Looking at Sedevacantism Issues Again What with All Our Troubles Breaking Full Upon Us

A Chairde, Amici,

Opening Note: Regarding Bergoglio's official approval of blessing the carnally deviant, this is, of course a "deal breaker". It cannot stand. Already we're seeing battle lines drawn up across the globe, for and against. We, the laity, must not tolerate it. If you have a local priest or bishop who approves of such an "abomination set up in the House of the Lord", break it off with them. Vote with your feet. They've excommunicated themselves from the Lord Jesus Christ. Full stop. Bergoglio has taught a lot of heresy before (death penalty, reality of Hell, etc.) but this is too much. Of course, "Bergi" is just pushing the envelope, seeing how far he can humiliate God, God's Church, you, and me. That in itself is the story of his war against the TLM. It's all of a piece.

Things are dire. People are on edge. Millions are leaving the Church, "voting with their feet". Things seem to be getting ever worse, more insane, more frightening. Now, as noted, "Pope Francis", aka Bergoglio, via his creepy henchman "Tucho" "Kissy" Fernandez, has allowed same-sex blessings in the Church. Taylor Marshall opines here that this is to destory marriage as a sacrament. And exiled Bishop Strickland calls on "his brother bishops" to unite against this Vatican ruling (fat chance). 

What with all this literal filth – spiritual septic tank filth spewing all over us from Bergoglio's volcano – I have been studying the Sedevacantists again. Personally, I think it quite reasonable to deduce that the papal office stands vacant with the so-called "Pope Francis". As with the reports above, every day his "Magisterium" goes from bad to worse. Reading Liz Yore's recent work at Lifesite News reinforces this deduction. However, going beyond that idea, I was perusing the Novus Ordo Watch site, going through their blog posts and Most Frequently Asked questions. They are considered "hard" Sedevacantists; i.e., that there's been no valid pope since Pius XII's death back in October of 1958. As such, they do not consider the Vatican II Church a Catholic avatar of historical Catholicism at all. That has some far-stretching complications, indeed. It certainly explains a lot of the past 60 years' history, but it is the answer to our problems? I will discuss this below.

Now, in August of this year I had written an article about Sedevacantism. My question then embodied the following, in which I wrote back in August regarding the "hard" Sedevacantist thesis that:

Anyway, were these men NOT actual popes, then we don't have a Catholic Church, because the last priest ordained by the last bishop Pope Pius XII assigned a diocese to has probably passed away by now. Invalid, false popes cannot ordain or assign bishops, and invalid bishops cannot ordain valid priests. Therefore, Catholicism is dead.

Remember the priests exist to validly ordain the Sacraments, especially the Most Holy Eucharist. (It's by Baptism and the Holy Eucharist that we participate in all the ancient Covenants. The Covenant system God set up with the First Covenant, when He blessed Creation and established the seventh day for the remembrance of it. The Holy Eucharist, capstone of the system, is required for salvation, as St. John makes clear in the sixth chapter of his Gospel. So it can't come to an end, until The End.) And the bishops exist to ordain valid priests and keep an eye on them. And in their turn, popes exist either to ordain and assign bishops or approve the election of bishops elevated by local cathedral canons, etc., as it was in the Middle Ages and before....   

So, if valid popes have not existed since Pius died on the 9th of October, 1958, (or I suppose since June 3rd,1963, if one assumes Roncalli was a valid pope), then the Church is an illusion, a "maya" as Buddhists say. That cannot be true, either. Not if God actually exists and if Jesus Christ is indeed God. So, how to square this circle? Maybe it is just me, but I've never seen a sedevacantist explanation of this: a clear one, concise, instantly recognizable to one's reason, as are the First Principles of Logic and the Truths of the Faith.

This was it. I wanted a clear, concise, instantly recognizable explanation to how this could work: how could a Catholic Church still exist assuming the "long-march" 60-plus-year sedevacantism? And how could we know/find it?

