Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Pilgrimage and Crusade

By Michael J. Matt Time moves on. The first time I walked the Pilgrimage from Paris to Chartres, France, I was 24 years old. I was young and the world was a mess, yes, but so much less so than it is today. People smiled more readily back then. The world wasn’t so jaded.

Now I realize that it’s well within the prerogative of grumpy old curmudgeons to think the world is blacker and bleaker today than it was when they were walking uphill both ways to school every day through driving blizzards. But this is different. It really is so much worse now than then, and I think it’s a provable fact. Nothing’s the same anymore.

When I went on pilgrimage back in 1991, for example, we were still travelling to the other side of the world to a place that had its own culture, language and currency. It was actually a foreign country in the truest sense of the word. McDonald’s in Paris? Yeah, right!

I remember the hassle involved with calling home. It usually involved a pile of coins, a payphone and a midnight stroll. When I telephone my wife from Paris these days, I pull out my cellphone and say, robotically: "Siri, call home".

And that’s it. I sound like a complete lunatic, of course, asking my little Star Trek communicator to phone home for me, but there you have it. Men behaving like lunatics is yet another sign of our advanced civilization.

And then there was the problem with language. At the time, I spoke no French and not many Frenchmen spoke English.

So we’d all babble away and see if any of it landed. It was fun, but nothing like

~ See Editor's Desk/ Page 2

From the Editor’s Desk Continued…

today. These days, I have some French but I rarely need it, since everyone speaks English in France, especially in Paris, and if you’ve a mind (and no sense of culture at all), you can order a Starbucks on the Champs-Élysées in English and get whatever New World Order flavor you like best.

Then there were the French Francs and the currency exchange. It wasn’t unusual for the rookie traveler to just open his wallet, exasperated, and ask the merchant to grab whatever he needed to complete the transaction. It was just a lot easier (if a lot more expensive). Today, if you need to purchase something you use your credit card, of course, because Big Brother doesn’t want us leaving home without it. And we don’t.

And then there’s the little issue of terrorism. When I first went to France I could have boarded the plane with my shotgun in hand, so long as it was in its case and not loaded. These days, a passenger has to take off his shoes, belt, jacket and undergo an entire body scan just to get in the general proximity of the gate area. And if you so much as joke about a gun you’ll spend your vacation in lockup.

The atmosphere of international travel really is like something out of Nineteen Eighty-Four. Big Brother is everywhere—watching, monitoring, scanning. You can’t get away from him but, what’s worse, you’re oddly comforted by the omnipresence of his all-seeing eye, knowing that he is all that stands between you and the Grim Reaper in a dynamite vest. The world’s airports are filled with citizens of the world who are grateful to Big Brother, even those that hate everything he is and everything for which he stands. Life is his to take and give. And resistance is futile.

The airports on both sides of the Atlantic are patrolled by soldiers of the New Disorder, naturally—grim little platoons, comprised usually of one Madame Defarge-looking female and two males, machine guns at the ready. The New World Order will have order, even if they have to shoot everyone to establish it.

Flying the friendly skies just isn’t what it used to be, unless you used to be incarcerated, in which case you’ll feel right at home these days.

So I may be a curmudgeon but that doesn’t mean we’re not approaching a positively post-apocalyptic world, the likes of which no previous generation in human history has ever experienced, even if the Volors are a bit faster. God is gone and guns and killing machines are vital to Utopia’s international security.

So, obviously, getting to France has changed rather dramatically in 26 years.

And with the passing of each year, the organizers of the Pilgrimage to Chartres are induced to take ever more security precautions as they launch the 5-mile pilgrim column through the streets of Paris—a city that over the past 26 years has gone from French majority to Muslim, with its Christian heritage fading fast, its French currency gone, English street signs all over the place, and patriotism equated with fascism and hate. This is not your grandmother’s Paris anymore.

Still and despite terrorism and nogo zones, each year the Pilgrimage grows stronger, larger and more unapologetically Catholic. What’s left of Catholic France is not backing down from an encroaching New World Order, because what’s left of Catholic France is a growing and thriving minority of Traditional Catholics who see the proclamation of the Kingship of Christ, the Latin Mass and the large Catholic family as the only way to make France French again.

The Pilgrimage to Chartres is made up of hundreds of what are called les chapitres or "chapters"—groups of about 50 pilgrims each, usually from the same parish or Catholic organization. There are all kinds of new chapters forming, including a vibrant chapter of displaced Iraqi Christians. And last year, a chapter made up of non-Catholics, fallen-away Catholics and perhaps even a few atheists was formed. Where did they

come from? So each year as the long column wends its way through Paris, local folks in windows and storefronts look on in bewilderment at the sight of the Catholic thing. They watch pilgrims from all over Europe carrying statues of Our Lady on their shoulders, wearing the Sacre Coeur, praying rosaries, singing the old Catholic hymns. The curiosity factor is enormous.

So last year, some enterprising chap in the Notre-Dame de Chretiente organization had the idea of trying to reach out to those onlookers and invite them to attend the pilgrimage, free of charge, to better understand this massive disruption that takes place in their neighborhoods every year over Pentecost weekend.

After a screening process to establish good will, there was enough of these curious spectators to form an entire chapter of would-be pilgrims, many of whom will return this year. Someone took the time to look up at them sitting in their windows and say: "Hey, you want find out what you’re missing?

Follow us." And by the grace of God it worked.

This, in essence, is what the Pilgrimage to Chartres is all about—making a public demonstration of Catholic faith and values to a world at war with both.

The Pilgrimage to Chartres is all about saying to the world: Je suis Chretiene!

Voila ma gloire, mon esperance, mon chant d’amour and de victoire.

For 26 years we at The Remnant have vigorously supported this event because it has the same message for young Americans— "Hey, you want to find out what they stole from you? Follow us." Islam tells young Muslims the world over to follow Allah, and they do to such an extent that much of the world is fearful of waking up Islamic. We Christians were once like that, too, and we must become that way again, only with the true God, Christ the King Lord of History. Nothing else matters.

We’re not interested in establishing our legitimacy in the eyes of the world. We have no need to win the approval of a modern Church which has abandoned the Traditions of Christ’s Holy Church.

Our young people must be made to understand that the world is at war with Christ, whether our Church wants to admit it or not. The infidel of old advances against our countries and our families, and the only way to stop him is with the Cross. There’s no better way to drive this point home than to join 15,000 Catholics from all over the world in a holy march across France.

The key to the survival of the Catholic family today is the Crusade itself--the fight to remain detached from a world drunk on the blood of the innocent and a Church that has clearly lost its way.

Better than any sermon, the Pilgrimage to Chartres allows young Catholics to experience exactly what was stolen from them and what they must be willing to give their lives taking back—not out of mere duty, but out of love for what they lost and what they will find again along the road to Chartres.

After all of these years organizing the U.S. Chapter on the Chartres pilgrimage, I admit that this is a labor of love. It is not easy. Organizing an event on the other side of the Atlantic is a challenge. We make no money off this event, other than enough to pay our own way to and from France. This year, we’ll have more than 85 pilgrims.

We’ll also be assisting a second U.S.

chapter from Washington state, which will have another 40 pilgrims. We will be joined by 9 traditional Catholics from Sweden who will walk it for the first time. I was contacted by a small group of Catholics from Malaysia, a now-Muslim dominated country, who practically begged us to let them walk with the U.S. chapter so they can make contacts to help them spiritually prepare for persecution rising.

The Chartres Pilgrimage is emerging, in other words, as the great meeting place for Catholics who understand the particular charism of pilgrimage in preparing the souls of the faithful for battle, spiritual and otherwise. And the folks at home can join us. This year we’ll again be posting daily updates on the Remnant website (RemnantNewspaper.com), along with the prayer and meditation schedule.

Especially as Catholic Europe falls into secularist chaos, with the Islamic scourge growing every day, I invite Remnant readers to pray and take part in this. The Pilgrimage to Chartres is not a vacation, not a parade, not a fun outing. It’s a journey back to the heart of Christendom, it’s a pilgrimage crusade.

Readers of The Remnant have already sponsored 10 young American pilgrims this year. But there is still a pressing need. We have a larger team this year, who are all volunteering their services, but who still need airfare and accommodations. We have two chaplains, a seminarian, a lead chaperone, 6 assistants and two guides.

My eldest son, Walter, is volunteering to join the French tent-building team. This means that he and one other young man will forego walking the pilgrimage itself and instead help build the camps for 15,000 pilgrims—truly grueling work.

So, you get the idea. The Remnant is committed to offering as much American assistance to this massive traditional Catholic operation as possible. It’s God’s work, but it’s hard work. And it requires financial commitment, too—though not a lot. The three days of pilgrimage are spent walking, the nights are spent on the ground in floorless tents, and the rations are meager (thin soup, bread and water). There are no creature comforts.

So every dollar donated to this effort goes to the cause, and there’s still time to get involved.

Donations of any size will be accepted in exchange for donor names and prayer intentions being placed on the Prayer List, which means donors will be prayed for every day—by name—and their intentions will be carried on pilgrimage all the way to Our Lady’s ancient "play house"—Notre Dame de Chartres.

And this year, by special arrangement, your intentions will be carried deep beneath the old cathedral, to the crypt where the veil of Our Lady is kept, the oldest part of the great gothic cathedral—built by St. Fulbert of Chartres in the year 1000. Through an old friend who lives in Chartres, I managed to get permission from the rector for the U.S. Chapter to conclude the pilgrimage exactly as pilgrims in the Middle Ages would have done—by candlelit procession, at night and down to the place of the Holy Veil. It’s a supreme honor, and a rare one. It’s also a tremendous opportunity for grace that I believe will benefit our country and our friends back home, too.

So join us, at least in spirit. Pray for the success of the Pilgrimage, which this year is appropriately dedicated to Our Lady of Fatima. Please help us make this year’s pilgrimage a huge success.

We’ve managed to raise most of the funds needed to subsidize the U.S.

team, but I need to raise an additional $7,000 to complete the job. Help me and I promise to do all in my power to honor your faith and confidence by using every waking moment to prepare the young American pilgrims for the war for Catholic restoration and counterrevolution to which they are so desperately called. Time is running out, and this pilgrimage is like boot camp for the Church Militant.

Donations and prayer intentions can be sent to:

The Remnant Tours Fund PO Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025

THE REMNANT ~ www.RemnantNewspaper.com

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Fatima and the Russian Connection

By William Price

Is the Church in Checkmate? Maybe.

In 1917, the Blessed Mother appeared six times at Fatima Portugal and put the entire world on notice. She chose three shepherd children to be Her earthly ambassadors, and conveyed heaven’s grievances concerning mankind’s moral turpitude.

On Our Lady’s third visit, July 13, 1917, she showed a terrifying vision of hell to the three children:

"You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart… If my requests are heeded many souls will be saved and there will be peace." "…But if men do not cease offending God…"

Our Lady predicted a worse war (WWII) than the one then-currently in progress (WWI). She informed the children that she would make a future visit to request the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart.

Thirteen years later, in June of 1929, at Tuy, Spain, Our Lady reappeared to Sister Lucia de Santos, the last living Fatima visionary, and stated that the time had come for the consecration of Russia, specifically stipulating the terms for such: It was to come by way of a solemn act and made specifically to her Immaculate Heart.

Consecrating Russia was the exclusive responsibility of the pope to oversee and execute. So, as long as the pope conducted the solemn consecration of Russia and ordered the bishops to participate in such, heaven would be satisfied, despite any lack of episcopal cooperation. Our Lady’s request to us, the people, was and is that we pray the Rosary daily, sacrifice, do penance and make first Saturday reparations. If Her requests were complied with, God would spare the earth from a terrifying global chastisement.

Let’s just suppose one of the eight popes from then until now did his part, but the people refused to change their ways.

Would God save the world from the deadly chastisement prophesied anyway? Conversely, what if we Catholics subordinated our intellect, memory

~ See Fatima/ Page 5

Fatima and the Russian Connection

Continued from Page 1

and will, with the aid of sacramental grace, to convert as Our Lady requested, would God spare the world this global chastisement, even if the pope didn’t do his part?

The predicted world chastisement is coming and we know the pope will eventually make the consecration because our Lord stated that he will, but " it will be too late". Our Lord used King Louis XVI’s tragic example of disobedience to make the point. The French King paid with his head for stubbornly refusing the Lord’s simple request: to place an image of his Sacred Heart on the King’s coat of arms.

Many good Catholics lament the failure of all the popes from Pius XI to Francis to heed heaven’s warnings, but how many of us "good Catholics" have really listened to Our Lady when it comes to our part in all of this? Are we saying a daily rosary? Are we doing penance?

Are we making sacrifices by rejecting the world’s endless seductions and participating in first Saturday Reparation devotions? Would God spare us some of the ferocity of the coming chastisement if just the remnant of his Church would fully surrender their intellect and will by embracing His truth, which includes the message He sent mankind via his Holy Mother?

Once again our collective sin has placed us at the threshold of an all-out nuclear war with Russia, a country with the world’s largest nuclear arsenal.

Interestingly, they also have the world’s best missile defense strategy, including a sophisticated system of bomb shelters and the like.

We, on the other hand, have comparatively little, with no Plan B in the event of a nuclear attack. Russia believes they can survive a nuclear war and also knows we have no contingency. In 1962 people understood just how grave was the threat posed in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Today, our nation continues in a terrifying state of cognitive dissidence. We are in denial… Listen to Fr. Fuentes’ interview with the last living Fatima ambassador, Sister Lucia de Santos, on December 26, 1957:

"Tell them Father that many times, the most holy Virgin told my cousins Francisco and Jacinta, as well as myself that many nations will disappear from the face of the earth.

She said that

Russia will be the instrument chosen by heaven to punish the whole world if we do not beforehand obtain the conversion of that poor nation" (emphasis mine) The Whole Truth about Fatima, THE THIRD SECRET pg. 504 vol. III.

The very fact that Russia was chosen by God should scare us to our knees and put us all in the pews for Our Lady’s requested first Saturday devotion.

Over the last couple of decades, Russia has abandoned much of its Communist ideology, while simultaneously becoming reacquainted with its historical Christian Orthodox roots. Could this be due to a Catholic remnant realizing its propensity for sin and finally heeding Our Lady of Fatima’s plea for prayer, sacrifice and reparation?

