Showing posts with label Revolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Revolution. Show all posts
The Broad Ocean of the Latin Rite: What True Liturgical Diversity Looks Like
“Beyond Summorum Pontificum: The Work of Retrieving the Tridentine Heritage”: Full Text of Dr. Kwasniewski’s Roman Forum Lecture
The following is the transcript of the lecture I gave at the Roman Forum on July 3. A video of the lecture has been posted at Remnant-TV (link). A synopsis (less than one-third the length) was published at Crisis Magazine on July 7, under the title “Summorum Pontificum at Fourteen: Its Tragic Flaws.” As we near the imminent restriction or suppression of this motu proprio, it is important to step back and look at the bigger picture: What is—or is not—the role of the papacy vis-à-vis the liturgy handed down in tradition? What should our attitude be to abuses of papal authority, particularly in regard to its attempts to “allow” or “forbid” immemorial rites of divine worship? I would draw the reader’s attention to the notes, which contain important supporting material.—PAK
Beyond Summorum Pontificum: The Work of Retrieving the Tridentine Heritage
Peter A. Kwasniewski
As we find out more and more about the sheer corruption of the papal court today, which rivals the record of the Renaissance, it seems (if anything) still more remarkable, bordering on the miraculous, that Summorum Pontificum was ever issued at all. It was a watershed moment, a gesture of fortitude and favor, and a clear factor in multiplying old Masses around the world and weakening the modernist hegemony. We were grateful to have a pope who, instead of throwing a bone to the nostalgics—the so-called “indults” of Paul VI and John Paul II—had the courage to say the truth: that the great liturgy of our tradition had never been abrogated and could never be abrogated. In just a few sentences, central claims of Archbishop Lefebvre, Michael Davies, Count Neri Capponi, and others were vindicated.
I think it is fair to say right from the start that Summorum Pontificum was useful to our movement in the way that an enormous booster rocket is useful for launching a spaceship into orbit: it has a lot of raw power, but it can only do so much, and when it’s empty, it falls away. Summorum Pontificum is destined to be one of the great papal interventions in all of history, but it is no more than damage control; it is not a pillar, much less a foundation, of a permanent structure. And those who lean on it too much will find themselves crushed by its incoherences. My goal in this presentation will be to walk through Summorum Pontificum and identify its principal flaws, the elements in it that act as weights pulling us down, so that we can resolutely go beyond it to retrieve the fullness of the Tridentine heritage that constitutes the authentic Roman rite.
I can imagine what some of you may be thinking: “Rumors are swirling everywhere that Summorum Pontificum is about to be severely curtailed or shelved—and you are complaining about its imperfections? Right now, we’d all be grateful and relieved if we could just hold on to this motu proprio, warts and all.” My response is that unless we understand precisely the weak points of Summorum Pontificum, we will not be able to understand why we are still so vulnerable to the machinations of Francis and his circle, and, more to the point, we will not be able to summon the necessary strength to ignore or to oppose what the Vatican might do to reduce or prevent the celebration of the classical Roman rite. For the motu proprio establishes or reaffirms false principles that are coming back to haunt us, or perhaps have never stopped haunting us. As much as the traditional movement has benefited pragmatically from Summorum (and of that, there is no doubt), we must learn to put our weight fully on our own two feet, so that when the legal crutch or brace is suddenly removed, we do not topple over helplessly.
Louis XVI, King, Martyr: a Catholic going to death and His Last Will and Testament
Procession to eternity
On January 20, 1793, the National Convention condemned Louis XVI to death, his execution scheduled for the next day. Louis spent that evening saying goodbye to his wife and children. The following day, January 21, dawned cold and wet. Louis arose at five. At eight o'clock a guard of 1,200 horsemen arrived to escort the former king on a two-hour carriage ride to his place of execution. Accompanying Louis, at his invitation, was a priest, Henry Essex Edgeworth, an Englishman living in France. Edgeworth recorded the event and we join his narrative as he and the fated King enter the carriage to begin their journey:
"The King, finding himself seated in the carriage, where he could neither speak to me nor be spoken to without witness, kept a profound silence. I presented him with my breviary, the only book I had with me, and he seemed to accept it with pleasure: he appeared anxious that I should point out to him the psalms that were most suited to his situation, and he recited them attentively with me. The gendarmes, without speaking, seemed astonished and confounded at the tranquil piety of their monarch, to whom they doubtless never had before approached so near.
