Rorate Caeli

Cantalamessa's Panegyric: "a new time is opening for the Church"; "partitions, staircases, rooms and closets" and "the residues of ceremonials" must be "knocked down"

The Preacher of the Pontifical Household, Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, OFMCap, preached in the Vatican Basilica on Good Friday what was formally a homily but truly a panegyric to the new pontiff with an embedded program of great ambition. Here is the main excerpt:

There is a short story by Franz Kafka that is a powerful religious symbol and takes on a new meaning, almost prophetic, when heard on Good Friday. It's titled "An Imperial Message". It speaks of a king who, on his deathbed, calls to his side a subject and whispers a message into his ear. So important is that message that he makes the subject repeat it, in turn, into his hear. Then, with a nod, he sends off the messenger, who sets out on his way. But let us hear directly from the author the continuation of this story, characterized by the dreamlike and almost nightmarish tone typical of this writer:

"Now pushing with his right arm, now with his left, he cleaves a way for himself through the throng; if he encounters resistance he points to his breast, where the symbol of the sun glitters. But the multitudes are so vast; their numbers have no end. If he could reach the open fields how fast he would fly, and soon doubtless you would hear the welcome hammering of his fists on your door. But instead how vainly does he wear out his strength; still he is only making his way through the chambers of the innermost palace; never will he get to the end of them; and if he succeeded in that nothing would be gained; he must next fight his way down the stair; and if he succeeded in that nothing would be gained; the courts would still have to be crossed; and after the courts the second outer palace; and so on for thousands of years; and if at last he should burst through the outermost gate—but never, never can that happen—the imperial capital would lie before him, the center of the world, crammed to bursting with its own sediment. Nobody could fight his way through here even with a message from a dead man. But you sit at your window when evening falls and dream it to yourself”.
We must do everything possible so that the Church may never look like that complicated and cluttered castle described by Kafka, and the message may come out of it as free and joyous as when the messenger began his run. We know what the impediments are that can restrain the messenger: dividing walls, starting with those that separate the various Christian churches from one another, the excess of bureaucracy, the residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes, now only debris.

In Revelation, Jesus says that He stands at the door and knocks (Rev 3:20). Sometimes, as noted by our Pope Francis, he does not knock to enter, but knocks from within to go out. To reach out to the "existential suburbs of sin, suffering, injustice, religious ignorance and indifference, and of all forms of misery."

As happens with certain old buildings. Over the centuries, to adapt to the needs of the moment, they become filled with partitions, staircases, rooms and closets. The time comes when we realize that all these adjustments no longer meet the current needs, but rather are an obstacle, so we must have the courage to knock them down and return the building to the simplicity and linearity of its origins. This was the mission that was received one day by a man who prayed before the Crucifix of San Damiano: "Go, Francis, and repair my Church".

"Who could ever be up to this task?" wondered aghast the Apostle before the superhuman task of being in the world "the fragrance of Christ"; and here is his reply, that still applies today: "We're not ourselves able to think something as if it came from us; our ability comes from God. He has made us to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; because the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life"(2 Cor 2:16; 3:5-6).

May the Holy Spirit, in this moment in which a new time is opening for the Church, full of hope, reawaken in men who are at the window the expectancy of the message, and in the messengers the will to make it reach them, even at the cost of their life.

Well, Saint Francis did his best not to knock things down, but to lift them up. As Sandro Magister recalled recently:
In the pseudo-Franciscan and pauperist mythology that in these days so many are applying to the new pope, imagination runs to a Church that would renounce power, structures, and wealth and make itself purely spiritual.

But it is not for this that the saint of Assisi lived. In the dream of Pope Innocent III painted by Giotto, Francis is not demolishing the Church, but carrying it on his shoulders. And it is the Church of St. John Lateran, the cathedral of the bishop of Rome, at that time recently restored and decorated lavishly, but made ugly by the sins of its men, who had to be purified. It was a few followers of Francis who fell into spiritualism and heresy.

After all, if one knocks down "partitions, stairways, rooms, and closets" that were added for a reason, one seriously risks, inadvertently or not, destroying supporting beams, with the collapse of the entire structure, or of most of it...


wissam said...

this is appaling. they want to destroy even what is left of the catholic church. we are the orphans of Pope Benedict.

John Fisher said...

Papa Cantalamessa is seeking to influence the pope! What an impertinent ignoramous! This is the agenda of Bugnini. You would think living amongst the ruins of ancient Rome he would grasp many old building are just simple ruins with all the beauty and ORIGINAL beauty destroyed by barbarians.
In his Encyclical Mediator Dei (1947), Pope Pius XII warned against those who attempt to subvert the Faith under the pretext of a return to primitive practice: such persons represent "a wicked movement that tends to paralyze the sanctifying and salutary action by which the liturgy leads the children of adoption on the path to their Heavenly Father."

In the same document, the Pope went on to further explain that "the desire to restore everything indiscriminately to its ancient condition is neither wise nor praiseworthy. It would be wrong, for example, to want the altar restored to its ancient form of a table . . . and pictures and statues excluded from our churches . . . This attitude is an attempt to revive the 'archeologism' to which the pseudo-synod of Pistoia gave rise; it seeks also to reintroduce the many pernicious errors which led to that synod and resulted from it and which the Church . . . has rightly condemned."

It is also an imagined past of fantasy not the real past.

Anonymous said...

Fr Cantalamessa is a fruit of the post vatican II rule of life of the Franciscan.


Benedict Carter said...

Look, these people know better than any reader here the disastrous state of the Church.

But they cannot, will not, refuse to, see the connection between the Revolution already suffered by so many millions and the collapse of the Church caused by that Revolution.

Indeed, it appears that the capacity of intelligent men to see basic cause and effect has been somehow negated by some kind of shadow that can only be demonic.

(Even more dangerously, there is another variant, true for some of them, maybe for most of them: they have become so persuaded of the evolutionary nature of life, societies and organisations that, as we are all embarked on "an evolutionary process", the very fact that there is still something to tinker with makes them believe that life courses through the Church's veins with undiminished vigour).

The original Franciscans soon degenerated into the "Spirituals", the Fraticelli, the radicals who took up arms and had to be destroyed by force of arms. Theirs is a radical call to compassion which un-directed soon becomes revolutionary.

We have seen this radicalism immediately in the Catholic blogosphere, with all critical faculties switched off and some individuals calling for a total sweeping away of everything that the Church currently is. It's a heady, drunken, uncritical mixture, ultimately of course destructive and entirely negative.

Pope Francis should therefore be very, very careful what he unleashes. But, given his reported tyrannical way of dealing with people, and the knowledge these men do have of how hopeless the Church's situation is after fifty years of auto-demolition, I think they are just going to go for broke in a spirit of "what the hell, who knows maybe we'll get lucky".

Justice & Peace, the "preferential option for the poor", "compassion", are now the law of the Church, not the Salvation of Souls.

It is going to be horrible, it is going to cause me and you and all Traditionalists great grief, shock and sadness.

As for me, I am back underground already. There's always the SSPX thanks be to God. Other than that, I await the Great Chastisement.

Benedict Carter said...


No! That is not true. We are the orphans of a Church that embarked upon the wrong course sometime in the early to mid-fifties. Pope Ratzinger did LITTLE to change things.

FrereRabit said...

The best April Fool on the interweb. Well done! :-)

Dan Hunter said...

Isn't Iconoclasm a heresy?

Bernonensis said...

Christ is risen! I believe that, most of you who read this do. Does the ironically-named Cantalamessa believe it? If he does, why does Kafka's tale seem to him an apt analogy for the task of evangelization? OUR KING didn't die in the heart of an infinitely large forbidden city; he died and rose again among his subjects, in the midst of the whole world. The voices of the Apostles have gone forth in every land, and their words to the ends of the earth.

If, instead of the mysterious cooperation of God and man that the God-Man has given us as the sacrament of Himself, Cantalamessa wants a church consisting in nothing but heavenly voices he should have no trouble finding one; the storefronts in every decaying city are full of them. Ah, but they don't have friaries or priests, so he'd have to go out and get a real job.

GQ Rep said...

They're going to try to turn us into the same as the Anglicans...(Low Church Anglicans).

No Thanks to that.

Dan Hunter said...

Jokes on me.

I am a slow one.

New Catholic said...

Not a joke... unfortunately.

paolomac said...

Doesn't 'cantalamessa' mean 'sing the Mass'?

Anonymous said...

"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, 'I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.' To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: 'If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.'"
GK Chesterton

Deetz said...

Luther would find nothing objectionable here and approve highly of this sermon.

RR said...

Let's follow the Anglican Communion, step by step. Great idea. Evangelism? The Episcopal Church (USA) membership is down at least by half of what it was in the 1960s even as the US population has grown. It is mostly populated by aging liberals.

Tear apart the fabric of the faith and there is little to evangelize with.

Tenebrae said...

It is bizarre that a Catholic preacher should take as his key text a book by the bleak existentialist Frank Kafka. Presumably no text in Holy Scripture existed that met the "destruction agenda." I find this sermon terrifying. It is a manifesto for destruction of the spiritual and temporal legacy of the church. And as well already know from the legacy of Vatican 2 it will not work. Francis may
The metaphor of a building is flawed. The church is more like a living tree than a building. Severe pruning will not turn a mighty ancient oak back to a sapling it will simply disfigure or even kill the tree.

skladach said...

I'm a glass-half-full sort of person. Seems to me that most of the improvised clutter in the Catholic Church appeared AFTER Vatican II. If some of that stuff (e.g. going through the motions of "collegial" governing) is swept away during the year of faith, great!

Acreator said...