Rejecting the world’s satanic global agenda is key, and is not Russia now the greatest threat the diabolical European Union has yet to face?

Although small in number have we—all those sincerely trying to do their part to heed Our Lady’s requests—made some difference? Do the multitudes of those that refused to listen in fact nullify the multitude of Catholics since 1917 that have complied? There have been millions since 1917, praying for forgiveness for their sins and the world’s indifference to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, According to Our Lady, heaven knows our collective hearts, those legitimately in submission and embracing her century-old Fatima admonitions to turn from evil have surely had some effect on the future.

The late Fr. James Downey, a contemplative Benedictine monk, was ordered by his Abbot out of his Missouri monastery to head the Institute of Religious Life. Fr. Downey said many times that the Catholic laity will save the Church. This could be our chance to prove him right. (Father Downey celebrated the traditional Latin Mass every day). Quite simply, have we complied with Our Lady’s requests to pray the rosary daily, reject the modern world, do acts of reparation, or not? If not, then we are part of the problem and the reason for the Church in checkmate. If so, then we have reason to hope and to continue to spread the message of Fatima in this 100th anniversary year of Our Lady’s attempt to save the world from the Divine chastisement we so richly deserve. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 01

Does Francis "endeavor to destroy the Church"?

by Christopher A. Ferrara

After four years of the Bergoglian tumult, it is undeniable that we are witness to a Pope who is averse to sound doctrine and whose teaching, if one can call it that, is generally unreliable if not positively contrary to the Faith.

The faithful look on with growing alarm and disgust as Pope Bergoglio commits an error almost every time he opens his mouth to speak, earning the world’s applause for his cavalier disregard of orthodoxy and traditional disciplines of Apostolic origin. The Church is rocked by the horrific impact of his formal, ghostwritten documents. Evangelii Gaudium, Laudato si’ and Amoris Laetitia are rife with false statements of fact, misleading citations, dubious opinions on matters far beyond the papal competence, captious theological propositions, and blatant departures from prior teaching on faith and morals— always intermingled, however, with orthodox bits and pieces that allow for a sophistical defense of continuity with the Magisterium.

In short, Pope Bergoglio is literally a font of error whose immense output of heterodoxy and plain nonsense would fill a book, as shown by this online catalogue of Bergoglianisms (Denzingerbergoglio.com) maintained by anonymous diocesan priests and constantly updated to reflect the latest addition to the ever-growing canon of Bergoglian folly.

The confused Catholic might ask himself: How is such a Pope possible?

What of Our Lord’s promise concerning the indefectibility of the Church? The answer to these questions is clear to any Catholic who understands the nature of the Petrine office and its relation to ecclesial indefectibility. In fact, the answer was provided to the Church, providentially enough, by Benedict XVI at the very outset of his mysteriously terminated pontificate: The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires

~ See Francis/ Page 4

Does Francis "endeavor to destroy the Church"?

C. Ferrara/ Continued from Page 1

are law. On the contrary: The Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.

The Pope is a servant. But he is not a servant of "the people of God" in the demagogic Bergoglian sense, which is merely a disguise for the abuse of power by one who is no servant at all but rather behaves precisely as "an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law." The Pope, rather, is a servant of the Truth that has been handed down to him for safeguarding and transmission intact to his successors as the deposit of faith. The Petrine office is thus essentially conservative, not creative.

As the First Vatican Council famously decreed in the very process of defining the strict limits of papal infallibility: For the holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.

That is, the conservative function of the papacy is custodial. The Pope has custody of the deposit of faith, and his primary duty is to guard that deposit against "every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism." Thus even John Paul II, whose traditional teaching on marriage and family Bergoglio labors ceaselessly to overthrow, declared in promulgating his new Catechism that " Guarding the deposit of faith is the mission which the Lord has entrusted to his Church and which she fulfils in every age."

What, then, of Pope Bergoglio, who clearly has little or no interest in confining himself to guarding the fidei depositum? Quite the contrary, speaking of his sham Synod on the Family, which was nothing more than a vehicle for the preconceived disaster that is Amoris Laetitia (AL), Bergoglio explicitly rejected the concept of the Pope as faithful guardian of Tradition, declaring that the Synod was "an ecclesial expression" by "the Church that questions herself with regard to her fidelity to the deposit of faith, which does not represent for the Church a museum to view, nor just something to safeguard, but is a living spring from which the Church drinks, to satisfy the thirst of, and illuminate the deposit of life [emphasis in original]."

By introducing the idea of a "Church that questions itself with regard to her fidelity to the deposit of faith"—as if the Church qua Church could ever be unfaithful to the fidei depositum— and by sophistically pitting the deposit of faith against a merely rhetorical "deposit of life," Bergoglio audaciously subjects the whole of Catholic doctrine and related discipline to his questions, which are merely the reflections of his own liberal Jesuit mentality. And by "living spring from which the Church drinks" Bergoglio means, of course, his own ideas, which he has promoted relentlessly from the moment of his election. The synodal sham was merely the means by which his ideas were assigned to what he quite ludicrously expected the faithful to believe was "a space for the action of the Holy Spirit," wherein the bishops could "put on apostolic courage," meaning the "courage to live life and not to make a museum of memories of our Christian life." Once again, the sophistical pitting of doctrine against "life." When the bishops failed to "put on apostolic courage," however, but rather insisted on defending the "museum of memories of our Christian life" by rejecting his attempt to ram Holy Communion for public adulterers down their throats, Bergoglio simply promulgated his own ideas anyway via AL, while continuing to pretend that his errant novelties in moral theology were an inspiration of the Holy Ghost working through the Synod Fathers. As if anyone could seriously believe such a blatant lie.

Pope Bergoglio, then, is a Pope who simply refuses "to bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism." But since the Pope, no less than any other human, possesses free will, such a refusal is possible.

The charism of papal infallibility is limited to immunity from error when the Pope teaches what the Church has constantly taught or formally defines a matter of faith and morals that has already been handed down to him in the deposit of faith as transmitted by the ordinary Magisterium. But not even when he infallibly defines a dogma does a Pope do anything more or less than to "religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles."

The Holy Ghost will not, however, force a Pope to perform his proper conservative function should he refuse to do so. Whether Pope Bergoglio’s refusal to conform himself to the proper function of the Petrine office makes him a formal heretic is not a question we have the competence or the knowledge to decide, for only God can know the subjective state of soul that determines the difference between material and formal heresy and there is no forum in which the faithful can compel a wayward Pope to reveal his subjective intentions.

This much, however, is certain: If a Pope insists on advancing the novelties of his own thinking, we can have no assurance whatever that his teaching is reliable.

Quite the contrary, it may well be that virtually everything he says and does according to his own lights is wrong.

Such a Pope is Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

What then of the Church’s indefectibility? Did not Our Lord declare by His divine authority "Thou art Peter (Kepha), and upon this rock (kepha) I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18)? Is not the papal office the foundation of the indefectible Church? Yes, of course it is, but that foundation rests in turn on Christ Himself and, to recall the words of Pope Benedict, "obedience to Christ and to his Word."

Again, the question comes down to the free will of a Pope respecting obedience to Christ and His word. The Magisterium itself has never declared that a Pope is incapable of such disobedience. There is at most a pious presumption that a Pope would never become an enemy of orthodoxy. But no less than Saint Robert Bellarmine, a Doctor of the Church, wrote matter-of-factly about the right to resist a Pope who is "invading souls… and much more if he should endeavor to destroy the Church." [ De Controversiis on the Roman Pontiff, trans. Ryan Grant (Mediatrix Press: 2015), Book II, Chapter 29, p. 303].

That a particular Pope consistently acts in a manner contrary to his foundational role as the conservator and defender of orthodoxy does not mean that the papacy as such has failed in that function, contrary to the promises of Christ. It means only that a particular Pope has defected from his duty, even though the Holy Ghost will prevent him from formally defining theological error and imposing it upon the Church. And it is either the formal dogmatic definition of a doctrine always held by the Church, by way of the extraordinary Magisterium, or the repetition of that doctrine without a dogmatic definition, by way of the ordinary Magisterium, that comprise the limited object of papal infallibility. (I do not address the common theological opinion that the object of infallibility includes universal disciplinary mandates, versus mere permissions).

When a Pope does not act within that limited scope, no teaching of the Magisterium denies that whatever can go wrong will go wrong with a given pontificate. Literally everything that can go wrong with a pontificate has gone wrong all at once with Pope Bergoglio. His pontificate is thus an historic demonstration of every way in which it is possible for a Pope to fail in his duty to "confirm the brethren." His governance of the Church represents what would have to be the ultimate intensification of the pursuit of novelty that more or less marks all of the post-Vatican II papacies. Unlike that of his immediate predecessors, his program is one of pure novelty, all of it operating outside of the charism of infallibility.

As Sandro Magister has just put it: "With Francis the Church has become an open construction site. Everything is in movement. Everything is fluid.

There is no longer dogma that holds up. One can reexamine everything and act accordingly." We are witness to the reality that Bellarmine considered only in theory: A Pope who would "endeavor to destroy the Church." It is not for us to know how far God will allow Bergoglio to proceed with his hubristic madness, which, however, will inevitably be undone. For our part, resistance is the remedy, each of us according to his station.

Then again, it might behoove us to consider the outcome of an upcoming unprecedented academic conference in Paris, evidently convened to address this unprecedented papacy: Deposing the Pope: Theological Premises, Canonical Models, Constitutional Challenge. Also worthy of consideration in this regard is the view of the renowned canonist Ed Peters, who writes (in line with the opinion of Bellarmine) that "in the view of modern canonists from Wernz to Wrenn, however remote is the possibility of a pope actually falling into heresy and however difficult it might be to determine whether a pope has so fallen, such a catastrophe, Deus vetet [which God forbid], would result in the loss of papal office."

Here, however, we can only watch and wait as history unfolds. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 03

The Remnant Speaks

Letters to the Editor: The Remnant Speaks P.O. Box 1117, Forest Lake, MN 55025 ~ Editor@RemnantNewspaper.

Mr. Cullen and Evolution

Editor, The Remnant: Although complaining about one statement in an otherwise fine article may seem trivial, my objection has to do with a much larger issue that receives very minimal attention in The Remnant. In the March 15, 2017 edition, Timothy J. Cullen’s article, "The Cypresses Still Believe" contains a sentence wherein he makes a statement about the Mediterranean Cypress tree as follows: "it points to the sky, is long lived, and is one of the oldest (over 150 million years) types of trees." Mr. Cullen’s claim that there is something on this earth that is 150 million years old raises the question as to where he, one of The Remnant’s foremost columnists, stands on the debate between the traditional Catholic doctrine of creation as it appears in Genesis, and the increasingly discredited theory of Evolution and long ages.

Before the modernist takeover of the Church, the traditional Church and the Church fathers always believed that: 1. Less than 6000 years had passed from the time of creation until the time of Christ.

2. The creation of the Universe took place in six twenty-four hour days or in an instant of time.

3. All living things were created instantly and immediately.

4. No new types of creatures were created after Adam.

5. Death and disease did not enter the world until after the sin of Adam.

Furthermore, one need only read the Gospels to see that Jesus regarded the events of Genesis as historical, and the persons in Genesis as historical people.

In Mark 10:6, Jesus clearly places man at the very beginning of creation, and through using Biblical genealogy and history, we can clearly see that no more than 6000 years have passed since Adam and Eve. To find 150 million years in the earth’s history, one would have to reduce Genesis 1-11 to allegorical folklore and be at odds with the historical perspective that Jesus clearly had toward Genesis.

It seems obvious that Genesis 1-11 was written to give man an understanding of how and why God created the world, and how sin entered into it. If Evolution or long ages of time existed, why has God not given any hint of that in His story of creation given to us in His Holy Word, the Bible? In fact, he leads us in the opposite direction. It seems that many persons feel pressured to conform to Evolutionary dogma for fear that they will otherwise lose their credentials among the intelligentsia. It is sad to see that this has now happened even at the highest levels of the Church, yet true modern science is showing us that from the molecular level upward, Evolution is virtually impossible.

Evolutionary thought and long ages are incompatible with the bible and the foundational doctrines of the Church and continue to lead many people away from God. Those who seek to compromise with it through some form of Theistic Evolution are only seeking to inject God into an atheistic philosophy. This issue continues to be the great elephant in the room among traditionalists who seem content to have a "don’t ask, don’t tell" philosophy on this issue. It is disappointing to see such a distinguished columnist like Timothy J. Cullen on the wrong side of this debate.

John Underwood Stroudsburg, PA

Editor’s Response: Many thanks, Mr. Underwood. In point of fact (and meaning no disrespect to my friend and valued columnist, Timothy Cullen), I agree with you. Quite frankly, I simply overlooked this parenthetical point in Mr. Cullen’s article, and I apologize. Our readers know very well where I stand on the issue of Evolution, theistic or otherwise. And I believe this is one of the few points on which Mr. Cullen and I disagree. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

MJM Block The Remnant Website in the UK?

Editor, The Remnant: In my local Costa Coffee (bigger than Starbucks in the UK), I try bringing up The Remnant website and their Wi-Fi provider O2 won’t let me. Obviously you’re on a hate/porno list along with the pedophiles and Nazis. Here’s what I get:

We’ve blocked this page: O2 Wifi takes public Wifi seriously and we block pages that could be deemed offensive in a public place, intrusive or affect your security online. If you believe this page should not be blocked, you can let our Customer Service Team know using the following Live Chat. OR, please try another web address or search below.

William Murphy

Editor’s Response: Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Welcome to Oceania. This is why we simply refuse to abandon The Remnant’s newsprint edition. In a few years and if something doesn’t change, I fully expect the paragons of toleration in the New World Order to pull the switch on Catholic websites like ours. So much for Freedom of the Press! Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

MJM Who Are Romans to Judge?

Editor, The Remnant: This Good Friday I partook in the traditional Cristo Muerto procession. It was a beautiful and sad event which took me from understanding Christ’s sacrifice on the cross to participating in Christ’s sacrifice on the cross by being part of his funeral procession. Staring at those wounds in the flesh of our Christ, I couldn’t help but think about the other participation we saw that fateful day in history, the participation of the Roman soldiers.

