“Since in the course of centuries the holy liturgy has been gaining more and more completeness, it is but natural that this precious mine should come to be further opened in honor of the Virgin Mother. The Order of Saint Francis, it would seem, as well as certain particular churches, such as Rheims and Paris for example— had already taken the initiative, when Urban VI in 1389 instituted today’s solemnity. The Pope counseled a fast on the vigil of the feast, and ordered that it should be followed by an octave; he granted for its celebration the same indulgences as Urban IV had, in the previous century, attached to the festival of Corpus Christi. The Bull of promulgation, stopped by the Pontiff’s death, was again taken up and published by Boniface IX, his successor on the Chair of Peter.
“We learn from the lessons of the office formerly composed for this feast, that the object of its institution was, as Urban conceived it, to obtain the cessation of the schism then desolating the Church. The Papacy, exiled from Rome for 70 years, had barely re-entered it, when hell, infuriated at a return which crossed all its plans, had taken revenge by ranging under two leaders the flock of the one sheepfold. So deep was the obscurity wherewith miserable intrigues contrived to cover the authority of the legitimate shepherd, that numbers of churches, in all good faith, began to hesitate, and ended at last in preferring the deceptive staff of a hireling. Thicker yet was the darkness to grow, till night should be so dense, that for a moment the conflicting mandates of three Popes would simultaneously spread through the world; whilst the faithful, struck with stupor, would be at an utter loss to discern accurately which was the voice of Christ’s true Vicar. Never had the bride of the Son of God been in a more piteous situation. But Our Lady, to whom the true Pontiff had turned at the first rising of the storm, did not betray the Church‘s confidence. During all those years while the unfathomable justice of the Most High let the powers of hell hold sway, she stood for the defense of holy Church, trampling the head of the old serpent so thoroughly under her victorious foot, that in spite of the terrific confusion he had stirred up, he was unable to sully the faith of the people. Their attachment was steadfast to the unity of the Roman See, whosoever might be, in this uncertainty, its veritable occupant. Thus the West, divided in fact, but in principle ever one and undivided, reunited herself spontaneously as soon as God‘s moment came for the return of light….
“It was now to be shown that such a return of nations, in the very midst even of the tempest, was indeed the work of her who had been called upon by the pilot, half a century before, to succor the bark of Peter. Even they of the fractious assembly of Basle gave proof of this, in a way which has unfortunately been too much overlooked by historians who undervalue the high importance that liturgical facts hold in the history of Christendom. When about to separate, these last abettors of the schism devoted the 43rd session of their pretended council to the promulgation of this feast of the Visitation, in the establishment of which Urban VI had, from the outset, placed all his hopes. Notwithstanding the resistance of some of the more obstinate, the schism may, from that hour, be said to have ended. The storm was subsiding; the name of Mary, invoked thus by both sides, shone resplendent as the sign of peace amidst the clouds, even as the rainbow in its sweet radiance unites both extremities of the horizon. ‘Look upon it,’ says the Holy Ghost, ‘and bless Him that made it: it is very beautiful in its brightness. It encompasseth the heaven about with the circle of its glory: the hands of the Most High have displayed it.’”
Thanks, Bishop Schneider. Agreed. Wait, what’s that over there?:
Full article at Lifesite News wherein the good bishop seeks to definitively address those who doubt the validity of Benedict XVI’s putative abdication. You can make your own call if he succeeds. But some quick observations:
Bishop Schneider, when calling into doubt the abdication’s validity as a cul-de-sac, smacking of a “spirit” of sedevacantism, takes a very odd tack. Is this like the “spirit of Vatican II”? Like the “schismatic” spirit of Abp. Lefebvre when he consecrated Bishops to (in his mind) protect the Mass and the availability of the Sacraments for the good of souls? Because of course those who contend Benedict is still pope are anything but sedevacantists. His Excellency lists a number of what-ifs that could force the Church into a position of whether it is unknowable just who is Peter. But it is unlikely that any of them would come about in this specific situation. To address one such hypothetical, this nonagenarian is highly unlikely to outlive every Cardinal appointed by JP2 and himself. Bishop Schneider uses the “attitude of sedevacanism charge to simply act as though we are saying the See is vacant, and then criticizing that position. He doesn’t address the canonical arguments at all.
Bishop Schneider rightly points out that the visible nature of the Church demands a visible head or else the mission of the Church would be paralyzed. Well, we have had a visible head during the entire Bergoglian regime. And the confusion engendered by the putative abdication and the resulting doubts about just who that is tends to prove that tendency to paralysis without a visible head. The situation is akin to the Great Western Schism, of course, in that we have a question of mistake of fact– who is the person of the Pope, not a true schism where those who favor the Benedict papacy are refusing to submit to the Roman Pontiff. They are trying to submit to the true Pontiff. I think it is clear that if there are any Catholics who refuse submission to the Pontiff, they are overwhelmingly in the Bergoglio camp.