Remember: No valid popes for so long means no valid bishops. No valid bishops means no valid priests. No valid priests means invalid sacraments and thus no salvation whatsoever. That is, of course unless we want to go Protestant and ditch God's entire Salvic Plan from the First Covenant (Genesis 2:1-3) down to the Seventh Covenant Our Lord Himself made with His Father two thousand years ago, as told in the New Covenant/Testament. 

But would the Lord God abandon thousands of years of Covenant, since Creation itself, in this way? Would he create a "Hidden Church" of true believers? And is that very idea very Protestant, in itself?

Trying to Understand This Thinking, What I Learned Is...

On their page Now What?, NOW helpfully provide a series of Mass directories where one can search for a Mass not hooked up in any way with the infamous "Vatican II sect", as they call it. I.e.

Look for a Mass location that is close to you, and keep in mind that you may have to go across state or country lines for your nearest Mass. The editors of these directories try hard to ensure that all of the Masses listed are sedevacantist, that is, as far as they know, the clergy who offer them profess the true Catholic Faith, are validly ordained, and do not profess communion with any false papal claimant or the Vatican II Sect.  

Notice they mean, of course, by "true Catholic Faith" the one defined for millennia, not its more recent iterations. And that they thereby totally discount ALL of the Vatican II Church, entirely. One has to find a Mass location (not a parish because those cannot be set up, things being as dire as the are) where the priest was ordained by a bishop who himself was NOT ordained by any Vatican II bishop – but would have been ordained by someone who "passes", someone somehow ordained in a line not connected with Vatican II.

So, that would be either some sort of SSPX bishop or priest who left the SSPX because the SSPX prays for Pope Francis, and the Society has not been cast off by the official Church. (Horrors!) Who fits such a description, though? Aye, there's the rub. Well, there were "The Nine" who left the Society at some point, and some of those (or maybe just one guy?) founded the SSPV, and was consecrated to the episcopacy by Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục (I guess it was) at some point. (Thuc died in 1984.) One of these ordinands just died, a "founder of Congregation of St. Pius V... Sedevacantist Bishop Clarence Kelly (1941-2023)". But then in the Novus Ordo Watch comments on an obituary regarding the late Bishop Kelly, debate arises whether the entire SSPV (not the SSPX, mind you) is Sedevacantist at all. Some say yes, some no, chaos reigns. Fascinating, but a bit like getting into the details of ancient Gnosticism, that or Japanese mythology. Bewildering, in a word.

Another of The Nine, was, I believe, one Father Anthony Cekada. Though dead (in 2020), he has a large Youtube presence. Look him up. You shall thereby find links to articles about some of the issues the guys commenting on Kelly's death brought up.

Another fly in the ointment is that, if nothing else, Pacelli (Pius XII) made it plain that a pope would have to approve new bishop consecrations. Things have changed since then; i.e. the mode and words of bishop consecrations have changed, the words of ordaining priests and deacons have changed, too, for that matter. Changes galore. But not only that. If I recall correctly, from at least Pius' day, the pope has to approve a bishop's consecration, and if there's no pope...er...well, you see the problem. 

Bishops are now not just consecrated as bishop of a certain town, region, or ruin, either; regardless whether they are a titular bishop of an actual place, ancient or modern, or not; they're ascended to a higher rank of clergy and are in direct Apostolic succession of the Apostles! Bishop Strickland is still a bishop fully gunned, victualed and manned, as the old Navy would say. He just doesn't have a ship, a diocese,  not even a titular one, but he still has all the power that being a bishop entails. Therefore, even "dry-docked", he has episcopal power to fire on Bergoglio, as Lifesite reports above. This, thanks to Vatican II. But not in the pre-Vatican II Church. 

Practical Considerations

• As regards changes in the consecration/ordination rites, I personally think that too much scrutiny on that makes it into more magic than grace. A spell won't work unless the words are quite right. Just ask Gandalf.
  
