Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter – now in Los Angeles

Traditional Mass priests looking downtown or Hollywood
Father Fryar

Father Fryar

The following comes from a posting on Rorate Caeli on July 18. 

The largest diocese in the United States, and one of the largest in the world, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, is about to officially receive and welcome the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP), Rorate can confirm. Rumors of this huge step for Tradition in America had been circulating in the past few weeks, but at last we are able to bring this piece of news to the general public.

Archbishop José Horacio Gómez receives our gratitude for warmly welcoming an institute dedicated exclusively to the Traditional Mass to the Archdiocese, the FSSP. The little pueblo of Nuestra Señora de los Ángeles de la Porciúncula was founded under the aegis of the Traditional Mass by settlers sent by Blessed Junípero Serra, so it is fitting and proper that the Mass of Father Serra be daily celebrated in a setting dedicated exclusively to it in the Archdiocese.

We are also informed that the FSSP will need to eventually purchase or build a church in the city: at first, they are looking at either the Downtown or Hollywood area. Fr. James Fryar, who will start this apostolate (misión, we should rather say!), will be permanently in the city beginning in August.

For future updates and information, keep an eye on the (still mostly empty, of course) new website of the FSSP Apostolate in Los Angeles: FSSP.LA

To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.

Comments

  1. Bob One says:

    Good News for those who prefer the TLM!

    • This is wonderful news! Wonderful. But why buy a parish? There are clusters in Los Angeles. Nativity for example is clustered with St. Columbkille. The bishop could hand over Nativity to the FSSP’s which is an ideal location (next to USC) for the many who will commute from the greater L.A..

      • Abeca Christian says:

        This is excellent news and lets all keep its success in our prayers, if we can help them in some way, God will also bless those who do.

        Douay-Rheims Bible 2 Corinthians 9:10
        And he that ministereth seed to the sower, will both give you bread to eat, and will multiply your seed, and increase the growth of the fruits of your justice:

      • You can’t just rake the parish away from its parishioners and give it to someone else.

        • Cardinal Mahoney ordered that one parish be handed over to the Chinese. The parishioners successfully stopped this from happening. Most Masses are still in English, with one Chinese and one Spanish Sunday Mass offered each Sunday.

          Quite a few other parishes have been converted to all Spanish language, or only one English Mass. Long time English only speakers of these parishes where forced to go elsewhere.

  2. Anyone from the LA area who can donate to the FSSP should do so.
    Their EF (Latin) Masses are beautiful, and they also train other Priests who are interested in learning the EF Mass.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      Actually since we have a great relationship with this order from another area, we can always donate through our local area for that intention. You can donate even through their website, you need to specify.

      Douay-Rheims Bible Matthew 6:4
      That thy alms may be in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret will repay thee.

  3. St. Christopher says:

    This is a good step, but be very vigilant. The N.O. crowd, and Corporate Bishops, of which Abp. Gomez is a prime member, love to dissemble, and bringing in a Traditional Order and then largely marginalizing them, is a key tactic. It is often the case — see, e.g., the Diocese of Richmond, VA — where the most liberal bishops will establish one or two personal parishes where the TLM is exclusively said. Then, the word goes out loud and clear to all clergy — no one else is to say this Mass and no parish is to schedule one on a regular basis. And, of course, no seminary curricula or catechism is expanded to teach anything Traditional at all (that is, before Vatican II). So, yes, the FSSP is a fine society and it is very good that they are going to LA, for any reason. But, don’t jump up and down too vigorously at this point. The new boys in town could be part of a careful exercise Three Card Monte game by the local ordinary. We will see what happens in, say, 4 or 5 years.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      So, let’s get this straight. Even when the Archbishop admits the old form mass, you still question his motives? I am not so long in the memory that I forget how you all have trash talked this Archbishop over and over again in this forum.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Trash talked? How about discussed the record, YFC. And everyone always has a motive or an agenda. You know that.

    • All legitimate local / regional catechisms must be approved by the Holy See, not local Bishops. These local catechisms are for understanding for those with differences of age, spiritual maturity ,culture, and social and ecclesial condition.

      There have only been 2 Catechisms of the Church in its entire history.
      1) Catechism of the Council of Trent (aka Roman Catechism) – 1566 AD.
      2) Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition – (aka CCC) 1997 AD.

    • Canisius says:

      St Christopher…. I agree with you most of the time… just let us give thanks for this…perhaps these small drops of water will lead to a flood of a conversion of hearts…

      • Abeca Christian says:

        Now you are talking Canisius…you are keeping your eye’s fixed on Jesus once again…..but its time to open your eye’s so you can grow more, don’t let others slow you down. There has been many good things happening too, don’t despair and don’t lose hope. I remember in my area, we didn’t have a Tridentine Parish and for years people where despairing, I told them, have faith, persevere with prayer, do it with fortitude. Those are virtuous attributions you know, well few years later, we now have a Tridentine parish!

        God knows how much further we can grow, without suffering how are we going to reach our full potential in Christ. Let them spew what they want, but you need to keep your eye’s fixed on Jesus. He helps me deal with all the injustices, yes even the body ailments, He refreshes my soul. Have faith and chin up, Christ is always with us!

        Reflect on PSALM 22

  4. Many heartfelt thanks to Archbishop Jose Gomez of Los Angeles. Una Voce Los Angeles sent a petition with way over 1000 signatures about two years ago and now our Pastor has responded. Gratias, gratias dear bishop, without you this would have never happened. This is something for the long term. Let us rejoice!

  5. Catherine says:

    May the faithfully departed soul of the recently murdered FSSP priest, Father Kenneth Walker, intercede on behalf of the success of the FSSP in Los Angeles and wherever God Wills.

    Taken from Lifesite News
    “In a closing reflection on Father Walker, written for OLSWA, Professor Meenan writes, “Father Kenneth, you will be missed, but our consolation, to paraphrase Saint Therese, is that you will do much greater good in heaven. Requiescat in pace, et ora pro nobis, frater meus.”

    “Though perhaps not that of a martyr (who strictly dies in defense of the faith), the death of Fr. Walker will undoubtedly be a seed, a grace for souls, and a particular grace for the Fraternity of St. Peter. In his application to Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary, then Kenny Walker already had very clear motivations for becoming a priest: “Along with the Church, then, I am deeply grieved by these errors concerning the nature of and dignity of man accepted by so many people in the world, which deviate them from their supernatural end. In full view of the situation in the world, then, the only vocation that I could be satisfied with would be one that would be dedicated to bringing people to salvation and this work is best carried out in the priesthood.” ….. Superior General FSSP

  6. Fr. James Fryar is the best pastor the FFSP could have sent for the huge Archdiocese of Los Angeles. He is a Holy man. Fr. Fryar invented LiveMass.org which allows you to watch the Latin Mass of that week. I have this as a free app for iPad or smartphone called iMass that is great. LiveMass even has masses in Latin with Spanish homilies, which is probably a way to go here. Fr. Fryar is Australian but was educated in Mexico so probably will be able to do a lot of evangelizing among the Hispanic community.

    The FSSP published the St. Edmund Champion Missal illustrated with actual photographs of Fr. Fryar offering High Mass at Friburg, Switzerland. He is one of their stars.

    Fr. Fryar has given Una Voce Ventura a very interesting conference two years ago at Thomas Aquinas College on the Latin Mass. It starts at one and a half minute here:
    http://www.unavoceventura.org/resources/mp3s/The_Place_of_the_Holy_Mass_in_Our_Daily_Lives.mp3

    We should also be extremely grateful to the two Holy priests that kept the Latin Mass going on here in LA and Ventura for many years, Fr. Robert Bishop and Fr. Michael Carcerano, and the Una Voce lay organizations that have done so much of the behind the scenes work. The Norbertine fathers of Orange County and the chaplains of Thomas Aquinas College have also kept the Vetus Ordo going for us in Los Angeles.

    Gratias

    • You are absolutely right that Fr. Fryar is a holy man and is the right priest for the work needed in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles…we all miss him terribly at Queen of Peace in Ocala, Florida. I am forever grateful to the FSSP for the work they do in bringing the TLM to churches…I am also extremely blessed that it was Fr. Fryar that was our priest traveling up from Sarasota to Ocala to bring us the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. May God Bless Fr. Fryar on his new journey to the Los Angeles Archdiocese to further the Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

    • I have no doubt that when Archbishop Gomez agreed to accept the FSSP, that the stipulation was that this parish be bilingual Spanish/English as most of the parishes in this diocese are. I would be extremely surprised if it weren’t.

  7. If you liked the conference by Fr. Fryar on the Mass above, you might like this one on Sacraments and Sacramentals:

    http://www.unavoceventura.org/resources/mp3s/On_Sacraments_and_Sacramentals.mp3

  8. The FSSP have a parish in Sacramento, St. Stephan First Martyr, which I attend each time I visit that area. The parish is traditional in every way, even has an altar railing, ambo, statues and racks of vigil candles. Most women wear skirts and either a hat or veil at Mass. There is also a gift shop-bookstore where religious objects and an excellent variety of Catholic literature is available. I hope the parish will be the same down here.

  9. Linda Maria says:

    I am so thrilled by this news! The presence of the FSSP in the Los Angeles Archdiocese, will bring tremendous good, to the lives of many people there, and their families! I hope they will also establish a parish school! Many good priestly vocations could also come, from a parish school! And there may be many “Novus Ordo” (OF) priests, who will come to their door, desiring to learn to say the old Latin Mass! Wonderful!! Maybe a lot of young couples also will come, wanting to be married in the beautiful, old pre-Vatican II Wedding Mass!! And their future children could be educated at the parish school!! Oh, what a thrill!! Of course, the FSSP always faces political marginalization, in today’s Church. But who knows, someday, that all may change!! They need all our prayers, for tremendous success!!

  10. Life Lady says:

    I am so happy for the people in Los Angeles. God’s blessings on all the efforts extended to Fr. Fryar and his work. We in San Diego have been supportive of our parish, St.Anne’s. I think that’s key: support your pastor and make certain you pray for help from above. There’s a lot of work to do, but God is calling on you all, and regardless of the obstacles, your parish can grow. St. Anne’s is currently having our annual Chant Camp, so you have that resource available to you all, and our children have catechism classes every Sunday. But your prayers are key to success. I would love to see how you all are doing in half a year. God bless your efforts.

  11. Canisius says:

    Let the conversions begin!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Deos Gratias ..

  12. This is the last thing the LA Archdiocese needs.

    • Kristin says:

      No, the last thing the archdiocese needs is people who deny the faith in word and action. It leads to all kinds of evil chaos that the people of the LA archdiocese know very well (to the tune of $700 million). Hey PJT, why not give the TLM a try? Discover, or rediscover the ancient mass of the saints.

      • A very large number of abuse cases, from the 40s and 50s occurred during the time when the old liturgy was the norm. We can’t pretend that the TLM is going to solve all problems.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Neither can we pretend that the TLM and the reverence and solid Faith formation that goes with it will not help to restore the flock. Movements take time, Emma. Much like the modernist movement that cropped up and grew prior to the implementation of the Novus Ordo took time to seize the Church. The groundwork for just such a rebellion took decades to foment. That’s why it is important to study the history of what took place, when, and who the were the parties involved.

        • John T. says:

          There will always be sinners within the Church.

          Even the Apostles were sinners.

    • Catherine says:

      PJT tragically writes…. “This is the last thing the LA Archdiocese needs.” = Our Lord blesses the LA Archdiocese and the one lost lamb still bleats out in predictable fear.

      “What man of you that hath a hundred sheep: and if he shall lose one of them, doth he not leave the ninety-nine in the desert, and go after that which was lost, until he find it? ” Matthew 18:12 Douay Rheims Catholic Bible

      “There is no pillow so soft as a clear conscience.” – French proverb

      “The man who is too set to change is dead already. The funeral is a mere detail.”
      -Henry Ford

      Epistle Of Saint Paul To The Colossians Chapter 3

      He exhorts them to put off the old man, and to put on the new.

      [1] Therefore, if you be risen with Christ, seek the things that are above; where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God: [2] Mind the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth. [3] For you are dead; and your life is hid with Christ in God. [4] When Christ shall appear, who is your life, then you also shall appear with him in glory. [5] Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, lust, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is the service of idols.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        PJT reading your comments from past articles, wow, you sound less Catholic each time dearie. What are you afraid of? There has to be some type of bad will, usually its connected with abortion, “gay”, immodesty etc

        If you ask me, this is what this society needs! God Provides for all His lay faithful, do you think He would provide less for your brothers and sisters in Christ? Think again.

  13. JimAroo says:

    One thing is for certain – no matter what a parish, diocese or Bishop does, it will never be enough for the Extraordinary Rite crowd. They will always want more, regardless of common sense and will see a conspiracy even behind good news.

    • JimAroo, by your stereotyping you are spreading lies.
      There are people on the left and on the right who are heretics and schismatics.
      There are many good and Faithful Catholics who appreciate the beauty of the EF (Extraordinary Form of the Mass).

    • F. Suleau says:

      It’s really unclear what you’re talking about on behalf of the “Extraordinary Rite crowd,” unless it’s the ability of that crowd to recognize hostility such as that dripping from your comment. You need to arise from your darkness.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        F. Suleau your one to talk.:
        F. Suleau says:
        July 9, 2014 at 5:21 pm

        I agree with John F. The statement “praise God we are living these times” – Wow – I guess it can be helpful to look for a silver lining. Bottom line, Vat 2 gave license to the greatest widespread disintegration of the Faith since Martin Luther. Only a person who grew up post-Vat 2 could sufficiently lack perspective to wax poetic about Amchurch. The people that love the current mainstream presentation of the faith in this country shouldn’t be regarded much differently than zealots that exist in various protestant sects. Hearing the enthusiasm of some evangelical means about the same. They’re just one more step removed, but similarly are blocked in their own lack of perspective. It’s so sad that the post-Vat 2 people just have no clue as to what they were deprived of without their knowledge or consent. No it’s not a time to abandon ship, only because the ship was abandoned long ago when traditional Catholicism was thrown overboard. Now is the time to return to the TLM. That’s where the action is. But tough to explain color to a blind man.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          That was quoted from the article “A plain cupboard in a back corner.” I believe he was replying to me from F.Salu.

          I need to point out the hypocrisy from both sides. I am tired of all this division, everyone is fast and ready to attack JimAroo but before we do lets take the rod out of our own eyes before we remove the speck of our neighbors. I tell you this is a hard one, I bet I will get heat for my comments, but they are the truth. I use to stick up for those who attended the Latin Mass, (because I attend the Tridentine Mass) even those from SSPX, because I thought they were misunderstood and my mistake was believing that we were the evil ones for attacking Traditional element of the faith but now I see that it is also the other way around. There is no pleasing both sides. All this division is upsetting to say the least. I was even attacked for my faith and loyalty but I trust that God allows those things to help me see that when that behavior is allowed it is so show us how divided we really are and how ugly it can be.

          JimAroo is just speaking from a place of how he see’s it. We may try to defend our stand on it but he too will be just as prideful and not want to meet us half way.

          • That is terrible what F. Suleau wrote to you. I’m sorry Abeca, its not how they brain wash people to think it to be. You have a beautiful love of Christ. I admire it and don’t let anyone rob you of it or poison it. Dear one I think they may be jealous of your genuine love for our Lord.

    • Catherine says:

      JimAroo = CruelAroo

      cru·el – adjective
      1. Willfully causing pain or suffering to others, or feeling no concern about it.

      “The Extraordinary Rite crowd?” = Shame on YOU!

      Matthew Chapter 5 :9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called children of God. [10] Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Douay- Rheims.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      JimAroo I’m sorry we made you feel that way. I really am. Sorry that we have made a bad witness to you and others, but most of all we have let Jesus down. I don’t know if you are an unreasonable person because I know that sometimes no matter what we do, someone will always find something wrong with our devout love for Christ, but if you are reasonable (I’m sure you are) and you spoke these words our of charity, well they may be just to help me to look deep inside of me and improve. If I let Jesus down and you felt it, I say please forgive me.

      Well anyhoo I invite you to visit a parish where the Tridentine Mass is said, I assure you, you will love it once you give it a try. Its good to grow spiritually you know, its good to love Jesus not just know of Him but to Know Him deeply is far more satisfying than anything else in this life, even if people may disappoint you or I. God bless you, go in Peace.

    • Ann Malley says:

      JimAroo writes: “…One thing is for certain – no matter what a parish, diocese or Bishop does, it will never be enough for the Extraordinary Rite crowd. They will always want more, regardless of common sense and will see a conspiracy even behind good news.”

      Common sense is not to bag on one’s own history, JimAroo. History is part and parcel of who and what we are. That’s why it’s critical to understand where one has come from so one can keep the wisdom but not repeat the mistakes of the past. That said, you may want to reassess your notion of conspiracy as not all are theories worthy of disdain, but actual conspiracies that change the face of the world/history as we know it. And if we do not know the past, we are fated to repeat it, mistakes and all. That is human nature which is why protecting the fullness of the deposit of the Faith is so vital. If we don’t protect Truth, whole and entire, it may not get lost, but will become so unrecognizable that most will pass it by without a care.

      That is why the ‘Traditional Crowd’ as you call it pushes for full disclosure, that is Truth, about what the Church teaches, how we got to where we are (the recent family survey is not a mark of good fruit, but rather the opposite) and what we can do to help future generations get back on track or stay on track. Giving passes to anyone in a time of moral crisis may seem positive and upbeat, but in reality does little to address problems effectively.

      • Kenneth M. Fisher says:

        It is very easy to realize how we got where we are. They lied to us, that’s how!

        They told us that the Mass of St. Pius V had been abrogated and nothing could have been further from the truth. Pope Benedict himself taught that “something that is at one time considered to be holy, can never be not holy”. So many of us knew they were lying to us from the start. It can also be said that something that is declared “Ex Cathedra” cannot be abrogated!

        All of the sophistic arguments to the contrary not withstanding!

        May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
        Viva Cristo Rey!
        Yours in Their Hearts,
        Kenneth M. Fisher

        • Ann Malley says:

          Yes, indeed, the truth was masked, Kenneth.

          Much like in Gone With the Wind, we were led through the burning of Atlanta with a feed sack on our heads so as not to go crazy and quit carrying the wagon. (Ignore the heat, ignore the crackling all around, the din of ruin and the shrieks of the scandalized women and children you’re carrying.) But how to explain that to the other horses now when they have no experience of what Atlanta used to look like, have never seen fire, only see Rhett as the man who gives them oats, and think fire is just the stuff of dreams and cranky old nags?

          Add to that the threat of the oats being cut off and you’ll have a lot of young colts and older horses telling you to just be quiet. So keep posing the question. How did we get here? Why don’t Catholics know their Faith? Why is there such disparity in Catholic practice? If you give the colts the answer, they’ll reject you outright, but if you ask the question and encourage them to think and discover and ask the hard questions themselves, they will come to learn the Truth!

          • Anonymous says:

            You weren’t even going to Mass for 27 years, for crying out loud. But you were robbed!!!!

          • Ann Malley says:

            I’m sorry for your sufferings, Anonymous. Be well. But please don’t let bitterness rot the fruits of your long struggle. It isn’t worth it.

        • Anonymous says:

          Who’s they?

  14. For those who have not saved this link in their “favorites” you may wish to do so, in case there are questions from others.
    ” INSTRUCTION on the APPLICATION of the APOSTOLIC LETTER
    SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM of His HOLINESS BENEDICT XVI”
    http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/ecclsdei/documents/rc_com_ecclsdei_doc_20110430_istr-universae-ecclesiae_en.html

    “21. Ordinaries (Bishops) are asked to offer their clergy the possibility of acquiring adequate preparation for celebrations in the forma extraordinaria. This applies also to Seminaries, where future priests should be given proper formation, including study of Latin and, where pastoral needs suggest it, the opportunity to learn the forma extraordinaria of the Roman Rite. “

    • ” 19. The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which
      show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria
      or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.”

      Anyone who enjoys the EF Mass must not belittle the OF Mass.
      Anyone who enjoys the OF Mass must not belittle the EF Mass.

      EF (Extraordinary Form) is the correct terminology of the Church for the Latin Mass of 1962, not TLM or Latin, or any other nickname.
      OF (Ordinary Form) is the correct terminology of the Church for the Mass in the secular language, not NO, not Novus Ordo or any other name.
      See the link above to the Vatican web site – which uses the correct Church terminology.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        Thanks MIKE. For years I have been praying for this moment and now with God’s holy will, we are seeing a step towards a positive step. God gives us hope, we just have to remain loyal, faithful with perseverance. God bless this area for they are blessed to have this order of priests and we pray for much more growth as people start to return little by little, even if little steps, to return to God.

        Both EF and OF are valid, our Lord is with us in both. We just need to make sure that the Mass is said the right way and that all priests remain faithful to Christi’s church. If not, then we can speak up and act. Our Lord deserves our Love and our everything.

    • Thank you MIKE for bringing order to this discussion by calling attention to official Magisterial statements and their links from the Holy See’s website. Keep up the great work.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        I agree Jay S…we have the truth and posting it without replying back to attacks from those who oppose its best. Christ is with His church till the end, its been told throughout the ages. The OF and EF mass are both valid forms! Study your CCC and Holy scriptures. those are excellent tools to start as one grows more the faith, then you can read books from the saints, earlier councils etc etc…..

        We are always learning more….the wholeness of the faith, one does not ever stop learning! Let us just remember while we are learning, we must be of good will and fix our eye on Jesus and His mum!

  15. St. Christopher says:

    “JimAroo”: You are correct, in a manner of speaking. On one hand, “Canisius” and “Your Fellow Catholic” are also correct, be thankful for any favor here and let’s see what happens; true. The “however” occurs where Traditionalists are supposed to be so thankful for this one crumb from Lazarus’ table, that they simply go off, kind of like one of those “historic ranches” where people work the range like they used to do in the 19th Century, and you get to pay to see them do this. No, this is not what Summorum Pontificum means. The Novus Ordo turned the Church inside out, and this needs to be corrected, including: (1) TLM in every Parish, for every Sunday at a convenient time; (2) complete fidelity to Veterum Sapientia — Latin taught to every seminarian; (3) the Traditional sacraments offered as an “option” at every parish (heaven knows there are options galore in the N.O.); and (4) meaningful areas for choice for all clergy and religious to worship solely in the Traditional form. This is a good first start; not a showcase TLM here and there.

    • What is a traditionalist? What is a novus ordo? What is a TLM? RATHER than getting into your own definitions, why do you refuse to conform the Catholic Church terminology rather than your own?
      Why do you feel the need to use slang?
      Most of your terms seem to be back from around the 1960′s.
      Use the same terms that the Church uses so that you will not leave out those under age 50.
      Or do you merely want to cause division?

      OF = Ordinary Form of the Mass;
      EF = Extraordinary Form of the Mass.

