Learned Liturgical Director says…

(The funny picture here was removed at the suggestion of frozencold, although I thought it was humorous!)    🙂

This fellow here, in his official capacity of “liturgical director” has informed me that the TLM and dinner at St. Rose is not a parish event –  this in spite of the fact that all proceeds from ticket sales are being donated to the parish and that we have not asked  one dime of them.

Please remember him in your prayers and at the collection.  It might just happen that when the collection basket comes around, we will suddenly remember, “Oh, gee, golly.  I suddenly recall that is not a parish event!  I guess I can put my wallet back!”

Save your hard-earned money and give instead to a Trad community of priests.  Maybe it’s time to shake the dust off our feet.

Oh, yes, I forgot to mention that he said we were “exploiting” the parish!  He took that back after I pointed out a few facts which gave the lie to his statement.

About ihmprayforme

lifelong Catholic; homeschooled our children; have been regularly attending the Tridentine Mass for at least the past 17 years.
This entry was posted in Kankakee TLM News. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Learned Liturgical Director says…

  1. Fr. J says:

    Okay calm down. Remember to practice charity, especially in words. Detraction is a sin. What use is it to have Mass in Latin, do everything just right, but to not have love? St. Gregory of Nyssa said, “May we never risk the life of our souls by being resentful or by bearing grudges.” Also consider, “Diu deliberandum, statuendum est semel,” which means that we should deliberate carefully because once we act or say something it is done. Always speak suaviter in modo. Many refuse to consider assisting at a Latin Mass because those who attend can act in ways that are just plain mean. I suspect you misunderstood this person. Next time you are in confession you might want to mention your temper. “You will accomplish more by kind words and a courteous manner than by anger or sharp rebuke, which should never be used except in necessity” (St. Angela Merici). May God bless you.

  2. ihmprayforme says:

    Thank you for your comment, Father. However, since you were not present at the actual conversation, I believe you are wrong in entertaining suspicions that I misunderstood. I understand plain English quite well. Besides, there was another person present who can verify that what I’ve said is accurate.

    As for charity, Father, I could have said more, but I didn’t, and in charity, I won’t.

    I might ask why it is that in controversies and disagreements such as this one, it is the Trad who gets accused of lack of charity?

    I can tell you this, Father. At the place where we attend the TLM, charity abounds, and it is evident to any and all visitors. Whereas what I have experienced in the N.O. , is the formation of little cliques, backbiting, envy, and infighting. They do it to each other.

    Please do pray for me, Father. What we face is diabolical opposition to the restoration of the TLM. I know this. You know this.

    God bless you, too!

    In Their Most Sacred Hearts

  3. Fr. J says:

    I embrace both forms of the Roman rite, ordinary and extraordinary. I am very grateful to His Holiness for granting to every priest the right to celebrate either or both forms. So the TLM has already been restored and it is a blessing for Mother Church. It is not “us and them.” My experience is that cliques and infighting exist in human beings regardless of the language of their liturgy, it is a result of original sin.

    My comment was that your tone and the picture do seem to lack charity. I suggest you do as our saints have done which is to forgive and be reconciled. That may take humility, but our Lord was humble enough to endure the cross. Our catechism says of detraction: “…without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them.” I think you could have handled this privately between your and this other person. Sometimes what we hear is not actually what the other meant or intended. I doubt that you are facing a demon. Rather you face a person and the picture you posted to ridicule him or her is most unkind. Take this to your confessor and see what he says. I hope my words will be helpful to you. May God bless you richly.

  4. ihmprayforme says:


    I leave your comment to stand. There is a purpose to my posting. It is a notice to all who are involved that we are not being embraced with welcome arms, and that I think it is best to shake the dust off our feet and leave, and to not hold any expectations of a weekly TLM in our area. You do not know all the details and of our long, long, tiring efforts.

