Tridentine Community News - List of canonized Popes; Local TLM Mass schedule

"I will go in unto the Altar of God
To God, Who giveth joy to my youth"
Tridentine Community News by Alex Begin (September 10, 2017):

September 10, 2017 - Fourteenth Sunday After Pentecost

A List of Canonized Popes


Holy Mother Church gives us the Feast of All Holy Popes each year on either July 3 or July 4, to commemorate all canonized popes. It is instructive to know which of history’s chief shepherds have been raised to the state of sainthood. With credit to the A Catholic Life blog, we present a list of all of the sainted Holy Fathers. The author of that blog makes the sound suggestion that we make a Litany out of this list, adding “pray for us” or “ora pro nobis” as we read through the names.

1. St. Peter (32-67)
2. St. Linus (67-76)
3. St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
4. St. Clement I (88-97)
5. St. Evaristus (97-105)
6. St. Alexander I (105-115)
7. St. Sixtus I (115-125)
8. St. Telesphorus (125-136)
9. St. Hyginus (136-140)
10. St. Pius I (140-155)
11. St. Anicetus (155-166)
12. St. Soter (166-175)
13. St. Eleutherius (175-189)
14. St. Victor I (189-199)
15. St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
16. St. Callistus I (217-22)
17. St. Urban I (222-30)
18. St. Pontain (230-35)
19. St. Anterus (235-36)
20. St. Fabian (236-50)
21. St. Cornelius (251-53)
22. St. Lucius I (253-54)
23. St. Stephen I (254-257)
24. St. Sixtus II (257-258)
25. St. Dionysius (260-268)
26. St. Felix I (269-274)
27. St. Eutychian (275-283)
28. St. Caius (283-296)
29. St. Marcellinus (296-304)
30. St. Marcellus I (308-309)
31. St. Eusebius (309 or 310)
32. St. Miltiades (311-14)
33. St. Sylvester I (314-35)
34. St. Marcus (336)
35. St. Julius I (337-52)
36. St. Damasus I (366-83)
37. St. Siricius (384-99)
38. St. Anastasius I (399-401)
39. St. Innocent I (401-17)
40. St. Zosimus (417-18)
41. St. Boniface I (418-22)
42. St. Celestine I (422-32)
43. St. Sixtus III (432-40)
44. St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61)
45. St. Hilarius (461-68)
46. St. Simplicius (468-83)
47. St. Felix III (II) (483-92)
48. St. Gelasius I (492-96)
49. St. Symmachus (498-514)
50. St. Hormisdas (514-23)
51. St. John I (523-26)
52. St. Felix IV (III) (526-30)
53. St. Agapetus I (535-36)
54. St. Silverius (536-37)
55. St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604)
56. St. Boniface IV (608-15)
57. St. Deusdedit (Adeodatus I) (615-18)
58. St. Martin I (649-55)
59. St. Eugene I (655-57)
60. St. Vitalian (657-72)
61. St. Agatho (678-81)
62. St. Leo II (682-83)
63. St. Benedict II (684-85)
64. St. Sergius I (687-701)
65. St. Gregory II (715-31)
66. St. Gregory III (731-41)
67. St. Paul I (757-67)
68. St. Leo III (795-816)
69. St. Paschal I (817-24)
70. St. Leo IV (847-55)
71. St. Adrian III (884-85)
72. St. Leo IX (1049-54)
73. St. Celestine V (1294)
74. St. Pius V (1566-72)
75. St. Pius X (1903-14)
76. St. John Paul II (1978-2005)

Tridentine Masses This Coming Week

• Mon. 09/11 7:00 PM: Low Mass at St. Josaphat (Ss. Protus & Hyacinth, Martyrs)
• Tue. 09/12 7:00 PM: High Mass at Rosary Chapel at Assumption Church, Windsor (Most Holy Name of Mary) – Note special location for Mass this week only. All are invited to a reception after Mass in the lower level social hall of Holy Name of Mary Church. [Holy Name of Mary Church itself is being used for an Ordinary Form Mass for its titular Feast Day this evening]
• Sat. 09/16 8:30 AM: Low Mass at Miles Christi (Ss. Cornelius, Pope, & Cyprian, Bishop, Martyrs)

[Comments? Please e-mail tridnews@detroitlatinmass.org. Previous columns are available at http://www.detroitlatinmass.org. This edition of Tridentine Community News, with minor editions, is from the St. Albertus (Detroit), Academy of the Sacred Heart (Bloomfield Hills), and St. Alphonsus and Holy Name of Mary Churches (Windsor) bulletin inserts for September 10, 2017. Hat tip to Alex Begin, author of the column.]

