In defense of holy days of obligation

Have we lost sight of what is fundamental?
Valesquez's Coronation

Valesquez’s Coronation

The following comes from an August 13 Crisis Magazine article by Christian Brown:

With the approach of the Solemn Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, American Catholics can breathe a sigh of relief thanks to the work of the USCCB. For this year, the Assumption, a holy day of obligation, falls on a Saturday. Ordinarily, this would mean—horrors!—that the faithful must attend Mass on the Saturday of the feast and again the very next day on Sunday!

A burden worthy of the Pharisees it would be to attend Mass on two consecutive days. Surely the hearts of the martyrs in heaven weep for their posterity. While they faced lions, axes and guillotines, we in twenty-first century America must cope with an obligation to make time for Mass, once a year, two days in a row.

Thankfully, the bishops’ conference has come to our rescue. According to a 1992 decree of the USCCB, issued pursuant to Canon Law 1246, the “precept to attend Mass is abrogated” whenever the Assumption falls on either a Saturday or a Monday. Translation: You don’t “have to go” to Mass this August 15.

This sort of fiddling with the Calendar is a disservice to the faithful. It has the obvious effect of discouraging attendance at Mass and diminishes the significance of both the “demoted” feast days and the Roman Calendar in general. These “loopholes” form a small part of the broader message that many Catholics gleaned from the aftermath of Vatican II: We don’t have to do certain things anymore, so we won’t.

The “abrogated” holy days are also of a piece with the post-conciliar fetish for “options” that have disrupted our liturgical tradition and sent confused, even illogical, messages to the laity. Certain practices are required—except when they are not (reception of Holy Communion on the tongue). In the Mass, we no longer have an actual Canon, as nothing is truly fixed. The priest may choose this, that or the other, and most hope not to bore the Faithful with the Confiteor or Roman Canon, opting instead with a lengthy “Pray of the Faithful” and tedious parade of “Eucharistic Ministers” into the sanctuary prior to Communion.

This August 15, most Catholics in the United States will skip Mass on the Feast of Our Lady’s Assumption. We have surely lost sight of what is fundamental. The notion that the Church can accomplish much of anything on this Earth without a vibrant Mystical Body that is consistently fed and nourished by the Bread of Life is pure folly. If the Sacrifice of the Mass is the “source and summit” of Christian life, it follows logically that the Church should do all in its power to ground the spiritual lives of the faithful in the Sacred Liturgy.

Thus, it is not a mere trifle to steal the obligatory status from certain days when they happened to fall just before or just after Sunday or to replace the Sunday Mass with a feast that has its own special place on the General Calendar. The General Calendar itself is a great font of the spiritual life, as it gives us pause to reflect upon the many varied aspects of the life of Our Lord and his mother, as well as upon the virtues and tribulations of the saints.

The Church should, therefore, promote its liturgical life, and call the faithful to immerse themselves in it. Instead of diminishing holy days of obligation, the American bishops should create more of them. Is there a more overlooked feast in the life of the Church than the Annunciation? Why not Corpus Christi (celebrated in its proper place on a Thursday), Sacred Heart, the Visitation of the BVM, the Transfiguration or the Exultation of the Holy Cross?

Somewhere amidst the post-council euphoria, the idea of the “obligatory” was discarded. It seems that acts done under a rule were considered empty, the result of the legalism from which the reformers hoped to save the Church. It is true that acts done out of some compulsion can take on such a character, but it is equally true that man has certain duties. No one quibbles with the notion that one has obligations to family, work or school. Our lives are filled with tasks and commitments we say we “must” do.

But man’s first and greatest obligation is the praise of God. It is this duty that the Church should exhort each individual to meet in some way every day of his life. The highest and best way to praise God is via the Sacred Liturgy. The Church, mater et magistra, should teach her children well, and oblige them in so far as she is able for the good of their immortal souls.

Have a blessed Assumption.

Comments

  1. We are required to adhere to the ‘Precepts of the Church’.
    CCC # “2180 The precept of the Church specifies the law of the Lord more precisely: “On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are bound to participate in the Mass.” “The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.”
    & CCC # 2042 – “You shall attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation and rest from servile labor”.

  2. This is a link to the US Holy Days of obligation, and the USCCB “requirements” on those in the USA.
    Save link for your records.
    http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-1246.cfm

  3. Steve Seitz says:

    Here’s a question related to the topic at hand: Does anyone else here abstain from meat on all Fridays of the year?

    The USCCB has given us the option to substitute it with something else which, in practice, means doing nothing. I recently restarted this practice and strongly recommend others to do so as well. Admittedly, this is a small thing, but the times that we live in call for moral strengthening and greater sacrifice.

  4. I have abstained from meat on Friday for many years. I do it as a self-imposed (very minor) penance. Years ago, abstaining from meat was thought to be a hardship for Catholics. How times have changed, now we are advised by nutritionists and M.D.s to eat less meat, eat more fish and eat vegetarian meals several times a week. Do the bishops still think that abstaining from meat once a week is too rigorous for Catholics? Being a Catholic is a blessing from God. We should do something to set ourselves apart from the non-believers.

    • Linda Maria says:

      I have abstained from eating all creatures– animals, birds, fish– for many, many years, out of love for them! I and my family, also do not buy any product, that has been either tested on a poor animal, or contains animal products, from their poor, tortured and killed bodies! This is a Sacrifice of Love, given to God, for the poor, suffering animals, as well as a penance, in reparation for sins! In high school, some of us were interested in contemplative religious orders– and we found out, that many of them required strict fasts, and either vegetarianism, or close to that! Regardless– the heart learns COMPASSION, when living simply, and without any part in killing! However, it is not expected of others, to agree!

