Tradicat

+ JMJ Just a quick thought for today. Some people take offense a the smallest glance, word, or phrase.  I think that in some cases this is simply because they are insecure. In other cases, some how the action has touched their self-image ... or the image of self that they want to present to the world. There is a simpler word for this - pride. How should a Catholic think of an 'offense' or word against them? My recommendation is to think of offense an object that someone either knowingly or unknowingly places on a table. It is up the persons at the table to decide from themselves whether or not to take it. You see, a person doesn't give offense, he offers it. The other person decides to take offense. Keep this in mind next time you believe someone has offended you. You can take it or you can leave it. P^3

+ JMJ In my research on the topic of 'state of necessity' I came across a number of good articles (some have been posted here already). Fr. Rostand makes a very good point: MJM: Archbishop Lefebvre justified his decision to consecrate bishops against the will of the Holy Father in 1988 by citing a provision in the Code of Canon Law for extraordinary measures during a “state of emergency” in the Church.  If rapprochement between the SSPX and the Vatican were now possible would that mean that the Archbishop was overzealous in 1988, or has the ‘state of emergency’ simply ceased to exist? FR: No, the state of necessity in the Church does not depend on the Society of Saint Pius X, regularized or not. It can only be an objective situation of the Church. Today, this state of necessity still exists, as unfortunately too often priests and faithful cannot receive in a normal way the true teaching of the Catholic Faith or receive the sacraments in a safe way. You have priests

+ JMJ I noticed this in a news article and I wondered - is the Islamic violence that we've witnessed unleashed across the world really blind? The Holy Father condemns once again blind violence which is a most serious offense against the Creator, and he offers his prayers to the Most High that he help us to continue working with determination for peace and harmony in the world. With these wishes, His Holiness confers his Apostolic Blessing on all the victims, their families and on the dear Spanish people.” Source: Joan's Rome While it may comfort the Pope to think that these people really didn't know what they were doing, but that is a delusion. These men knew what they were doing and would have done worse if they hadn't accidentally blew up their main explosive devices / supplies .  This is not 'blind' violence, this is a thought out plan to attach those who are not Muslim. Period. End stop. What will it take for the Pope et al to realize this is

+JMJ+ It seems to me that many people have forgotten the difference between knowing and believing. First I don't believe that the Catholic Church is in crisis - I know it is. Simply put the collection of the facts enables me to rationally reach that conclusion. If someone heard me make that and based on that alone agreed with me, they would simply believe it based on their trust in me, like an authority. Now do you believe that the Catholic Church is in crisis or do you simply believe it? Either way the next question is how should you act? If you just believe it, then you need to do the work to understand the issues in their true light. Then you will know. Then you need to act on that knowledge. When enough people know and act accordingly, then we will emerge from the darkness of the second vatican council. Act well!!! P^3

+ JMJ Looking back to 2012, I came across and article by Dr. Lamont that sheds some perspective on the state of the game in 2012. P^3 Source: Oriens Journal

+ JMJ There are two sacraments that require jurisdiction to be valid: Marriage and Confession. In this conflict between Rome and the SSPX, only Rome has compromised. Rome has: Conceded that the Tridentine Mass was never abrogated Lifted the 'excommunications' Granted jurisdiction for confessions Granted the bishops the authorization to grant jurisdiction for marriages. It is this latest Roman concession that is causing some people angst. As Rome makes concessions we need to keep a balance and read exactly what it says.  Do we hope for a full vindication of the fight of Traditional Catholics for the last 50 years - absolutely.  Will it happen that way - probably not. It took a hundred years for the Church to stamp out Arianism, the problems in the Church after Trent took at least 50 years. We haven't even hit the end of the first phase. So don't get angry with the latest shenanigans of Pope Francis et al.   Get even: Pray for them!

+ JMJ As a Traditional Catholic I find it ironic that I'm usually the one talking Modern Catholics off the sedevacantist ledge. Recently, Louie Verrecchio has posted an article by a Fr. Campo, that is asserting that the abdication was forced and therefore invalid ... of something to that effect. Sadly, the electrons spilled over this issue are in vain. Here's a quick summary of the doctrine on Dogmatic Facts: Now the point is this: We want to believe that Pope Francis is not the Pope, because he is doing such a bad job. However, we know that he is because of the doctrine of dogmatic facts. Any action that we 'believe' that would invalidate the election is proved wrong by the acceptance of a newly elected Pope by all the Bishops and by extension the whole Catholic Church. Pope Francis was accepted by the Bishops in Union with Rome, ergo - we have the assurance of the doctrine that he was validly elected. P^3 PS.Now if the Church should deter

+ JMJ As the Pope's personality cult collapses, I predict he will become more and more isolated.  He will see enemies everywhere until ... he makes a big decision and takes a big action. Pray that he makes the RIGHT decision and makes the RIGHT action. P^3 Courtesy of FSSPX.NEWS