"All words have lost their meanings now."

For a man whose favorite mode of communication seems to be carrier pigeons, our underground correspondent somewhere in an Atlantic seaboard state, Guy Noir - Private Eye, seems surprisingly savvy about contemporary electronic technology. He used some sort of messenger app on his smart phone (didn't know he even had one) to contact me today as I was sitting at my computer. All of a sudden, there he was, bushy beard and all. One might have mistaken him for one of them mountain men up in the hollers of the Appalachian mountains.

Anyway, he blurts out: "Peter Kreeft has a new book out on world religions. [This is the one I think he had in mind.] At Amazon, one reviewer calls him an 'exclusivist.'"

At which point Noir, without letting me get a word in edgewise, contorts his bearded face and simply yells into his phone: "TO WHICH I REPLY, ALL WORDS HAVE LOST THEIR MEANINGS NOW!"

"Well, what do you mean?" says I.

And he replies: "I esteem Kreeft and his writing, but he engates in wishful thinking and his solutions are compromises of the Wojtyla-Ratzinger-Bergoglio sort."

"Whaaaa???" says I.

"They do not solve problems but amplify them," says he. "Ratzinger has a book called Faith and the Future, which is like a political pamphlet in its effort to please."



"This is more on point ..." says he, "old but useful." And he sends me while still on messenger (don't ask how, I wouldn't know), sending me a link to this article by Stan Guthrie, "Whose Submission? A Muslim-Christian dialogue," a critical review of Kreeft's Between Allah and Jesus: What Christians Can Learn from Muslims from some years back.

Guthrie begins his review by quoting the first line of Kreeft's earlier classic, Between Heaven and Hell, about three luminaries -- John F. Kennedy, Aldous Huxley, and C. S. Lewis -- who each died on November 22, 1963. In the first line from that book, JFK asks, "Where the hell are we?"

Guthrie observes that he had a similar reaction after reading Kreeft's later work, Between Allah and Jesuss, noting that it seems to stand the earlier one on its head, making a Muslim protagonist "a stand-in for the Lord," even having him claim to be "a better Christian than his Christian foils." Of course, given the state of Christian catechesis these days, this may not be too far from the truth in some cases.

In any case, Kreeft, Guthrie, and Noir all raise an important question to think about: Have our words lost all their meanings now, or, at least, are we in danger of our words losing their meaning? If we accept von Balthasar or Fr. Barron's hypothesis that hell could be empty, or nearly empty, for example, has our use of the word 'salvation' or 'redemption' lost all meaning? It's a fair question. And the same could be asked of our 'pastoral' use of words like 'love,' 'mercy,' and 'forgiveness,' in venues where there is almost no reference to 'repentance' or 'contrition.' If all religions present genuine paths to God and all non-Christians, Protestants, and members of sectarian religious cults have a reasonable expectation of finding themselves in heaven in the world to come, then what's the point of converting to the Catholic Faith? For that matter, what's the point of the New Evangelization? Sweet, merciful Jesus could be so severe at times:

Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. (Matthew 7:13-14)

Poverty of spirit: different Papal styles

In his Vicars of Christ: A History of the Popes(Arcadia: Tumblar House, 2014), 380-90, Charles Coulombe makes the following insightful observation about the difference in 'style' between Benedict XVI and Francis:

