VIDEO: Michael Matt on the passing of Pope Benedict XVI

Yesterday I posted a few words on the death of Pope Benedict XVI, RIP. It was all I had time for. More to the point, I have mixed feelings about the papacy of Pope Ratzinger, and needed time to sort out my feelings. Even more to the point, I could never write a clear and objective analysis of the Benedictine era so well as others, notably Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant newspaper. 

In this special edition of The Remnant Underground, Mr Matt says that, for some, Benedict was a saint, while, for others, he was a villain. What cannot be denied, Mr Matt says, is that his intervention on behalf of the Latin Mass changed history and breathed new life into the Catholic counterrevolution.

   

In an e-mail received here today, Mr Matt outlines the legacy of Pope Benedict XVI: 

* An entire generation of young Catholics were reconnected to the Mass of our fathers, thanks to Benedict. 

* As Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, he was instrumental in the founding of the Fraternity of Saint Peter. 

* He made it clear that the Latin Mass was never abrogated, and never could be. 

* He lifted the excommunications of the bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X. 

But in the end (Mr Matt writes), he left the Church in the hands of the worst pope in history. So where does one stand on the pontificate of Pope Benedict, and how will history judge the man who restored the Latin Mass on the one hand, and saddled the Church with Francis on the other?

Let us pray: Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May his soul, and the souls of all the faithful departed, rest in peace. Amen.

Pope Benedict XVI - RIP

Joseph Alois Ratzinger, born 16 April 1927, the son of Josepoh and Mary Ratzinger, died as Pope Benedict XVI on 31 December 2022.

The reasons for his purported resignation in February of 2013 remain shrouded in mystery. Unlike Abraham Lincoln, he lived long to see the awful consequences of his decision.

Worse is yet to come, and thank God he will be spared the earthly sight of the final act in the fall of the Catholic Church. 

Requiem æternam dona ei, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei.

Rush Limbaugh, RIP... plus: death watch

In Rush Limbaugh: An Army of One, (((Zev Chafets))) quotes Rush Limbaugh as saying, "In my heart and soul, I know I have become the intellectual engine of the conservative movement." Walt would agree. Mr Limbaugh was a powerful influencer -- an inspiration, in fact -- as well as a voice for millions of conservatives, libertarians, fundamentalists, nationalists, populists and others on the right. His death from lung cancer was reported by his family yesterday. RIP.

Mr Limbaugh first announced his diagnosis a year ago, saying he would take time off for medical tests and to determine treatment. He said he intended to continue to work as much as possible, as well as focus on what he called his "deeply personal relationship" with God. A day after he announced his diagnosis, during the State of the Union address,President Trump awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I have a feeling that next year's posts on People Who Left Us in 2021 will be voluminous. Britain's Prince Phillip entered the hospital yesterday (under his own steam, apparently) "for observation". He is 99. His better half, HRH Queen Elizabath II, will turn 95 in April.

April will also see the 94th birthday of Joseph Alois Ratzinger, aka Benedict XVI, sometime Pope of Rome. If he dies, the Roman Catholic Church will be left with only one pretender to the Chair of Peter.

And then there's Hazel McCallion, longtime mayor of Mississauga ON, who turned 100 on St. Valentine's Day. Walt wishes "Hurricane Hazel" many more years!

What is Francis trying to say? A Lenten confession, perhaps?

Catholic World News reports that in the latest Vatican yearbook, the Annuario Pontificio, the title "Vicar of Christ" does not appear on the listing for Pope Francis.

In the 2020 edition of the Annuario, the page devoted to Pope Francis is headed simply by his name: Jorge Maria Bergoglio. Past editions have always been headed by the titles accorded to the Pope, beginning with "Vicar of Jesus Christ".

Other titles have been "Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church, Primate of Italy, Archbishop and Metropolitan of the Roman province, Sovereign of the Vatican City-State." In the 2020 edition, these titles appear at the bottom of the page devoted to Pope Francis, where they are identified only as "historical" titles.

Such a change would undoubtedly have required the approval of the Pontiff. What, then, is the significance of this deletion?

In 2006, Pope Benedict XVI dropped another traditional title: "Patriarch of the West". The Vatican explained that the elimination of this title "could prove useful to ecumenical dialogue." The statement also noted that the significance of that title "was never very clear, and over history has become obsolete and practically unusable."

But this change is different. The title "Vicar of Jesus Christ" has a clear and unmistakable theological significance. Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, called the downgrading of the title a "theological barbarism."

To date the Vatican has not issued any explanation for the change, but Walt has a thought... or two... From the very beginning, the legitimacy of Cardinal Bergoglio's election has been called into question. There were those who said, with the weight of precedent behind them, that the position of Vicar of Christ (etc etc) wasn't open, since the incumbent, Benedict XVI, was still alive. His purported resignation, they said, was a nullity. One pope at a time is enough!

Then, leaks from within the conclave of Cardinals which chose him suggested that a good deal of campaigning and lobbying was done, contrary to the norms for such events, and that all necessary steps were taken to ensure that (as the hockey metaphor says) the puck was nailed to Jorge's stick.

Favours were promised, they said, and any number of things Pope Bergoglio said and did after his elevation to the Chair of Peter suggest that the promises were kept. Many somewhat traditional bishops were cast out, and liberals put in their places. The Church founded by Jesus Christ has now become simply the "church of accompaniment". One wonders if the next word to be deleted will be "Catholic".

And then came the Amazon Synod, which seemed even to many "moderate" Catholics -- never mind the Traditionalists -- a step too far. Was God Himself displeased? Is it merely a coincidence that the entire world, and particularly the once-Catholic countries of Italy and Spain, have been smitten with a modern-day plague -- the corona virus? Could Covid-19 be God's way of telling us -- especially you, Francis -- "Wait just a minute there!" And just in time for Easter too!

Could it be that Pope Bergoglio -- if "pope" he is -- has seen the error his ways? He was leading us into heresy -- women priests, sodomy not a sin, you don't have to be Catholic to be saved -- and now God, who will not be mocked, is telling him to set things right, and quick too! Stripping himself of the title "Vicar of Christ" could be a tacit admission that he was not legitimately elected, and therefore not pope after all.

From there, it would be easy enough to step down. In theory (as I understand it) that would leave Benedict XVI in the position. When he dies, a new pope could be elected -- one who, we pray, would be worthy of the title "Vicar of Christ".

Cardinal Zen decries/Vatican defends sell-out of Chinese Catholics

Even before the beginning of WWW, I've been writing about the Vatican's perfidious sell-out of the Chinese Catholic "underground Church" -- the 1000s of Catholics who remained loyal to Rome and refused to join the schismatic Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association created by the Communists when they took power in 1949. Ever since, the bishops, priests and laity of the underground Church have endured persecution, imprisonment and even martyrdom, while their church buildings and holy sites have been taken over by the Communists, with many being closed and destroyed.

In 2018, an agreement was signed between the Vatican and the Communist Chinese government in which the bishops appointed by Rome -- some of whom had been imprisoned for years -- were effectively fired, to be replaced by stooges of the CPCA. The "official" Catholic churches are now required to pledge allegiance to the Communist Party and worship the false gods of Communism, replacing hymns with patriotic songs. See "Vatican bends the knee to Chinese commies in secret accord", WWW 23/9/18.

Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, Archbishop Emeritus of Hong Kong, has from the beginning been an outspoken opponent of the 2018 agreement, which the Vatican insisted was simply intended to "normalize relations" between the Holy See and Communist China. See "Cardinal Zen denounces Vatican's capitulation to Chinese Communists", WWW 13/2/18.

Even though he is now retired, Cardinal Zen has persisted in his criticism of the sell-out of millions of faithful Catholics. See "Vatican-China agreement 'terrible, terrible, terrible': Cardinal Zen", WWW 4/12/19. Now the prelate has been publicly scolded by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, the incoming dean of the College of Cardinals.

In a letter sent to cardinals last week, Cardinal Re says Cardinal Zen "did not properly understand the agreement", and insisted that a draft of the deal had the approval of Pope Benedict XVI. He claims that the China-Vatican deal represents the minds of Popes John Paul II and of Benedict XVI, and that Cardinal Zen is mistaken in his opposition to the deal.

"I desire first of all," Cardinal Re writes, "to emphasize that, in their approach to the situation of the Catholic Church in China, there is a profound symphony of the thought and of the action of the last three Pontificates, which -- out of respect for the truth -- have favored dialogue between the two parties and not contrariety.... Cardinal Zen has affirmed several times that it would be better to have no Accord than than a 'bad Accord'. The three last Popes did not share this position and supported and accompanied the drafting of the Accord that, at the present moment, seemed to be the only one possible."

Imagine if Saints Peter, Stephen, Paul and the rest had made a deal with the Romans because "that was the best we could do. It was better than dying..."

Cardinal Zen accused the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin (aka "Petrus Romanus")  of passing incorrect translations of Chinese terms to the Vatican in his effort to push through the deal and neglect criticisms.

In a letter released on Sunday, Cardinal Zen wrote, "I have evidence that Parolin manipulates the Holy Father, who always shows me so much affection but does not answer my questions,"  He charged that Cardinal Parolin "manipulates the Holy Father."

To Cardinal Re’s claim that Pope Benedict XVI had approved an early draft of the Vatican-Beijing agreement, Cardinal Zen responded, "Why was it not signed then?", insisting that the former Pontiff had rejected the deal.

To Cardinal Re, the prelate said, in the letter published in his blog, "I admire your courage in venturing into matters which you also recognize as complex, jeopardizing the prestige of your newly inaugurated honorable office." A very back-handed compliment, well deserved.

Further reading: "Re Against Zen. Divided By a Wall of China", by Sandro Magister, Settimo Cielo, 3/3/20.

Vatican-China agreement "terrible, terrible, terrible": Cardinal Zen

There is another prelate of the Roman Catholic Church -- still alive, thank God -- whose reproaches to the mainstream Church are in the news today. He is Cardinal Joseph Zen Ze-kiun, S.D.B., who is one of only two living Chinese cardinals. He served as the sixth Bishop of Hong Kong, and was made a cardinal in 2006. He has been outspoken on issues regarding human rights, political freedom, and religious liberty, often attracting criticism from the Communist Party of China and, sadly, highly placed people in his own church. (Hello, Cardinal Parolin!)

In a recent interview with New Bloom, Cardinal Joseph Zen describes Vatican policy toward China as "terrible, terrible, terrible!" The prelate says that he strongly suspects that a diplomatic agreement between the Holy See and the Chinese government, which has never been made public, is substantially the same as a previous draft accord with Pope Benedict XVI refused to sign. (See "Vatican bends the knee to Chinese commies in secret accord", WWW 23/9/18.)

The Archbishop Emeritus of Hong Kong, who has warned frequently about the campaign by the Chinese government to exert control over the Church, told New Bloom that his own recent relations with the Vatican have been "simply disastrous." He revealed that when he first became a bishop, he worked closely with Cardinal Jozef Tomko, who at that time was prefect of the Congregation for Evangelization, in efforts to ease tensions between the Church and the Beijing regime. He said that these efforts had borne fruit, with the Vatican regularizing the status of several bishops who had been appointed by the government but were ready to pledge loyalty to the Holy See.

However, Cardinal Zen continued, the Vatican's involvement took a different path when Cardinal Tomko was succeeded by Cardinal Crescenzio Sepe, whom he bluntly characterized as "no good." Cardinal Sepe in turn was succeeded by Cardinal Ivan Dias, who (Cardinal Zen commented) was a disciple of the late Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, the Secretary of State from 1979 to 1990. Cardinal Casaroli was noted for his willingness to seek accommodations with (read: sell out to) Communist regimes.

Still more recently, Cardinal Zen said, Vatican policy toward China has been driven by Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the current Secretary of State. The Chinese cardinal has frequently criticized Cardinal Parolin for failing to see the dangers in an agreement with Beijing. As for his relations with Pope Francis, Cardinal Zen said that they are "personally wonderful." However, he said, "he doesn’t answer my letters." No surprises there! He also accused Francis of having "low respect for his predecessors" and "shutting down everything done by John Paul II and by Pope Benedict."

Will Pope Francis and Cardinal Parolin pay any attention to what Cardinal says, or to the ever-increasing persecution of Chinese Catholics by the Communist dictatorship? Errr, no. Our Lady of China (Simplified Chinese: 中华圣母, Traditional Chinese: 中華聖母), pray for Cardinal Zen, for all Catholic Chinese, and for all who hold and teach the True Faith.

Benedict XVI blames 60s culture, sexual revolution, for scandals, moral decline of Catholic Church

I have often written, here and in other publications, and told anyone who will listen, that the decline of the Roman Catholic Church and Christian (Western) society in general started in the hippy-dippy sixties. Our religion and our culture was killed by secularism and the counter-culture. So I enjoyed something of a "told ya so" moment yesterday when "Pope Emeritus" Benedict XVI released an essay on sexual abuse in the Church, which he blames on the "absence of God".

In the introduction to his "notes", the ex-Holy Father [Can there be such a thing? Ed.] writes: In the first part, I aim to present briefly the wider social context of the question, without which the problem cannot be understood. I try to show that in the 1960s an egregious event occurred, on a scale unprecedented in history.... In the second part, I aim to point out the effects of this situation on the formation of priests and on the lives of priests. Finally, in the third part, I would like to develop some perspectives for a proper response on the part of the Church."

In the 6000-world essay, which originally appeared in Klerusblatt, a German-language magazine for the clergy, Pope Ratzinger blames the Church's sexual abuse scandal on the 1960s sexual revolution, growing secularization and weak church laws that made prosecution of guilty priests difficult. "Among the freedoms that the Revolution of 1968 sought to fight for was this all-out sexual freedom.... Part of the physiognomy of the Revolution of `68 was that pedophilia was then also diagnosed as allowed and appropriate." What an amazing admission! How dismaying for faithful Catholics, to hear this from no less a personage than the former Vicar of Christ. But there's more...

"Why did pedophilia reach such proportions?", Pope Ratzinger asks. "Ultimately, the reason is the absence of God," he answers, noting failed attempts to include a reference to God in European Union treaties as a negative example of Western secularization. He also cited the appearance of sex in films in the 60s in his native Bavaria and the formation in seminaries of "homosexual cliques" in seminaries "which acted more or less openly and significantly changed the climate." He also attributes the moral corruption of the Catholic clergy and the Church as a whole to "failures in moral theology".

