Give Bergi a little credit, him or his "creatures and hangers on"

Friends,

Regarding this news that indeed, the Traditional Latin Mass will be widely banned, essentially outlawing it for any non-FSSP or ICKSP priest to say it  –

Give Bergoglio and his henchmen (Andrea Grillo, Tucho "Kissy" Fernandez, Vittorio Francesco Viola, & Arthur Roche) a little credit. They know full well they can't have the pre-Vatican II TLM Mass being offered because it shows – wildly, unmistakably – that the Vatican II Mass (more specifically, the Hannibale Bugnini "Spirit of Vatican II Mass") is definitely NOT Catholic, or at the very least "Catholic Lite". They can't allow the TLM to exist because it accuses them manifestly and continually. It shows them up. They want to finally "fulfill" or "complete" what they allege Vatican II started, and the TLM is a roadblock to that.

Also, remember, the Bergoglians are working on a new even more "ecumenical" liturgy that won't have a consecration. Little mentioned in the mainstream Catholic press, it has been written up and they're going to use it for the Synodal Church.

In this context, you can see why Bergoglio is pushing this right now – or his imps Grillo, Fernandez, Viola and Roche might be pushing it, as Tio Jorge himself doesn't celebrate liturgy at all and seemingly couldn't  care less. (How ironic that the champion of the Novus Ordo rite is obviously bored with it!)

Of course, trying so outrageously and stupidly to ban the TLM will ironically even prove all this to all but the most unhinged papal supremacists. Their own acts will reveal them. 

So in the Libyan fable it is told
That once an eagle, stricken with a dart,
Said, when he saw the fashion of the shaft,
"With our own feathers, not by others' hands,
Are we now smitten."

Aeschylus

Only these clowns are not eagles. They're dodos.

Kinda like the Biden administration, actually. 

  An Préachán

No to the TLM Grab: Catholic Ecumenicism with Vatican II Church Devilry Has to End /with Update

Update Note:

News of the Vatican's 'extrajudicial penal trial' against Archbishop Viganò is hardly surprising, and just confirms what I've written in the essay below. 

Amici,

One usually thinks of Ecumenicism as a "dialogue" (whatever that overused word means outside of drama or narrative) between Christian denominations, but it actually primarily occurs, I think, within the Catholic Church, and there only between the Traditional Catholics and the "Novus Ordo" Vatican II Catholics. It is NOT a dialogue, however, but a tyranny, as we've all seen these past 60 years.

It is time – long past time, but now SO obvious – Traditional Catholics ended the ecumenicalism we've had with the Vatican II Church. Yes, to be Christian is to suffer for the Faith, but it is not Christian to suffer heretics lording it over us. The secular world already hates us; we have no need to let so-called Churchmen hate us and force us to suffer their wickedness. Souls are being lost, and it has to stop.

Abrogating the TLM?

Word is out that Bergoglio and his peeps will be cracking down on – as in eliminating or banning – the Traditional Latin Mass. This will probably consist, as Anthony Stine suggests, of Rome banning the TLM in diocesan parishes. (But it could be worse, he notes.) Rorate has the initial article here. Anthony Stine provides a thorough review of it here. Stine quotes Prof. Kwasniewski discounting the rumor, but Dr Stine explains how, with Bergoglio's Vatican being what it is, we can expect literally anything to manifest. I agree. Commentator Kennedy Hall, for his part, offers a very insightful understanding of this mess. Mr Hall points out that this has happened before. This is, after all, what they forced on us in the 1970s. A billion Catholics were worshiping in the TLM, Hall reminds us, including the pope, the cardinals, bishops, religious, and the laity, and even so the Modernists dropped the hammer on it.

In this, Mr Hall makes an excellent and indispensable point. Astutely, Hall points out that Pope John Paul II (God have mercy on that confused soul) only allowed the TLM because he and his Vatican team insisted hardly anyone except old folks wanted it, as though from some sentimental attachment. And the Polish pope insisted it would not be allowed at all if any Traditionalist thought that the Novus Order slop was somehow inferior to the TLM. For JP2, attraction to the TLM was a "problem", Hall notes, reading from a JP2 document, that needed to be "solved". 