    • Linda Maria says:

      I will continue, with my post, above. It is not necessary, that others agree, or understand, something like vegetarianism, or veganism, and “anti-cruelty.” One can take the time and trouble, to put a little hardship on oneself, do many little acts of kindness, spare others’ suffering, spare poor animals’ suffering, and help God make a more loving world! It is also good to learn to live without many things, of Western society— it makes you a better person! Jesus and His disciples were Jewish, and followed the Jewish dietary laws. (Later, of course, this was dispensed with, for Christ’s Gentile followers.) Our earthly life is brief– we must prepare for Eternal Life, with God, in Heaven!

    • Linda Maria says:

      It is a terrible heartbreak, to travel outside the U.S., and to see the vast poverty and suffering, in so many foreign countries– with no hope! Western society is so absurdly affluent, by comparison, with so much waste, that no one really needs, for a decent life– particularly, in America! And many Americans lead a scandalous lifestyle, of literally gobbling material things, and food (obesity!) as well as so many vices and sins — never taking good things in small, reasonable amounts, and enjoying simple, everyday pleasures, that God naturally gives! (Of course, foreign countries also have vices and sins, as well as disease, and obesity! But their poverty and suffering, is a terrible shock!!) Continued…

    • Linda Maria says:

      I will continue, with my above post. Because of all this suffering in the world, it would be an especially good thing, for the Catholic Church to impose a regular Friday penance, for all– of abstinence, as we used to have! It would be good to also have special prayers, in loving solidarity with those who have no food at all, to eat! I like the “Simple (meatless) Soup Suppers,” along with the Stations of the Cross, in Lent, at many churches! But I think we all would be a better Church, with once-again, universal, Church-imposed, Friday abstinence, for all!

    • Linda Maria says:

      For decades, members of my family all have cooked and offered two kinds of dishes, meat and meatless– at big gatherings, and on holidays. Meat and meatless versions of many delicious dishes, can be easily made! Especially, with many cultural foods– such as Mexican and Italian foods! With many delicious recipes, that are very healthy! It also introduces others to try “going meatless,” and enjoy it, too, and maintain good health! On the Assumption Feast, after church, my 86-year-old mom and a close friend of hers had lunch together, at a Mexican restaurant– guacamole and chips, and then, plates of chilie rellenos– all made vegan-style, too!

    • Linda Maria says:

      My mom was married young, at age 17, like many people. As newlyweds, my dad once invited my mom along, on a hunting trip. When they saw a beautiful deer in the forest– she broke down in tears, and begged him not to kill any precious animals! Then, my dad broke down, too! He was sensitive, and realized he loved “Bambi” and all the beautiful wild animals, too! That was the start of love and compassion, for our family home– and later, the decision for vegetarianism and veganism! My parents were happily married 68 years, until my father passed away! We have a favorite prayer, of the saintly missionary doctor, Dr. Albert Schweitzer, who believed in love for all God’s creatures!

  5. Michael McDermott says:

    I attended the Saturday 5pm Mass on 8-15, but saw that the readings were different than those for the Assumption Mass in the am.

    I am somewhat confused on attendance on a Day of Obligation, which also falls on the Saturday when a 5pm Mass is held a a Vigil- Does this cover both?

  6. The words FEAST and HOLIDAYS refer to holy days. There once were quite a number of them, especially in the Middle Ages. Workers had the day off, and of course attending Mass was the main event during the holy day. Gradually the holy days decreased. It was Pope John Paul II who ended St. Joseph’s Day and the feast of Sts Peter and Paul as a holiday in Italy. Here is the United States we have holy day roulette in regards as when certain feasts are holy days of obligation.

    • Pilar, you are wrong again. Someone posted the Holy Days of obligation for the USA near the beginning of the “comments”.
      Please pay attention for posting baloney.

  7. What is the 12th Day of Christmas? It is the Epiphany, that is, up until Vatican II. Now it is on a Sunday, so more people can come to Mass. What is 40 days after Easter? It is Ascension Thursday, but now, it is on Sunday so more people can come to Mass. Unfortunately, fewer people are coming to Mass. It is logical that the more opportunities you have to attend Mass, the more graces you will merit. Ave Maria Purrissima !

    • Anonymous says:

      The 12th Day of Christmas is January 5, the eve of the Epiphany. In countries where the feast of the Epiphany is not a Holy Day of Obligation, the celebration can be moved to 2nd Sunday after Christmas. I think the Feast of the Epiphany predates the Feast of the Nativity. The Catholic Church celebrates the Octave of Christmas and the season of Christmas ends on the 3rd Sunday after Christmas with the Feast of the Baptism of our Lord. The 12 days of Christmas is popularized in an English Christmas song (which is entirely secular, despite the Internet hoax of it being a secret way to catechize).

  8. Brown wrote: “No one quibbles with the notion that one has obligations to family, work or school.”

    I disagree; America elevates no-fault divorce, hyper-extends unemployment benefits, and eviscerates discipline in public education. Our nation’s sense of social and personal obligation is left to Relativism.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      Karin i totally agree. So where does it leave people of good morals? Well pretty much to fend for themselves. Karin Im glad you brought up those comments. People who have expressed the same concerns as you brought up here, when given the opportunity, should educate the public and hopefully these unjust laws imposed on its people will be rejected. We have been accustomed to hand over our state to godless politician’s.

  9. A very good and timely article. The bishops in the United States need to start
    emphasizing the importance and beauty of these holy days.

  10. St. Christopher says:

    What do you expect, Catholic Readers, from the feckless leadership of the USCCB? They are virtually all CINOs anyway, and really want to be Protestants (and “lite” ones at that).

    The post-Vatican II clergy pretty much all dislike the “Medieval” Catholic Church, and have little to do with Marian devotions. What, what you say, dissing Mary?