Benedict also faulted Church laws that protected accused priests. He wrote that during the 80s and 90s "the right to a defence (for priests) was so broad as to make a conviction nearly impossible." In 1981 Pope John Paul II named Cardinal Ratzinger (as he then was) Cardinal-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly known as the Holy Office and, especially around the 16th century, as the Roman Inquisition.

But did he do anything to excise the rotten and diseased members of Christ's Church? He tried in 2001 to reforms of those laws to make it easier to remove priests who abused children, and later, as Pope, defrocked 100s of priests accused of raping and molesting children. But he was opposed by powerful forces -- "the lavender Mafia" -- within the Vatican itself. Some say his unprecedented "resignation" was engineered by those same evil men, who succeeded in replacing him with the more tolerant and merciful Jorge Bergoglio.

Compared with Pope Francis, Benedict XVI emerges in this essay as a voice calling Catholics to turn away from the excesses of Vatican II, and back to the values of traditional Catholicism. Of course he does not suggest that Vatican II was in error or anything like the "anti-council" which many traditionalists now claim it was.

He writes: "The Second Vatican Council was rightly focused on returning this sacrament of the Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ...to the centre of Christian life and the very existence of the Church. In part, this really has come about, and we should be most grateful to the Lord for it. [But] what predominates [now] is not a new reverence for the presence of Christ's death and resurrection, but a way of dealing with Him that destroys the greatness of the Mystery." The reference is to declining participation in Sunday Mass and treatment of the Eucharist as "a mere ceremonial gesture."

"We do not need another Church of our own design," Benedict concludes. "Rather, what is required first and foremost is the renewal of the Faith in the Reality of Jesus Christ given to us in the Blessed Sacrament." A pity he didn't tell us sooner, but let us hope and pray for a Catholic Counter-Revolution, before Christ's Church disintegrates completely. Amen.

Further reading: "Benedict XVI addresses sex abuse scandal", Catholic Herald, 11/4/19.

VIDEO: "Peter the Roman" ready to take over from Pope Francis

Sunday is my day to catch up on my reading on topics religious, especially the parlous state of Holy Mother Church. First on my list today was "Curia Stories: The Comeback of the Cardinal Secretary of State", by noted Vaticanista Sandro Magister, in his blog, Settimo Cielo, 14/1/18. [Kudos to Matthew Sherry, who does the English translation, for coming up with the excellent pun in the headline! Ed.]

The article is about Pietro Cardinal Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State, or, in political language, the No. 2 man in Rome, after Pope Francis. Of Cardinal Parolin, Sig. Magister writes, "He flies high. So high as to be now the only candidate for succeeding Francis with a serious chance of being elected pope."

If Pope Francis was validly elected -- a matter of considerable debate for many reasons -- he is the 111th pope to have headed the Roman Catholic Church. If he dies or purports to resign, and Cardinal Parolin is chosen to succeed him, he (Parolin) would be No. 112. "Pietro" is Italian for "Peter". And Cardinal Parolin is a Roman. Is he, then, "Peter the Roman"?

"Peter the Roman" is the last pope mentioned in the Prophecy of Saint Malachy (1094-1148), renowned as a great prophet. In 1139, while on his way to the Vatican to assume the post of papal legate for Ireland, he fell into a trance and saw a line of papal reigns stretching from the successor to Innocent II and extending through the centuries to the last of the line, identified as "Peter of Rome" or "Peter the Roman".

When he committed his vision to paper, Saint Malachy assigned short Latin descriptions to each pope. These mottoes usually refer to a family name, birthplace, coat-of-arms, or office held before election to the papacy. Some of the phrases are multiple prophecies, written with ingenious word play. According to his prophecy, John Paul II was No. 110. Benedict XVI is No. 111. The motto given for him is "Glory of the olive". To explain this, those who believe in the Prophecy draw a connection between Benedict and the Olivetan order. Benedict chose his papal name after Saint Benedict of Nursia, founder of the Benedictine Order, of which the Olivetans are one branch.

The next line in the Prophecy is "In persecutione extrema S.R.E. sedebit." which means "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit." forms a separate sentence and paragraph of its own. While often read as part of the "Peter the Roman" prophecy, some interpreters view it as a separate, incomplete sentence explicitly referring to additional popes between "glory of the olive" and "Peter the Roman". Whether it refers to Benedict or Francis or Peter the Roman, there can be no doubt that Holy Mother Church is today being persecuted as never before. Every year of this century has seen hundreds, even thousands of Catholic Christians imprisoned, tortured and martyred for the Faith.

We come now to the last lines of the Prophecy of Saint Malachy. "Petrus Romanus, qui pascet oues in multis tribulationibus: quibus transactis ciuitas septicollis diruetur, & Iudex tremẽdus iudicabit populum suum. Finis."



Peter the Roman, [who] will pasture his sheep in many tribulations, and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills [Rome] will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The End.

The final pope, Peter the Roman, will likely be the Antichrist whom students of prophecy have long foretold. Satan, taking the form of a man named Peter, will gain worldwide allegiance and adoration. Even the very elect -- the leaders of the Church and all but a small remnant of the faithful -- will be deceived. And then will come the destruction of Rome, something like the vision attributed to Sister Lucia in what the Vatican alleges is the Third Secret of Fatima. And then will come "the dreadful Judge" who will judge the people. Let us not say we were not warned.

Pope Francis becomes leading propagandist for Islam

"As the prototypical progressive Jesuit, Pope Francis prides himself on his 'ecumenism'. He oozes enthusiasm for every religion except his own. At the top of his list of favorite religions is the Church's fiercest adversary -- Islam."

So says George Neumayr, author of The Political Pope (soon to be published), in "The Papal Propagandist for Islam Heads to Egypt", in The American Spectator, 26/4/17. Mr Neumayr refers to the visit of the "Holy Father" -- Walt thinks quote marks are appropriate, now, for Francis's title -- to Egypt for the purpose of repairing relations between the Holy See and al-Azhar, which took place during the time of Pope Benedict.

Al-Azhar can refer to either or both of a prestigious university or one of the great mosques of the Islamic world. There was a falling out between the Vatican and Al-Azhar because Pope Benedict XVI dared to speak out about the Muslim persecution of Christians. Francis went to Cairo to say Benedict didn't really mean it, we love Muslims, we all worship the same God (a grievous theological fallacy), yada yada yada.

Mr Neumayr says Pope Francis "often sounds more like a spokesman for CAIR [the Council on American-Islamic Relations] than a Catholic pope. After jihadists cut off the head of a French priest in July 2016 — yelling 'Allahu Akbar' over the priest’s slit throat — Pope Francis rushed to the defense of Islam. 'I don’t like to talk about Islamic violence, because every day, when I read the newspaper, I see violence,' he said, before ludicrously blaming the rise of terrorism on the 'idolatry' of free-market economics....

"As Europe turns into Eurabia," Mr Neumayr continues, "Pope Francis is picking up honors and awards from progressives, including, hilariously, the 2016 'Charlemagne Prize' for his Islamic apologetics. It is hard to imagine a Christian leader less like Charlemagne. Pope Francis is energized not depressed by the disappearance of Christian Europe. 'States must be secular,' he told La Croix. Christian states, he said, 'end badly' and go 'against the grain of history.' He added that 'when I hear talk of the Christian roots of Europe, I sometimes dread the tone, which can seem triumphalist or even vengeful.'"

The truly sad thing about Francis's embrace of the Islamists is that too many Catholics treat him as if he were a divine oracle, his every utterance to be revered, respected, studied, and followed. Vatican II erroneously stated that "religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra," and "must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will."

