Peter Kwasniewski

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

...

Even converts show us yet again why nobody likes NOChurch, and for good measure, Bergoglian scandals abound as well - Sunday 18th to Saturday 24th of February

It is quite often to hear people saying that the Church needed to change because it was not effective in evangelisation, or was losing members, or whatever other tripe the ill-informed or ill-intentioned will give us about the pre-Vatican II Church. They say this to rationalise or justify the rapture which took place at Vatican II, whose negative effects are growing by the day.

In this context, and given that we are approaching the 'canonisation' of Paul VI, it is timely to have a look at how the Church actually was, statistically, at the death of Pope Pius XII. Indeed, Rorate Caeli never gets tired of reminding us of how booming the Church was, and even though the figures are for the U.S., I am quite certain that the trend holds world-wide. In a piece titled "The Canonization of Vatican II: The case for Pacelli, revisited", they did just that.

Long story short, if the Church today was to have even 1/4 of the numbers that the Church was pulling in 1958, it would be seen as almost miraculous, given how bad things are today.

These are only the positive numbers. For a complete picture we would have to also find out the number of apostates every year, how many priests became laicised, how many monks and nuns left religious life and the number of divorces and annulments. With regards to annulments, I know for a fact that there were less than 1,000 in the whole world in the reign of Pope Pius XII, compared to more than 60,000 in the U.S. alone just some 10 years later and today probably. I suspect the other negative numbers from the reign of Pope Pius XII would put NOChurch to shame.

'Shame' and NOChurch are never far apart, and this week was no different. From Rome we had a high-ranking member of the Apostolic Signatura sentenced to 18 months probation for child pornography possession. This particular pervert was revealed as he groped a man at a market and was then run down by the young man, only for the police to intervene. Upon looking him up they noticed he had prior convictions for indecent exposure and this led to a search on his apartment wherein the perverted material was found.

In the U.S., we had one of Bergoglio's most popular sodomy-pushers, Cardinal Tobin - a Bergoglio appointment - tweeting out "goodnight baby" before promptly erasing the tweet. He claimed that it was to his sister, but I am not sure how many people believe that, as I certainly don't. The best we can hope for is that he was writing to his mistress, although it doesn't take much of an imagination to suspect that he was sending to someone with not quite so squishy parts...

In Germany, they have gone full-blown apostaste, with news that protestants will be allowed to receive Holy Communion, if they are married to Catholics. I'll not spend much time on this, but it is amusing to note that Catholics who do not pay the Church tax are barred from all sacraments, whereas protestants who share the same bed with Catholics are welcome, even though they do not believe any of the Chuch's imporntant doctrines. That's NOChurch logic if ever we had it. Gloria.tv wondered when Muslims will be up for some Sunday bread.

The Remnant wrote a piece on sacrilegious Communion by protestants and traced the rot all the way back to the documents of Vatican II, in 1965. It is very fashionable by many who dislike Bergoglio to pin all the blame on him, but the fact of the matter is that Bergoglio is only a very virulent strain of the Novus Ordo virus. The rot began a long time ago and there are very many people to blame, and no Novus Ordo pope gets off lightly, with the exception of Pope John Paul I whose reign was too short and not excluding even Pope Benedict XVI, however much good he did. These are the same popes, by the way, who are automatically canonised at death, with Bergoglio even blasphemously joking that Benedict and he are on the waiting list.

We are supposed to believe that the greatest crisis and apostasy in the Church's history has been overseen by a series of holy popes not seen since the early centuries, when many of them died to save the faith.

One of these supposed 'heroically holy' popes, Bergoglio the terrible, has this past week been implicated in a financial corruption scandal. It involved the transfer of money to a scandal-ridden hospital on Bergoglio's behest, to the tune of $25 million from an organisation which normally limits itself to donations of $100,000 and in exceptional cases to $200,000. The cardinals in the U.S. voted for the money to go to the hospital because Bergoglio urged them to do so. We would all like to know how much of that money has gone to its proper use and how much went off to pay off people for their silence.

In " Peronism and Corruption" , Fr. Ray Blake attempted to explain why Bergoglio surrounds himself with so many perverts. He puts it down to Peronism, in which people are promoted not due to competence or virtue, but out of loyalty to the head honcho. Hilary White picked up on this and pointed out that part of the reason why Bergoglio wants perverts around him is because they are easier to control since he has more dirt on them. That he is one of them did not get a mention, but perverts of a feather perve together.

The now rather famous Jordan Peterson revealed in an interview to former Catholic Answers host Patrick Coffin that he needs 3 more years before he can give his position on the "historical Jesus". I remember getting into a discussion regarding whether the man was a Christian or...

Pages

Subscribe to Peter Kwasniewski