    Yes, although it is done subtlely. Look at the words of Bisop-elect Barron who, when pushing back against the reality of Hell, said that “private relevations,” such as at Fatima, need not be followed. Recall that Mary told the three shepherd children that “many souls go to Hell”. But, most Catholics know little of this and are lied to constantlly by the Church about sin and the need for…

    • St. Christopher says:

      (Continued) “repentance.

      Recall Cardinal Maradiaga’s very recent words that “authentic pastoral accompaniment means always walking with the person and knowing that, whatever road they walk, it leads to heaven”. Really?

      If this is true, there is no need for a Church of any kind, nor of the useless sacrifice made by Jesus Christ. Too bad that Maradiaga wears priestly vestments of any kind. He is a walking scandal to the Faith.

  11. walt osgood says:

    Christian Brown….the priest is the ONLY EUCHARISTIC MINISTER…everyone else is a EXTRAORDINARY MINISTER…..

  12. John Patrick says:

    Sadly Our Mother Mary is neglected. These people wonder why the civilization is collapsing.

    • Anonymous says:

      John, just from these two recent articles alone one can now see how the changes of Vatican II were brought about so rapidly and to be frank, unconscionably : http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/08/apostasy-how-suppression-of-truth-about.html?m=1. And this one:http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/08/apostasy-how-suppression-of-truth-about.html?m=1
      Having come home to the Catholic Church in 2007, I’m a relative newcomer. But what I’ve learned is whatever was intended or written in Vat II has never been carried out and that whatever has been done in its name is something else entirely and most assuredly not of God! The fruits speak all one needs to see…confusion, strife, apostasy, division and contention. The people who defend…

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Anonymous, part of the problem is that those who want to part ways with the Ecumenical Council known as Vatican II point to strife, division, etc., which is the same strife and division that they bring to it. It is called: “Self fulfilling prophesy”. Those who cling to the Body of Christ, including her solemn ecumencal councils, are at peace with the Church. Those who sow dissent hope to reap the rewards of dissent, which is to destroy the Church and her Councils.

        • And yet you, “YFC” dissent over the issue of sodomy, which is causing havoc within the Church. Outrageous to see how so many claiming to be in the Church are actually the ones doing such damage to her.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Well said: it is interesting to read what Vatican II actually says, then how it contradicts what it says,; finally, how everyone is mystified by contradiction in the Church.

        Sacro. Concilium: “In celebrating this annual cycle of Christ’s mysteries, holy Church honors with special love the Blessed May, Mother of God…” (#103). Yet we see the virtual elimination of the Assumption, the Immaculate Conception, and Jan. 1st (New Church: “Solemnity of Mary Mother of God”). You can forget the Annunciation (Mar. 25th), and the others as well.

        What you really get down to, regarding the Assumption of the BVM, is that most clergy and their bishops really don’t believe Mary’s body was assumed into heaven (even though the…

  13. Oops! That was me! Anyway, I truly don’t think they can pull off too many heresies like the ‘good old days ‘ of the sixties and seventies simply because of the Internet and the Catholic Blogosphere. Why they feel they can just dismiss Holy Days of Obligation is beyond me! I ‘m saying the Angelus, keeping meatless Friday’s, daily Rosaries etc. I’m sorry if bishops have become lax…obviously we must be led by the saints that went before us, and those who are alive today. In them we still hear our Master’s Voive, no? *stop*

    • Anonymous says:

      Can. 1246 §1. Sunday, on which by apostolic tradition the paschal mystery is celebrated, must be observed in the universal Church as the primordial holy day of obligation. The following days must also be observed: the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Epiphany, the Ascension, the Body and Blood of Christ, Holy Mary the Mother of God, her Immaculate Conception, her Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saint Peter and Saint Paul the Apostles, and All Saints.

      §2. With the prior approval of the Apostolic See, however, the conference of bishops can suppress some of the holy days of obligation or transfer them to a Sunday.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        I don’t ever remember some of these. Perhaps they went by other names in the US?

        My recollection – yikes I’m bad at this –

        Christmas-Nativity
        Mary/Holy Family jan 1
        Acension Thursday
        Immaculate Conception
        Assumption
        All Saints

        So I wonder about Ash Wednesday. It’s one of those I was never clear whether it was a Holy Day, but we observed it religsiously, even though I actually don’t think it was ever declared as such.

        I can’t remember Corpus Christi ever being a holyday of obligation. Yikes, confession awaits!

        • Heh. I vaguely remember our local priest saying Ash Wednesday isn’t a Holy Day…and anyone can come in to receive the ashes on their foreheads. We celebrated it In the Presbyterian church. I have a calendar with all the Holy Days…Remember, ALL Sundays are days of obligation, and here are the others…Jan1( solemnity of Mary, Mother of God) Thurs of the 6th Wk of Easter( Ascension)
          Aug 15(Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary) Nov 1, the solemnity of All Saints
          Dec 8(Immaculate Conception) Dec 25, ( Nativity) I was feeling so guilty that I didn’t go to Mass last Sat. and discovered it wasn’t a day of Obligation this year. I know what you mean yfc…but I’m not going to confession. As far as I know, being forgetful isn’t a…

        • Anonymous says:

          Dana, you don’t need to confess this year because it was not obligatory because it was on a Saturday. In my opinion, in years when it is obligatory, you should confess even if you forgot. It may not be a mortal sin but it is serious.

  14. Steve Phoenix says:

    First, the name of the Spanish Golden Age baroque painter, Diego Velasquez (“Coronation of the Virgin,” image heading this Crisis essay) is mis-spelled. It is also a different mystery: Titian’s Assumption of the Virgin is on point. Just in case anyone else noticed.