So Catholic leaders and publications -- hello, Jeff Mirus and Phil Lawler! -- tend to think that they must adhere to anything and everything the Pope says about anything and everything. Too many Catholic leaders and institutions are more interested in being papists than in being truthful. They would rather show loyalty to the Pope, no matter how damaging his utterances, than stand for the True Faith even when -- especially when -- Francis stands against it!

Further reading: "Pope Francis sez 'no religion' is terrorist. LMAO!", WWW 17/2/17, and "Pastor asks Pope Francis, 'What's wrong with you?'" (includes video), WWW 12/3/17.

Cardinal Sarah laments "devastation" of Catholic liturgy

Sadly, what you see in the picture is not an April Fool joke. It's not a joke on any day. It is a "clown mass", as celebrated in what is called a Roman Catholic church. It is but one of the 1000s of grave liturgical abuses committed every year by people calling themselves Catholic priests, following the "reforms" of Second Vatican Council.

One of many poisoned fruits of Vatican II was the unlawful suppression of the tradition Latin Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Ages. In the interests of "modernizing" the Church, the Council (directed by the Abp. Annibale Bugnini, a Freemason!) decreed that the Mass should be celebrated in the vernacular, the vulgar tongues of the people. And it should be more man-centred than God-centred, and more... wait for it... fun! Yes, just a big happy-clappy celebration of a community coming together for a family supper.

Ten years ago, seeing the horrors that the reforms had wrought -- the "clown masses" are not the worst -- Pope Benedict XVI issued a moto proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which said (as traditional Catholics knew all along) that the Latin Mass was not "illegal", and that it should be used more often, alongside the vernacular mass. But, he said, the "new mass" would continue to be the "ordinary rite", with the Latin Mass relegated to second-class status as the "extraordinary rite".

This week, in an address to a German conference marking the 10th anniversary of Summorum Pontificum, Robert Cardinal Robert Sarah, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, offered an extraordinarily blunt appraisal of  "the disaster, the devastation, and the schism that the modern promoters of a living liturgy caused."

The prelate reminded his audience that Summorum Pontificum was intended to broaden access to the traditional Latin liturgy, Pope Benedict XVI expressed the hope that the two forms of the Roman rite would enrich each other. That enrichment is badly needed, the cardinal argued, in light of the impoverished state of the Catholic liturgy today. He said:

"The serious crisis of faith, not only at the level of the Christian faithful but also and especially among many priests and bishops, has made us incapable of understanding the Eucharistic liturgy as a sacrifice, as identical to the act performed once and for all by Jesus Christ, making present the Sacrifice of the Cross in a non-bloody manner, throughout the Church, through different ages, places, peoples and nations. There is often a sacrilegious tendency to reduce the Holy Mass to a simple convivial meal, the celebration of a profane feast, the community’s celebration of itself, or even worse, a terrible diversion from the anguish of a life that no longer has meaning or from the fear of meeting God face to face, because His glance unveils and obliges us to look truly and unflinchingly at the ugliness of our interior life.

"Even today, a significant number of Church leaders underestimate the serious crisis that the Church is going through: relativism in doctrinal, moral and disciplinary teaching, grave abuses, the desacralization and trivialization of the Sacred Liturgy," 

Cardinal Sarah said that while some liturgists say the period after Vatican II as a "springtime" for the Church, today wiser observers recognize "a renunciation of her centuries-old heritage.... Political Europe is rebuked for abandoning or denying its Christian roots. But the first to have abandoned her Christian roots and past is indisputably the post-conciliar Catholic Church."

Further reading: "Saint Annibale Bugnini, Pray For Us!", by Michael Matt in The Remnant, 19/10/14.

FREE: "Pope Benedict, 'Gender Theory' and the Threat to Civilization"

Ed. here, with a special FREE offer for our Catholic readers and for all who are concerned about the degradation of our Christian values and society -- Western civilization itself.

A friend has sent us a pamphlet published this month by the Fatima Center entitled "Pope Benedict, 'Gender Theory' and the Threat to Civilization". Here are the two introductory paragraphs.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his 2012 Christmas address to the Roman Curia, warned against what is called "gender theory". This theory, which coincides with the rise of homosexuality in society, claims there is no such thing as a God-given masculine nature or a feminine nature. Individuals are free to choose and remake their gender.

The acceptance of such theories not only defies God and nature, but gives rise to the persecution of Christians, and of anyone who opposes the pro-homosexual program....

The section headings which follow include: Nature Defied; The Family Threatened; Normal People Bullied; and Persecution and Punishment.

The entire article is too long for us to republish here on WWW, but we are converting it to a .pdf file (less than 1 MB), which we will e-mail to you, FREE. All you have to do is e-mail us your request.

We won't save or sell your e-mail address. You won't receive any follow-up mailings, requests for money, or spam. We make this offer only because we feel this message MUST be circulated to all Christians concerned for the future of our society.

Footnote: Those who were scandalized, earlier this month, by the political correctness of school authorities in Hillsboro MO in allowing "Lila", a self-proclaimed "transgendered" girl, to use the female lockers and toilets in "her" school will find this article of great interest. It is also relevant to Ontario parents fighting the provincial government's new pro-LGBT sex education curriculum.

No wonder the Church is losing respect and influence

The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, must be shedding rivers of tears in Heaven as she looks with profound sorrow on what has become of Her children in the last half-century. Two news stories this month confirm that the Church no longer has any significant influence on the morals and lives of the majority of people in two nominally Christian countries -- the United States of America and the once ultra-Catholic Republic of Ireland.

On 12 May 2015, a new study by the respected Pew Research Center revealed that in just seven years under Popes Benedict XVI and Francis, the number of self-identified Catholics in the USA has fallen from 23.9% (in 2007) to 20.8%. And now, for the first time, the "Catholics" are outnumbered by those claiming no church affiliation.

The study says that nearly a third of American adults (31.7%) reported being raised Catholic. The bad news, for the mainstream Church, is that fully 41% of that group no longer identify with Catholicism. This means that 12.9% of US adults are former Catholics, while only 2 (two) per cent of US adults have converted to the Church from another religion. No other religious group in the study had such a lopsided ratio of losses to gains.

Meanwhile... In Eire, what Patrick Buchanan called "the long retreat in the culture war" continued, as over 60% of Irish voters -- over 90% of whom would have been baptized Catholics -- voted in a binding referendum to legalize "gay marriage".

Irish bishops had urged them to vote "NO", but Pope Francis sat out the campaign, refusing to make any definitive pronouncement. Walt suggests Catholic voters read more into the Pope's silence -- "Who am I to judge?" -- than the appeals of their own church leaders.

Not that the Irish bishops were very strong in their condemnation of the abomination that is homosexuality. Most Rev. Diarmuid Martin, Archbishop of Dublin, pointedly refused to preach on this one of the Four Sins that Cry to Heaven for Vengeance, singled out in the Holy Bible (Genesis 18:20-21). Following the vote, Abp. Martin told the Irish state broadcaster RTE: "We [the Church] have to stop and have a reality check, not move into denial of the realities.... I appreciate how gay and lesbian men and women feel on this day. That they feel this is something that is enriching the way they live. I think it is a social revolution."

