"It is a grave offense not to work for the extermination of heresy when this monstrous infection requires action"
(Council of Vienne)

♰♰♰

Tuesday, April 30, 2019

Prominent clergy, scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in open letter

April 30, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – Prominent clergymen and scholars including Fr. Aidan Nichols, one of the best-known theologians in the English-speaking world, have issued an open letter accusing Pope Francis of committing heresy. They ask the bishops of the Catholic Church, to whom the open letter is addressed, to "take the steps necessary to deal with the grave situation" of a pope committing this crime.
The authors base their charge of heresy on the manifold manifestations of Pope Francis' embrace of positions contrary to the faith and his dubious support of prelates who in their lives have shown themselves to have a clear disrespect for the Church's faith and morals.
"We take this measure as a last resort to respond to the accumulating harm caused by Pope Francis's words and actions over several years, which have given rise to one of the worst crises in the history of the Catholic Church," the authors state. The open letter is available in Dutch, Italian, German, French, and Spanish.


Among the signatories are well-respected scholars such as Father Thomas Crean, Fr. John Hunwicke, Professor John Rist, Dr. Anna Silvas, Professor Claudio Pierantoni, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski, and Dr. John Lamont. The text is dated "Easter Week" and appears on the traditional Feast Day of St. Catherine of Siena, a saint who counseled and admonished several popes in her time.
The 20-page document is a follow-up to the 2017 Filial Correction of Pope Francis that was signed originally by 62 scholars and which stated that the Pope has “effectively upheld 7 heretical positions about marriage, the moral life, and the reception of the sacraments, and has caused these heretical opinions to spread in the Catholic Church,” especially in light of his 2016 exhortation Amoris Laetitia.
The authors of the open letter state in a summary of their letter (read below) that it has now become clear that Pope Francis is aware of his own positions contrary to the faith and that the time has come to go a "stage further" by claiming that Pope Francis is "guilty of the crime of heresy.”
"We limit ourselves to accusing him of heresy on occasions where he has publicly denied truths of the faith, and then consistently acted in a way that demonstrates that he disbelieves these truths that he has publicly denied," the authors state.
They clarify that they are not claiming Pope Francis has "denied truths of the faith in pronouncements that satisfy the conditions for an infallible papal teaching."
"We assert that this would be impossible, since it would be incompatible with the guidance given to the Church by the Holy Spirit," they state.
In light of this situation, the authors call upon the bishops of the Church to take action since a "heretical papacy may not be tolerated or dissimulated to avoid a worse evil.”
For this reason, the authors “respectfully request the bishops of the Church to investigate the accusations contained in the letter, so that if they judge them to be well founded they may free the Church from her present distress, in accordance with the hallowed adage, Salus animarum prima lex (‘the salvation of souls is the highest law’). The bishops can do this, the writers suggest, “by admonishing Pope Francis to reject these heresies, and if he should persistently refuse, by declaring that he has freely deprived himself of the papacy.”
The authors first present in detail – and with theological references to substantiate their claims – the different positions against the faith Pope Francis has shown himself to hold, propagate, or support, including “seven propositions contradicting divinely revealed truth.”
One of the heresies the authors accuse Pope Francis of committing is expressed in the following proposition: “A Christian believer can have full knowledge of a divine law and voluntarily choose to break it in a serious matter, but not be in a state of mortal sin as a result of this action.” Many of these heretical statements touch on questions of marriage and the family and are to be found in Amoris Laetitia, but there is also a new claim made by Pope Francis in 2019 – namely, that the “diversity of religions” is “willed by God” – that is listed in the open letter.
In one section of the open letter, the authors list the many prelates as well as lay people, who, despite openly dissenting from Catholic doctrine and morals — either by word or by deed — have been by Pope Francis either publicly praised (such as Emma Bonino) or raised to influential positions (such as Cardinal Oscar Rodrigez Maradiaga). On this list are names such as Cardinal Blase Cupich, Cardinal Godfried Danneels, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Bishop Gustavo Zanchetta, and Bishop Juan Barros.
The fact that Pope Francis never responded to the dubia (questions) concerning Amoris Laetitia published by Cardinals Carlo Caffarra, Joachim Meisner, Walter Brandmüller, and Raymond Burke is mentioned. Moreover, the authors point out that Pope Francis has changed the members of the Pontifical Academy for Life to such an extent that orthodox Catholic experts have been replaced by heterodox experts, such as Father Maurizio Chiodi.
Addressing the bishops of the world – among whom are to be found all the present 222 cardinals – the authors of the open letter express their gratitude toward those bishops who have defended Catholic doctrine by their own personal witnesses.
“We recognise with gratitude that some among you have reaffirmed the truths contrary to the heresies which we have listed, or else have warned of serious dangers threatening the Church in this pontificate,” they state. Here, the dubia cardinals, but also Cardinal Willem Eijk, are mentioned. The authors also thank Cardinal Gerhard Müller for his Manifesto of Faith.
The authors believe, however, that at this time in history, six years into the Francis pontificate, more is needed, namely a more direct and authoritative approach. They recognize their own limits when they tell the bishops: “Despite the evidence that we have put forward in this letter, we recognise that it does not belong to us to declare the pope guilty of the delict of heresy in a way that would have canonical consequences for Catholics."
"We therefore appeal to you as our spiritual fathers, vicars of Christ within your own jurisdictions and not vicars of the Roman pontiff, publicly to admonish Pope Francis to abjure the heresies that he has professed. Even prescinding from the question of his personal adherence to these heretical beliefs, the Pope's behaviour in regard to the seven propositions contradicting divinely revealed truth, mentioned at the beginning of this Letter, justifies the accusation of the delict of heresy. It is beyond a doubt that he promotes and spreads heretical views on these points. Promoting and spreading heresy provides sufficient grounds in itself for an accusation of the delict of heresy. There is, therefore, superabundant reason for the bishops to take the accusation of heresy seriously and to try to remedy the situation,” they state.