The procession lasted almost two hours; the streets were lined with citizens, all armed, some with pikes and some with guns, and the carriage was surrounded by a body of troops, formed of the most desperate people of Paris. As another precaution, they had placed before the horses a number of drums, intended to drown any noise or murmur in favour of the King; but how could they be heard? Nobody appeared either at the doors or windows, and in the street nothing was to be seen, but armed citizens - citizens, all rushing towards the commission of a crime, which perhaps they detested in their hearts.
The carriage proceeded thus in silence to the Place de Louis XV, and stopped in the middle of a large space that had been left round the scaffold: this space was surrounded with cannon, and beyond, an armed multitude extended as far as the eye could reach. As soon as the King perceived that the carriage stopped, he turned and whispered to me, 'We are arrived, if I mistake not.' My silence answered that we were. One of the guards came to open the carriage door, and the gendarmes would have jumped out, but the King stopped them, and leaning his arm on my knee, 'Gentlemen,' said he, with the tone of majesty, 'I recommend to you this good man; take care that after my death no insult be offered to him - I charge you to prevent it.'… As soon as the King had left the carriage, three guards surrounded him, and would have taken off his clothes, but he repulsed them with haughtiness- he undressed himself, untied his neckcloth, opened his shirt, and arranged it himself. The guards, whom the determined countenance of the King had for a moment disconcerted, seemed to recover their audacity. They surrounded him again, and would have seized his hands. 'What are you attempting?' said the King, drawing back his hands. 'To bind you,' answered the wretches. 'To bind me,' said the King, with an indignant air. 'No! I shall never consent to that: do what you have been ordered, but you shall never bind me. . .'
The path leading to the scaffold was extremely rough and difficult to pass; the King was obliged to lean on my arm, and from the slowness with which he proceeded, I feared for a moment that his courage might fail; but what was my astonishment, when arrived at the last step, I felt that he suddenly let go my arm, and I saw him cross with a firm foot the breadth of the whole scaffold; silence, by his look alone, fifteen or twenty drums that were placed opposite to me; and in a voice so loud, that it must have been heard it the Pont Tournant, I heard him pronounce distinctly these memorable words: 'I die innocent of all the crimes laid to my charge; I Pardon those who have occasioned my death; and I pray to God that the blood you are going to shed may never be visited on France.'
He was proceeding, when a man on horseback, in the national uniform, and with a ferocious cry, ordered the drums to beat. Many voices were at the same time heard encouraging the executioners. They seemed reanimated themselves, in seizing with violence the most virtuous of Kings, they dragged him under the axe of the guillotine, which with one stroke severed his head from his body. All this passed in a moment. The youngest of the guards, who seemed about eighteen, immediately seized the head, and showed it to the people as he walked round the scaffold; he accompanied this monstrous ceremony with the most atrocious and indecent gestures. At first an awful silence prevailed; at length some cries of 'Vive la Republique!' were heard. By degrees the voices multiplied and in less than ten minutes this cry, a thousand times repeated became the universal shout of the multitude, and every hat was in the air."
[References: Cronin, Vincent, Louis and Antoinete (1975); Edgeworth, Henry in Thompson, J.M., English Witnesses of the French Revolution (1938, Memoirs originally published 1815).]
***
LAST TESTAMENT OF LOUIS XVIIn the name of the Very holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
Francis: We must join cultural revolution to see Church's "weaknesses and shortcomings"
The Francis Revolution may be going into hyperdrive. Video below courtesy Rome Reports:
FRANCIS: “There is a real cultural revolution on the horizon of history at this time. The Church must, first and foremost, be part of it. In this perspective, it is essential to honestly recognize her weaknesses and shortcomings.”
A Catholic pope. Speaking of joining in a "cultural revolution." Let that sink in.
"To the poorest daughter of Carmel,
honor speaks louder than fear."
Mother Marie: Sister Blanche...First Commissary: I forbid you to continue...Mother Marie: You have the power to force me to silence, but none to command me to it. I represent here the Reverend Mother Prioress and I shall take no orders from you.A Commissary: Confounded old hag! She cannot be made to hold her tongue, fellow Citizen, but remind her that the Republic has a machine at its disposal that will leave her somewhat short of breath!First Commissary: Enough! I repeat that you must behave as a true representative of the people! [He turns to Sister Blanche:] Young citizen, you have nothing to fear from us, who are your liberators! Say but one word, and you will find yourself beyond the sway of those who, to better put you in their power, have not feared to offend nature in usurping even the sacred name of "mother". Henceforth, you are under the protection of the Law.Mother Marie: But she is first under my protection. Do you think I shall permit you to take any further advantage of the terror of a child? I shall take great care to avoid a language that you cannot understand. You know nothing of that which holds us here and keeps us united unto death - or, if once you knew it, it is now certainly forgotten. But there are still perhaps words which are common to us, and which can touch your conscience. Well, sir, you must know that to the poorest daughter of Carmel, honor speaks louder than fear.