      • Anyone who enjoys the EF Mass must not belittle the OF Mass.
        Anyone who enjoys the OF Mass must not belittle the EF Mass.

        • Paula that is only if the OF Mass is being served according to the approved rubrics and not if serious liturgical abuses are taking place. If there are real serious liturgical abuses taking place, people have the right, and duty of times, to speak out.

        • That;s right Paula. There’s no arguing there. This is the truth and we can’t get caught up in their schism. Don’t entertain them by arguing back. Even if the truth was presented to them, they will ignore it.

          • Anonymous says:

            Yep.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Mrs A, you post like an American schoolgirl who just learned that George Washington owned slaves. Get a grip. Learn your own history. Learn to deal with it in a rational manner and go forth better armed to discern spirits.

            The Truth is not a blindfold.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Paula, please do not credit those under 50 with not understanding the terms Novus Ordo vs Tridentine Rite. That is patronizing beyond belief. And if young people do not understand, TEACH THEM! There is nothing divisive in asking what somebody means if you or someone else does not understand. There is no slight.

        Would you accuse your grandparents of causing division because they talk of family history in antiquated terms? Or would you just chalk it off to their being divisive or having to speak in your terms before you give them the opportunity to teach others in the family about a history you seemingly do not know? At some point, the children in the family have a right to know the truth in the family instead of suffering through endless tense holiday dinners some members being shunted off to the corner because everyone wants to have a ‘nice’ dinner. Especially when the problems in the family are something the older folks recognize all too well.

        Catholic patrimony is not something that should be buried like some family skeleton, Paula. I understand that you may have strong attachment to the Novus Ordo. Perhaps that is all you know. But an adult discussion comparing the realities of the two rights is long overdue. Especially for those younger people who do not even know the history that belongs equally to them.

        • John T. says:

          Ann Malley you are not using the correct Church terminology.
          All should use OFFICIAL Church terminology to avoid confusion by anyone throughout the world
          who may read our posts on the internet.

          OF = Ordinary Form of the MASS
          EF = Extraordinary Form of the MASS.

          • Ann Malley says:

            John T, you are not using common sense and logic in your correction.

            You may not realize as much, but by your reasoning, Holy Mother Church should then opt back to the TLM across the board so as not to confuse the faithful and everyone else with disparity of Catholic belief that is taught by the varying practice endemic in the rite of Paul VI. Sadly, inconsistency is rampant as Bishops and priests and religious interpret at will what they will teach, how they will teach, and how they will practice. That is what truly confuses as what is said is out of touch with reality. Much like children can sense when their parents are not being straight with them.

            That said, please know that my posts are intended to speak to the truth in observation, not necessarily to promulgate the approved narrative of ‘there is no difference’ aka: “Do not look at the little man behind the curtain,” as commanded by Oz the Great and Powerful in the Wizard of Oz.

            If readers are confused – good. Perhaps they will be confused or their interest piqued enough to seek out that which has come before so they can come to a greater understanding of the Church and the Faith. People are not as ignorant as you may believe. And if they are, perhaps the use of proper terminology, that is terminology that speaks to the realities of difference will regain the respect owed to the eternal Church.

          • That’s right John T. This woman is indoctrinated well in those heresies, her own pride will not acknowledge the truth you are trying to share with her. She is lavished well in her own heresies. I felt sorry for her but I see that she has this Catherine woman, also helping her remain in her schism.

      • Kenneth M. Fisher says:

        Paula,

        Don’t you see that something is very wrong when the Mass of SAINT PIUS V is considered extraordinary and the Mass largely written by SIX HERTICS, Protestant Ministers is declared “ordinary” while the Infallibly declared Mass for the End of Time is declared “extraordinary”.

        I don’t know how much logic you have studied, but it sure came off as “illogical” to me, and I COULD NOT BUY IT!

        It is no accident that the men and women behind “Una Voce Int’l.” are and were very highly educated in Theology!

        May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
        Viva Cristo Rey!
        Yours in Their Hearts,
        Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
        Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc

        • John T. says:

          Heretics and schismatics can be to the far right, as well as the far left.
          Read: “The Ratzinger Report ” Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict) – the chapter on “Liturgy: between the Old and New” starting on page 119, and a ” Council to be Rediscovered” on page 27.

          Church Definition:
          CCC: 2089 – ” HERESY is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;
          SCHISM is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

          You, Mr. Fisher, by Church definition are a heretic and schismatic from the far right.

          • Ann Malley says:

            And you, John T, instead of talking to one whom you falsely declare to be a heretic through their very valid issue are playing the role of Pharisee. That said, what truth is being denied? What is being refused?

            Have you looked to the roots of the formation of the Novus Ordo Missae? If not, perhaps you should and then you would be better equipped to help in this scenario instead of using your CCC to condemn those who are very committed to Holy Mother Church. Good grief.

    • Canisius says:

      St. Christopher, agreed the NO messed up the Church big time.. nothing would make me happier than to see it tossed into the ash bin. Whatever happens one thing is for certain we traditionalist are here to stay and modernist know and can’t stand it. So let’s give them as much grief as possible by being Faithful and in time our allies will assume positions of powers and right the ship.

  16. hosemonkey says:

    I am in agreement with St. Christopher, give it four or five years and then make a judgement. Gomez is a comrade of Mahoney and a graduate of our local “seminary”. The “Spir it of Vatican II” still permeates our archdiocese and “progressive” thinking still rules much of our clergy. The Mass of the Ages is still met with scorn among many of our people and is thrown like a bone to reactionary dogs. The OF contains nourishment, but so does a baloney sandwich. I prefer the feast of the Mass of the Ages.

    • Gratias says:

      Archbishop Gomez is not linked to Cardinal Mahony in any way. He was an Opus Dei priest. By this brave decision he could be even imperil a Cardinal’s hat.

      Thank you Archbishop Gomez for responding to the petition of your flock. This is the action of a true pastor.

      Now it is up to us to make this opportunity work.

      • Kenneth M. Fisher says:

        Gratius,

        In case you don’t know it, not all that comes from “Opus Dei” is holy.

        If you don’t yet know that Gomez is linked to Mahony, I want to sell you a bridge to nowhere, cheap!

        May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
        Viva Cristo Rey!
        Yours in Their Hearts,
        Kenneth M. Fisher

      • Ann Malley says:

        How is ‘risking a Cardinal’s hat’ any measure of accolades, Gratias. No Archbishop should run his diocese with a mind for the Cardinal’s hat – that’s one of the big problems here. Kind of like saying a man actually invited his wife to a corporate picnic risking the displeasure of the bosses daughter who might have seen that he received a promotion. But not now. Good grief.

      • John T. says:

        Gratius, please check out the web site of the Diocese of LA of which Abp. Gomez is in complete control.
        He continues to honor Roger Mahony, and there is no Church requirement to do so.

  17. Linda Maria says:

    For about 1500-2000 years, the Latin Rite Church had a theologically correct, liturgically beautiful, and excellent Mass, beautifully expressing the Heavenly descent of Christ to earth, in Our Lord’s salvific gift, on Calvary! “Heaven coming to Earth,” is the truly holy, uplifting, and beautiful religious experience, which many people are blessed to receive, when attending the old Latin Mass! Many Catholic conversions also occur, and many religious and priestly vocations are born! The “Mass of All Time” is really excellent! The “gem” of the whole Church! The heart and soul of our Faith! A great shock, to see this “gem” casually tossed aside, by the Pope and his bishops of Vatican II, for reasons of “aggiornamento,” adapting Christ’s suddenly “outdated” Church, to suit the needs of “modern man,” struggling in the always-wayward, modern, secular world! Christ is Eternal, and for all time, outside of human history! The modern world does not know Him! Sadly, the first thing many children did, in our parish school, was to burst out in LAUGHTER, when the New Mass was introduced. I was so embarrassed by these children, who probably knew the truth!

  18. John T. says:

    There are several HERETICs and SCHISMATICs posting who are bad mouthing the OF Mass.
    (This can lead to doing away with the EF Mass. Pope Benedict warned of this breach and sin against Unity. Keep it up and you reap the benefits of your heretical and schismatic actions. And you won’t like it.)

    • Ann Malley says:

      You wouldn’t have the TLM if not for those who you now unlawfully condemn as heretical and schismatic, John T. The breach and sin against unity was not begun by those seeking the TLM, but rather those who foisted a manufactured rite upon the faithful. Much like pressing communion in the hand etc. It is good to know what is right and truly lawful so as to not be bamboozled into accepting misused authority to the detriment of one’s soul and the souls of one’s children.

      As for bad mouthing the ‘OF’, look to its origins, John T. Why do the Catholic faithful need to be bullied into the dismissal of examining their own patrimony for fear of the TLM being taken away. (Other than that being a very effective method of putting a lid on bad policy.) Much like looking into family medical history so as to be better aware of potential disease and weakness in oneself. It may be unpleasant. We may not like to look at to learn, but we shouldn’t be so afraid of discussing the OF in plain terms. If only for the health of the body.

      • BILL K. says:

        Ann O’Malley if you want the EF form of the Mass to continue, stop bad mouthing the OF Mass. Get over it. Pope Benedict wants unity within the Church among the Faithful, and I doubt Pope Francis would want disunity either.
        Just because others sin, you think its OK for you to do the same? What kind of logic is that?

        Further, Pope John Paul II approved the FSSP in 1988, not you or any other bad mouther.

        If you want to encourage others to attend the EF Mass that is fine, just stop badmouthing the OF Mass.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Let the Novus Ordo stand or fall on it’s own merit, Bill K. That said, your fear mongering will do nothing to stifle the rightful examination of the rite of Paul VI or the fruits thereof. There is no need to bad mouth. Nobody is sinning, Sir, by examining facts.

          If you are afraid of speaking in historical truths or just examining the rites side by side, that is your issue. As to the FSSP, Pope John Paul II approved these men to exclusively offer the TLM, but you may want to research the surrounding circumstances as *context* means everything. That is why Catholics should not be gagged or blinded when it comes to calmly examining the realities of the Novus Ordo and the TLM.

          If Pope Francis wants us to freely preach the Gospel to one and all, attempting to stifle discussion regarding that which is in our own history is counterproductive and ludicrous. Why? Because it isn’t only the Catholics who know that something changed in the Catholic Church in the aftermath of VII and the advent of the Novus Ordo. We need to know and understand our history, Bill K, not just the approved talking points. Many folks just won’t go for that…. not at all.

          God bless

          • Anonymous says:

            The Merit of the Mass is infinite.

          • Anonymous says:

            The fruits of the Mass- Catholic dictionary
            The spiritual and temporal blessings obtained through the Eucharistic sacrifice. The general fruits of the Mass are applied to the whole Church, in which all the faithful share, both the living and the dead. The special fruits are applied first to the priest who celebrates Mass, then to those for whom he offers it, and finally to those who participate in the Eucharistic liturgy.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Yes, the Eucharistic Sacrifice is endless in merits which is why the mass itself should reflect the august dignity of that reality in addition to expressing the solemnity and truths of the Faith in its entirety.

            By your logic, we shouldn’t oppose clown masses because the ‘fruits’ are there. That is fruit loop logic, Anonymous. And nothing but an excuse to give faulty reasoning a pass.

            You’ll please excuse me if I prefer to attempt to offer Our Lord in the mass the best of what we can give and should give Him.

      • Aren’t there enough legitimate things to support or fight against – - rather than fight over my Mass is better than your Mass like a bunch of little kids?
        This is sinful.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Mac, we need to know our own history and message before we can go out and catechize the world. That’s not fighting like kids, but rather having a necessary discussion to hammer out talking points and reality checks before we go out and spread the good news.

          • Rod LaRoque says:

            The rite of mass and related ceremonies is the most important thing to discuss within the Church, after all it is the Church’s official worship of God, appeases the Divine wrath and brings grace upon the earth.
            What else could be more important than this, and with this understanding of the Mass, how could the authorities treat this greatest treasure of the Church so shabbily over the last 50 years. These modernist liberals will have much to answer for.
            Thank God that there are still pockets of resistance to the VII Church of Nice crowd. They have had their time in power and what have we seen? The greatest apostasy the Church has yet known. Sin has not only multiplied but it is now public policy.
            A return to the past is the only real strategy in a time of crisis, as St Paul tells us, caused by an irresponsible overly optimistic reading of the times.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          MAC I complete agree but don’t fight. A holy priest from the Ukrainian Parish that I use to attend, a few years back, he told us that its easier to convert an atheist then someone who have been scandalized in some form of dissent against the church. We had a discussion that day since we were praying for the conversion of all sinners within our church and those outside of it.

        • Thank you MAC.

      • Who cares what Ann Malley says. We know the truth.

    • St. Christopher says:

      “John T.”: No. You are very mistaken regarding comments on the made-upness of the “Mass of Man.” Benedict, to the extent he commented at all as to criticizing the N.O., was concerned with people that argued that the Mass was illegitimate and false. Many Traditionalists accept what the Church has established as a valid celebration of the Mass. Yet, this does not mean that the N.O. has anywhere near the outpouring of graces that is given to the priest, and parishioners, celebrate the TLM. Moreover, the phrase “Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi” has meaning; how we pray really is how we believe. The laxities, the informalities, the reference to the N.O. as a “communal meal,” the notion of communal forgiveness of sin, the refusal to believe in the Real Presence (as shown by people taking the Host in their dirty hands and failing to kneel), the disobedience of bishops regarding the teaching of Latin to seminarians, the complete rejection of many of the teachings of the Church (all in the name of “conscience” or “pastoral sensitivity”), all of this makes an enormous difference on what Catholics now believe. It is like the man who tries to pray the Rosary at least once a week, if not daily, and the man who says that he, “finds God on the golf course” and is offended by having to sit in Church once a week. The N.O. may serve a base purpose of meeting the weekly obligation to attend Mass, but look at how the Catholic Church is crumbling.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        John T I understand you completely. Its that division but rest assured many also know that the OF is also a wonderful Mass to attend, just like the EF. I praise God for faithful priests, we usually drive far to attend a faithful OF mass and also the EF mass. We enjoy both especially since we have friendships with priests from those loyal parishes. I have to say also is that I have enjoyed attending Mass at our local Ukrainian Parish many years ago. Very holy mass as well.

        God bless you John T.

      • Anyone who is going to support the Legitimacy of the OF Mass as required by Pope Benedict, can NEVER bad mouth it. -
        The Body and Blood of Christ at both forms of the Mass.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          MAC that is true but we can expose the abuses that some bad willed priests allow ….if I was traveling and I was warned, I would avoid any parish that does not follow the GIRM. At least try and its good to stay informed but to argue that the Latin mass is better than this or that, is also not charitable. It causes scandal and confusion and stops people from growing with Christ. I would not want to be responsible for stopping someone from their spiritual growth because I love Jesus more and would want all to come to Him in union with Rome, even in their own level.

          Praise God for the OF mass, it has brought many devout and holy converts too! I am seeing good fruits and I can say that growing up in my OF parish, I too learned to have a personal relationship with Christ in my level at that young mind of mine, but as the years went by, because my love for Christ is genuine and sincere, He took mercy on me, I kept soul searching and still do, He is always gentle with me. I pray the same happens to many others. Christ is my life. Without Him I have nothing so I do not want to scandalize others by discouraging them to go to mass, but I would pray that they would grow closer to Jesus and discover what is honorable to Him in both the EF and OF.

  19. Yes, fantastic news the F.S.S.P. is coming to Los Angeles to bring the “True Mass of All Times” there, Father Fryar is indeed a Holy priest and is saving many souls. On the other hand your telling me that the F.S.S.P. has to buy or build a church???? Of all the churches in the Los Angeles Archdiocese the largest in the nation, you have got to be kidding me. Now if they were Muslims or Protestants wanting to have their “services” in a Catholic Church the good Archbishop would make sure they had one A.S.A.P. And yes I agree with the above post not all that comes from Opus Dei is good or friendly to “The Mass of All Times”. The spirit of Vatican II is firmly entrenched in Los Angeles and will take decades to eradicate and bring back the “Mass of All Times” to ALL Roman Catholic Churches.

  20. By the way who is this PJT, who hates the True Mass of All Times?

    • No Catholic should dislike either form of the Mass.
      Those that do are heretics and schismatics – using the Church definitions in 2089.

      The Mass of all time? uses the 1962 Missal.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        God bless you MAC…..I agree….

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          I agree Abeca.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            YFC I am grateful that we can agree on something, your not all lost there and you can reason as we can see…While we have life this here in this earth, there is always hope for conversion. Jesus is the great physician and healer, His church is for the sinners because we are all in great need of THE doctor when we repent and want union with our Lord.

            I’ll continue to pray for you. There is always hope YFC. Who am I to doubt in that Hope that comes from our Lord. I am a sinner too YFC, just like you. I am no better. God have mercy on the both of us. I place the blood of Jesus on the great evils that divide us and May His saving blood protect us from the snares and lies of the devil!

          • Abeca Christian says:

            YFC in our Catholic church we have X-homosexuals, they are living a chaste lifestyle and a good friend of mine is now married. He and His wife have beautiful children and He lives for the Lord. Its rare but it does happen. One thing for sure is that he would never want to deceive anyone away from a loving relationship with our Lord. He would die then to promote sins against the natural law. When he was a practicing homosexual, he was the total opposite. People do change. Just thought I would share. No pun intended. Take care.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            YFC why don’t you shock us all and denounce “gay” lifestyles and maybe just maybe people here might finally take you seriously when you do speak truths about the church. I will edify you when you are noble enough to speak truths about the church but I will not stand by and watch you bring it down with your dissent either and its not just you, but others too even those who call themselves faithful. I trust that if you are open to certain truths, then there is hope for you, only someday by chance, if you choose to go all the way with our Lord.

            YFC admit it! Its time to grow. Sorry that some of us here may have pushed to much in their attacks which may have provoked you to being more prideful and perhaps it is that very reason that you choose not to grow in our beloved Jesus. Reach in there and rebuke that pride that is stopping you from fully having a precious relationship with our Lord. Don’t you know that what you choose to say and do about “gay” agenda’s hurts your relationship with our Lord, His first commandment, before the ten commandments, to mankind was and continues to be the Natural law!

      • Ann Malley says:

        If you know the innate differences in the forms of the Mass, Mac, you surely can dislike that which by its very nature supports a decided shift in what is most important. That doesn’t make one a heretic or a schismatic, but rather a keen and interested observer who understands the reality of Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi.

      • Rod LaRoque says:

        From: Papal Document Vindicates Adherents of Latin Mass
        by John Vennari
        http://www.fatima.org/news/newsviews/070707.asp
        _________

        “Pope Benedict XVI has voiced his own reservations about the New Mass of Paul VI. Years ago, then-Cardinal Ratzinger lamented that he had hoped the liturgical reforms of Vatican II would draw from the riches of liturgical tradition, instead, he said, we “can only stand, deeply sorrowing, before the ruins of the very things that (we) were concerned for.”

        Of the New Mass, Cardinal Ratzinger said, “in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over the centuries and replaced it — as in a manufacturing process — with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”

        This was not the first time a Vatican Cardinal spoke negatively of the liturgical reform.

        In 1969, before Paul VI released the New Liturgy, Vatican Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci sent Pope Paul VI a letter that accompanied a brief Critical Study of the New Mass. Here the Cardinals said the New Mass “represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent,” and would produce an agonizing crisis of conscience for numerous priests.

        The Critical Study also said that the New Mass “would gladden the heart of the most modernist Protestant”.

        • Anonymous says:

          This is an unreliable website from the organization of a suspended priest.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…And some of the Pharisees, from amongst the multitude, said to him: Master, rebuke thy disciples. To whom he said: I say to you, that if these shall hold their peace, the stones will cry out.”

            The truth will out, Anonymous.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, I want the truth and when it does come out, I welcome it. Learn the truth, I challenge you. Stop reading crap websites and read the writings of the Popes. Read the Vatican documents on Fatima which were issued to protect the faithful a deceiver that Sister Lucia refused to see.

          • Anonymous says:

            To correct my post: Sister Lucia agreed to meet with him over the objections of her Mother Prioress, but he did not arrive for his appointment. He arrived too late to see her and tried to force his way in to the cloister with a crowd but the way was blocked by Sister Lucia’s doctor and others. Sister Lucia gave a message for him to humble himself, accept that the Consecration had been done and that he asks for too much. Her message to the world is “He that is not with the Pope is not with God and he that wants to be with God has to be with the Pope.” This was reported by Rick Sabalto who was present at the time she made these statements.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Then let’s hope full disclosure of many things comes out. In the meantime, please don’t assign ill will to those who actively pursue truth or blind yourself into thinking that the internet is the only place to find it. And yet the Dutch Catechism of 1966 was released and given an imprimatur. That was long before the internet, Anonymous, and even with ‘proper approval’ has proved to be a prime source of much of the crap causing problems even today. Those reporting on the crap inside it are not deceivers, nor are they making things up out of hatred for Holy Mother Church. Quite the opposite, my friend.

            As to this so-called deceiver that Sister Lucy refused to see, Anonymous, where is the help in dropping bait, but not naming names? Also, something to consider, Sr. Lucy was a religious and as such was not at liberty to visit without the permission of her superiors. So Sr. Lucy’s refusal to see some ‘deceiver’ could also be Sr. Lucy being denied access to one who may not interview her with the pat question/answer key that fit the narrative of Church hierarchy. Context matters, my friend, always.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…Sister Lucia agreed to meet with him over the objections of her Mother Prioress, but he did not arrive for his appointment.”

            A holy, cloistered nun would NEVER agree to meet with someone or be allowed to do so over the objections of the Mother Prioress, Anonymous. That in itself makes the entire account smack of falsehood as it is humility (that which Sr. Lucy ‘supposedly’ admonished her visitor for lacking) was lacking in her so called acceptance of an interview outside obedience.

    • God bless you Anonymous

  21. Mrs Clark says:

    We are praying that this invitation is also extended by our bishop (neighboring diocese). Our pastor will retire next year and our Parish has the TLM and would welcome them with open arms.

  22. mrpkguy says:

    Can some one help me out here? If the order is called Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter why is it FSSP? Shouldn’t it be PFSP? Please some one, be kind enough to explain where I have gone wrong or what I have missed! Thanks.

  23. Why is Father Fryar holding up such a small Host?
    Isn’t the Celebrant’s Host usually larger, so one can break it?

    • BILL K. says:

      The host is broken.
      Size does not matter, but the smaller host is quite normal in the EF Mass.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      Q.”Why is Fr F. holding up such a small Host?”

      A. In the Traditional Latin Mass, the priest consumes the large host that is consecrated at each Mass shortly after the prayer “Domine non sum dignus”. Then, after the “2nd” Confiteor prayer, in this case recited by the server, and the following absolution (“Misericordia vestri..”), he turns back to the people and, presenting a small host, recites the prayer, “Ecce Agnus Dei”, inviting the people’s adoration, (at which the server responds with the “2nd” “Domine, non sum dignus”-prayer). It is at this point that the photo was taken.