The generation of westerners of which [Francis] is a part was marked -- in Church, State, and indeed, in every field -- by what can only be called a sort of "personalization" of authority. That is to say, that the traditional division in perception between an office and the current holder of that office -- which allowed people of wildly differing, sometimes even opposed, views to collaborate out of shared respect for the office under whose direction they functioned -- has been blurred or even obliterated. Such folk, when in authority, tend to downgrade or do away with traditional symbols of their office while emphasizing their own personalities in pursuit of some nebulous "authenticity." So it is that morning dress and uniforms disappear from presidential inauguration and legislatives openings, and royals love to appear in casual wear. The difficulty with such an approach is that it tends to weaken respect for the office in the eyes of its subjects, who in turn begin to believe that their loyalty to it is dependent purely on their personal feelings for the occupant of the moment. Seeing the problems this had created, Benedict XVI began to restore the symbolic side of the Papacy, for all that formalism and display ran extremely counter to his nature. But it is not an issue that one of Francis's generation could be expected to understand -- quite the contrary.... Despite the lack of tiara noted earlier, piece by piece [Pope Benedict] restored bits of the papal wardrobe that his immediate predecessors had discarted: the fur-lined mozzetta, the camauro, the fanon, and -- most annoying to some -- the traditional red shoes, symbolizing the fact that as Pope he walked in the footsteps of the martyrs.

Commenting on this passage, Prof. Peter A. Kwasniewski writes about Benedict:

This humble Bavarian who shied away from the limelight saw that it was necessary to elevate and accentuate the sacramental iconicity of the pontiff in order to move beyond the cult of personality inadvertently started by John XXIII and vastly augmented in the charismatic athlete, actor, poet, and playwright of John Paul II. With Pope Francis, we see a return both of the cult of personality and of the false conception of poverty, this time applied not only to liturgy but also to doctrine itself.

By "poverty of doctrine," Kwasniewski explains, "I refer to the superficiality, messiness, ambiguities, contradictions, and unclarity of this pope's teaching, in contrast to the rich truthfulness of those of his predecessors who take seriously the Lord's command to 'let what you say be simply 'yes' or 'no' (Mt 5:37); cf. 2 Cor. 1:17-19, Jas. 5:12. (Peter A. Kwasniewski, "True Poverty of Spirit in the Splendor of Worship," The Latin Mass: The Journal of Catholic Culture and Tradition, Vol. 26, No. 2 (Summer 2017), p. 14.

"Pope Francis, pray for us"???

Commenting on Confitebor's observations about the shameless papalotry represented by this pewter cross in a Catholic religious store -- a cross bearing the image of the Holy Father and the words, "Pope Francis, pray for us" -- Guy Noir - Private Eye, now our mid-Atlantic Piedmont correspondent, declared:

If every recent pope ends up canonized, what should we expect?

The cult of the saints becomes "cult like," encouraging veneration of people that ought to go to God's Son.

I used to think canonizations were exercises in papal infallibility. That confidence has been completely eroded. The modern Church has pushed its credibility on this score past the breaking point, with John Paul II himself, sadly, leading the way via removing the Devil's Advocate. Another example of how the Church's leaders do not seem overly keen to protect its enduring credibility in an age of disbelief. I just don't get it. Sanctity should not need overly aggressive PR hacks.

De Mattei: When public correction of a pope is urgent and necessary

"De Mattei: When public correction of a pope is urgent and necessary" (Rorate Caeli, February 22, 2017). Excerpt:

At Antioch, St. Peter showed profound humility, St. Paul ardent charity. The Apostle to the Gentiles showed that he was not only just but [also] merciful. Among the works of spiritual mercy there is the correction of sinners, called by moralists “fraternal correction”. It is private if the sin is private and public if the sin is public. Jesus Himself established the manner: “But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. (Mat. 18, 15-18).”

We can imagine [then] that after having tried to convince St. Peter privately, Paul did not hesitate in admonishing him publically, but – says St. Thomas – “since St. Peter had sinned in front of everyone, he had to be reproached in front of everyone” (In 4 Sententiarum, Dist. 19, q. 2, a. 3, tr. it., ESD, Bologna 1999).

[Hat tip to E. Echeverria]

Related:

• Phil Lawler, "This Diastrous Papacy" (CatholicCulture.org, March 1, 2017)
  
  
• Philip Willan, "Anti-Reform Cardinals 'Want the Pope to Quit'" (Times of London, March 2, 2017).

Bishop Athanasius Schneider on the Social Kingship of Christ

By all accounts, this is one of the best recent presentations on the subject to be found. The first video is the presentation. The second is the Q & A. Enjoy.



[Hat tip to Sir A.S.]

Tiptoeing through the Catholic tulips

The underground correspondent we keep on retainer in an Atlantic seaboard city that knows how to keep its secrets, Guy Noir - Private Eye, sent us a message by courier pigeon today, which read as follows:

Like Ann Coulter, MM can be an articulate ass.