What Abp. Martin is really saying is: since the secular humanists and pushers of perversion disagree with God's commandments, God's Church must change the rules to follow the prevailing "morality". Here's a commentary from St. Peter's List on that astonishing proposition.

The “Sin of Sodom” is described as "carnal sin against nature, which is a voluntary shedding of the seed of nature, out of the due use of marriage, or lust with a different sex." Given modernity’s substitution of God and Nature with the will of the individual as an autonomous moral universe, sodomy – more specifically active homosexuality, not orientation – has become part of the new post-Christian norm. Neither Divine Law nor Natural Law form an external guide for the modern man; thus, the only boundary of autonomous individual is the autonomy of another. The boundary for what is and is not moral appears to be consent. Consequently, moral dialogue has been flattened to mere platitudes, e.g., this isn’t hurting anyone, it’s my body and my choice, love is love. Many often comment on the modern West’s apparent lack of morality, but few comment on the fact the West has lost the vocabulary to even discuss on morality.

Walt wonders if the Holy Father was properly instructed in the Catechism of the Church. "Who am I to judge?" he asks. And it seems he was a great fan of the notorious gay activist, radical priest, Michele de Paolis, with whom he is seen here concelebrating the Novus Ordo Mass.

Father di Paolis openly rejects Christian morality, pontificating: "Homosexual love is a gift from God no less than heterosexual." To claim that God is the author of evil is blasphemy, a damnable sin against the First Commandment. Moreover, Fr. De Paolis is a well-known promoter of the "anarcho-Catholicism" of the extreme left, which has been dominant since the 1970s in parts of Italy and South America, from whence comes Pope Bergoglio.

Getting back to the Irish vote... One could also interpret the vote in favour of "gay marriage" as a rejection by the Irish people of the Church that tolerated and covered up the perversions of sinful priests and religious who for decades assaulted Irish children in the most vile ways. So hostile had Eire become to the predations of the clergy that in 2010 its prime minister warned Benedict XVI not to include the Republic (or Northern Ireland) in a proposed tour of the "British Isles" because his safety could not be guaranteed.

But it's not just the paedophile priests who are to blame for the increasing rejection of the Church. Nor is it the lay gay Catholics or LGBT secular humanists outside the Church who are hell-bent (literally) on wiping out the Christian religion. No, dear Catholics, it is the Gay Mafia in the Vatican, and the Popes themselves! They are the stars pulled down from Heaven by Great Red Dragon, who stood before the "Woman clothed with the sun", when she was to be delivered, that he might devour Her son. (Apocalypse 12:1-4).

There is something seriously wrong -- dare we say immoral or even unChristian -- with the leadership of the mainstream Roman Catholic Church. It should come as no surprise, then, that people who once looked to the Church for guidance, direction and a moral code by which to live, are now deserting in droves.

Our Lady of Fatima, Our Lady Help of Christians, Queen of the World, pray for us!

Further reading:
"Commentary on the 4 Sins that Cry to Heaven for Vengeance", St. Peter's List, 1 February 2014.
"Pope Francis’ meeting with homosexual activist Fr. De Paolis: the unanswered questions", LifeSiteNews, 28 May 2014.
"Papal Silence: The Most Decisive Factor in Ireland's Same-Sex 'Marriage' Victory" by Roberto Mauro, in Catholic Family News, 27 May 2015.

Pope Francis tells interviewer he's going to quit

A Te Deum will be sung today -- or should be -- in Traditional Catholic chapels and mass centres throughout the world, following the revelation by Pope Francis that, after only two  years sitting on the throne of St. Peter, he feels that another two years is about enough, so will be stepping down.

In a wide-ranging interview with Joaquín López-Dóriga of the Mexican media company El Noticiero, the Pope said, "I have the feeling that my pontificate will be brief: four or five years; I do not know, even two or three. Two have already passed. It is a somewhat vague sensation. Maybe it's like the psychology of the gambler who convinces himself he will lose so he won’t be disappointed and if he wins, is happy. I do not know. But I feel that the Lord has placed me here for a short time, and nothing more."

Vague sensations are nothing new to Pope Francis, but he seems clear enough in seeing a precedent in the purported resignation of Benedict XVI. He told the interviewer that "an institutional door has been opened", through which he is free to walk when the next sensation strikes him.

Assuming that Benedict XVI is still alive -- he seems quite well for a man who resigned "for health reasons" -- when Francis steps down, the Roman Catholic Church will then have not one "Pope Emeritus" but two. Depending on the longevity of those two, the number could grow to three or four or... God only knows.

Some have suggested that Francis can't really be the pope, not because his predecessor is still alive, but because no pope, guided and protected by the Holy Spirit, could possibly preach and teach the heresies which Francis utters. God only knows that, too. We mere mortals -- the remnant who cling to the Faith of our Fathers -- can only pray that God will deliver His Church from the present plague of bad prelates.

Pope Francis refuses to acknowledge Middle East "War of Religion"

On Monday, in "Under Pope Francis, Christianity matters less", Walt gave you the key points from a lengthy interview with leading Vaticanista Sandro Magister, on the 40th anniversary of the beginning of his career as an analyst and commentator on the state of the Church and religion in general.

Sig. Magister noted several trends in the Papacy of Pope Francis that disturb not just Traditionalists but many mainstream churchmen, including leading bishops and Cardinals. One of these was the inexplicable silence of the Vatican on Islam and the Muslim world in general. He called the Vatican's political correctness "caution pushed to extremes.... I don’t see any advantage to it. It seems to me that it hasn’t resulted in any help, even minimal or partial, for the Christians in those regions. Caution is understandable, if it’s measured in proportion to the effect. It’s valid if it produces lesser damage.

"We have a power like ISIS and we are too fast in saying that Islam has nothing to do with it; that they are instead nurtured by radical Islam, which doesn’t resolve the question of rationality and the relationship between faith and violence. That is exactly what Pope Ratzinger had addressed in Regensburg. In fact the only true dialogue between Christianity and Islam came about after that lecture...."

Today, in his Chiesa blog, Sig. Magister takes up the question again. In the face of the offensive of radical Islam, he writes, Francis’s big idea is that "we must soothe the conflict." Forget Regensburg! And forget about the 1000s of Christians among the many victims of puritanical Islam.

Sig. Magister finds it "impossible not to see in this the features of a 'war of Islam' pushed to the extreme, fought in the name of Allah. It is illusory to deny the Islamic origin of this unbridled theological violence. This has been published even by the officially supervised La Civiltà Cattolica, only to be contradicted afterward by its fearsome director, Antonio Spadaro, the Jesuit who plays the role of Francis's interpreter.

"On Islam the Catholic Church stammers, the more so the higher up the ladder one goes.

"The bishops of the dioceses of the Middle East are calling upon the world for effective armed protection, which never comes. In Rome, Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran publishes the most detailed denunciation of the atrocities of the caliphate, and declares an end to all possibility of dialogue with those among the Muslims who do not stamp out violence at its roots.

"But when the secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, speaks in New York from the tribunal of the UN, as he did on September 29, he carefully avoids the taboo words 'Islam' and 'Muslims', and pays the obligatory tribute to the mantra that denies the existence of that conflict of civilization which is plain for all to see....

"In 2006 Benedict XVI, first in Regensburg and then in Istanbul, said what no pope had ever dared to say: that violence associated with faith is the inevitable product of the fragile bond between faith and reason in Muslim doctrine and in its very understanding of God."