    As to your contention that the TLM has already been restored, well, I am happy for you that you have the privilege of celebrating it, but unfortunately, we do not have priests in our diocese like you. In the entire diocese, there is absolutely not one diocesan priest who offers the TLM. The one apostolate in the diocese that has been provided, is not accessible to many of the older Catholics here who would like to attend.

    It is no problem for younger families to travel, but hinderances (yes, diabolical) like those posed by personnel in authority are making it nearly impossible for all those who would like to attend that Mass on a regular basis. So, it has not been restored to all who who long for it.

    God bless you, too.

  5. Josue says:

    It was charity that Saint Nicholas punched that heritic Arius in the face.

    I think it may be that the “learned director” just wants to take down the Mass of Ages. We do have enemies and it’s worse when we have them at Mass.

  6. Gerard says:

    The troll image may be a little too snarky but, bringing to light the attitude of the “liturgical director” regarding their execution of their public function can be an act of charity and not “detraction.”

    Detraction against someone would be talking about some private flaw such as excessive drinking or some other immoral behavior that constitutes a private sin.

    Those who prefer abusive liturgies like most Novus Ordo services, are displaying by their actions a schismatic mentality. There isn’t parity between TLM advocates and those that resent the TLM and attempt to stop it. There also isn’t parity between those who are against the Novus Ordo’s use and those against the TLM. One is a liturgy of Apostolic origin with the organic development of the Church evident in its refinement. The other is a 41 year old manufactured liturgy by a committee seeking ecumenical compromise. A comparison of the two missals even in Latin bears this out.

    Your group may need to plan long term and make an attempt to right the parish wrongs. See if you can teach RCIA, take over the various “ministries” that liberals love to dominate (music, flowers, decoration) and organize rosaries to be said publicly for restoration. And, if you can, see if you can either switch or get the holy water replaced with holy water blessed in the traditional rite. A couple of priests in one parish found the old blessing in a book in their library and switched out the holy water and there was an immediate change in the atmosphere of the Church.

    • ihmprayforme says:

      Thank you, Gerard for your comment. It’s a long, long story that spans most of my life; my family and I have been active at this parish for many years. My children were baptized there under a most kind, most fatherly, most loving pastor. When he was more or less forced into early retirement by chancery politics, that’s when many left the parish to find a home at a Trad Mass site. Our family kept ties to the parish, including maintaining the Monthly Holy Hour of Reparation on first Saturdays. Before our dear, older pastor left, I had been teaching CCD there for 6 years. I taught one more year under the modernist pastor, but he gave me the boot after that one year. He told me his agenda was different than mine. He actually said that.

      We entertained great hopes when our new pastor arrived. I do like him very much. But he seems to be greatly influenced by his liturgical director. I will say no more on that.

      Believe me, we have tried what you suggest. We started a one-mile rosary procession of reparation 13 years ago, and have been continuing it since, in spite of no priestly support. Before SP we petitioned for a Tridentine Mass to conclude the procession but were denied. However since SP, we have had a TLM on the First Saturday of October after the procession.

      There are many, many others things that we have tried.

      But rejoice for us! Yesterday was a triumphant victory for our Risen Lord – the FIRST Sunday TLM in the entire area since 1969! Today, I actually felt within me His power, His joy, His triumpant victory over His enemies.

      Viva Cristo Rey! VIVA!!

      Life is good. Victory in Him is heavenly!

  7. frozencold says:

    Dude…you really need to take the picture down.

    I have followed your efforts on fisheaters and pray for you efforts…I pray, if it is His will, for the massive growth in the TLM because of how it has aided my own spirtual growth and hope others can find the same treasures my family and I have with the TLM (On a personal note, I have family in town and this would sure beat the long hikes to other places to attend a TLM when we come to visit…so, yeah, I am really pulling for your efforts).

    A group of us in my own parish is trying to do the same and we have had many meetings and requests and prayers and lobbying…and there have been many delays and roadblocks and despite a HUGE list of supporters, we have no clear path, yes, the past few year have been frustrating to say the least. And in a sense, I ask myself why should this be so difficult?