      • Anonymous says:

        And you expect people to follow all that? Not gonna happen.

        • Ann Malley says:

          No expectation, but rather an observable reality, Anonymous, as folks do follow that and have been for centuries. Are you that intent on relegating your own generation to the trash bin of ineptitude.

        • Well, Anonymous, it is happening, and Fr. Fryar accepts the Ordinary Mass as long as it is according to the approved rubrics without any serious liturgical abuses as is evident on the audio link that Gratias posted.. It is those who bring in serious abuses or heresies into the Ordinary Mass who are causing such awful problems and divisions with the newer Mass.. I suspect, Anonymous, that there is some strong liturgical abuse or heresy — such as women priests or so-called same-sex marriage — that is causing you to be so radical opposed to this Mass. Otherwise, why would you even care if there are two forms of the Latin rite. In fact there are other forms of the Latin rite, too, that are just as ancient as the Extraordinary form but are only used by some orders. Are you against those also?

          • Rod LaRoque says:

            People are returning to the EF because the OF has too many loop holes and options being exploited by the modernists.

            Perhaps, and this is a big perhaps, if the Vatican was more disciplined in its regulation of the OF the desire for the EF would have diminished rather than continue to grow.

            However, we all know, but don’t want to admit, the return to the EF is driven by the great scandal on all levels within the larger church.

          • Anonymous says:

            Anne T. I’m not against them and this has nothing to do with homosexuality or women priests or any other heresy. Why would you even go there?

        • Anne T. says:

          Two people posting as Anonymous, one pushing so-called “marriage’ between two people of the same sex and one not doing so is most confusing. One of you needs to put a letter after his/her name to separate you two, or you can expect more misunderstanding.

  24. This is very good news for L.A. , one problem though, i would not like to have the parish in downtown LA, it keeps away the large families for daily mass that the FSSP attracts, it has been that way in other downtown FSSP parishes, if its in Hollywood the daily mass will swell

  25. Bob One says:

    Let me see if I have this right. The Archbishop has invited an order of priest dedicated to the EF Mass to come into the Archdiocese and set up a parish. Therefore, we should all condemn him for doing this? Could this be a case of “no good deed goes unpunished?”

    • Catherine says:

      “Let me see if I have this right.” AND “Therefore, we should all condemn him for doing this? Could this be a case of “no good deed goes unpunished?”

      Bob One,

      No one has condemned the Archbishop. You chose to use that ugly word. And YES it is surely a blessing for the FSSP to be In L.A.!!!

      Let me see if I have this right…In the NOW exposed light of the fallout of faith from other patterns that were ignored for well over 40 years, we are still dealing with the horrific wake of the terrible scandals. There is nothing wrong with expressing concerns about the realities of patterns of actions that have taken place. God wants us to be faithful sheep : ) holding all of our our beloved shepherd’s feet to the fire….not dumb : ( sheep lining up right to the edge of a steep cliff.

      Also Bob…Who should know about the idiom “no good deed goes unpunished” more than you? You consistently punish those who charitably perform the good deed of not letting you think that you are fooling anyone. You’re political agenda always speaks much louder that than your faithful Catholicism. Sorry that you feel so punished. I am sure YFC feels punished too.

      • Bob One says:

        Catherine, there you go again. I have no political agenda. I’m an independent in the political world. In the Catholic world, I can’t think of anything I have ever said that would lead you to believe that I am anything but orthodox. I just wish that we could take an article like this and say “Bravo” and let it go at that. People who attend NO Masses don’t hate people who attend EF Masses, and I believe the opposite to be true as well. I think that it is great when someone goes to Mass on the weekend, no matter which they attend or prefer. And, we all know that one format is not better than the other in terms of grace, etc. When you go to communion it is the same God, the consecration is the same, just in different languages. I believe I was the first on this thread to say that this was a good thing. Then it went every which direction. This is a good thing. Let’s treat it as good news.

    • Rod LaRoque says:

      Because it is a concession that is so little and so late.
      And BTW since when should any Catholic grovel to receive their own patrimony from their own bishop?
      When we were baptised we were promised to be given the faith. Not a modernist reinterpretation, but the Faith of the Church has it has been passed on from generation to generation.
      There is no reason to grovel to receive our birthrights especially since it means our salvation.

  26. BILL K. says:

    We should support Our Clergy whenever they do something good.

  27. Caiside says:

    You mean to tell me there is “an institute dedicated exclusively to the Traditional Mass”? I mean, I can see having the Traditional Mass for those who like that sort of thing, fine, but to have an institute that only exists for this purpose? Sort of like a music group dedicated to medieval music? No better use for priests in this day and age?

    • Canisius says:

      “No better use for priests in this day and age?” Nothing is more important than the salvation of souls NOTHING!!!!

  28. For those interested, the Latin form of the Mass is offered every Sunday except when the celebrant is out of town. The Mass is celebrated at Sacred Heart Church in Palm Desert at 2:30 Sunday afternoons. The church is located at the intersection of Fred Waring Drive and Deep Canyon. Notice is provided in the parish bulletin when the Latin Mass will not be celebrated. For anyone driving in from out of town, I suggest you call the parish office (760-346-6502) during the week before to make sure the celebrant will be in town.

  29. Steve Phoenix says:

    I always think it good to review what Vatican II actually said regarding the liturgy: in Sacro. Concilium (SC), The Traditional Mass was to retain its immutable elements (n. 21); no priest was to add, remove or change any part of it. As we all know, the norm of the Mass was to remain in Latin (36.1); at least at times the congregation were to observe times of reverent silence (30) The Council Fathers said that Gregorian chant was specially suited to the Mass (116); and the pipe organ was the preferred traditional instrument for the liturgy (120).

    Now, add to that what Cardinal Alfons Stickler, a peritus at Vat 2, said in a lecture a few years ago, that the Council Fathers never conceived of an abrogation of the TLM, “the Mass of all time” (nothing is ever mentioned of this sort in SC); nor even the wholesale abandonment of Latin: on the contrary, Stickler said the limited use of the vernacular for the Epistle and Gospel readings was only conceived for mission lands (you can see this in 36.2)

    Again, since the liturgical change was reserved to the Apostolic See alone, not even permitted to be changed by a Council and its acts, Stickler states that the Council Fathers left the Council in 1965 fully anticipating only minor ritual changes, and assumed that the organic unity of the whole of the Mass and the other rites would be preserved.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      Now, in fact we know that if you are attending a Catholic Church where, like with the FSSP, the Mass is in Latin, it is the Mass of 1962 (or at least the 1965 missal); that Gregorian chant is sung and the pipe organ is played, you are probably at a rank SSPX “traditionalist” church (if not the SSPX), —yet all these are the explicit prescriptions of Sacrosanctum Concilium of Vatican II.

      But the obvious break in our worship and belief that occurred at Vatican II had to be remedied (one of the reasons for Summorum Pontificum constructing the artificial designations “Ordinary Form” and “Extraordinary Form”: the very name of Paul VI, the “Novus Ordo of the Mass” admitted it had broken with tradition and the past.

      Now, if you read Rembert Weakland’s autobio, “Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church”, he admits constructing the new liturgy with Abp. Bugnini and presenting it Paul VI in an “experimental liturgy” at the Sistine Chapel over about 3 evenings in 1966-1967. There are no notes or records of whom Bugnini and Weakland consulted as liturgical experts to “preserve” the unchangeable elements of the liturgy (n. 21 in SC): we know Louis Bouyer, Klaus Gamber, Stickler and others were not included; even Joseph Gelineau (hardly a Lefebvrist!) said, “”The Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.”

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        There are no notes or records of whom Bugnini and Weakland consulted as liturgical experts to “preserve” the unchangeable elements of the liturgy (n. 21 in SC): we know Louis Bouyer, Klaus Gamber, Stickler and others were not included; even Joseph Gelineau (hardly a Lefebvrist!) said, “”The Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.”
        And then, in Bugnini’s publication Liturgiae Ephemerides, in a “Notitiae”, the new rite was mysteriously promulgated. (Later, Paul VI added an Apostolic Constitution to the New Roman Missal: but without a statement to the universal church explaining the abolition of the old rite and the substitution of the new.)

        So, in this state of confusion and break with the past, this is where we are. And no wonder everyone is confused.

      • So what do you intend to do about it ?

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          “So what do you intend to do about it?” Let’s start with telling the truth. Michael Davies (“Pope Paul’s New Mass”), Romano Amerio (“Iota Unum”), and Klaus Gamber have excellent books out there documenting the actual events from 1962-on. Every Catholic should know the truth covered in these accounts.

          In fact, Cardinal Ratzinger himself wrote the preface to Gamber’s book, “The Reform of the Liturgy”, saying: “”What happened after the Council was something else entirely: in the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came fabricated liturgy. We abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it – as in a manufacturing process – with a fabrication, a banal on -the-spot product. Gamber, with the vigilance of a true prophet and the courage of a true witness, opposed this falsification, and, indefatigably taught us about the living fullness of a true liturgy” (ca 1993).

          So, this is [later] Pope Benedict XVI speaking about the problem of the TLM vs. the Novus Ordo Mass. Everyone needs to know what the Council Fathers intended, what SC actually said (granted its contradictory trap-door clauses) and what actually happened.

          • Ann Malley says:

            God bless you, Steve Phoenix, for patiently explaining the necessity of understanding the truth. Too many people fear that learning the realities of what happened, why, and how it happened is somehow detrimental to winning souls. Nothing could be further from reality as the truth will always out. Putting off real problems under the blanket of fear will only increase future repercussions, much like we have seen with assorted other scandals in the Church. That approach also degrades credibility to the point that even the truth will no longer be acknowledged for the messengers cannot be trusted.

            Thanks again!

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            What you prescribe for the faithful is only true if you think it is wise or commendable to second guess the teaching authority of the Bishops, who have approved the Ordinary Form for regular use. Learn history, sure. Use history to question the teaching authority. Not so much.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Now, when Card. Ratzinger himself, later P. Benedict XVI, speaks of the Novus Ordo Mass saying (C. Ratzinger/PXVI speaking) “..In the place of liturgy as the fruit of development came [a] fabricated liturgy” and endorses Msgr. Klaus Gamber’ as “one who truly represents the liturgical thinking of the center of the Church.” and “one who opposed this falsification”, we know we have a problem.

            After all, it was Klaus Gamber who opposed Paul VI’s changing of the words of institution to “you and for all”. Gamber: “Pope Paul VI saw fit to alter the words of Consecration and Institution, unchanged in the Roman Liturgy for 1,500 years- a change that was never intended by the Council. Truly problematic, in fact truly scandalous, is the translation of the phrase ‘pro multis’ as “for all”, a translation inspired by modern theological thinking but not found in any historic liturgical text.”

            The fact is it took about four decades for the truth to come out about the ‘pro multis’ issue: but in the end it did and it was finally corrected. In the end, there is no doubt the truth about the Novus Ordo vs. the TLM will come out also. The facts are there: it is just too much for most people to believe.

          • Ann Malley says:

            What I proscribe for the faithful, YFC, is to be wise as serpents but innocent as doves. What do you proscribe?

          • Anonymous says:

            YFC, it is not the authority of the bishops. It is the authority of all the Popes since Paul VI.

          • Ann Malley says:

            It’s also the authority of all the Popes prior to Paul VI, Anonymous. Tradition is not just the Pope now. Or the Pope since X time. But rather since Peter.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Dear Ann Malley: The word I used was prescribe, not proscribe. What I prescribe is to love God with all your heart, soul and mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself.

            Dear Anonymous. Popes are Bishops, are they not? First among equals, in fact.

          • Anonymous says:

            YFC, The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, yes.
            Bigotry against the bishops is so rampant on this website that I wanted to clarify that it is not the bishops but the Pope who promulgates the form of the Mass. The bishops can adapt the Roman Missal to their language and customs but it must be approved by the Holy See.
            Ann Malley, i guess you did not follow the conversation. We are talking about the currant Ordinary Form of the Mass. Also, Tradition is completely different. Tradition is from the Apostles. It is the Pope and the Bishops duty to preserve Tradition as it was handed down by the Apostles. You seem confused on the meaning of Tradition. It is in the CCC if you need to review.

          • Ann Malley says:

            I didn’t put the word proscribe into your mouth, YFC, but thanks for the charitaable clarification just the same. But please, when attempting to love your neighbor as yourself, do not forget that you are your closest neighbor. And if one doesn’t love oneself enough to choose Our Lord over sin, one has no proper basis for loving anyone else. So while you’re focusing on word choices, a very good thing to be sure, you may want to focus on the meanings and intentions behind using certain terms.

            And the Pope is the Pope, as being ‘first among equals’ in this instance equals his being the Vicar of Christ, too, not just being a Bishop. Again, it gets down to what the words and titles actually mean.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            AM, I know the difference and the meanings behind prescribe and proscribe. Do you? I understand what First Among Equals means – and it does not mean he is the first among Popes. It means he is Bishop of the Diocese of Rome, and is given a place of primacy in the Church. It means that he has authority to teach in unison with his Brother Bishops. It could also be said to mean that he is the Servant of the Servants of God.

            But thanks for the condescending lecture.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…But thanks for the condescending lecture.”

            You are a fine teacher, YFC, but sadly not in Catholic doctrine. So you are welcome for my corresponding charity. And despite what you may desire, Our Lord never said, “…Thou art Bishops and upon these rocks I will build my Church.” Translation: no dream of individual ‘sees’ as you termed it on another thread. Because individual ‘sees’ by way of nature is the opposite of unity.

            So yes, I very much acknowledge that you know precisely what you are saying. That is why I respond to your exceedingly clear and consistently anti-Catholic posts.

  30. Ski Ven says:

    It is probably easier to find a Klingon Mass.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      lol SKi Ven where do you come with that. LOL you are funny, miss you and our other good regulars. Hope you are well. If you were gone because you were fighting the good fight, then more power to you! YAHOOOO

      • Ski Ven says:

        Thanks, Abeca, for your comment. Life happens and I end up having to deal with a lot of unexpected things. I also had some computer problems that took me off the Internet for a while. I could use some prayers. I miss JLS. There is no way that I could know if he has gone to his eternal reward. Since we are on the subject of eternal rewards, I have been to quite a few funerals lately. They help me to keep things in perspective. Some people can do really well in life, but no matter how well they do, they have to eventually let go of the things that they had in this life. Life is here today and gone tomorrow. Death is the great equalizer between the rich and the poor, between Kings and peasants. I thank God that he has given me the gift of faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ can give me what the world could never give me, for the new normal of the world is decay and death. I may not have it good in this life, but thanks be to God that I have the promise of being raised from the dead and receiving everlasting life in the Kingdom of Heaven through Jesus Christ my Lord. Alleluia.

        • Yes, Ski Ven, it’s good to have you back! I was just thinking about JLS myself. I hope he’s okay. May God bless and keep you.

        • We can only pray for JLS, Ski Ven, at this point. No one seems to know what happened to him.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          Ski Ven I understand, same here, lots of unexpected things. Our beloved Jesus knows our good hearts and He is with us. Yes let pray for JLS and others. I just hope we can be welcoming to new comers who are faithful. I don’t like this ugly display of division I am seeing. I can tell you this, this experience has made me stronger to my loyalty to the Magisterium that is for sure. I’ve been blessed this past year to be part of a group of lay faithful who are my age (yes those post V2 people some love to call us, I take it a compliment). I also have a holy priest in my family’s life too. Excellent guidance too to help us stay well grounded. They call us the fruit of V2, I call all this arguing the fruit of PreV2. Fair is fair. Yes they will reply to try to hang me for my personal opinion but this behavior produces nothing good. MIKE and others who posted the truth on what the CCC teaches, have warned us that it was a sin to attack the OF mass and it is also wrong when the liberals attack the EF mass. They are both valid forms of Mass. Our Beloved Jesus is with us. Can we just focus on our Beloved Jesus before we bash anyone who has their preference? Its time to get out and see what is really happening in the world and I am doing that and I see very holy people today who are fighting the good fight. We need to unite and take back what belongs to our beloved Jesus. I lean heavily on Virgin Mary for her intercession.

  31. Anne T. says:

    The FSSP is a fine order of priests. Even the younger priests, and there are many, many of the them, give excellent sermons.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      Anne T also Milies Christi, http://www.mileschristi.org/ order is excellent. We also have the Norbertine Order such lovely order! http://www.stmichaelsabbey.com/abbey/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=63We have the Fathers of mercy, order too. http://fathersofmercy.com/.

      We are blessed in our Universal church to have these orders. The OF Mass has many devout and holy people who are fighting the good fight, I am grateful for them. I have met very holy lay faithful within our church ,who never whine about the ills we are facing but actually are out in the font line fighting the good fight, many are even working with some protestant fallen away brothers and sisters in this good fight to defend the Natural law, they are defending Marriage, they are preaching the message on chastity and even priests and nuns too. They are all in union with Rome. yes while we have the disease of bad will, we also have saints in combat! Yes saints! They want to be saints and persevere with fortitude. Being in union with Rome is a gift and and I praise Jesus for this gift and virtuous to persevere in His church, God bless the Magisterium! God bless our POPE!!!!

  32. Anne T. says:

    The FSSP website also sells Latin Missals through Baronius Press.

  33. If anyone reading this has never been to an EXTRAORDINARY FORM (EF) of the Mass, I encourage you to get a copy of the “LATIN-ENGLISH BOOKLET MISSAL” to ensure better understanding.
    http://www.fraternitypublications.com/labomi.html

    Clothing worn should be modest business attire.
    It is not mandatory but out of Tradition and in accord with the Bible, most women and female children wear Mantillas.
    http://www.ewtnreligiouscatalogue.com/shop.axd/Search?keywords=mantilla&x=0&y=0

    The FSSP does a beautiful, holy and uplifting Mass.
    With the permission of any Diocese Bishop, they will teach all interested Priests to say the EF Mass.
    I encourage everyone to attend.
    http://fssp.com/press/locations/
    and
    http://fssp.com/press/

    Financially support the FSSP closest to you if you can.

  34. I tried for years to convert my husband to the Catholic Church. He refused and said there was no difference between his Protestant Chuch and the Novus Ordo Chuch. It was only after my mom and dad took my husband to a Latin Mass did he say he wanted to convert to the Church. He went to RCIA and needless to say he learned absolutely nothing. He would come home and tell me what was taught and I would have to explain things and tell him what the Church truly teaches. They had lay people teaching watered down Catholicism and outright heresy. One woman said that,” God is a woman.” When they learned about the sacrament of marriage, all the speaker spoke about was how you can get an annulment. Nothing else. He was converted through the Novus Ordo. After much research and studying the Church before Vatican II did we realize what was stolen from us at Vatican II. We now attend ONLY the traditional Latin Mass. The whole Church changed drastically and NOT for the better. The whole Church was modernized and became lukewarm with the Novus Ordo Mass. Our Sacraments and Mass changed drastically. Unless Catholics really study the Church history, they do not realize what has been taken away from them. The Church needs to go back to the way it was for thousands of years before Vatican II. Until then, there will be diabolical confusion in the Church as our Blessed Mother said at Fatima.

    • Ann Malley says:

      Thank you, RR, for reiterating the reality on the ground for many. The story of your husband’s conversion is VERY much like my husband’s. I thank God for the TLM, literally.

      Type-casting a knowledge and adherence to Catholic Tradition and factual history as bad mouthing is so detrimental in the long run. You said, “Unless Catholics really study the Church history, they do not realize what has been taken away from them,” is so true. That is often why those who convert via the Novus Ordo upon learning what the Catholic Church really teaches often feel a deep sense of betrayal.

      God bless you for your post!

      • Abeca Christian says:

        RR my husband is a convert (from the pentecostal born again crowd) and it was in the OF Mass that has helped him come home to Rome. He would disagree with thinking that its the same. Its not. I wish I knew you, my husband can share with you some important things. My husband says that sometimes people use excuses and don’t let that one instance of your husband make you think that its true.

        I will pray for you as I have for the several years we have come to know one another through these threads. God bless you. jmj

    • Anonymous says:

      RR, please study the CCC sections on the Church and the Sacraments. History did not end in 1965 (nor did it begin in 1570.). Your statement “The Church needs to go back to the way it was for thousands of years before Vatican II.” indicates that you do not know Church History at all. Please make sure that the research you do is from reliable Church sources. Please re-read the messages of our Lady of Fatima. The term diabolical confusion was not used be our Blessed Mother. It seems as if you have confused the sayings of our Lady with some other things.

  35. Ann Malley: Too bad much of my post at 7:52 was edited. I said a lot more that I wish wasn’t edited. I used to post here much more often, but stopped for a long time because my posts were always either edited to where they didn’t make sense or they didn’t get posted at all. I remember now why I stopped posting. Seems some things never change. I can’t believe what some people get away with in writing their posts and I do not believe what I had written deserved editing. I guess what I have to say in response is, “whatever.” I still read California Catholic Daily and sit back and observe who are faithful Catholics and I know you, Catherine, Canisius, Kenneth and a few others are definitely faithful. Keep up your defense of the Traditional faith. My comments about the Traditional Church and Faith are what got edited. Sad, if you ask me!

    • CalCatholic Moderator says:

      Thanks for your comment, RR. Please refer to the 250 word limit in regards to your previous comment today at 7:52am.

    • Ann Malley says:

      RR, keep posting. We need defense of truth on CCD – all of it. Even if it is painful and challenges those lines of what we think could never have happened. The Church is the Spouse of Christ and as such will suffer a passion much like His…and at the hand of Her closest friends. Otherwise, it wouldn’t hurt so much. And no true servant is greater than his Master.

      Despite what others may tell you, your experiences and the instincts of your parents are right on the money. Thank God for that. And congratulations on your husband’s conversion to the Faith! You are right on in repeating Sister Lucy’s warning concerning diabolical disorientation. That said, there would be no disorientation if those outside the Church attempted to bring Her down as those against the Church have always done as much. The confusion or disorientation comes when those inside the Church attempt to bring Her down as it is disordered and confusing for a Body to fight against itself.

      That said, CCD has no problem posting comments in defense of Tradition, not at all. Goodness knows they’ve posted enough of mine.

      God bless and keep the Faith!

    • Catherine says:

      RR, Welcome back and it is so nice to hear from you. Your beautiful posts always added a very sweet richness and depth to this website and we have missed your voice. Thank you for posting and please continue to share your love of the Catholic Faith. RR, You can divide your posts into two comment boxes and write continued on the bottom of your first comment box and then continue your thoughts into the next comment box underneath. If on occasion you should need a third comment box be sure to write continued and then keep using the 250 word limit in each box and you should be fine when it comes to expressing your thoughts in their entirety.

