language misuse

Beware of NOChurch cardinals, especially when they come saying the Tridentine Mass - Sunday 10th to Saturday 16th of June

In a week which contained a lot of major news from the secular world, it might seem odd that my highlights are to do with an event that didn't even take this week - the Chartres pilgrimage. My primary concern is for the Church, for only the Church can save the world, and with that in mind I shall go on to address some of the events on the Chartes pilgrimage.

It is rather significant that the Chartres pilgrimage has become so famous. I had not even heard of it until som 4 years ago or so, but I shall have to agree with Michael Matt that it is one of the most significant events taking place in the Church today, although in his case he plainly states that it is the most significant, with which I do not quite agree. Along with its increasing profile, the mass has attracted higher profiles of celebrants. Last year it was Cardinal Raymond Burke, who is probably the closest thing we have right now to a champion of the faith. When Cardinal Burke celebrated though, it was without a position in the Curia, having been unceremoniously kicked out of his position as the head of the Apostolic Signatura (the Church's highest court) so that Bergoglio could railroad his full-throttled assault on marriage through easy annulments and sacreligious Communion.

This year's celebrant, therefore, would have to count as the most high-profile yet. In Cardinal Sarah, we had the head of the Congregation of Divine Worship, the man in charge of not only the Mass but the administration of all sacraments. Yes, there are bureaucratically speaking other higher-profiled cardinals - the secreatary of state comes to mind - and even with regards to Catholicity the prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith ranks higher. However, in his capacity as head of worship, he ranks second only to the pope, so one is entitled to say that they don't come much higher than Cardinal Sarah. Also in terms of standing up for the faith, Cardinal Sarah is one of only 2 cardinals under the age of 80 - the other being Cardinal Burke - who have consistently stood up against efforts to water down the faith, or to outright corrupt the faith (however tepidly).

It was therefore with great sadness that I read a piece written by Peter Kwasniewski titled Traditional Clergy: Please Stop Making “Pastoral Adaptations”. It quickly became clear that the piece was about the final High Mass at the Chartres pilgrimage, of which Cardinal Sarah had been the main celebrant. Among the 'pastoral adaptations' on show was reading both the Epistle and the Gospel in French, instead of Latin, and not bothering with having the proper orientations when reading Sacred Scripture, instead turning towards the people, and not even bothering to chant but rather speaking it out instead. These were grave liturgical abuses. It is unclear who was in charge of these abuses - the master of ceremony, the local bishop, or the cardinal are all potential agents. What cannot be denied, however, was that in perhaps the most prominent Tridentine Mass in the world today, we were being confronted with a very well-orchestrated Novusordoisation, and that ought to trouble us all.

If there is anything that the Novus Ordo has taught us, it is that slippery slopes are real, and once embarked upon one will quickly find oneself close to the bottom. It is therefore inexcusable that at the most prominent Tridentine Mass the celebrants would embark upon the same slippery slope which led us to where we are in NOChurch today, i.e., little if any reverence at Mass, with priests who treat the Mass as if it is their plaything, and laity who froth in anger at hearing that there are authentic Catholic alternatives. Another point that Dr. Kwasniewski made which is worth repeating is that Latin is the language of the Church, and the Chartres pilgrimage is the most international pilgrimage that we have today. It therefore makes little sense to have the readings in French when many of the attendees will be non-French. They could, if they so wished, read out in Latin according to the rubrics and then afterwards read in French (which is allowed by Ecclesia Dei, it turns out, although even that is a slippery slope) but that's not what they did. In other words, I am quite certain that whoever made the decision did it knowing full well that it was against the liturgical laws and against the spirit of the Tridentine Mass, yet did it anyway, perhaps to force the point that the Tridentine Mass has to get along with the Novus Ordo mass.

This being NOChurch times, of course, not everyone was upset. As I have previously mentioned, Catholics as a whole have lost the ability to get angry at anything directed against the faith. In "WHEREIN ROBERT CARDINAL SARAH GETS IT RIGHT AND FATHER Z DOESN'T " (I've no idea why he insists on capital letters for his headlines), a response to Fr. John Zuhlsdorf's Why we Say The Black and Do The Red, which was in turn a commentary on what Dr. Kwasniewski had wrriten , Fr. Allan McDonald chimed in that Cardinal Sarah was right to make adaptations in order to get people to feel at home, once again showing that the Novus Ordo has poisoned the minds of even many of those who say the Tridentine Mass occasionally. We don't adapt the Mass to ourselves; rather we adapt ourselves to the Mass, and the arguments he was making were well-adressed in Dr. Kwasniewski's original piece, which it seems blew completely over his head.