This insight says it all. For the Modernist heretics, devotion to the Traditional Faith, the handed-down Faith ("I give you what I have been given", as St. Paul says twice in First Corinthians), is merely a psychological condition that needs "solved." Or we are just plain heretics. As one Modernist wrote (referenced below), we are "not in a relationship of fidelity" to Rome, but we are "at odds" with Rome. Of course we are, you fool, because you are "not in a relationship of fidelity" to the Faith as it has been handed down from the Apostles! Duh! 

To them, the New Mass is infinitely better; we see it as infinitely inferior. To insist the Novus Ordo is better is to fry our brains on the skillet of cognitive dissonance. I, myself, grew up with the new Mass and I testify about it thoroughly in these pages; I repudiate it. It's horizontal, not vertical, secular not sacred. If nothing else, it simply prays for a lot less – literally asking for less from God – and therefore naturally far fewer graces accrue from it. Of course far fewer graces accrue from it. We've copious proof of that over the last half century, have we not? I won't go back. 

Now, clearly, these are diametrically different viewpoints between the Modernists and Traditionalists. They can't both be correct. If the Modernists (technically "post-Modernists") running the Church since John 23 called Vatican II could disregard what that impotent and flaccid Council actually recommended for the liturgy; i.e. the calls for Latin to be retained in the Mass and Gregorian Chant be given pride of place, they could get away with anything they wanted to. And they did. This despite the Vatican II Council supposedly being a "Pastoral" Council, so its teaching consists of recommendations on pastoral outreach rather than dogmatic definitions, as Vatican I and most other councils promulgated. But the Modernists use it as a dogmatic sledgehammer to smash us actual Catholics all to bits. We live in the ruins.

Whatever Bergoglio, the Anti-Pope extraordinaire, and his lavender imps and cross-eyed hobgoblins are planning for the TLM, they obviously hate it. They hate actual "bead counters" and "breeders". They obviously do not understand the Traditional Liturgy. So, therefore, surely, now it is time to say enough, as in "Good-bye to you, get out of our house!". Yes, long past time. I could list all the devilry Bergoglio has imposed on Holy Church, but you-all know most of that already. Funding the drag tranny at the children's gathering was the slap in the face many needed to wake up. The Argentinian is just the icing on the Vatican II cake.

This is why I write that our ecumenicalism with the Vatican II tumble-down disaster has to end. Yes, our Catholic engagement with Modernism and the Modernist Church has to end. 

The Apostolic Faith

There exists the Catholic Faith, the Apostolic Tradition, the Deposit of Faith that has been handed down from the Apostles, and as St. Paul wrote of it, if he himself or an angel from Heaven dare teach another, let him be anathema. (Galatians 1:8-9) Then there exists a wide variety of Churches teaching versions of this Deposit of Faith, affirming this bit while discounting that bit, picking and choosing. Some are less heretical than others, certainly, such as the autocephalous or self-headed 14 Orthodox Churches. These are separate from Rome but they have valid sacraments and Apostolic Succession. Then there are the Oriental Orthodox. Many Eastern Rite Churches exist that are indeed in communion with Rome. (Though Bergoglio is putting absolutely everything under mortal strain by making "Rome" heretical.) Then there are the Protestant Churches, 20,000 or so – some say a lot more – who are not Apostolic-founded Churches, but denominations separating themselves in profound ways from Apostolic Christianity.

Failure to Stop the World Wars

Ecumenism was a big thing post World War II, as the various theologians and church leaders tried to deal with their being totally impotent to affect such a abrutal horror as either World War – or for that matter, the looming World War III. (That's something Bergoglio could be raising Cain about, but he is too busy coddling homosexuals.) During the Covid fraud, the Vatican II Church went belly up entirely. Though the pre-Conciliar Church was quite healthy generally speaking, these disaffected leaders during Vatican II and after pushed the idea to make the Church relevant again by refounding it as more modern, more "with it", more mundane and less "religious' or "spiritual". A key to this Modernist self-inflicted murder focused on Modernists trying to attract mainly the Protestant sects into rejoining the Catholic Church via negotiations – the idiot idea being to make Catholicism more like Protestantism so Catholicism would be less objectionable to Protestants. 

• That was the origin of the Novus Ordo, the New Mass as Annibale (Hannibal) Bugnini – the toad who wrote the new Mass up – himself said. No wonder so many Catholics left the Church after the Church imposed it on them.
  