So what, so can I! And so can be every single cleric we are forced to humor, including or especially the popes.

And so, let's agree that sometimes she makes her points.

Twice here...

First (regardless of the rust of the piece, this)

"Oh, please! There comes a time to grant a bit of credit to Mae West: “Between two evils, I always choose the one I haven’t tried before.”

http://studiomatters.com/catholic-case-donald-trump

(see graphic of HC on ice)

And then this beauty, which partially explains the popularity of a blowhard like Trump. I mean, how much Vatican II-like crap can any real man or woman stomach, anyway?:

"All the tiptoeing, the pussyfooting, the if-you-please-your-Majesty gets in the way of the truth of things."

Quite.

http://studiomatters.com/speak-nice-power

Sigh. O Tempora, O mores!

Of papal memoirs and gay lobbies

Commenting on Philip Pullella's report from the Vatican, "In memoirs, ex Pope Benedict says Vatican 'gay lobby' tried to wield power: report" (Reuters: Breaking News, July 1, 2016), our underground correspondent, Guy Noir - Private Eye, declares:

So much for remaining hidden. For some reason, I have little more interest in reading this than I do Hillary's "Living History." Popes should not write memoirs, any more, I increasingly think, than they ought to be granting serial interviews. In a crass conflating of categories, it "cheapens the brand." Weren't Ganswein's observations enough already? Our leaders might actually all serve us best by a season of silence.

Food for thought.

Star-struck popes confirm "hermeneutic of continuity"!

Doubtless you've heard about how Salma Hayek, Richard Gere, and George Clooney were feted and awarted with medals by Pope Francis recently to promote the work of a foundation inspired by the pontiff, Scholas Occurrentes. "Important values can be transmitted by celebrities," said one of the organizers, Lorena Bianchetti. There's a short video from the event at this site.

Now comes the intrepid Amateur Brain Surgeon, founder of ABE Ministries, with balm for the wounds of wounded conservative and traditionalist Catholic souls. First, from a book entitled Shepherd of Souls: A Pictorial Life of Pope Pius XII, he points to a page showing how Pius XII was a movie buff, a fan of Clark Gable, and, writes the author:

When the movie King of Hollywood, his wife and daughter were granted a private audience, the subsequent callers were kept waiting in the reception hall for two hours. When Clark Gable's visit ended, Bishop Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli followed. This bishop is now known as Pope John XXIII.

Finally, from the May 9, 1967 issue of the Sydney Morning Herald, ABS quotes from an article with a banner photo of Pope Paul with his arms outstretched to welcome actress Claudia Cardinale at a special audience to mark World Social Communications Media Day. The article says:

Claudia Cardinale worse a mini-skirt, Gina Lollobrigida braved her critics, but Sophia Loren couldn't make it to an unprecedented meeting between Pope Paul VI and the world of showbiz yesterday.

... the film stars stole the show -- even from the Pope himself, who was garmented in dazzling white robes.

Claudia was the first to bring gasps when she walked to her seat near the Pope's throne wearing her mini-little black dress.

Miss Cardinale recently married outside Italy a man who is not the father of her son, born when she was unmarried.

The Church forgave her early sins, but not her marriage to a man the Church considers to be still married to his first wife.

Then came Lollobrigida, who, at first, stood in a small crowd and then was escorted to a chair in a reserved section immediately facing the Throne.

On the way a bearded Swiss Guard stopped her, but a horrified officer reprimanded the Guard with: "Obviously, you don't go to the cinema."

Miss Lollobrigida was recently acquitted of an obscenity charge brought over a falling towel scene in her latest film.

But she has also earned the Church's disapproval because of her legal separation from her husband, Milko Skofic.

... But Miss Loren, who has been embroiled for years in an alleged bigamy case over her marriage to producer Carlo Ponti, disappointed the crowd by preferring to continue work on a film, although invited.

Fr. Perrone: candid thoughts when popes err

Fr. Eduard Perrone, "A Pastor's Descant" [temporary link] (Assumption Grotto News, March 6, 2016):

The Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals. This is a dogmatic truth which no Catholic can deny and yet remain a Catholic, united to the one true Church. Yet it is evident that Pope Francis erred recently in speaking about an exceptional use of a contraceptive for married couples in order to avert a disease which may cause birth defects in pregnant women. (For the record: the context here was the use only within the marital relationship; outside of marriage, contraception is of no further moral consequence because the act is already sinful.) How we do reconcile papal infallibility with the lately publicized error?