The best commentary on Fr. McDonald's piece came from Henry , who wrote:

A single instance of vernacular abuse, as at Chartres, is not a big deal. No doubt God will survive the desacralization of a couple of moments in this one Mass, and the

...

We prefer to use the term 'idiotkind'; it's more descriptive - Sunday 28th of January to Saturday 3rd of February

Football is one of my biggest TV interests. My favourite league to watch is the English Premier League.

It used to be one of few areas uninffected by the general effiminacy and homosexualism of the U.K. establishment, although it always had its fair share of political correctness, which has been increasing beyond all control. If it continues on its current trajectory, I fear I might be pushed into not watching it.

The latest scandal to hit the league is the firing of a scouting director because he had informed someone else, form what I gather to be an internal memo, that they were not interested in any more African players. His reasons were very simple, and not at all racist - that many of the ones the club have bought have ended up being trouble-makers when they are found themselves out of the starting line-up. I feel sorry for the man, as he seemed to have a hard time understanding why his letter should have become an issue in the first place. He pointed out that he would not also recommend Russian players, because they seem to have a hard time settling into the country. None of these are hateful things, simply his professional opinion, which he is bound to give before his employer shells out milions of pounds on buying the rights to a player.

If the man had been wrong on his professional opinion, for which he gets paid quite well, then he should have been challenged on professional grounds by being disproved. Instead, the media whipped up a storm over it though and he was gone. Everyone is to blame in this, apart from the sporting director, whose only fault is in being honest in his professional evaluation. Honesty, alas, is no longer permitted in the once 'Great' Britain, the same country which imprisons children in hospitals so they cannot get potentially life-saving treatment elsewhere.

In Syria, a Russian jet was downed by anti-aircraft missiles. Nobody knows who provided the rebels with the missules, but it is likely to be the anti-Assad forces, and although the list of thos miscreants is long, we do know that the Western powers have sent weapons to Islamists since the beginning of the war. Whoever is to blame should be warned that the Russians are not in the slightest amused about losing one of their pilots. This war might get much hotter and very soon.

On the topic of Russia, we had the vice-president of the detestable Obama regime telling us that Russia is in "enormous decline". A commentator writing for RT corrected the narrative. Now, Russia Today is obviously a government mouthpiece, but allegations that Russia is in decline keep propping up. The charge is so manifestly false that one wonders whether all of Washington's power brokers are lying to the people of whether they are seriously this deluded. Even Russias demographic problems - their greatest danger - are nowhere near as catastrophic as it is cliamed.

We also had the now infamous "Kremlin List", which was a list drawn up by people within the Trump administration listing threats to Russia within the Russian political establishment. Keen observers noted that the political list was virtually taken from the Kremlin's website, titles and all, with the list of economid figures being taken from the Forbes list of Russian's businessmen.  Our main man Vladimir Putin joked that he was offended/disappointed (different tests depending on the translation) to find himself outside of it. It's a good thing that the Russian leadership has a good sense of humour to go with their wisdom, or the world would be a far more dangerous place than it already is.

Turning to the Church, we have to thank the faithful laity, because when bishops abandon their flock, we still have people willing to put their necks on the line for Holy Mother Church and her Bridegroom. This time it is by launching a new academy called  John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family which will work to futeher God's view on these issues. The striking thing is that these are the pople who were kicked out of the Pontifical Academy for Life by Bergoglio the defiler. It is sad when truthful and faithful Catholics no longer have a place in the Church's official institutions.

From Sandro Magister, we were told that Bergoglio intends to attack Humanae Vitae not directly, but through winks and shrugs. His henchmen are already doing it, many of them having replaced faithful Catholics at John Paul's Academy for Life, the above-mentioned.

For my money, it is much more likely that Bergoglio's attack on Humanae Vitae will be much more direct, something along the lines of "it can no longer be said..."

I finally got around to wathing that famous Jordan Peterson interview with the BBC. I did not find it to be the trouncing that many observers have made it out to be, although that was only because the annoying Newman woman kept interrupting him and throwing him of course, never allowing him to build up any steam on any of the topics on which he had received a question. It was actually interesting to observe her technique of disinformation. Step 1, ask a question . Step 2, rephrase his answer into something preposterous he never said, but which you had in your notes as a point of attack. Step 3, allow him a quick response to your ridiculous rephrasing. Step 4, change the topic to something wildy diffrent - "that's some segway", Peterson once remarked.

The most glaring example of Kathy losing the plot was when she said "So you''re basically saying that I should just stay home and play with my dolls". Had I been Peterson, I would like to think that I would have remarked, "Well, if that's what you understood to be my response, then good luck with that and if you can manage playiing with dolls then...

Subscribe to language misuse