Georges Bernanos
Dialogues des Carmélites
Dialogues des Carmélites
On the day following her feast, the Blessed Virgin of Mount Carmel would receive her dear French daughters, martyred for their faith in her Son and for their loyalty to His Church.
O glorious Martyrs of Compiègne, pray for us!
[Our regular July 17 homage.]
[Personal recess for several weeks]
Synod, Day 2 - It's becoming Vatican III
| Auguste Coder, after a David drawing Le Serment du Jeu de paume [The Tennis Court Oath on June 20, 1789] 1848 |
Whatever one might say of the sacrilegious "Kasper proposal" (the very embodiment of what Saint Thomas Aquinas warns us not to do in the Lauda Sion - not throwing the Blessed Sacrament away...), at least it has a very tenuous link to some structure one might identify as a "couple".
The Tennis Court Oath was made by the Progressive Bishops in Rome a few months ago, and the Revolution is in full swing, in the Jacobin phase -- they will not let go of their chance to strike deep, fast, strongly, and in all directions, and nothing is a coincidence.
Some of the "faith and family" issues debated on this second day of debates?
Some of the "faith and family" issues debated on this second day of debates?
The "ordination" of women to the Diaconate...
Polygamy - a matter to be better decided locally. ("There must be an end to exclusionary language and a strong emphasis on embracing reality as it is," said the Vatican English-language spokesman - which is the absolute opposite of the entire Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ.)
After the high hopes of the Erdo report yesterday, it has gone downhill fast -- into freak-show territory.
Rorate Exclusive: A Memorandum by Publisher Neil McCaffrey on “Papal Cheerleaders,” from February 1976 — How History Repeats Itself Today
Rorate is pleased to publish, for the first time, a memorandum that was written by the late traditional Catholic publisher Neil McCaffrey in February 1976. Addressed to Fr. Edward J. Berbusse, S.J. (first chaplain of Christendom College), Fr. Robert Bradley, S.J., Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, S.J., Dr. & Mrs. Dietrich von Hildebrand, and Dr. & Mrs. William A. Marra, this memo reduces to shreds the "papolatry" that has become such a characteristic feature of neo-Catholicism. Though written almost 40 years ago, it is perhaps more pertinent today than ever. (Published with permission of Roger A. McCaffrey.)
February 25, 1976Memo to:Fr. BerbusseFr. BradleyFr. MiceliDr. and Mrs. von HildebrandDr. and Mrs. MarraFrom:Neil McCaffreyBill asked us to contribute a memo about our discussion. I’d like to offer mine on the subject on which we seemed to show the least consensus, criticism of the papacy.1. Scripture makes no bones about the weaknesses of the Apostles and especially of Peter; which in any case were well known to the early Christians, whose faith survived the knowledge. Catholic history, from the age of the Fathers on down, provides us with the model. It was only in the 19th century that some Catholics found it necessary to refine the policies of the Holy Spirit.2. The papacy is given primacy from the earliest years, yet there is little evidence of papolatry until we get to the last century. The papolaters of our day would have been regarded with astonishment by the Fathers, by Dante, by St. Catherine, by Bellarmine, by Suarez, by just about anyone you can name.3. We can see papolatry in perspective when we put it beside its kin; and we can do that with a flying visit to Moscow or Peking. There too we are allowed to criticize underlings. Pravda does it every day. But the Leader, never.
Obergefell, the Treason of Catholics, and the Social Kingship of Christ
| Destruction of Catholic images in Zurich, 1524 |
Even though they may have seen it coming, many Catholics are still in a state of shock after Obergefell. How did this happen so quickly? How did we end up in the top-down legitimation of sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, perversions that make a mockery of nature, disorders that unravel the fabric of human society? The world is clearly a mess—hardly Christian even in those lands once favored by widespread allegiance to the one true faith. It is no fairy tale: once upon a time, the Western world was permeated with Christianity through and through; governments, laws, economies, the arts and sciences, were Catholic. What happened?
The story of modernity is inherently bound up with the politics and economics of rebellion, revolution, the false messianism of secularization and secularism. “The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ. Let us break their bonds asunder: and let us cast away their yoke from us” (Ps 2:2-3). Thanks to the naïve “opening to the world” of the Second Vatican Council, a move that eviscerated the Church’s otherworldly interior, a vast number of Catholics today view history, culture, politics, and economics as foreign to, or outside of, theology and faith, as if the Church had nothing to say about human nature and life in this world.