I met p Cantalamessa some years ago. He then repudiated the idea that any unbaptized child could go anywhere else than to Heaven. He seemed to believe that hell is not real, not more than as some kind of tool for making people a bit better. And he was strongly opposing the idea that God could be anything but merciful.

Anatole Upart said...

If treated by the standard treatment for art vandals in the secular world, all these humble reformers would be locked up in the mental institutions. But in Catholic Church, they found a refuge. We've seen the same contempt for material culture and humanity's heritage only from French revolutionaries and Bolsheviks, hellbent on racking the old.
God Bless Pope Benedict XVI - he really tried. You try to restore tradition not with the Church you want, but with the one you already have, to paraphrase DR.

Uncle Claibourne said...

What are we to think?

When one reads Magister's entire article, he seems to be saying it's an error to apply this "pauperist mythology" to Francis. And yet, on Good Friday, in the presence of the Pope and presumably with his prior approval, Fr. Cantalamessa applies the pauperist mythology to Francis.

Who's right? Magister or Cantalamessa? Neither? Or am I missing something?

Pius X said...

An inspiring homily. I truly feel our church is getting back to what's important. God bless Pope Francis.

nanetteclaret said...

Tenebrae, I agree. It is very telling that of all the authors out there, he had to pick an existentialist with socialist leanings! He couldn't find something in Chesterton, Belloc, or Knox (among others)?

It seems to me that those who favor destruction are on the side of the Destroyer, not God the Creator. My tiny brain is not big enough for "nuanced shades of grey," so it seems very black and white to me. One can't be on both sides at the same time.

We need to pray the Rosary every day (if we aren't already) and beg Our Lady of Fatima to help us. This state of the Church could be what she predicted in her messages.

Benedict Carter said...


"You try to restore tradition not with the Church you want, but with the one you already have ..".

Forgive me, but I cannot agree. BXVI had the plenitude of power given to him by Christ and he chose not to use it. Yes, I accept that (to use + Fellay's words), he "didn't want to break anything", but the truth is that Benedict is ONE OF THEM.

Ora et Labora said...

This is what we'll see pretty soon during Papal Masses, I mean, if this is how Francis celebrates the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for children, for the young people who will attend the WYD, and for the Church in general the Papal Masses won't be much different.

MISA DE NIÑOS 2011 - 3.wmv:

Francis calls the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass a meal "esta comida" and in minute 14:12 to minute 14:17the deacon says having celebrated the party of Jesus we can go in peace "habiendo celebrado la fiesta de Jesus podemos ir en paz"

This Easter, we were lucky not to see more irreverence than what we have already witnessed, because some of the vestements and the music for the Paschal Triduum were already prepared for Benedict and his traditional way of celebrating the Holy Mass, but once Francis takes full control of the Liturgy and the governance of the Church we are going to be even more shocked by his novelties.

The reality is that with Cardinals like Bergoglio and Schönborn participating in the Conclave what chances did we have to have a traditional minded pope???

The answer is hardly any.

Mary Help of Christians pray for us!!!

Lynda said...

Sounds like the antithesis of the Catholic Faith. Sounds like Marxism. This is not of God or His Church.

Ezekiel Mossback said...

It's quite possible that "past ceremonials" refers to the Pauline Mass!

Don't write off Francis yet. Ratzinger is still called a modernist by some traditionalists, but he was for the ancient Mass. Francis isn't the dream come true for traditionalists, but that doesn't mean he isn't traditional. No man in reality doesn't have something obnoxious about him.

If he cleanses the clergy of impurity and avarice, and appoints good bishops, I will call his pontificate a success, even if he doesnt set a good example liturgically. We still have the Summorum Pontificum, and the Holy Spirit, and our zeal.

Ligusticus said...

Talk about "the two lungs" (of Christianism) !

If Cantalamessa preached such an homily in a Muscovite church (and not even in Christ the Saviour and on Good Friday) , he would be kicked out after two seconds, à la Pussy Riot!

(And they are proud Hilarion came to Rome for Francis' installation..!)

Long-Skirts said...

Benedict Carter said...

"BXVI had the plenitude of power given to him by Christ and he chose not to use it."

May God have mercy on us all and again I'm sorry but I have to say...


Not the Society
Or bad Cardinals inclined
The brand new Pope
Humble fashioned-designed.

Could have regularized
With no strings attached
He held the Keys
Could have ordered, dispatched --

But had Pilate's syndrome
Washed his hands and declined
Therefore, so-to-speak
His Holiness resigned.

Anonymous said...

If, tearing down structures is the way the Church is to proceed in order for the beaurocracy to be cleared out we must accept it as Gods will for his Church. Maybe things are so rotten in the administration that there is no other way at present. Maybe Pope Benedict became aware of this and decided that as they were not listening to his warnings, reasoning and his softly softly approach, that the time had come to unleash a bit of harsh realism and Justice upon those who refused to change in the administration. Even as traditionalist believers we cannot ignore the sickly state of our Church administration any longer, it has to change. If Francis was chosen for this role, and my guess is he was, then God speed to him. As traditionalists we must be prepared for a few years of discomfort and defense of other matters pertaining to our faith while this is being carried out. On the other hand if things turn out badly and our fears are confirmed Maybe it is now time to prepare for the final warnings and corrections, which can only come from the Lord Jesus as all other avenues will have been exhausted.

Alsaticus said...

Fr Cantalamessa has always been a sort of liberal : he just wore his wojtylian/ratzingerian mask well and was cunning enough to fool two popes sorry "bishops of Rome".
Now he is removing the mask : plain and simple.

Besides this (rather revolting) bout of bravado with the big destruction and all is nearly a quote of Hans Urs von Balthazar's pamphlet "Rasez les bastions" (1952) in English : "Razing the Bastions : on the Church in This Age" which is often seen as a sort of draft for the "spirit of the Council".

Fr von Balthasar left the ... Society of Jesus in 1950.

Hilltop said...

Dan Hunter is correct to call this iconoclasm.
I carry the point further to speculate if we are not seeing Cantalamessa picking up on Pope Framcis' gentle but obvious iconoclasms to date?
No mozetta, intentionally limited use of the Stole, intentionally limited use of the pallium, intentionally limited use of the mitre, no red slippers, intentionally limited use of the pectoral cross, "call me Francis","call me Jorge", no Papal apartment for me, thanks", "no need for all Cardinals to swear allegiance",
Add to this Pope Francis' two-fold, public, and clearly rendered harm to the "icon" of the Mandatum by washing feet of young girls and washing feet of a mohammedan.
To that we can additionally consider the iconoclastic aspects of encouraging and facilitating the "active participation" of a mohammadan at Catholic Mass, and not just a Mass in "ordinary time" but the Mass of the institution of the Mass and of the Priesthood.
I recite the above not as an accuser but as an observer. If we have an iconoclast in our present Holy Father, or if we have in our present Holy Father a Pope who permits iconoclasm in others, we might as well recognize the signs so that we may be aware.

Prof. Basto said...

Thanks, John Fisher, for reminding us of the much ignored words of the Magisterium, contained in the Encyclical Mediator Dei of 1947.

Unfortunately, what followed from 1963 onwards was the ignoring of those warnings.

And today, in Pope Francis' quick and radical ignoring of the rubrics and abandonment of liturgical and extraliturgical ceremony, we see a radicalized version of the Spirit of Vatican II.

As for Fr. Cantalamessa, the John Paul II appointed, Benedict XVI maintained, Preacher of the Pontifical Household, he has always been an arch-liberal.

And his Good Friday homily is nothing but a rallying cry, asking the Pope to implement a radical vision of the "Spirit of Vatican II" by means of a total Rupture with the past.

The very meaning of the order given to St. Francis "Go and rebuild my Church" is distorted and perverted. It is made to sound like an order (directed to Pope Francis)for a refoundation of the Church on a completely new basis, a re-edification of the Church as if in a "New Pentecost". It is the radicalism of the Vatican II age, of the sixties and seventies all over again.

And, in reality, this call, under the pretext of restoring the primitive, linear aspect, of the ecclesiastical edifice, is nothing but a call for the DEMOLITION OF THE CHURCH.

The ecclesiastical structures (the rooms, stairways, etc.) exist because they are needed. The ceremonies, they to exist because they are needed, and for the glory of God, the greater glory of God, by the way.

To demolish them is not to be humble. It is to humiliate the Church, cripple her, rendering her incapable of aptly discharging her mission vis-a-vis the multitudes that need Salvation.

Such a self demolition of the Church would only lead to more loss of Faith, more secularization, more loss of souls.

The agenda of Fr. Cantalamessa, the agenda being followed in this Pontificate by Pope Francis, seems indeed to be the agenda of Bugnini.

That's what we saw in the contra legem washing of the feet of women, mahommedan infidels, on the day of the institution of the Catholic Priesthood; that's what we see in a Pope who espouses a populist, demagogical pauperism, that refuses to live in the Papal Apartment, that refuses to wear the Holy See's pectoral cross, that refuses to wear choir dress, the Papal Mozzetta and other insignia, that, in the liturgy, refuses to comply with the Ceremonial of Bishops and instead preaches homilies standing and without mitre; that abandoned the Papal Throne for the urbi et orbi, giving it in abito piano and again only wearing a stole for the actual blessing; he has discontinued Benedict XVI's use of dignified Paraments, worthy copes, Roman Chasubles; he has abandoned the recently re-introduced Fanon, etc., etc.

And that is only in the first twenty days of his Pontificate. Today is the 20th day of Pope Francis' Pontificate, including the date of the election. He has not yet even taken posession of his Cathedra at the Lateran, and yet so many symbols and ceremonies have already been changed and simplified.