    Christian Brown’s comments on the continuing and endless change in the annual worship calender that Catholics are subjected to each year (“..The post-conciliar fetish for ‘options’ that change every year and have disrupted our liturgical tradition..”) points out that the revolution and break in continuity that was initiated under the cover of V2 will never stop: it means endless, progressive rejection of tradition.

    • Anonymous says:

      I have to say that I prefer that they keep the holy days of obligation as holy days of obligation. And I wish we would have all the holy days of obligation that are cited in Canon Law. However, there is nothing keeping me and you from attending Mass on those days. And taking the day off work if you have that option.

  15. Linda Maria says:

    Our Church has lost its way, in the modern world! We need a truly Catholic way of life, that places God and religion first– and the secular world, second! The Catholic home and family, must also be the center of our Faith! The secular world must be made to respect God, and the Pope, and Catholicism– and to slow way down, for religious observances! God cannot help us, if we forget Him, with lots of dumb excuses!

  16. History repeats itself. We are re-living the Arian heresy, but modernism is worse because it pretends to be orthodox. Also because of mass communications, this heresy is widespread. The bishops, and the Vatican will do nothing to stop it, because they are the problem.

  17. Steve Phoenix says:

    Because V2 effectively authorizes the Consilium to famously “revise” the calendar (read: wreck) [as they “revised the liturgical books” (#31) and created an entirely Novus Ordo rite], there occurs the elimination of many Marian feasts—contradicting V2’s espoused emphasis, to maintain the reverence due the Blessed Virgin (#103).

    Just a partial list of the eliminated feasts for example, in the New Rite: (Divine Maternity of BVM; Most Holy Name of BV Mary; OL of the Miraculous Medal; OL of Ransom; OL of La Salette; OL of Perpetual Help, many more), others were greatly de-emphasized (OL Mt Carmel; OL Fatima, etc); Yves Congar would be proud.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      You are talking about something different than holy days of obligation. Marian feasts were deemphasized so that the focus could be brought back on her son, who is the central figure in salvation history. There was such a multiplication of marian feasts that no one could figure out who was central anymore.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Correction, YFC, there was Catholic emphasis on Our Lady which is wholly proper, but deigned a stumbling block for Protestants who confused the honor given to Our Blessed Mother as some sort of idol worship.

        Obfuscating the importance of Our Lady was yet another policy change that has produced a bad and bitter fruit. We are blessed that She is Our Mother in truth and therefore ready to forgive our slights and help us in spite of our neglect.

        Anyone with a solid Catholic upbringing understands completely the importance of Our Lady – and Our Lord’s own desire that all generations shall call Her blessed.

        In future, I hope the Church will seek to fully catechize and promote those devotions so necessary to maintaining the Faith and…

        • Ann Malley says:

          …and combating the slow creep of heresy. In the end, Her Immaculate Heart will triumph.

          • Catherine says:

            Thank you Steve Phoenix and Ann Malley.

            http://insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-27-2015-on-this-day

            “When I began my task,” explained Caffarra, “I wrote to Sister Lucia… I did not expect an answer seeing that I had only asked for prayers. A few days later, I received a very long letter signed by Sister Lucia herself.” continued…..

          • Catherine says:

            continued..

            “In it we find written: “…the final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid, because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue.” And then she concluded: “However, Our Lady has already crushed its head.”

            continued…..

          • Catherine says:

            continued…

            “This is the central point because it is the very pillar of creation, the truth of the relationship between man and woman among the generations. If the founding pillar is touched the entire building collapses and we see this now, because we are at this point and we know it.”

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank you for that link, Catherine.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          WRONG. Christ is the central figure in Salvation history. I’m sorry that the refocus upon HIM has you so upset. However, Christ, our Lord, Lived. Died. and Rose for us. All of us, including you who try to obfuscate it with any reference to his Mother, who Bore within her his Life.

          • Ann Malley says:

            YFC, your feeling the need to correct Catholics in giving due regard to Our Lady is disturbing. (This is why your citing VII changes as that which moved you to become Catholic in other threads is odd. You seem to believe doctrines have changed somehow. That in itself gives credence to the novelties in VII. )

            STOP attempting to denigrate the lawful deference shown to the Mother of God, She who was foretold to crush the head of the serpent.

            YOU are doing nothing more than obfuscating Christ’s desire to honor His mother by implying a lack of focus that doesn’t exist.

            Stop projecting your discomfort with honoring Our Lady as some attempt at denying the centrality of Christ. That is your issue.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          No correction. THe proper focus is on our Lord, which the Second Vatian Council requested of us. But you don’t abide by the council, or it’s pastoral counsel, so I am not surprised that you ignore it’s desire to recenter the Church upon the Christ who saved us by his Cross. Sad.

          • “From that time every woman of that tribe hoped to have the great privilege of herself being the Mother of the Messias, or Christ; for it stood to reason, since He was so great, the Mother must be great, and good, and blessed too.” I feel you can’t love Our Blessed Mother too much.

            My quote above is from this site. http://www.cardinaljohnhenrynewman.com/mary-mother-of-christ/
            To paraphrase St Cd Newman, to love Mary is to love Christ. She always points us to Him.

          • Anonymous says:

            Devotion to Mary is devotion to Christ. She is His Mother and his first disciple. She always leads those who honor Her to Her Son. Our Lord desires us to honor Her, to consecrate ourselves to Her Immaculate Heart. When we belong to Her, we belong to Him because all that She has is His. Her cooperation with God’s Will is held up as something we should imitate.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            One who incarnates himself desires the greatest connection with humanity possible. That it happened through The Virgin is amazing, and that her vessel needed to be, and was, sinless, is worthy of admiration. But when the worship of Vessel supersedes the Divinity contained within Her? Then I think we need to talk…

          • Anonymous says:

            Jesus was incarnated by the Holy Spirit.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            OK fine, what is your point?