With full cognisance of my inadequacy–nay incompetence–to speak either as a moral theologian or a critic of the vicar of Christ, I write humbly, with a filial love for the pope and a steadfast adherence to the Catholic faith. I have hitherto refrained from speaking or writing about things Pope Francis has said or done, things which have caused wonderment and confusion among many. The reason for this reluctance–besides those reasons already mentioned–is that prudence forbids hasty, knee-jerk reactions, especially when facts are uncertain and there may be the danger of giving scandal by speaking impiously when the utmost certainty and reverence are demanded. In the case of Pope Frances giving approval for married couples to employ a means of avoiding conception which is intrinsically evil (which is to say, evil under any conditions), there’s no doubt that he erred. Two disturbing things may then result: first, the scandal of a pope proposing moral error; second, the consequent questioning of papal infallibility.

Popes have not always been among ostensibly best choices for the office. Even the great Saint Peter’s somewhat mercurial and impulsive nature, would seem to disfavor his suitability over, let’s say, the ever-faithful apostle St. John. Some popes in our long history have been outright immoral men, yet the validity of the papal office established by Christ remains unaffected.

The pontificate of Pope Frances is manifestly unlike those of his immediate predecessors. John Paul II was a noted philosopher and an imposing world figure who restored a measure of stability in the Church after the shaky post-conciliar days. Pope Benedict XVI was a theologian, a teacher of considerable stature, and a repairer of the breech in restoring severed links to our Catholic tradition. Pope Francis’s contribution to the Church is as an embassador of the merciful Christ to the people of our time whose lives have been much scarred by sin, people who have felt hopeless in making their return to God. The Holy Father wants people to know that “the Lord’s mercy endures forever,” and that no one should be without the hope of reconciliation. This is much needed in our day since so many have gone very far from moral rectitude, committing the gravest of crimes with their consciences stinging from a guilt that has brought them to near despair (one of the devil’s greatest devices to secure eternal loss). As a sign of the open disposition of God to reconcile repentant sinners, the pope has made himself very approachable to people, mingling among the crowds, and speaking candidly–even off-handedly to avid and perhaps disingenuous media personnel to entrap him. Speaking off-the-cuff in such ways has not had good results. However one may decry a capricious manner of exercising the petrine ministry, one must recall that the pope is infallible only in his official teaching capacity and not in casual, spontaneous comments. He must speak ‘from the chair’ (ex cathedra), that is, with the intent of engaging his full apostolic authority, proclaiming a teaching to be held by all the faithful. A pope may  do this in an ordinary or an extraordinary way, but the binding force of such teaching must be evident by the manner and frequency of his statements on a given subject.


As it is, popes rarely employ this infallible charism of the papal office and, when they do, it is most often not in moral teaching but in matters of faith (as an example of the latter, in the papal definitions of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary). Pope St. John Paul did bind Catholics in three areas of moral teaching: the intrinsic evil of abortion, and the same of contraception; and he forever repudiated the alleged capability of women as recipients of Holy Orders (that is, as possible priests).

What then to say of Pope Francis? First of all, he is a true, legitimate successor of Saint Peter and visible head of the Church, the vicar of Christ, whose essential duty is to preserve the deposit of faith, the apostolic inheritance: a conservating not a creative function. One need not like all that a pope does–history providing many, many examples of popes imprudent in their doings. The fact remains that the pope is the Holy Father, and like the father of a human family, deserves the respect of his God-appointed position. Should dads err, or even sin, they do not cease thereby to be fathers, nor lose their claim to respect and love. Similarly (as I’ve said before in sermons), the Church as our mother suffering (note the relational words, ‘father’ and ‘mother’) is no warrant for disowning or abandoning her. Pope and clergy–and Mother Church generally–demand our love and our prayers, now more than ever, even if we cannot as a matter of conscience agree with everything they do. Realize however that there is no alternative Church, nor Pope, nor legitimate hierarchy apart from what we are given.

My constant advice is to remain calm, prudent, prayerful, charitable–and unyieldingly in the orthodox profession of our faith. This is no easy accomplishment: it is a suffering from the conflicting inner tension of a reverent forbearance with the unrelenting imperative of orthodoxy in faith.