• But the basic idea on its face is asinine. 
• No Protestant can respect it, as it is so craven, and no true Catholic can tolerate it, as it most definitely isn't Catholic. 
  
• For hundreds of years now, Protestantism has defined itself in thousands of ways, but common to all its emendations stands its refusal to be Catholic. Ecumenism is as dumb as trying to "reunite" with the Jews by adopting kosher laws when Jews have spent the last 2,000 years being Jewish precisely by rejecting Christ, the point of Christianity. 
• Finally, trying to be "Protestant-lite", Catholics only succeeded in insulting Protestants by "getting into their lane". Of course they're insulted. They staked out their ground years ago and don't want us invading it. So imbecilic is all this that perhaps it is true this is all a plan of the Freemasons to bring down the Church.
  

Ecumenicism

Ecumenicalism is a falsity in and of itself. It's founded not on reason but emotion. ("Wouldn't it be nice if we could all agree?") It's not about faith but negotiation. Christianity is not – and never has been – about negotiations with other religions. Even within itself. From the beginning, Christians saw all other religions as at best false, at worst diabolical. And as one can see from St. Paul, they continually policed themselves. Christians could have saved their lives by burning a pinch of incense to the emperor; it would have been easy to "negotiate" that. Yet they would rather die. That's because they had FAITH in Christ and knew via God's grace that all else was a lie. And now we are reliving exactly this situation, with our pinch of incense now required abandoning the Traditional worship. 

This is essential to understand. While paganism is about ignorant superstition or tribal identity ("I swear by the gods my people swear by" Cú Chullainn used to boast) and Judaism is about inheritance and Islam is about submission (Al-Islam literally means The Submission), Christianity is about Faith in Christ, and Faith is more than belief: it is a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is supernatural, and definitely not up for negotiation.

Besides: Individuals convert. Institutions do not. Individual pagans can become Christian, as can Jews and Muslims (though the latter might be killed for doing so). Catholics can convert to other religions or become atheists. That's the Mysterium Fidei of God's gift of grace and the vagaries of human free will. None of that is arrived at by committees negotiating minutiae – or by elite bureaucrats imposing their diktats on the Faithful.

Ecumenism, if it is anything other than being "nice" to folk of other religions, is a negotiation: "Well, if we give up this teaching, will you join with us then?" Or "If we accept your teaching on this, will you join us then?" And that is exactly how John Paul II and Benedict saw easing off on TLM restrictions. A negotiation. Offering crumbs to dumb birds to keep them from flying the coop. But they imposed a time limit from the beginning, as Kennedy Hall asserts. Their patience with us has run out. Our Traditional time is over, this new Vatican ruling is saying. Pinch the incense or else. They fully intend to force the issue. We must refuse their entire gambit.

In short: WE CATHOLICS have had to give up so much of the Traditional Teaching of the Faith to the Modernists who took over the Church just in order to "stay Catholic" and not be called Schismatics or Sedevacantists. But it was never enough, was it? It never is with terrorists, and that's what the Vatican II Reformers were. Now, with Bergoglio bringing to birth this demonic "Synodal Church" of his, they're demanding even more! The Ape of the Church is come. And it is a baboon.

What Modernists Think

No. Just no. Of course Modernists think the Traditional Catholicism isn't true, or THE Faith is just a mental condition explained by psychology. Remember the fundamental idea of Modernism is that life evolves, our understanding of things evolves, and even God evolves. And they are the elite who see all and know all and we have to evolve as they tell us to. 

Of course they think they can manipulate us, push us around, consign us to some reservation in a school gym somewhere. Until they terminate us. Remember, to them, we have a psychological condition that needs "solved." Or we are just plain heretics. Anthony Stine in a followup podcast in which he reads from an interview with Andrea Grillo, the Vatican's "leader of liturgical progressivism": it is Grillo who asserts we are "not in a relationship of fidelity" to Rome, but we are "at odds" with Rome. Grillo also callously dismisses the Chartres Pilgrimage, saying,

"What are 18,000 people compared to the great multitude of the Catholic Church? Little more than a sect that experiences infidelity as salvation, as is often linked to moral and political positions, and very concerning customs. Tradition and Traditionalism cannot be equated."