      RR, How is your brother doing? I remember that he was carrying a heavy cross and that you were always trying to bolster him with encouragement. I believe that we can all learn from one another and we can bolster up one another with the beautiful truths of our faith. Once again, welcome back!

      • Hi RR, I agree with Catherine’s post entirely…I copy half my ” brilliant” responses and paste it in another comment box in the event one precious word is lost. (Heh heh). Also, don’t get discouraged. You always bring interesting insights that help clarify thing. As Card. Newman wrote, “to know history is to become Catholic.” You are so right.

        • Charles A says:

          Its bazaar how could these Catholics compliment people who are schismatics? I better leave this website. Exiting ….

          • Ann Malley says:

            You do not understand the true nature of schism, Charles A.

          • Catherine says:

            “Its bazaar how could these Catholics compliment people who are schismatics?” = Is that you kanonymous?

            What is even more bazaar is that after the great loss of faith, the horrific scandals and the original Jon Jay study, that Our Holy Father still had the charity to say this about homosexuals. “Who Am I To Judge? ” So Charles A, follow the example of the Holy Father and stop calling names and judging. Show the same charity in acknowledging the truthful points that Ann Malley is saying and then follow the same footsteps as the Holy Father in attempting to reach out in charitable dialogue to everyone for unity. After all kanonymous you constantly reached out to MarkfromPA who consistently pretended to be in “so called” full communion as he congratulated the sinfully homosexual lifestyle of Aaron and Tomas in Spain. So Charles A. Take the selective beam out of your own eye and follow the charitable example of the Holy Father in trying to unite all souls.

          • Catherine is that how you talk to another faithful? Is this how this woman talks down to a convert! Its not holy behavior. Charles is right to have felt displeasure in this. Its what true Catholics should do and have no part in this talk. I will do what Charles said I will be exiting too…..I don’t want any part in this.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Mrs. A, you need to understand what you are being faithful to. Having no part in ‘this talk’, that is about the realities of our own Catholic patrimony, yet believing we can go out and credibly speak with non-Catholics, many who know our Catholics history, is a catch 22. You may have not been caught in that scenario. I have. And having to dig for the answers to give them sends one on an amazing journey of self discovery – that is discovery of Catholic patrimony.

            Scripture tells us to be wise as serpents, but innocent as doves. Being wise would indicate taking the time required to learn in depth, not just study talking points and shut down honest inquiry with unfounded charges of heresy and schism. If the Catholic Church is now being called to humble itself to take responsibility in part for the separation of brethren (formerly called heretics) over doctrines, how much more should those inside the Church humble themselves when discussing the doctrines of the Catholic Church with Catholics that very rightfully discern the shift in spirit after Vatican II? Like calling Lutherans who were condemned rightfully in the past as heretics separated brothers.

            That is a decided shift, Mrs. A. It is a shift in the concept of heresy and, despite what you may have been taught, a condemnation of those in the Church who died fighting such heresy.

            That said, you would do well to learn from Catherine’s wise approach if only to learn how better to approach your brethren – not separated – but understandably vigorous in their defense of the One True Church.

          • Ann Malley says:

            As for my talking down to a convert, if you want to behave as the Church is telling you to, you should look to what your husband did to provoke the response. He was out of line, ma’am.

      • Catherine: My brother is doing well. He still attends the Latin Mass and receives the sacraments. He is now dealing with the fact that his oldest son is now living with his girlfriend in sin just like the mother has done for years. She continues to date and live with men who come and go and she still is up on the altar handing out Holy Communion at the Novus Ordo Mass she attends. She is leading my nephew to hell. The Church today condemns and shuns the Traditionalists, but this woman is in good standing with the Church. Really?Why can’t people see that the Church since Vatican II has crumbled? Nothing is a sin anymore. The Faith is watered down and the Commandments are just suggestions to live by. Shakin” my head!

        • Ann Malley says:

          Look to the perennial teachings of the Church, RR, not the disorientation of this present time and not to anonymous posters who have no authority whatever. Most do not even understand the concept, but use what little they think they know to try and frighten folks into lose/lose scenarios of despair.

          I thank God that you have the TLM and community to support you in your struggle. And it is a struggle. Keep posting. I’d like to hear more of what you have to say.

          As to wondering why people can’t see, try not to. The devastation in the vineyard is part and parcel of that which was predicted by Christ. It is another testament to the Truth of the Gospel.

          God bless!

          • Anonymous says:

            Gal. 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury, [20] Idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects,[21] Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God. [22] But the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, [23] Mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity. Against such there is no law. [24] And they that are Christ’ s, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences. [25] If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.[26] Let us not be made desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying on another.

          • Anonymous says:

            OK Ann Malley, success. I found one. Although a long held belief in the Catholic Church, it was not until Vatican II that Mary was officially declared Mother of the Church.
            If that is what you are upset about, we gonna have another long talk.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Our Lady was always considered Mother of the Church, Anonymous. But ‘Mother of the Church’ was less than the title, ‘Mediatrix of All Grace’ that was thought would be an impediment for those in heretical sects who do not honor Her as Catholics do.

            That said, if you really want to know what I object to in the documents of VII, here’s a link to start:

            http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2003_March/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

            If you do not wish to read, that’s okay. If you’re interested in true outreach, read on. If you can respond to the real disconnects from Tradition inherent in the documents noted, please, DO. I would love to be proved wrong with regard to the written explanation that so perfectly corresponds with the confused muddle that I lived in the Novus Ordo. Please.

            But, and this is a biggie, if you consider me outside the Church then it would be the charitable thing for you to read about my position for understanding, much like the post VII Church encourages outreach.

          • Anonymous says:

            May I kindly suggest that you read the Catechism and the Vatican documents. I so not know who runs the website but I am very sure that the bishops of the SSPX are not that stupid. But again, that is one of the problems with them is that they lie to the people who follow them. With Cardinal Ratzinger, they never brought up such silliness.
            If you don’t know and understand the teachings of the Catholic Church, anybody can come along and tell you “The Catholic Church says so and so” and you won’t know any better than to believe them. No wonder you are so confused when you have been reading stuff like this. Remember, there was a sermon by Bishop Fellay where he admitted that he told the Vatican that he saw the SSPX followers as confused and simplistic so he over-simplify things and ends up saying things that aren’t true.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, I have read the VII documents. You seem incapable of or unwilling to accept that reality. (I find them horrifying.) Either way, what the SSPX has proposed in their analysis confirms my own. That is my own analysis *and* experience of a dynamic shift in theology – that VII documents are inherently flawed by their lack of clarity and intimating that the Faith (Reality) has changed.

            Regarding Bishop Fellay, he was referring to how one generally interacts with those who are ‘not’ interested or able to do their own investigating. Those who do not read and investigate, Anonymous, or those who find the matters too weighty to understand. Many folks do not want to and do not have the time or intellectual capacity. Many head of large families look to their clerics to lead them, much like those who followed their Bishops into the Novus Ordo and all that accompanied it.

            Even so, what you are pointing out is that the documents are ambiguous. Ambiguous enough that they could be interpreted to mean exactly what the Society believes that they do imply. THAT in itself is a problem, Anonymous, as official Church teaching should be conveyed with ultimate clarity.

            You would not expect to use an official operators manual for a Mercedes and yet have to call in for perpetual clarification on what the book says, would you? Of course not. You would rightfully expect that the technical writers of Mercedes manuals would take into account the steep price you paid for their product and put a heightened attention in the creation of their manual – if only in acknowledgement of how much you paid for the car.

  36. Anonymous: My Catholic research is spot on. St. Pope Pius V Quo Primum is a source for Tradition. If you can’t see the difference of the Sacraments from what they used to be pre-Vatican II and what they are now, then I don’t know what to tell you. I could go on and on about the differences here, but it would take months to write them. The CCC is NOT the only source to find Church history. Oh, and by the way, aren’t you the pro-gay supporter here on CalCath?
    If you are, then apparently you don’t know Church history at all either! You’re one to talk, aren’t you? I will have to give you the one where you said Blessed Mother didn’t say “diabolical confusion,” You are correct. It wasn’t her. It was Sr. Lucy who said that because of what the Blessed Mother told her what would happen if her message wasn’t done.

    • Anonymous says:

      RR, Quo Primum is a source for Tradtion? Do you know what Tradition is? Are you sure you are not conflating the so-called Traditional Latin Mass with Tradition? Do you understand the ordinary form and the extraordinary form of the Roman Rite are the same rite? Do you understand that all Catholic Masses in any rite are the sacrifice of Jesus renewed? The very same sacrifice that Jesus Christ made on the Cross for the forgiveness of sins? Do you understand the the CCC is not a book on Church History?
      As for your false accusation of my being a “pro-gay supporter,” I am concerned that you lowered yourself to do such a thing. Praying for you.
      As for Sister Lucia supposed use of the term diabolical confusion, if you can source that term from one of her writings. please let us know. I know there are websites by Catholics who are in revolt against the Church who claim she wrote letters containing a term similar to that. If you can prove their veracity, please do so.
      I again encourage you to read the Catechism and also to get Lucia’s real memoirs and a book on the Mass and on the Church’s History. Be wary of internet sites. There is no imprimatur for them. Anyone can start a site that says it is Catholic.
      God bless you and may the Holy Spirit protect you from error and increase in you His Gifts. St. Michael and St. Joseph, intercede for us. Our Lady of Fatima, protect us under your mantel and ask your Son to give us the grace of knowing His Truth.

      • Ann Malley says:

        They are not the ‘same’ rite, Anonymous. Pope Paul VI gave his mass the moniker, Novus Ordo Missae. That is new order, not revamped, improved, revised, but new. Please give the man some credit for knowing his own mind.

        As to that:

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

        • Anonymous says:

          “Art 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the ‘Lex orandi’ (Law of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same ‘Lex orandi,’ and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church’s ‘Lex credendi’ (Law of belief). They are, in fact two usages of the one Roman rite”. Summorum Pontificum Pope Benedict XVI

          In your quote, the former Cardinal Ratzinger is not talking about the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. He is talking about straying from the Rite, being creative with the Rite-which we endured quite enough of, thank you. You must not equate the Roman Rite of the Holy Mass with variations and abuses that are inappropriate and unapproved.

        • Ann Malley says:

          God bless you, Anonymous. The law of prayer IS the law of belief. That is one reason why the ‘new’ law of prayer has produced so many who seem to have a very new ‘law’ of belief.

          “…These two expressions of the Church’s Lex orandi will in no any way lead to a division in the Church’s ‘Lex credendi’ (Law of belief).”

          With all due respect, I’ve no doubt Pope Emeretis Benedict was directing this statement to those Novus Ordo proponents who fear a return to solid, Catholic belief in all its fullness. A fullness that could be ushered in by an across-the-board acceptance of the TLM. They didn’t want a return to solid Catholic tradition then and they still don’t. That is precisely why there are Bishops who ignore the Summorum Pontificum because they, unlike you, at least in what you put forth in your posts, know all too well that the law of prayer is the law of belief. And they will have none of it.

          Regarding ‘musts’. You must not expect others to obey your dictates, Anonymous. The authoritarian tone alone is a complete turn off and antithetical to catechizing.

  37. Ann Malley: I couldn’t agree with you more on your post at 5:18 pm. What people don’t know is that Vatican II was only a pastoral council and no dogmas were made. There were Protestant ministers there who helped make up the Novus Ordo Mass. The Council was overtaken by liberal, priests, bishops, Protestants, and, yes, Freemasons. There is so much information out there if people would take off the blinders and read all the information that is out there. The Mass and the Sacraments changed drastically and if people took the time to research and find out these differences, then things could get better in the Church. Until God straightens things out in the Church I will continue to attend the Mass of Pius V and follow Sacred Tradition.

    • There were 4 Dogmatic Constitutions at VII, 9 Decrees, and 3 Declarations.
      http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/

      Anyone who read the Documents knows that Vatican II – DID NOT -
      1. Promote Communion in the hand
      2. Altar girls
      3. Priests facing the people
      4. Eucharistic ministers [An utter novelty in the history of the Church, but flow naturally from Communion in hand]
      5. Protestant music in Mass [Dan Schutte]
      6. Movement of tabernacles from center of altars
      Vatican II DID –
      7. Insist upon Gregorian chant
      8. Insist upon use of Latin in parts of the Mass [And a document of the highest doctrinal import by Pope St. John XXIII, Veterum Sapientia] .

      We can thank the National Council of Bishops (USCCB) of the 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s for promoting and not adhering to the VII documents.
      Cardinal Bernardin and others got special permission (indults) to impose their own wills upon us.
      These are the same Bishops who made ILLEGAL immigration a big business in the US Catholic Church.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        It’s really unfortunate that posts like this are allowed to continue to sow seeds of division within the Church. Just because an Ecumenical Council did not make certain changes does not make the changes that followed illegal, bad, or out of step with the doctrine of the faith.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Yes, YFC, it does follow that changes that are not approved will lead to that which is inherently illegal, bad, and out of step with the doctrine of the Faith. For if they were inherently good changes, why was authorization not sought in the first place?

          So it is not Jose’s post that is sewing anything, but rather the innovations of those men who decided that they wanted something new instead of that which has been handed down.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, may I politely point out again that since you do not attend the Catholic Church you could not possibly know what goes on in it.
            And your speculations about it are usually completely wrong.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Thank you again for resorting to your only defense, Anonymous, which shows you incapable of addressing the reality of inconsistencies.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, you are so offensive and unChristian I sometimes wonder if you are just here to lead people astray.
            It is hard to believe that someone would hold a debate (and a long debate) on a subject and never say what your issue is with these Church documents that you haven’t even read.
            Is you motive simply to plant doubts about the Catholic Church in the minds of faithful CCD readers?
            We really are not that unintelligent. You have brought nothing to the table but vague and changing insinuations which all have been shot down by other posters. So are you just wanting to try to erode people’s Faith? You can always trust the Catholic Church. It is protected by God, by Jesus Christ, by the Holy Spirit, by Mary, by St. Joseph and St. Michael. You are duty bound to be docile to Her teachings-all of them.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Ann Malley, I didn’t say that there were changes made that were not approved. Your favorite tactic is to put words into people’s mouths. Please read it again….I said just because VII did not make the changes [in the mass] it doesn’t mean that the changes that were approved were illegal or not in keeping with the deposit of faith. Is it really so difficult to read what people write, or is it your intention to skew what people say so that it is easier for you to contradict. Liturgical changes do not have to be made by ecumenical council. Benedict changed many words just a few months ago. Did he convene an ecumenical council to approve them? NO!! Were there ecumenical councils to approve changes to the liturgy that happened in 1950, 1958, 1962 ? NO!! SSPX itself celebrates a liturgy that had undergone changes without the benefit or approval of ecumenical councils.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Read if you’d like:

            http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2003_March/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

            If you don’t want to, don’t keep asking. There is nothing vague about what I’m saying. You just don’t like what I’m saying, Anonymous. As for doubt, VII did much to sow doubt in me. Not with regards to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, wherein lies the deposit of the Faith in ALL fullness, but it sowed doubts in me with regard to the council and those who promulgated it. The same men that went forth and, whether by weakness or willfulness, allowed the devastation of the vineyard to the detriment of my entire family. The family of my blood and the family of my Faith.

            If you take issue with that, too bad. Take your misplaced hauteur and write your Bishop.

          • Ann Malley says:

            YFC, I am glad to have spurred you to learn something outside of your own progressive agenda. Perhaps further posts will get your dander up enough to actually learn the salient points.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Jose, thank you for being clear. You are spot on with what VII did not impose. Even so, whereas I did find reference in the link you provided to that which was – Constituted, Declared, and Decreed – I find no dogmatic pronouncement. That is why I cannot attribute dogmatic authority to Vatican II constitutions, declarations and decrees that go against previously established dogma. Especially when Pope Saint John XXIII and Pope Paul VI went out of the way to expressly declare that Vatican II was in no way intended to declare dogma.

        • Ann Malley says:

          There is also the quote from Pope Benedict regarding the council:

          “Certainly there is a mentality of narrow views that isolates Vatican II and which provoked this opposition. There are many accounts of it, which give the impression that from Vatican II onward, everything has been changed, and what preceded it has no value or, at best, has value only in the light of Vatican II. […] The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council.” (Address to the Chilean Episcopal Conference, Il Sabato 1988)

          • Ann Malley says:

            Also:

            Pope John Paul II:

            “Indeed, the extent and depth of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council call for a renewed commitment to deeper study in order to reveal clearly the Council’s continuity with Tradition, especially in points of doctrine which, perhaps because they are new, have not yet been well understood by some sections of the Church.” (Ecclesia Dei, 1988)

            John Paul II admitted the novelties of Vatican II and claims that they are “new points of doctrine.” But Pope Pius IX defined ex cathedra at the First Vatican Council as follows.

            “For the Holy Ghost was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by His revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by His assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or Deposit of Faith transmitted by the Apostles.” (Pastor Aeternus, chapter 4)

            So hence we have confusion. Was VII pastoral as proclaimed by the Popes presiding over it? One would think the Popes at the time of the Council knew what they were about. If so, then why would Pope John Paul II say that there are ‘new’ doctrines when specifically it was said there was no intention to define new doctrines. Combine that with the fact that the council is openly proclaimed pastoral and you get confusion.

            That is why many folks are clinging to tradition… and also why many shepherds took advantage of the opportunity to press for novelties.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Ann Malley – whether The Council fathers declared new dogmas or not, is not an excuse for you and others to ignore it and sow seeds of discontent because of it.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank you for posting that quote from Cardinal Ratzinger to the bishops of Chile.. It should be enough to correct what you wrote in your other post. You left out the first sentence.
            “It is a necessary task to defend the Second Vatican Council against Msgr. Lefebvre, as valid, and as binding upon the Church. this opposition…(then your quote)…then you left out…
            The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero.”
            Also: “The one way in which Vatican II can be made plausible is to present it as it is; one part of the unbroken, the unique Tradition of the Church and of her faith.”
            You will like this address if you have not read it. It talks a lot about some of the same issues that you have. It is a good read for those who confuse problems that occurred after Vatican II with the Council itself.
            God bless you.

          • Catherine says:

            Your Fellow Catholic says:
            July 23, 2014 at 12:07 pm
            Ann Malley – whether The Council fathers declared new dogmas or not, is not an excuse for you and others to ignore it and sow seeds of discontent because of it.

            The teacher of homo-heresy ( our Fellow Catholic says:
            July 23, 2014 at 12:07 pm
            Ann Malley – whether The Council fathers declared new dogmas or not, is not an excuse for you and others to ignore it and sow seeds of discontent because of it.

            Practice what you preach! Thank you for letting everyone know how much the homosexual network within the Church is threatened by “the fullness of the truth.”

            Imagine…A Saul Alinskyite troll requesting others to not sow seeds of discourse.

          • Ann Malley says:

            If there were no new binding declarations, YFC, that is nothing ‘new’ by which one is bound dogmatically then one may certainly ignore it in favor of tradition.

            The sowing of discontent arises when those confronted with said inconsistencies attempt to castigate others who are not discontent, per se, but rightfully doing what their conscience demands to save their soul.

            So if there be no dogma involved, what is your issue? Why react so viscerally to the observations of others?

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Catherine – Vatican II is part of the fullness of truth. You won’t find me attempting to undermine an entire ecumenical council. Core teachings about our faith in the modern world. Central aspects of our faith. Dogmatic teachings reframed for a nuclear age. Besides, why do you keep turning the conversation back to homosexuality?? Were we talking about gay stuff? No, I didn’t think so. You are unable or unwilling to see me as a whole person, and you cannot seem to help treating me as though my sexuality defines my entire self, therefore you convert this conversation into one about homosexuality.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You are welcome, Anonymous. But I ask… binding in what way if the council itself was not dogmatic and supposedly did not teach any new doctrine? And yet it does teach a new doctrine does it not? Otherwise there would be no need to defend the Council.

            So yes, it is an interesting read, but it is the fact that that which should be crystal clear requires such exhaustive explanation that leads one to believe that the documents are not what they should be. That is clear in and of themselves in light of tradition.

            That’s a problem.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, you keep interchanging dogma and doctrine. Why are you so fixated on that? Did Trent define new dogmas?

          • Ann Malley says:

            Catherine is merely pointing out your inconsistency, YFC, that of supposedly not wanting to sow ‘discontent’ unless, perhaps, it is your personal pet issue.

            As for viewing you as a whole person, everyone here on CCD views you as a whole person. It is only you that seemly perceives yourself as inseparable from a homosexual sexual filter.

            “…Dogmatic teachings reframed for a nuclear age.” Good grief.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Ann Malley – It is genuinely ironic that every time I post here, regardless of the subject, you all end up talking about homosexuality. You seem completely oblivious to that fact, yet it is quite provable, and is instantly obvious to even casual visitors. They must wonder why it is that a conversation about going off to college ends up being a conversation about the sexuality of an individual poster. This would not be the case if you actually saw me as a complete human being.

            In addition, it is curious that you seem to think I need for you to interpret what other posters are saying. So either you think Catherine is a bad writer or you think I am incapable of understanding English. Do you really fashion your role in life as playing this interpreter?

            Finally, you cannot possibly think that you can sit in the schismatic pew you sit in and lecture Catholics in communion with Rome about discontent and division. You are so discontented with the Roman Catholic Church that you have sought life outside of it. You sprout the seeds of discontent an division every time you enter an SSPX chapel.

          • Ann Malley says:

            YFC, you sprout the seeds of true schism and discontent every time you apparently sit in the same pew as your fellow Catholics and press for that which is against Catholic teaching. You do much the same on CCD.

            With regard to interpretation, you have put forth countless times a twisted interpretation of St. Paul’s writings to support your anti-Catholic agenda. By the logic you apply to me, you either consider St. Paul a bad writer or you decry the Catholic Church throughout the ages as incapable of reading.

            Which is it YFC? Be consistent, please. If I sit in a pew at the SSPX, at least I can rely on the consistency of belief and intention coming from the pulpit. That is I can trust the priests to do, act, and transmit what the Church has always taught. Not a particular diocese’s interpretation of what that might be someday or could be now if we don’t let anybody know about it. And not that which is new and no tradition at all.

            So if you consider honest questions a lecture, that is on you, Sir. As is your incapacity to defend via that which is the obvious disconnects being highlighted. That is NO preparation for evangelization, YFC, unless the tool of choice is to be ambiguous in the hopes of filling the pews minus the option of Faith. Let your yes mean yes and your no mean no, YFC.

            Again, I am tickled pink that the FSSP is finally in Southern California.

          • Ann Malley says:

            The Council of Trent clearly defined doctrines, Anonymous. Vatican II, by its very nature, did not define anything. That is why much is left up to interpretation. The invitation may be to interpret VII by way of Tradition, but many ‘choose’ not to do so.