The authors make it clear that it is up to the bishops to take action and that they do not need a majority among the bishops to do so.
"Since Pope Francis has manifested heresy by his actions as well as by his words, any abjuration must involve repudiating and reversing these actions, including his nomination of bishops and cardinals who have supported these heresies by their words or actions. Such an admonition is a duty of fraternal charity to the Pope, as well as a duty to the Church," they state.
"If – which God forbid! – Pope Francis does not bear the fruit of true repentance in response to these admonitions, we request that you carry out your duty of office to declare that he has committed the canonical delict of heresy and that he must suffer the canonical consequences of this crime,” they add.
Thus, the authors state, “these actions do not need to be taken by all the bishops of the Catholic Church, or even by a majority of them. A substantial and representative part of the faithful bishops of the Church would have the power to take these actions.”
The full 20-page document may be read here. A select bibliography to support the case made in the open letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church about Pope Francis’ heresies may be read here.
A petition launched by the organizers of the open letter to support their initiative can be found here.
***

Summary of open letter to bishops as presented by the authors themselves:

The Open letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church is the third stage in a process that began in the summer of 2016. At that time, an ad hoc group of Catholic clergy and scholars wrote a private letter to all the cardinals and Eastern Catholic patriarchs, pointing out heresies and other serious errors that appeared to be contained in or favoured by Pope Francis’s Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. The following year, after Pope Francis had continued by word, deed, and omission to propagate many of these same heresies, a ‘Filial Correction’ was addressed to the pope by many of the same people, as well as by other clergy and scholars. This second letter was made public in September 2017, and a petition in support of it was signed by some 14,000 people. The authors of that letter stated however that they did not seek to judge whether Pope Francis was aware that he was causing heresy to spread.
The present Open letter to the bishops of the Catholic Church goes a stage further in claiming that Pope Francis is guilty of the crime of heresy. This crime is committed when a Catholic knowingly and persistently denies something which he knows that the Church teaches to be revealed by God. Taken together, the words and actions of Pope Francis amount to a comprehensive rejection of Catholic teaching on marriage and sexual activity, on the moral law, and on grace and the forgiveness of sins.
 The Open letter also indicates the link between this rejection of Catholic teaching and the favour shown by Pope Francis to bishops and other clergy who have either been guilty of sexual sins and crimes, such as former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, or who have protected clergy guilty of sexual sins and crimes, such as the late Cardinal Godfried Danneels. This protection and promotion of clerics who reject Catholic teaching on marriage, sexual activity, and on the moral law in general, even when these clerics personally violate the moral and civil law in horrendous ways, is consistent enough to be considered a policy on the part of Pope Francis. At the least it is evidence of disbelief in the truth of Catholic teaching on these subjects. It also indicates a strategy to impose rejection of these teachings on the Church, by naming to influential posts individuals whose personal lives are based on violation of these truths.