(to be continued)

Prof. Basto said...


A true demolisher, our Pope. And now, from the Franciscan preacher of the Papal Household, this call for a radical demolition of the Church.

And this call is proposed as the supposed solution to the problem of the rapid secularization! It is indeed diabolical. It is indeed as if they can't see, as if they were blinded, as Benedict Carter points out above:

"... they cannot, will not, refuse to, see the connection between the Revolution already suffered by so many millions and the collapse of the Church caused by that Revolution.
Indeed, it appears that the capacity of intelligent men to see basic cause and effect has been somehow negated by some kind of shadow that can only be demonic. "

Of course, the current sorry state, deplorable state, of the Church, the secularization of formerly Catholic societies, is the direct result of the "desacralization" of the Church herself in the wake of the Second Vatican Council.

The loss of Faith by the multitudes is the consequence of the abandonment of ancient structures, of the mysteries, the devotional practices, the traditional Catechism, that so well and clearly handed down the Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Faith.

And in Rome, they now propose to intensify this rupturist Revolution...

Had a Conservative Pope been elected, the Mainstream media would be grilling him, talking only of scandals, controversies, Vatileaks, homosexuals in the Vatican, paedophilia.

But the conservative mainstream media has sensed that it has an ally, a liberal, in the Chair of Peter. That's why they have allowed the news cycle to change.

Bertone and Sodano are in their posts, the entire Roman Curia has been confirmed, at least "donec aliter provideatur", curial veterans such as Cardinal Re have been concelebrants of important rites such as the Chrism Mass, Godfried Danneels, and not the Cardinal Protopriest of Holy Roman Church has recited the oratio super Pontificem in the inauguration of the Pope (Danneels is only the most senior elector Cardinal Priest, but that rite is not reserved to Cardinal electors; in 2005 it was performed by Cardinal Kim, a non elector; and Sodano, a non elector, as Cardinal Dean, delivered the Ring, not Cardinal Re, the senior elector Cardinal Bishop). And yet the agenda of the media has changed.

Because the Pope is a liberal, the focus of the media is now on Francis, the humble, the promise of a great reformer. His "simplicity". His simplifications of ritual and of the way of life of the Papacy. All of a sudden, nobody speaks of paedophilia, or of Vatileaks. But the rotten elements of the Curia are all there, surrounding the new liberal Pope.

Beefy Levinson said...

Well... Look on the bright side. After fifty years in the driver's seat, the revolutionaries don't have much left to destroy.

John Fisher said...

Long Live Papa Francesco! Long live the revolucion!! Death to Catholic culural imperialists! May the spirit of St Simon Bolivar liberate us. Here we go the Old World is being introduced to what makes South America so bad. Constant revlucion!

Clayton said...

Benedict Carter, given the opinions you have expressed about Benedict XVI, I would say you need to spend more time with his writings. What is it to use a "power" that will have no effect on most of those for whom it is intended? To console the self-righteous? I am sad about some of the 70's rhetoric coming out of the Vatican. The thing is that Benedict, through his luminous teaching, has erected for us a beautiful theological edifice which, while it will be ignored for now, will bear fruit for ages and protect many minds and hearts from dated "theologies" and ideologies.

JabbaPapa said...

Thank you for posting a longer extract of this homily than is available elsewhere.

May I quote the original Italian ?

C’è un racconto dell’ebreo Franz Kafka

"There is a short story by the Jew Franz Kafka"

Cantalamessa is opposing Kafka's story, which is bogged down in the necessities of this world, with the far greater and clearer and brighter message of the Gospel and of Our Lord Christ.

He is comparing the darkness of Kafka's story, unenlightened by Christianity nor by Holy Catholic Faith, Hope, and Charity -- with the Shining Light of the Passion of Our Lord.


I remain of course quite seriously shocked by the ending paragraphs of his homily.

Not only by the VERY dubious suggestions that he makes therein -- but by the sheer ineptness of his rhetoric, which seems to suggest that black is white, down is up, and wrecking is building.

Traditio vivax said...

Dare I suggest that it is the bureaucracy of liturgy committees at seemingly every level of the church, from the smallest parish on up, that is most obstructionist to genuine vitality, found in Tradition?

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Principles of Catholic Theology Joseph Ratzinger:

Does this mean that the Council should be revoked? Certainly not. It means only that the real reception of the Council has not yet even begun. What devastated the Church in the decade after the Council was not the Council but the refusal to accept it. This becomes clear precisely in the history of the influence of Gaudium et spes. What was identified with the Council was, for the most part, the expression of an attitude that did not coincide with the statements to be found in the text itself, although it is recognizable as a tendency in its development and in some of its individual formulations. The task is not, therefore, to suppress the Council but to discover the real Council and to deepen its true intention in the light of the present experience. That means that there can be no return to the Syllabus,which may have marked the first stage in the confrontation with liberalism and a newly conceived Marxism but cannot be the last stage. In the long run, neither embrace nor ghetto can solve for Christians the problem of the modern world. The fact is, as Hans Urs von Balthasar pointed out as early as 1952, that the "demolition of the bastions" is a long-overdue task.

...Although God may console Us with you, We are nonetheless sad. This is due to the numberless errors and the teachings of perverse doctrines which, no longer secretly and clandestinely but openly and vigorously, attack the Catholic faith. You know how evil men have raised the standard of revolt against religion through philosophy (of which they proclaim themselves doctors) and through empty fallacies devised according to natural reason. In the first place, the Roman See is assailed and the bonds of unity are, every day, being severed. The authority of the Church is weakened and the protectors of things sacred are snatched away and held in contempt. The holy precepts are despised, the celebration of divine offices is ridiculed, and the worship of God is cursed by the sinner. All things which concern religion are relegated to the fables of old women and the superstitions of priests. Truly lions have roared in Israel. With tears We say: "Truly they have conspired against the Lord and against His Christ." Truly the impious have said: "Raze it, raze it down to its foundations."

Michael said...

The greatest tragedy in all of this is that Catholics are starting to question whether obedience to this insanity is licit. Many in my circles are asking about women's ordination, the suppression of the TLM, etc.

This is the real danger that Catholics are going to see the authority of the Church as something superfluous. With JPII & Benedict (both of whom I consider modernists) there was still hoping against their action, but not this pontificate.

My FSSP friends are openly talking about SSPX and just 6 months ago this was an impossibility in their minds.

I wish this pope would have the courtesy to abdicate tomorrow or restore tradition and leave his modernism.

Bernonensis said...


"Sing the Mass" would be ironic, too, but I took Cantalamessa to mean "Sing at the harvest." It put me in mind of the Psalm verse: They who sow as they weep shall sing as they reap.

Anonymous said...

Long-Skirts, can you please email me offline?

Dan Hunter said...

St Francis would never preach of this tearing down of our Catholic Identity.

But who was this simple holy beautiful lover of Catholic Beauty?

Only a humble Deacon,
The Supreme Pontiff.
The Pope.

Sweet Christ on earth.
The Vicar of Christ.

Perchance God wants our senses to be torn down and smashed into a minimalist parody of the "Spirit of Vatican II"

Perchance, the Catholic Church was wrong in Her promotion of beauty and majesty, all for the glory of Almighty God, for 2000 years?

This is a new "fecundity"


sam said...

"The whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Modernist"

O Holy Spirit bring back St. Athanasius and St. John Damascene.

Was prepared to be amused.... said...

I thought that was an April Fool, and was prepared to see the funny side (though it was hitting a nerve that wasn't funny)....when I discovered it is in fact serious. God help us.

John said...

Ligusticus said... "If Cantalamessa preached such an homily in a Muscovite church (and not even in Christ the Saviour and on Good Friday) , he would be kicked out after two seconds, à la Pussy Riot!"

Indeed. For all the talk of Francis' outreach to the East, they aren't going to join with a church that they don't even recognize liturgically.

There is a (former) church in Constantinople/Istanbul called St. Irene's. It was built during the iconoclast period, and it is totally devoid of iconography. Rather than an icon of Christ in the apse, there is a stark, black cross.

Francis' plain, "humble" ways remind me a lot of that church.

Iconoclasm seems to describe well what he is doing. If so, it is heresy.

I wonder if someone could look at the writings of the 7th-8th century iconoclasts and see if there are parallels to the anti-tradition rationales being bandied about recently.

Prof. Basto said...

Hilltop: "Dan Hunter is correct to call this iconoclasm."

Indeed. This is a form of iconoclasm.

And we need a "Triumph of Orthodoxy".

On the day when finally Truth and Catholicity will prevail over this Spirit of Vatican II continuing Revolution, we in the Latin Church will need a Feast of the Triumph of Orthodoxy to comemorate the overcoming of those errors, just like the Bizantine tradtion has its Feast to commemorate the overcoming of the iconoclastic heresy.

thetimman said...

Absolutely appalling in every particular.

P.J.David said...

Cantalamessa is another Bugnini lingering to Pappacy. "Can tell (him)a mess = Cantalamessa.A liberal modern Franciscan.
We have to pray more to God as Traditionals to spare us.Near future itself looks darker but God is there for us;let us not fear wolves in Rome.

friarpaul said...

My Dear Brothers & Sisters in Christ,
I am very sorry that many of you feel betrayed and bewildered by the first weeks of our new pope. But I beg you to try and imagine that the Holy Spirit may still be working in this successor of St. Peter. If you read the letters of these poor juvenile inmates in LA, you may begin to see the beauty of this man so many of you seem all too quick to pillory. I pray that you do.
Pax et Bonum,

A Mom said...