            That is not being hung up, Anonymous, but rather the expression of the need for proper clarity on that which should, considering the weighty matter involved and increased confusion in the world, exceedingly clear. Without clarity we devolve into the, “…well, that depends on what your definition if ‘is’ is,” mentality that attempts to paint lies as truth by way of interpretation or perpetual redefinition.

          • Anonymous says:

            You keep changing your opinion on it. Notice how you changes what I said which was “new dogma” to doctrine. You keep bobbing and weaving.
            Why are you asking for clarity on something you haven’t even taken the time to read? If you have trouble understanding something, use the footnotes-most are from Scripture, The Catechism of Trent or writings from the Saints. Refer back to other Catechisms. If you come to something you distrust, pray over it. Give it time. It is necessary to read and ponder them more than once. Pray to the Holy Spirit prior to reading it and after.
            I have seen things justified by people saying “Vatican II said this” when it did not. If you have read the documents you will be able to catch these people out and tell them what the Church actually said.
            “He who hears you, hears me.” Jesus Christ to the Apostles

          • Anonymous says:

            “If I sit in a pew at the SSPX, at least I can rely on the consistency of belief and intention coming from the pulpit. That is I can trust the priests to do, act, and transmit what the Church has always taught. Not a particular diocese’s interpretation of what that might be someday or could be now if we don’t let anybody know about it. And not that which is new and no tradition at all.”
            Ann Malley, I am sure that you are very aware that in the SSPX what is taught varies from bishop to bishop even from priest to priest. That is why there have been so many schisms in it You know what is going on in that group, now. It also seems that the laity who attend there have no problem coming up with their own twist on the Catholic Faith as witnessed by your posts. And some bishops have been caught telling one thing to one person and something completely different to another. Then there is the corruption. So please don’t paint the SSPX as so pure and holy. If they stick to the rubrics of the TLM, you will get that in its correct form. But that is all. Each Catholic diocese does not have its own interpretation of the Catholic Faith. That is ridiculous. It is so apparent that you really do not know much about the Catholic Church.

          • Anonymous says:

            The FSSP is the order that was made by Saint John Paul II of those who refused to go into schism when Lefebrve and the 4 bishops of the SSPX were excommunicated. They are a great apostolate.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You asked me, “Did Trent define new dogmas?” And I answered you stating that Trent defined doctrine. How you define that as bobbing and weaving, I cannot say, other than you seem intent on explaining the ambiguous to mean do whatever is said at the moment.

            But I would imagine if you asked, does Costco sell ready made hamburgers, you would be put off by the statement that Costco only sells ready made hotdogs and pizza.

            You demonstrate increasingly the need for rock solid clarity in Church teaching, Anonymous. That said, “He who hears you, hears me,” relates not only from one Pope to the next, but rather as the whole of teaching history. For if a religious asserts that previously defined doctrine notwithstanding, I say that adultery isn’t a sin anymore, sorry, that is not Catholic teaching.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Nobody is painting the SSPX to be perfect, Anonymous. That is your interpretation. So saying, there is schism of heart within the Church as those who are supposedly in *full* communion with Her are having to be told to interpret Vatican II within a hermenuetic of continuity with tradition. Such clarifications would not have to be made if there was no question or wiggle room.

            Let’s all be honest, Anonymous. I am not advocating solely for the Society nor patently against those in full communion with the Holy See. I never have.

            You assert that, “…Each Catholic diocese does not have its own interpretation of the Catholic Faith. That is ridiculous. It is so apparent that you really do not know much about the Catholic Church.”

            If this is what you truly believe, then there is no speaking in depth with you as your arguments are little more than a shallow parry to avoid reality. Why, I cannot say.

            As to the beginnings of the FSSP, those priests were initially formed by Archbishop Marcel LeFebvre and I thank and credit Our Lord and the Immaculate Heart for that. Much like I thank God for the TLM offered by others in those areas where the FSSP is not.

          • Anonymous says:

            So I guess in your own way you have admitted that Trent, just like Vatican II, did not introduce any new dogmas. Do you feel that Trent is binding?

          • Ann Malley says:

            Trent at the outside claimed the language and intent to bind, Anonymous. VII did not. So when one compares the two, Trent is binding. There is no ‘feeling’ involved, Anonymous, as there shouldn’t be.

        • Anonymous says:

          It appears that you do not understand the terms involved in what you are trying to discuss.
          Do you know what pastoral means?
          Do you know what the word dogma means?
          You seem to be misapplying papal quotes to a construct of your own making. You seem very confused so I understand why you speak of confusion. It can take a lot of years of study and everything you expose yourself to that is wrong can set you back for years. Please stick to approved sources and try to understand. You can trust the Vatican II documents. There is nothing in them that violates Tradition.

          • Ann Malley says:

            It seems again that you will revert to some superiority of the knowledge of terms while seemingly incapable of naming yourself, Anonymous.

            As for ‘approved sources’ the USCCB is an approved source and yet one must be highly discerning with what issues forth from that body. You may be up on the Conciliar narrative, Anonymous, but your use of logic is faulty as always.

            That said, I do appreciate the opportunity you provide me to fight for the Faith, whole and entire, that is without spin, cover-up, or the stonewall tactics that seem to be the only method of dealing with other Catholics, but nobody else.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, if you so deluded that you think you are fighting for the faith while you are attacking the Body of Christ, I can only pray for you.

          • Ann Malley says:

            If you are so pride filled to believe that your Anonymous snarks against faithful Catholics can lull them into confidence in that which is admittedly openly ‘open to interpretation’, you are sinning against the unity of the Body you profess to love. You are also having difficulty keeping your word as you’ve promised countless times to….”only pray for me.”

            So pray already, Anonymous. And take it as a grace that it is I who ask you these questions and not some Protestant or Buddhist who could ask you the very same in all logic.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, I know that you do not trust the Catholic Church and that you have found a place where you feel confident and call it the Catholic Church. The errors you make are one thing, but posting them online where it lead others astray is something else. Dana is a recent convert who has been misled by you. I pray for God to sent to Dana and to all who are led astray by you or any others who doubt the Catholic Church someone they can have confidence in who will lead them back to the straight and narrow way.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, you seek to protect the faithful from understanding the entirety of the Faith. That said, I do trust the Catholic Church, that is the Church as She has stood inviolable since the first and ONLY Pentecost.

            The only one seemingly led astray is you in your hyper focus on what is Catholic patrimony as you assert intentions and judgments upon me that are not yours to make. It is in no way Catholic to be afraid to acknowledge one’s own shadow or the reality of its own reflection.

            Please stop relegating all converts to the dustbin of childish ignorance. It took and takes a lot of courage and souls searching and investigation and, at times, academic pursuit to come to the Truth of the Catholic Church. This is greatly facilitated by Grace as well. So please, if you believe in grace, dialogue in truth and objectivity, not fear and the promotion of shutting the door on our own history. You do yourself and others a grave disservice.

          • Rod LaRoque says:

            The Vatican II documents are ambiguous, the proof of this is that 50 years later we still don’t know, what, if anything, we have to believe as a result of the council.
            Given this confusion and the overwhelming apostacy in the Church, the most prudent strategy is to take refuge in the traditions of the Church as they were, unadulterated before the mass confusion.
            St Paul himself tells us to keep the traditions…
            So until the Holy Father declares, in a solemn manner, a new syllabus of modern errors and says exactly what, if anything, we should make of Vatican II, attending the TLM and clinging to the traditional interpretations of the faith, commentary and devotions is the best strategy to save one’s soul.

    • Ann Malley says:

      Duck, cover, remain in the state of grace, do your duty of state, and persevere, overcoming evil with good. That’s the order of the day, but most especially in times of crisis. In truth, I’ve found that crisis brings one closer to Our Lord for we cannot get too attached to this cleric or that Bishop or this chapel etc.

      God bless you in striving for faithfulness!

    • Anonymous says:

      RR, you have been had. Statements similar to “Vatican II was only a pastoral council and no dogmas were made.” are frequently found on websites that preach rebellion against the Church and seek to undermine the Holy Spirit. Now please research ecumenical council. Your other statement indicates that you have been badly misled by liars, wolves in sheep’s clothing and false shepherds. There is so much information out there that is wrong, that is deceitful and it is from Satan who is trying to remove the faithful from the Holy Catholic Church. If you do not accept the teachings in Vatican II, you are not following Sacred Tradition. Again, I think you really need to choose approved sources from which to do your research.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Anonymous, undermining the Holy Spirit is something that even a council of Bishops can do by electing who they will. Your approach seems to be that Our Lord does everything by active will – as if Church officials are mere puppets instead of men. You forget that Our Lord has a permissive will too, that is He allows us in some instances to choose our own way and reap the sour fruits of our own doing. That goes for individuals and communities as we are a Church comprised of men. (Not to exclude the female sex, obviously.)

        That said, you need to point specifically to these holy teachings of Vatican II and show that they do not go against the proclaimed dogmatic teachings of tradition. For it these new teachings contradict the perennial teachings of the Church then it is the tradition of the Church that condemns the novelty, not those charitably pointing out the inconsistency.

        As for VII being pastoral you should take that up with Paul VI:

        Pope Paul’s opening address on 29 September 1963 stressed the pastoral nature of the council, and set out four purposes for it:

        to define more fully the nature of the Church and the role of the bishop;
        to renew the Church;
        to restore unity among all Christians, including seeking pardon for Catholic contributions to separation;
        and to start a dialogue with the contemporary world.

        That’s from Wiki. So you may want to reread sources and look to the whole document and surrounding circumstances before telling others what is and isn’t dogmatic.

        That said, Paul VI himself called his mass the Novus Ordo Missae. That is the New Order of Mass which in itself declares that it is indeed something very new………….and very different.

        • Anonymous says:

          Obviously, it is not a question of whether Vatican II was pastoral. The problem is how it is twisted by schismatics who take advantage of the naive.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          “RR, Statements similar to “Vatican II was only a pastoral council and no dogmas were made.” are frequently found on websites that preach rebellion against the Church and seek to undermine the Holy Spirit,”

          Well, here are the arguments of the popes themselves against the claim that V2 defined new dogma (it did not):

          Paul VI: “In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner any dogma carrying the mark of infallibility.” –Pope Paul VI, closing address to Vatican II, December 7, 1965
          Paul VI: ““Differing from other Councils, this one was not directly dogmatic, but disciplinary and pastoral.” -Pope Paul VI, August 6, 1975, General Audience
          PBVI: “”The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of ‘superdogma,’ which takes away the importance of all the rest” (P. BXVI, July 17, 1988, Address to Chilean Bishops).
          JP2: ““Pope John conceived the Council as an eminently pastoral event.” (Angelus address, October 27, 1985)
          There are many other citations we could produce, including P.John XXIII’s express statement also that V2 was to be pastoral and non-dogmatic. So if 4 popes state V2 was not dogmatic, it was not dogmatic.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            The most salient point is P. Benedict XVI’s observation that V2, a pastoral, not a dogmatic council, had become a “superdogma” (his words) and almost sole constitutient of the Mysterium Fidei.

            But this topic in Cal Catholic is about the FSSP bringing the TLM back to LA diocese in a significant way. So, please note this also:

            “The [Novus Ordo] rite is by itself is not a dogmatic definition.”
            –Pope Paul VI, Nov. 19, 1969, Apostolic Constitution, “Missale
            Romanum

          • Ann Malley says:

            Thank you, Steve Phoenix.

      • Anonymous says:

        Ann Malley, I suggest that you actually read the documents of Vatican II.

        • Charles A says:

          Anonymous is right. Once again Ann Malley is the pro-schismatics police.

          • Catherine says:

            Charles A.

            Please direct us to the specific post where a poster named Charles A. instructed even one our many homosexual activists to adhere to “all” Church teaching.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            It’s always about homosexuality, isn’t it Catherine? Please, obsessions can be debilitating, perhaps you need to seek treatment.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Why shouldn’t we defend others when they are falsely labeled, Charles A? Calling names and asserting unlawful authority to declare others one thing or another is not Christian behavior despite the feeding-frenzy it inspires.

            As for reading the documents, Anonymous, it takes more than just reading, but rather comprehending precisely what one is reading. And what the words themselves, as written, mean. Not in light of tradition (unless an actual addendum to the documents is added), but reading exactly what is said as it is stated.

            Goodness knows one cannot rely on that hoped for lens of proper understanding in the world of law, but must hold instead to what documents actually say. I cannot see anyone on CCD engaging an attorney or paying said attorney for rendering documentation that leaves them wide open to a multiple of interpretations.

            So when the potential loss is the Faith and subsequently one’s soul and the souls of future generations, why shouldn’t Catholics want to be as clear and forthright as possible in every declaration.

            That said, I’m very glad the FSSP is coming to L.A. The more TLM the better. Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Seek treatment yourself, YFC. If Catherine brings up homosexuality why should it bother you any since you are more than homosexuality? Or so you say.

        • Ann Malley says:

          How is it twisted by ‘schismatics’ when the particulars inside the council refute previous teaching, Anonymous? If a mere pointing out of inconsistencies causes you to flinch and get defensive, that is no basis for evangelizing anything.

          It is also no defense of Holy Mother Church to hide or whitewash that which is confusing instead of clarifying it dogmatically. Your rush to claim ‘schism’ or ‘heresy’ against those with honest, well founded issues with regard to Council documents is so reactionary. Why? Nobody is encouraging anybody to leave the Church, but rather to protect and defend Her at her most vulnerable. That is at Her heart, the dogmas that define Her.

          Why you take such hot offense at that is beyond me especially when it was just such naivete of the faithful that led to that which Jose rightfully pointed out:

          “…We can thank the National Council of Bishops (USCCB) of the 60′s, 70′s, and 80′s for promoting and not adhering to the VII documents.
          Cardinal Bernardin and others got special permission (indults) to impose their own wills upon us.”

          What is that, but being misled out of naivete. And yet you would not call those men heretical or schismatic. Why not?

          • Why not indeed, Ann Malley? Your informed and logical response is simply not addressing annonymous’s emotions and feelings. Using quotes and background just isn’t enough for annon. whom we all know must have read the Vat.II documents at least thrice over and had an advanced four-hour independent study of every word! Hence the famous moniker anonymous, which we see frequently adorning various hidden treatises, R rated books and has even generated a cult following with funny white masks. Anyway, I wish I knew a fraction what you’ve forgotten, Ann! :o)

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          I would wager that Ann Malley in a Vatican II-Jeopardy show would mop up the floor with the entire Anonymous crowd singlehandedly with her Austin Flannery edition of the Docs of V2, bitte, Herr Meister.

      • Annonymous: Who are you to judge what God is leading me to do as far as my faith? Some day we will face God for judgement all by OURSELVES. We will not be judged with our church community. We will not be judged by being either a Traditionalist or a Novus Ordo Vatican II Catholic. God reads each and every one of our hearts and He alone knows what is in our hearts. He will judge us by what we have done in our lives and what we have not done. Each of us has to do what we feel is right by the knowledge God has given us of our faith through His grace. You can call me a heretic, schismatic, …. but the fact remains that you have no say as to whether I go to heaven or hell. Insult me all you want. Only God can judge whether I am a schismatic or a heretic. NOT YOU! God knows and reads my heart, NOT YOU! I feel God has given me much grace to see what I need to do as far as my faith and obviously He has given grace to others here on CCD much grace also. Annonymous: Please continue to pray for me. None of us are guaranteed salvation We only have God’s mercy to hope for.

  38. There is great excitement surrounding the Extraordinary Form of the mass. We see this in these 140 posts in California Catholic Daily, in the EF Mass becoming more accessible (see Wikkimissa for a complete listing of EF masses worldwide, perhaps you have one in your own backyard or a city you are traveling to on business). We are, however, a tiny although slowly growing minority of Catholics. We can make our case by supporting this new parish by attending mass and donating financial support. Una Voce Los Angeles has invested decades of work to reach this happy moment. Now we common pewsitters will have to make this new initiative work.

    Muchas gracias Arzobispo Gomez por este gesto que mejorará a la Iglesia de Los Angeles.

  39. Abecca: I would love to respond to your post to me, but I don’t understand what you wrote. And. yes, we have gotten to know each other on CalCath, and God Bless you too!

    • Charles A says:

      You don’t understand Abeca because you are a schismatic like Ann is. I never knew the church had this much division until I came across this website. Terrible!

      • Charles, don’t be disheartened…this is what comes of allowing independent interpretation of Church liturgy and teaching for fifty years. If this were a baptist website, for example, it would have already been divided into SouthCaliforniaBaptistDaily, NorthbyEastFirstBaptistDailyonlyweekly, and on and on. This has to take place because it’s been allowed to fester for so long that many, many faithful Catholics are confused about Church teaching. They’re not encouraged to read the CCC nor are they allowed to ask questions. This site offers a way of clarifying issues and addressing heresy and downright lies, such as what the Church teaches on homosexuality, marriage, etc.
        This shouldn’t threaten anyone, but give us hope that eventually TRUTH will out. It teaches us all to be more compassionate (or at least try to be) or less apologetic that the Church teaches things not held to be true in the secular world.

        • PS, Ann Malley and Abeca are NOT schismatics, and I’m surprised anyone would think that. Why does what they say here threaten you? What is it you believe? Surely you’re not against the Traditional Latin Mass, which has been used faithfully for hundreds of years?

          • Charles A says:

            Dana I’m a convert. I never said Abeca was a schismatic! She is not, she is a holy woman. You must be new but it was Ann Malley who was attacking Abeca in the past. I don’t need to revive that episode but you are speaking too early without knowing the facts.
            @Catherine I have admonished your fellow catholic in the past too. Catherine wants to question my integrity as a Christ child, but she is uncharitable in doing so, she is defending the bad will actions of Ann Malley. Dana dear, I don’t agree with you, its wrong to have these discussion in the way these ladies are doing it. They are very self righteous. I’ve been around for a long time to know this is not Christian behavior.

            I had a long road in my conversion and Ann Malley is no more protestant than I use to be. Good day ladies. Now exiting again…..I don’t have to prove anything to Catherine or those of bad will. Only to my Lord.

          • Ann Malley says:

            God bless you, Dana. Charles A was leveling that charge at RR and me. Why? Because that is what he has been taught. But that’s okay. He’s not the arbiter of reality.

            God bless and thank you for your continued kindness!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Charles A, while I admire your defense of holiness, you need to look to the whole of discussions before castigating one as attacking another or attacking the Faith. There is no need to dredge up past interactions in detail, but there is equally no call to distort past interactions to the degree of painting a single party as an ‘attacker’. That is much the same as decrying one a heretic or schismatic without taking into account the fullness of the situation. In other words, those are not judgments within your scope of jurisdiction, especially when one isn’t interested in reading a full dialogue.

            Catherine is not being uncharitable, Charles A, but rather calling out your own lack of discernment. Something very apparent in that you ascribe bad will to my intentions. Something you have no way of knowing. That said, you should follow the Faith, whole and entire, not a man or woman you may consider holy, no matter how holy. The why is because we are all human which is why we *need& to preserve the deposit of the Faith, without alteration.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Charles A, I know you are a convert so I’ll forgive you – again. You know nothing of what schism really means. One day, you might. I hope you do at some point. It will be a blessing to you.

  40. Let’s get back to the FSSP coming to LA, and thank Jesus for this blessing.

  41. http://fssp.la/

    Thank you Archbishop Gomez. I hope may Diocese Priests will choose to learn the EF Mass.

  42. John Feeney says:

    After reading some of these comments, there are some Catholics who apparently think that Vatican 2 is the is the greatest thing that ever happened to the Roman Catholic Church. Where are the positive results of Vatican 2?

    • John Feeney, if you are Catholic V II is not your decision. It’s over. Get over it, and move on.

      Support the FSSP instead of wasting time on something you can do nothing about.
      I also would like to thank Abp Gomez for bringing them to the LA Diocese.

      • Ann Malley says:

        It is a shame that faithfulness is ascribed to Vatican II instead of the Catholic Faith, whole and entire, to include all that has come before as it has been passed down, John Feeney. Much like a child who would consider themselves the fruit of an exploratory surgery of their mother’s womb rather than the fruit of the womb itself. Or the union of husband and wife.

        The ‘there is nothing Catholics can do’ mentality is also patently false as the FSSP is embodying what Catholics can do and do do. That is, adhere to Catholic tradition. I pray they will be able to continue! God has surely heard the cries of His people in L.A. Bless His Holy Name!

        • Rod LaRoque says:

          yes, one’s Catholic-ness does not depend on allegiance to one ambiguous pastoral council, but on adherence to the Faith of all times, given to us by the Apostles.
          How anyone can think a rite of mass that ‘permits’ women in stretch pants to distribute Our Lord to people on their hands with little reverence is a legitimate expression of Lex Credendi, the faith in the real presence, is just one example of the bizarre world of the Novus Ordo Church. Can’t anyone see and admit that this is just not part of the Church’s tradition. As Catholics we are bound by decisions made in the past… We can’t just do willy-nilly what we want and these modern popes are ignoring the tradition in the face of the modern world so as to simply avoid the coming persecutions that are inevitable.
          This modern apostasy is simply a caving in to the modern world for expediency… to save the institutions and the comfy jobs of the clergy. But the world is massing its forces and the persecution is coming.
          Those faithful that won’t submit to the modern Catholic-lite style will be persecuted. God help us!

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            There is no Norvus Ordo Church. THere is only Chist’s Church. Please understand that!!

          • Ann Malley says:

            That is precisely why the Church who, in her wisdom, exhorts the faithful to abstain from the grave moral disorder of homosexual sex cannot, even under threat of complete abandonment by an unfaithful faithful, recant. Truth is fixed, not determined by increased societal pressure.

            Please understand that, YFC.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            It’s all about the gays for you, isn’t it Ann Malley. If only you understood the totality of the Gospel!

          • Ann Malley says:

            There is no matter of gays here, YFC, but rather triage. One cannot accuse others of not addressing the whole health of the body when a gangrenous leg wound threatens to kill the entire person. Not unless the patient has a death wish and wants to let the gangrene alone and just have a glass of water.

            If a man lays dying in the street should a priest dismiss him in favor of the children across the street waiting for him to come read the Gospel to them? I mean, they are children. The man is only one. But doesn’t the critical nature of his wounds coupled with the serious matter of his potentially dying in the state of mortal sin take priority? Gosh, I hope so.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            I think the Church’s obsession with homosexuality, as exemplified in this thread by Ann Malley, is truly a scourge. The fact that an entire subject can be distilled down to comments about gay stuff just shows how absolutely obsessed with minor things we have become. Why do you suppose that every conversation gets bent into an anti- gay thread on this website? Surely there are bigger problems and more issues to deal with than homosexuality!! Especially when this nonsense goes on and on and on!!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Minor indeed, YFC. Give it up, Sir. Your distractions fool no one, most especially yourself.