    I don’t know many facts here (just what I can read here) but it sounds like you have a very solid priest here at this parish with a clear understanding of things liturgical and otherwise… that is what we have as well…we are blessed with a wonderful priest and honestly a very beautiful NO Mass..

    But what the process has taught me is the need for prayer (which I am sure you do) and patience and charity. I humbly suggest you listen to your priest on this one…have patience…and remove the pict.

    • ihmprayforme says:


      Yes, I will take the picture down. I smile as I write this. Heck, doesn’t anyone have a sense of humor? :- )

      Are you under the assumption that the priest commenting here is my pastor? He is not. I have no idea who Father J. is.

      God bless you. Let’s keep each other in mutual prayer.

      Christus vincit! Christus regnat! Christus imperat!

  8. Tancred says:

    It’s amazing how unwelcoming and bigoted neo-Cons can be, although they’re the first to tell horror stories about how unfriendly Traditionalists are.

    This is yet another case of Joseph’s brothers throwing him down the well.

  9. ihmprayforme says:


    You understand! I am reminded of that passage that speaks of how good it is for brethren to dwell together – those of one mind and heart in Their Hearts!

    God bless you Tancred. Your understanding is a balm to my soul.

  10. Fr. J says:

    I am grateful you took down the offensive picture. I would remind Gerard that in the new instruction issued just today it says we, “must not in any way support or belong to groups that show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria ” or against the authority of the Pope as Supreme Pastor of the universal Church…”Both forms are legitimate. That said a priest can certainly use the blessings from the Roman Ritual. I am grateful to the Holy Father for his kindness to those attached to the extraordinary form. We should reflect that kindness to others. I suggest you invite this liturgical director to a Mass celebrated in the extraordinary form. I think he would really enjoy it and it would be an excellent experience for him. Maybe he, assuming it is a he, would even be willing to serve the Mass? That would be wonderful. God bless.

    • ihmprayforme says:

      Fr. J.,

      I will let Gerard answer for himself, if he wishes, but my two cents regarding this part of your comment, “must not in any way support or… “:

      Those individuals who do not accept the validity of the N.O. missae, will certainly not be approaching the local N.O. parish to request accommodations for a TLM. Neither will sede-vacantists! As far as legitimate criticism, may I remind you Father, that the Institute of the Good Shepherd has permission to engage in such questioning.

      And who was it who made this astounding criticism:

      “The liturgical reform, in its concrete realization, has distanced itself even more from its origin. The result has not been a reanimation, but devastation. In place of the liturgy, fruit of a continual development, they have placed a fabricated liturgy. They have deserted a vital process of growth and becoming in order to substitute a fabrication.They did not want to continue the development, the organic maturing of something living through the centuries, and they replaced it, in the manner of technical production, by a fabrication, a banal product of the moment.”
      –Josef Kardinal Ratzinger, Revue Theologisches, Vol. 20, Feb. 1990, pgs. 103-104.

      By the way, Father. the liturgical director did attend a previous TLM at the parish last October.

  11. Gerard says:

    Fr. J,

    I will gladly obey the directives of the Holy Father and as I understand what was written, I will not support priests or bishop (whatever their canonical standing) who “show themselves” engage in sacrilege and liturgical innovation in the Novus Ordo since they corrupt either the form, matter or intention (by their stated beliefs and actions) in their confection of the sacrament.

    And I will not support the use of dubious translations of the Missal of Paul VI. I will also not support any bishop who uses his office to undermine the Holy Father’s efforts to make available the missal of 1962. A missal that was immorally and illegally supressed.

    I also accept that while the Novus Ordo is a manifestly inferior form of the Roman Rite due its omissions and ambiguity, it is not contradictory but rather silent in its expression of the Catholic faith compared to the TLM.