• But in Church sacraments, it is not magic, but grace ("grace" means Divine gift, freely given: i.e. God does this); thus, some verbal variation might be tolerable. It depends on the sacrament, and so on. Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rites, i.e. non "Roman"-Catholic Churches, have different words for ordination and consecration than the Western Church had. They've always been valid. It's the intent that mattered. (I'm just making this notation to save folk from losing their marbles about their local clergy's ability to confect the sacraments.)
  

Bottom Line

Assuming – and I think it is a valid assumption – that Novus Ordo Watch in their research, their articles, their links, are solid for "sedes", that they're well-intentioned but that their zeal puts them on a very tall cliff, basically; i.e. they solve some problems but create new ones. Perhaps even bigger ones. What can we deduce?

I'm Not Joking

That you'd rather be Orthodox. Not a joke. (Well, sarcasm.) And I do mean one of the autocephalous Orthodox Churches, "the 14". Consider, my friends: 

1. These Churches A: have existed for centuries, 
2. B: you know that since they're not "fly-by-night" you don't have to dig around to verify whether they've Apostolic Succession, and...
   
3. C: your problem is how to adapt to a foreign national culture in your religious life: i.e.: We're Western Christians. The Orthos are Russian, Greek, Syrian, whatever. Can you deal with that? Myself, I could not. (But I love icons in general and Russian Church architecture in particular!)
   

As for the search recommendations the Novus Ordo Watch suggests, I've only one word: headache.

1. A; whatever Sede "Mass community" or "church" you found would NOT have existed for very long, and thus been proven by that cruel, exacting "Test of Time"; 
2. B: therefore you would have to spend a lot of time, energy and patience trying to ferret out whether they have Apostolic Succession.
3. And C: With the Orthodox, of course, they're national Churches. So, if you are not Russian, or Serbian, or Romanian, or Greek, or Bulgarian, or Syrian, or...well, you really think some generic Orthodox Western Church is a real thing? But with these tiny Sede break-aways that are insisting they're really Roman Catholic, does that sit well with you in your craw? Maybe your gut says yes. Maybe not. And we have to live with our gut.
   

To Finish Up

The Hard Sedevacantist situation, my friends, is nearly impossible. Honestly. On the one hand, sure, they describe well and thoroughly the very falleness of the mainstream Church. (NO doubt as to the N.O. Church.) And Bergoglio is so obviously a wild boar of an enemy of Christ that he has usurped the throne (a lot like Biden and his swamping the USA with military-aged men from China, etc.). But on the other hand, their long march attempt at a solution just doesn't work for long. 

• Spiritually, who are we to ascertain that Bishop Strickland – to take an example – is not only not a bishop, but not even a priest? That he, and Bishop Schneider and so many others are what we used to say of Anglican/Episcopalian clergy: just laymen in fancy dress.
• Morally and legally, oddly but truly, we have no right to judge these others in that way. We can judge moral action, definitely; for example, Bergoglio's sell-out of the Chinese Catholics and other Christians is a horrific evil no pope could allow. Yes. See Liz Yore here. So also his "Kissy" up to the Gays.
  
• But regarding your local bishop or priest? Unless they excommunicate themselves, as in the Opening Note, can we excommunicate them?
• And what do demons judge? They are THE hyper-legalists of all hyber-legalists. If a local bishop isn't valid, he cant appoint a valid exorcist. However, I believe Fr. Ripperger has said he can cause a demon great pain by just showing him the photograph of a local bishop. And for that matter, Fr Ripperger himself, how's he casting out demons if he's just a confused layman in fancy dress?
• And finally: Practicality. Practicality hangs over Hard Sedevacantism like Damocles' Sword. What in Heaven's name is the practicality of a layman having to do tons of research, not to mention serious travel, prayer, and simple reflecting, on whether some local off-shoot outfit is really Catholic at all? Does that sound like something we can practically engage in, time and again? 
• Yes, sometimes "the less must lead" as with confronting Bergoglio, who affects us all. We can all see his immorality and judge that. We can judge those who openly embrace his apostasy. But locally, in judging whether Fr. So-and-So is a Catholic in the first place? God set up the spiritual hierarchy of human beings for a reason, and we all agree Luther went too far with his priesthood of all believers (he himself clearly thought so after seeing its consequences). 
  