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      YFC, you are a smart guy: the focus of the Council became, after the fact, a de-emphasis on the role of the Blessed Virgin. As I believe you already know, the two schema proposals that received the most pre-Council support by all the bishops were: (#1) a condemnation of communism and (#2), a declaration of Mary as Mediatrix of the human race. They are related, in fact.
      When you get around to reading Yves Congar’s My Journal of the Council, Congar was adamantly opposed—and so were all in his controlling faction—to any elevation of the status of the BVM.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        In fact, the only time in the last (roughly) 140 years that the Catholic Church has made a definitively extraordinary magisterial statement, that is, a statement ex cathedra and de fide of Catholic belief—do you know what that statement was?

        RIght: The declaration of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, body and soul, at the moment of her death, into heaven, so that her body didn’t undergo corruption (1950, Munificentissimus Deus, Pius XII)

        And here we are, 50 years after the Council,, and putatively no one even celebrates or commemorates the event any more. That speaks volumes about the effect of the Council.

        • From one of my favorite sites, thebadCatholicsbingohall.com on Mary’s Assumption…I love this!

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUfhaSnuURQ

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          I went to catholic grade schools as VII was ending, and there was no end of mariology. I never ever undrestood as a child why we had to endure hot spring days to place flowers on a statue. A statue of Mary.

          OK, so she’s a good kid. She’s alright by me.

          But if we are to endure suffering, why for her, and not for Jesus?

          • Ann Malley says:

            Again, YFC, you need some Catholic catechism.

            ….as for being hot in the sun for Her, you may want to think that She stood by the foot of the Cross in pain FOR YOU. And in imitation of Christ, who honored His Mother, YOU SHOULD TOO.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            YFC go to Catholic Answers website. You can even phone in with your questions. Its alright if somethings you dont understand about our blessed Mother. Its a faith walk at ones own pace.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Precosely right: any further elevation of the BVM would put her above our Lord. This is why VII called for a reconsideration of the role of our Lady, and she would rightly agree.

        • Ann Malley says:

          …She would agree that you need Catholic teaching, YFC, not the Protestant holdover that has you thinking that being Protest in your mindset is now Catholic.

          Thank you again, however, for clearly stating your understanding. Very helpful for ongoing discernment.

        • Abeca Christian says:

          YFC glad your not afraid to ask questions about Mary and your doubts which you express to get clarity on. I suggest you look up Scott Hahn. He has some excellent books on Mary, that may help explain with clarity. I know its hard to understand but its not only that its something we need to locate in our brains but it is really more about faith and heart. What appears to you as elevation of Mary, its actually elevating Jesus through Mary. She is our Mother, Jesus mother. God commanded “honor thy mother and thy father” Key word “honor” imagine that.

        • Anonymous says:

          Actually, Vatican II said that devotion to Mary should be fostered.
          https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marye7.htm

        • Anonymous says:

          Because of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Her cooperation with Grace and all the perfections and virtues which the Lord gave her from the first moment of Her Conception she is vastly exalted above every other human being. But she is infinitely below the Lord.

    • Anonymous says:

      I think if you do your research you will find that these feasts were not eliminated.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        I think if you do a little reading, you will find out the actual wreckage is worse than you admit, and is part of your wholesale denial of reality.

        Compare the heavily purged USCCB calendar:
        http://www.usccb.org/about/divine-worship/liturgical-calendar/upload/2015cal.pdf

        and the Traditional Catholic Calendar:

        http://www.calefactory.org/calendar/wc201511.htm

        By the way, the notes on the USCCB calendar alone are very telling about their intentions.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          Just a few examples: OL Perpetual Help 6/27 – off the calendar. OL Mt Carmel, Immac. Heart, OL Lourdes — downgraded to “optional memorial” (meaning: discarded). Divine Maternity, OL Good Counsel, OL of La Salette, OL Victories, OL Miraculous Medal, many more, too many to list — eliminated.

          The point: since V2, devotion to the Blessed Virgin in the New Church has been downgraded, and often outright eliminated. So, who is surprised with the predicament in which we find ourselves

          • Anonymous says:

            Every date of the year has many feasts. They have not been eliminated because they are not on the Calendar.
            In addition, there is the General Roman Calendar, National Calendars, Diocesan Calendars, and religious orders can have their own Calendar.
            These Calendars are changed, usually by feasts being added.
            The Calendar on the Calefactory website is not named or dated, so I don’t know what they are using. I think the Extraordinary Form uses the General Roman Calendar from 1960, but I am not sure.

          • Anonymous says:

            An optional memorial does not mean discarded.
            Almost every country, almost every order has been given an apparition or special miraculous image of Our Lady. I’d love it if they all were on the Calendar, but it is probably not realistic. Nothing stops private devotion. (Our Lady of LaSallette is the same day as Our Lady of Sorrows, Our Lady of Victory is the Feast of the Holy Rosary)
            You can look up the feast days for those examples. Some that you mentioned are still on the Calendar and are celebrated, especially Our Lady of Lourdes, the Immaculate Heart and Our Lady of Mt. Carmel.

        • Steve, how I wish that what you, Ann, Catherine and others are saying would be more available to our Catholic family! Had it not been for the current papacy, I wouldn’t have been able to grasp how changes of such magnitude and audacity could have taken place. What I’ve been observing first hand is the simple method of ‘sleight-of- hand” wherein the pope says very orthodox, spiritually uplifting things that make terrific sound bites for many homilies, press releases etc. Whilst all eyes are focused on the luscious fruit being proffered by the right hand, the left hand is busy moving out the valuables and bringing in the synthetics and imitations that can fool the untrained eye.

          • Ann Malley says:

            ….the game afoot is becoming increasingly clear to many, Dana. But keep in mind, it takes the desire to ‘see’ in order to see. Many prefer not to, but rather choose to believe that they can isolate themselves in a cocoon of disbelief. That is precisely why they attack others who threaten, legitimately, the integrity of the little safety bubble.