But Benedict XVI isn't the Head of the Church any more, or so we're told. Instead we have Francis, who believes in "peaceful coexistence" with the Muslims. Perhaps next month he'll tell us he believes in Santa Claus too.

Under Pope Francis, Christianity matters less - key points from interview with Sandro Magister

From time to time Walt has referred to -- and sometimes quoted at length -- the noted Vaticanista, Sandro Magister. I am a follower of his Settimo Cielo blog in l'Espresso. His first article appeared in the Italian daily l'Espresso in 1974.

On the occasion of his 40th anniversary, Maestro Magister was interviewed at length by Goffredo Pistelli, who writes for Italia Oggi. The interview was published, in translation, on the Rorate Caeli website. Here are the key points. Quotes from Signore Magister are shown in purple. The emphasis is mine.

Pope Francis, Sig. Magister conceded, has been basking in worldwide success. But, he said, there are contradictions inherent in the Pope's character, which can be seen  by analyzing  his statements and actions since his elevation. "Throughout his life, he has been a person who has acted on different fronts at the same time. He does the same thing now as Pontiff; he leaves passages open, and on first reading, there are many contradictions."

For example, Francis "is a very talkative Pope. He has telephoned and approached all different kinds of people both near and far. But he has been silent about [the plight of] Asia Bibi", the Pakistani Christian woman who has been imprisoned for years, condemned to death for apostasy. See "Martyr in waiting needs your prayers", posted on WWW in March 2011.

So also, the Pope has said not a word about the kidnapped Nigerian girls and "that unbelievable act of a few days ago in Pakistan when a Christian married couple were burnt to death in a furnace."

Indeed, the Pontiff has been silent about Islam and the Muslim world in general. And his hand-picked Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin was very prudent when speaking at the United Nations recently. They seem determined not to upset the Muslims, in contrast with Benedict XVI’s lecture at Regensburg, which incited strong reactions and even deaths.

Sig. Magister calls the Vatican's political correctness "caution pushed to extremes.... I don’t see any advantage to it. It seems to me that it hasn’t resulted in any help, even minimal or partial, for the Christians in those regions. Caution is understandable, if it’s measured in proportion to the effect. It’s valid if it produces lesser damage."

The point, the analyst says, is that "We have a power like ISIS and we are too fast in saying that Islam has nothing to do with it; that they are instead nurtured by radical Islam, which doesn’t resolve the question of rationality and the relationship between faith and violence. That is exactly what Pope Ratzinger had addressed in Regensburg. In fact the only true dialogue between Christianity and Islam came about after that lecture...."

Pope Francis has said repeatedly that he doesn't want to make compromises with doctrine, that he respects the Tradition of the Church. But then he opened discussions on "modernizing" or "reforming" the Tradition, like the ones at the recent Bishops Synod on the Family, about Communion for the divorced and remarried, which effectively touch the very foundations of the Church.

Why, the interviewer asked, does he do so? Sig. Magister responded, "It was all inevitable considering the Pope’s decision to assign the opening of the discussions to Cardinal Walter Kasper. This basically was the start of the hostilities...."

What Cardinal Kasper is proposing are the same theses defeated in 1993 by Pope John Paul II and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Holy Office who later became Benedict XVI. Sig. Magister's opinion is that "it is inevitable that Communion for the divorced and remarried will result in the acceptance of second marriages, and so to the dissolution of the sacramental bond of matrimony."

Is that what Francis wants? As Cardinals Burke and George have remarked recently, it's hard to know. The Pope works both sides of the street! According to Sig. Magister, "It’s another recurring practice of this Pontificate -- reprimands to one side and the other. However...the scoldings aimed at the traditionalists, the legalists and the rigid defenders of doctrine appear to be much more numerous. On the other hand, whenever he has something to say to the progressives you never understand who he is really referring to."

That confusion to the point of bewilderment is growing is undeniable, Sig. Magister says. "We have leaders in prominent positions...who are making this clear, even if they don’t express it in drastic and antagonistic terms.... There isn’t a prejudicially hostile tendency against the Pontiff [but] certainly there are evident manifestations of uneasiness.

"Take for example the Episcopate in the United States, that is, the bishops of one of the most numerous Catholic populations in the world. In recent years, that Episcopal Conference expressed a coherent and combative line in the public arena, even regarding certain decisions by Barack Obama on ethical issues. A line shared by many prominent prelates."

Now, he continues, the American cardinals and archbishops "like Timothy Dolan from New York, Patrick O'Malley from Boston, José Gomez from Los Angeles or Charles Chaput from Philadelphia, are all uneasy. This is the episcopate that [Cardinal] Burke himself comes from and is certainly not restricted to the marginal traditional circuits, but continues to be part of one of the most solid national Churches."

The interviewer next refers to a new book by Antonio Socci, Non è Francesco, ("It's Not Francis", Mondadori, 2014.) Sig. Socci's thesis (as Walt understands it) is that since the Pope cannot lead the Church into error, if Francis is leading the Church into error, he must not be truly the Pope. QED.

Sig. Socci adduces evidence -- a missing ballot -- to suggest that Pope Francis was not validly elected. But even if he's wrong on that, could his reconstruction of the Pope's contradictions be taken to prove his thesis? Sig. Magister was asked if he'd read the book. Here's what he said.

"Yes, I read it all in one evening. It’s a real page-turner.... And not for the theory of the invalid election: the result of the cancellation of a ballot in the conclave because there was an extra blank ballot-card. In my view it’s an inconsistent theory.

"[I found it interesting] because of what’s creating the book’s success, so much so that it has reached the top of the best-sellers list, exceeding the books of and about Bergoglio. That’s because it reconstructs, in incontestable facts and words, the contradictions we have been talking about."

One of the contradictions of this papacy, the interviewer pointed out, is that despite Francis' enormous personal popularity,  religious practice has not increased. On the contrary, the aversion to Catholicism is increasing. Sig. Magister contrasted the popularity of Pope Francis with that of his two predecessors.

"The popularity of his predecessors was very strong. John Paul II experienced world-wide success and not only during the years of his illness. Also Benedict XVI between 2007 and 2008, reached the highest levels in the polls, even if this has been forgotten. His trip to the United States was the peak, where he received a great welcome even from secular public opinion.

"[The difference is] that the predecessors were mostly popular inside the Church, even if they were harshly criticized from strongholds of non-Catholic public opinion. Whereas Francis' popularity is more conspicuous outside the Church, even if it isn’t eliciting waves of conversions. Actually, with him there seems to be a certain pleasure in outside culture...in seeing the Head of the Church shifting towards their positions, which he seems to understand and even accept.

"The Christianity from the mouth of Bergoglio is no longer provocative, does not create problems as in the past, it can be treated with courtesy, superiority and detachment. Christianity matters less." 

Further reading from Sandro Magister's blog Chiesa (24/11/14): The Lenses of the Cardinal, the Sociologist, the Journalists - "All focused on Francis. To understand who he is and where he wants to go. In the Church, at all levels, criticisms of the pope are no longer being silenced. They are voiced openly. Among the cardinals, the most explicit is Francis George."

Further reading on WWW:
"The 'liquid' message of Pope Francis; will he be the last supreme pontiff?"
"Is the Catholic Church about to disintegrate?"