        • Anonymous says:

          “It is a shame that faithfulness is ascribed to Vatican II instead of the Catholic Faith, whole and entire, to include all that has come before as it has been passed down”
          Ann Malley, had you actually bothered to read the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, you would never had made such an offensive and scurrilous charge against the defenders of The Church established by Christ which is his Mystical Body. You can see that Pope Benedict XVI, in the quote that you yourself brought to this thread, insisted that it was necessary to defend Vatican II against people like you. We are obeying him and in obeying him, obeying Christ.

          • Ann Malley says:

            God bless you, Anonymous, but you prove my arguments every time as you seem to believe that life and the Church began at the New Advent. As to the ‘charge’ it is leveled at those who believe themselves to be fruits of VII as opposed to fruits of the Catholic Faith. Read for understanding, Anonymous, and perhaps you will not be so easily over set.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, what argument? You refuse to say what you object to in Vatican II and the Catholic Church.
            What fruits of Vatican II are you referring to?
            I could list a lot of changes since Vatican II but I can’t think of any that are a change of dogma or doctrine-so please instead of dragging arguments out by making inflammatory and/or self-aggrandizing statements, just say what you think has changed that is a dogma or doctrine.
            Over set? Is this some kind of game you play?
            It is evil for you to portray faithful Catholics in the way that you do.
            And “the new Advent” was not Vatican II.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Thank you for leveling a direct question, Anonymous. But you are incorrect. I do not object to the Catholic Church. That is why I object to the inherent ambiguity and confusing aspects of VII documents. You ask for specifics and I will give you one:

            By its faulty wording Lumen Gentium led to the erroneous belief that heretical sects are actually Churches. It is not confusing that those outside the Catholic Church should call themselves such (Something you accuse me of often), but it is against the Faith for the Catholic Church to even suggest such a thing as we profess belief in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. And it is a union of the actual FAITH that unites us under Christ. That is why Pope Benedict XVI corrected the error in ’07.

            He was doing nothing more than speaking in a truly Catholic sense and yet his actions stirred anger in both the Catholic and non-Catholic alike because he appeared harsh and regressive. Harsh and regressive because he was speaking CLEARLY and as in a Catholic manner. Isn’t that what a Pope is supposed to do? Isn’t that what ecumenical councils are supposed to do? That is dispel error, not create confusion?

          • Ann Malley says:

            to Anonymous cont:

            Even on this one point, a generation has passed under the confused assumption that, ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation,” has somehow been overturned. The reality ‘seems’ more that this truth was redacted so as not to appear offensive. That said, one cannot judge subjectively whether or not an individual visibly outside the Church is saved or not. But one MUST objectively teach the Truth that resides in all fullness inside the Catholic Church as that is the job of the Church – to safeguard the deposit of the Faith, evangelize that one Faith, and to baptize all nations into that Faith. Not apologize for the Faith or obscure it so as to appear kinder and gentler, opting for human means of broken human quasi-union in lieu of those divine means that Our Lord died to give us. (And He was considered highly offense in His teachings. He was killed for them.)

            I understand that you do not like to look at unapproved sources regarding VII, but as you already consider me an unsafe source, and yet you still ask me for specifics, I will direct you to do your own reading as to the time-bombs or inherent errors in VII documents.

            If anything you could consider the exercise an outreach as it would give you a basis for understanding the objections of many Catholics to VII documents.

          • Ann Malley says:

            To Anonymous cont:

            …and if you want to follow Pope Benedict XVI in defending VII, defend the council, not by decrying ‘people like me’, but rather in pushing for written clarification from the top that will reign in the inherent soft-speak that has caused such misinterpretation of that which should be clearly Catholic…. as it is evil for anyone to portray the Catholic Church as anything but what She is. Not sister to many other Churches, but the only one.

          • Anonymous says:

            First of all, faithful Catholics don’t push the people at the top. We trust God to do that.
            Second of all, sister churches means those united with the Pope. If you recall, every diocese is a Church and there are other Churches with various ancient rites that are united with the Pope.
            You are right that separated brethren has been used to describe other ecclesial communities but that is not against Tradition because all the baptized are children of God. It is about the individuals not the churches. That has always been the case. I am not sure what you are referring to as a heretical sect. I really think you have misunderstood something. Ecumenism is a stumbling block for some people. Schism and heresy are grave sins which are mortal when done with full knowledge and full consent. They also incur an immediiate excommunication. In order for that to be they have to have been Catholic. The other thing that you are overlooking is “I will give you the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. What you declare bound, is bound in Heaven and what you declare loosed is loosed in Heaven.” Matthew 16:19 He also said “Blessed is he who finds no stumbling block in me.” I trust God and I trust the Church. I will not be led astray by you. This suspended priest who wrote the article (and has never been a priest in the Church but only in the SSPX-and yes his ordination was valid but illicit) does not have any authority to declare anything in Vatican II an error. (He cannot even licitly say Mass.) You are safe in accepting the Church’s teaching; you are in danger accepting his ideas.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, it doesn’t take authority to see a train wreck. And yes, faithful Catholics do trust in God. But God expects us to engage our minds, too, and call out error when error is present.

            Ambiguity in the case of Church teaching is error. That is why I accept those Church teachings that are clear and defined. And I find no stumbling block in Our Lord, that is why I do not want to hide my Faith in Him and the fullness of His Truth beneath a bushel.

            As to the rest, I will await final judgment on the nature of said ambiguities before I follow that which my Faith and instinct tells me is a different Faith or at the very least an increasing watered down transmission of it.

            Thank you for your concern and prayers, however. I will continue praying for you as well.

          • Anonymous says:

            Have you read the Credo of the People of God?

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, just because you don’t understand it, does not mean it is ambiguous. You may just need better instruction in the Faith.
            Your perception of ambiguity does not make it an error.
            All Catholics have to accept things they cannot fully understand.
            The way to understanding is through the Holy Spirit. Use mental prayer to have the Lord instruct you. Don’t wait to get it by yourself.
            God bless you. I am sorry you have this issue but I think if you take it slowly and pray and don’t just reject what you don’t understand, then you will be safe.
            Let me give you an example of something that freaked people out at the time of Vatican II. People like my mother were erroneously taught that all people who weren’t Catholic were going to hell. When Vatican II came out a lot was made of a passage which said that they could hope for salvation. People were shocked. The Church changed. No, it did not. The Catholic Church never taught that all people who were not Catholic would go to hell. It is not in Scripture. It is not in Apostolic Tradition. People were taught wrong. Who taught that to my mom? Her father, not anyone in the Church.
            There is no salvation outside the Church does not mean that non-Catholics are automatically going to hell. People were taught wrongly about many things because they learned things as children and if you got to go to Catholic College you usually learned that some of the things they taught you as kids weren’t true. My mom was taught that it was a sin to read the Bible. She was taught that nuns were not permitted to drive. You would go to hell if you ate meat on Fridays. You really need to double check whether what you think is Church teaching is really Church teaching whenever you encounter something that is upsetting to you. There are many errors in books written prior to Vatican II, also.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “You really need to double check whether what you think is Church teaching is really Church teaching whenever you encounter something that is upsetting to you.”

            I was taught by ‘Catholic’ VII hip-nuns at Catholic high school (age 14) that fornication wasn’t adultery and so – you’re not adults – he he – so don’t worry about it as adultery is the ‘mortal’ sin, not fornication. We were also taught the rhythm method in Biology class and the girls were advised that that’s the only method allowed by the Catholic Church so we should mark out periods on our bedposts. The future trickle of falling rocks led to a landslide of – if it doesn’t matter and if Protestants are okay where they are (even by slight intimation), then why in the world should one concern themselves at all with the hard road of Catholicism? Life is an intoxicating buffet. And, well, God loves us. That didn’t lead to a seeking of other religions so much, but a disregard for the entire confection. And hey, there’s always HOPE!

            That’s much of what happened after VII, Anonymous. People freeing themselves of the so-called misunderstood shackles of what was marketed as ridiculous. That is what is still happening today. It did not lead to a flood of Protestants clambering to enter the Catholic Church. Why should it?

            So while you may not want to scare your teenagers by telling them that driving 150MPH on the freeway might kill them or others, I will continue to advise that, while it is not guaranteed that going 150MPH down the freeway WILL kill you, it will increase your chances of being killed or killing someone else. Actions you cannot take back. But sure, for those racing hither and yon, we can all HOPE.

          • Ann Malley says:

            No, I haven’t read the Credo of the People of God, Anonymous. Please, if you would, provide a link. I’d like to read it.

        • Anonymous says:

          Ann Malley, I hope you will go to an FSSP priest for confession and ask him about some of your issues and beliefs.

          • Ann Malley says:

            If a young man doesn’t believe in the superiority of continued tradition as expressed in the TLM and all that accompanies it, there would be no reason to seek out a priestly order dedicated to the ongoing transmission of the TLM. Thank you for your good wishes.

          • Anonymous says:

            superiority of continued tradition (with a small t)?
            You seem to have decided that it is OK to break with Apostolic and Sacred Tradition-which is inerrant-as long as you are given the illusion of a traditional rite with is less than 600 years old.

          • Ann Malley says:

            It’s not about me, Anonymous, it is the TLM rite and the teachings of the Church that condemn modernity. If you take issue with the TLM, maybe you should speak with an FSSP priest and as them why they prefer tradition – sorry – Tradition.

            That said, it is so much more than the mass, but that is the core.

            But while we’re nit picking capitals perhaps you should say, ‘a rite which is…’ not ‘a rite with is.’

            My but you are one angry individual.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Goodness, I said ‘as them.’ It should be ask them. Are we okay now?

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, you are confused again.
            Everyone supports the use of the TLM. It would be unfaithful not to.
            The Church does not and never did condemn modernity. Are you thinking of modernism? Modernism is heresy. It’s core is to question the authority of the Church.
            I take no issue with the TLM. I admire the FSSP and I wanted so much to attend their parish in San Diego but it was not to be …yet.
            All Catholics are bound to accept Tradition. It is not a matter of preferring it-it is required.
            I am not angry. I have at times gotten angry at your unceasing attacks on the Holy Church but mostly I feel pity for you. I remember converting and it was very difficult because there were so many different people saying so many different things. The Lord gave me those I could trust to tell me the truth about him: Mary, Holy Scripture, Holy Mother Church.
            Tradition with a capital T refers to Sacred Tradition or Apostolic Tradition which like Scripture is from God and is infallible. It cannot be changed. Not even by the Pope. The Pope and the Bishops have the duty to hand Tradition down to each generation.
            Small t tradition are things that can change. Like the colors of vestments or whether priests can marry. The Pope or the Magisterium can change that. It is a Catholic tradition to give up something for Lent or not to eat meat on Friday-those can change.
            The feast days can change. It was traditional at one point to have the Feast of Adam on the day before Christmas-that changed. The word means two different things depending on whether it is capitalized or not.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, do not get angry about what I write as the Truth (let’s call it Reality) cannot be taken away. I appreciate your concern and understand that your anger is grounded in your Faith. But what you consider unceasing attacks on Holy Mother Church are actually a defense of what you cannot understand at present, that is Faith at the stage where I life it. Not because you lack intelligence, but because you are looking to teachers whose approach is to just move forward. It is not a matter of capital T vs little t or a misunderstanding of terms or those things common when one initially converts. Again, not that you lack intelligence. But you do have zeal, the mark of a new convert to be sure.

            That said, in time, zeal of that nature can and does change. Much like marriage changes from the first flush of the wedding progresses on to the honeymoon and then gets to the business of the sacrifice of marriage. As one lives their marriage they come to understand that what they believed marriage to be isn’t really marriage. The same can be said of Faith in a way, that is we come to a deeper understanding of what it really means.

          • Ann Malley says:

            But that is why analyzing, questioning, and recalling to mind the solid foundations of what marriage is – or in this case what Faith is – is so important. It is not a loathing or hatred of marriage, but an understanding that if we do not look to the roots of the institution we often lose that which is meant to help us reach the goal at the end.

            That said, your understanding of married priests being a small ‘t’ that equates to the color of a vestment is highly worrisome. There is so much more involved in the matter of having a celibate clergy. So while you may get angry at what you perceive to be my attacking the Faith, you may want to consider what you write with regards to priestly celibacy. Ask an older celibate priest who is not disgruntled. One who loves his priesthood and reveres his sacrifice. I daresay if you equated it to a changing of vestment color, he’d take grave offense and rightfully so. My goodness.

            How would you react if your husband announced that he was going to take on a couple of extra wives because Church law is just a discipline. Or that he was going to divorce you and leave because marriage is not what he expected and the Church understands that now so he’s gone. THAT is the kind of thing I’m talking about, Anonymous. What you propose sounds very easy at the outset. But there is a severe lack of depth in teaching, respect for tradition (what it means and why it is there), and a frightening openness to just hop on the change train.

            I still cannot get over your casual dismissal of priestly celibacy. My goodness. For any priests who feel marginalized for their very real and appreciated and necessary sacrifice of a personal family life, God bless and thank you!

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      Pope Saint John XXIII, Pope Saint John Paul II, Blessed Pope Paul VI.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        John XIII, JP2, and Paul VI are all “positive results” of the period prior to Vatican II, since all completed their priestly studies and doctoral degress well-prior to 1962; all 3 were ordained priests and at least elevated to the episcopacy prior to V2′s initiation. So all were literally pre-Vatican II’s “positive results”.

        I think if you want to look at the “positive results” of Vatican II, you should look at Card. Roger Mahony (made bishop in 1975), Abp. Rembert Weakland (bishop in 1977), Card. Bernard Law, now avoiding criminal prosecution in Rome (bishop in 1973), and no list would be complete without Card. Joseph Bernardin (bishop in 1966—definitely he being one of the “first fruits” of V2).

    • Abeca Christian says:

      With all due respect John Feeney but they are in the front line fighting the good fight, its too bad that many do not want to see. = ) its hard to talk to deaf ears.

      My beloved Jesus Christ is with us and knows. Its His church. We are His church. That is all that matters.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        John Feeney also there are many faithful from the OF mass that do not post here. Don’t judge the church on the few regulars who dissent here and don’t blame it on all the negative reporting either. Many avoid it to be honest. They say that it is not productive to their spiritual growth especially since there are many pro-gay activists here. A few years ago a good friend of mine who died of breast cancer, (RIP)she lead many wonderful pro life efforts and other wonderful pro-family work, when I asked her what she thought about this website, she said “isn’t most comments from homosexuals”. This website was fairly new and it use to have it’s own newspaper too. I had a good friend also that was connected to the newspaper NewsNotes and she attended back then the same OF parish I did. She is very faithful and devout Catholic very active in the pro life efforts. We met when I was collecting petitions to end the partial birth abortions. I remember being pregnant and even with my big belly trying to collect signatures.

  43. Abeca Christian says:

    “There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. ….As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.” By Archbishop Fulton Sheen

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      I agree Abeca! Oh my God what has happened to us that we agree twice. Except, not so fast. Archbishop Sheen makes this statement as though there were no bad representatives of the Church. Certainly we all know that any one of us at certain times are bad representatives of the faith and regrettably cause others to hate her because of us. Most extreme examples being the priestly child molesters and Mafia members. His statement takes no account of them, who didn’t necessarily say lies and untruths about her, yet caused people to hate her because of their misdeeds. I don’t fault you for Sheen’s failing to take that into account, but it needs to be said nonetheless.

      • Ann Malley says:

        How about the bad example of those clerics who masque the truth and lead souls into Hell, YFC? The Mafia sounds really high profile, but leading mass numbers of souls into Hell is pretty serious stuff. That said, the ‘priestly’ child molesters were mainly those clerics intent on pursuing post pubescent boys. Could be why those clerics are so disinclined to uphold Church teachings. That’s not the sense of the faithful, that’s keep your mouth shut.

        By the way, one shouldn’t go about using Our Lord’s name as an exclamation.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Crafty, Ann Malley, crafty, indeed. However, even though you do not name the thing you are going after you are STILL going after everything I say and do, regardless of whether what i say and do is a good thing done. Get over yourself. We all know where you are going, and the fact that you are obsessed with a certain thing. Sad. Exclamation!

          • Ann Malley says:

            There is indeed much craftiness that surrounds the issue of what is commonly called, ‘The Child Abuse Crisis,’ YFC, when those tasked with rooting it out choose intentionally not to address the particulars of what crimes actually entailed.

            If a married man confessed to sex with a female who was not his wife, there would be a very big difference in the nature of the sin if the female was 16 and his daughter and not say a 40 year old co-worker. There would be an even bigger difference with regard to the sin involved if the man confessed to having sex with an underage girl, but the female was 2 and not 16. Both females are underage, so technically, the one confessing is correct. The same holds true when confessing the sin of child abuse. One needs to know the age, the sex, etc because while all child abuse is evil, circumstances can point to additional grave matter and subsequently additional problems that need solving within the Church. Like a snake with many heads. Decrying the need to cut off one as the means to kill the snake won’t do anything it the beast has 6 more.

            If anyone is being crafty, YFC, it is you in continuing to misdirect from the homosexual nature of the Child Abuse Crisis. So if you don’t want the conversation to turn to Sodomy, you may not want to bring up such a huge and public episode of it.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Thus speaks Ann Malley gay homosexual sodomy expert. Have a good weekend. Try to have at least one conversation this wekend that doesn’t revolve around homosexuality,please! Your family and friends must get awefully bored.

          • Ann Malley says:

            …like those on CCD get bored to death with your gay victim schtick?

            Sorry, YFC, but I don’t live to entertain like you do on CCD. Try taking a weekend off to just be what you really are without the act.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        YFC our beloved Jesus and Virgin Mary hurts with all division but He did warn us and told us that He did not come to unite but to divide. Douay-Rheims Bible Matthew 10:35
        For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Matthew 10:36 Douay-Rheims Bible
        And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          Its no different than when Judas betrayed Jesus..so the saying goes “don’t leave our Beloved Jesus because of Judas.” and that means His Universal Church!

          Like King Salomon had many wives and even worshiped their idols, but God’s people did not leave God because of Him, Kind David took after God’s own heart yet he did a few things that later on he repented for. Look at Moses time, he was a stutterer and was not an eloquent speaker but God still used him for His purpose, even with the parting of the sea, God’s people still chose to build a god for themselves while Moses was away talking with God. I know that God’s people are not perfect because I am the first to say that I am not perfect but it is God who perfects me in Him, because He is my love and my joy. It just takes our participation, humility, love etc. So even if people do what they do, there are still those who seek to be faithful, loyal in all things that are from our Lord. Its either we give it up to God all of it or none of it. Some try to do the in between thing and pick and choose but no, its all or nothing. Because once we die, that is no turning back, no ooops sorry can we try again, its here on earth that we are given a chance to it right by Him, our Beloved Jesus Christ!

          • Catherine says:

            Dear sweet sister in Christ Abeca,

            Follow the example of the Popes who have worked to charitably continue to resolve these matters and the example of the Norbertines who charitably treated a fellow Catholic priest with Christlike kindness.

            You, yourself even wrote that Ann Malley writes such beautiful truths about our Catholic faith. You even used the word “precious” if my memory serves correctly in describing that fact. Ann Malley represents what we all should know when speaking about many of the teachings of the Catholic Church. Make no mistake, it isn’t the not being in “full communion” that threatens those who hate the teachings of the Catholic Church but many will use that as a reason to marginalize or silence the “fullness of truth” such as YFC. You know who that poster is. YFC is the poster who now has found common ground with YOU while telling Ann Malley to not sow seeds of discord. Ann Malley has never taught others that it is acceptable to live in a mortally sinful homosexual lifestyle. Ann Malley has never asked anyone to leave Rome either. If you are going to defend the Catholic faith on a faithful Catholic website then your charity should not be ordinary. It should be extraordinary before you call others schismatics and Judases. Follow the example of the Holy Fathers and the Norbertines that you yourself rightfully praised.

          • Catherine says:

            continued for Sweet Abeca from above July 25, 2014 at 3:38 pm

            Pope Emiritus Benedict XVI and Pope Francis both have and are still trying to re-unite many in charitable and truthful dialogue. Jesus did say that he came to cause division but the Holy Fathers are not causing division by dialoguing and either are we. Dialoguing informs and often teaches both sides when done in truth and charity. You recently praised the true faithfulness of the Norbertine Order, so then perhaps you can also learn from the example of their charity. At a TLM funeral for a faithful diocesan priest I personally watched Norbertine priests who were sitting in attendance in the first row of pews get up and go back to the last pew to welcome and invite and bring up a priest who says Mass at an independent chapel who respectfully attended and humbly sat quietly by himself in the back of the Church. These Norbertine priests showed Christlike charity in wanting to re-unite with a brother priest. These Norbertine priests did not go to the back of the church and verbally attack this individual priest or call him Judas or schismatic when they were given the same opportunity as you to either choose showing love over choosing to call someone names like Judas or schismatic. I am most positive that this single act of charity given by these Norbertine priests will one day cause more unity than our limited minds can conceive. ” He who humbles himself shall be exalted ”

            Pope Francis is trying to resolve and unite! The pace may not be to anyone’s preference but the name calling has never been a part of the dialogue or else there would be none. Follow that example.

            http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/05/pope-has-interest-in-resolving-sspx.html

          • Catherine says:

            continued for Abeca from July 25, 2014 at 3:55 pm

            Once again..

            Pope Francis is trying to resolve and unite! The pace may not be to anyone’s preference but the name calling has never been a part of the dialogue or else there would be none. Follow that example.

            http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/05/pope-has-interest-in-resolving-sspx.html

          • Ann Malley says:

            God bless you, Catherine, for you are far more charitable than I.

          • Anonymous says:

            abeca, I am sorry that you are not feeling well and you did not deserve that sweet sweet thrashing from the unfaithful.

        • SandraD says:

          Thank you once again Catherine for your outreach. God Bless.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        YFC perhaps I’m too anemic but did you reply to my post to mock me? or to try to prove a point? I;m trying to receive clarity here. YFC what are we gonna do with you? You sound faithful one post then you destroy it with your dissent on other issues. I was offering up my sufferings and I prayed for you but something kept telling me not to be fooled because you are in bad will still but I guess I still have hope.

        YFC if I am our Lord’s little child, even in my adult body, will you still reject Jesus when He calls you by name? Haven’t we learned anything from His passion? His life here on earth? Look in the old testament “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,”. Now that is personal very personal, that is why we need to seek a personal relationship with our beloved Jesus!

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Abeca – I responded to your 7/25 10:49 AM post but for some reason they chose not to publish it, so let me try again: I did not make a post to mock you, and I’m sorry if anything came across that way. It is a reminder to me to try to be kinder with my fellow travellers.