The authors consider that a heretical papacy may not be tolerated or dissimulated to avoid a worse evil. It strikes at the basic good of the Church and must be corrected. For this reason, the study concludes by describing the traditional theological and legal principles that apply to the present situation. The authors respectfully request the bishops of the Church to investigate the accusations contained in the letter, so that if they judge them to be well founded, they may free the Church from her present distress, in accordance with the hallowed adage, Salus animarum prima lex (‘the salvation of souls is the highest law’). They can do this by admonishing Pope Francis to reject these heresies, and if he should persistently refuse, by declaring that he has freely deprived himself of the papacy.
While this Open letter is an unusual, even historic, document, the Church’s own laws say that “Christ's faithful have the right, and, indeed, sometimes the duty, according to their knowledge, competence, and dignity, to manifest to the sacred pastors their judgment about those things which pertain to the good of the Church” (Code of Canon Law, canon 212.3). While Catholics hold that a pope speaks infallibly in certain strictly defined conditions, the Church does not say that he cannot fall into heresy outside these conditions.
The signatories to the Open Letter include not only specialists in theology and philosophy, but also academics and scholars from other fields. This fits well with the central claim of the Open Letter, that Pope Francis’s rejection of revealed truths is evident to any well-instructed Catholic who is willing to examine the evidence. The signatures of Fr Aidan Nichols OP and of Professor John Rist will be noted. Fr Nichols is one of the best-known theologians in the English-speaking world, and the author of many books on a wide range of theological topics, including the work of Hans Urs von Balthasar and Joseph Ratzinger. Professor Rist, who is known for his work in classical philosophy and the history of theology, has held chairs and professorships at the University of Toronto, the Augustinianum in Rome, the Catholic University of America, the University of Aberdeen, and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
The Open Letter is released just after the celebration of Holy Week and Easter Week, in the hopes that the present ‘passion’ of the Church will soon give way to a full resurrection of God’s saving truth.
Clergy and academics who wish to sign the open letter may send their name and credentials to organizers at this email address: openlettertobishops@gmail.com.  All requests will be thoroughly vetted.
List of signers:
  • Georges Buscemi, President of Campagne Québec-Vie, member of the John-Paul II Academy for Human Life and Family
  • Robert Cassidy, STL
  • Fr Thomas Crean, OP
  • Matteo d’Amico, Professor of History and Philosophy, Senior High School of Ancona
  • Deacon Nick Donnelly, MA
  • Maria Guarini STB, Pontificia Università Seraphicum, Rome; editor of the website Chiesa e postconcilio
  • Prof. Robert Hickson, PhD, Retired Professor of Literature and of Strategic-Cultural Studies
  • Fr John Hunwicke, former Senior Research Fellow, Pusey House, Oxford
  • Peter Kwasniewski, PhD
  • John Lamont, DPhil (Oxon.)
  • Brian M. McCall, Orpha and Maurice Merrill Professor in Law; Editor-in-Chief of Catholic Family News
  • Fr Cor Mennen, JCL, diocese of ‘s-Hertogenbosch (Netherlands), canon of the cathedral Chapter. lecturer at de diocesan Seminary of ‘s-Hertogenbosch
  • Stéphane Mercier, STB, PhD, Former Lecturer at the Catholic University of Louvain
  • Fr Aidan Nichols, OP
  • Paolo Pasqualucci, Professor of Philosophy (retired), University of Perugia
  • Dr. Claudio Pierantoni, Professor of Medieval Philosophy, University of Chile; former Professor of Church History and Patrology at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile
  • Professor John Rist
  • Dr. Anna Silvas, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, Faculty of Humanities, Arts, Social Sciences and Education, University of New England
  • Prof. dr. W.J. Witteman, physicist, emeritus professor, University of Twente