Summation

Who among the laity – except for the "hard core", whoever they might be – could stand the trouble? All this searching NOW recommends, and for what? So much would depend on our money and time as well as our will, and then our mental state rather than our rational state, and wouldn't so much depend on the charisma – or lack thereof – of the priests involved? Father Anthony Cekada exhibited a great and winning personality. It is said Father Leonard Feeney (died 1978) could be mesmerizing, too. Doesn't make them wrong – or right.

1. It's obvious the Vatican II Church has troubles, and that it has been moving further and further away from the Deposit of Faith. 
2. But that's been a process, my friends. A PROCESS. It is an arc. 
3. This latest fiasco about blessing homosexuals shows it is reaching its apogee, its culmination, its denouement. Maybe the majority of bishops in the world will submit to Bergoglo and "Kissy", thus separating themselves from the Lord Jesus. We'll all be scrambling, then. But there will remain 7,000 who have not bent the knee to Ba'al. (First Kings 19:18)
   
4. I recently watched that enemy of Tradition (and hence the Deposit of Faith and hence a Ba'al knee-bender) Cardinal Wilton Gregory, say his piece about Tradition dying a bloody death. It's stomach-churning to watch. The man parodied an actor back in a '60s "Rat-Pack" movie playing a homosexual man. Gregory is very "faggoty". He's just a parody entirely. So many of Bernadine and McCarrick's highly placed "sons" are. 
5. And besides that, it's equally obvious to EVER more people that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not a valid pope. Whether invalidly elected or fraudulently elected (or post a valid election he abandoned his post argument) we can set aside for this discussion we're on. 

My argument is long-march Sedevacantism like this – that the entire Catholic Church except for a few eccentrics (apologies to everyone at N.O. Watch), is very valuable in a great many ways, but ultimately, I'm sorry: arguing over whether the SSPV is really and truly a Sedevacantist or just a seemingly merely Sedevacatist church, is nuts. I can't reduce Catholicism to that. I really don't think they want to, either.

Right now, we have to weather the storm that's on us as best we can. Pray. As I wrote above, the battle lines are being drawn. Fundamentally: Schism, True Schism, is now upon us all.

• Pray to St. Patrick. He went to Ireland without the approval of his bishops back in Britannia. They didn't consecrate him a bishop. They might not even have ordained him a priest. But he went regardless, and the Lord God rewarded his sacrifice pretty handsomely in the test of time. 
• There's a delightful Russian story about three monks on an island in a lake who spent their days and nights chanting, "We three below adore You Three above." So the local bishop got a boat and went out to enlighten them about the Faith. As he was boating homeward, he saw one of the monks running across the water. He ran to the boat and stood on the lake to ask the bishop a child-like question. I'd rather be one of those monks than the bishop, wouldn't you?
  

   An Préachán

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      

I renounce, denounce, and repudiate Bergoglio as pope – because...

...Because it is obvious he's out to destroy the Catholic Church.

Yes, that's right. It is obvious, especially after this doleful trip to Canada wherein Bergogio engaged in a pagan seance, opening his stupid self – and the prelates there with him – to demonic possession! It's insane. INSANE. And so I'm taking off the gloves. No more Mr. Nice Préachán. (And anyway, after 60 years of "turning the other cheek" to these people, enough is enough.)

Attack on the TLM intensifies

As we approach the establishment of One World Religion with the opening of the Abrahamic Covenant House in Abu Dhabi, attacks on the TLM intensify. And now the anti-pope Bergoglio is directly attacking the TLM, trying to close them wherever they are, using Cupich in Chicago,  Gregory of Washington D.C., and now the bishop of Arlington, Virginia, Michael F. Burbidge, to do so. (This tactic is being repeated all over Europe as well as North America or anywhere on the planet.) Of course Bergoglio's attack on the Traditional Latin Mass is a direct attack on Holy Church. Why?