            In that sense, Pope Francis has given some insightful statements: The condemnation of ideology, clericalism, casting judgment from ivory towers and Catholics wanting their little safety suits (my paraphrase).

            But it is not the Catholics who want the whole of Catholic doctrine who are seeking a safety suit. For the fullness of Truth is Christ Himself. Rather, to me, the safety suit are…

          • Ann Malley says:

            … those who plug up their ears, close their eyes, and shout hater, hater, hater whenever their comfort zone is threatened that are the problem.

            They don’t want Christ – they want safety of, “See my certificate. I’m saved.” And that’s not Faith either….. so sad.

          • Catherine says:

            continued…

            “Against such the Lord complains by the prophet, saying, They have reigned, and not by Me; they have been set up as princes, and I knew it not Hosea 8:4. For those reign of themselves, and not by the Will of the Supreme Ruler, who, supported by no virtues, and in no way divinely called, but inflamed by their own desire, seize rather than attain supreme rule. But them the Judge within both advances, and yet knows not; for whom by permission he tolerates them surely by the judgment of reprobation he ignores. ” continued…..

          • Anonymous says:

            Being Church is not a game, Ann Malley. By even using phrases like “the game afoot” shows the disrespect you have for Church and those who belong to it.

          • Anonymous says:

            The Jehovah’s Witnesses can tell you all about what’s wrong with he Catholic Church, too. They can actually name things. (they are wrong, but at least have concrete things to talk about.)
            We are not afraid of your ideas. Your accusations are not out of our comfort zone. You do not make any genuine critique.
            Very few people read Church documents so anybody can tell people something is in them and they will never know they are being played. I read them. I know very well what is and isn’t in them. I suspect you never read them. I suspect you never read the web page you linked to or if you did, you did not know enough about the documents or the Catholic Faith to know why it was wrong.
            You know there is nothing in the documents…

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, the fact that you don’t understand the particulars about Vatican II, the documents, the ambiguities, the bad fruit, the rejected schema, the Ottovani intervention, the premise behind the construction of the Novus Ordo Missae shows your disrespect for the Church, for human intellect and will, and the overwhelming possibility that you are way out of your league in discussion.

            Again, if you refuse to educate yourself, don’t pretend a superior fidelity or to understand anything outside of your assigned duty of state.

            And no, the Faith is no game which is why it is critical to understand what those in positions of power are playing at.

        • So what ?
          If you want to continue to be an SSPXer that is your choice.

  18. Steve Phoenix says:

    “…The problem is that those who want to part ways with the Ecumenical Council known as Vatican II point to strife, division, etc., which is the same strife and division that they bring to it.”

    This is an old canard—to blame the factual observers—added with a mis-characterization, as tho’ “to part ways” with the obvious errors catalyzed by Vatican II is to part ways with “what the Catholic Church has always taught, everywhere, without exception” (St. Vincent of Lerins’s rule [AD 434] on orthodoxy, the rule by which he examined and pronounced two true Ecumenical Councils, Nicaea and Ephesus.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      But there are two different problems going with Vatican II, and its supreme exaltation as the virtually only rule in the Catholic Church:

      One is its self-alleged claim to ecumenical infallibility. Several councils claimed “ecumenical” (Gr. “all the peoples”, oikomenos) infallibility: obviously, the 2nd Council of Ephesus (439) was not; what about the 8th Council of Constantinople, which was at first considered ecumenical, then 3 centuries later rejected? Kind of blows your mind and your theory, doesn’t it?

      The second problem is its ambiguity, and its refusal to explicitly define canons which must be adhered to: As we know from Schillebeeckx, this was deliberate, so that “After the Council, we will know how to…

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Schillebeeckx: “After the Council, we will know how to interpret them (=the documents of V2).

        Schillebeeckx ended his life, like Kasper, believing none of the miracles of Jesus, that there were no sacraments in the Early Church, and that Jesus was just a man. (There: I have just synopsized for you his 800+ magnum opus, “Jesus”, ca. 1985). Remember, he was a “Council expert” on systematic theology and Christology. And you think that had no effect on the conciliar documents?

    • Steve, it is NOT the VATICAN II Council.
      It is mostly the ABUSE of the VATICAN II Council Documents.
      Those who continue to blame V II, rather than the appropriate evil persons – allow the guilty parties to continue their dirty work unhindered.
      When someone wants to blame the Documents, they should be required to provide Document and paragraph number to back up their assertions.
      Many (but not all) claims are made based upon hearsay, and are lies.
      http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm

      • Ann Malley says:

        Those who consistently negate the weaknesses exploited by evil men in Vatican II documents, ALLOW GUILTY PARTIES TO CONTINUE THEIR DIRTY WORK UNHINDERED. (Or do you think there were no evil men present at the council?)

        Time to wake up, DOTTIE. Evil men with no tools are not able to do much. But evil men with tools – tools strategically placed by, guess what, evil men – that nobody wants to clean up or put away are ALWAYS going to make evil use of them. Or do you think that the baddies are only out there today, but at the council everyone wore a halo and committed no sins. Really?

        • Anonymous says:

          Ann Malley, i’m sorry to say this but you have been haranguing us for years, always criticizing those who follow the Pope and the Church. You can never say what is wrong with the Church, just repeat silly stuff that you find on websites that attack the Church. Then when someone points out that they are not correct you fly off into really bizarre insults. I have come to the conclusion that there is something more going on with you than just being suspicious of the Church. So I will pray and love and pray some more.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…I have come to the conclusion that there is something more going on with you than just being suspicious of the Church.”