Monday, April 29, 2019

Bergoglio Distributes $500K to Pro Gay illegals Migrants on US Border

Raises questions whether philanthropic or meant to embarrass Trump

News broke from the Vatican over the weekend that Pope Francis had donated $500,000 to assist the plight of migrants massed on the U.S.-Mexico border. The funds — raised from the Catholic Peter's Pence Collection — will fund 27 projects sponsored by 16 Mexican dioceses that will provide food, shelter and other necessities to approximately 75,000 stranded migrant families and individuals.
But the Pope's philanthropy is perceived suspiciously by Michael Hichborn, president of The Lepanto Institute.
"I'm not sure, exactly, what Pope Francis is hoping to achieve," he wrote in an email to Church Militant. "The money was ostensibly sent to 'house and feed' the 75,000 'stranded migrants.' But $500,000 divided among them is $6.66, which is just enough to buy everyone there a single Whopper meal at Burger King."
Hichborn continued: "This has all the appearance of an expensive publicity stunt aimed at poking the United States in the eye, but all it will really accomplish is proving that you can't just throw money at a problem and expect it to fix things."
An outspoken critic of current U.S. immigration policies, the Pope has made pointed barbs against President Donald Trump's goal to construct a barrier on the border separating the United States and Mexico.
For example, the Pope supported the 14,000-member caravan initiated in Honduras last November, which required the United States to deploy an additional 800 soldiers on the border to maintain control. The number of immigrants has proven tremendously burdensome on the Mexican border towns and has caused a humanitarian crisis.
This has all the appearance of an expensive publicity stunt aimed at poking the United States in the eye.Tweet
Last month, Francis went even further. After making veiled comparisons of Trump to Adolf Hitler, the Pontiff declared, "Builders of walls, whether they are of razor-wire or brick, will become prisoners of the walls they build. That's history."
He added: "[W]e need bridges and we feel pain when we see people who prefer to build walls." Conservative pundits noted the Vatican is protected by a wall.
The surge in migration to the U.S. southern border includes former residents of El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala.
Speaking to The Washington Post last October, U.S. Vice President Mike Pence said he was told by Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández that the caravans were financed by the Marxist government of Venezuela.
Pence continued Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro funded the caravan in retaliation for unsubstantiated charges the United States attempted to assassinate him. Pence stated:
People that are driving this caravan north to challenge our sovereignty, to challenge our borders, are doing so without any regard for human life and doing advance some political statement, or in the case of human traffickers, strictly for financial profit. The president is absolutely determined to use all means at his disposal to organize efforts to have Mexico turn this caravan around. ...
It is inconceivable that there would not be individuals from the Middle East as a part of this growing caravan. What the President is determined to do is put the safety and security of the American people first, and I know the President will be addressing this in the coming days about ways we need to close the loopholes that human traffickers and other dangerous individuals used to entice vulnerable families to make the long and dangerous trek north.
According to an April 10 report in The New York Times:
The immigration courts now have more than 800,000 pending cases; each one takes an average of 700 days to process. And because laws and court rulings aimed at protecting children prohibit jailing young people for more than 20 days, families are often simply released. They are dropped off at downtown bus stations in places like Brownsville, Tex., where dozens last week sat on gray metal benches, most without money or even laces on their shoes, heading for destinations across the United States.
The same article claimed an estimated 100,000 migrants arrive at the border each month, which adds up to 1 million individuals attempting to cross the border into the United States over the past calendar year. Twenty-seven thousand children are estimated to trek over the U.S. border in April alone.
Additionally, according to the newspaper, migrant families rose 560% between February 2018 and February 2019.
Kishore Jayabalan, director of the Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty's office in Rome, wrote earlier this month: "The weakness of institutional Christianity is perhaps one reason why mass immigration has become a political crisis: There is no mediator between open-border globalism and ethnic nationalism."

Friday, April 26, 2019

Bergoglio mocks the papacy instituted by Christ



St. Thomas Cajetan, O.P. (1469-1534)
Theologian and Cardinal

He points out that the famous axiom "Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia" (Where the Pope is, there is also the Church) holds true only when the Pope acts and behaves as the Pope, because Peter "is subject to the duties of the Office" otherwise, "neither is the Church in him, nor is he in the Church."




Jerome: I suppose the gates of hell to mean vice and sin, or at least the doctrines of heretics by which men are ensnared and drawn into hell. 
Origen: But in heavenly things every spiritual sin is a gate of hell, to which are opposed the gates of righteousness. 
Raban.: The gates of hell are the torments and promises of the persecutors. Also, the evil works of the unbelievers, and vain conversation, are gates of hell, because they shew the path of destruction. 