The "hermeneutic of continuity" argument that has been repeated over the past several years has always confused me, because it differs greatly from what I myself see and experience. I have spent may nights in tearful prayer begging the good Lord to help me understand and thus clear up my confusion.
The more I read, the more I believe that this pontificate will provide the answers that I have been looking a clear and unambiguous way that even I can't miss. It will be very painful, but it is necessary.

Matt said...

Well, here we go. The Church has Her own Chairman Mao and his Cultural Revolution. From what I've read, China lost countless treasures, manuscripts, items of antiquity, etc., by being destroyed, buildings were burned or knocked down. Western institutions there also suffered the same fate including Catholic and Protestant churches. The Nazis did the same thing to Germany. We've all seen those old footage of bonfires of books being burned and other things destroyed. It's all facism which is liberalism, and narccisistic when anyone wants history to begin with himself or reorders history to fit his sick idea of reality.

When a liberal doesn't like something he makes sure no else has access to it and will contort and distort reality to make things fit his mind-set, and he makes sure no one else is able to have it or enjoy it. Look around. This is what political correctness is. "Incrementalism--" death, destruction by a thousand incremental cuts.

It remains to be seen what His Holiness will actually do (cringingly waiting).

Long-Skirts said...

Adfero said...

"Long-Skirts, can you please email me offline?"

Uh - oh!! Am I in trouble?

Anonymous said...

Yes, but I expected you to phrase that question in the form of a poem :)

C.S. said...

Good fruit from a bad tree, friar paul? What he did was not of a good tree. And this based on what you read from something the Vatican was quick to blurt so "humbly" to the world? I don't think so. He knelt publicly and washed and kissed the feet of females and muslims but does not kneel at the Consecration? His actions were BAD and so will be their fruits.

sam said...

Peace be to you my brother "friarpaul" from God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit One God. Amen!

> "I am very sorry that many of you feel betrayed and bewildered by the first weeks of our new pope."

As you know, God is a Simple Being who Is ordered without contradictions. Disordered is an attack on the Holy Spirit.

>If you read the letters of these poor juvenile inmates in LA, you may begin to see the beauty of this man so many of you seem all too quick to pillory.

A call to "ad misericordiam" is a logical fallacy. You are trying to justify an error, by a call to pity. As a religious, who is formed in the Catholic Faith, you should know better.

I'll pray to God on your behalf and ask that you do the same.

May the Holy Spirit guide the Hierarchy of the Church and the Lay faithful, without the confusion of roles or the denial of the received Apostolic Tradition. In Christ Our Lord!

In Christ,

Matt said...

John said, Francis' plain, 'humble' ways remind me a lot of that church."

Sadly so. I've had it with this use of the word humble. We need to get a handle on the word humility. Humility means to accept the truth, accept things for what they are. If one is Pope, then all this et. al. is what comes with being Pope, and he doesn't seem to be accepting of it. Most of the comments made here are right on. The Holy Father carrying on with making a show of this *modesty* routine is narcissistic. Look it up. It's a person who is excessively preoccupied with issues of adequacy and needs to make a show of it. Will the Holy Father go so far as to use a sleeping bag? How about eating off of paper plates with styrofoam cups? He wants to be "humble..."

Jack O'Malley said...

Pope Pancho the Proud's puerile populism promises parlous portents for the Petrine patrimony.

"You see, Francis, my Church was beginning to thrive again. Go, Francis, knock down my Church."

The Wrecking-Ball Pope. Will Pancho sell off the Sistine ceiling piece by piece or just paint it over and hang some medallions for his next dhimmi liturgy?

When will we see his abject obeisance to tradition with a visit to Écône? For we shall surely soon see His Meekness smiling obsequiously in mosques and synagogues?

Ah, the hubris of humility.

RipK said...

Talk about brown nosing!!! Good job, Cantalamessa! How come you didn’t tell all this to the Benedict XVI last year?
When we all thought that the Bergoglio Cantalamessa generation of priests (now in their 70s+) was finally done, and was about to exit the stage for good, and us breathe some relief, the most unexpected thing happened. The Joker reappeared. Out of the ranks of this failed theology, the new successor of Peter was elected. An atomic bomb. Once again their outdated hippiesh mentality, flat ideology, uninspiring and failed attitudes are being shoved down our throats in the name of “simplicity”, and “humility”. It is a surreal anachronism; it is major regression to say the least. Their approach has miserably failed and it is doomed to fail again at the loss of so many more souls. This is the power of denial.

Corax said...

I don't currently go to the Chapels of the SSPX but if this Priest's words translate into reality then this Raven will be taking flight for the nearest Chapel.

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Boniface has a brilliant post about humility that is a must read

Jason C. said...

Something the liturgical and church wreckovators never understood: Never tear down a wall unless you know why it was built.

Dr. Mabuse said...

I do not think that Benedict XVI is "one of them". Rather, I think that he relied too much on logic and miscalculated. While trying to change the direction of the Church, he thought that he was dealing with a mechanism. It was a matter of changing some parts and pushing the right buttons, and then the machinery would automatically work as intended.

He didn't realize that he was also dealing with a personality, a spirit, and, I believe, a malevolent one, that would seize any opportunity to infiltrate and disrupt the Church.

When he resigned, the blogs and press were full of calculations on how many cardinals he'd installed, and how they could be expected to automatically choose someone similar as pope. Instead, the whole business went haywire - all the seemingly logical predictions exploded, and we ended up with a 30-year throwback as pope. Either Benedict was severely mistaken in his understanding of the character of the men he elevated, or some other, unforseen element entered into the mix and directed matters in a quite unlikely direction.

Michael said...

I can only tell you of two things said in homilies over the last several days which have left me absolutely desolate.

1.) "For the first time in my life I'm proud to be Catholic."

The priest was speaking of the changes which Pope Francis has initiated, and he was quoting a woman. I had no idea that we couldn't already have been proud to have been Catholic until Pope Francis was elected.

2.) "We have a Pope Francis; now, maybe in the future we might have a Pope Francine."

From the priest's homily on Easter Sunday (to much applause), speaking about the great changes in our Church.

I am desperately trying to make sense of all this without losing my charity, my love, and my soul and my faith.

Please, let us pray for one another.

Benedict Carter said...

Clayton Orr:

Have read virtually all of Benedict XVI's writings, thanks. Yes, there are some beautiful passages and depths of thought, but there's also a denial that St. John wrote St. John's Gospel and many other dubious speculations.

I have little or no time for a man who was one of the mob who sacked the Holy Roman Church better than Alaric or Attila could have done.

nanetteclaret said...

The fact that Pope Francis has rejected so many of the traditions of the Papacy leads me to wonder if he really even understands his job description. I think his rejection will have some unintended consequences. For example, the fact that he did not require all of the cardinals to pledge fealty to him means that many of them did not. At some point, they may openly defy him and remind him that they did not pledge loyalty to him. There are a few cardinals who are conservative and traditional who may at some point become alarmed. By trying to be "humble" and not follow protocol, Pope Francis may find that he has undermined his own authority.

P.S. My eyesight is not that good and I'm having trouble reading the captcha characters, especially when they are smushed together. The numbers, especially, are nearly illegible.

Anatole Upart said...

Major proponents of the Spirit of the Second Vatican Council found themselves in legal troubles, covering up pedophiles, or for their own sexual misconduct. A thorough investigation into the top Vatican officials' corruption and apparently sexual misconduct produced a voluminous report, laid on Pope Benedict's desk. And, right before the enormous cleansing of Lord's House, the Pope resigned? With the very cardinals accused in courts and in report promptly electing a successor, allegedly to do just that - clean the house. Who are we kidding?!

Prof. Basto said...

If in the Holy Thursday Feet Washing Pope Francis signaled the end, the death, of the Reform of the Reform, as acurately described by Rorate Caeli, then the Good Friday Homily by Fr. Cantalamessa signals the banishment of the "Hermeneutic of Coninuity".

We are now, officialy, under an Hermeneutic of Radical Rupture.

The homily tacitly approved by the Pope and preached to his Court says, in summary: Destroy the Church as it is, in order to build something new, that will supposedly be "better", more "pure", and will correspond to a supposed restoration of the "primite ways".

Well, if by primitive one means, before the Council of Trent, before the Council of Chalcedon, before Ephesus, before Constantinople I etc., then surely all the errors defeated by those Councils would return.

The Mass of Ages is as it is for a reason. The rooms, staircases, etc., exist for a reason.

Janice Kraus said...

I listened to one of Fr. Cantalamessa's Good Friday sermons a few years ago. I realized it was an occasion of sin for me when I became angrier and angrier during the sermon and lost all the work I had done during Lent to try to reform myself. I'm glad I didn't hear this one, although reading it takes me right back to that other sermon.

J.G.Ratkaj said...

I woonder what they intend to break down. Since the ongoing liberal-modernist smuta of the last 50 years has reprieved rather nothing precious from destruction.
I watched again the easter liturgies (last year 2012) of His Holiness the Patriarch of Muscovy, whose church regards tradition in highest esteem. What a contrast to this minimalist liturgical staging in Rome of the last days!

Prof. Basto said...


In deference to the Truth, I'd like to point out that the Pope celebrated the Mass in Coena Domini not on secular ground, but on holy ground, as the Mass was celebrated in a chapel (Padre Misericordioso Chapel), located within the detention centre.

I'm assuming that this Merciful Chapel is an actual Catholic Chapel. Anyways, the Mandatum was botched, as the Pope illicitly washed the feet of women and unbelievers.

Benedict Carter said...

Prof. Basto:

" ....starting with those that separate the various Christian churches from one another ... the residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes ...".