1. Because a Church or any religion "is how it worships".
   
2. The traditional Latin saying for this is Lex orandi, Lex credende. "As you pray, so you believe". 
3. Its the style, form of worship that creates a religion's paradigm.
   
4. Making Muslims worship like Mormons or Hindus like Baptists is just as insane as making Catholics worship like Methodists. (I grew up with Methodists, and the Novus Ordo is often exactly that style of worship.)
   
5. The leaders of the Catholic Church have been launched on one huge "psy-ops" for over a half-century now, a cognitive-dissonance psy-op. The results are obvious.

More and more "mainstream" Catholics are cottoning on to the truth that is Lex orandi, Lex credende; one's worship forms one's belief. As the soul is the form of the body, so the liturgy forms the Church. When the soul departs at death, the body putrefies. We have all of us, Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, have see the Catholic Church literally decompose over the past half century. Benedict tried to reverse it with his Summorum Pontificum. and was overthrown. His 'installed' replacement, Bergoglio, has wielded his axe against S.P.

This is inherently cruel. Bergoglio's cruelty is not remotely Christian. It is not honorable pagan. We KNEW Bergoglio was bad news when he crucified the Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate, which various "Church Lady" busybodies, true imps, "accused of focusing only on the Extraordinary Form", so the bureaucracy under Benedict in 2012 launched a visitation (a formal investigation) and Bergoglio, installed March 13, 2013, in 2013 smacked them down. Hard.  

What about the current TLM smack down?

Consider this sorrowful lament – and damning indictment – of both the remorseless cruelty of Bergoglio an the screaming stupidity of Bergoglio and his henchmen. The author describes the devastation wreaked on a southern Maryland TLM parish:

"Catholics who don’t hew to the official program of mind control which views 2,000 years through the exclusive lens of one pastoral council, which occurred over a period of a few years in the 1960’s, must be monitored closely and accompanied into the true Church as envisioned by prelates promoting LGBTQ+, transgender ideology and Communion for adulterers, just for starters." (We should all memorize this!)

The author of this excellent article, Father Kevin M Cusick, notes that the parish simply cannot afford to lose the TLM: only 20 to 30 Novus Ordo parishioners show up on a Sunday, and the parish just spent a bunch of money on restoring the Church for the TLM, as well. Just a mess. People are, to use that poignant Irish phrase, "gob-smacked". In this one area, three-hundred TLM parishioners from three parishes will be herded into a mission church with room for only half that number (and apparently with little or no parking). Father Cusick likens the parishioners to being prisoners of war, herded into official camps, or to 19th century American Indians forced onto the reservation.

With all this, we can truly say, Damn you, Beregoglio, and the horse you rode in on.

Then in this article, well-known and widely respected mainstream "Trad" Dr. Peter Kwasniewski writes another of his very learned and wise articles on how the Church is in such a free-fall catastrophe, and at least we can toss the "forced optimism" that has characterized Catholic prelates and commentators for 60 years. Prelates and theologians and priests galore smiled their Joker-smiles and repeated ad nauseam how much better things were getting. Liars. The Vatican II reforms, at least as implemented by those "in the spirit of Vatican II" are an unmitigated disaster. We don't have to pretend any longer. Also, Professor Kwasniewski "goes for broke" and clearly says the Novus Ordo has no future, that the TLM will be fully restored:

I will regretfully but more truthfully stick with the language of crisis. We will never find a solution to this churchwide crisis until we reclaim our Roman Catholic birthright, our innermost identity through the celebration of our traditional sacred liturgy. When the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Divine Office, and the sacramental rites of the Church are once again offered to God in a manner truly in continuity with tradition, then, and only then, will come that “Second Spring” about which postconciliar Popes have spoken with such premature confidence; only then will a new age of evangelization begin in earnest, with the Mass of the Ages as its pulsing heart.