The role of the Pharisees is pretty straightforward, they made their judgement against Jesus and ordered him killed. But the case of the Roman soldiers is a bit more convoluted. They didn’t judge, but accompanied the Pharisees in their sinful judgement. In a way you could say it was not their place to judge, they were just following orders. But they went above and beyond their job as simple executioners, and used a sick level of cruelty toward Christ.

The crown of thorns, the scourging, the nailing thru the wrists, the cut with the spear, and the heckling.

They didn’t judge, but joyfully engaged in the crime, and the wounds on our Christ bear witness to that fact.

What it comes down to is that their lack of judgement was in fact their judgement. To accompany someone in Sin, is sin. Or as Christ said, "those who are not with me are against me".

This eerily reminds me of a statement by our Roman Pontiff who when asked about homosexuality said "who am I to Judge". I suppose the Roman soldiers could say the same thing. But just like the Roman soldiers, the Roman Pontiff’s lack of judgement is in fact his judgement.

Sincerely, Rudolf Hutter

Start with Communion in the Hand

Editor, The Remnant: Not even through reading your March 31, 2017 Page 2 editorial, but I have to wholeheartedly agree. Please start with Communion in the hand. I again became an altar boy about a year ago, after last serving the true Mass back in the 196465 era. When I hold the paten during Holy Communion, there are always particles of the Sacred Hosts left behind.

This is nothing new to us who serve, but to have the neo-Catholics become aware may be all that is needed to get them to realize the truth that Communion on the hand is a grave abuse, even a sacrilege.

Of course we must realize that the Church is going through a passion of sorts. We as Catholics have to accept our own crosses, bearing them, offering up to God our pains and sufferings for the conversion of sinners. As I re-studied Latin to become an altar boy again, I came to find that Psalm 42, which is prayed at the foot of the altar in the true Mass, was the first to get the ax after Vatican II: Yes, do us justice, O God and fight our fight against a faithless people; from the deceitful and impious man rescue us... Our help is in the name of the Lord,

Robert Stefanick

Thanks, Remnant!

Editor, The Remnant: Just wanted to say thanks for The Remnant! I’m loving my subscription to your newspaper.

I love all the YouTube videos, The Remnant posts and love blogging with other Remnant family members online. God bless you all for the Holy Apostolate you carry on. I love the "Godly Meditation" by St. Thomas More written while he was held in the Tower of London, in the March 31, AD 2017 edition. The Church is in so much need of more Godly men like St. Thomas More. I know there are some out there and God will justly reward them too as He did St. Thomas More. St. Thomas More, pray for us.

Melissa Harpring North Augusta, SC

Masses for John Vennari

Editor, The Remnant: I noticed in this morning’s news that John Vennari passed away yesterday, and I wanted to let you that I will offer some masses for his soul and for his family’s comfort. I will have 3 offered at the parish, and I can send you the dates when I know, and will do two myself. I will also keep you in my prayers, as I know he was a good friend and colleague. Requiem aeternam dona ei requiem, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei. Requiescat in pace.

Father Blatchford

Mass for Gretchen

Editor, The Remnant: I am a Spanish priest, who lives near Madrid (in Alcalá de Henares). I receive your newsletter and read some of what you publish online, which makes me happy. In an hour I will offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for the eternal life of your sister, Gretchen. I give thanks to God for her life.

Fr. Pablo Ormazabal Albistur

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 04

Letters to the Editor Cont...

I Want to become a Catholic, but…

Editor, The Remnant: I’ve studied the history and theology of the Catholic Church for the last few years and have come to the realization that it is the One True Church and that to be saved I must become a Catholic. But strangely, since Vatican II and especially with the election of Pope Francis, that Church no longer exists. What should I do now?

Thank you Barry Gill

Editor’s Response: You have been given a great grace---to see the Truth despite the crisis in the Church. Don’t abandon hope, and remember that the Church will never cease to exist. Please contact a priest of the Society of St. Pius X or the Fraternity of St. Peter. If you don’t have either in your area, please contact us and we will put you in touch with a good priest who can assist you in this urgent moment of grace that God has so obviously given you. God bless you.

MJM Remnant TV on John Vennari’ Death

Editor The Remnant: I wanted to thank you, Mr. Matt, and colleagues/ friends/faithful for so many things - for bringing my family to the Traditional Church, for introducing us to the likes of John Vennari RIP and for telling it how it is. I can’t tell you how much I needed this talk [WHAT IS DEATH; John Vennari Remembered] right now. You have articulated the worries that have been banging around inside my mind but I couldn’t get a handle on.

You are so right about the children. I talk to mine often about the 4 last things (to my limited ability); the importance of being close to Our Lord with the help of Our Lady, the angels and saints; the perils of this world and the very real threat and presence of the devil. But mostly being ready to face Jesus when our time comes. It seems that not many parents find that important. When Our Lord said to the women of Jerusalem ‘don’t weep for me but for your yourselves and your children’ we can see perhaps that those words are particularly appropriate for our time.

This would have made a much better TED talk....

A. Clay RemnantNewspaper.com

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 05

On the Political Front...

Spicer's 'Gaffe" and the New Dogmatism of Modern Society

by Dr. Boyd D. Cathey The current news cycle is full of odds and ends that seem to catch interest in a bizarre manner. Recently, the mainstream media launched a massive, personal assault on President Trump’s press secretary, Sean Spicer, for something he casually said during a press briefing. Of course, Spicer has been attacked and caught in numerous cross hairs since he was appointed. But this time the criticism was outside the realm of presidential politics.

His "sin"? On April 11 he made an off-hand comparison of the supposed barbarity of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad with the crimes of German dictator Adolf Hitler over the use of poison gas. Oh, no! You can’t do that! You can’t even get close to that analogy! CBS News called the comparison a "colossal error," and the rest of the media jumped in (including Fox) to condemn Spicer for his "being tone deaf," and even "possible anti-Semitism." It was a "serious gaffe," Fox intoned. "You gotta know your history and can’t say some things!" was the nearly unanimous refrain.

You see the "Hitler analogy" is totally verboten; you are simply not allowed to use it. The crimes of Hitler---the horrendous gas chambers, the genocide--are considered unique, and absolutely no comparisons are permitted. Thus, to suggest that the thousands of Polish Catholic citizens who suffered barbarity at the hands of SS, or the approximately ten million Christian Ukrainians who perished under dictator Josef Stalin’s brutal rule in a process called the "Holodomor," are in any degree comparable with the Holocaust, means that the speaker is shouted down as "insensitive," "beyond the pale," or, worse, labeled "anti-Semitic." Even the publication a few years back of the famous Black Book of Communism, describing in irrefutable detail nearly 100 million deaths caused by world Communism, was condemned for somehow equating those lives with victims of the Holocaust. Spicer, of course, immediately groveled and apologized profusely, demonstrating once again that there are certain totems in contemporary society that are even more dogmatic than any doctrine of religious faith ever was! You can deny the divinity of Christ or the Virgin Birth or the existence of Heaven and Hell, and no one will pile on you these days; indeed, most of the secular mainstream media and pundits like Bill Maher will most likely praise you for being "intrepid" and "fearless" in the face of "religious intolerance" and "bigotry." But you cannot---under the pain of universal outrage and secular "excommunication" ---make any comparison with the unique, untouchable criminality of Nazi Germany.

In fact, the assault on Spicer was based on a new type of dogmatism that infects nearly every facet of American life.

Even on the basic point the press secretary was trying to make, the narrative was muddled. Even if we were to accept that Assad were responsible for gassing (which remains unconfirmed by independent observers), the clear attempt of the mainstream media in humiliating Spicer was to attack President Trump, once again, by way of his press secretary, using this accusation of his supposed "insensitivity" and the violation of one of the new dogmatic iron rules of our mentally corrupt society.

What we have witnessed in recent years is the erection of a whole series of new tenets of modern "faith," unchallengeable totems that we dare not question, lest we be cast out into utter darkness, reprobation, and exile from "civilized" society. Thus, you cannot question the "fact" that the War Between the States was "about slavery," or that "man-made climate change is a fact," or that "white racism infects our entire society," and so on. These "dogmas" have in an increasingly aggressive way replaced older Christian doctrines in the hearts and minds of millions of citizens.

And the difference is this: those older doctrines were authored by our Creator, and they were fitted not only to fallible human nature, but also to the rhythm of Natural Law. For nearly two-thousand years Christianity and Christians were able to create a civilization and a culture that glorified God. Certainly, mankind has had its share of conflicts and wars, famine and persecution; but through it all, there was a common recognition that what was "right," was "right," and what was "wrong," was "wrong." Original sin, human fallibility and greed did produce barbarities. But Christianity, most importantly, taught salvation and forgiveness through God’s grace, and that humans could receive that grace and illumination, and that with that illumination a Christian culture could— and did---exist.

The modern template disdains that legacy, perverts it, erects new dogmas, and those new dogmas reject and dissolve the historically Christian transformation of men as "children of God," casting mankind back into the darkness of secular barbarism and the law of the jungle.

As Christians, it behooves us to regain that vision and renew the faith that never becomes old or loses its savor.

As G. K. Chesterton once said about our supercilious modern society: "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." ■

Press Secretary, Sean Spicer

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 06

Lost In The ‘50s, Too

America

Magazine, Pope Pius XII and the New World Order

By Walter L. Matt (RIP)

Editor’s Note: This article appeared in the April 26, 1951 issue of The Wanderer, when my father was editor of that newspaper. We reproduce it here to illustrate just how long the globalists (including their liberal Jesuit accomplices at America) have been hard at it, as well as to demonstrate how the more things change, the more they stay the same.

MJM Last week the Jesuit review America asserted apodictically that the Holy Father in his address to the World Federalist Congress in Rome, on April 6th, 1951, had "endorsed unequivocally the World Federalist movement." To this and other naïve and onesided assertions by America we took exception in this column, pointing out that though the Pope, quite in accordance with his august predecessors on the Chair of Peter, champions of course a Christian reconstruction of the world and has worked unceasingly and consistently toward that goal, he by no means "unequivocally endorsed" all the principles, methods and leadership of the United World Federalist organization.

What he did, rather, was to stress the fact that there is a right and a wrong kind of Federal world government and that the right kind must be truly Federal—that is, must be an association of sovereign States which does not take the form of a "mechanical unitarianism." To attempt world government through this forced, mechanical "unity," deciding all questions by simple majority vote of a world parliament, would merely bring into play, he warned, the "disintegrating forces from which the political and social order has already suffered too much."

But this, apparently, is not the way Fr. Edward A. Conway, S.J., read the Pope’s address. In this week’s (April 29th) America, Fr. Conway, himself a partisan in the controversy on World Federalism, since he admits having to "defend" his presence on the national advisory board of the United World Federalists, Inc., "confesses" to his readers how "hard-pressed" he had been to defend his presence on the UWF national advisory board in the face of strong opposition from Catholic circles.

"Unfortunately for me," he writes with pleasing simplicity, up to April 6, 1951, the Holy Father had never made "a clear-cut and quotable statement dealing directly with world Federal Governments." In other words, Fr.

Conway admits, it had been impossible for him to find some apt Papal quotation to resolve his "embarrassment." He, Fr.

Conway, tried hard but failed, up until April 6th, 1951, to justify his position on the advisory board of the United World Federalists, Inc. His failure to do so prior to that date—the date, according to Fr. Conway, when the Holy Father’s address gave "solemn approbation" to the World Federalists— had been largely due to widespread and ‘irresponsible’ opposition to the United World Federalists. This opposition had come, says Fr. Conway, not only from such "misrepresentative" arguments as adduced by Mervin K. Hart, Joseph P.

Kamp, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Daughters of the American Revolution, and a number of other nonsectarian organizations, but also from "respectable Catholic organizations" such as the Knights of Columbus, the Catholic War Veterans, etc/, etc. All this was most "disturbing," says Fr. Conway, to himself, of course, and to the United World Federalists. So they decided, he says, "to do something about it."

They got Thomas H. Mahoney— Boston attorney, prominent Catholic, and himself chairman for three years of United World Federalist policy committee—to show in a booklet the alleged affinity between "Catholic statements from St. Augustine to Pius XII" and "corresponding UWF proposals." In this booklet, according to Fr. Conway, Mr. Mahoney, "eschewing all argument," (sic!) "simply asked his readers to ‘draw their own reasonable inferences from the comparison.’ The similarities were sensational."

Unfortunately, however, this booklet by Mr. Mahoney made "little impression in some Catholic communities," according to Fr. Conway. Various "die-hards" in the Catholic opposition just couldn’t see it Mr. Mahoney’s way. That this may have had something to do with Mr. Mahoney’s own Ordinary, Archbishop Cushing of Boston, having definitely taken issue with the World Federalists, Inc., Fr. Conway does not suspect.

In fact Fr. Conway’s silence about Archbishop Cushing’s position in this matter (see Brooklyn Tablet, March 25th 1950) makes one wonder whether here, too, all criticism of UWF can simply be dismissed as "the aberrations of an intransigent nationalism which denies or spurns the common bonds linking the nations together."

At any rate, after explaining all the difficulties he had had defending his position with the UWF heretofore, Fr.

Conway finally got hold of the Holy Father’s address of April 6th. From this address Fr. Conway tries to "assure and inspire all Catholic Federalists" by culling a total of twenty-four lines. But even this meagre quotation, though it is cited without one syllable of the many essential reservations and warnings which were the substance of the Pope’s address, is not, as Fr. Conway would have it, an unequivocal endorsement of the United World Federalists, Inc., or, as he puts it, an endorsement of this "nonsectarian movement." It is one thing for the Pope to endorse the general purpose or end to which the world Federalist dedicate themselves; it is quite something else again for Fr. Conway or anyone else to interpret or misinterpret this to mean the unqualified endorsement of a particular organization, specifically a "nonsectarian" organization.

That the Pope is urging all Catholics to help re-build a disintegrated world into a structure organically inter-related and functional in all its component parts; that he pleads with them not to be indifferent to the problem of establishing a world comity of nations based on the natural and moral law but to strive by all means to take the lead in this regard—this, of course, goes without saying. But that the Pope is pleading with Catholics to become members of the World Federalists, Inc., or to fall in line with or take dictation from a nonsectarian and far from unquestionable organization or group—this is a far-fetched inference which only a "hard-pressed" partisan in such an organization might hazard!