This is more than a call for the institutional demolition of the Church:


Eugene said...

State of necessity, anyone?

concerned said...

To those who read Italian (or who may know otherwise), is there any news of Cardinal Piacenza, the Prefect for the Cong. of the Clergy, who collapsed during Mass on Palm Sunday?

And was a letter issued, or any other gesture made to priests on Holy Thursday?

Ted Maysfield said...

Let us please recall that the "preacher to the papal household” could have been replaced by Pope Benedict with someone far more orthodox. Instead Pope Benedict left him in place. The revolutionaries in the Church in most cases pre-date Benedict and did not forfeit their power or position under him.This could be called a 'hermeneutic of continuity' in that, whether the modern pontiffs describe themselves as conservative or liberal, they all serve the same basic modernist current.

davidforster said...

There are in fact perfectly serviceable texts from Scripture that Cantalamessa could have used.

For example, Psalm 73:
"They that hate Thee have made their boasts, in the midst of Thy solemnity ... They have cut down at once the gates thereof ... They have set fire to Thy sanctuary ... Let us abolish all the festival days of God ... Our signs we have not seen; there is now no prophet ... How long, O God?"

Robbie said...

Normally, I would say this is just one relatively minor person's feelings about what should be done to fix the Church. Unfortunately though, Pope Francis almost certainly had some sort of advanced warning about the topic and seemed to, at least, tacitly approve of the topic.

I have zero doubt in my mind Francis agrees with the thrust of the Good Friday homily. As others have written, he seems to have a militant humility about him. That's clearly governed his first few weeks as Pope.

Referring to himself as the Bishop of Rome on his first day was the canary in the coal mine. I think he wants to strip bare the role which has taken. The question is though is whether many of the Cardinals will allow an institution formed by 2000 years of tradition to be recreated by one man. I don't know.

backtothefuture said...

nothing really left to demolish

OpenEyes said...

Many are now hoping for the appearance of a new St. Athanasius. Yet he's already appeared. His name was Abp. Marcel Lefebvre.

not anonymous any more said...

I don't understand why abandoning the mozzetta and red slippers are indicative of apostasy, but not the tiara.

Merci, Monseigneur said...

Yes, and this is the Year of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who without whom my Catholic family would have long ago been destroyed.

Patrick said...

"Hilltop said: 'I recite the above not as an accuser but as an observer. If we have an iconoclast in our present Holy Father, or if we have in our present Holy Father a Pope who permits iconoclasm in others, we might as well recognize the signs so that we may be aware.'"

This is the crux of the whole matter that causes springs to pop out of the faithful's heads. What happens when a pope is a manifest heretic? Does the mere fact of his universal jurisdiction require all the faithful to accept his heresy and let God punish him in the future while the rest remain piously obedient and guiltless? The East has known many patriarchs such as Nestorius who were arch-heretics as they sat on their thrones. Those that followed them became themselves heretics. Those who broke with them were considered orthodox and lauded. It only took a few decades for heresy to become firmly established and embraced. Does the papacy really possess such ethereal power to undo everything and "good" Roman Catholics must "spin" the heresy and acquiesce? If so, then all that is honestly required of a Roman Catholic today is to blindly acknowledge papal power and leave the details to those whom God has obviously entrusted the Kingdom. "Pray and obey!" then becomes the slogan. I recognize that the vast majority of the faithful today are the tragic result of decades of ecclesiastical abuse to the point that their faith amounts to little more than cultic hero worship when there happens to be a concert. I am so bored by these starry-eyed crowds at papal events who would be just as ready to cheer if (fill in the blank, practically anything) occurred. As to the Rev. Cantalamessa, he seemed just fine for the last two popes. That speaks volumes and my days of observing are drawing to an end.

El Cid said...

Rev. Cantalamessa's homily is, I think, indicative of fissures within the Vatican--and among clergy globally--that is likely to become more prevalent in the coming months. I submit the following study in contrast between Archbishop Cordileone and Cardinal Wuerl as a case in point:

+Cordileone: "Those who believe what every human society since the beginning of the human race has believed about marriage, and is clearly the case from nature itself, will be regarded, and treated, as the next class of bigots," he told USA Today. "That's untrue, and it's not kind, and it doesn't seem to lead to a 'live and let live' pluralism."

+Wuerl: "The only thing I worry about is someone saying to me, 'You, because you believe that sex is intended for marriage and because you believe that marriage is indissoluble and because you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,' that somehow you don't belong here. That somehow, this is bigotry or this is hate speech,” he said. “That's what I worry about. There has to be room enough in the society as large, as free and as pluralistic as America to make space for all of us.”

GMMF said...

The Pope is not an iconoclast in the sense condemned as heresy by the Second Council of Nicea. He venerates images of Our Lady and other Saints often, and even wears an image of Our Lord around his neck.

Patrick said...

Iconoclasm is only one of so many. This should be interesting.

JTLiuzza said...

Remaking the Papacy in your own image and likeness, as if the Papacy was yours to do with what you please, seems to me to be about the most un-humble thing one could possibly do.

David said...

From reading over the homilies of Pope Francis from this past Holy Week, what struck me is that I see the message of salvation being watered down by empty gestures and simple platitudes. While this may sell well with the shallow secular culture of our times, I don't see anything that will truly move people to follow Christ. Once it no longer matters whether you truly follow Christ or not, then what is the point? Why should anyone listen when you show no strength of convictions? We seem to be returning to the Church of all carrot and no stick. Washing the feet of women, and more troubling, followers of Mohammed, is not going to lead anyone to conversion. Only by preaching the Lord's truth, and not our own, does conversion occur. If we are all equal, if everything is relative, again the question becomes, what is the point? If you strip away the liturgy piece by piece, then what is left of the Church? Just another NGO. So it's not just without the cross that we cease to follow Christ, but also without the reverence for Him, that only He is truly worthy of. The Mass is not about us, the Mass is about Him. When we forget to worship Him truly and with reverence, we begin to slowly fall away from Him, until it is not Him that we worship anymore, but the god of our own 'humble' human selves, brought low by the serpent.

Fashioned said...

In some news back in Argentina, Francis appointed his auxiliary bishop, Mario Poli, to be bishop. Poli's view of Francis?
Mario Poli: "Yo soy pastor y no político; no soy Bergoglio en eso"

Now, as a politico, will Francis go 100% for the big tent approach? The only way to fill a big tent in the modern world is to lower all standards and also abandon principles as much as necessary.

Fashioned said...

This is from way back on March 14, 2013, when paying the hotel bill was the big story:

And he has a sense of humor.

During dinner after his election on Wednesday, the cardinals toasted him, Dolan said. "Then he toasted us and said, 'May God forgive you for what you've done.'"

Prof. Basto said...

Not anonymous any more,

No-one mentioned apostasy.

But the abandonment of the Tiara is also hugely problematic.

The fact that Pope John Paul II explained that the Tiara was not a symbol of temporal power, but a religious symbol, but that yet it would seem in the eyes of the world to be a symbol of a temporal power of a bygone age, and yet he reiterated the abandonment of the Tiara in the manner of his Predecessor, is just a proof of how inadequate John Paul II was.

As were Paul VI, John Paul I and even Benedict XVI. They have presided over the secularization of formerly Catholic societies, over the decline in vocations, over the loss of respect for Canon Law, over the abandonment of the disciplinary nature of the Magisterium, initiated by John XXIII.

The tiara was abandoned to the pages of history together with the traditional rules of fasting and abstinence, together with traditional Catholic devotional practices, together with the Eucharistic fast, together with devotion to the Eucharist, together with deep respect for everything that was directly or indirectly connected with Catholic liturgy.

And in the place of the mysterious regalia, paraments, vestments, rubrics, associated with the Mass of Ages, including the Papal Tiara, the mundane, the pedestrian Novus Ordo was implemented.

And thereby the Latin Church acheived a feat never before seen in history, a supreme feat of an Hermeneutic of Rupture and Destruction: the TOTAL replacement of its Liturgy and of its paraliturgical ceremonial with new and empoverished rites and symbols, fabricated in the 60's with the view of appeasing Protestant non believers.

Father G said...

Great posts Mr. Carter and Prof. Basto

The thing is...they have been doing this for the past 50 years beginning with Vat.II and the novus ordo missae..with Pope Francis, I afraid to say, we haven't seen anything yet.

Cuff of Coppee said...

"May the Holy Spirit, in this moment in which a new time is opening for the Church, full of hope,

Hey, it's a NEW new time! A New, new Pentecost! NEW NEW SPRINGTIME!

Hey wait a minute, 'dem are load bearing walls sir!

Bookworm said...

From TRADITI HUMILITATI, Encyclical of Pope Pius VIII, May 24, 1829:

"Truly the impious have said: 'Raze it, raze it down to its foundations.' (Ps 136.7.)

Among these heresies belongs that foul contrivance of the sophists of this age who do not admit any difference among the different professions of faith and who think that the portal of eternal salvation opens for all from any religion.... This is certainly a monstrous impiety which assigns the same praise and the mark of the just and upright man to truth and to error, to virtue and to vice, to goodness and to turpitude.

Indeed this deadly idea concerning the lack of difference among religions is refuted even by the light of natural reason. We are assured of this because the various religions do not often agree among themselves. If one is true, the other must be false; there can be no society of darkness with light (Jn. 3:19-21; 2 Cor. 6:14; 1 Jn. 1:5-7).

Against these experienced sophists the people must be taught that the profession of the Catholic faith is uniquely true, as the apostle proclaims: one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5). Jerome used to say it this way: he who eats the lamb outside this house will perish as did those during the flood who were not with Noah in the ark (Epistle to Damasus, the 37th pope). Indeed, no other name than the name of Jesus is given to men, by which they may be saved (Acts 4:12). He who believes shall be saved; he who does not believe shall be condemned (Mk 16:16)."