We are not living in ordinary times and cannot pretend to live in a time past when a greater observance of God’s moral laws and a more strict observance of the Catholic faith were prevalent. You are obligated to be faithful to Christ and to His Church in this age. God, for reasons of His own, made us to live not in some idyllic past but in this time of crisis and confusion.

Be true and valiant Catholics! Love the pope, practice the faith with exactitude, and join to your prayers the sacrifice of your sorrows and your daily works, so that the glory of Christ may be made manifest in the suffering members of His mystical body. Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church, pray for us!

Fr. Perrone
 

Parting shots: 1. Our annual St. Joseph dinner will take place after the noon Mass next Sunday: don’t miss it! 2. Married couples should remember to meet in the school classroom today after 9:30 and noon Masses to watch and discuss a fine video presentation on marriage.

Call for a moratorium on papal interviews, synods, and 'non-magisterial' documents

Well, certainly one can dream.... It would do us a lot of good, I'm sorry to say. Just imagine what a decade (or even a year) of blessed silence would be like!

I do not speak for the majority of Catholics, obviously. I am a lowly convert, an interloper, a pew peasant in the back row just happy to be in my parish church on Sunday. So I speak for myself and perhaps, to a degree, for other converts.

Too many Catholic converts, like myself, have had to learn the hard way that the Church's "official teaching" isn't necessarily to be found in what any given local pastor or bishop may say, or even what this or that pope may say in an interview. Sad to say. Where do you go to find it then? You have to dig for it. It's in the catechisms, at least if you have an accurate catechism (not like, say, the notoriously revisionist Dutch catechism); it's in the conciliar documents (at least where they're relatively clear); it's in papal encyclicals (at least where they're not weighing in on topics about which they have no expertise); it's in the sedimented records of Sacred Tradition.

Converts who have awakened to this fact have had to push back against a fairly recalcitrant sort of post-Vatican II Ultramontanism, which insists on taking every word of the reigning pope as the distilled nectar of authoritative magisterial Church teaching for our day. It's especially hard, for some, to learn that papal infallibility doesn't eliminate the fact that any given pontiff has feet of clay. It's good to remember that it was St. Peter, who betrayed our Lord and on one occasion had to be corrected by St. Paul who resisted him "to his face," that was the first in line (hand-picked by Christ) for that venerable office.

In that vein, Michael Voris' latest Vortex is a great tonic for this sort of ailment, and puts Pope Francis' recent foibles in historical perspective. I highly recommend it. It's called "A Disgrace to the Chair of Peter" (Church Militant, February 23, 2016).

Failure of executive power in the Church: from John XXIII to John Paul II

In "Failure of the Executive Power" (Super Fluma Babylonis), the author assumes that at all times each pope (John XXIII, Paul VI, and John Paul II) acted in what he regarded as the best interests of the Church; hence the criticisms he offers are not intended to reflect on the personal integrity of these popes. Yet, he says, it is possible for a saint to err. What he claims, accordingly, is that each of these popes played a part in the abdication of the Church's authority -- an authority that must be restored if the Church is to exercise the fullness of her sanctifying role in the world.

[Hat tip to Sir. A.S.]

"Recycling the Revolution: 3"

From the editor of Christian Order (November 2015), this provocative piece called "Recycling The Revolution: 3." (Somehow the Beatles' "Revolution No. 9" keeps recycling in my poor head.)

Only this is serious. And it begins with four quotes whose authors (and timeline) are food for thought in and of themselves:

• Blessed Pius IX (1871): "Believe me, the evil I denounce is more terrible than the Revolution.... that which I fear is Liberal Catholicism, which endeavours to unite two principles as repugnant to each other as fire and water ...."
  
  
• St. Pius X (1910): "[W]hat has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organisation... is now [part] of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world... the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak..."
  
  
• Yves Marsaudon (1964): "[W]e are unable to ignore the Second Vatican Council and its consequences... With all our hearts we support the Revolution of John XXIII... This courageous concept of the Freedom of Thought that lies at the core of our Freemasonic lodges, has spread in a truly magnificent manner right under the Dome of St. Peter's."
  