It is, to my way of thinking, not unlike suggestion that the Popes, having pointed out world abuses which have led to Communism and having declared that the Church, too, is opposed to such abuses were urging Catholics to join the Communist movement or at least the great international and humanitarian movement known as Freemasonry and thus bring to the world that peace and that tranquility which all the world longs to see!

It wouldn’t do, however, for me to end discussion of so important a problem as world peace and world order on the shallow reasoning of starry-eyed partisans of World Federalists, Inc.

Certain it is that whilst we question various endeavors in this regard, this is not to discourage but rather to spur Catholics to make a distinctively Catholic contribution to the problem of world reconstruction and peace. The April 6th address of the Holy Father, although it has nothing "quotable" in favor of World Federalists, Inc., surely is not the first instance in which Christ’s Vicar has pleaded for a workable solution to the modern barbarism of total war, world war, class war, together with all their enervating and socially destructive concomitants.

Farther back than the knowledge or recollection of many of us goes, the Popes have truly been urging One World,--not, however, in the superimposed and arbitrary sense that many today would have it, but in the sense presupposing in first place that spirit of mutual understanding and cooperation which is begotten only by a common faith or at least by generally accepted principles in the social, economic and moral spheres.

But where today do we find such prerequisites for world unity? Where in our modern, cynical, skeptical, disjointed and apostate world do we see manifest that spirit of genuine solidarity among nations and peoples and classes which once prevailed but which, since the onslaught of the Reformation and Enlightenment, has been patched up again and again with devious and, so far, short lived and inadequate makeshifts and plans?

Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 07

Continued...

civitas maxima

And yet today, though disjointed and rent to its very foundations by conflicting principles and programs for peace, the world still clamors for peace—a peace, however, on which no two people seem to agree. And that is what makes it so vast and so difficult. Because in first place the world must be agreed as to what constitutes a right peace and a wrong peace, it must be agreed, as Christendom once was agreed, at least as to principles of right and wrong, good and evil, justice and injustice, virtue and sin. In short, it must be agreed as to truth, for truth is by its very nature one; it cannot be many things. And since it is one, truth alone will bring unity and peace. Merely to will peace, therefore, is not enough. Peace must be built, slowly and painstakingly, from correct premises and for a common object, by men and nations who have first learned from a commonly accepted code to govern themselves virtuously, truthfully, orderly and peaceably in their homes and workshops, communities and States.

Assuredly, we all want peace, and, ultimately, only world governments can give us peace. But the question is: what kind of peace do we want, what kind of world government will be right and acceptable for all?

These are questions competently analyzed and discussed by Catholic political philosophers, among them Dr. Heinrich A. Rommen, LL.D., professor of political philosophy at the College of St. Thomas in St. Paul. In his comprehensive volume, The State in Catholic Thought (Herder, 1945), Dr. Rommen devotes several important chapters specifically to the Catholic doctrine on war and peace, the ideal of a World State, means to abolish war. For those who either early or late may have lent themselves to dubious movements inspired by a false pacifism or a muddled humanitarianism, Dr. Rommen makes many things clear. It would be impossible, of course, within the narrow confines of this or even a series of articles to do justice to Dr. Rommen’s treatise. Suffice it to say that he is not an emotional pacifist who falls for the Socialist clap-trap about the coming deliverance of mankind through a

without classes or States or nations. He is not one who believes the soldier to be a murderer and depreciates the ethical virtues connected with war.

Nor, on the other hand, is he a cynical skeptic despairing of sense in history and of reason in man and resigned, therefore, to the "inevitability" of everrecurring war. Rather, he believes in the possibility of men cooperating with Divine Providence in establishing social, political and spiritual order based on "commonly accepted moral ideals," and shows how this can be done not through a universal world monarchy or empire as was dreamt about during the time of the medieval

orbis christianus,

but though socio-political institutions backed by spiritual and moral ideals, by the principles of the natural and divine law, by "a plurality of independent and free States living in an order of coordination and not of subordination of one to the other."

"The strife among nations," Dr.

Rommen concludes, "can be best settled if the universal law of morality, the principles of natural law as the unwritten constitution of the international community, are commonly accepted" (p. 735). As for world federalist schemes, we think this quotation needs underscoring: "Too many who eagerly draw up perfect blueprints for world organization are secretly influenced by the expectation that after the establishment of such legal institutions they will get rid of the continuous responsibility of a burdensome foreign policy" (p. 734). Dr. Rammon emphasizes that peace is the work of justice, of moral responsibility on the part of all, and that without this sense of individual and social responsibility all institutions, no matter how perfectly conceived, "will be empty hulks, a derision of the idea of law" (p. 735). Justice and charity anchored in a genuine faith in a personal and omnipotent God—this, he declares, is "the real guaranty for the peace of the world." But as for a world government as conceived in the minds of modern humanitarians, materialists, rationalists, atheists, "such a world government has a fine appearance—on paper."

In reality, however, such plans are doomed to fail not only because of incorrect premises, but for very practical political and economic reasons. "A world government that would perform what its promoters expect it to perform would have to become a super-State with the right of continuous intervention in the domestic affairs of the member States" (p. 731). Such intervention would be intolerable, however, both for the individual as well as the State.

Moreover, and even in a World State to which merely the one sovereign right to decide when to make war would be transferred, even such a limited world power under present-day conditions is impractical, as recent experiences have shown.

"The idea of a world federation," Dr.

Rammon writes, "suffers from another shortcoming. That is the Rousseauist theory that, if we discard all particular and group interests in a community and establish liberty and equality for each member, then the will of all transforms itself without the intervention of a concrete authority into the general will of the new community, a general will that cannot err. This theory supposes that the public opinion of the world, or at least of the majority of the States, is always right" (p. 721). And again: "The underlying illusion [regarding most theories and proposals for a World State or world government] is… the Rousseauist assertion that if there exist perfect institutions then all will be well since the people are good and any form of evil must spring simply from imperfect or corrupt institutions. Thus [according to Rousseauist thinking] it is enough to set up such perfect institutions and thus automatically a good and just order will continuously produce itself…" This is a Liberalist principle diametrically opposed to the Christian doctrine on Original Sin and its consequences.

It is also, we might add, a prime tenet of Freemasonry.

In conclusion we quote this significant statement by Dr. Rommen: " Practically all [World State plans] contain utopian elements and are based, at least partly, on an illusory concept of law and Society. If not divested of these utopian elements, they are a danger to world peace" in that they lead to "an optimistic belief that once such legal machinery is instituted it will work automatically, without the catalyst of personal or communal authority and moral responsibility…" (p.

718) Let me respectfully suggest to those, particularly some students at St.

Thomas College who have written to us about World Federalists, Inc., that they devote themselves to a careful and prayerful study of Dr.

Rommen’s book. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 07

Spiritual Communion

What Is It?

A devotion which we can initiate on our own, either inside or outside of Mass, AS MANY TIMES A DAYAS WE SO DESIRE. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote that it involves "a real longing for union with Christ even when we are unable to receive Him sacramentally."

Our Lord, holding two chalices, appeared to St. Catherine of Siena and said, "In this golden chalice I put your sacramental communions. In this silver chalice I put your spiritual communions. Both chalices are quite pleasing to me."

WHO?

Anyone: --IN THE STATE OF GRACE --UNABLE TO RECEIVE SACRAMENTAL COMMUNION --NOT CATHOLIC --SICK AND HOUSEBOUND

COMPONENTS:

ACT OF FAITH ACT OF LOVE EXPRESSION OF DESIRE INVITATION TO OUR LORD TO COME INTO OUR HEARTS My Jesus, I believe that you are present in the most Blessed Sacrament. I love you above all things, and I desire to receive you into my soul. Since I cannot now receive you sacramentally, come at least spiritually into my heart. I embrace you as if you have already come and unite myself wholly to you. Never permit me to be separated from you. Amen Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed. ( pray 3 times) ■

How?

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 08

Catholic Heroes...

Fr. Jose Planelles and the Spanish Civil War

Editor's Note: The Spanish Civil War ( 1936- 1939) was fomented in increments by the resentments caused by the Carlist wars of the nineteeth century, the Spanish - American War, and the deepening anticlericalism of the postenlightenment age.

The mounting tensions exploded into war at dawn on July 18, 1936, when Nationalist troops, under the heroic leadership of General Franco— who would become probably the greatest ruler in modern Spanish history— rose up against the new, communist Republic of Spain. Almost immediately, surrounding world powers began to send aid to their favorites: Soviet Russia came to support the Republic, while Germany and Italy backed the Nationalists.

The Spanish Civil War was not merely a surface conflict between political parties with opposing interests; it was a monumental struggle between two antithetical ways of life— two faiths. It was the anarchist, utopian ideals of the Republic— ideals which constantly devalue, even sacrifice, the present generations in exchange for some forever- unattainable but glorious future— these ideals versus the " old", Catholic way of life, which seeks to live for a different kind of future entirely, and until then lives fully, lovingly and truthfully in the present. Wherever the Republic’s army went, it left smashed churches, murdered religious, corpses raised up in the streets as warnings to dissenters.

The efforts of the Nationalists included heroic feats like the siege of the Alcazar of Toledo, and bittersweet sacrifice, such as the martyrdom of Bishop Asensio. Their moves and countermoves on the battlefield led to an impasse on the outskirts of Madrid, and finally to a triumphant entrance into the city. Victory for God and for Franco! Viva Cristo Rey!

But the war, of course, was not without heavy losses on all sides. The POWs experienced a very different war from those on the field, but acts of heroism, even martyrdom, were not uncommon among them. One such hero was a priest named Fr. Jose Planelles, who had been free to walk away, but remained to administer the sacraments to the prisoners. This selflessness ultimately cost him his life.

MJM THE MARTYRDOM OF FATHER JOSE PLANELLES MARCO (18841936) By Manuel Morillo Translated for The Remnant by Dr. Boyd D. Cathey In the part of Spain controlled by the Republican Popular Front toward the end of the first year of the bloody Civil War, to be a priest was a certain way to prison, torture, and eventual execution. Father Jose Planelles Marco, nevertheless, had a chance to avoid this fate. Two times he had an opportunity to escape and avoid execution, and two times he was faithful to his vocation and his calling to "care for souls," remaining with the souls in his care to deliver the sacraments to the condemned. And, as a result, he was killed by a firing squad along with a number of other so-called "political prisoners."

His history is recounted in a very detailed volume authored by historian Francisco Torres Garcia, titled El Ultimo Jose Antonio (Ediciones Barbarroja, 2013). Although Torres Garcia’s definitive study is centered on the imprisonment and last days of the founder of the Falange Espanola, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera, the book is laced with vivid accounts of Jose Antonio’s relationship and dealings with Father Planelles, and the testimony, gathered from official reports and eyewitness accounts, including from former members of the Socialist militia, is both impressive and moving. Father Jose was born in the village of San Juan de Alicante, in the province of the same name, educated in the seminary of San Miguel de Orihuela, ordained in 1910, then serving as a simple parish priest in various assignments before becoming director of a high school in the city of Alicante. There he became well-known known as a wise, holy, and very knowledgeable priest, a reputation significant enough to get him arrested (September 12, 1936) after the beginning of the Civil War by order of the local "popular committee."

Imprisoned with a number of so-called "political prisoners," Father Jose suffered bad health, including back problems, and the filthy conditions of the prison only intensified his condition. Nevertheless, in a short time, at only 51 years of age he became known as "the little old priest and confessor of the imprisoned." He took upon himself the role of comforting and consoling spiritually the numerous prisoners, hearing their confessions, and offering words of hope and good counsel.

After two months--on November 18-- a civilian tribunal re-examined his case, and seeing that no particular charges had been lodged against him, decided to release him. Despite this, managerial confusion and Father Jose’s own desire to comfort and remain with the prisoners meant that he would continue behind bars.

It was at this very time that the founder of the Falange, Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera, who had been sentenced to death, asked for a priest to hear his final confession before being executed. Father Planelles, already a resident there, was selected to hear the Falange founder’s confession. Torres Garcia recounts in detail this famous scene: "During forty-five minutes, kneeling in humble submission, Primo de Rivera confessed his sins and asked for forgiveness.

At the end, both men stood and embraced tearfully. The older priest presented to the young political leader a copy of the New Testament. Shortly before his execution, Jose Antonio would inscribe in this volume the following words: ‘God grant that my blood will be the last Spanish bloodshed and that my death can divert the great discord.’ On November 20, Jose Antonio was executed, blessing his guards as he died."

Unable to secure his freedom despite the decision of the tribunal, Father Jose remained in prison, where he continued to comfort spiritually the many prisoners. On November 29, it seemed that he might truly gain his liberty, but once again, the civilian Socialist militia intervened and removed fifty-one prisoners to be executed, in reprisal, it was claimed, for bombing of the city by units of the newly-formed Nationalist air force. According to Torres Garcia, Father Planelles might have managed to avoid the fate of the others. Still--and again based on numerous testimonies-he chose to accompany the prisoners, requesting that he be permitted to give them final absolution before execution by firing squad.

At the execution site, while he heard confessions and gave absolution, one of the militia members recognized him: "Hey, it’s the priest who confessed Jose Antonio!" At that, the decision was made to include Father Planelles among the condemned. With courage, he exclaimed to the guards: "You may still my body, but my soul belongs to God! I bless you and offer my final prayer for you and for Spain." In a few seconds, he was cut down in what Torres Garcia calls "an orgy of blood, but one that only confirmed his martyrdom."

His process of Beatification by the Church has been introduced and is advancing. ■

On 1 April 1939, Generalissimo Franco broadcast his final radio communique of the Spanish Civil War: 'Today, after having disarmed and captured the Red Army, the Nationalist troops have secured their final military objective. The war is ended. Burgis, April 1, 1939. Year of Victory.'

Fr. Jose Planelles

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 09

The Stuff of Nightmares

Continued on Page 14

By Nigel Thorne

Father Dillon closed his breviary, genuflected, blessed himself and hastily headed for the chapel exit. As he opened it, he very nearly struck the rotund frame of his incoming confrère, Father Cesik, who (despite his large build) dodged the out-swinging door with surprising agility. Surprising, that is, for anyone who did not know that Father Lawrence Cesik had starred for Yale University Intervarsity hockey team before answering the call and entering the Seminary of Winona in 2006.