Desperate Catholic Church now offering sainthood to anyone who attends Mass regularly

Earlier today (see preceding post) Walt mentioned the long and complex process involved in canonizing someone -- making them a saint of the One True Church. I was talking about Archbishop Fulton Sheen, who died in 1979 and has only now been credited with the first of two miracles necessary to canonization.

Too bad that Archbishop Sheen wasn't alive today, as the Church seems about to relax the rules a little. Agent 36 alerts us to this report from the Onion.

VATICAN CITY—Alerting faithful around the world to changes regarding its process of beatification and canonization, Vatican spokesman Fr. Federico Lombardi announced today that the Roman Catholic Church will now bestow sainthood on any man or woman who attends weekly mass on a regular basis.

"After careful deliberation and prayer, the Church has elected to enter any believer into the Canon of Saints so long as he or she is pure of heart and shows up to mass once a week, or even three out of four times a month," Lombardi wrote in a statement distributed to all dioceses worldwide, noting that the Congregation for the Causes of Saints will promptly begin taking up the cases of any parishioner who arrives on time and stays for the whole thing.

"We are also waiving the requirement that individuals be dead before attaining sainthood. As long as you take Communion and stick around for a few minutes after the service, you're pretty much in. You can be patron saint of anything you want—good health, food, music, whatever—as long as you're sitting in that pew."

Lombardi said that in addition to revising canonization procedures, the Vatican would now allow anyone who attends mass to put on the priest's vestments at the end of the service and play the church's organ if they want.

It's satire, right?! But like all good satire, it's based on the truth. A new Pew Research Center survey has found that indeed, Holy Mother Church is having trouble putting posteriors in the pews -- this in spite of the rock star popularity of Francis the Party Pope.

According to the survey, 85% of American Catholics have a favourable view of the second of two living popes. That's up from 79% in September. The first of the two, Benedict XVI, was viewed favourably by 67% to 83% in the past. JPII got higher ratings than both of them, ranging from 91% to 93% in past surveys.

Dear Catholic readers, what lesson do we learn from this? Just about anyone who sits on the Throne of Peter is bound to be viewed in a positive light by the majority of Catholics, no matter who he is or what he does.

But will the same majority pay attention to his teachings? Errr, no. According to the same survey, 63% of Catholics who attend Mass at least weekly -- the candidates for sainthood mentioned above -- want the Church to change Her teaching on birth control. 72% want to allow priests to get married. 68% support women’s ordination to the priesthood. And 50% support same-sex "marriage".

The percentages are even higher among Catholics who attend Mass less than once a week. That whirring noise you hear underneath you would be the sound of real saints spinning in their graves.

Just how sick is Pope Francis?

Vatican watchers are starting to gossip about the health of Pope Francis. Is some kind of problem being covered up? The Vatican is, after all, quite expert in hiding the truth, not just about the Third Secret of Fatima, but about the medical problems of the Holy Father's two predecessors.

Pope John Paul II was visibly severely afflicted with Parkinson's Disease. His palsy was painfully obvious, yet the Vatican kept denying it until it was impossible to do so any longer. Even in his last days, when JPII was no longer in public view, we were told he was celebrating Holy Mass in his bedroom. But his doctor's official report, published later in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, indicated that he had a fever of 40 degrees Celsius and was rendered essentially unconscious by blood poisoning.

Then there was Pope Benedict XVI, elected at a rather advanced age but, according to the same Vatican sources, in remarkably good health for a man in his mid-80s. Such good health, we could see, that he was unable to walk down the aisle of St. Peter's but had to be transported on a wheeled platform. After his resignation, the "pope emeritus" explained that he had given up the office because of his poor health, flatly contradicting the official party line.

Which brings us to Francis. His audiences scheduled for November 15th were cancelled because -- according to the official Vatican network -- he had a cold. Other media raised the ante a bit, calling his problem "the flu", but that could be just a difference of terminology between North American usage and that of Europe. Whatever it was, it kept him home from work, so to speak.

Now comes news that the Holy Father cancelled a private audience which was to have been held on December 5th. (If you're going to follow the link, ignore the headline. The news about the cancelled meeting comes in the second sentence of the text.) A statement from Vatican spokesthingy Father Federico Lombardi claimed that Francis was "fatigued." How so? Well, it seems the Pope had attended meetings with cardinals that morning and the previous afternoon. You would think that schedule not abnormally onerous, but who knows?

What we do know is that the statement was given by the same Father Lombardi who was, errr, economical with the truth when he spoke of the health of John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Father Lombardi said there was "no cause for alarm". Forgive us, Father, but we've heard that before. Of this you can be sure: when the Vatican denies what would otherwise be a minor matter, they are almost certainly hiding something major!

SSPX leader finally gets off the fence, gives up on reconciling with Rome

Just over a month ago, Walt had an eyeball-to-eyeball chat with John Vennari, the editor of Catholic Family News, one of a handful of newspapers and magazines that are still Catholic in more than name only. John mentioned that he would be at the Angelus Press Conference in Kansas City this past weekend, and was looking forward to hearing talks by Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X. I don't know if John expected to hear the strong views expressed by the bishop.

You see, Bishop Fellay has for some months now been accused by "radical traditional" Catholics of being "soft on Vatican II and soft on Rome", in a push to reach an agreement with the Vatican that would see the SSPX brought back into communion with Rome and end the break which occurred in 1988.

It has been suggested by some that Bishop Fellay's motives for desiring the "regularization" of the SSPX were more personal than spiritual, since he would presumably be the head of any new "personal prelature" that might be set up by the Vatican. One group, led by Bishop Richard Williamson, has left to form the "Society of St. Pius X of the Strict Observance". Their stated reason for breaking away is that they absolutely refuse to accept Vatican II and any sort of accommodation with the mainstream Church.

Many in the audience at Kansas City were shocked to hear Bishop Fellay -- after months of dithering -- clearly denounce Vatican II. He described the Novus Ordo (New) Mass imposed by the Council as "evil", and said he is grateful that the SSPX never reached the mooted accommodation with the Holy See.

John Vennari has written a lengthy summary of Bishop Fallay's talks, well worth reading in full: "Bishop Fellay on Pope Francis: 'We have in front of us a genuine Modernist!'" Here are the highlights.

The clear statement that so many traditionalists have waited for for so long was this: "It is has never been our intention to pretend either that the Council would be considered as good, or the New Mass would be 'legitimate'. Bishop Fellay explained that although the Novus Ordo Mass may be valid, "The New Mass is bad, it is evil."

The SSPX leader said that talks with the Vatican collapsed last June because the Vatican insisted on acceptance of the teachings of Vatican II. He flatly rejected the teaching of Pope Benedict XVI that the statements of Vatican II should be read in the light of consistent Catholic teaching. "The Council is not in continuity with tradition," he said. You couldn't ask for a much clearer pronouncement than "It is not."

However, the bishop said, while the "hermeneutic of continuity" preached by Benedict was unrealistic, he acknowledged that the former pope was at least somewhat sympathetic to the concerns of traditionalists. But Pope Francis, he said, the gap between the SSPX and the Holy See is widening. "When we see what is happening now," Bishop Fellay said, "we thank God -— we thank God! -— we have been preserved from any kind of agreement" with the Vatican.

Bishop Fellay noted that we cannot simply obey the present popes without question, because then we would endanger our Faith and so destroy ourselves. He warned also that we may be entering into the time of Antichrist, although we cannot know when, or how far off in the future this may be. Be sure to read: "The 'liquid' message of Pope Francis; will he be the last supreme pontiff?"