Tenebrae said...

As a Jesuit Francis comes from an order that, true to the military background of Ignatius of Loyala has always put blind obedience above reason. It is clear that Francis has a strength of will to get his own way, quite unlike the gentle Ratziger who proved to be a "paper tiger" - failing to implement most of what he urged in print.
I rember reading a study of the Post V2 "reform" of an active order of sisters in the Jesuit tradition. Up til V2 they had thriving numbers, ran schools, wore the habit, lived in community and celebrated the hours. Then a new superior general came in bit by bit she reformed. Out went the habit, the saying of the hours, the community living etc. She met much resistance but ultimately she got her way because the order stressed obedience and so the sisters obeyed. Of course the order collapsed to a shadow of it's former self. The order had been "renewed" the way the iceberg "renewed" the Titanic! But it was the last line of the study that always haunted me. The order had a rule that the Superior General was elected for 5 years renewable once. When her 10 years were over a successor was elected but the author commented she had no real successor because she had destroyed the authority if her office along with the order itself but because she was charismatic and because the sisters were used to obeying that woman personally none of that was apparent til she had demmitted office. This may well be the outcome of the Franciscan papacy: he will bring in extreme reforms. The liberals will love them and the traditionalist through gritted teeth will obey and by the end the Catholic Church will simply be a form of Anglicanism and the next Bishop of Rome will have no more authority than the Archbisop of Canterbury. In a very real sense Francis may be the last pope a title he himself never uses. Perhaps he should have taken the name "Samson" as he will use his strength to bring the temple of Holy Mother Church down.

John said...

GMMF said... "He venerates images of Our Lady and other Saints often, and even wears an image of Our Lord around his neck."

The iconoclasts still retained the image of the Cross. One can be an iconoclast without going all the way to capital-I Iconoclasm.

But the Catholic Church has been iconoclastic since Vatican II. In the wake of that horror show, in my own area, the gorgeous marble high altar of a historical church was violently destroyed and cast into a dumpster. Even the relics of the saints!! People walked into church one Sunday and everything was gone.

That's old news now, but this whole modern movement was kicked off by utter madness that had not been seen since the 8th century.

Francis is finally bringing the fulness of VII to the highest level. It's all about warm fuzzy feelings.

Holy Tradition, which was created to protect the Church, has been systematically dismantled and thrown away. You cannot simply snap your fingers and bring it back, either. It is gone, and what took 50 years (or even two weeks!) to destroy will take exponentially longer to rebuild.

I fear the Catholic Church is quickly going the way of the Anglicans. Look at how they destroyed themselves from 1900 to today. The useful idiots were taken by the ideas of little reforms around the edges to promote fairness and equality. And now they have lesbian priestesses and everything else you can imagine. Unthinkable 100 years ago.

I'm sorry I don't have anything hopeful to say. It's just SO bad and dangerous, I cannot even process it.

AndrewRusso said...

Me thinks Bergoglio is the best recruiting tool the Society of St. Pius X ever had. Bishop Fellay had better start on a crash seminary-building program.

Corax said...

I remember a certain Welshman to whom all Traditionalists owe a great debt once commenting "We are witnessing not the renewal but the “accelerated decomposition of Catholicism”, our bishops, beginning with the bishop of Rome, insist that we are basking in the fruits of a new Pentecost"

Sadly I was not privileged enough to meet Mr Davies in person but I humbly submit that if for no other reason we must Fight tooth and nail for Tradition so that he and Msgr's Lefebvre and Castro De Myer did not labour in vain to protect our Catholic Faith

katie said...

There is much for Francis to do
1. get rid of the bank
2. get rid of the papal state
3. sell of as much of the gold and jewels as possible and use it for the poor
Paul VI (encyclical letter Populorum Progressio, 1967): “Private property does not constitute for anyone an absolute and unconditional right. No one is justified in keeping for one’s exclusive use what one does not need, when others lack necessities.”

MDer said...

Corax, you've just reminded me that on Youtube there are some good talks by Davies. Search using this:

Michael Davies, long

Caroline said...

I think it's hopeless. The staircases are down, the pillars destroyed, the roof torn off, the walls crumbling, the inner treasures looted or scattered to the winds.

In my N.O. parish the priest preaches heresy almost constantly. He has contradicted the Marian Dogmas, forbidden the Rosary and the St. Michael prayers, locked the church all day, deprived lifelong parishioners of the Last Rites, cancelled Adoration at least half the time, fired everyone "traditional" from the Parish Council or volunteer jobs, placed a child offense convicted criminal as Sacristan, Plant Manager, and Vicarate rep (with master key and access to children).

The priest's latest: we are not allowed to pray for ANY sick or dead parishioner. He forbids mentioning their names in the Intercessory Prayers or even in the bulletin. We have to find out about deaths (which are many, very elderly congregation) thru the gossip mill.

This is the worst N.O. parish I have ever seen, and 90 percent of my "Catholic" brethren just go along with it. The other 10% are stunned and hurt, and write and write to the bishop - to no avail.

The Church is dying and just about dead. I have not met a decent priest (NO) in decades. They are simply ignorant. The "Remnant" left is so spread out (except a few urban areas) we cannot get together to try to maintain our faith practices.

To be a Catholic today is to have your heart constantly broken.

Woody said...

As Katie infers, Francis is looking more and more like the second coming of Paul VI, rather than, as hoped by our CRC friends, for example, John Paul I. Even they appear to be starting to have doubts:

Joe said...
Dança do Fogo Sagrado
Vigília Pascal - Paróquia Bom Pastor - Campinas
Dança do Fogo Sagrado / 2013

Simon Platt said...

Dear Katie,

did you ever explain how and why you disagreed with Benedict XVI? I'd really like to know.

Corax said...

Dear Katie

All of those gold and jewels (I presume you are talking about that which decorates the alters of Rome's churches was paid for by the halfpennies (Italian equivalent of) for the Glory of God so that the Most Holy Sacrifice could be conducted in the most august manner possible, they did this because they desired the greater Glory of God rather than the (perfectly legitimate0 fleeting pleasure of whatever the Italian equivalent of a pint of ale is.

I was in at the Birmingham Oratory yesterday for Solemn Vespers and Benediction, the place is incredibly ornate and beautiful and is the only free beauty available for miles around (it is located in a very poor part of the city), Westminster Cathedral (wonderfully ornate) likewise was built with the halfpennies of working class men and widows mites .

Oh and just in case you didn't know the name of the first person who advocated what you suggest was Judas Iscariot

David Messick said...

The Church is a ship, if one starts to tear away the hull, the ship will sink. This sermon seems contradictory to the supposed reason for the current Pontiff taking the name of Saint Francis of Assisi. Who's mission it was to rebuild, rather than knock down. There has been enough knocking down, it is time to rebuild what has been lost. Tearing down more will only cause more to be lost.

Lastly, I cannot help but remember the prophetic words of the Venerable and Most Reverend Fulton J. Sheen, waring about knocking down parts of the Church.

"In the midst of a great sea there was an island with a great wall, a high wall. On that island lived children, who sang and played. One day some men came to the island in a rowboat.

They called themselves 'liberators' and said to the children, 'Who put up these walls? Who built these barriers? Can you not see that they are restraining your freedom and your liberty? Tear them down. Be free.'

The children tore down the walls. Now if you go back, you will find all the children huddled together in the center of the island, afraid to sing, afraid to play, afraid to dance, afraid of falling into the sea!" -- The Venerable and Most Reverend Fulton J. Sheen

Anonymous said...

To Katie,
if you don't like either banks or Vatican or gold and jewels and private property right, why don't you move to North Corea and let all other people enjoy all that stuff ?
Are you aware of all the charities and schools and hospitals etc.etc run by the Church ? If they simply stopped to run them in Italy only, our State will crumble to feet in a matter of days in order to get in charge of all things !
Rosa, Italy

Hilltop said...

' ...a Bishop dressed in White 'we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'.
"Peter of Rome"

So we have a newly elected Pontiff who is dressed in white and who from his dress gives the impression of being the Holy Father but only claims the title "Bishop" (of Rome)
And we have in the same man a successor to Peter who, to date, only claims Rome. Petrine? yes. Beyond Rome. No (so far).

Watch and pray that interpretations like this are wrong...

iowapapist said...


I agree that friarpaul's spin on the situation is an example of argumentum ad misericordiam. While admittedly not a trained logician, is there perhaps a touch of argumentum ad populum (i.e. using an appeal to passion in lieu of logic)? It seems as though both of these fallacies are commonly used by iconoclasts both secular and spiritual. The insult to intelligence does get tedious.

tt said...

Well, Fr Cantalamessa is right in one thing: there are certaintly obstacles, "partitions, staircases, rooms and closets" that impede the message of the Church. The failure of the Church in evangelizing the modern world shows that much.

But he is so wrong in identifying those obstacles and impediments. They are not "the residues of past ceremonials"; they are ambiguous and incoherent anthropocentric expressions of the "new theology", that prevent the articulation of the simple christian message and render the faith unintelligible. That's the thing that suffocates the Church's message; that's the thing that must be knocked down. And instead of it, we have to return to clear and simple catechesis that worked so well in the past, reinforced by intellectually rigorous thomistic theology and philosophy.

The liturgy, on the other hand, is an expression of our attitude toward God. Do we care about Him, do we adore Him and treat Him as God - or do we not? Minimalist liturgy - minimalist faith. Horizontalist liturgy - God forgotten. Dear Pope, dear Fr Cantalamessa, isn't this obvious?