Yes, valid appointments of Bishops and the other activities involving the Church’s Supreme Pontiff must be addressed. But in his discussion of supplied jurisdiction, HIs Excellency gives it short shrift, and does not discuss at all the effect of a Pope Benedict who sits by and allows all these appointments of Cardinals and Bishops, etc, without saying a word. Is he prohibited from objecting, or claiming his rights, or is it perhaps tacit consent to allow the juridical Church to function as she must in this unprecedented situation? I agree this is not clear, and due to our lack of knowledge involves some pure speculation from the Benedict is pope camp. But I don’t think this definitively proves Bergoglio is therefore pope. Will anyone, especially a member of the college, address the canonical arguments and the actual text of the resignation? For that is where the matter starts.
Finally, I think the most revealing thing about the Lifesite article and His Excellency’s essay is that reputable people are apparently feeling the need to address the issue at all. There must be a growing number of Catholics who are making known their doubts about the legitimacy of the Bergoglian regime. Beyond doubt, there are many Catholics who realize something is seriously, and unprecedentedly, wrong with this situation.
Microscopic cruelty is in some ways more cruel than great cruelty. Bergoglio’s behavior reminds me of the description of the possessed-by-satan Professor Weston in Perelandra, by C.S. Lewis. Lewis notes the devil really isn’t mainly the charming Mephistopheles type, but rather more often just a nonstop producer of unimaginative, banal evil.
The full story from RorateCaeli below. They use the word “Pope” to describe Bergoglio. Not sure if that’s a typo:
Pope Mocks Roman Liturgical Art and Humiliates Sicilian Priests
Sicily is almost a nation in itself, and Sacred Art and liturgical beauty have always flourished in that island, in times of Christian freedom. Much of the liturgical beauty of vestments has been preserved in Sicily and elsewhere in Italy since the invention of the 1969 New Mass, and it is still used.
So it was astonishing to hear Francis mocking both Sicilians and their vestments, as well as their grandparents in a meeting with Sicilian bishops and priests today:
More lace, but where are we? Sixty years after the Council! A little updating also in liturgical art, liturgical fashion! Yes, sometimes bringing some grandmother’s lace goes, but sometimes. It’s to pay homage to grandma, isn’t it?
It pays to repeat occasionally what I always have maintained: one must respect the office of the papacy and also the person who holds it. This does not preclude deploring any evil acts of such a person. And of course, no ridicule of an antipope seems out of line. Considering my views on the current situation, it puts me in a weird spot.
Not that she has ever wavered on THE issue of the Church today, but her last few posts are golden. This latest is a must read. A quote that hit me in particular today:
The virile man wants to know what is going on around him. He wants a clear, accurate description of objective reality, no matter how ugly, because the virile man is constantly seeking to formulate and execute the best possible response and path forward. The virile man does not ever plop down on the ground, declare the situation too difficult or too unpleasant, and disengage in favor of a quietistic, passivistic, self-righteous pity-party.
After a mini-resurgence of regular blogging in the first few months of this so-far annus horibilis, you may have noticed a mini-dearth of posting in the last few weeks. Why? My motivation is still there, but after the nuclear war talk paused among the Ukraine media cheerleaders, and as it seems Russia is slowly but surely drawing the noose over the Azov battalion, there has been an absolute dearth of news.
By dearth of news, I stress dearth of news youdon’t already know. I mean, yes, scads of professional athletes, young people and early middle-aged people are dropping dead of the clot shot. You knew that. Yes, they will bring back the coof restrictions as long as sheeple let them. You knew that. Yes, the Chinese communists have zero respect for human life. You knew that.
And yes, Bergoglio sure does everything in his power to destroy the Church. You knew that, too.
Today, news from Lifesite that he has removed the chaplain of the traditional Carmelite community he is trying to destroy in Pennsylvania. Yep, accompanying them all the way to an inability to receive the Sacraments. This order has said they will resist this unjust and illegitimate crackdown. Good for them.
May their chaplains stick with them, and may faithful Catholics support them. May God protect their vocations, their charism, and their souls.
Perhaps when Mary’s Immaculate Heart triumphs the Pope will finally break his long silence. Until then, pray for him.