The "liquid" message of Pope Francis; will he be the last supreme pontiff?

Even mainstream Catholic theologians are tiring of Pope Francis. His rambling, apparently off-the-cuff speeches tha frequently contradict traditional, even dogmatic Catholic teaching, are leaving them astonished and bewildered. How much more so is it for your average parish priest and us humble laymen ["laypersons", surely! Ed.]

Sandro Magister's studious and highly informed newsletter, Chiesa, brings us today a lengthy commentary -- over 2500 words -- by Professor Pietro De Marco, a teacher at the University of Florence and the Faculty of Theology of Central Italy. Its title is "A 'liquid' message". And to call it critical is the grossest understatement.

Prof. De Marco analyses recent public statements by the Pope -- Sr Magister calls them "encyclicals by interview" -- and points out the flawed reasoning and heresies into which Francis seems to have fallen. Notice I didn't say "unwittingly". Neither does Dr. De Marco. It is his contention that the Pope knows full well the import of what he's saying, when he says things like "Who am I to judge [homosexuals]?" and has fallen into serious error.

Walt and Len said the same thing, albeit not with such eloquence or at such length, back in July. Here's an excerpt from Prof. De Marco's commentary on this point.

No one is exempt, in daily and private conversation among a few, from approximations and distortions, But there is no person who has responsibility in regard to many - who teaches, for example - who will not adopt another register in public and seek to avoid improvisation.

Now, instead, we have a pope who exclaims: “Who am I to judge?" as one can emphatically say at the table or even in preaching spiritual exercises. But before the press and the world a “who am I to judge?” spoken by a pope objectively jars with the entire history and profound nature of the Petrine function, moreover giving the distasteful sensation of an uncontrolled outburst. Because of his function as a vicar with respect to Christ, not as an individual, the pope judges. [Walt's emphasis. Ed.]

The good doctor goes on to excoriate the Pope's slighting references to "religion" -- as if it were something bad or something of the past -- and his reversal of his predecessor's efforts to correct the abuses of the liturgy which are the bitter fruits of Vatican II.

Walt is tempted to reproduce the entire commentary here, for the sake of its comprehensive criticism of the Pope's utterances and the profound damage being done to the Faith. (Dr. De Marco didn't say anything about placing a soccer ball and t-shirt on the altar. Perhaps words failed him as they fail me.) Sadly, constraints of space prevent posting the whole thing here. You can read it on the Chiesa site, or, if you wish, we'll send it to you as a .doc file. Just e-mail your request to Ed. Here's the closing paragraph:

The expressive model chosen by Bergoglio cannot be pushed to the limit of knocking down the ordinary magisterium and making it hardly or not at all obligatory. The powers of a pope do not extend to the very nature of his own "munus," which transcends him and imposes limits on him. I do not approve of the traditionalist extremists, but there is no doubt that tradition is the norm and the power of the successor of Peter.

And a closing thought from Walt... well, actually from Saint Malachy, known as a great prophet. While in Rome in 1139 he received a vision showing him all the Popes from his day to the end of time. According to his prophecies, only two Popes would come after John Paul II.

The 111th prophecy, describing the second-last pope, is "Gloria Olivae" (The Glory of the Olive). The Order of Saint Benedict claimed that this pope would come from their ranks. The 111th pope was, sure enough, Benedict XVI.

St. Malachy refers to the last pope in his vision as "Peter the Roman". It is hard to relate this title to Pope Francis, who was born "Jorge Mario Bergoglio" in Argentina, half a world away from Rome. But that's the maddening thing about prophesies -- it's almost impossible to understand them until after the predicted event occurs.

Anyway, many believe that the final pope will likely be Satan, taking the form of a man who will gain a worldwide allegiance and adoration. Ah yes, a crowd-pleaser, a very "humble" man of the people, deceiving even the elect! He will be the Antichrist which students of prophecy have long awaited.

The 112th prophesy states: "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Petrus Romanus, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations; after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End."

Francis, the Party Pope: all style, no substance

Len and Walt are both traditional Catholics, appalled by the changes to the liturgy and indeed the Faith of the Church made in the wake of Vatican II -- "the best council the Protestants ever had".

We are more than a little disappointed in the pontificate of Pope Francis. It seemed to start with such promise. For instance, we were encouraged when, in April, the Holy Father asked the bishops of Portugal to consecrate his papacy to Our Lady of Fatima. See "Pope Francis to move on the Third Secret of Fatima?"

Even then, we were turning our eyes away from the "humbler-than-thou" nonsense, such as giving up the papal apartment in the Vatican, refusing the three-tiered crown, and generally proclaiming his humility and unworthiness (or unfitness?) to be the Vicar of Christ. See Walt's little April Fool "'I am not worthy...': Pope Francis resigns".

But we can no longer ignore the accomplisments of the Holy Father since his election. They amount to... wait for it... Nothing! Nada! Rien.

An article in last week's Economist said that his papacy is more about style than substance, but the fact is, there is no substance. Yes, the emperor does have new clothes -- as we see in this picture -- but underneath, he is all talk and no action.

Let's examine what Pope Francis has done... or not done... about the serious problems besetting the mainstream Roman Catholic Church today.

The most serious problem is the scandal and shame of paedophile and homosexual priests. Benedict XVI at least acknowledged the problem. But what does Pope Francis say? "Who am I to judge?" Click here to read Walt's answer!

Then there's the Vatican Bank. For years now, it had been turned into a money-laudering operation for the benefit of certain prelates and, yes, the Mafia. The Bank of Italy, frustrated with Benedict's failure to clean it up, went so far as to refuse to process bank-card transactions at Vatican ATM machines.

So what has Pope Francis done? He told the international press in July that he has turned over the bank to "trusted" advisors, Monsignori the Church. One of them, Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, was promptly arrested for financial fraud. Another, Monsignor Battista Ricca, was outed by Sandro Magister and L'Espresso, as a flaming homosexual, who regularly used the services of underage boy prostitutes and went so far as to bring his favourite rent-boy with him to the Apostolic Nunciature in Uruguay.

Now it is reported that the Holy Father's vaunted reform of the Curia, mandated by the College of Cardinals, has turned out to be too difficult for him. Francis himself said he was "too disorganized" and was being thwarted by "lobbies", including the notorious gay lobby within the Vatican. He tried to foist the problem onto a council of eight cardinals, but they won't even meet until this coming October.

Many of the other cardinals are getting restless. Cardinal Dolan (doubtless still miffed that he wasn't seriously considered for the position) has been grumbling publicly about the Pope's slowness to deal with the likes of Cardinal Bertone (still the Secretary of State), and Gerhard Muller, Benedict's Prefect of Doctrine, largely responsible for the rupture in negotiations with the Society of St. Pius X.

In the latest post on his Chiesa blog, Sandro Magister says Pope Francis is carefully avoiding reliance on old veterans of the Roman Curia, as he weighs his options for reforms at the Vatican. The Secretariat of State, traditionally the major power at the Vatican, has lost some influence to the small circle of the Pope's trusted staff -- most importantly his secretary, Father Fabian Pedacchio Leaniz. But Francis makes all important decisions himself.

The papacy of Pope Francis is not off to a good start. Good Catholics, please pray every day for the Holy Father, and that the True Faith will be preserved in spite of the failings of the leaders of Holy Mother Church.