  44. Steve Phoenix says:

    I always find it very interesting to lay out the facts on the TLM vs. the Novus Ordo: since heavyweight authorities like P. BXVI, Card. Alfons Stickler, and Card. Dario Castillon Hoyos, who point out that the Novus Ordo was a break with tradition and cant be controverted, the argument switches to the “infallibility” or New Dogmas of Vatican II argument. Really?

    “V2 is infallible?” Well, to declare something as infallible, first, it must be defined. Yet almost every statement (esp. in Sacro. Concilium, Lumen Gentium, and Gaudium et Spes) seems to contradict themselves in the very next clause: so in whole and often even in part, it can’t be defined and it cant be clarified. Andso pray tell, what are the “New Dogmas” of V2? Dei Verbum? Scripture and Tradition? We already believed that. Transubstantiation? That too. So what are these legendary New Dogmas,which are the new sine qua non of being Catholic?

    When Pius XII defined the Assumption in 1950, he laid out the history of evidence supporting the truth (7-39) and then defines it explicitly (esp. 40-45); he then declares it a matter of faith, and forbids the specific refusal to deny the explicitly defined truth. By contrast, John XXIII in the opening address to the Council in 1962, announced the specific refusal to declare anathemas, instead that the Council would prove itself “by showing the validity of her teaching, rather than by issuing condemnations.”

    So there are no condemnations of “not believing in Vatican II,” but as Ann Malley would say, “For if these new teachings contradict the perennial teachings of the Church then it is the tradition of the Church that condemns the novelty.”

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      When Pius XII defined the Assumption in 1950, he laid out the history of evidence supporting the truth (7-39) and then defines it explicitly (esp. 40-45); he then also declares it a matter of faith, and forbids the specific refusal to deny the explicitly defined truth. By contrast, John XXIII in the opening address to the Council in 1962, announced the specific refusal to declare anathemas, instead that the Council would prove itself “by showing the validity of her teaching, rather than by issuing condemnations.”

      So there are no condemnations of “not believing in Vatican II,” but as Ann Malley would say, “For if these new teachings contradict the perennial teachings of the Church then it is the tradition of the Church that condemns the novelty.”

      So now John Feeney brings up a perfectly valid point, and is immediately jumped upon, questioned “if he is Catholic” and basically told to shut up, shut up shut up (“If you are Catholic V2, is not your decision. It’s over. Get over it, and move on.”) (Pro-V2 fans always overflow with charity of course.)

      Many in the increasingly shrill and discombobulated V2 cheering section wish not to look at the evident facts of decline in the aftermath of V2: but look at them we will. Kenneth C. Jones, a lawyer by trade, provided a shattering argument as to the bitter fruits of V2 (2003 article: “The Vatican II Renewal: Myth or Reality”, Latin Mass): just appalling statistics: read it for yourself.

      And yet great church luminaries who presided over the decline of their own dioceses (think John Raphael Quinn in SF) claim that the decline in Vatican Ii would have happened anyway.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Many in the increasingly shrill and discombobulated V2 cheering section wish not to look at the evident facts of decline in the aftermath of V2: but look at them we will. Kenneth C. Jones, a lawyer by trade, provided a shattering argument as to the bitter fruits of V2 (2003 article: “The Vatican II Renewal: Myth or Reality”, Latin Mass): just appalling statistics: read it for yourself.

        And yet great church luminaries who presided over the decline of their own dioceses (think John Raphael Quinn in SF) claim that the decline in Vatican Ii would have happened anyway and its not their fault (“The Claims of the Primacy..” Oxford Lecture, 1996). So we were told that V2 would be a “new springtime” in the Church, and when it obviously in fact was a nuclear winter of vocations, ex-Catholics, and empty Churches, we should be glad and rejoice. (“Humph,” said Pooh.)

        Sorry, Mr. Feeney, you shouldn’t follow your good common sense and reasoning powers, just “get over it”—”IF you are Catholic”, like US, that is.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Brilliant, Steve Phoenix. God bless you!

          • NEVER BRILLIANT! This is shameful these so called Catholics! You bless but when people say God bless America, how can God bless dissent! There is no blessing. The Lord does not approve of dissent like yours, you are misleading people and I beg you to repent!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Yes, BRILLIANT, Mrs. A. You would do well to learn and read before you condemn. You know not of what you speak. You may think you do, but your posts say otherwise.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Steve, most of the decline of the Church did not occur during the Papacy of Paul VI, which extended well beyond Vatican II and the issuance of the Novus Ordo. Indeed, even under Pope Saint John Paul II, his obvious love of God and of the People of God were very attractive even to unbelievers, and could have created an opening for an evangelization, rather than a retrenchment in our numbers.

          However, he made a bad appointment in Cardinal Ratzinger and gave him increasing voice over the years. Starting at CDF with increasingly clamping down on free speech within the Church’s theologians, followed by his Holloween surprise against gay people, and his constant reaffirmations of the failed encyclical Humanae Vitae, the Catholic Faithful increasingly realized that Rome would say one thing when they discerned God saying other things. This created tensions.

          I think two things created the flood of people from the Church since then. The increasingly tensioned relationship between Rome and the pews was exacerbated by the increasing frailty of St. JP II. He was less and less able to reign in the more dogmatic and anti-pastoral aspects of Ratzinger, and ultimately his accession to the throne of Peter only made that worse. The second thing that caused people to flee from the pews was the priestly abuse crisis, mishandled from Rome to Kansas City. What parent would want their child to be influenced by a clergy that couldn’t stamp out the most vicious molesters from their ranks?

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            cont’d

            I think two things created the flood of people from the Church since then. The increasingly tensioned relationship between Rome and the pews was exacerbated by the increasing frailty of St. JP II. He was less and less able to reign in the more dogmatic and anti-pastoral aspects of Ratzinger, and ultimately his accession to the throne of Peter only made that worse. The second thing that caused people to flee from the pews was the priestly abuse crisis, mishandled from Rome to Kansas City. What parent would want their child to be influenced by a clergy that couldn’t stamp out the most vicious molesters from their ranks?

            Once the tensions from my first paragraph were in place, the weight of the anti-pastoral approach of Ratzinger and the failure to address the child abuse scandal broke the branches, severing them from The Vine. If you doubt me, look at the accelerating reduction in attendance that has taken place in the last decade!! It is far more profound than anything that happened in the first several decades after V2!!! If Benedict was sent to us to save the Church, he did a good job of clearing it of its adherents, starting with his time at CDF and continuing on the throne of Peter!

    • Anonymous says:

      Steve Phoenix, respecting the amount of time it must have taken you to write your posts, I think you have set up a straw man or two. When did anyone say there were new dogmas in Vatican II? When did anyone say that a person would be condemned for not believing Vatican II? What “new teachings” in Vatican II are you referring to.
      I assume that you are old enough as I am to remember the Church prior to Vatican II and know what has changed. Were any dogmas changed? doctrines? Are any of the things that you call fruits of Vatican II or new teachings in the Vatican II documents?
      And I am very curious as to who said Vatican II was a new springtime in the Church?
      These are real sincere questions. Please answer.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        Anony they ignore facts too……that is where they go wrong. I don’t think they will change, nor will they listen because they have a prejudiced against you choosing to go anonymous, they think you are someone else. Such is life……

        We have this beautiful article of this good news and look how this article went. In my area I am trying to get more to try the EF mass but its unfortunate but where there is a Latin Mass, it attracts people who are immersed in AntiV2 theories and it stops people from joining this order of Mass. I really believe that the reason the EF of mass is growing its because of the lay faithful within the church who are working hard to have it but I have seen with my own eyes that those who are anti V2, they are the ones who slow down its progress with what we have seen here, its one of many pure examples.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Thank you, Steve Phoenix, for not ignoring facts prior to VII, facts that do not change when they are clearly defined in Catholic doctrine. Thank you for not ‘changing’ for that would clearly indicate a change in Faith. That stability is a definite mark of grace in this onslaught of ambiguous feel-good nonsense that has wreaked havoc in the Church!

          Sadly, there are those who only hear what they want to hear or only hear the fallacious backing-and-forthing of what is most definitely diabolical disorientation. Much like those who attack anonymous posters for using an anonymous moniker in one thread only to suggest that ‘others’ have a prejudice against anonymous postings. Inconsistent is the word. And unwilling to look at the very real issues of the dreaded Anti-V2 theorists WHO HAVE PRAYED the FSSP into LA. Is that an unwillingness to look at facts or just look? I wonder. Either way, I’m glad that Tradition is on the rise in LA, even if only in appearance.

          But ignorance IS often bliss.

  45. Steve Phoenix says:

    First, according to the Michael McDermott rule, I dont respond to Anonymous posters;

    2nd: Your Fellow Cath has a weightily valid point about the abuse crisis absolutely killing the Catholic Church and still killing it today (I disagree about Ratzinger/P BXVI being a bad choice, but I am sure he and I disagree about Bergoglio/PF, so that is fair play.)

    The abuse-crisis’ genesis is profound and long-term: some of it is rooted prior to V2, some after. However, the dissolving of seminary and religious order discipline and structure around 1965-present did not help (Note ex-Rogerian therapist William Coulson’s essay, “We overcame their Traditions and Their Faith,” SF Faith, as to how religious order groups and seminary groups in 1960′s were completely destroyed by their newfound V2 -inspired “spiritual quest for self”.) One of the priests Coulson corresponded with was at St Anthony’s Seminary in Santa Barbara, ground-zero on the Richter scale for the abuse-crisis.

    [Related to the abuse crisis,] Finally, there is the issue of the “diabolical disorientation” sweeping the Catholic Church—which exact language Sr. Lucia Santos of Fatima DID use several times documented in a series of approved letters dating from 1969-1971, printed with the imprimatur of the Bishop Joao Venancio of Fatima in 1973 (“Um Vida ao servico de Fatima: A Life In Service to Fatima”) . Specifically the opposition was to a life of prayer and penance: a matter which is specifically the problem today.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      [Related to the abuse crisis,] Finally, there is the issue of the “diabolical disorientation” sweeping the Catholic Church—which exact language Sr. Lucia Santos of Fatima DID use several times documented in a series of approved letters dating from 1969-1971, printed with the imprimatur of the Bishop Joao Venancio of Fatima in 1973 (“Um Vida ao servico de Fatima: A Life In Service to Fatima”) . Specifically the opposition was to a life of prayer and penance: a matter which is specifically the problem today, where actions and programs are invoked and the ordained are more functionaries, social workers, administrators or therapists than cultic priests. There remains a disorientation in the Church which transmits itself as an absence of grace, and absence of Christ’s peace, and a strange spirit of disturbance. This is “where were at.”

      • Thank you for the source but it is not checking out. Do you own the publication or where did you hear of these letters? Putting in a name so you will answer me.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          The book (Um Vida Ao Servico de Fatima, Martin Reis: Porto, 1973) is only available to my knowledge in Portuguese (I read/speak Portuguese) and only excerpts have been translated into English. It used to be available in Fatima, PT, at various of the bookstores. Why it has never been translated into English is a good question: but who would want to be attacked as a “Lefebvrist” or a “Grunerist” or what-have-you, if one did. Who needs the headache?

          Another thing to remember is that no one questioned the stark language (“diabolical disorientation” or “desorientação diabólica”) of Sr. Lucia Santos at the time she made these interviews: but it became fashionable later on, especially under the deviously deceptive (in my opinion) attacks of the late Belgian Jesuit Fr. Edoaurd Dhanis, who attacked/implied/accused Sr. Lucia of being mentally disturbed and making up the account of Fatima, “adding to it” as time went on.

          Well, the fact is that Sr. Lucia, as she explained in a 1946 interview to William T. Walsh, only answered specific questions put to her as she said “under strict obedience” to her bishop. It wasnt until later in the 1930′s that the bishop of Leiria asked her to write a full account of everything that happened, for example, that she then mentioned the Angel of Mercy that had come to the children first, urging them to diligence in prayer and penitence.

          Well, I am done on “explaining” the message of Fatima (as if I could): anyone who wants to know the truth can read about it, or better yet go there and find out for themselves. Kind of like the TLM or the mystery of Christ himself.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Well, the fact is that Sr. Lucia, as she explained in a 1946 interview to William T. Walsh, only answered specific questions put to her as she said “under strict obedience” to her bishop. It wasnt until later in the 1930′s that the bishop of Leiria asked her to write a full account of everything that happened, for example, that she then mentioned the Angel of Mercy that had come to the children first, urging them to diligence in prayer and penitence.

            Well, I am done on “explaining” the message of Fatima (as if I could): anyone who wants to know the truth can read about it, or better yet go there and find out for themselves. Kind of like the TLM or the mystery of Christ himself.

          • Thank you for your answer. I do appreciate it. I am not questioning the language and, of course, diabolical disorientation is a good term for much of what we see going on, including misappropriation of approved apparitions and unapproved apparitions. I was wondering where the term comes from and why it is not in any of the works of Sister Lucia that I am familiar with.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      Steve Phoenix: First, thank you for engaging in dialogue on substance and not rejecting ad hominem my arguments. I TRULY appreciate and welcome that, even if on certain points of substance we might disagree. Secondly, I offered a VERY strong point about the poor choice of Cardinal Ratzinger to be the CDF chair and then Pope. That was my opinion and I had no illusions that any regular poster would agree with me. At least you seemed to agree that it was a matter open to various disagreeing opinions, and for that I thank you. Thirdly, I’m not sure whether or not the Fatima letters had anything to do or not, with the Abuse Scandal. We need not invoke Fatima, we only need to our own sense of decency to understand that whenever children are abused, parents have every right to flee. Thus we should not be surprised that when a Church is unwilling to deal with childhood abusers, parents will flee from our pews!! It is just that simple! They would be complicit in the abuse themselves if they did not!! This is precisely why our Holy Father is correct in calling our Church to deal with the crisis immediately and cover it up no longer.

      • Canisius says:

        YFC I would have paid good money to see the look on your face when Cdl.Ratzinger came out on the balcony of St. Peter’s as Pope Benedict.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Not worth any money at all Canisius. I was disappointed for sure. But not to the extent money needs change hands.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        I avoid interpreting Fatima and the message of “the devil’s final conflict” (1957 interview of Sr. Lucia Santos with Fr. E. Fuentes) as applying solely to the abuse-crisis (yes, the abuse-crisis is part of the diabolical attack on the Church and all of us, no doubt: we have JP2′s, BXVI’s, and F1′s assent to that point).

        I was responding to a claim in prior notes above that had challenged that Sr. Lucia Santos actually used the words “diabolical disorientation” (which she did, on several occasions, in several letters, principally to her 3 priest-nephews, certainly during the period of 1969-1971, before she was silenced — again). This is part of the revisionist-history that tries (in my opinion) to disregard Our Lady’s message at Fatima almost entirely, an act for which we have paid a heavy price in the last 4 or 5 decades. That is my point in attempting to document the basis for the phrase “diabolical disorientation” and warn against making this an “Our-Lady-of-Bayside”-type belief. Big mistake.

        • Anonymous says:

          I agree with you on the neglect of our Lady’s message. We need to pray the rosary daily. I confess my own neglect. The Christians in Syria and Iraq, Egypt, the Holy Land etc desperately need our prayers. They are living in martyrdom. We need their prayers, too.

  46. Anonymous says:

    If you reject the teachings of Vatican II, you reject everything the Church has ever taught.

    • Canisius says:

      Utter nonsense Anon… Vatican 2 has in the end turned out to be a failed council no matter how you liberals try to spin it.

      • This is a lie! It is not a failed council! You are dishonoring our Lord, calling Him a liar in His own church. Shameful behavior. What kind of Catholics are posting here? Is this a Catholic website or a protestant sect? Who are you people!

        WARNING TO HOLY CATHOLIC FAITHFUL IN UNION WITH ROME, stay clear away from these schismatics! Read your CCC and your bible and listen to the warnings that they give in regards to these gossipers and schismatics.

  47. Steve Phoenix says:

    “The Council” as a “A new springtime in the Church”: Just two examples:

    1) See par. 2, John Paul II, Redemptoris Missio, encyclical, Dec. 7, 1990: The Council a “new springtime in the Church.”

    2) JP2: “The movements and new communities, providential expressions of the new springtime brought forth by the Spirit with the Second Vatican Council, announce the power of God’s love which in overcoming divisions and barriers of every kind, renews the face of the earth to build the civilization of love”. 31 May 2000, address, Mass for Pentecost.

    These are both from Vatican.VA, not some lying SSPX website :)

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      Even more common is to call V2 a “New Pentecost”, this crazy imagery often repeated by Paul VI in many addresses, almost as an incantation in a false hope to turn around the sinking post-Vatican II bark; still later it became a title of Card Leo Joseph Suenens book regarding V2 and the newfound charismatic movement.

    • Anonymous says:

      Thanks for the quotes.

  48. Anonymous says:

    almost 300comments and noone has come up with any dogma that was changed by vatican2

    • Ann Malley says:

      Good point, Anonymous, so tell me what is binding in it? That’s the question.

      • Anonymous says:

        Everything.

      • Anonymous says:

        You really don’t know what Vatican II is, do you? That is not unusual.
        Many times when people questioned some of the things that went on in their parish, they were given the answer that Vatican II was responsible for it. Well, it wasn’t.
        You probably are not old enough to even know what has changed. I hope you are not being fooled by people who exploit disgruntled Catholics. There are three things and only three things in Vatican II that the SSPX takes exception with. Pope John Paul II said it is because they misunderstand the Vatican II texts.
        Now think about this: you posted above from a statement of Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) in which he said that his plan was to restore the TLM to the Church so that those who were attached to that Rite would not be tempted to attend illicit Masses-which he did, unfortunately not with a full cooperation and understanding from his fellow bishops in some cases. Now, think about this-how are those who now make their living supplying the TLM to those attached to it, going to keep their customers or followers? There is the now a crisis The only way is to convince their followers that there has been some change in the One Holy Catholic Church which renders it flawed (which we know by faith that cannot be and would be a sin against faith and even heresy) and that they are in danger if they attend it. I notice that you are a victim of this error. I will pray for you.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Anonymous, the documents of Vatican II are the very source of the the heretical notion that the Church needs to change and/or does not have the fullness of the truth:

          “…as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her (Dei Verbum§8).

          This is to make it sound as though Tradition, which guards the deposit of faith from the time of the Apostles’ preaching, does not already possess “the fullness of divine truth!” In the reading of the above, one is led to believe there might be something else to be added or that what is already there can be modified.

          This idea of the Church being in “incessant tension” with the “fullness of divine truth” openly contradicts the Church’s idea of the “deposit of faith” (I Tim. 6:20). In turn, this error is connected to “subjectivism”-the signature of modern thinking-typified by the “New Theology,” of which the reigning idea is that everything is always moving in a continual upward progression, and that absolute truth does not exist, rather, only the endless tending of a subject toward a truth whose endpoint is himself.

          You have NO IDEA, despite your charity, what the crisis or error is, Anonymous. If you want to understand my POV, read the following:

          http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/SiSiNoNo/2003_March/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

          If you do want to read it, that’s okay. But the ‘error’ of the Truth perhaps needing to change is the very error presented in VII documents. Documents that teach different ideas, but are not ‘officially’ binding as the council was merely pastoral.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            And it is the insistince that Vatican II taught error that derailed the talks between BXVI and SSPX.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank you for your reply. You have completely misunderstood the quote from DV. I will read your document. Will you please read Dei Verbum which is about the Bible.

          • Anonymous says:

            I haven’t finished the webpage you gave me but I honestly cannot believe the level of total lack of understanding. They pull sentences out of the documents and interpret them to mean something which is contrary to the Faith. However, those sentences DO NOT mean what this author claims they mean. It is ridiculous.
            I hope you will read the Vatican II documents and the sources cited in their footnotes. I am sure you will see that when you take these sentences in context and in the light of the Catholic Faith they are prefectly in keeping with Tradition; in fact Vatican II teaches that Tradition and Scripture are from the same source-the Almighty God-and they are inerrent and infallible.
            Please educate yourself so people like this cannot mislead you.
            Going back to reading it.

          • Anonymous says:

            Dei Verbum 8. 8. And so the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time. Therefore the Apostles, handing on what they themselves had received, warn the faithful to hold fast to the traditions which they have learned either by word of mouth or by letter (see 2 Thess. 2:15), and to fight in defense of the faith handed on once and for all (see Jude 1:3) (4) Now what was handed on by the Apostles includes everything which contributes toward the holiness of life and increase in faith of the peoples of God; and so the Church, in her teaching, life and worship, perpetuates and hands on to all generations all that she herself is, all that she believes.

          • Anonymous says:

            This tradition which comes from the Apostles develop in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. (5) For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.
            (The Church contains the Fullness of Divine Truth because she has within Her-Jesus Christ Himself. However, some truths the Father has kept to himself so it is also proper to say the the Catholic Church has the fullness of REVEALED Truth and also, as in Scripture it says that in the future “we shall know as we are known.” This is my thought on why it is not contrary to Scripture or Tradition to say what Dei Verbum says but I am sure there are others with more profound thoughts. The individual who wrote that it is contrary to Tradition is not correct. He has ignored the preceding paragraph and completely misinterpreted the text-just as John Paul II said.)

          • anonymous you are right! These schismatics think they are teachers now! I don’t trust them like I don’t trust Jehovah’s Witness knocking on my door but this time, they are nagging my computer screen. UGG lol Since I don’t want them in my home, I will have to sign off…..my pleasure and I shake the dust off my feet!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Yes, YFC, you are absolutely correct.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, it is what you say, “I cannot believe the total level of the lack of understanding” that is the issue. God bless you, but that is precisely the point. The documents *can* be interpreted this way. And by those who have no care to interpret them *in the light of tradition* that is exactly what is being done. Hence the ‘spirit’ of the VII council and not what the writers wanted to achieve. But writers must be very exact when they write or else take the hit for loophole mis-interpretations. There is no Bishop standing over one’s shoulder to say, “No, that doesn’t mean that. That really means this.” In other words, if the documents can logically be construed to be one thing or something completely opposite, the reader isn’t necessarily to blame as the WRITER has the primary duty, especially in such weighty matters as eternal salvation, to communicate with precision.

            So yes, we must interpret in light of Tradition. And I do see where the Council fathers were trying to go. But look to the confusion of what has come into the Church in the past 50 years and what you will see are clerics and religious acting upon these misinterpretations. That is why teaching documents need to be extremely clear. VII documents by the very nature of the pastoral language they use are not. That is how they were ‘hijacked’. The world is full of, “…what is “is”” when one is trying to explain oneself out of getting nailed for bad behavior and/or in an attempt to justify bad behavior prior to doing it.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Again, while I understand what the Council Fathers might have intended, Anonymous, the portion between the asterisks is highly problematic:

            “…This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts through a penetrating understanding of the *spiritual realities which they experience*, and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.