Origen: Wherefore if we, by the revelation of our Father who is in heaven, shall confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, having also our conversation in heaven, to us also shall be said, "Thou art Peter;" for every one is a Rock who is an imitator of Christ. But against whomsoever the gates of hell prevail, he is neither to be called a rock upon which Christ builds His Church; neither a Church, or part of the Church, which Christ builds upon a rock. 


Bergoglio is a heretic therefore he can not be a legitimate pope but a usurper because otherwise the gates of hell would have prevailed.


Related:

Horror Missae: Easter Sunday in Lecce: Pastor disguises himself as an Easter egg


Thursday, April 25, 2019

Francis’s House Liturgist: “Limit Access to the Traditional Rite”


Andrea Grillo, the liturgist who is heard by Pope Francis, prefers to dispose of Summorum Pontificum today rather than tomorrow and is looking for crown witnesses.


(Rome) In the spirit of its political analogues, the ecclesiastical left demands the end of freedom. The liturgical scientist Andrea Grillo, a dogged opponent of the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, who finds an open ear in the Italian Episcopal Conference and in Santa Marta, is calling for stricter access to the traditional rite.


The free exercise of religion for believers and especially priests of the tradition should, according to the liturgist Andrea Grillo, be restricted. As reason for his demand he identifies the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, that of Pope Benedict XVI., adopted in 2007. Summorum Pontificum, which have a homeland to the traditional form of the Roman rite, leads, according to Grillo, to an "ever more paralyzing embarrassment" in the Corpus ecclesiae, which is why it urgently needs a return to a unified rite - and that could only be the Novus Ordo.

Andrea Grillo teaches liturgical sciences at the Roman Pontifical Athenaeum Sant'Anselmo of the Benedictine Order. He is not an isolated gambler, but is much appreciated in Santa Marta as a kind of "house liturgist" by Pope Francis.

Hate object Summorum Pontificum

In mid-2017, he attacked Cardinal Robert Sarah, Prefect of the Roman Congregation for Worship and the Order of the Sacraments, with unbelievable severity. He insulted the Cardinal for being "incompetent" and "unsuited" for his office. At the same time, he accused Benedict XVI, whom he called only "Ratzinger", of being the cause of the Church's "failure".


Grillo's enemy image of the traditional rite

The wrath of the Novus Ordo liturgist was challenged by Cardinal Sarah's persistent call to all priests to return to the East or ad Deum celebrations, as well as Benedict XVI's. ordered reform of Missal translations in the vernacular languages.

Grillo is a key figure of the inner-Church secret commission that Pope Francis established in late 2016. He works behind the back of Cardinal Sarah, the prefect responsible, but with the consent of Pope Francis at an "ecumenical Mass". It would be the definitive "liturgical revolution" after the radical liturgical reform of 1969, as Riccardo Cascioli, the editor-in-chief of Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, wrote in June 2017.

The existence of this commission, which was revealed by the Vatican Marco Tosatti on December 26, 2016, has not been confirmed by the Vatican, but denied at the end of 2017. The corresponding rumors and hints persist, however, and do not allow any reasonable doubt as to the existence of this liturgical commission. In January 2017, Spanish columnist Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña even revealed the names of the commissioners - including Andrea Grillo.

Grillo is one of those in the papal entourage who is worried about a "renunciation of renunciation." What if Benedict XVI, who has continued to maintain his pope's name and numerous visible signs of papal dignity, resigns from his resignation and reclaims his powers as pope? Such an option seems increasingly unlikely due to age. Nevertheless, Grillo hinted at what might happen if Pope Francis was to die and to be replaced by Benedict XVI. The fear of a possible reaction of Benedict drives the liturgist, to ever new, increasingly explosive attacks. Nothing will change that as long as the German church leader lives.

While others are silent, Cardinal Sarah replied on 6 June 2017 to the attacks against Benedict XVI .:

"The arrogance, the violence of the language, the lack of respect and the inhuman contempt for Benedict XVI. are diabolical and cover the Church with a cloak of sadness




and shame. The people destroy the Church and its deeper nature. The Christian does not fight anyone. He has no enemies to defeat. "

At the same time, he emphasized that before and after the Council, the Church was and always must be the same Church, because there is no Church with two identities.