+ JMJ Around 2002 Bishop Fellay said that things will become more difficult as the SSPX and Rome near an agreement. He was right! One good point is the clarity that is provided - such as the state of necessity! "(The terms used will be rather words like "regularization of a situation" because, actually, in this respect), there is the problem to the consecrations themselves, which are censured by Rome ; on our part, we try to explain that the censure does not apply because of the circumstances, and, let us say, on the basis of canon law. Rome will say or has attempted to say through the Pontifical Council for the Interpretation of Laws that our argument, i.e. the argument of necessity, was not valid in that case. To express things more pointedly, let us say that there is a code, well a canon of the new Code of Canon Law which says that if someone acts out of necessity, he does not fall under the law; and another canon says that if this necessity was p

+ JMJ Has Rome ever supported the SSPX's conclusion that a state of necessity exists? We have the words of Pope Benedict XVI as related by Bishp Fellay from 2006: Nevertheless, and this is very interesting too, during the private audience with the pope, the pope re-used the argument saying: "You may not justify your activity by referring to a state of necessity" giving as explanation: "I am trying", he said, "to solve the problems", such were his very words. It is at the same time an avowal: it means that there are problems; if he tries to solve them, it is because the problems still exist. And a few minutes later, in his explanation, he himself said: "We should see if there is not a state of necessity in France and in Germany." This shows that after all our argument is not so bad. Well this was just a very small development to say that… Bishop Fellay: ... First I wondered why these two countries? Now this is a pure… it is a per

+ JMJ Hi All, Just a quick note that I was traveling for the past few days. Hence, I was using the android blogger feature - which is a little awkward. That is the reason for the lack of formatting in some of the recent posts. I have tried to correct them . . . hopefully I didn't miss anything. P^3

+JMJ + What justified the actions of Archbishop Lefebvre? What made it an obligation to disobey the direct order of a Pope? A complete breakdown in core aspects of the functionality of the Church. Liturgy: new mass and countless abuses doctrine: heresy spread throughout the church without check. Discipline: completely redirected to the punishment of the Catholic's who are trying to be faithful and rewarding of the evil. Dereliction of duty by the pope and effectively the whole hierarchy has created a state of necessity. Archbishop Lefebvre would have been negligent in his duty as a Bishop of the Catholic Church if he had not provided the sspx the means to carry on its work for the salvation of souls. This is what I have concluded and this is why, following St. Thomas, we can conclude that he was right! This was clear then and it is clear now! The question that you need to ask yourself is this: am I doing my duty? P^3

+JMJ + Now if the anti results of Trent were present but the Pope and Bishops were actually doing something to resolve instead of promoting the crisis or being impotent, then there would be no necessity. What we are witnessing is a dereliction of duty. The duty to God. This brings me to the novus Ordo missae. First of all the novus ordo missae is not a received and accepted liturgy of the Church (harsh I know ... sorry). It is a banal on the spot fabrication (quoting Pope Emeritus Benedict).  Its architect ensured that key elements expressing the Catholic faith were left out. So while it is possible that for the sacrament to be confected, the fact remains that compared with the Tridentine mass, it does not fulfill the duty of a liturgy. Just read the ottaviani intervention and you will see what I mean. So as Catholics we have a duty to worship God in a fitting catholic manner. Not a protestant manner. Since the council catholics (bishops, priest

+JMJ+ Last post I talked about the state of necessity and how this was created by the dereliction of duty by the pope's since the council. Here's the benefits of the Council of Trent as described by the first vatican council ( http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum20.htm) a closer definition and more fruitful of the holy dogmas of religion and the condemnation and repression of errors; thence too, the restoration and vigorous strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline, the advancement of the clergy in zeal for learning and piety, the founding of colleges for the training of the young for the service of religion; and finally the renewal of the moral life of the christian people by a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also came a closer union of the members with the visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole mystical body of Christ. Thence came the multiplication o

+ JMJ I cross-post this for future reference and to highlight the distinctions that need to be made concerning the documents of the Second Vatican Council. P^3 Courtesy of Rorate-Caeli

+ JMJ Fr. Couture (presently District Superior of Canada) asked that this consecration be on July 2nd. It is similar to the consecration performed by the Bishops of Canada in 1947. Until this moment I did not know that the Bishops of Canada had performed such a consecration. It makes me wonder what it would be like if they had not done the consecration! P^3

+ JMJ A long overdue summary of Catholic Doctrine / Dogma on Justification : Justification is the translation from the state of original sin into the state of grace. Sanctifying grace is the sole "formal cause' of justification.   The infusion of sanctifying grace eradicates sin as well as creates inner sanctification. No man or woman can, over their own nature, justify themselves (translation from a state of sin to a state of grace). Although Christ died for all, all do not receive the benefit of His death, but those only unto whom the merit of His passion is communicated. The translation is effected by Baptism (laver of regeneration) or the desire thereof.  In adults the beginning of Justification is the result of a prevenient (preceding) grace of God. Faith is the beginning of human salvation and is necessary for justification in adults. By every mortal sin, grace is lost, but not faith. Besides faith, further acts of disposition must be present. Th

+ JMJ A Priest provided me with a copy to this article in French noting that it provides a more balance view point on the Theology of the Body. This may be why an updated version of Don Pietro Leone's article  "The Marriage Crisis in the Catholic Church" was issued after some criticism. Eventually, I hope to translate it into english. P^3