That's exactly what they think of us. This is 180 degrees opposite of Tradition's understanding of the Faith, of devotion and the innate human desire to worship God as God has laid down.

We must break with these people. They are not Catholic. Bergoglio has defected from the Church, and this Professor Grillo, a VIP in Bergoglio's Vatican speaking though the Argentinian's mouth, is a truly blind guide. Grillo is a callous ideologue whose heartlessness is as plain as if he had horns and a forked tail. Fr James Mawdsley presents an excellent explanation of why Bergoglio cannot stop priests from saying the TLM starting at 12:06, "A word about obedience".

Millions have left the Church and the Holy Sacraments necessary for Salvation – to them the Sacraments are just juju, magic superstition for mental degenerates exactly like some Protestants have so long alleged. No wonder the Vatican II Church is so "Protestant"!

Raising Christ's Royal Standard

Suffering is a part of life, and sometimes we must suffer: accident, heartache, disease, tragedy. We Catholics can carry it too far, as did Luisa Piccarreta of the false Divine Will cult within the Church. (For details, see Fr Mawdsley.) The Blessed Virgin Mary as Our Lady of Sorrows is the all-time exemplar of true Christian suffering. She endured all that God sent her after her Fiat without the slightest demur, and is therefore the greatest created being, and our Mother and Intercessor. See what the demons testify to this.

In terms of the Faith, however, the world will always hate Christians because it hated Christ. We suffer when we must but it is sadomasochistic to suffer needlessly. We instinctively draw the line at a certain point. 

1. We couldn't let the Jews kill off Christianity in the first forty years of the Faith.
2. We couldn't let the Gnostics bury it alive in its infancy.
3. We couldn't let the pagan Roman state snuff it out, the Germanic barbarians or the later Mongols crush it.
4. We definitely could not let Islam – yet another Gnostic legalistic system – swamp it and tax it to death. 
5. We couldn't let the Cathar Gnostics kill it with their homosexual cult in the Middle Ages any more than we can let perverts destroy it now. 
6. And we couldn't let Protestants dissolve it into initial confusion, then empirical irrelevancy and finally the modern all-pervasive secularism.
7. We cannot let Bergoglio and Grillo and so many others destroy it from within, either, any more than we can allow the One World Government or Communism or Consumer Capitalism or Freemasonry to throttle it. The challenges from "the world, the flesh, and the devil" never end.
   

For our children's sake, we must preserve the Faith. We must fight. Therefore I repudiate Bergoglio, and have done so for some time. If that makes me a Sedevacantist, then at least I am not suffering from Cognitive Dissonance. What we need is a bishop, just one, to start the avalanche that has been building pressure and is about to burst. Bishop Strickland, for example, or Bishop Schneider to name another, who would formally declare by their Apostolic Authority that Bergoglio and Grillo and the rest have clearly defected from the Catholic Church, and that Catholics need to anathematize them.

We need to raise Our Lord's Royal Standard, the Sacred Heart, and not take it down until God triumphs.

        AnP

'The "Vatican Rite" or "Pauline Rite" is the Novus Ordo, but NOT the Roman Rite...'

Amici,

For all of us repudiating and discarding – to the extent we can avoid it, something Bergoglio is making difficult at the moment – the hapless, never sufficiently disparaged Novus Ordo Mass, there's an essay from Dr. Peter Kwasniewski at OnePeterFive, here online that I encourage everyone to read.

Dr. K is a great defender of the Vetus Ordo, the Ancient Rite, the TLM, and I always read him with profit. Usually, my only quarrel with him revolves around whether Bergoglio (for whose pitiful soul we must all pray while he's still among the living, before it is too late for him to repent – though it is a pretty big mountain to repent: i.e. a lifetime of trashing out the Church and supporting the sexually deviant in myriad ways) is actually pope.

But leaving that issue aside, this article at OnePeterFive focuses on the infamous Sant’Anselmo professor of liturgy Andrea Grillo. Grillo has been outed as the creator of Traditiones Custodes and the subsequent liturgical garbage Bergoglio has tightened around our necks, like successive slave collars. Indeed, except for one or two individuals, Grillo is perhaps the biggest influence on Bergoglio.