A hard patch for the traditional rite

Italy has always been a hard patch for the traditional rite. There are several reasons for this. The Italians as a Mediterranean people are quite emotional, but not dogmatic. In addition, the bond with Rome is a matter of course. The change from Vetus to Novus Ordo was correspondingly untraumatic. And corresponding difficulties are encountered by the faithful of the traditional rite for obtaining Mass locations. The bishops are largely deaf to their wishes.

There is also another factor: the massive presence of a strictly Moscow-based Communist Party and another galaxy surrounding other Marxist parties and organizations after the Second World War made a part of Catholicism eager to seek an alliance between socialism and Christianity and to accept the corresponding politicization. As a result, the Catholic world and its institutions have gradually been interspersed and disintegrated since the 1960s.

This alliance became apparent when, on 1 June 2018, the new Italian government of the Five-Star Movement and Lega was sworn in. They took power, like family minister Lorenzo Fontana. Andrea Grillo lunged at him with incredible vehemence. What makes Fontana the hate object of a liturgist? He is opposed to abortion, mass immigration, gay marriage, gender ideology and visits Mass every Sunday in the traditional rite.

Grillo initiated a conflict  and employed choice words that were previously known only by the radical left. He cursed Fontana as a "fascist" and wrote on Twitter:

Summorum Pontificum is "fascism"

"One of the requirements for Fontana's fascism is Summorum Pontificum. Memento ... "

In other words, the "home liturgist" of Pope Francis sees Summorum Pontificum as an expression of "fascism" and implicitly also Benedict XVI. as "fascists.” Grillos' verbal derailment reveals the radical nature of the unholy fusion of left-catholicism with the left-leaning left - especially in the language. The fact that he was not condemned or even reprimanded by the episcopal side or by the university where he teaches, clarifies the drama of the inner-church situation.

Fontana reacted calmly:

"The hatred of the elites does not scare me."

Crown witness Hans Urs von Balthasar

In recent months, the attacks on Summorum Pontificum in Italy have become more conspicuous, so conspicuous. It is unclear whether this is an organized thrust. Recently, Andrea Grillo also participated in this with an essay on his blog. The blog Come se non, parked on the website of Munera - a European Cultural Magazine, highlights how pinned Grillo is to the enemy image of the Summorum Pontificum, to which numerous entries are devoted.

Hans Urs von Balthasar Little Primer for the Unsettled Laity (1980)

On February 18, he led Hans Urs von Balthasar as a witness for the necessary and legitimate "end of Vetus Ordo" in the field. In his book "Little Primer for the Unsettled Layman," published in 1980, Balthasar states "with great clarity" that the traditional rite "was definitively overcome by the liturgical reform". Balthasar writes that against all criticism of the "traditionalists", whom he accuses of "sectarian" behavior, everything ultimately speaks "for the Council Church and against the traditionalists.” The Holy Mass required an urgent renewal, especially the participatio actuosa of all believers in the sacred action, which was a matter of course in the first century. The Roman canon had remained unchanged and Communion received while standing  in the hand was common until the 9th century.

Traditionalism, on the other hand, does not lean on living theology and philosophy, and for that very reason it can not claim validity today. Balthasar refers to the view of various theologians, including Joseph Ratzinger, that the traditional rite could have survived a transitional period parallel to the Novus Ordo, but then dissolved in an "organic" way and will would completely replaced by the New Rite.

So far, these are some aspects that led Balthasar in his writing. Not only do they inspire Grillo, because Balthasar can not be dismissed as a "progressive", as the liturgist emphasizes in his remarks. It is likely to encourage him because Balthasar in his remarks is repeatedly called upon by the then theologian and Archbishop of Munich-Freising, Joseph Ratzinger.

Grillos quarantine claims

Grillo draws from this his conclusions. In "Ratzinger's autobiography,”  he attributed the liturgical form to a "supplementary character" and described the Tridentine rite in the version of 1962 as "inviolable". But Balthasar's remarks would emphasize, with reference to Ratzinger, that the liturgical reform of 1969 was an "inescapable necessity," even though the previous form of the Roman rite in a "provisional and limited" wat could continue to enjoy protection. Grillo's quintessence:

Ordinary for Liturgical Sciences at the Benedictine School of Sant'Anselmo in Rome
Professor of Liturgy at the Benedictine School of Sant'Anselmo in Rome

"If one hears the words of Balthasar again at an interval of 40 years, they point out the only possible way to get out of an increasingly paralyzing embarrassment."