            The parts between the asterisks have been used on this website to justify the promotion of the LGBT agenda. Not with a mind to carry one’s cross in accordance with Church teaching, but to defend a new and progressive approach to dealing with homosexual couples who, based on *spiritual experiences* (vague, undefinable terminology), would have Catholics accept their unions to be similar in nature to that of man and wife.

          • Ann Malley says:

            to Anonymous cont:

            Those progressive clerics who promote that which is so obviously against Church teachings in practice often draw on such VII statements for doing so. Based on the ‘spiritual’ experiences of the faithful. And in today’s world, many are falsely led by what they believe to be spiritual experiences without discerning the spirits that are leading them. They relate back to statements in VII such as the above and then go forward trusting their ‘spiritual experiences’ in lieu of doctrine.

            That is the ambiguity of which I speak. I know you understand that there is a strange push for homosexual sexual acceptance in society today and inside the Church. Those who would do so in the Church are not of a mind to identify or interpret documents within the light of Tradition. Just look at YFC’s commentary on the crisis in the Church written at:

            Your Fellow Catholic says: July 24, 2014 at 1:57 pm

            YFC is not acting alone, Anonymous, but acting in union with those inside the Church who would change Her based on the ambiguous that would render the sensum fedelium to be a majority rules and *spiritual experience* to trump defined moral teachings.

            That’s just one example of why clarity is necessary.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, don’t worry about the teachings being “hijacked.” Just learn them and accept them. Stop worrying so much about what humans do and just put your confidence in God. He is almighty. He is all-knowing. His Mystical Body which is the Church has Him as its Head.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Really, Ann Malley??? You are using ME to justify your leaving the Catholic Church? You’ve got to be kidding!!!

          • Ann Malley says:

            I’m using your progressive agenda as a very clear teaching example of the ‘Fellow Catholics’ in the pews who are attempting to subvert Catholic teaching and morality. That is why I often thank you for your posts because you illustrate the modernist agenda of so-called changing Truth with increasing clarity. But do not mistake my pointing to your posts as pointing to you directly for you would have no voice whatsoever inside the Church unless you had clerics in positions of authority to back you up. And that is the issue – not you.

            Much like you were using posts on your own now seemingly defunct blog to point out so-called homophobia within the Catholic Church. Let’s be straight with one another, YFC. Wouldn’t that be a refreshing change?

          • Ann Malley says:

            Thank you again, Anonymous, but I have to be concerned about what is or is not hijacked. As the saying goes, “You are what you eat.” That is also true of what one hears and digests into the mind.

            I do trust God. That is why I seek to surround myself with the affirmations of His true teachings and the Faith, full and entire. For grace builds upon nature. And knowing myself, I would be a fool to surround myself with that which I already know to be a scandal to Faith. But again, thank you for your concern. And God bless you for your faithfulness.

          • Anonymous says:

            It is a paradox that in trying so hard not to go astray, people go astray. You have forgotten the words of Jesus Christ: “Fear is useless; what is needed is trust.”
            The fullness of the Faith is only available in the Catholic Church.
            The SSPX does not contain the fullness of the Catholic Faith because they have rejected some of the teachings of the Church. All of their priests are suspended so while some of the Sacraments (not all) are valid, they are all illicit. One does not receive the same graces attending the Mass of a suspended priest (a Mass he is forbidden to say) as one receives at the most indifferently said Mass in the Catholic Church. These are facts that you do not like to face. I really would like to see you trust God more and not yourself. The Catholic Church is not a scandal to the Faith. I think you have a lot of wrong ideas about the Catholic Faith and you should spend a length of time (say 6 months or even 3) immersing yourself in study of the Catholic Faith from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other trustworthy material. Surround yourself with only things that are approved by the Church. Do not trust yourself. Do not trust men that are so sinful that they purposely disobey orders from the Church. You are trusting evil to be good and you are going to find out the hard way that you put your trust in lying men rather than God. Please find at least one priest in the Catholic Church that you can trust and ask about a prayer of deliverance, just in case.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, thank you again for your concern. But your diagnosis negates reality as you seem to believe, however charitably, that I have not and do not do the things you yourself advise. That said, I am not trusting in myself. I never really have. I am, however, trusting in the Church, that is the Church as She always has been and still is despite mass confusion. I understand that you do not see things that way and so be it.

            As for Our Lord’s admonishment, “Do not be afraid; only have faith and she shall be saved,” I am not afraid and I have Faith. Faith in Our Lord and the ultimate correction of this confusion. In the meantime, I do what is necessary to guard the precious gift of Faith God in His mercy has given me. If you do as much where you are, that is to your credit and God bless you. But please, do not admonish me not to be afraid and then attempt to use that which in all honesty is nothing but a scare tactic to undermine my confidence in the perennial and clear teachings of Holy Mother Church, not ‘sinful men.’

            If a parent asks a child to sin or insists they put themselves in the occasion thereof it is no virtue to obey. You may not be in need of a deliverance prayer, but rather a better understanding of true obedience.

          • Anonymous says:

            A scare tactic? I’m sorry, Ann Malley, but again I really recommend that you increase your study of the Catholic Faith.
            Ann Malley, if you knew the perennial and clear teachings of Holy Mother Church, you would not write the things you do. You could not.
            “”We see how evil wishes to dominate the world and that it is necessary to enter into battle with evil,” [Pope Benedict XVI] explained. Evil is seen in many forms of violence, the Pontiff reflected, but also “masked with goodness and precisely this way destroying the moral foundations of society.”
            “With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. [3] Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. [4] One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. [5] One Lord, one faith, one baptism.
            [6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all. [7] But to every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the giving of Christ.”

          • Catherine says:

            Anonymous writes, “All of their priests are suspended so while some of the Sacraments (not all) are valid, they are all illicit. One does not receive the same graces attending the Mass.”

            Speaking of the word “suspended” or “illicit” then let’s talk about the priests who are in “full communion” who are also being “forbidden” from preaching the full truth from the pulpit by bullying from their pastors or bishops under the penalty threat of transfers to the outskirts of Siberia or some other various blackballing punishment.

            The people attending these Masses could surely attain knowledge and graces from hearing the full truth but the collection plate can never be threatened… just good priests who want to be faithful. Meanwhile, priests are still being told to tiptoe around the tulips and completely dodge particular teachings in order not to offend sensibilities that could interfere with the collection basket.

          • Anonymous says:

            Catherine, if a priest is mistreated by his peer or bishop, he has a recourse to the Vatican.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous writes: “… if you knew the perennial and clear teachings of Holy Mother Church, you would not write the things you do. You could not.”

            I understand what I write shakes you, Anonymous, but it shouldn’t. Truth is stranger than fiction as the story goes. That’s all. As for:

            “Catherine, if a priest is mistreated by his peer or bishop, he has a recourse to the Vatican.”

            The Vatican is not a personal mommy-make-him-stop line. And living the actual Faith translates to suffering the Faith, Anonymous, and that includes taking the many, many lumps of injustice. Trouble is the sheep are bleeding, leaving, are often confused into believing themselves to be goats now, or are looking to the goats saying let’s get together and learn from each other.

            But again, if you are safe and moving forward in your spiritual life where you are, great. That is a blessing, but please do not attempt to shout down others with something you do not even want to learn

            “…masked with goodness and precisely this way destroying the moral foundations of society.”

            Why do you think Pope Benedict was so adamant about fixing the situation with the Society, Anonymous? Because they are evil and teach evil? No. But precisely because they teach the Catholic principles and morals that are the foundations of society. You’re battling a phantom, Anonymous, one that could very well be your mom or dad trying to wake you from a bad dream.

  49. This is great news but I am concerned that these schismatics will be drawn to this new parish and spread their views of bad will. This website attracts schismatics and homosexuals. What is it that all there is harping about this mass or that mass? It has to be a sin to have these scandalous discussions. I am petrified.

    • Ann Malley says:

      “…What is it that all there is harping about this mass or that mass?”

      Why ask a question you are petrified to have answered, Mrs. A?

      I thank God the TLM will be increased in LA. Why? Because it conveys sound doctrine in its very form. So God bless the FSSP!

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      “Humph”, (said Pooh): “Mrs A”: since we are all homosexuals and schismatics”—I am so glad that you have such a discerning gift of knowing hearts and minds to be able so charitably to pass judgement. I would not thank you would you want to sell way your typewriter by posting on such a website. By the way are you sure you have not posted previously under a different name, anonymous.

      • Its absurd to think that anyone new wanting to voice their opinion here has to be one of your regulars. Don’t worry, don’t worry I do not plan on being a regular. I posted by my first initial of my married name. Would it have been better if I went anonymous? It does not matter, I have better things to do with my time. bye

  50. Steve Phoenix says:

    ..meant to say,” I would not think you would want to sully your keyboard,mysterious “Mrs A.” “

  51. Anonymous says:

    It is indeed a sin to argue over the EF or OF Mass, and some will have to go to Confession.

    Yes to the FSSP. Promote it, and support it financially and with your time.

    Btw regarding the SSPX, did you know that even though the excommunication had been lifted that -
    ” The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons.
    As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church.
    There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved.
    In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church,
    and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
    Pope Benedict 2009 – Vatican web site.
    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica_en.html

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      It is absolutely unfathomable to claim that discussing relevant
      facts re. the Traditional Latin Mass and the relative differences of the Novus Ordo, its sources and its origins is “a sin”—or even to “argue” about it. This is the “Shut-up-shut-up” argument. What we are doing here is trying to understand the truth, and that is a threat to many in itself. The name-calling starts.

      We now know much more about the facts surrounding V2, its history, its proponents, the origins of the Novus Ordo Mass, and the massive break with tradition (Yes: listen to Fr. Joseph Gelineau , a pro-Novus Ordo peritus himself: “The Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.” 1976). This was why in 2008 the artificial designation of “Ordinary Form” vs. “Extraordinary Form” had to be created: the New Mass broke with the Traditional Liturgy. Its right there in black-and-white.

      We have now at least 3 monumental but readable histories of V2 with direct sources: Iota Unum, Romano Amerio; Pope John’s Council, Michael Davies; The 2nd Vat Council: an Unwritten Story, Roberto de Mattei). We have proud first-hand accounts of the constructors of the New Mass (see Ch. 9, “A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church”, Rembert Weakland) who describe how, without the Council Fathers or the true liturgical experts present, they concocted the New Mass in Jan 1968 and THEN presented it to Paul VI at the Sistine Chapel over 3 “experimental liturgy” evenings. Even the Pope didnt know what they were doing: until it was done. Then, faced with a quandary that he would reject the Consilium “experts’ ” New Mass, he was forced to adopt it or face a cataclysmic rebellion of “going back on the Council.” Ever the diplomat, Montini went along with it: even to the shock of the 1968 Synod Fathers, most of whom were present at the V2 Council itself.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Steve Phoenix, I appreciate your appeal to history and fact, and your sharing your sources with us. I haven’t read them, but someday I might, so thanks for the share. I looked at downloading the Weakland book. It’s the most expensive Kindle title I’ve ever seen at $20. Is it worth it?

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          [ Re. Weakland's book, YFC, I dont know if it is worth $20/Kindle version. Used copies are available at Amazon.com from $2.58 + s/h on up. Even so, he doesnt discuss a lot of his life that one would have expected him to mention.

          What amazed me about Weakland was how he received the best of education in the pre-1962 Church ( @ St. Vincent's Archabbey in Latrobe, PA); how he catalogs a fabulous post-graduate degree history (he has at least a Master's in Music from Juilliard/NY, no slouch achievement); and all the best that the Benedictine order could give in terms of years of study andeducation (he remains an expert on Gregorian chant and medeival music)--- and for what? I think he stopped saying the powerful St. Benedict's Cross prayer ["Crux S. Patris Benedicti ..Eius in obitu nostro praesentia muniamur! ("The Cross of our holy father Benedict...May we be strengthened by his presence in the hour of our death!). ." ] a long, long time ago.]

      • Ann Malley says:

        Well said, Steve Phoenix. Catholics should never be afraid to know and understand their own history.

        The 2nd Vat Council: an Unwritten Story, Roberto de Mattei is a very solid, academic analysis of events. Very thorough.

    • Ann Malley says:

      To make this clear, Anonymous, those who are in doubt regarding the ambiguous nonsense wreaking havoc in the vineyard need to take action to maintain the Faith. I’m glad that you are taking that action you need to. Please, do not step outside the realm of your jurisdiction, and try to assert that others are not when the very documents you would defend decry the sinful aspects of being judgmental with your separated brethren. (In other words, if you believe that salvation can be had outside the Church, relax.)

      Our Lord does is not a circus master, setting up a confusing maze to keep souls from salvation. The Church, that is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church will supply.

      • Anonymous says:

        What kind of Catholic would write something like that? Repent and become a true Catholic or please stop posting your errors on a faithful Catholic website. I know there are other schismatics who post here, but none of them are so badly informed on the Catholic Faith. Please learn the Catholic Faith.
        There is no salvation outside the Church. All the Popes have had the strongest condemnation for schismatics and heretics. Humility and docility will help you. Obedience will allow you to perform at a level that is much higher than your own knowledge and understanding. Get to a Catholic Church, confess your grave sins including what you post on this website. Jesus is always ready to forgive. Ask the Blessed Mother to obtain for you the graces that you lost by following your own re-invention and mutation of the Catholic faith. (All this assumes that you are sincere and not just a trouble maker-it is hard to tell.)

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          Ah, how sweet the sound! Threats and name-calling. This is the “Spirit of Vatican II” we are most familiar with… ever-brimming with charity and loving patience.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            By the way, Michael Davies was called the same names…until Card. Ratzinger/PBXVI wrote a public comment at the time of his passing in 2004:

            “”I found him as a man of deep faith and ready to embrace suffering,” Cardinal Ratzinger wrote. “Ever since the Council, he put all his energy into the service of the Faith and left us important publications especially about the Sacred Liturgy. Even though he suffered from the Church in many ways in his time, he always truly remained a man of the Church. …Therefore we can be confident that the Lord opened wide for him the gates of heaven. We commend his soul to the Lord’s mercy.’”

            So blessed are you when they call you names, “homosexuals (presumably incontinent homosexuals, that is) and schismatics”, all even as they claim to serve Christ.. How sweet the sound!

          • Anonymous says:

            It is interesting that you perceived that as name-calling and threats.
            and then turn around and use sarcasm to insult the faithful who are trying to help an errant soul.

          • Catherine says:

            “Ah, how sweet the sound! Threats and name-calling. This is the “Spirit of Vatican II” we are most familiar with… ever-brimming with charity and loving patience.”

            Ever-brimming with pastoral sensitivity too! God bless you Steve Phoenix!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, helping an errant soul is not to shut down conversation about real Church history that exists and is still wreaking havoc today. (Yes, with name calling and threats.) If anybody should repent, it should be you in that your ‘conversion’ attempts are based on pride and blindness – you lack purity of intention or perhaps suffer from misguided zeal. Otherwise you would not take such a strident tone in condemning that which you do not understand, are not willing to study, and are unwilling to converse about civilly.

            IOW: The ‘because I said so’ argument isn’t going to work for thinking adults. Especially those who have experienced, to great detriment, the ‘Spirit’ of VII. Your inability to take even partial responsibility when it comes to solving very real issues within the Church negates the very writings of VII. Talk with your priest about it. He’ll likely tell you that if my writing disturbs your peace of soul to such a degree that you should not be reading CCD.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Well said, Steve Phoenix. God bless and keep up the good fight!

        • Ann Malley says:

          “There is no salvation outside the Church. All the Popes have had the strongest condemnation for schismatics and heretics. Humility and docility will help you.”

          Sadly, Anonymous, with the teachings of VII one now needs to question what ‘Church’ means as it has been made ambiguous instead of clear.

          It would be similar to the Church attempting to redefine marriage to mean potentially those polygamous unions where children have been the fruit and well, they’re nice people, their children seem mentally stable, so we now must concede that perhaps marriage is some greater institution that is perpetually progressing toward revealed truth. We must address these people now – in a religious sense – our fellow married and treat them as such because we don’t want to question the Holy Ghost working amid them. That would be utter nonsense.

          If such were the case, however, would you decry those Catholics defending marriage to mean one man, one woman to be schismatics and heretics for supporting true marriage? Really? Because that is precisely what you are doing, Anonymous. For there is no Buddhist theory or Calvinism in my posts, only that which has always been Catholic.

          Why you hate that with such ferocity is my question.

          • Anonymous says:

            I do not hate the Catholic religion. I do not hate you. Your posts are not accurate in Catholicism, pre-or post-Vatican II. That is what you refuse to accept. That you do not know Catholicism and you refuse to study it .
            I do not know Calvinism or Buddhism so I would not know if your errors come from them. I just assumed you were making stuff up without bothering to look it up and that is where they come from or from reading schismatic websites.
            Look at your second paragraph-it is heresy. If you really believe that-you are a heretic and a schismatic. (And please don’t blame that one on the poor SSPX-they don’t teach that.)
            Again, I hope you will swallow your pride, stop trying to guess Catholic teaching and learn it from the official sources of the Church. If you can’t make yourself study the CCC, then please study the Roman Catechism. They are both online. May the Blessed Mother, St. Joseph, St. Michael, St. Charles Borromeo,
            St. Alphonsus , St. Pio of Pietrelcina, St. John Paul II and all the Apostles intercede for you with the Lord. May God bless and protect you from all error and demonic assaults.

          • Ann Malley: I agree with you.

            Douay Rheims Bible Quotes:
            “Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”

            He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.

            I do not see how anyone outside the Catholic Church can be saved. The Catholic Church is the ONLY Church that has Christ’s body, blood, soul, and divinity present in the Holy Eucharist. Catholics are the ONLY Christians who are able to eat Christ’s body and drink His blood. Technically, only Catholics are Christians meaning they follow Christ. Any other “Christians” follow a man-made religion which is Protestantism. Maybe, God in His grace, forgiveness, and true love for us can somehow save a soul outside the Catholic Church, but according to His words, they will not be saved. According to Christ, they have no life in them. There are many mansions in God’s house, so maybe they may not go to hell, but I don’t think they will see the Beatific Vision. For thousands of years the teaching was no salvation outside the Church and then modernism and mass confusion (no pun intended) in the Church happened and now Catholics believe you don’t even have to be a Catholic anymore and let’s not stop there, nothing is a sin anymore. It is disheartening!

          • Ann Malley says:

            Nobody said you hate me, Anonymous. You keep getting personal here. That said, study Church history in its entirety. And swallow your willful ignorance. You may choke on it, however, so take small bites.

            You wrote:

            “… I just assumed you were making stuff up without bothering to look it up and that is where they come from or from reading schismatic websites.”

            You’re in out of your depth, Anonymous. You do not understand what the Truth is so of course you’ll misunderstand what schism actually means. So step back and listen and learn and jump into the Double-Dutch game at the right time or you’ll be nailed with two ropes. Don’t blame those swinging the ropes because you’re not doing your homework. And don’t tell the folks swinging the ropes or those successfully jumping that they are doing it all wrong.

            God bless you and good luck.

          • Ann Malley says:

            RR: Thanks for posting. I agree with you. Subjectively speaking we have no ability to judge another’s soul. Objectively speaking, we are called to judge words/actions etc in accordance with our state in life.

            So good going in accepting that which Our Lord has provided for you and your husband. And don’t give up hope about the visible Church. She is still there and will coming through just like Our Lord came thru His Passion.

            God bless!

    • Canisius says:

      It is not a sin to point out the superiority of the Extraordinary Form, nor to point out the abuses in the Ordinary Form

  52. Steve Phoenix says:

    To me, this discussion has been a fruitful one (the “officially approved” return of the Latin Mass to Los Angeles Arch under the FSSP): but the liturgical wars and the pro-Vat2 types’ ever-so-charitable namecalling (“homosexual and schismatics”) shows that there are forces threatened by facts and the truth.

    It is a very familiar tactic: scare good-hearted people, the Abeca’s, the Catherines’, the Dana’s, the Linda Marie’s, away from those “baaaad” “traditionalists”: but never, never, never deal with the facts, the history, the evidence. The same pro-V2 types that were willing to put up with an altered and possibly invalid sacramental Eucharistic formula (pro multis: “for the many” vs. “for you and for all”) for four decades dont face facts. By the way, it was Monsgr. Klaus Gamber, a liturgist praised by Ratzinger/PBXVI, who “argued” (a sin, I guess) for all those years that Paul VI had no right to change the formula and that it was possibly invalid. Yes: invalid. Scream all you want about the SSPX, but their sacraments, tho perhaps illicit, are never invalid. Gamber thought the N.O. consecration was. This is the kind of deviance that a throng of proudly “faithful” bishops and Catholics were willing to accept, even while the wall are collapsing all around them.

  53. Steve Phoenix says:

    In summary, marching arm-in-arm with bishops historically has been no demonstrator of following Christ, of true dogma, “infallibility”, or “tradidi quod et accepit” (” I handed on what I received,” Paul, 1 Cor. 15:3). For many people that is all fine.

    But whether it be Athanasius opposed by the many fine, upstanding Arian bishops at Nicaea; or the many outstanding Donatist bishops that denounced Augustine; or my personal favorite, all the bishops who went over with Cranmer to Henry VIII in adopting a new “mass” rite, Cranmer’s Godly Order; or, more recently, due to V2, the Dutch Bishops Schism of 1966-1970, a schism which has destroyed the Catholic Church in The Netherlands to this very day.

    So follow St. Jerome: “”the best advice that I can give you is this: Church traditions—especially when they do not run counter to the faith—are to be observed in the form in which previous generations have handed which we have received from the fathers of old”.

    • Ann Malley says:

      Thanks again, Steve Phoenix. I always enjoy your posts and your unflinching view to what is and what was without fear. That”s Faith. God bless.

  54. Steve Phoenix says:

    As much as I heartily disagree with the formation of the Novus Ordo Mass,
    I see and attend regularly N.O. Masses (although it is not my preference necessarily to do so) where there are priests and congregations that are deeply involved, where Catholics are seen in a touchingly profound attitude of prayer, and where they participate in a moving, reverent manner. The Our Lady of Peace Shrine in Santa Clara, as an example, is mobbed with families and young children, youth and old people, literally 24 hours a day, and tho’ they celebrate the N.O. Mass, one would be a fool not to see God at work. They also inspire numerous vocations to religious life and priesthood.

    Would that that were in fact the norm in most Catholic parishes. It is my belief that the TLM animates the N.O. to at least recall Catholic belief’s pre-1962 tradition and meaning; because without the TLM, the NO would have no meaning at all (even tho’ Bugnini proudly acknowledged the N.O. was a deliberate break with the past, and with its language of oblation, offering, and “unbloody sacrifice”).

    • Anonymous says:

      Have no meaning at all? The Word of God has no meaning? The Sacrifice of Calvary has no meaning? Prayers have no meaning?
      What could you possibly mean by this?

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 250 words, and should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 250 words, and should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.