And:

In short, if the Catholic Faith survives in any given diocese of the West, it will survive either by embracing the Tradition of the Church, or by dwelling beneath the shadow of the wings of that Tradition. Liberal territories are drying up; the moderate or eclectic approach has shown itself weak and spineless, incapable of responding effectively to the aggressive and even demonic secularism of our time.

 

The Canadian Trip

This article at LifeSiteNews is an excellent source what what happened in Canada, while this article details some of the shocking things Bergoglio is saying about the TLM. He clearly has no clue about what attracts people to the TLM and thus you get all his commentary (and his supporters ominous wording) about how Trad Catholics need to be "re-educated". Sounds like Communist re-education camps, doesn't it? Many of his people are saying the TLM will only be allowed as a half-way house to full-scale re-education.  

The Irony of it all

Ironically, if Bergoglio's goal is to destroy Traditional Catholicism, he'll only succeed in destroying Pope Paul's creation, the inherently "disgraced" Church John Paul II kept going for 30 years. (Somewhere in these articles, one of the insightful authors wrote of the Novus Ordo that the only thing that distinguished it was the collapse of Mass attendance it caused!) Whereas another John Paul II-type pope would have killed us with a thousand cuts, Bergoglio is the axe wielder. God allows all this because the Lord wants His bishops on Earth, what used to be called the Church Militant, to show themselves to themselves (and everyone else) to be gutless cowards, knaves, and "disgraced" fence-sitters. It's a divine effort to get them to "wake up" and "repent" before they die. And as Bishop Athanasius Schneider says, the restoration of the Latin Mass is the work of the Holy Ghost and cannot be stopped. They need to get on board, or drown.

Destroyer of Church Government

Before I finish, let me take a moment to explain just how bad it is if one pope undoes, formally declares null and void, what a previous pope promulgated. Take birth control for an example. The Church has always damned artificial birth control and counseled abstinence, etc., instead. Love it or hate it (and if you hate it, you don't understand the teaching), that's the Church's rule. But if Bergoglio refutes that and supersedes it with a contrary law, then he's murdered the Papacy. Sound crazy? It's not. Why? Because the Church operates on Stare Decisis. It's governing system stands or falls on Stare Decisis.

• A pope is chief legislator and chief jurist and chief exec of the Church: he has carte blanc power – but only to defend the deposit of Faith.
  
• He's like Aladdin's genie, unlimited power but confined to a lamp – he has a very restricted use of his power.
  
• Unlike the president of the Mormon Church or a willful Protestant, like Luther, a pope cannot break precedent.
  
• As St. Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 "… 14 To this He called you through our gospel, so that you may share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brothers, stand firm and cling to the traditions we taught you, whether by speech or by letter."
  
• A pope is as bound to that as is any lay Catholic or parish priest.

Luther broke the Tradition, coming up with a novel revelation about Romans 3 while sitting on a toilet; in contrast, a Mormon president can make it by saying he has had a prophesy to reveal, such as the decision to repudiate "plurality of wives" that Mormon president Wilford Woodruff made in 1890 (after a business trip to San Francisco). No pope can do that. If a pope were to start overturning precedent, he has dynamited the Church's government. He's cut its throat.

• Bergoglio has already done this on a number of levels, such as with capital punishment, a Church teaching since St. Paul himself. See Romans 13:4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. John Paul II tried to nibble away at that, and Bergoglio has broken it, changing the Catechism (which no one reads anyway). His next step would be to excommunicate Catholics who still hold the traditional teaching.
• Because Bergoglio has set this new precedent, the next pope can overturn everything Bergoglio did, without even having to declare him an antipope. Or a pope could overturn any basic dogma. Recreate the religion in his own image. This what Bergoglio has done, and the world's bishops let him get away with it.