The article is lengthy, but should you have interest in how the official Catholic Church (à la the "Officials" for you who know IRA history) is now so determinedly anti-TLM, well, Grillo is yer man. He's just evil. And stupid. These two estimable qualities vie in his cockroachian soul. But don't take my word for it. Read the article.

I will say that the comhrá os íseal, the scuttlebutt, that the TLM will be formally cancelled sometime next year, must come from Grillo's fevered imagination. "Grillo proposes, God disposes" ought to be a saying. Actually, Grillo is insisting it is banned already! (Read the article.) By this time next year, however, there'll be mass starvation around the world, national power outages in the "developed world", esp Europe, and social unrest on a horrendous scale. Covid vaccine mortality alone will bankrupt public and private insurance on a planetary scale. So somehow I think it will be easier than ever to dismiss Bergoglio's rantings (as indeed, Prof Kwasniewski would have us do, though not as I would, as the words of an anti-pope whom we must pray for lest he be damned).

Here is an extract from the article, a fascinating and a very revealing exchange of email Grillo had with a student; here's the student:

More and more voices, of different sensibilities, testify that the 1969 operation was truly radical, in the face of a limited conciliar mandate: from the right, as in Card. Stickler’s lengthy memoirs; and from the left, as in Fr. Gelineau’s lapidary comment: “This must be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.”

And it is precisely on account of Gelineau’s admission that I personally feel like making a concession: it is indeed true that the theorem of the two forms of the Roman Rite is fragile (to be generous) and sophistic (to be more ruthless). For the Council had called for a reform of the Roman Rite. The Consilium produced instead a “Vatican Rite” or a “Pauline Rite,” with some vestigial resemblance to the historic Roman Rite, and some superficial resemblance to some of the Council Fathers’ indications, although most were ignored de plano. Hence with a little intellectual honesty—but that is still a long way off—it will sooner or later be necessary to acknowledge that the Vatican Rite or Pauline Rite is not the Roman Rite, as indeed a forthcoming book argues.

AnP again:

• An excellent way of saying it. The Vatican II Council called for one thing and got another, something with "some vestigial resemblance to the historic Roman Rite, and some superficial resemblance to some of the Council Fathers’ indications." Touché. It's ridiculous, but there it is. We should have demanded they toss it back then, reject it on the spot, yet the "Vatican I Church" (from 1870 to 1962) had drilled Catholics to pray, pay, and obey. No longer. That sort of submission no longer exists much of anywhere in the Church.
  
• FWIW, I never bought into Ratzinger's spiel that two forms of the western Roman Rite existed, the "Ordinary" form and the "Extraordinary" form. Many others did not, either; anyone, in fact – me thinks – will come away with that realization who bothers to even remotely interact with the TLM Vetus Ordo. Hence the idea of a "Vatican Rite" or "Pauline Rite" seems so fitting. The N.O. is an alien thing altogether. A Changeling. As I say, it's a Methodist service with one of the N.O.'s Eucharistic prayers squeezed in.
  
• If you take time to read Grillo's responses to this student above, and another exchange Prof K provided, you realize Grillo is a parrot to Modernist notions purely ideological in nature. A high apparatchik in a dying cult. Such ideas cannot be sustained except by brute force (via KGB, Stasi, or FBI), which is precisely why Bergoglio acts the way he does.
• The near-term future is not conducive to the Novus Ordo: world-wide social stresses and economic upheavals will destroy, at long last, the "Vatican II Church", for as we saw with the ridiculous Covid lockdowns, that Church has no stuffing, no guts; it bent over showed its  butt to the dominant Grillo gorilla-brute culture of power, the fascist "boot on the human face forever" (Orwell) when what the world needed was the actual Catholic Faith, represented during the lockdowns best by the SSPX, which kept chapels open and priestly services ongoing, as much as possible. If you want to see that actual Catholic Faith in action, watch this video of an SSPX priest making the rounds in Alaska. 
  
  

So, we'll see. Time will tell. But remember: Motus in finem velocior. Time speeds up before the end. Or as Aristotle said: Time is the measure of motion. And things are running ever faster toward Global Dystopia.

    An Préachán

Psalm 146 of the Douay-Rheims: verse 9:

Who giveth to beasts their food: and to the young ravens that call upon Him.