From this the liturgical scientist formulates his demands:

-The upswing of liturgical reform can not take place unless all work on a single rite.

-Access to the previous rite is destined to extinguish,  and can only be performed in exceptional circumstances, under the supervision of the locally competent authority.

-The "development" of the new rite, with all the corrections and necessary promotions, can only be done at a "single table": there is no other possibility that forms two rites, one of which has arisen to replace the other, other than division, disruption and discord.

Finally, Andrea Grillo triggers the guillotine:

"He [Balthasar] knew already 40 years ago that the model of 'structural rite parallelism' was not an ecclesiastical rematch of the past versus the future, but the sectarian delirium of a past that has no future."

It is "extremely worrying" that a man like Andrea Grillo is heard by Pope Francis, said  in early 2017, the Spanish columnist Francisco Fernandez de la Cigoña.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Munera / Come non / NLM (Screenshots)
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Bergoglian modernist Claims That Vatican Backs Him in Fighting Tridentine Mass

en.news The ordeal of the faithful in Cremona, Italy, started when in March 2009 more than one hundred of them asked for an Old Mass but then-bishop Dante Lafranconi, 79, rejected them.

The years went by, the Commission Ecclesia Dei got involved, and the priest ready to say Mass died.

Finally, forty Catholics took things into their own hands starting a monthly Old Mass in a private chapel. The new bishop, Antonio Napolioni, 61, killed it after two months.

A new initiative started in January 2017, when the faithful informed Napolioni that they had found a church and a priest willing to celebrate Mass. Napolioni rejected their request.

In spring 2018 another priest started saying the Old Mass. Around 60, mostly young people, attended. But in February 2019, Napolioni stopped it, contradicting Benedict XVI's Summorum Pontificium.

During a recent parish meeting, Napolioni declared that he will never allow the Old Mass in his diocese and that his decision is backed by the Vatican.

Now the last word is with the Vatican.


Italian 'Bishop' doubles down on ban of traditional Latin Mass 


Bergoglio in Argentina began abusing the ecclesiastical power to persecute priests faithful to the Magisterium and to the Catholic tradition.





A Buenos Aires journalist describes Bergoglio
Marcelo González:

Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and morals seem to have been irrelevant to him.

A sworn enemy of the Traditional Mass, he has only allowed imitations of it in the hands of declared enemies of the ancient liturgy. He has persecuted every single priest who made an effort to wear a cassock, preach with firmness, or that was simply interested in Summorum Pontificum.

Famous for his inconsistency (at times, for the unintelligibility of his addresses and homilies), accustomed to the use of coarse, demagogical, and ambiguous expressions, it cannot be said that his magisterium is heterodox, but rather non-existent for how confusing it is.

His entourage in the Buenos Aires Curia, with the exception of a few clerics, has not been characterized by the virtue of their actions. Several are under grave suspicion of moral misbehavior... This election is incomprehensible: he is not a polyglot, he has no Curial experience, he does not shine for his sanctity, he is loose in doctrine and liturgy, he has not fought against abortion and only very weakly against homosexual "marriage" [approved with practically no opposition from the episcopate], he has no manners to honor the Pontifical Throne. He has never fought for anything else than to remain in positions of power.







Translated by Vox Cantoris:

Bergoglio: The Seven Plagues from Egypt for the Argentine Church
Francisco José Fernández de la Cigoña

Sagrada Tradición 

An Argentine reader, undoubtedly overestimating the strength of the Blog, asks me for help that on my own doing is not going to proceed. And more so, agreeing that Cardinal Bergoglio is the most directly responsible for the current decline of the Church in Argentina.

There is exactly a year, three months and a day -seems to be a criminal conviction- so that the archbishop of Buenos Aires may present the resignation of his archdiocese, or of what remains of it, to the Holy Father. I hope it’s accepted immediately.

And Bergoglio has not only been a calamity for his archiepiscopate, but has extended his evil influence to the whole nation over whose Church prevails for soul’s perdition.