Father Pat Dillon, who had played hockey with him many a Sunday afternoon during their seven winters of formation together, did not, however, fall into the category of the surprised.

"Lost none of the old reflexes, Larry", he quipped.

"A bit slower than I used to be, all the same, Pat!", Father Cesik replied cheerfully.

"Like us all, I guess... Eh, sorry Larry, I’m in a bit of a rush. I’ve got to head down to the Diocesan Offices to meet the Bishop this morning, so I won’t be there for breakfast. Gotta swot up on that letter from Ecclesia Dei as well, so that I have my facts straight..."

"Oh, ya... I’d forgotten you had the appointment to go and sort out the new marriage situation this morning". Father Cesik’s brow darkened as he continued: "Rather you than me, anyway. Glad it was you who got picked to be Pastor!...

Slippery eels, those bishops, especially our local specimen. He’s relatively new, but I’ve already heard some bad stories about him. Don’t let him push you around, Pat, whatever you do..."

"Come on, Father! Let’s have a bit of respect for the Hierarchy...and trust! I mean, things aren’t like they used to be! We’re not back in the 80’s and 90’s now!"

"You know what they say about leopards and spots, Pat... they never change ‘em!...Anyways, you better go... I’ll say a prayer for you. Good luck!"

"Thanks, Larry. I’ll let you know how I get on".

Father Dillon held the chapel door open long enough for Father Cesik to pass through, then turned on his heel and practically ran down the stairs towards the kitchen, where he proceeded to prepare his absolutely necessary morning coffee.

"Double quantity required today", he muttered to himself. "Gotta calm those nerves... Now, where did I leave that print-out...?"

He found it where he had left it the previous night – on the kitchen table.

Gulping down his coffee which he held in his left hand, he scanned the document which he held in the other.

Between mouthfuls, he read aloud: "...

Insofar as possible, the local Ordinary is to grant the delegation to assist at the marriage to a priest of the Diocese...

Where the above is not possible, or if there are no priests in the Diocese able to receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society... O.K., that’s the part Father Sullivan told us we have to emphasize with the bishops – ‘impossibility’ is a big word...different kinds of impossibility – physical, of course, but also moral...

legitimate desire of the couple to be married before the priest who prepared them for the Sacrament, etc...stress the pastoral...!" He felt like he was back in Seminary, preparing for a moral theology exam, going over and over the principles required for solving tricky cases.

Shooting a glance at the clock (which read 8.45), he took one last draught of his tar-like beverage, and poured the remainder down the sink. Leaving his unwashed cup, he hastily folded the document in two, stuffed it into his cassock pocket, grabbed his keys from the hook beside the fridge, dashed out the hall door, opened his car and got in.

It started first time, and he was soon on the road to the Diocesan Offices on the other side of town.

Traffic was light, so he made good time.

He parked in front of the Offices and made his way towards the Reception.

As he approached the door, he realized that both his stomach and his mind were racing... He had never met a bishop from outside of the Society before! How should he address him? Should he kneel and kiss his ring? Would the Bishop know why he was there, or would he have to explain?... He pushed through the door, feeling for all the world like he was entering a football field before an important college match.

"Good morning...eh... Father...?" came a female voice from the other side of the hall. Looking up, he saw that the voice belonged to a plump lady, presumably a sub-secretary, who was seated behind a long desk. The voice looked him up and down with evident disdain and suspicion. If he had never met a diocesan bishop before, this woman was clearly similarly lacking in encounters with priests in cassock!

"You are Father...?", the voice continued. "Dillon...Patrick Dillon", he replied.

"I didn’t know we had a Father Dillon in the Diocese. What Parish are you at?"

"Eh, Saint Anthony’s... it’s the Society of Saint Pius X Parish on the other side of town".

"Oh, Society of Saint Pius X..." Father Dillon detected the disdain in the voice increasing by about 200 per cent as it uttered those five words. "Oh, yes, the Bishop’s Secretary told me I was to expect one of you... to do with marriages, I think?"

"Yes, that’s right. I have an appointment for Ten".

The voice turned to her computer screen, clicked a few times, and then said: "Yes, you’re down for Ten. The waiting-room is over there. The Bishop’s Secretary will call you when he’s ready".

"Thank you", replied Father Dillon, and walked across the hall to the waitingroom.

He was the only one there. He sat down on one of the comfortable looking chairs and tried to gather his thoughts. This proved impossible, so he abandoned the enterprise and randomly picked up one of the many glossy magazines which were scattered on the table in front of him. It turned out to be the Diocesan magazine – The Seed – whose front cover depicted a smiling Pope Francis, waving. The large caption read: Pope of Mercy. "Not very original", he thought to himself. He glanced at the loudly ticking clock – he had ten minutes to go. He began to read the contents page.

Page 2: Bishop Tom discusses pastoral accompaniment in the light of Pope Francis’ teaching.

Pages 3-4: Sister Nancy: The Lord looks at love, not marriage contracts.

Page 5: Father Paul Kazowicz: God – severe judge or merciful Father?

Page 6: Youth Corner: Don’t worry about sin – God loves you!

He decided to peruse Father Paul Kazowicz’s article because it looked the shortest. After a few lines, he wished he hadn’t. It favoured admission to all the sacraments for all forms of couples so long as both parties really loved each other. Father Paul glibly called for an end to terms like "extra-marital" and "adulterous", going so far as to say: "We priests should rather refuse the Eucharist to those long-faced, pharisaical Catholics who, while ticking all the boxes prescribed by the law, reduce love and marriage to a cold signature on a contract…" Disgusted, Father Dillon was just about to scrunch the magazine and deposit it in the nearest garbage can, when he checked himself and decided instead to put it into his pocket. "I’ll give it to Father Cesik to read…", he muttered to himself.

Just then, he heard the sound of a door opening and the hum of voices coming from farther down the corridor. A few moments later, the first person came into view in the doorway of the waitingroom. Father Dillon recognised him as the Bishop from photographs in The Seed. He was wearing a brown sweater, jeans and white sneakers, with no pectoral cross.

Father Dillon gaped as, one by one, the owners of the other voices came into view. One was a Rabbi, complete with beard, ringlets and kippah. Another was some sort of Imam, and the third was a middle-aged lady with short cropped hair, sporting a rose-coloured clerical suit. Father Dillon recognized her as the local Episcopalian "bishopess" who had also figured in one of The Seed’s many photographs.

Bishop Tom embraced his departing visitors one by one. "Shalom, brother", he said smilingly to the Rabbi.

"Shalom", returned the Jew. "Peace to you, brother", he whispered to the Imam as they came head-to-head. The Imam replied: "Allah be with you". "And, peace to you, sister", concluded the Bishop, embracing the Reverend Rachel Winthorpe. "Yes, peace to you, brother Thomas", she replied.

"All systems go for next week’s service in the Cathedral, then, friends… I know a good, quiet restaurant in town where we can eat afterwards as well. Promises to be a good occasion… if last year is anything to go by…" "What – the service or the meal?", joked the Reverend Rachel.

"Both, hopefully", replied Bishop Tom, beaming from ear to ear.

"So long, friends – until Tuesday!", said the Bishop, waving. Then, with a look of great satisfaction, he turned and retraced his steps down the corridor from whence he had come. Father Dillon heard the three guests exchanging pleasantries with the voice behind the reception desk. Then, he was left alone with the ticking clock once more.

After a few minutes, the silence was broken by the sound of an opening door, followed by footsteps in the corridor.

Father Dillon braced himself. Moments later, a tall, middle-aged man in grey clerical stock appeared in the doorway.

"You must be Father Patrick Dillon?", he asked in quite an acerbic tone of voice.

"Yes, I am", replied Father Dillon.

"Good. I am the Bishop’s Secretary.

Follow me – the Bishop is waiting to see you in his office".

"

We priests should rather refuse the

Eucharist to those long-faced, pharisaical

Catholics who, while ticking all the boxes prescribed by the law, reduce love and marriage to a cold signature on a contract…

"

Stuff of Nightmares

Continued from Page 9

Father Dillon followed the Secretary down the corridor until they reached a door at the end. The Secretary opened it and stepped back to allow Father Dillon to enter. The latter stepped inside, Father Sullivan’s advice ringing in his ears: "Stress the pastoral!"

Bishop Tom was seated behind a desk in what was quite a modern, sparsely furnished office. He rose as Father Dillon entered, smiled briefly and extended his hand. The young priest immediately took the Bishop’s hand, genuflected on his left knee and made to kiss his ring … only to discover to his embarrassment that there was none. Blushing and confused, he rose, muttering: "Pleased to meet you, my Lord…" "Seems like we have been doing things differently since you guys were last around…" said the Bishop, disdainfully withdrawing his hand.

"Oh… and Tom’s my name, by the way. We don’t do those formalities any longer…Take a seat", he added, pointing to an office chair across the desk from his own.

"You won’t mind my Secretary, Father Brian, sitting in on our little meeting, will you? He sits in on all my meetings".

Father Brian accordingly smiled and sat down at the back of the room, out of Father Dillon’s range of sight.

"Of…of course not", stammered Father Dillon.

The Bishop himself sat down opposite the Society priest and began to peruse a document which had been lying on the desk in front of him.

"So… let’s get down to business, Father. You’re here about the letter from the Ecclesia Dei Commission to do with marriages of people who go to your church".

"In a nutshell, that’s it", replied Father Dillon, happy that the awkward formalities were over and that the substance of the matter was at last being addressed.

"Well, as far as I’m concerned, it’s fairly straightforward. You inform me of the names of the couples who want to be married and the relevant dates, and I will send one of my priests down to Saint… Francis’s… is it…?

"Eh, well… Saint Anthony’s, actually…" "Saint Anthony’s…my apologies… So, I’ll send a priest down to Saint Anthony’s… if I’m satisfied otherwise that everything is being done according to the laws of the Church, that is, of course…" "Of course… I think that you’ll find that everything is in order…" Here, Father Dillon reached into his cassock pocket and drew out his own copy of the letter.

Sensing that the ground was being taken from under his feet, he knew that he had to play the pastoral card, and quickly.

"Pardon me, My Lord…err Tom … (it stuck in his throat, but he knew that now was not the time to insist) … Don’t get me wrong – I’m very grateful for your offer, but … the Commission’s letter states here that " the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society". Would it not be easier for all parties if you simply delegated myself… or one of my fellow Society priests… for these marriages?" He added hastily: "We would, of course, ensure that the Diocese was informed of all the details, as the letter requires…" The Bishop stared at him, his lips curling into a smile. "Of course, it might be easier, Father, but since when can we dispense with Church law just to make our lives easier? Let’s look at what the document says: " Insofar as is possible, the local Ordinary is to grant the delegation to assist at the marriage to a priest of the Diocese... Where the above is not possible, or if there are no priests in the Diocese able to receive the consent of the parties, the Ordinary may grant the necessary faculties to the priest of the Society..." Well, I can assure you, Father, that the above is possible, so I have no right to bypass the general rule… There is, you might say, no case of necessity to justify it…" Father Dillon felt the jibe keenly and the blood rose to his head. He knew he had to keep his cool, however, so he repressed his urge to retort, and continued with the pastoral card. "Yes, but surely there are different kinds of impossibility – there is the physical impossibility of not having another Diocesan priest…" "…or any other regular priest..."

interrupted the Bishop.

"Or any other regular priest, if you will…, which I grant is not the case… However, since our couples will have been prepared by a Society priest, could the Bishop – at his discretion, of course – not decide that there was a case of moral impossibility due to the legitimate pastoral desire of the couple to have their marriage witnessed by the same priest who prepared them for the Sacrament…and, in some cases, even baptized them?"

"I suppose, he could... in theory.

However, I am the Ordinary in this Diocese, and I have considered the matter, and I say that it is very possible to have a priest sent down to witness your marriages. Therefore, I am not going to interpret this letter like some Jesuitical moral Houdini...as you appear to wish me to do..."

"I thought you might like anything Jesuitical...", blurted Father Dillon. It was out of his mouth before he realized it. The Bishop simply stared coldly at him, knowing that he had his man on the ropes. "You will learn that obedience is not an empty word ... at least in the Regular Church... Now, I think we have covered the essentials...Unless you have any questions, of course?"

Father Dillon could only bring himself to say: "No, I think that will be all".

"Very good. Have details of any marriages emailed to Father Brian – he will ensure that you are given his contact details. Following that, you will be informed on a case-by-case basis of the arrangements for each occasion.

Naturally, we will endeavour to dove-tail with your current pastoral arrangements concerning times of ceremonies etc....

insofar as this is possible... Now, if you will excuse me, I must deal with some pressing business. We have an interfaith service in the Cathedral next Tuesday, and there are a lot of things to be organized... You are, of course, welcome to come along should you wish..."

The victory was complete. Father Dillon didn’t even attempt to answer the Bishop. He simply shook his hand, muttered "Goodbye and thank you" and followed the Secretary out the door, up the corridor past the Reception and out to the parking lot. As he shook hands with Father Brian, the latter handed him a business card. "All my details are there. I would appreciate if you would inform me at least two months in advance of any marriages. That is standard Diocesan practice".

Father Dillon simply nodded, and took his leave.

He was soon back at the presbytery. He went straight to the chapel and knelt there without moving, his head buried in his hands.

A half-hour later, he suddenly felt a hand come down on his shoulder. He started and looked up. It was Father Cesik.

"How’d it go, Pat?", he whispered.

"Disaster, Larry! Absolute disaster!... Come to the library and I’ll explain".

Father Dillon rose, genuflected and followed his confrère out of the chapel and along the landing to the library.

The two men sat down in the comfortable armchairs and Father Dillon proceeded to fill in Father Cesik on the morning’s happenings.

Fifteen minutes later, he was concluding...

"So, you see Larry, it’s big trouble. I’ve been... we’ve been trapped! And there’s no way out! The Bishop can send any priest he likes at any given time. Can you imagine the reaction of the faithful?! And, who could blame them!"

"I told you we were dealing with slippery eels, Pat!... Well, it’s not of your making, if that’s any consolation to you! Why don’t you get in touch with Father Sullivan at District H.Q. to see what he says?"