  
• Cardinal Danneels (2001): "Before Vatican II, in theology, as in other areas, the discipline was fixed. After the council there has been a revolution — a chaotic revolution — with free discussion on everything. There is now no common theology or philosophy as there was before."

Then there's the article ... Read more >>

[Hat tip to JM]

The popes between 1814 and 1963

H.J.A. Sire, Phoenix from the Ashes: The Making, Unmaking, and Restoration of Catholic Tradition(2015), writes, on p. 146:

The history of the Holy See offers us in these years [1814 to 1963] one pope who has been canonised (Pius X), two beatified (Pius IX and John XXIII), and another (Pius XII) who would certainly have been beatified or canonised but for the ideological bias of the following period. The Middle Ages and the Tridentine period offer no such succession of exemplary Vicars of Christ. Yet personal sanctity is not identical with the gifts that make a great ruler of the Church, and in that respect this time provides two exceptional figures. Leo XIII and Pius XI deserve to be considered not only the ablest popes of the period but two of the greatest popes in the Church's history, notable for the distinction of their teaching and in particular for the development of Catholic social theory. Their pontificates may be taken as the example of how the Church ought to be governed in the modern world and has not been governed for the past fifty years: with authority, with statesmanship, with a grasp of the needs of contemporary society, and with a firm attachment to the principles of Catholic tradition.

Pope Pius XII's Vatican plot to assassinate Hitler?!

Thomas D. Williams, "New Book Reveals Vatican Plot to Assassinate Hitler" (CM, October 22, 2015):

Although many people have come to swallow the caricature of Pope Pius XII as "Hitler's Pope," after the malicious smear campaign by John Cornwell, the facts now seem overwhelmingly to reveal the opposite: Not only was Pius adamantly opposed to the Führer's policies; he actively sought to have him assassinated.

A fascinating new book by intelligence expert Mark Riebling, Church of Spies: The Pope's Secret War Against Hitler, offers a compelling narrative of the actions taken by Pope Pius to stop Hitler from carrying out his campaign of world domination and ethnic cleansing.

Backed by a mass of carefully compiled documentation, Riebling shows that Pius cooperated in a variety of plots, initiated by patriotic, anti-Nazi Germans, to assassinate Hitler and replace the National Socialist regime with a government that would make peace with the West.

The Nazis, in fact, were deeply disturbed by the election of Pius XII in 1939, well aware of Pacelli's many anti-Nazi statements and actions. They commissioned an assessment of the situation from Albert Hartl, a former Catholic priest, who warned that the Catholic Church would prove a serious threat to the Third Reich.

"The Catholic Church fundamentally claims for itself the right to depose heads of state," Hartl wrote, "and down to the present time it has also achieved this claim several times." This statement seemed to embolden disaffected German officers who were seeking assistance to overthrow Hitler.

In 1938, several high-ranking German officers began turning against Hitler, for fear he would lead the country into a devastating war. One of these, General Ludwig Beck, was joined in this endeavor by Admiral Wilhelm Canaris, head of the Abwehr (Germany's intelligence agency), and his deputy, Colonel Hans Oster.

Read more >>

Fr. Hunwicke: “Do not exaggerate, overestimate, what a Pope can do….”

Fr. Z writes (February 20, 2015):

The inimitable Fr. Hunwicke has a good reminder at his fine blog HERE about papal authority (my [Fr. Z's] emphases):

Two points. Despite the anxieties entertained by the Intellectuals on both sides of this question … the Traditionalists and the Tablettentendenz … I see no grounds for panic. I see no practical likelihood whatsoever that anything will happen to put into doubt our duty, in our day-by-day Christian life, to adhere obediently to the judgements of the Roman Pontiff. But … let’s be honest … there have been in history occasions when Roman Pontiffs have wobbled in their adherence to orthodoxy …. Liberius and all that. In these circumstances, there does have to be a duty to resist that wobble and to decline to give effect to edicts purporting to enact the wobble. But here is the Red Line: at Vatican I, a great deal of historical work was done to ensure that the Decree on the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was so worded as not to be vulnerable on such historical grounds. It is watertight. We can be sure that whatever a pope says ex cathedra is protected by the Holy Spirit from any error (but even here, we are not obliged to believe either that the decree concerned was necessary, or that it expressed things in the best of all possible ways). But it is not unknown for a papal decree which falls short of the ex cathedra status to be flawed. Of course, that cannot be a good position for the Church to be in. But it is not some sort of Ultimate Catastrophe! The Church survived Liberius! And so did the Papacy! And, to the end of time, both will survive!