Just because I’m usually so shy about expressing my opinion. Especially opinions where I don’t have all the facts. But, given the importance of the event, here goes:
Of course anyone who knew the importance of the Fatima apparitions/promises/warnings/consequences would want the consecration on Friday to be compliant with Our Lady’s command. We all want that. I want it. So what did she actually request (as translated in English)? From the Fatima.org site:
To save them [poor sinners who are on the road to hell], God wishes to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end; but if people do not cease offending God, a worse war will break out during the reign of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that He is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions against the Church and against the Holy Father.
To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If My requests are heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions against the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, various nations will be annihilated.
In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.
The above was from the Second Secret told to the children by Our Lady and made public. Read here. Later, in 1929 Our Lady appeared to Sister Lucia and spoke the following words:
The moment has come when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means. So numerous are the souls which the justice of God condemns for sins committed against Me, that I come to ask for reparation. Sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray.
So, Our Lady said God wants this. He directs that Holy Father must make this consecration, and that in union with all the bishops of the world. Therefore, on to the first condition.
Will it be the Holy Father consecrating Russia at all? Unless you found this site through an internet randomizer, you know that I believe this question, far from being an obvious yes, is a matter AT LEAST of very understandable doubt. I read the putative Benedictine abdication and I cannot conclude the text complies with Canon Law for validity. If it is invalid, Pope Benedict never stopped being Pope. He is still alive, you know. And there are signs he knows he is still Pope, ET CETERA ET CETERA.
So, the first condition of God’s request given through Our Lady is in serious doubt. OK, but Tim, aren’t both Bergoglio and Benedict “bishops” and thus if both consecrate Russia, would that not be compliant?
Yes, dear readers, that is the million dollar question. IF they both consecrated Russia as requested, then I can see how it very well may be acceptable, even under the bizarre conditions in which we find ourselves and the Church. And I get it– it would be just like Our Lord and Lady to bring such a wonderful miracle out of the mouth of the Church’s enemies themselves. Yes, quite fitting, actually. But what immediately is obvious to me is that we have not heard a peep out of Benedict about his participation. Nope, just the Vatican apparatus and its prison guards who always speak for him. Frank Walker calls this apparatus by the humorous name “BenedictBot”. Again, I tend to see things through the legal lens, and will just say this: everything ever said by anyone other than Benedict that claims to be “Benedict said this…” is HEARSAY. Sometimes they resort to double hearsay. Whatever, it would never be admissible in a court of law due to its inherent unreliability and unverifiability. That is why Ann Barnhardt very sensibly insists that Benedict, if participating at all, should be visibly doing so. Or, you’re going to tell me you will take Bergoglio’s word for it?? The man who allowed a demon to be worshipped in the Vatican gardens, and likely in St. Peter’s Basilica, too? The guy who tried to abrogate the Mass? Do I need to go on?
The second condition, assuming arguendo that the first was fulfilled, is that the consecration is to be done in union with all the bishops of the world and at the same time. A very lengthy discussion, and an informative one, about this condition can be found here. I’ll leave it at that. How many of the world’s bishops are required before this is satisfied? Does it have to be all? Some moral equivalent? I don’t know. So, would the invitation to all the Bishops to participate Friday, and the positive response of many, do the job? Again, I can’t decide, but just leave it as an issue.
Third, what is the effect of the inclusion of “humanity” and “Ukraine” along with “Russia”? Does that invalidate the consecration? Or is the mention of the word “Russia” enough, regardless of any additions? On this point I can see validity (if the other conditions are present) by specifically mentioning Russia. Why he needs to add anything else is a very good question not worth going into here.
Finally, Russia must be consecrated to Mary’s Immaculate Heart. Specifically. If Russia is consecrated to say, a demon, now, I ask you, would that be good? I link to Ann Barnhardt below, but the concern is that included in the many titles given to Our Lady in the consecration, what is rendered in English is “Queen of Heaven”, but in the romance languages the title roughly translates to “Queen of the Land of the Sky”, which according to persons pointing this out is a title attributed to the demon pachamama. The consecration will be read in Italian.
Which ultimately leads me to Ann Barnhardt. Her post is worth reading, and she lays out all the bad intentions/circumstances/effects of Bergoglio’s effort. Ann writes with her usual assurance, but she has been right so many times I can understand her intensity. I think she lays out the worst case scenario, and though I am not 100% convinced Mary will not somehow bring the consecration about despite any shenanigans–because she so desperately wishes to help us— I can’t say the Barnhardt probable outcomes aren’t plausible, to say the least. After all, she wishes to help us but first and always she wishes exactly what God wills.