"Good idea, Larry. I think I’ll do just that".

With that, the two priest friends parted and Father Dillon went straight to his office to contact Father Sullivan.

***** An hour later, Father Dillon was hanging up after his call to District H.Q. Father Sullivan had been understanding, but not really helpful. Several priests across the District were having to deal with similar situations, but that was the way it was in the real world, he said. Father Dillon was to proceed as agreed with the Bishop. The fears of the faithful were understandable, but they had to be allayed by stressing that the delegated priest was only there to witness a Sacrament which they themselves conferred, and that there was no question of any priest other than a Society priest

Continued Next Page

'No rules here - The most important thing is Love!'

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 10

Traditional Latin Mass 101

The Our Father

And the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X

By Father Ladis J. Cizik

In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

The Pater Noster (Our Father) serves as a transition between the Canon of the Mass and the preparation for the reception of Holy Communion. The Pater Noster, understood through the shining light of basic Catholic Truths contained in the traditional "Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X," cuts through the noxious dark fog of Modernism which pervades our Church today. Modernists endeavor to diabolically change the Faith. As traditionally understood, the Our Father will help us to ‘ keep the Faith.’ Pope Saint Pius X issued his Catechism in 1908, based upon a text that he himself prepared when he was Bishop of Mantua (1884-1893). Some onehundred years later, on 2 May 2003, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, soon to be Pope Benedict XVI, stated: "The Faith, as such, is always the same. Therefore, Saint Pius X’s Catechism always retains its value."

We are fast approaching the 110th Anniversary of Pascendi Dominici Gregis, the Encyclical of Pope Saint Pius X on the Doctrine of the Modernists, issued on 8 September 1907, the Birthday of the Blessed Virgin Mary. In this magnificent document, Modernists are identified as "partisans of error" (par. 2) and Modernism is defined as the "synthesis of all heresies" (par. 39).

The Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X, as applied to the Our Father, will help us to avoid Modernist errors and identify Modernist heresies.

Quoting from the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X, and referencing to the section numbers therein, we now proceed with a traditional reflection on the Pater noster:

Introduction

At the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Our Father is introduced by the Priest, bowing his head to the Most Blessed Sacrament and joining his hands, as he says aloud: Oremus. Praeceptis salutaribus moniti, et divina institutione formati, audemus dicere (Let us pray.

Instructed by Thy saving precepts, and guided by the Divine institution, we make bold to say).

Such a grand introduction is merited, as the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X explains: "The most excellent of all vocal prayers is that which Jesus Christ taught us, that is to say, the Our Father (1). The Our Father is the most excellent of all prayers because Jesus Christ Himself composed it and taught it to us; because it contains clearly and in a few words, all we can hope for from God; and because it is the standard and model of all other prayers (2). It is also the most efficacious of prayers, because it is the most acceptable to God, since in it we pray the very words His Divine Son has taught us" (3).

After first addressing Almighty God, the Pater Noster contains seven petitions.

The first three petitions are attentive to the glory and majesty of God; the following four are concerned with man and our salvation.

At the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, after the Praeceptis salutaribus moniti, extending his hands, with eyes fixed on the Sacred Host, centered on Christ, the Pater Noster is then prayed aloud by the Priest. It is said that the seven petitions, recited aloud, call to mind the seven Last Words of Our Lord Jesus as He hung dying on the Cross.

Pater noster, qui es in caelis Our Father Who art in Heaven

"In the beginning of the Lord’s Prayer we call God Our Father, to foster confidence in His infinite goodness by the remembrance that we are His children (7). We are the children of God: first, because He created us in His own image, and preserves and governs us by His providence; and secondly, because by an Act of special benevolence He has adopted us in Baptism as brothers of Jesus Christ and co-heirs with Him to eternal glory (8). We call God Our Father and not my Father, because we are all His children, and hence we should look on and love one another as brothers and pray for one another (9). God is in every place, but we say: Our Father Who art in Heaven, to raise our hearts to Heaven, where God manifests His glory to His children" (10).

First Petition Sanctificetur nomen tuum Hallowed be Thy Name

"In the First Petition: Hallowed be Thy Name, we ask that God may be known, loved, honored and served by the whole world and by ourselves in particular (11). We intend to beg that infidels may come to the knowledge of the Lord God, that heretics may recognize their errors, that schismatics may return to the unity of the Church, that sinners may repent, and that the just may persevere in well-doing (12). We first of all ask that the Name of God be sanctified, because the glory of God should be nearer our hearts than all other goods and interests (13). We can promote the glory of God by prayer, by good example, and by directing to Him all our thoughts, affections and actions" (14).

Second Petition Adveniat regnum tuum Thy Kingdom Come

"By the Kingdom of God we mean a threefold spiritual Kingdom: that is, the reign of God in us, or the reign of grace; the reign of God on Earth, or the Holy Catholic Church; and the reign of God in Heaven, or Paradise (15). With regard to grace we beg that God may reign in us by His sanctifying grace, by which He deigns to dwell within us as a king in his palace; and that He may keep us ever united to Himself by the virtues of faith, hope and charity, through which He reigns over our intellect, our heart and our will (16). Regarding the Church, we ask that she may be spread and propagated ever more and more throughout the world for the salvation of mankind (17). Regarding Heaven, we beg to be one day admitted into that Paradise for which we were created and where we shall be perfectly happy" (18).

Third Petition Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in caelo, et in terra Thy Will be Done on Earth as It is in Heaven

"In the Third Petition: Thy Will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven, we beg the grace to do the Will of God in all things by obeying His Commandments as promptly as the Angels and Saints obey Him in Heaven; and we also beg the grace to correspond to Divine inspirations and to live resigned to the Will of God should He send us tribulations (19). It is as necessary to do the Will of God as it is to work out our salvation, because Jesus Christ has said that they alone who have done the Will of His Father shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven (20). We can know the Will of God especially by means of the Church and of the spiritual superiors appointed by God to guide us along the way of salvation; we may also learn His Most Holy Will from the Divine inspirations that come to us and from the very surroundings in which the Lord has placed us (21). Both in prosperity and adversity we should always recognize the Will of God, Who directs or permits all things for our good" (22).

Fourth Petition Panem nostrum quotidianum da nobis hodie Give Us This Day Our Daily Bread

"In the Fourth Petition we beg of God all that is daily necessary for soul and body (23). For our soul we ask of God the sustenance of our spiritual life, that is, we pray the Lord to give us His grace of which we stand in continual need (24). The life of the soul is nourished principally by the food of the Word of God and by the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar (25). For the body, we ask all that is necessary for the sustainment of our temporal life (26). We say: Give us this day our daily bread, rather than: Give us bread this day, to exclude all desire of what is another’s; and hence we beg the Lord to help us in acquiring just and lawful gains, so that we may procure our maintenance by our own toil and without theft or fraud (27). We say: Give us, rather than, Give me, to remind us that as everything comes from God, so if He gives us His gifts in abundance, He does it in order that we may share what we do not need with the poor (28).

We add, Daily, because we should desire that which is necessary to life, and not an abundance of food and other goods of the Earth (29). The word Daily signifies that we should not be too solicitous regarding the future, but that we should simply ask what we need at present" (30).

Note here that while Saint Luke’s Gospel reads "Give us this day our daily bread" (Lk 11:3), the Holy Gospel according to Saint Matthew (Douay-Rheims) has: "Give us this day our supersubstantial bread" (Mt 6:11). Of Luke’s use of "daily," the Haydock Biblical Commentary refers to Saint Augustine (Serm. Ii. De verbo Dei): "In Greek it is called epiousion; i.e.

supersubstantial. This is not the bread that goeth into the body, but the Bread of Eternal Life, that supports the life of the soul … (the) Heavenly and Most Venerable Sacrament." However, in its commentary on Matthew’s use of "supersubstantial," in addition to referring to the Most Blessed Sacrament, Haydock allows for an interpretation that also includes: "it need not be taken for supernatural bread, but for bread that is daily added, to maintain and support the substance of our bodies."

Fifth Petition Et dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris Continued Next Page

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 11

Sixth Petition

Et ne nos inducas in tentationem

And Lead Us Not into Temptation

silent, for the Seventh Petition...

Seventh Petition

Sed libera nos a malo. Amen.

But Deliver Us from Evil. Amen.

Pater Noster

with an

Amen

Amen

the

Missale Romanum

(Roman Missal) both place the

Amen

at the end of the

Pater Noster.

Conclusion

temporal

needs first, we see here that the

Pater Noster

puts God Almighty, and then our

spiritual

Pater Noster,

Pater Noster

Three R’s of Modernism: Recognize

it;

Refute

it; and

Return

to Tradition.

■

Fr.

Cizik/

Continued...

And Forgive Us Our Trespasses as We Forgive Those Who Trespass Against Us "In the Fifth Petition: And forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us, we ask God to pardon our sins as we pardon those who offend us (31). Our sins are called debts (trespasses), because we must satisfy God’s justice for them either in this life or in the next (32). Those who do not forgive their neighbor have no reason to hope that God will pardon them; especially since they condemn themselves when they ask God to forgive them as they forgive their neighbor" (33).

"In the Sixth Petition: And lead us not into temptation, we ask God to deliver us from temptation either by not allowing us to be tempted, or by giving us grace not to be conquered (34). Temptations are an incitement to sin that comes from the devil, or from the wicked, or from our own evil passions (35). It is not a sin to have temptations; but it is a sin to consent to them, or voluntarily to expose oneself to the danger of consenting to them (36). God allows us to be tempted so as to test our fidelity, increase our virtue, and augment our merits (37). To avoid temptation we should flee dangerous occasions, guard our senses, receive the Sacraments frequently, and have recourse to the practice of prayer" (38).

The Priest then joins his hands, and is

"In the Seventh Petition: But deliver us from evil, we ask God to free us from evils, past, present, and future, and particularly from the greatest of all evils which is sin, and from eternal damnation, which is its penalty (39).

We say: Deliver us from evil, and not, from evils, because we should not desire to be exempt from all the evils of this life, but only from those which are not good for our souls; and hence we beg liberation from evil in general, that is, from whatever God sees would be bad for us (40). It is lawful to beg liberation from some evil in particular but always in bowing to the Will of God, Who may even ordain that particular affliction for the good of our soul (41). Tribulations help us to do penance for our sins, to practice virtue, and above all to imitate Jesus Christ, our Head, to Whom it is fitting we should conform ourselves in our sufferings, if we wish to have a share in His glory (42). Amen means: So be it; So I do desire; Thus do I pray to the Lord; Thus do I hope" (43).

It should be noted here that, unlike the other petitions prayed by the Priest, this last petition is made on behalf of the faithful by the acolyte or choir.

The Priest then concludes the

in a low voice.

As opposed to praying the Our Father outside of Mass, as the Catechism presumes, Father Nicholas Gihr notes in his classic book, first published in 1902, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: "This

from the lips of the Priest, who is mediator between God and man, has in this place a peculiar significance.

It does not express consent and desire, as at other times, but is, so to speak, the answer that God gives, that He has received the petition of the people."

In any event, the "Amen" at the end of the Our Father is

traditional ending of the prayer that Jesus taught us. The Latin Vulgate (see Mt 6:13) and the

For centuries, going back to ancient times, it has been considered to be a part of the prayer. As a result of the removal of the ‘Amen’ from the Novus Ordo Mass, many souls, contrary to venerable tradition, no longer complete the Our Father either in church liturgy or in their private prayers.

In "The Oath Against Modernism" given by Pope Saint Pius X on September 1, 1910, there is a declaration that we "hold that the doctrine of the Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously." Modernists are always seeking to change the meanings and formulations of our dogmas and prayers.

We cannot trust them. They will not safeguard the One True Faith.

As Modernists put the cult of man and our

needs, before all else. The foregoing analysis of the Our Father decries the constant Modernist clamoring today for religious indifferentism, as the Catechism makes specific sorrowful mention of infidels, heretics, and schismatics as being outside the Church. Modernists essentially deny the Catechism’s teaching of the Divinity of Christ by their distinction between a "Jesus of History" versus a "Jesus of Faith." The Social Kingship of Christ is reflected in the Our Father, as opposed to the novelty of religious liberty. Purgatory and Hell are found in the Catechism’s exposition of the

but denied by the Modernists. Eternal damnation is held out as a consequence of sin in the Our Father, as opposed to the Modernist serpents who promote sinful lifestyles along with the notion that everyone goes to Heaven.

Hence, we can have confidence in the interpretation of the

as provided by the Catholic Catechism to which the Great Champion against Modernism, Saint Pope Pius X, lent his name. Indeed, Modernists strive to deliver us unto evil, contrary to the Our Father and the teachings of Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Always remember my

In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 11

The Christian Circle of Life

By Renée Henning

Back in 1951 I was admitted as a three-year-old to an American hospital for the long stay typical of that era. My recollections of that period are vivid. Many people underestimate the ability of a preschool child to form lasting memories. Many also underestimate the difference one act of compassion can make.

I was then at the stage at which some youngsters, like Linus of cartoon fame, walk about dragging their blankets behind them. My cuddly blanket and I were virtually inseparable. Unfortunately, I was also at the age to contract chicken pox, and I had. I also had something far worse.

The hospital, fearing the spread of chicken pox through the pediatric ward, had at first refused to accept me. However, besides being sick from a common childhood disease, I was in pain, and no one could figure out why. Ultimately I was admitted on the condition that I be put in a crib in a private room on the adult ward.

Unfortunately, the ward was ill-equipped to deal with this non-routine situation. The nursing staff limited all contacts with me for fear of contagion, and my parents had to abide by the restricted visiting hours of the adult ward, rather than the more liberal hours of the pediatric ward.

In the hospital one night I was awakened by pain. I was unwell from chicken pox and hurting from what was later discovered, when my appendix ruptured there, to be appendicitis. The hospital stay was my first time away from my family and the first time I was not sharing a bedroom. Yet I was at an age when children prefer companionship to face the mysteries of the night. Deprived of my security blanket, I felt so alone, and I cried. A stranger appeared in the doorway. It was a matronly black woman wearing a hospital uniform. She appeared to be a cleaning lady.

The woman walked slowly into the room.