t is very important to remember the limits of the Papal Magisterium. This is best done by a careful reading of the decree Pastor aeternus of Vatican I. That is the touchstone. Do not exaggerate, overestimate, what a pope can do, and then, when some pope or other goes a bit off the rails, or you think he has, start running around in a frantic fear that you have “lost your faith”. The pope is not an Absolute Monarch. B Pius IX made this very explicitly clear. Benedict XVI taught this with determined vigour. This is serious! The Pope is not some God-on-Earth who can never make a mistake! Not a few of them have made quite a lot. There is no reason why the same should not be true in the future. Learn not to fret! Learn to live with it, as so many Catholics in previous generations have done! And if you’re the sort of person who can laugh at it, laugh. In any case, sit yourself down comfortably, pour yourself a drink … and learn the following off by heart:

“The Holy Spirit was not promised to Peter’s successors so that they should, by His revelation, disclose new teaching, but so that, with His assistance, they should devoutly guard and faithfully set forth the revelation handed down through the apostles, the Deposit of Faith.”

Popes make mistakes.  Popes are not infrequently wrong on a range of issues.  There is nothing new in this.

[Hat tip to L.S.]

Weigel's striking watchword on the papacy

I have not seen or heard George Weigel criticize any pope during his lifetime, except perhaps to mention that Pope St. John Paul II was never a micromanager, and that this was likely the price to be paid for the benefits of a papacy with great intellectual creativity and public impact. Yet both in his Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope John Paul II (1999) and in the Letters columns of the March 2015 issue of First Things, he claims the words of Melchior Cano, whose theology helped shape the Council of Trent, as his watchword in correspondence and conversation with and about the pope.

In the latter (p. 10), he quotes Cano as follows:

Peter has no need of our lies or flattery. Those who blindly and indiscriminately defend every decision of the supreme Pontiff are the very ones who do most to undermine the authority of the Holy See -- they destroy instead of strengthening its foundations."

And he adds: "As it was with John Paul II and Benedict XVI, that has been my watchword in correspondence and conversation with Pope Francis, and in my writing on his pontificate; and it will continue to be so."

Hmmmm ... Okay ... A stalwart exemplar, no doubt.

For the canon lawyers: What does "papal infallibility" mean in the case of Pope John XXII?

Roberto de Mattei has written a study of Pope John XXII, who, he says, according to St. Robert Bellarmine (in De Romano Pontifice, Opera omnia, Venetiis 1599, Book. IV, chap. 14, coll. 841-844), fell into heresy in his ordinary magisterium (with the intention of imposing it as truth on the faithful) but was saved from undermining the principle of infallibility by dying before he could define the dogma. [Advisory: See Rules 7-9]

Random cool factoid about Pope # 5

Pope #5 was Pope Saint Evaristus (c. 101- c. 109), a Greek from Antioch, the son of a Jew named (surprise!) Juda from Bethlehem. One of my favorite things about him is that in his first epistle, addressed to the bishops of Africa, he decreed that seven deacons were to monitor a bishop's preaching in order to ensure that he did not lapse from the authentic traditions and teachings of the Faith. (Is that not cool, or what?!!) Of course he reserved to the See of Rome the power to terminate any bishop as a result of such an indiscretion, but the practice has something to commend it in keeping a bishop on his toes. It reminds me of how Dutch Reformed churches used to have elders from the congregation give immediate feedback to the local pastor after his delivery of the Sunday sermon; and if he made any doctrinal mis-steps or flirted with danger a bit by pushing the edge of the envelope, they would let him know it in no uncertain terms.

Who would have dreamed of such things?

[Advisory & disclaimer: See Rules 7-9]

An article, now, by James V. Schall, S.J., "On Heretical Popes" (The Catholic Thing, November 11, 2014); and even a "Petition to the Cardinals of the Roman Church regarding the grave improprieties of Pope Francis." (ipetitions, November 11, 2014). Unbelievable. Who would have dreamed of such things appearing in print only several years ago?

And here is Michael Voris promoting, and trying to walk, The Razor's Edge dividing errors of the two opposite extremes:


[Hat tip to L.S.]