This is the letter of the unknown Argentine friend:


Dear Don Paco Pepe:

I know that you do not have much time, but I have not been able to synthesize more what I want to tell you, I beg you to have the patience to read it until the end:

I have been following your blog for a long time, not remembering very well if I have ever written to you.

Our blog, Catholic Page, is dedicated mainly to provide the audio of the Sunday sermons and some conferences of very good Catholic authors.


But at the same time, I was personally in charge of a Chapel in the Buenos Aires archdiocese (at the request of the previous parish priest), called the Sacred Heart of Jesus. The last four years, with the effort of neighbors, families with many children in general, the chapel that had been closed for 25 years lived the splendor of the traditional liturgy (Novus Ordo in Latin, Gregorian chant, kneeling Communion, etc.). To the point where there was no place for the people who filled the path. Such ceremonies are almost never seen in Buenos Aires. I remember an old woman who said, "How beautiful! It's the same as watching the Pope's Mass on TV." With this you can have an idea of what the Chapel used to be.

The RP Dr. Alfredo Sáenz, SJ celebrated mass regularly. He is one of the most lucid minds of the local and American Catholicism. Author of more than 50 books and international speaker. In a recent trip to Rome where he was one of the experts convened by the Pontifical Council for Culture, which sponsored a Congress on the Church and American Emancipation, he visited Cardinal Cañizares and told him about the "experiment" of the Chapel, for which he received congratulations from both the Cardinal and Mons. Ferrer.

Then more celebrants were added, some four in total, which made it possible for 4 years not to miss the Holy Mass any Sunday or feast of precept, including Holy Week celebrations. 

With this background I want to tell you three episodes.


1 Prohibition of the Tridentine Mass in 2007:

That year, after the publication of the Motu Proprio, we went to the former parish priest, Father Carlos White, to ask him to give place to the Tridentine Mass in our chapel, without canceling the Novus Ordo. He said yes, so that on October 14, 2007, a very solemn Mass was sung. Another was foreseen for the 28th of the same month, but Cardinal Bergoglio (whose plan on the subject didn’t match with this mass), ordered to close it definitively, which was communicated to us by the Parochial Vicar, by the Chaplain of the traditionalists here, by the Pastor and by the Episcopal Vicar of the Zone (always by word). As a result, we had the suspension of the Tridentine Mass in October 2007 until now.


2 Closing of the Sacred Heart Chapel in 2010:

After this outrage, the neighbors decided to remain silent (not to go to Ecclesia Dei) because, knowing the persecutory ways of Bergoglio, we prefer to stay with the Novus Ordo in Latin and as the Church commands, and not risk what we had for the Tridentine Mass. Thus we live in peace for three more years.

But in March 2010 the parish priest changed (Father White left the Archdiocese to the south of Buenos Aires, about 2,000 Km. It is clear that he did not get along well with the Cardinal). The new priest, a man who can be quietly placed within the Third World movement, was not happy with the ways of the chapel and reluctantly tolerated them until, in disagreement with a Corpus Christi procession that had been done for four years and that was not forbidden, interrupted the ceremony and finally closed the chapel, throwing the neighbors and leaving the neighborhood in the hands of the Protestant sects that patrol it.


3 New request for Tridentine Mass in 2010:

As a means of defending our rights, more than 100 faithful who for four years had attended there, integrating a perfectly formed and stable group, we request by letter the application of the Motu Proprio to the parish priest. He replied that it will not be granted because the Cardinal does not allow it (always by word, they do not write when they misbehave). The Zonal Bishop told me exactly the same thing that the cardinal does not allow them. We then turned to the Cardinal who has not answered us for more than a month, despite the repeated calls we made searching for him.


We are about to appeal to Ecclesia Dei these days.

All these events are detailed in our blog (Except the suspension of the Tridentine Mass of 2007 that we will do shortly). We have even published the audio of the interruption of the ceremony that made the parish priest to scold us.

If something of this comes out on your blog, I think it will be a great pressure to try to have Justice restored in our Archdiocese, where progressivism is devastating the Church.

If you have time watch two videos that we publish of a procession of Christ Rey 2009 to give an idea of what happened here. This will no longer be seen on the streets of Buenos Aires.

I have 52 years and 7 children of my only wife with whom I have been married for more than 22 years.