She leaned over the side of the crib and looked at me. "Don’t cry, baby, don’t cry," she said. Then she softly crooned me a lullaby.

I cannot express how much her presence and her singing helped ease the suffering.

But may God bless her, wherever she is.

In 1986 I went to visit a dying friend in a hospital, and it brought back memories of my medical experience years before.

Hospitals no longer have the pungent smell of ether and disinfectant of the American hospital of 1951. However, they remain fearsome places, with their intimations of mortality and promise of pain.

Recalling my hospital stay and the kind stranger, I realized it was my turn to do more to help others. I became a volunteer in the pediatric department of a major hospital, where I sing to infants and toddlers. Since the late 1980’s I have crooned to hundreds of little patients.

Although I cannot reliably carry a tune, they seem to enjoy my one-on-one concerts and to find comfort.

In 2009 I noticed that a janitorial worker would spend an inordinate amount of time sweeping in my area during my recitals.

She was a distinguished older woman from Jamaica who loved children and knew hundreds of songs. Occasionally she joined in singing or humming, and her voice was magnificent. Through our conversations I learned her plan. After observing me, she was determined to sing to sick babies and was just waiting for her retirement and return to her native land. The last I heard, the lady had retired and moved back home. I imagine her serenading infants and toddlers somewhere in Jamaica, a part of the Christian circle of life. ■

Renée Henning...a long time ago

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 12

HOLY MARY, MOTHER OF GOD:

A Mother Like No Other

Edited from "The World’s First Love" (1952) By Bishop Fulton J. Sheen No mother whose son has won distinction for himself, either in a profession or in the field of battle, believes that the respect paid her for being his mother detracts from the honor or dignity which is paid her son. Why then, do some think that any reverence paid to the Mother of Jesus detracts from His Power and Divinity?

Where does this coldness, forgetfulness and, at the least, indifference to the Blessed Mother start? From a failure to realize that her Son, Jesus, is the Eternal Son of God. No one mother of a mortal is entitled to more love than any other mother. Therefore, no sons and daughters should be required to single out someone else’s mother as the Mother of mothers.

If Mary were only the mother of another man, then she could not also be our mother, because the ties of the flesh are too exclusive. Flesh allows only one mother. Since Mary is the Mother of God, then she can be the Mother of everyone whom Christ redeemed. The key to understanding Mary is this: We do not start with Mary. We start with Christ, the Son of the Living God! The less we think of Him, the less we think of Her; the more we think of Him, the more we think of Her; the more we adore His Divinity, the more we venerate Her Motherhood; the less we adore His Divinity, the less we have reason for respecting Her. Never will it be found that anyone who really loves Our Lord as a Divine Savior dislikes Mary. Those who dislike any devotion to Mary are those who deny His Divinity, or who find fault with Our Lord because of what He says about Hell, divorce and Judgement.

It is on account of Our Divine Lord that Mary receives special attention, and not on account of herself. Left to herself, her motherhood would dissolve into humanity. Our Lord is God Who became Man. Never before or since did Eternity become time in a woman, nor did Omnipotence take on the bonds of flesh in a maid. It is her Son Who makes her Motherhood different.

Our Lady is not a private person; all other mothers are. We did not make her different; we found her to be different.

We did not choose Mary; He did.

When Mary told the Apostles after Pentecost about His Virgin Birth, it must have made a difference. Because the Apostles put it in their Creed and teaching, it must have made a difference. Once Christ is accepted as the Son of God, there is an immediate interest not only in His prehistory, but also in His history and particularly in His Birth.

How could God become Man and yet be sinless Man without original sin? He could be a sinless Man by being born of a Virgin.

We do not believe that Jesus is God because He was born of a Virgin Mother. We believe in the Divinity of Christ because of the evidence of His Ressurrection.

If He had never taken on our human flesh, we would never have heard His Sermon on the Mount, not have seen Him forgive those who dug His Hands and Feet with nails on the Cross. He asked Mary to give Him a human life-to give Him hands with which to bless children, feet with which to go in search of stray sheep, eyes with which to weep over dear friends, and a body with which to suffer--that He might give us a rebirth in freedom and love.

Christ is the Mediator between God and humanity; Mary is the Mediatrix between Christ and us. Our Lord is a Mediator between God and man. A mediator is like a bridge which unites two opposite banks of a river, except that here the bridge is between Heaven and earth. As Man, Christ could act in our name, take on our sins; as one of us, He redeems us on the Cross and gives us new life in His Resurrection. It was through Mary that He became the bridge between the Divine and the human. Without Mary, we would no longer have Our Lord! She cannot be compared to Our Lord, for she is a creature and He is the Creator.

But if we lose her, we cannot get to Him.

Without her, we could never understand how that bridge was built between Heaven and earth.

Mary does not prevent our honoring Our Lord.

Nothing is more cruel than to say that she takes souls away from Christ. That could mean that Our Lord chose a mother who is selfish, He Who is Love Itself.

As our love does not start with Mary, so neither does it stop with Mary. Mary is a window through which our humanity first catches a glimpse of Divinity on earth. Or perhaps, she is more like a magnifying glass, that intensifies our love of her Son, and makes our prayers more bright and burning.

God, Who made the sun, also made the moon. The moon does not take away from the brilliance of the sun. The moon would only be a burnt-out cinder floating in the immensity of space were it not for the sun. All its light is reflected from the sun. Our Blessed Mother reflects her Divine Son; without Him, she is nothing. With Him, she is the Mother of Men.

On dark nights, we are grateful for the moon; when we see it shining, we know there must be a sun. So in this dark night of the world when men turn their backs on Him Who is the Light of the World, we look to Mary to guide their feet while we await the sunrise.

Hymn to Mary, Our Mother

Mother, at your feet is kneeling One who loves you, ‘tis your child Who has sighed so oft to see you Bless me, Mother, bless your child. Mother, when my Jesus calls me From this world so dark and drear From the wily snares of Satan, Shield me, Mother, Mother dear.

Plead for me when Jesus judges Answer for me when He asks How I spent so many moments How performed so many tasks.

Mary, oh my dearest Mother, May it ever to me be given As, on earth I fondly love Thee, So, to love Thee still in Heaven.

Dearest Mother, tell my Jesus How I love Him fond and true And oh Mary, dearest Mother, Tell Him I belong to you.

Mary, Mother of God and Our Mother...

Pray for us!

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 12

God and Our Right

By Timothy J Cullen

" Furthermore, even when a social system is organized on true principles, its proper working has always to meet obstacles rooted in men’s passions and ignorance and sin. These obstacles can be effectually overcome only by the forces of religion."

1

Once upon a time it was considered incumbent upon anyone aspiring to be considered as educated to have a reasonably broad and deep knowledge of history. In what once was Christendom, the emphasis was upon the history of the West, as one might expect. The history of non-Western, non-Christian cultures and

1 Cahill, Rev E., S.J., The Framework of a Christian State, M.H. Gil and Son, Ltd, Dublin, 1932, p. xxii.

civilizations was seldom taught beyond the cursory at the secondary level and aside from broad survey courses for nonspecialists not overly emphasized at the post-secondary level. This is no longer true: Western, Christian cultural and civilizational history has been slowly but steadily shunted aside in favor of more recently "discovered" non-Western "histories" aimed at dethroning both God and the West in the name of an imagined latter-day "enlightenment," histories that frequently border on fiction when they don’t cross the frontier outright. Be that as it may, common sense dictates that a broad and deep knowledge of the history of the West and Christendom remains the standard by which a well-educated person should be judged.

The phrase " Dieu et mon droit" (God and my right) is likely familiar to Remnant readers as the motto of the Monarch of the United Kingdom outside Scotland and was adopted as such by King Henry V of England (1387-1482), although the phrase itself dates from the time of King Richard I (the "Lionheart", 1157-1199), who first used it when boasting to Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV (1056-1105): "‘I am born of a rank which recognises [ sic] no superior but God".

2 Richard later used it as a battle cry during the re-conquest of Normandy during the penultimate year of his reign and his life.

Perhaps less familiar is the title phrase of this essay, an adaptation of the famous motto used as the motto of the Hearts of Oak, "a volunteer militia based in the

2 https://infogalactic.com/info/Dieu_et_mon_ droit#cite_ref-17

Continued on Page 13

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 13

T.

Cullen/

Continued...

British colonial Province of New York and formed circa 1775 in New York City".

3 The motto appeared on red tin hearts sewn to their jackets. 4

The phrase has a certain resonance to it, one that rings out to a Traditional Catholic with a clarity akin to that of the Angelus bell at the high noon of the Faith. We recognize no authority superior to that of God and such is our right, although we acknowledge the God-granted authority of the pope, his prelates and priests in matters of Faith. It is within our right, however, to question that which is not Dogma of the Church when it appears that deviance from Dogma and time-honored Tradition outside the Magisterium is being preached; in fact, it is not only our right but our responsibility to do so, just as it is our right and our responsibility to defend our Faith, our Church and our once- Christian culture and civilization from subversion and invasion by those inimical to them.

Recently, this writer had an instructive conversation with a young (24) Israeli who had shortly before completed her obligatory military service and was touring South America, as do a goodly number of young Israeli veterans. As we made our way along a tributary of the Amazon, she stated her belief that the Jewish people are unsafe living anywhere but Israel and that they have an obligation to do so if they are to consider themselves truly Jewish. She was fully prepared to take arms should the Jewish homeland be threatened in any way by any non-Jewish collective or State. Should we of the now-secularbut- previously-Christian West not learn something from this? Is it not time or perhaps past time to take a stand for God and our right? This writer believes these are rhetorical questions, but recognizes that our present pontiff and the hierarchy of the Catholic Church would be unlikely to agree.

We do not need to wear red tin hearts to demonstrate our convictions, though if we openly display religious symbols we may well in a not-too-distant future find ourselves open to convictions of another sort. Those who display their Christian convictions in certain other nations may find themselves martyred for doing so; in fact, that may occur in the home countries of their Christian ancestors as well while the secular governments of those nations stand idly by.

We as Traditional Catholics stand foursquare behind our God and our right to worship Him as He saw fit to tell us to do, not as others might have us do, perhaps, but as we know we must if we are to be counted among the Faithful.

Our fellow Faithful have stood up to be counted as armed soldiery in Spain shortly before and during the 1936-39 civil war, in Mexico in the time of the Cristeros and in the Vendée of France.

Others fought primarily to defend their Faith in Ireland, in the European wars of religion and in the Crusades. From its beginning, the Faith has been subject to struggle and likely will be so until the Last Day. There will always be those

3 https://infogalactic.com/info/Hearts_of_Oak_ (New_York_militia)#cite_note-Chernow-1; Chernow, Ron, Alexander Hamilton, Penguin Books, Penguin Group, NY, 2005, p. 203.

4 Chernow, op. cit., p. 204.

willing to fight for God and our right.

Catholicism began as a small and persecuted sect, but the Truth of the New Covenant soon spread beyond the borders of Judea to Rome and eventually to all of Europe, creating a new culture and a new civilization to take the place of that created by fallen Rome and fallen Man. The Faith, along with the culture and civilization that were by-products thereof, would eventually spread to all corners of the globe, saving countless souls from damnation while making the Faith the cornerstone of new cultural and civilizational structures in societies that adhered to the tenets of the Faith and the Church. Then, somehow, societies began to abandon the Faith in favor of a secular utopianism that promises an earthly paradise but at best yields a societal purgatory. How did this come to pass?

We all know that while the spirit may be willing, the flesh is weak, and the earthly utopia is meant to appeal to the flesh, but this alone cannot account for the considerable abandonment of the Church and even the Faith by so many, particularly following the ill-fated "reforms" implemented in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Author and professor of sociology and philosophy David Carlin ( The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America [2003]), focusing on the USA, sums it up by stating: "Catholics, in sum, were embracing American culture at precisely the moment when that culture was losing its Christian flavor and taking on a decidedly anti-Christian flavor. Is it any wonder, then, that the Church went into sharp decline?"

5 Carlin points to the dramatic increase of secularism in the USA as the principal suspect: "[T]hey [anti-Christian secularists] comprised a mass movement. Millions were repudiating Christianity by repudiating the ethic of Christianity."

6 He adds: "In this attack on Christianity, the outright secularists were aided and abetted by DM [‘denominational mentality’ 7]

5 Carlin, David, "The Sudden Decline of the Catholic Church in America", The Catholic Social Science Review 10 (205), p. 116. (http://www.

catholicsocialscientists.org/CSSR/Archival/2005/ Carlin_107-116.pdf).

6 Ibid, p. 115.

7 N.B. "DM Catholics believe, not in Catholicism,

Christians, including DM Catholics, in other words, by liberal Christians, for the DM Christian and the liberal Christian are the same thing."

8 It requires no great leap of the imagination to extrapolate these observations to encompass the West in general.

In all likelihood, much of what is written in Prof. Carlin’s article (and likely his books as well) is familiar territory, but the full article is highly recommended reading. If we are to defend our God and His right as well as our own, it merits reemphasizing that our principal opposition comes from the secularists who "came to control what may be called the four great ‘command posts’ of American culture: the national press, the entertainment industry, the elite

which is a very specific thing, but in what may be called "generic Christianity." That is, they believe that what is important about Christian faith and morals are those things that all Christians hold in common…" ( Ibid, p. 112).

8 Ibid, p. 115.

colleges and universities, and the higher ranks of the bench and the bar."

9 It is all well and good to recognize this and repeat it often, but if we are to mount as successful an opposition to them as they have mounted to us, we must learn to infiltrate and subvert their secularist agenda as they have so successfully done with respect to the Catholic Church and Western culture and civilization in general. Then too, there remains the final stronghold of the secularists: their usurpation of the financial sovereignty of the West, the controlling mechanism that has allowed them to seize the cultural "command posts" referred to above.

The secular wolf is no longer at the door in the West: he is seated at the head of the table and is eating everyone’s lunch while those he hypnotized with those big eyes of his remain complacent and content with what scraps he allows them to consume. Behind the wolf, of course, lurks the all-devouring Dragon awaiting the lost and ever-less-tended sheep whose souls make fine fare for an endless banquet. Where, oh Lord, is the woodsman whose task it is to slay the wolf, where is St. George of Lydda, the

9 Ibid, p. 116.

Dragon-slayer? The saint, patron of soldiers, wears the Cross emblazoned on his shield and in some representations on his armor. This writer has since 1982 worn the Cross of Santiago (also red) as a lapel pin after his first visit to Santiago de Compostela and much prefers it to a tin heart.