    The N.O. contains doctrinal lacuna that requires strong catechesis to fill in, because if not, heterodox ideas will be inserted into the liturgy. The main problem has always been the faithful bringing to the standard vernacular Novus Ordo both orthodox and heterodox beliefs and not seeing any guidelines within the Novus Ordo for correction of heterodoxy as compared to the text of the TLM.

  12. Fr. J says:

    ihm, nowhere does he suggest that the ordinary form of the Mass is invalid. That is what I was referring too. One can argue that it was not a fully organic development, but not that it is illegitimate. His Holiness did not and does not say that. I am very glad he assisted at the extraordinary form. Hopefully baby steps will lead to full strides.

    Gerard, if a priest subverts either from of the Mass then he is certainly wrong and should be dealt with. I think the new translations will be a wonderful gift to the Church. With both forms now being celebrated there is a great opportunity for real organic development of the liturgy. We may not live to see it, but it will come. God bless.

  13. Gerard says:

    Fr. J,
    With all respect for the office of priest, I seriously do not understand your rhetoric. And I don’t mean to single you out, it’s common rhetoric among a majority of priests.

    Simple, correct translations of a doctrinally weakened rite of mass are “gifts?” That’s like the “gift” of a crutch from the person who broke your leg. Add to that the 41 year delay in this. At best it’s a small reparation for a liturgical crime owed in justice to the faithful. A larger scale historical analogy would be the British bringing the “gift” of a small portion of basic foodstuffs back to the Irish that they deliberately starved. (And simultaneously honor the leaders who starved them if we want to be analogous to the recent beatification of JPII.)

    Why frame these partial acts of reparation that are owed in justice to the faithful as “gifts?” The “gift” is the faith from God and the full patrimony handed down from the Apostles. . The Bishops and priests are obliged to offer and make available the authentic faith and liturgy handed onto them by the Apostles, not the omissions and innovations of Annibale Bugnini. The Novus Ordo is de facto and despite the Holy Father’s claim a separate rite. It does not go back to the Last Supper like the 4 root rites. ( It can be traced to the condemned Synod of Pistoia though. ) You can’t reasonably remove the majority of a rite away add ad hoc additions and call that organic development. It’s a new creation.

    I don’t understand this deliberate ignoring or diabolical myopia when it comes to the facts documented by Popes for over a century of the infiltration of the Church by her enemies and the post-conciliar removal of any sense of combat and defense of the faith, whole and entire. The very fact that no one even acknowledges deliberate efforts on the part of both individuals and organized movements of enemies of the Church is beyond frustrating and prevents the lay-faithful with their eyes and ears open.

    Even the letter of the Holy Father calling for “peace” and “serenity” is against the militant spirit of combat that is the Catholic Church on earth. This passivity is something totally alien and even contradicts the teaching of the Church on the virtues, the gifts of the Holy Ghost and the Spiritual Works of Mercy. It serves the purpose of a chemical warfare attack by anesthetizing the Church militant from her Divinely appointed mission.

    God Bless.

  14. OrganVirtuoso says:


    I understand that you have good intentions here, but it seems rather clear to me that if anything is being misunderstood, it is the postings of the others and you are the one misunderstanding. I have seen no mention by anyone challenging the validity of the Novus Ordo Mass here, so I cannot see why that topic was brought up in the first place. It actually seems to be steering the discussion away from the original subject, which had nothing to do with the Novus Ordo, but was about unreasonable statements made against the Catholics who only pursue that which our Holy Father admits is our patrimony. Is the derailment of the original blog focus an attempt to force attention away from the topic at hand?

  15. ihmprayforme says:

    “…post-conciliar removal of any sense of combat and defense of the faith…”

    It is often the case that the very shepherds who should be laying down their lives for us, instead, not only turn away from the fight, but would disarm us as well.

    There are those who mean well, and speak of “charity”, of “love”, but if they only realized that what they are doing is giving aid and comfort to the enemy! There is a vicious fight going on, and as Sister Lucia said, the devil is in the mood for the final confrontation; his main strategy is to target our priests because then the lambs are left without a shepherd. I see this so clearly.