            There is no suspicion with regard to the Church. She is inviolate. The real problem lies with you and others who equate blind enabling to an obviously unfaithful leadership as being faithful. No wonder when confronted with the truth you label it bizarre and or silly and or wacky. You react much like a poor soul imprisoned his entire life with his first experience of the warmth of the sun, the feel of the breeze, or actual human touch. You shrink, hankering for what you’ve become accustomed to.

            If you prefer the oubliette, Anonymous, return to it. God gave you free will. But God also gave free will and…

          • Anonymous says:

            So you understand you are doing something wrong but you want to keep doing it so you have to falsely accuse people who are doing the right thing of doing something wrong.

          • The blind include the SEDEVANCANTISTS, the SSPXers, and the PROGRESSIVES.
            It would be so peaceful in the Catholic Church if you would all just leave.
            Most Catholics do not care about your heresies and issues.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Paul, you are called to be a light upon the earth, not an oil cloth or a blind follower.

            That said, if Catholics don’t care about the integrity of Catholic doctrine, you’re not exactly doing what Christ bid you to do. But you are correct, it seems that ‘most’ Catholics do not care about heresy which is precisely why they welcome it into the Church so long as it comes with an ‘official’ welcome.

            If you don’t have the capacity to understand what others are discussing, Paul, keep quiet.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Round and round Ann Malley goes, accusing the Church of heresy without telling us what the heresy is, attempting to justify her self excommunication from Rome becasue she believes she is part of some sort of super race of Catholics who, unlike Rome, holds to a true faith.

            And while she spins she spits out insults like “If you don’t have the capacity to understand what others are discussing, Paul, keep quiet.” As though anyone has the capacity to understand what she is actually not discussing.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Round and round goes YFC promoting heresy within the Church while calling himself Catholic. What was that about the Church having to be more inclusive of women or else risk becoming inconsequential in the modern day?

            If Paul and Anonymous and Abeca, by proxy, desire such evolution, they will get it. And much like the Jews in the Babylonian captivity will wail and cry and lament. But there will be absolutely no more hiding out as to the how and why it happened.

            And yes, Ted, keep posting. You are a solid example to many Catholics of what precisely is happening to Holy Mother Church. YFC, too. So keep posting. I only wish I could get video tapes in order to further demonstrate the pernicious ignorance passing as Catholic…

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, we were chosen to be Catholic by Jesus Christ. (John 15:16 We are not going to abandon Him, no matter what happens in the Church. As Vatican II, points out it “follows faithfully the teachings of previous Councils.” (Lumen Gentium
            We are not going to commit sin because YOU do not believe. We are not going to betray Him by falsely accusing the Church of something She has not done.
            We are very well aware of the accusations of sedevacantists and schismatics (and no, that is not name-calling.) We have examined their claims and found them to be without truth or merit. (1 Thessalonian 5:21) We are not blind to anything that goes on in the Church. We are not blind to all that went on in the Church in the past, either. The…

          • Ann Malley says:

            …Anonymous, 1&2, there you go again. Now you’re putting an ‘if’ on consecration to Our Lady and using a document to guarantee itself. That’s neither faithful nor logical. If you have issues, deal with them, please. But whatever fears you may have about leaving the Church are yours, friend. It is past time, however, that you understood that those inside the Church, even those you calumniate, understand the nature of the changes after V2.

            That said, I too have chosen, by God’s grace not to abandon Him. That is why I will correct you. The Bride of Christ, that is the Church, has done nothing untoward. But whereas you will allow Her to be abused, others do not have the calling to stand idly by and allow that to continue…

          • Anonymous says:

            Deserters are such a help in the battle.

          • According to the perennial teaching of the Church, Catholic doctrine, the Church founded by Christ is a visible commonwealth. Since you refuse to worship with that entity, you are no longer part of the Catholic Church. There is no invisible Church made up of those who believe certain teachings.
            I refer you to a book called The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Who is using a document (what document? The Dogmatic Constitutions and Decrees of Vatican II?) to “guarantee itself”. This seems to be a new argument in your quiver. I wonder what SSPX homily you heard that in recently.

            Well to say that the document guarantees itself is actually heresy. Christ guarantees the Church, a guarantee he made in blood. “The Document” is part of the ordinary magisterium, the teachings of the Church, promised eternal guidance by the Holy Spirit.

          • Ann Malley, no one cares what you and your SSPXers think.
            Take your garbage to an SSPX site. They teach heresy about the OF Mass, and I’m not going to sit through any other heretical teaching videos they may have.
            All of your arguing just causes more hard feelings toward the SSPX whom you represent. You and a few of your fellow SSPXers are making things worse not better.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Paul, God bless you, too. Nobody is asking you to sit through anything. You may want to lay off the Vortex, however, because he is the individual steeping your tea.

            As to your feelings, take ownership of them, friend. You are in control of yourself.

          • Ann Malley, are you a SEDEVACANTIST or an SSPXer ?
            Admit the truth.

          • Malley, I am not called to be a heretic – a SEDEVACANTIST,
            nor am I called to be an SSPXer who teaches that it is sinful to attend a Mass that is not one of theirs (when they hold ZERO ministry within the Catholic Church).
            You spout their garbage all the time. What to you expect to achieve ?
            We certainly are not going to leave the Catholic faith for you. And you are not the Magisterium of the Church.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You are called to be Christian and a gentleman, Paul, which is why your devolving into schoolyard address, i.e. “Malley”, does nothing but convey the inadequacy of your understanding. That said, I am absolutely not the magisterium of the Church, but it would do you well to understand fully what that means. And Simon-says is not it.

            Be well.

          • Anonymous says:

            The way you talk down to people who are trying to help you is really offensive. The editors asked us to be charitable. Simple manners would help too.

