Wondering where all the new church music comes from?

Walt and other traditional Catholics have been complaining for half a century that the modern hymns and other alleged music used in the Novus Ordo mass in the "mainstream" churches is... not to put too fine a point on it... terrible. IMHO, there hasn't been any good church music written since the day the priests turned `round. (Older Catholics will know what I mean.)

The same complaint is heard in the mainstream Protestant churches, particularly the Episcopalians/Anglicans, Methodists [Do they still exist? Ed.], Lutherans and the like. The few who still attend services find their ears assaulted by 1000 different versions of "Kumbaya", meant to emphasize inclusivity, diversity and the rest of the New Age, we-are-all-one BS. God forbid that Christian music should suggest that ours is the One True Faith and that those who do not believe are somehow excluded from God's plan of salvation.

But where (I hear you ask) does all this quasi-liturgical garbage come from? The Babylon Bee (Your trusted source for Christian satire) has come up with the answer. Yes folks, it's the

Click here to check it out. See you in church!

VIDEO: Michael Matt on the hippification of the Catholic Church

I was listening, the other day, to Gavin McInnes chatting with Stefan Molyneux about the attack on Christmas and other seasonal topics. I hadn't realized until now that Mr McInnes is a practising Catholic. He is no traditionalist, it seems, but from what he says about the sickness in today's Church, I gather that he is distressed by the distortion of the Faith -- dare we say heresy or apostasy? -- manifest in the mainstream Church. He is not alone.

Here's a new video from The Remnant in which Michael Matt recounts his experience at a recent Novus Ordo "Gathering Rite". That leads him to ask a lot of very good questions, such as: What is neo-Catholicism? What is the New Mass? Why are Jimmy Fallon, Bill Murray, Sting and Bianca Jagger readily admitting that which the neo-Catholics insist on denying: The Catholic Church is going through an all-out revolution that kicked into high gear at the Second Vatican Council. If you're one of the millions who have left the Church because of what the liberals, the progressives and the hippies have made of it, listen up, because Michael Matt is speaking for you!

Prominent Cardinal suggests "more traditional" Catholic worship

Walt knows that this item is going to be relevant only to a minority of WWW readers, including Agents 9, 10 and 3. But I'm posting it anyway because I think it's important for traditional Catholics and the world at large to know that the modernists in the Vatican have not yet succeeded in stamping out the yearning for the Mass of All Time and forms of worship that are more spiritual and respectful than the dreadful Novus Ordo Mass, particularly as "performed" in the USA.

Yesterday, L'Osservatore Romano (the official Vatican newspaper) published "Silenziosa azione del cuore", an article written by Robert Cardinal Sarah, in which the prelate discusses the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Modernists, including Pope Francis (known for his "anything goes" celebrations of the Mass) should be mortified to read Cardinal Sarah's call for a more faithful implementation of its text.

The Cardinal laments the continuing misinterpretation of the Constitution's teaching on "active participation", and suggests (shock! horror!) an appendix to the Roman Missal that might better manifest what he thinks is the continuity of the ordinary (Novus Ordo) and extraordinary (Tridentine - traditional Latin) forms of the Mass.

It should be noted that Cardinal Sarah is the Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, so should know whereof he writes. In a telling criticism of priests and bishops who see the Mass as a kind performance or entertainment, and make themselves the focal point of the liturgy. He writes, "The liturgy is essentially the action of Christ. If this vital principle is not received in faith, it is likely to make the liturgy a human work, a self-celebration of the community."

Discussing the peculiar American practice of having not just the priest but everyone involved -- holding hands during the Our Father, raising their hands during the consecration, shaking hands and kissing during the abominable "sign of peace" -- Cardinal Sarah criticized the "contemporary Western mentality" in which the faithful are to be "constantly busy" and in which the Mass is to be rendered "convivial".

"To speak of a 'celebrating community'", he writes "is not without ambiguity and requires real caution. The participatio actuosa [active participation] should not therefore be understood as the need to do something. On this point the teaching of the Council has often been distorted. It is instead to let Christ take us and associate us with his sacrifice."

Instead, the Cardinal recommends modification of the Novus Ordo liturgy to include some of the elements and practices of the traditional Tridentine Mass which the modernists -- not least Pope Francis -- have been trying to suppress. He advocated ad orientem (East-facing) workship, in these words: "It is entirely consistent with the conciliar constitution, it is indeed opportune that, during the rite of penance, the singing of the Gloria, the orations, and the Eucharistic prayer, everyone, priest and faithful, should turn together towards the East, to express their will to participate in the work of worship and of redemption accomplished by Christ."

He also recommends less noise! The Tridentine Mass has long periods of silence during which the priest prays in a low whisper, or even silently, allowing the faithful to meditate or pray silently. Cardinal Sarah says that "sacred awe" and "joyful fear require our silence in the presence of the Divine Majesty. It is often forgotten that sacred silence is one of the means set forth by the Council to encourage participation."

And there's more! Cardinal Sarah recalled the Council’s teaching -- ignored even before the ink dried on the documents -- that the faithful should "be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them," and said that the liturgy "must stop being a place of disobedience to the requirements of the Church."

The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, he emphasized, should not be read with a "hermeneutic of rupture". Walt can imagine Pope Francis and the likes of Cardinal Dolan saying, "Really? But we thought it was supposed to be a break with the past!" But Cardinal Sarah disagrees strongly: "It would be wrong to consider the extraordinary form of the Roman rite as coming from another theology." To manifest that the ordinary form and the extraordinary form are "in continuity and without opposition," he writes, "it would be desirable that there be an appendix in an upcoming edition of the Roman Missal that would permit celebrants in the ordinary form to use the penitential rite and the offertory of the extraordinary form."

So there. Vatican II did not call for the suppression of the Latin Mass. Indeed, it could not be, because, as John Vennari points out in "Traditional Mass Never Forbidden", the Papal Bull Quo Primum of St. Pius V solemnly proclaimed that the Latin Tridentine Mass could never be forbidden, and that all priests and faithful will always have the right to avail themselves of this liturgy."

Now, all Cardinal Sarah has to do is convince Pope Francis to not just read but heed what the Vatican II Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy actually said, and put its recommendations (and his) into practice. The Pope could, himself, set the proper example. But, dear Catholic readers, don't hold your breath...

Further reading: "Derive liturgiche. Ma il cardinale Sarah riprende il timone", by noted Vaticanista Sandro Magister, in L'Espresso.

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?"