Fashioned said...

John said, "It's all about warm fuzzy feelings."

Well, Francis said about kissing criminals' feet that it came "from my heart. Things from the heart don't have an explanation."

Frank S said...

It's all being destroyed! Oh God HELP US!!!!!

Mike said...

I am not happy with the "poverty" being forced on many fine traditions that remind us of the splendor of the Papacy, however:

Last summer, with Archbishop Muller's appointment to the CDF, many here cried havoc, we have a modernist at the CDF.

Well, if Pope Francis, and God forbid it, inclined to listen to arguments for female deacons, I suspect it won't go very far, for Muller has literally "written the book" on how female deacons are 100% inconsistent with the Apostolic Faith.

My friends, Providence still exists.

jp said...

Among all the medieval churches of Arezzo's countryside (Casentino) the most beautiful church was proudly built, it recites an inscription, in tempore famis, that is: in time of famine. I can only think that the idea of pulling down and destroying must be conceived by those who never knew any time of need.

Haec nox est in qua primum patres said...

Call me a hopeless optimist, but perhaps the reason Cantalamessa has remained in place is because the Papal Household is the place he can do the least damage?

M J Cronin said...

Benedict Carter said: I think they are just going to go for broke in a spirit of "what the hell, who knows maybe we'll get lucky".

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Just like the failing "democratic socialist" government in the western political world, the destroyers get to a point where pretty much anything goes, because there's a) not much left to lose, and b) in any case, no-one to stop them until the next election.

The concern about this pontificate - after merely 2 weeks - appears to be almost universal amongst conservative Catholics (even amongst some of the less conservative).

It seems clear that the revolution has had a shot in the arm. May God help His Church.

M J Cronin said...

Deetz said:
Luther would find nothing objectionable here and approve highly of this sermon.

Herein lies the essence of the revolution. Only this time, the destroyers have stayed within Holy Church's walls.

Bingleby said...

What next? bulldoze the Vatican state? Turn St Peter's basilica into a giant soup kitchen? Burn all liturgical books? Ask Hans Kung to be the papal speechwriter and ghost write some encyclicals? We may as well ordain gorillas and chimpanzees. There will be no quick end to this madness. Oh and it is all for "pastoral reasons" isn't it?

El Franco Loco said...

Ora et Labora, the primary sense in which a trad-minded translator would have to understand "fiesta" is "festum". That there are happy overtones in both Spanish and Latin is no mere coincidence.

The novel phrase "habiendo celebrado la fiesta de ..." isn't really new. It occurs for example in this passage that was published in Mexico in 1853:

"Después, por el año de 1159, el Exmo. é Illino. Sr. Dr. D. Manuel Antonio Rojo Rio y Vieyra, arzobispo y capellán general de Manila, alumno distinguido del colegio, habiendo celebrado la fiesta de S. Ildefonso su patrono en el año dicho, le cedió auténticamente este dia su esquisita y copiosa librería, regalando en el acto la mayor parte de sus libros, y reservándose con calidad de préstamo los restantes."

The horror!

As for "la comida", the meal, I believe the error would lie in imagining that the Mass is only a meal. This is manifestly not the case, as the Cardinal's opening words at 1:51 were:

"Oremos, hermanos, para que esta sacrificio mio y de Ustedes sea agradable a Dios Padre Todopoderoso".

Surely we could attack the brevity of the mass, or the music, or the happiness of the children, pero, que no. Let it go.

"Remember my judgment: for also shall be so: yesterday for me, and today for thee." (Sirach 38,23)

"Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." (Matthew 6,34)

Uncle Claibourne said...

Thank God for this blog. The last place where we traditionalists can vent and try to figure things out together. Fr. Z, as I just noticed, is now peddling "Pope Francis Z-Swag".

The "Company Man" will cling to the sinking ship to the bitter end. New Catholic and collaboators, I totally understand if you don't approve this. But somebody needs to say it.

Anonymous said...

We have endured the "fruits" of Vatican II.

Now it seems that we have to endure the "fruit cakes" of Vatican II as well!


Archimandrite Gregory said...


If the 10% were to walk out, stop contributing to the parish and inform the bishop of their intent, I doubt that this "priest" would be there much longer. Mention the pedophile sacristan in the report and that will shake things up at the chancery and, if need be, contact SNAP.

Wormwood said...

In Pope Paul VI’s words . . . “from some fissure the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God.”

Satan will no longer be looking for fissures when the temple walls are brought down.

Proponents of novelties, however, don’t need fissures, etc. They already enter with impunity in grand ‘processions’ via the front door, swaying and dancing in rainbow colored costumes to the sound of profane music.

20 years ago I found myself a catacomb where Catholic tradition reigns supreme and I’m not leaving it anytime soon.

Lynda said...

It is certain suffering. But you ought to complain about the most serious matters right to the CDF. Keep a factual record for future reference. God bless you. Many of us suffer with priests who do not profess the Faith, but oppose it, with impunity.

Joan said...

Uncle Claibourne,

It's helpful you spoke up - if we vet that subject fairly and reasonably.

I myself was an ardent Fr. Z follower until about a year ago. Until it struck me he's a little arrogant, and puts down anyone who slightly disagrees with him, even in his own blog comments.

He just wrote a strangely convoluted piece with the premise that Pope Francis will save the TLM because as priests imitate him, the NO will become so bad, they will be driven to it. Well, the NO is already at the point of implosion.

He ended with an unkind bash of Benedict that was inexcusable.

That was really the gist of it, and I'm just not going to read that sort of drivel.

Fr. Z is a priest first and a journalist second, and at times I've felt he has forgotten that. I wish he'd see himself more as an educator than a critic.

Fr. Z is a brilliant Latinist and a great source of liturgical info. He should back off from the social and pastoral analysis, it's not his field and it shows.

Wormwood said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lynda said...

Cardinal Weurl looking for the easy life, not wanting to upset the ruling classes.

Lynda said...

And Holy Mass is subject to the liturgical laws of the Church wherever it is offered. And what is the basis of requesting a non-Catholic to take part in the Mass, unless that person has a disposition to conversion?

Janice Kraus said...


I read Fr. Z'a post about Pope Francis and Summorum Pontificum, too. What a graceless, snarky crack about Pope Benedict XVI.

I just saw a YouTube video of Pope BENEDICT's election and I was surprised how much it hurt to watch it now that he has abdicated, even though I share the reservations about his pontificate that many have elaborated here.

Rescue said...

These "humble" people sound like salafists and wahabists
Who also want's to return to a fictional simple, humble, pure & uniform islam, of the long gone khalifat,that never existed, and look what they have done to islam in the last ten years.
I truely fear for the future of the catholic church, these humble purifiers sounde like they want to raze st. Peters and the apostolic palace in honor of a fictional past.

gadria said...

"Thank God for this blog. The last place where we traditionalists can vent and try to figure things out together. Fr. Z, as I just noticed, is now peddling "Pope Francis Z-Swag".
Uncle are you serious?
Well the z-swag says "Pray for Pope Francis" - can you believe that -indeed those outragious catholic company man...
I always suspected that for many folks around here it is more about liturgical style than substance - yet the increasingly more unhinged rage of the uncles and carters is sad to witness for decdnt Catholics.
'The "Company Man" will cling to the sinking ship to the bitter end." That about takes the cake.

Sad - but it is good to see the true colours of some folks after all.

Athelstane said...


He ended with an unkind bash of Benedict that was inexcusable.

I think Fr. Z's comment that "And Pope Francis has done more to promote Summorum Pontificum then Pope Benedict ever did" was meant as sarcasm.

Ora et Labora said...

El Franco Loco you don't need to remind me of this passage,

"Remember my judgment: for also shall be so: yesterday for me, and today for thee." (Sirach 38,23)

I have no problem knowing that the Good Lord will judge me, I expect it. I'm not a saint and I have never claimed to be one, I'm more aware of my faults than you aware of yours.

My comment was not geared at what you are saying here "Surely we could attack the brevity of the mass, or the music, or the happiness of the children, pero, que no. Let it go."

But I think you are missing the point of my comment. The lax way of celebrating Mass of the then Cardinal Bergolio is exactly the way he is and will be celebrating the Mass now.

Bergoglio just like many members of the clergy are just undermining the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and creating a bad example for Catholics of every age.

Now that Bergoglio is the Pope of the Catholic Church and within 2 weeks he has managed to create scandal by braking away with Tradition, whatever he did as Cardinal will now reflect on what he will do during his Papacy.

And In response to your other bible passage:

"Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." (Matthew 6,34)

I think you are only trying to pick a fight.

p.s. Before I forget, in regards to your comment "The novel phrase "habiendo celebrado la fiesta de ..." isn't really new. It occurs for example in this passage that was published in Mexico in 1853." The deacon was not referring to the feast day of any particular saint. I speak Spanish and he is clearly referring to the "THE FIESTA DE JESUS"

alfred caulkin said...

with respect, from a person who is not a traditionalist:

cantalamessa was doing what is know in the trade as "kissing up to the new boss"

Marian Chevalier said...

Was not Our Lord stripped of His robes before His crucifixion? If Holy Mother Church is indeed going through her own passion to mirror Our Lord's own, this sermon shows that we have reached the Tenth Station of it.

I feel more with every passing day that the current occupant of Peter's See will be greatly responsible for degradation and humiliation of the Church during his tenure. But it is all part of God's inerrant plan.

The Minor Chastisement is coming, and the Church is prophesied to rise from the lowest depths to the greatest hights in order to conquer the hearts of all men for the Sacred and Immaculate Hearts.