    Father J., I am sure you are a good man, but you have no fight in you. These are the times for heroic virtue, something of which we see so little in our leaders.

  16. Fr. J says:

    Gerard, so Pope Benedict is in error and you are right? You don’t think that John Paul is among the Blesseds? By doubting the validity of the ordinary form, if that is what you are saying, you are disobeying the Holy Father. Do you notice where this leads? To the very Protestantism that you abhor. You set yourself above the Church as the Judge. I realize your anger at liturgical abuse and you have probably been treated very badly for decades. That is the fault of many dissenting priests. I am not one of them. Don’t protest dissent by becoming a dissenter yourself. Instead work to implement what the Holy Father has taught. Things are going well for us. This should be a time of rejoicing.

    Organ, it appears to me that Gerard is in doubt of the legitimacy of the ordinary form. He says so himself. The Holy Father does not want this to happen. Both forms are valid and legitimate. I only bring this up because it is hurtful to the movement to provide greater access to the extraordinary form. Those who oppose that will use those kind of statements to point and say that traditional Catholics dissent from Church teaching. We must not give them that chance. Things are going very well for us, so lets not blow it just when we are winning!

    ihm, we can certainly fight if we must, but we should not create a fight unnecessarily. We have won already. I have fought battles and suffered for being too “traditional.” If anyone knows how viscous dissenters can be it would be me. But I have learned to work calmly and carefully to advance real reform. However, I also realize it isn’t all on me. We didn’t get here in a day and we won’t fix what needs fixing in a day. There are many ways to fight. In fact we must pray to the Holy Spirit for it is really He that does the fixing. I honestly wish you all the best in implementing the liturgical reforms instituted by Pope Benedict. Many of us never thought we would see this day.

    God bless all.

  17. Gerard says:

    RE:Pope Benedict in error. It’s simple. If Pope Benedict has facts wrong or states things that are not true, he’s wrong. If he says the truth, he’s right. The same principle holds for any of us.

    RE:JPII among the Blesseds. He’s on the books. Whether the books reflect reality, we will not know in this life. His interior state aside, he was one of the worst Popes in history, I doubt his orthodoxy in the Catholic faith from his actions and his words.

    RE: The validity or legitimacy of the Novus Ordo. It’s simply not within the Pope’s ability to guarantee the validity of every variation and innovation done in every Church where the Novus Ordo is offered/celebrated. Do I doubt the validity of the Latin text promulgated by Paul VI? No. Do I doubt the translation and possible corruption of the consecration of the chalice due to the erroneous translations of Joachim Jeremiah (a Lutheran being relied on for Catholic translations?) Yes, I have doubts about that. It’s Aquinas vs. Bonaventure on that one, added to all of that we have priests who simply can’t resist fiddling with the form or the matter and the intent is dubious in many cases, so I’ll avoid the whole thing, since it’s so unsettled. I can’t fire a liberal dissenter who is a priest or a bishop or a Cardinal. It’s a Pope who appoints them and a Pope who can remove them or fail to remove them.

    I accept the legitimacy and validity of the Novus Ordo on paper and I accept the reality in front of me at each Church or chapel in which is makes an appearance in various states of dissaray. But I’m not interested in accepting it as a permanent accretion to the Church. I always be working towards it’s total abandonment, I’ll point out its many, many deficiencies to people and demonstrate the superiority of the TLM and the Eastern rites. It’s an act of charity to want the highest and best for people, superior liturgy is a part of that.

    I reject the argument that by using sound reason, obeying the perennial magisterium of the Church and not accepting every novelty or experiment with sacred things that Church leaders permit or insist on is Protestant. The very fact that the liberal Popes of recent years refuse to invoke the infallible Magisterium of the Church on virtually all issues which cry for an infallible resolution, tells me these Popes are punishments, not gifts. Give me a Pope that’s hated by the world any day over the dog and pony shows celebrating JPII’s implied indifferentism. Pope’s are infallible sometimes, but they are not impeccable and rarely irresistible.