Bergoglio is also clearly relaxing (previous to truly changing) Church teaching on homosexuals and their behavior, (Many Progressive bishops, esp in Germany, have already done so! See this LifeSiteNews article for details.) But regarding the Traditional Latin Mass, Bergoglio, with Traditiones Custodes and its later supposed Dubia, and Archbishop (and Progressive flunky and former ice-skater) Arthur Roche's anti-Trad rulings, Bergoglio the Accursed is clearly moving toward an outright suppression of the TLM. Many commentators expect this to come in 2023. As noted above, he's allowing it a limited existence now in order to "re-educate" us.

Again, taking off the gloves, not trying to mince words and not trying to be "nice" about it, the New Mass has been an act of cognitive dissonance. It has never been accepted by everyone in the Church, beset as it has been from the beginning by controversy, bringing with it rampant abuses, scandal, sacrilege and loss of faith. (Did you see the news from Italy of the priest who celebrated Mass in the surf, on a floating altar?) As noted above, the only constant by which the Novus Ordo can be measured is a continuing decline in attendance.

So, my friends, all things Catholic are in turmoil. But secluded havens exist, such as Dom Alcuin Reid's haven in the South of France, the Monastère Saint-Benoît. And there's Silverstream Priory in Ireland. About them, too, "allegations were made" but investigation by both Irish police (The Garda) and Church authorities found "no cause of action". (It just never lets up, does it?) And of course Clear Creek Abbey in Hulbert, Oklahoma. And everywhere, too, we'll be seeing the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass offered in the proper way despite the screechings of the Progressives. (Can't someone tell them the Age of Aquarius has passed?) With God's blessing, we'll have a myriad of other such havens of the True Faith. So, keep praying!

  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.

Wilton Gregory gets face-slapped by WaPo articles on his crushing the TLM; plus Savannah

And it couldn't happen to a better ogre than the odious Gregory.

And the author of the piece, one William Wan, bothered to to actually go to the parish, something that reprobate Gregory most definitely did NOT do.

An excerpt:

An air of earnest contemplation hung over Sunday Mass, tinged by sadness. 

This would be one of the last weeks the church’s parishioners would be able to celebrate using a traditional Latin form that traces its roots back more than a millennium. 

Last year, prompted by ideological wars between conservative and liberal wings, Pope Francis said he wanted to limit use of the old Latin form of Mass. 

This week, the consequences of that papal letter — issued halfway across the world — landed here in Washington with heavy consequences for this small parish in the city’s Chinatown neighborhood. 

By Sept. 21, the parish was told, they were to cease use of the Latin rituals that had been part of St. Mary’s history almost since its founding in 1845. Friday’s local decree, written by Cardinal Wilton Gregory, who oversees the archdiocese of Washington, allows only three non-parish churches in the region to perform the Latin Rite. That means hundreds of Catholics who attend that type of Mass at roughly six parishes in the D.C. area — including St. Mary Mother of God — will be forced to overhaul their ritual or abandon their spiritual homes to attend the three locations in the area allowed to perform it. 

“It’s been devastating to be honest,” said Erin Menke, 42, whose family has attended St. Mary for almost two decades. Three sons had been altar servers at the parish. To assist the parish priest, they painstakingly learned the intricacies of the Latin Mass, which incorporates traditional elements like incense, Gregorian chant and elaborate gestures and words often missing from the modern form of the Mass. 

“There’s a sacred reverence to it that is just beautiful,” Menke said. “These words that are spoken and have been spoken for centuries in the church, they often feel like the closest thing to heaven that we’ve got. To realize we are going to lose that, we’re in shock.”

Great article, and I love it they're rubbing Gregory's smug face in it.

Another such story is surfacing in Savannah, Georgia, with the worthless bishop of Laodicea there being revealed to be nothing less than an utter worm. (Well, most American bishops are Laodiceans, those who aren't "Sodomiceans".) I'm not the greatest fan of this author, but he's raising important questions and important history we should be asking the bishops. 

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant", and with this Vatican, we need all we can get!

An Préachán