Such a narrow mentality, an obvious exhibition of the vices of individualism and spiritualism, is explicitly rejected by a long line of modern Popes who saw clearly into our age. Just as no man is an island, Catholicism is not an atomistic thing but a social reality; it has always had and, where truly believed, will always have ramifications in the social order, the life and culture, the laws and structures, of peoples. Due to the fall of Adam, those very structures can become what Pope John Paul II called “structures of sin,” preventing people from hearing the Gospel or at least making it more difficult for them to live according to it.
Abp Luigi Negri: Western Civilization is at an end
Among the bishops of Italy currently serving as Ordinaries, Archbishop Luigi Negri stands out for his trenchant commentary and prolific writings (including a multitude of articles and around 30 books) on a wide variety of topics, always with the object of defending a conservative Catholic world view and its presence in the public square and the world of culture. A close student and collaborator of Msgr. Luigi Giussani, founder of Comunione e Liberazione, he was appointed Bishop of the small diocese of San Marino - Montefeltro in 2005 and then Archbishop of the small Archdiocese of Ferrara-Comacchio in 2012. He is already well-known to Traditional Catholics for his interventions in favor of the Traditional Latin Mass: his telegram to Pope Benedict XVI thanking him for Summorum Pontificum, his denunciation of episcopal opposition to the same, and his 2013 homily to Traditional Catholics with its precious words of encouragement and praise.
A friend and reader of Rorate has kindly presented us with this translation of an article written last month by the Archbishop and published by La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana. This is a bishop who knows how to fight, who knows how to denounce the French Revolution (and its Catholic apologists) in the same breath as the Islamist menace that he does not fear to name either.
By Luigi Negri, Archbishop of Ferrara-Comacchio
02/28/2015
Ancient Statues and bas-reliefs were toppled down by bearded men who then proceeded to destroy them by using jackhammers. This is the latest video released by ISIS in Mosul. It is the continuation of a campaign against remnants of the past. Islamic State militants have been blowing up places of worship, feeding flames with books taken from libraries, and destroying a part of Nineveh’s city walls, the ancient Assyrian capital in the outskirts of present-day Mosul. These images, spread by a Twitter account used by the Caliphate, show the methodical destruction perpetrated in the rooms of what looks like a museum in Mosul. During the five-minute long video, we notice museum labels in Arabic and English describing exhibited artefacts. It is because of this that we have recorded the comments of Mons. Luigi Negri, the Archbishop of Ferrara-Comacchio.
I hope that the technological means which our society uses – and oftentimes abuses – can vividly preserve for future generations the images of such terrible scenes of barbarism which we have been able to see “live” in different parts of the world. This is rage, much more demented than barbaric, against the artistic expressions of one of the greatest ages of world culture, which have been handed down with devotion and respect from one generation to another, from one culture to another, from one civilization to another. And so culture and civilization are not exclusive, unlike the case of this horrendous ideology, even if it is religious. Culture and Civilization are inclusive and even know how to incorporate cultural and historical realities not born from the limitations of their proper milieu; thereby becoming all the more enriched.
The Pope's Strength: Does it Come from God or from "the People"?
"Progressives" Make a Pope In Their Own Image
| Jacques-Louis David Le Serment du Jeu de Paume le 20 juin 1789 [The Tennis Court Oath on June 20, 1789], c. 1791 Musée Carnavalet |
The ultra-"progressive" founder of the interreligious community of Sant'Egidio, and also former (unelected...) minister of the Italian government, Andrea Riccardi (more about him here), is one of those ideologues who have never received a vote in their lives but think they can better describe what "the people" want.
In an interview to French weekly L'Express published this Friday, he reaches the height of "progressive" populism. In his view, the strength of the Pope comes not from God, but "the people."
"The strength of Pope Francis is the people"...On which allies can the Argentine pope count?
His strength is the people. In my view, he has achieved an alliance, not with the Church's hierarchy, but with the faithful, to whom he gives orientations, but without decreeing to them, "You must do like this, or like that." He appeals to the liberty and responsibility of Christians, who come by the way massively to Saint Peter Square to see him. In the Anglo-Saxon world, his glow is particularly strong. A well-known American journalist has told me, "He's become our new Mandela." He has conquered Germany, that had turned its back on Benedict. Among you, in France, he does even better than John Paul II, who had connections, such as Jean-Marie Lustiger. Francis raises enthusiasm by himself. He is not submitted to the media, it is the media that turns towards him.
It must first be made clear that this was never said by the Pope, who was not elected by "the people," but by a very restricted and exclusive Church structure -- revolutionary populism is what "progressives" want to make the Pope look like, a Pope in their own image.
This populism must be denounced from the outset.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)