Gaudete hodie, omnes gentes!

Jerry said...

'The "Company Man" will cling to the sinking ship to the bitter end." That about takes the cake.

So you're calling Father Z a "Company Man", because, despite their differences, he stands with and prays for his Pope... another term for this kind of person is "Catholic"

Jerry said...

He ended with an unkind bash of Benedict that was inexcusable

No Father Z did not 'bash' Benedict. Nor would he. His remark was ironically. The context made that overwhelmingly obvious to any attentive reader

Gratias said...

The pendulum swung. We will have to suck it up and take one for the team. Traditional Catholicism has to be preserved even if we have to return to the time of the catacombs.

We can always hope for His Holiness Pancho walks up to Sta. Trinità dei Pellegrini in Rome and asks to sit in Chorus while Guido Marini offers a Solemn Mass. The new Pope likes actions rather than reasons, so this would be the best example to calm our anxieties.

Mar said...

St. Louis de Montfort prophesied that when things got really bad for the Church - whether it was in relation to the end times I can't quite remember - God would raise up megasaints who would help the Church and lead the faithful. Oh, good Lord, please let it be soon!

Benedict Carter said...


" ... the increasingly more unhinged rage of the uncles and carters ...".

Who knows about "unhinged"? Maybe you are right.

But maybe not. Some of us have had many years experience of the meltdown following the Revolution, which I am certain beyond any doubt whatsoever was quite deliberately planned and executed, and at least some of the planning and execution was by men who actively wished the Church harm.

That being the case, and because I do not believe in co-oincidences, the sermon from Cantalamessa, tweets by Mahoney, and hints of immanentism from the Pope himself of course (quite rightly) have one's alarms tripping and red lights flashing.

As to "rage": I admit it but most certainly do not apologise. Christ Himself whipped the traders out of the Temple: how much more should heretics, apostates and homosexual clergy (and other types) be whipped out of the Sanctuary of God!

I cannot understand ANY Catholic who is NOT in a rage at what has been done. Even if you are not particularly religious but appreciate the great sweep of history and the Western Civilisation built by the Church over the many centuries with all its beauty and art and glorious music and all of it - you should be in a rage at the barbarian Popes, Cardinals, Bishops and priests who have destroyed it all!

And if you had even the first glimmerings of a clue about the grief, profound shock and psychological trauma suffered by the generation who first suffered the Revolution, you would be on your knees begging for forgiveness for your lack of understanding!

It is therefore a laudable and righteous anger felt by Traditionalists.

I certainly AM in a rage! WHY AREN'T YOU?

Jim said...

Joan, I totally agree with you. Until about a year I also used to read Fr Z's blog daily.

I began to notice however that after reading it I felt irritated and discouraged. There is a real sense that everything in the blog is pointing at Fr Z, not Christ. I didn't want to hear about what he's cooking for dinner, the birds in his garden, that he's hopes to win the best blogger prize, his begging us to donate money online for his latest overseas trip.

I feel very uncomfortable with the way he holds himself as a the interpreter of the popes, and his harsh criticism of people who hold differing opinions. There is something very puerile and self-centred about the way he writes at times.

I wish for his sake he would do less blogging and a bit more priestly ministry.

Jan said...

Thank you for publishing this sermon by Cantalamessa. It will be the last straw for many Catholics who attend the Novus Ordo Mass. Already there are rumblings from some of those Catholics who normally go with the flow because they thought the new translation of the Roman missal would sort things out. They are saying they don't want further tinkering with the Novus Ordo Mass. I'm sure it will cause many (priests and lay people) to turn towards the Latin Mass as the hopes they had have literally been smashed to pieces by this sermon of Cantalamessa.

Don M said...

Father Z was not being disrespectful to our previous Pope Benedict XVI. For me I found it more sad how hard Father Z has to work to bring a good spin on things.
We should pray for Father Z and all Priests that have ANY attachment to the Holy Traditions of our Church. Father Z along with the rest of us: I suspect will be struggling manfully with CHANGE.
Also How can any Catholic complain about a Priest promoting items with a picture of the Pope on it?
Check your passions.

Wormwood said...

gadria said... "I always suspected that for many folks around here it is more about liturgical style than substance – “

I think liturgical style is a fairly good indication of substance or the lack of it.

I went to the N.O. mass for most of my youthful years until I started looking for “substance”, and that led me to the Tridentine Mass. And there I’ve stayed where “substance” is the norm, the same substance that nurtured countless saints and martyrs through the centuries. The traditional Mass ... it’s overflowing with real Catholicity.

Andrew said...

One can only wonder what this priest must think of the Eastern Rites of the Church.

(To be fair though I read that Pope Fracis has had very close relationships with the Eastern Catholic Churches).

Jack O'Malley said...

Benedict Carter, kudos for your comment of 2 Apr at 9:44. I completely agree. Having sat through some of the original guitar masses back in the day, I was enraged then and I am enraged now.

I agree with much of the negative criticism of Fr. Z. And just for the record, Fr. Z. is a no more than an adequate Latinist, hardly a "brilliant" one. I have a file of his boners which I will not embarrass him by citing. Suffice it to say that once when his Latinity was questioned, he deleted the comment but fixed the Latin. (I was not the commenter, BTW). Not a thank-you, just a snub. Telling.

Living out my Confirmation vows to the fullest said...

Dear critics of Father Zuhlsdorf's vanity blog. I am no fan of his and haven't visited there since he started to Twit. Prior to that it was a rare visit anyway. I found him to be off the mark many times and arrogant and uninformed when it came to the SSPX. His over emphasis on food and (especially during Lent!)is in my opinion gluttonous. Then of course The Love Boat sailed with his co-arrogant and often off the mark partner Voris.

I too wish that Father Zuhlsdorf would use his website to educate Catholics on the real Catechism and the real Mass and put down the heresies being preached elsewhere. However, the comment that Father Zuhlsdorf made regarding the Summorum Pontificum was NOT a dig against Benedict XVI. It was said to show that by his nonsense Francis would send droves of Catholics to take shelter in the Traditional Mass as they flee his Modernist devilishness. A feat that would have taken Benedict's actions (which were good) generations to accomplish, Francis unwittingly accomplished (with actions that were evil) in just days.

In that same way I attribute the soaring increase of my Catholic militancy to the Modernist nonsense of ever pope in my lifetime. I couldn't get away from it fast enough. They unwittingly herded this lamb right into the arms of the Society of Saint Pius X.

MJ said...

In reply to Benedict Carter: Most everyone I know seems to be in this "daze" over the new pope; kind of the same way they were/are about Obama. I feel that some are reluctant to express any doubts. I, on the other hand, am becoming increasing outraged with each passing day. I lived through the second Vatican Council and it was horrendous.I will be attending mass at one of the SSPX chapels this weekend. I feel that is the only recourse I have and I thank God for it.

Short-Pants said...

Dear Picard, the bishops you cite saw that their mistrust of their very good and very wise Superior General was totally unfounded. So if they stopped listening to the bleating lies, why can't you?

Fellay was most prudent
And wise is the student
Who follows the example he set
But those who think lyin'
Like that of the "Lion"
Will anything good beget
Are losers and users
Of lying accusers
And that you will someday regret

John said...

I have to disagree with the idea that Francis' and others' liberal liturgical ways will drive people to traditional worship that will trigger a great reset.

Look at the Anglicans and Episcopalians. Sure, there are traditionalists who are hanging on for dear life to their traditional liturgy and beliefs. But that church has been utterly and irreversibly transformed. Who cares if the radical gays are killing themselves? They have their own in the episcopacy and they won't let it go once they have it.

We need to fight tooth and nail against every abuse. Whatever goes unchallenged will become the norm. If that means confronting your priest, or even throwing a bishop out of his own cathedral during the mass (it has happened in the east), it must be done. We are quickly moving past the time of writing letters.

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

I always suspected that for many folks around here it is more about liturgical style than substance - yet the increasingly more unhinged rage of the uncles and carters is sad to witness for decdnt Catholics

Dear Gadria. If guests at your Wedding arrived wearing Scuba Gear, Chris Brown Tee Shirts, Rickie Fowler Golf Gear, Bozo the Clown Uniforms, Bib Overalls, Pole Dancer Grab, Waste Management Uniforms, Hockey Masks, Spear Fishing Gear, or, dressed like Elton John in his Duck Uniform, would you be a decdnt Catholic would you ignore what they wore?

Barbara said...

Re: comments on Father Z.

Good grief - how fickle some are - the undermining of a good priest despite his idiosyncrasies (who doesn't have them?) is pretty shameful for Catholics. These are like poison darts. In the present situation we lay are freer to blow the lid off the strangeness going on in Rome than priests are.
I am weary of people turning sides so quickly simply because of differences of approach in countering the modernism rampaging the Church. The enemies are not everywhere - least of all in a priest of that calibre...we hardly need to create more divsions in our thinking...

God bless Father Z and all the other priests like him - who - I am sure - actually know what's going on - but cannot speak as openly and sometimes as clumsily as lay people can.

Prayers for all our good priests we would be lost without them!

Haec nox est in qua primum patres said...

Benedict Carter: "I certainly AM in a rage! WHY AREN'T YOU?"

Because rage is a deadly sin.

sam said...

@ Barbara

I agree with your comments about Father Z. Some of the comments are over the top.

Although I disagree with some of his conclusions, he is nonetheless faithful to tradition.

In those cases where his answers are diplomatic in nature, I think this is due to him being a priest. If he was to give more direct answers, then they would just throw him out without hesitation. This is why the faithful have to stand up against errors, and encourage priests who are trying to live by the received traditions of the Church.