Rorate Caeli

Quando uberior vitiorum copia?

"When were vices more rampant?", asked Juvenal 1900 years ago, as the faith of the Nazarenes struggled to survive under persecution in a world gone mad. Juvenal lamented the fall of the strong, harsh, Latin spirit of old, mollified by wealth and moral decay such as had never been seen before.

This year, the coincidences between the calendar and the Proper of Time were very interesting: the week which led to Laetare Sunday was filled with joyous Christmas spirit, from Saint Joseph to Lady Day. The last, most solemn part of Lent, Passiontide, begins next Sunday. The first week of Passiontide will coincide with that Traditional devotion to the Sacred Heart, the First Thursday and First Friday, a wonderful opportunity to prepare one's spirit to the following week, the holiest of weeks -- and to meditate on our own disgraceful responsibility for the vices of our age, when the Christian Latin spirit which created and strengthened the West for so long has deteriorated beyond recognition.

The Holy Father today reminded European politicians of the unwaivering principles which must guide public life:

Among these the following emerge clearly today:

- protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death;

- recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family - as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage - and its defence from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role;

- the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.

Is it possible, however, that the words of Mother Church will be heard when she has become a den of discordant bureaucracies? The Church of Rome is a moral beacon, but will a Church living her own passion be heard by a continent in "silent apostasy" (Ecclesia in Europa, 9)? First, some problems have to be fixed, problems which are inside the Church, problems mentioned by His Holiness in those very stern words the then-Cardinal pronounced on March 25, 2005, Good Friday:

We have considered the fall of man in general, and the falling of many Christians away from Christ and into a godless secularism. Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in his own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of his Presence abused, how often must he enter empty and evil hearts! How often do we celebrate only ourselves, without even realizing that he is there! How often is his Word twisted and misused! What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him! How much pride, how much self-complacency! What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall! All this is present in his Passion. His betrayal by his disciples, their unworthy reception of his Body and Blood, is certainly the greatest suffering endured by the Redeemer; it pierces his heart.


  1. It seems that NYC's decision to close parishes a là Boston, just after the Plenary of Cardinals, indicates that B16 has given a go ahead for the destruction of ecclesaistical monuments to pay for sex scandals.

    This makes one wonder how much in principle the men governing the Church have personally rejected the whole notion of the Catholic Church being the one and only True Faith, and that the seeking of converts is Her primary Mission. It rather seems that keeping the priestly brotherhood lifestyle afloat and managing the few "strident" believers of this "nonesense" until they too dwindle away, is the present de facto agenda of the Hiearchy.

    Most of the sign of "growth" today in the Church, conservative to liberal are superficial spiritual movements, that reject a priori some or all of the basic conscepts of Christian religion contained in the deposit of the faith. They do this, because otherwise, they would not receive approbation.

  2. "superficial spiritual movements, that reject a priori some or all of the basic conscepts of Christian religion contained in the deposit of the faith."

    Thank goodness we have Br. Alexis Bugnolo to set us straight about which these concepts are. Where would we turn if he were taken from us? If only we had a Magisterium!

  3. I was thinking today while out walking in lovely spring weather and beautiful sunshine I am living (and I mean "we") in humanity's darkest hour. It's not something one sees on the face of nature, like stormy weather. The sun still shines as before, but the moral state of the world is unlike anything before.

    If it were only the decadence that accompanies wealth or if it were only the apostasy within the Church - perhaps we've seen the like in ages before. But what is unprecedented in our age is our own self-destruction; and more, on a scale which only our age has been ingenuous enough to carry out. Between contraception and abortion, we exceed the nihilism and carnage of all previous ages combined.

    Perhaps it is only an accident of history that we have been so gifted with wealth and technology to carry out so successfully our wicked ends, but nevertheless, we are the ones with our hand at the rudder.

    God's hand guides all of history, of course, but in as much as we steer our own little ship, we are headed straight towards the whirlpool.

  4. I mentioned this myself to someone yesterday, Josephus: I feel so queasy about the 21st century... I sense it will be much, much worse than any age the world has ever witnessed. God help us!

  5. Jeff,

    We do, its the infallible Magisterium of Christ, which speaks in the infallible Magisterium of the Church, which by faith teaches us that the ministers who exercise it are fallible men, not the idols, that papaloters would make of them.

    If one is charged with usurping the magisterium simply because he adheres to the magisterium in his judgements, then one would be unfaithful to Christ precisely and only when being faithful to him.

    Jeff, you preach once again a contradiction: once again the gospel not of Christ, but of the Antichrist!

  6. "you preach once again a contradiction: once again the gospel not of Christ, but of the Antichrist!"

    Yes, Brother, the Antichrist stands with Peter! In Rome! With the true Pope (upon whom, of course, we cannot rely.) And you, Brother Bugnolo, get to correct Popes when they err. Since, of course, you are a better guide to True Tradition than they are. Hey! The Catechism of Bugnolatry is all beginning to fall into place!

    Papolaters like me take a little time to understand the True Constitution of the Church, but we learn after a while! If I ever get tired of being Roman Catholic, perhaps I'll give your little conventicle a whirl.

    And, I'll leave you the last word, if you want it.

  7. I read the complete speach the Holy Father delivered regarding Europe, part of which has been cited on this post.

    I found something deeply troubling in it.

    He says:

    "As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable."

    Then the Pope cites the three items alredy written on the post.

    He later continues:
    "These principles are not truths of faith,(...) they are inscribed in human nature itself and therefore they are common to all humanity. The Church’s action in promoting them is therefore not confessional in character..."

    So far so good, but if you read it closely, you´ll find that the Pope just said that the principal focus of the Church`s intervention in the public arena is "not confessional in character".

  8. After giving it some thought, perhaps i was too hasty on my criticism... I was thinking about the need to proclaim Christ and His Kingship in society. But If the primary focus of the temporal sphere is justice, perhaps the Church needs to proclaim natural truths as much as confessional ones. Certainly the only action the State can do regarding Religion is a negative one, that is, to cencede its supremacy, its Truth, not to hinder it, not to contradict it. And an accessory positive role in defending it.
    On the other hand, the State has positive tasks as regards natural principles, and therefore it may not be incorrect to say that when the Church talks to the State, respect for natural law assumes preeminence, not out of its absolute importance vis a vis religion, but because of the nature of the interlocutor...

  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  10. Hi ho, Jefferino (After the late Louis Nye).

    Br. Bugnolo is not alone in being a Magisterium; I, too . . . yesterday I couldn't even spell Magisterium, now I are one. In fact my name is legion. At least that's how papolaters would phrase it, those who put their trust in Princes and children of men. I think when the Psalmist gave that warning he had mostly the Princes of the Church in mind. And John Chrysostem is famous for have said the floor of Hell would be paved with the skulls of bishops.

    Of course, Brother Bugnolo is correct. The Magisterium is embedded in the amber of the ages and cannot be removed (or remodeled), just as perhaps the skull of a certain well-known in Rome will add to the decorative arrangement of that floor to which the Saint referred.


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!