    Just because a man has a mitre or wears a fisherman’s ring doesn’t mean he isn’t a dissenter. Christ will give him quite a lot of leeway in running the Church either into the ground or raising it up towards Heaven. We’re only guaranteed that he won’t destroy it. The current Holy Father is simply a braking mechanism Pope, while the Church slides downward. He’s not interested in restoring anything. It’s right out of Pope Pius X’s Pascendi a “species of compromise between the conserving force and the progressive force.”

    RE:What the Holy Father has taught. I unfortunately find him to be completely dizzying in his formulations. His penchant for taking myths like global warming and evolution as dogmas and shaping doctrine around them is lamentable and shows him to be an intellectual of several generations damaged by WWII. He’s got too much Rahner and Hegel in his thinking to this day. To read a little book like “In the Beginning” establishes a gulf between his beliefs in a symbolic Original Sin vs. my literal belief in a fallen nature due to the literal actions of one man requiring a literal Savior to literally die on a Cross and Rise for literal redemption. It was good enough for hundreds of Popes, if not the last few on a personal level, I’ll stick with the majority on this and other issues.

    This Pope is leagues better than the last few, but he’s still not on the same page as people who are not emotionally attached to Vatican II and see the disaster for what it is, without a nostalgic utopian ideal of a post-Trent Catholicism complete with a love-in with false religions.

  18. Fr. J says:

    Gerard, I will put this simply…you are wrong. Not necessarily on everything, but on one very core thing. You say you support the magisterium, but in fact only when it agrees with you. You replace the magisterium with your own personal magisterium and arrogate to yourself the right to interpret it. That makes you a Protestant, while ironically decrying Protestantism in the Church. Your quest for orthodoxy ends up making you a dissenter. You have fallen into a terrible trap. You are not Pope. I urge you to pray the Litany of Humility and meditate on the submission of intellect and will that are owed to the Supreme Pontiff.

    Can. 750 Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, which is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred magisterium. All are therefore bound to shun any contrary doctrines.

    Can. 752 While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ’s faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.

    You are perilously close to schism. You undermine what you hope to advance. Certainly you can work to reform the Church, but this is not the way to do it. If I must choose who to obey someone, you or Pope Benedict, well you can imagine who it will be. “Where Peter is, there is the Church.” Please consider this prayerfully. I will give you the last word if you wish to respond. God bless.

  19. Gerard says:

    Fr. J,

    Obviously we’ll wrap this up. I’m disappointed that you avoided addressing any of the quantifiable and verifiable points I brought up. When John XXIII called the second Vatican council, he requested new formulations for the faith for modern man to understand better. Instead we recieved modern formulations using the old vocabulary. Thanks to Rahner and co. we have too many priests and bishops who talk about “resurrection” that doesn’t mean the literal, bodily resurrection, we also have new terms for infallibility, communion, etc. all which put us in whirlwind of confusion. The traditionalist response has been to reject it and the conservative response has been to adopt their own brand of redefinition. We now have Catholics who believe and accept the Protestant caricature of the papacy and they like it. (who wouldn’t? latch your cart to the Pope and it’s guaranteed salvation) The difficulty is that it’s not the Catholic position.

    RE: “You say you support the magisterium, but in fact only when it agrees with you.”

    Not true. Assuming we understand the Magisterium in the same way, I submit to and follow the perennial magisterium of the Church, the Holy Father is subject to that Magisterium and his job and power of evoking it are contingent upon his guardianship of the Sacred Deposit of Faith. When the Holy Father invokes magisterial authority, I’ll grant it the submission it is due.

    Re: “You replace the magisterium with your own personal magisterium and arrogate to yourself the right to interpret it.”