So, in the reader’s digest version of this post, I would say I think it is very slightly possible this will satisfy Our Lady’s request, but much more likely that it will not. If it does, we will see her Immaculate Heart triumph. IN REALITY. A real miracle, not some needing-to-be-interpreted, just right Francismiracle, like his appalling interpretation of the loaves and fishes. We will KNOW. Mary’s Immaculate Heart will be GLORIFIED. Russia will CONVERT. TO THE TRUE FAITH, THE CATHOLIC FAITH.
Any mild pause in the globalist agenda isn’t the endgame here. Radical conversion, repentance, and the Age of Mary is what I would look for.
And what will happen if this is not good enough, or worse, an outright scam by an antipope? Need I say that this likely would greatly offend Heaven? On the cusp of a nuclear war?
Our Lady asked Sr. Lucia to sacrifice and pray for the intention of the consecration of Russia. I would like to point out we have two days left before the ceremony on Friday.
And no matter what. DO NOT LOSE FAITH IN OUR LORD, OUR LADY, OR THE CHURCH. She will triumph, sooner or later. Don’t give in to scandal should this go down badly. She will triumph. She crushes the head of satan. He is less than a match for her.
OK, I have said before that the question of the identity of the Holy Father is of waaaaay more importance to the average Catholic than the “above my paygrade/keep my head down and try to get to heaven” contingent lets on. Getting it right is the key to unraveling the disaster of heresy and tyranny that has been promoted for the last nine years. It is the key to defense of the Mass and Sacraments.
And it is the key to the conversion of Russia, as our Lady of Fatima promised she would bring about after the Holy Father consecrates Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart in union with the Bishops of the world.
CAN YOU STILL TELL ME IT DOESN’T MATTER WHO IS POPE?
The consecration of Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart will be the solution to all of the evil, satanical forces that have made, are making, and will further make, a kind of hell on earth. She will triumph. It is our deliverance.
But the consecration of Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart by an antipope, even if —ahem— it were done in good faith, could be an occasion of the loss of faith of millions and perhaps even despair, should this consecration not be satisfactory. I’m not Our Lady, but one would think this type of consecration would not suffice by a long shot. Again, I claim zero knowledge or authority to decide that; I’m just thinking out loud here.
It is not hard to imagine that, when this consecration is made, if the conversion of Russia does not happen and a period of peace does not ensue, many may lose their confidence in Fatima, their confidence in the Church, or perhaps just lose their faith entirely. You know– a distilled and immediate version of what has happened by slow drip from 1962-2022.
On the other hand, perhaps Our Lady, in the plan of God’s holy Providence, has decided to show a definitive proof of the identity of the Pope. If Bergoglio consecrates Russia and it works, maybe he really is pope. Mea culpa from me. But if he does his consecration and nothing good happens, would that by itself be enough to confirm the Benedict is still Pope? We shall see.
Only the Pope could have answered the dubia. Only the pope can consecrate Russia according to Mary’s request.
If Cardinal Burke, or any Cardinal for that matter, or any active Bishop, or perhaps Archbishop Vigano, could see his way to address at last the identity of the Pope publicly, please? Not that it is strictly speaking relevant to the question of whether the putative abdication was valid, but it could really help to strengthen those Catholics who are left.
…he would be right about everything. Plus funny, salty, and entertaining generally.
Latest example: the losers at DuckDuckGo. Everyone who used this search engine to avoid censorship and dealt with its horrible performance in actually finding anything, will not regret ditching the product itself. We regret only that the soldiers for freedom keep shooting only themselves.
Maybe my last search on DuckDuckGone will be this: “who is the real pope”
As reported over at Rorate Caeli here, and here, Bergoglio met with the superiors of the FSSP and confirmed the use of the “1962” books for Mass, the sacraments and the Breviary for the FSSP. The communique of the Fraternity even states that Bergoglio stated that Traditiones Custodes does not apply to the FSSP, as the use of the traditional books is part of their foundational documents.
Of course, the usual advisals apply to this story: only a Pope can issue a motu proprio binding the universal Church. No pope can abrogate the traditional Mass and no permission from Pope or Bishop is needed to celebrate that Mass.
My question is why? Why did Bergoglio do this? My initial take is he must be feeling the heat from lots of different quarters, and has decided to go incrementally, contenting himself for the time being by merely cancelling 99% of all Diocesan Latin Masses and by bringing heat to the Ecclesia Dei communities in the more strident Francisdioceses. Kill the revival of the Mass as much as he can without buying a fight with those who have indicated they will resist him. Wait until they are completely isolated.
Too cynical? Too facile? I am open to other interpretations. But good news is good news, I must admit, even if it goes to further give credence to the false base premise that this man has the authority to do any of what has transpired.