Santiago (St. James the Greater, patron saint of Spain), after all, was credited with a miraculous intervention that played a key part in the Reconquista, the Catholic re-conquest of Spain after centuries of Muslim occupation. St.

James’s distinctive red cross seems as fitting a symbol as that of the Cross of St. George to display one’s intention to stand as a soldier of our God and our right to restore Christ the King upon His throne in the West. It is also worthy of note that the millennial Camino de Santiago (Way of St. James) is among the most important Catholic pilgrimage routes and was in 1987 chosen by the Council of Europe to be the first European Cultural Route; it has also been designated a World Heritage site by UNESCO as well as a destination for Remnant pilgrims participating in the annual pilgrimage to Chartres.

Whatever symbol we choose to display, increasing militancy seems to be called for, given that papal calls for a "reconquest" of societal "territory" lost are not likely to be forthcoming in the foreseeable future. Said militancy cannot be restricted to symbols displayed by individuals; it requires unity and a willingness to sacrifice for the sake of our cause. We are greatly outnumbered and cannot expect support even from many of our coreligionists, religious or lay. We find ourselves caught between the Rock of St. Peter and the hard place of obedience to authority even when it is known that such obedience is detrimental to the defense of the Faith.

"What is to be done" asked Lenin in his infamous 1902 political pamphlet that served as a preview of what would be done as the secularists gained the ascendency they presently enjoy.

Traditional Catholics must ask this same question and set about answering it with action in the spheres of the four "command posts" cited above while exposing once and for all the truth about the "command and control" center itself: the unconstitutional and anti-Catholic US Federal Reserve System and allied central banks (BIS, ECB, etc.) that finance the "command posts" and allied enemies of Christendom with nonasset- backed debt. What is to be done about them is likely beyond the scope of Catholic action now, but we must pray that God decides to do what we seemingly cannot.

People of the Jewish faith have their own confessional state as do Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and will fight to protect them, but Christians no longer do whereas once the West was ours. Will we have the determination to stand for our God and our right as the non-Western religions do for theirs?

Begin with this, as Michael Matt urged Remnant readers in his 13 April 2017 post on the Remnant website: "Never hesitate to tell the world: I am a Christian. I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a Catholic." ■

Saint George and the Dragon bronze sculpture in historical Nikolaiviertel, Berlin

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 15

Continued...

celebrating the nuptial Mass. Any problems with a particular delegated priest could be respectfully made known to the Bishop afterwards.

***** The test case was not long in coming.

The following Sunday, Father Dillon announced the banns for the future marriage of John Dean and Maria Worthe, who were to be prepared for marriage by Father Cesik. John was from an old-time SSPX family which had been with the Society since well before the Consecrations in 1988. Maria, on the other hand, had come to the parish three or four years previously, having become disgusted with her local parish priest in particular and the Novus Ordo in general. Because of this, she had incurred the wrath of her parents and family, who no longer spoke to her.

Immediately after Mass, Mr. and Mrs.

Dean were waiting outside the sacristy to speak to Father Dillon. John’s father made it perfectly clear that if a priest from the Diocese were to witness the marriage of his son, then he was not going to be present! Mrs. Dean was no less vociferous in her opposition, but stopped short of following her husband to the point of not attending. Father Dillon managed to extricate himself alive from the conversation, but he knew it was not the last he was going to hear of the matter.

As arranged, he informed Father Brian of the upcoming marriage, who replied that that the Bishop was considering the matter and would inform him of the details of the arrangements as soon as possible. Three weeks later, one week before the marriage, Father Dillon received an email from the Secretary, stating that the Bishop had delegated a priest of the Diocese for the Dean/ Worthe marriage: a certain Father Paul Kazowicz, Pastor of Saint Paul’s in Wakeville. Father Paul would be in contact directly in the coming days.

"A very bad situation has just got much worse", was how Father Dillon put it to Father Cesik that evening. "Look at this article written by him in the Diocesan magazine! Absolutely disgraceful! The Bishop has sent the worst he has!"

"You can say that again, Pat! Kazowicz is notorious, and if I’m not greatly mistaken he was Maria Worthe’s Parish Priest!"

Once more, Father Dillon buried his face in his hands. "What are we going to do, Larry?"

"Leave it to me. I’ll speak to John and Maria. They have to know what’s going on".

Father Cesik turned out not to have been in any way mistaken. Father Paul Kazowicz had indeed been Maria’s Parish Priest – the same one who had told her that she was narrow-minded for considering marriage to be a lifetime commitment. "Marriage lasts as long as love lasts – Jesus doesn’t expect people to torture themselves for life", he had told her.

Maria Worthe was inconsolable. Nothing Father Cesik said could reassure her.

Mrs. Deane, on hearing the pedigree of the Diocesan witness, firmly joined ranks with her husband and refused to attend the wedding. Even some of the cousins of the Deane family who were conservative Novus Ordo Catholics, and who had never agreed with the SSPX stance, also refused to attend the wedding since one of the Diocese’s most liberal priests was officiating! Several members of the congregation expressed their anger and disappointment... But, perhaps the most distraught of all was Father Patrick Dillon, who now presided over a deeply divided parish.

***** The day of reckoning finally arrived.

As far as Fathers Dillon and Cesik were concerned, it was more like the day of a funeral than a wedding. At ten minutes to ten, the sacristy doorbell rang. Father Cesik opened it to find a low-sized, scruffily-bearded individual sporting a clerical collar, a black leather jacket and jeans, standing on the doorstep.

"Hi. I’m Father Paul Kazowicz. I’m here for the Dean/Worthe wedding".

He was ushered into the sacristy. Father Dillon steeled himself and went to greet him.

"Father Kazowicz – pleased to meet you! I’m Father Dillon, Pastor here at Saint Anthony’s".

With that, he directed the visitor to the vesting table, where there was a cassock, surplice and stole laid out.

"Oh, thanks very much...but I brought my own gear", he replied. To the dismay of the two priests, Kazowicz proceeded to open his backpack and withdraw a large alb and giant white stole. Two minutes later, he was asking to be shown to the sanctuary.

Father Cesik led him to the communion rail, while Father Dillon remained in the kneeler, bracing himself for the ordeal.

As soon as the congregation caught sight of the official witness (who had merely bowed in the direction of the tabernacle), a subdued, but distinctly audible collective groan was heard.

"You got the book, pal?", Kazowicz almost shouted to Father Cesik. Father Dillon winced. Then, obviously addressing the congregation, he continued: "Not used to having this barrier between myself and God’s People! Who’s being kept away from who, I wonder?!" Silence from the congregation. Another wince from Father Dillon. "I thought this was a wedding, not a funeral – seems to me I got the wrong place!" Again, no reaction from the congregation. Finally getting the message, Kazowicz shrugged his shoulders and waited for the bride to arrive.

She arrived pretty much on time and came to join her future husband at the altar rails. It was then that the ceremony was to officially commence.

Father Cesik beckoned to Kazowicz and pointed out in the book where he was to start. But, the official witness motioned that he wasn’t interested, and instead started to speak. "Brothers and sisters", he began. Father Dillon beckoned to Father Cesik to try to stop him, but Father Cesik could do nothing.

"Dear brothers and sisters in the Lord!", continued Kazowiz. "We are gathered here today to celebrate the love of John and Maria. And that’s the most important thing here – that you love each other, John and Maria. In the past, the priest would have droned on to you about the rules of marriage – one man, one woman, for life, woman be subject to your husband – all that nonsense! No, today we know that the most important thing is love. Jesus told us that God is love. Your marriage, John and Maria, is a sign to the world that love – in all the various forms which we recognize today – is possible. You have decided to express this love by a ceremony in church; others decide not to. But the most important thing is that you love one another..."

At this point, a seething Father Cesik showed his watch to Kazowicz, who took the hint, and turned his attention to the book and began the ceremony proper. But, at least half of those in attendance had already left the church in protest.

The bride was in tears from beginning to end and the groom was barely able to suppress his anger. Near the altar, Father Dillon had buried his head in his hands and his fingers in his ears, mortified that such words could be uttered in his church...

******* "Hey, are you still asleep, Pat?!" It was the voice of Father Larry Cesik. "Wakey, wakey...it’s supper-time!"

"Huh?" Father Dillon rubbed his eyes, stretched and looked around him. He was in the big comfortable armchair in the presbytery living-room. "Have I been asleep long?"

"About four hours – I didn’t have the heart to wake you after you came back from that long Mass-run! You must’ve been exhausted!... Here, take a look at this – it’s from the Mother House".

Father Cesik handed a piece of paper to his confrère - it was a press-release concerning the SSPX’s position in relation to the Ecclesia Dei Commission’s letter on jurisdiction for marriages. Father Cesik pointed out the salient passage, which read: " Having consulted with the Society’s major superiors, the Superior General has informed the Vatican that (despite an initial press-release to the contrary) its priests will continue to witness marriages as usual, and will not accept delegated priests from the local ordinaries, as the Ecclesia Dei Commission’s letter requests. The Society will do this, relying on the extraordinary jurisdiction conferred to it by the Church in these times of everworsening crisis, waiting for the Light of the True Faith to return to those in the highest ranks of the Church..." "So, we won’t have to go through all that again?"

"All what again?!"

"Why...having that Diocesan heretic witness a marriage in our church again!"

"My dear Father Pat... you have been dreaming!"

"Have I?!... So, you mean I never went to see the Bishop, and all that?!"

"Not that I know of...!"

"Just as well!", said Father Dillon, wiping the perspiration from his forehead. "I could never go through all that again!... Right, Father Cesik, let us off to supper...and I order a Te Deum after Compline for the next week, at least!" ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017

Next Article >        < Prev Article

Mon, 1 May 2017 | Cover | Page 16

The Last Word...

By Fr. Celatus

A

Pope Dubius Maximus

Via Crucis

Leave no stone unturned or tradition unchanged,

The Last Word

has been inspired to write

The Stations of the Spirit of Vatican II

Amost ancient and venerable Christian devotion is that which we know as the Stations of the Cross. The original Way of the Cross, of course, was travelled by Jesus, along with His Mother and devout disciples at the time. Without doubt the Blessed Mother, the Apostles and disciples frequently retraced the Stations of the Cross along the Via Dolorosa through Jerusalem to Golgotha, in prayerful memory of the Lord. In the first centuries of the Church, in fact, this devotion was bound inseparably to the Holy Land.

But not all Christians could make an arduous and at times dangerous pilgrimage to Jerusalem and so eventually the Church, over time, granted permission for the Stations to be exported from the Holy Land. Originally entrusted exclusively to the care of the Franciscans, owing to the fondness of Saint Francis for this devotion, in time the Church authorized the placing of Stations in all churches worldwide.

Nowadays it is not uncommon to find blessed images of the Stations in the homes of the faithful, a laudable practice.

The number of the Stations as well as their individual designation has varied over the centuries but in the eighteenth century the Church officially fixed their number at fourteen, under the titles by which we have prayed them ever since. Ever since, that is, until changes made in 1991 under Pope John Paul II, who omitted Stations which were not mentioned explicitly in the Gospels— Jesus’ falling and Veronica’s veil.

But even these changes were not enough for Francis of Rome. This year,

invited a progressive French woman Biblicist to design and write the papal

prayed annually in Rome. In addition to introducing personal variations on the JPII Stations innovations, she quotes a schismatic and a heretic in her meditations.

is the mantra of Modernists.

Following in the footsteps of Francis,

its own set of Stations, drawing upon the Passion that the Mystical Body of Christ has suffered now for more than half a century.

The First Station: The Papal Coronation of Angelo Roncalli as Pope John XXIII V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Second Station: The Convocation of the Second Vatican Council V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Third Station: The Papal Coronation of Giovanni Montini as Pope Paul VI V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Fourth Station: The Reformation and Desecration of the Sacred Liturgy V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Fifth Station: The Mass Exodus of Priests and Religious from their Vocations V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Sixth Station: Homosexuals Infiltrate the Priesthood and Religious Communities V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Seventh Station: The Worldwide Compromise and Collapse of Catholic Institutions V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Eighth Station: The Institution of World Youth Day Celebrations with the Pope V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Ninth Station: Pope John Paul II the Great Kisses the Koran in a Mosque V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Tenth Station: The Bankruptcy of Dioceses Due to Rampant Clergy Sexual Abuse V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Eleventh Station: The Abdication of Pope Benedict XVI from the Papal Throne V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Twelfth Station: The Papal Coronation of Jorge Bergoglio as Francis of Rome V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Thirteenth Station: The Pope Washes the Feet of Women and Infidels—the First Time V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Fourteenth Station: Francis makes a mess at WYD in Rio de Janeiro V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Fifteenth Station: The Pope Washes the Feet of Women and Infidels—the Second Time V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Sixteenth Station: The Promulgation of the Papal Encyclical, Laudato Si V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Seventeenth Station: The Pope Washes the Feet of Women and Infidels—the Third Time V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Eighteenth Station: Francis of Rome Sabotages the Synod on the Family V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Nineteenth Station: The Promulgation of the Papal Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves

The Twentieth Station: The Collapse of Marriage and Morality under Francis of Rome V: Deliver us, O Lord R: From the ravages of modernist wolves One wonders how many more Stations could be added to this small representative number and how much longer the Mystical Body of Christ will suffer from the ravages of modernist wolves. It seems likely that impending Stations will include horrific chastisements upon the Institutional Church and the World, as we now approach the 100th anniversary of the apparitions of Fatima. After all, pope after pope has hidden the Third Secret of Fatima and they have obstinately refused to consecrate Russia, as requested by our Lady.

But we have a precedent for hope; for after the Bloody Passion of the Incarnate Christ, there followed the Resurrection and the Triumph of the Cross. So too this Passion of the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church, cannot end in defeat but will be an occasion for some much greater good. Therefore it falls to faithful Catholics to suffer this passion patiently as we await the resurrection and triumph of Tradition. ■

Powered by TECNAVIA

Copyright (C) 1996-2017 Remnant Press 05/01/2017