    Again, not true. I would suggest that you have conflated the Magisterium of the Church with the heirarchy itself.
    I haven’t expressed anything that isn’t reasonable, demonstrable and in line with Catholic teaching.

    Re: ” That makes you a Protestant, while ironically decrying Protestantism in the Church.”

    I hope you rail against the evils of Protestantism from the pulpit at the Novus Ordo. If your accusation were true, the hiearachy would be falling over to please me in the name of ecumenism. JPII would have solicited me in how he could reshape the papacy to conform to the wishes of my “protestantism” as he outlined in “Ut Unum Sint.” (Funny how many people don’t see the hand of God in JPII’s debilitation. God put a stop to him by taking away his health, vigor and beatiful voice because it obscured the message of Christ and was in danger of becoming the ecumenical, indifferent, phenomenological Church of John Paul II-when he tried to tamper with the papacy itself, God said, “Enough.” I hope and pray he got the hint and repented before his death.)

    Re: ” Your quest for orthodoxy ends up making you a dissenter. You are not Pope.”

    Nonsense. I have never claimed to be the Pope. But the Pope does not own the faith and neither do I. It is the Truth that matters. And both he and I are bound by that truth and the Magisterium of the Church as it was before him. I don’t have the power to open up the treasury of the Church in indulgences, move calendar days, or define teachings infallibly. But he is also limited in what he can do. He cannot change the truth or the natural law or repeal or add to the Deposit of Faith. 2+2=4 just the same if I say it, the Pope says it Michael the Archangel or Hitler or Stalin would say it. The truth simply is.

    And redefining policies as teachings and redefining theological terms to mean other than they previously did does not compel me in following an errant Pope.
    If Pope Stephen commanded me to dig up the body of Pope Formosus for trial, I wouldn’t. I also would not necessarily accept his ruling on the validity of Formosus’ ordinations and papal actions.
    And when Pope John 22nd, preached that no one would see the beatific vision, I would not accept that simply because it comes from the Pope.

    Pope Benedict XVI wants to “let the matter drop” on Limbo? Sorry. I’m not going to do that foolhardy opening for abortionists. “The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of limbo of the children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire […] is false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools. -Auctorem Fidei-Pius VI-August 28, 1794

    And if Canon Law impresses you more than the undisputed history of the Church as well as an ecumenical council with the authority of the Pope behind it…

    (Canon 212 § 3) “The Christian faithful…according to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors
    their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful…”

    Re: “on the submission of intellect and will that are owed to the Supreme Pontiff.”

    Too broad a decree. Vatican I does not ask for this and St. Thomas Aquinas would not recommend this according to the threefold obedience teaching adopted by the Church. (Neither would St. Peter or St. Paul for that matter) Submission of intellect and will does not mean the abandonment of reason and just judgment.

    Click to access Response%20to%20John%20Dejak%20of%20The%20Wanderer.pdf

    Re: “You are perilously close to schism.”

    I will be careful not to fall into schism, heresy or apostasy. I would posit that I am further from schism than you are it seems from Ultramontanism in its modern form of Papolatry. Schism is denying the authority of the Pope. It has nothing to with resisting Popes who abuse their authority or refuse to use their authority.

    Thank you and God Bless.

  20. ihmprayforme says:

    Thank you, Gerard. I agree with you completely, though I doubt you will convince Father.

    God intended that the Church’s Magisterium be used as a safeguard in transmitting the truth across the generations, not to impose anything new.

    If any novelty should arise, it is incumbent upon us to shun it like the plague. In these times of diabolical disorientation the best advice I could give any fellow-Catholic would be to pray for fortitude, and to hold fast to the Faith which we have been taught for 2,000 years.

    The simple, the child-like, do hear and recognize the voice of God because He knows His own, and they know Him. Let us become little in the arms of our Mother, and she will insure that we keep the Faith.

    And pray, pray, pray and make sacrifices for our priests. They are the primary targets of the devil’s deception.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s