          • Anonymous says:

            Maybe AM just wants approval.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Besides thoughtful analysis and self-control, Paul, maybe you can learn to spell “sedesvacantists” too.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Some days later, the nearly blind orthodox Cardinal Ottaviani came to the mike to speak out, particularly against the hijacking of the new schemata on the Liturgy. It was at this time, Alfrink, no friend of Ottaviani, had his mike turned off in mid-sentence (his pretext: “he had taken too much time”) —showing once and for all who controlled the council. Humiliated in front of everyone, the prefect for the Sacred Congregation for the Faith was crushed: the progressives applauded and some cheered; the conspiracy had gained momentum: the original schemata were in the trash for good.
            The more accurate report in the French newspaper France-Soir 10/16/65 read: “Rebellion of the French bishops!” in bold type. Congar was upset…

          • Anonymous says:

            I am sorry that they did that to Cardinal Ottovanni. There are jerks everywhere.

          • “Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. 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. And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household.”
            There can be no peace in a divided house. A divided house cannot support itself. As long as there are heretical bishops, cardinals and amoral priests we will have no peace.

          • Anonymous says:

            Philippians 4:6-7

          • Anonymous says:

            What truth are you referring to?

          • Anonymous says:

            Maybe if you would stop all the drama and silliness, people could understand what you are talking about.
            Who told you that the Church is inviolate? Did you make that up? If you really believed the Church is inviolate, why would you not attend it? Or are we back to the invisible Church thing again?

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, I am sorry but your posts make no sense at all. There is no option for Catholics but to attend the Catholic Church. It does not matter what you think of the leadership. You don’t have to like us or approve of us.. That does not matter either. Insults and contradictions are part of the sufferings of Catholics.
            May God forgive you and bring you to everlasting life.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, God bless you, but you are not sorry in the least. Try not to compound your own issues. And yes insults and contradictions are part of the sufferings of Catholics which is precisely why I’m not surprised by your unChristian behavior here. You already have much to answer for. Thankfully God, in His mercy and wisdom, provides.

          • Anonymous says:

            Admonishing the sinner is not unchristian and I have been polite and patient with you, even in the face of great evil from you.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, it does not please God for you to demean faithful Catholics. Your whole advertisement for error is :There is something wrong with those who don’t buy what I sell. Yet you sell nothing but words with no meaning which offend God. Still, it is preferable to you speaking an error that might lead another astray. Please consecrate yourself to the Immaculate Heart. Place your husband under the tutelage of St. Joseph who rescued Jesus from those who sought to destroy Him. Then your husband will be enabled to save his family from pernicious error.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, you again have skipped over what I actually post to react to your own narrative. By your dogged and most beloved ignorance you further scandalize those who have been woefully abused and then seek to beat them with a stick you will not dare to identify.

            Your advise to consecrate oneself (and one’s family, mind you) is something long since done and oft repeated, friend. That is why I tell you, stay in your lane Sir/Ma’am. Stop selling your own fear and let Our Lady and Our Blessed Lord work how they will, not as you will have them. That is precisely how one is led out of pernicious error, not by blinding oneself and insisting all must follow suit.

            Have FAITH, Anonymous. Let God and Our Lady act. Have FAITH.

          • Anonymous says:

            If your consecration to our Lady was sincere you would not be so mean. You would not use your words to put people down or to harm the Church. You would not spend so much time online saying things that aren’t true. And you would be a whole lot more humble.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, at least you won’t be able to say no one told you.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Ditto.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Now here is an interesting contrast: How post-V2 practice demoted Marian devotion “…Because Marian feasts had taken over the calendar, therefore the spiritual life of the Church, and Christ had gotten lost in the mix.”(Anonymous, Aug. 25, 2015 at 12:47 pm): = Justification for rejecting Ch VIII (#55-69) of Lumen Gentium, which actually calls for greater reverence of Mary as God-bearer and her Divine Maternity (Ha: the actual feast was dropped).

            I could not have asked one to point out a more salient example of the ambiguous double-language and contradictory actual practice as actually effected by V2.

          • Anonymous says:

            “Greater reverance” does not equate to a multiplication of feasts to the exclusion of all other feasts. Sorry, it’s a bit like saying that out of reverance for your wife’s great spaghetti you will force her to cook it 21 meals a week for you 52 weeks out of every year for the rest of your life.

          • Ann Malley, are you a SEDEVACANTIST or an SSPXer ?
            Admit the truth.

          • Anonymous says:

            Because suspended priests who have no ministry in the Church are such faithful leadership?

          • You do that, anonymous. It’s really reassuring to Ann, I’m sure, to have someone with no identity praying for her. The problem is, which anonymous are you? How do we pray for you? We might be praying for the wrong one?

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Ann Malley – There are no completely “evil men” just as there are no completely “holy men”. Every council throughout time has been populated by human men, sinners all. Every single man who voted at Vatican II was a sinner. Every single man who voted at the Council of Trent was a sinner. Every single man who sat at the Table on Good Friday was a sinner, save one. That they were sinners does not lessen the value of the contribution they left for the Church, thanks to the Holy Spirit.

          • Ann Malley says:

            …thanks to the Holy Spirit the council was only a pastoral one. As for contributions, there are good and bad. The bad should be removed or clarified.

          • Anonymous says:

            Like what?

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            May I suggest a slight amendment, YFC: “There are FEW really evil men..” I would easily vote Stalin, Hitler, and Mao into that category: merciless killers of millions, “all for the cause.”

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Certainly there was very great, extreme, really real evil in the men you name. However, I didn’t say there are no really evil men, I said there are no completely evil men. There is a very important difference.

        • ALL need to know that those who constantly berate the Vatican II Council, are probably Sedevacantists, SSPXers, or other heretics.
          And they expect that we have never read the 16 Documents which are published on the Vatican web site, so we will believe their lies, and misinterpretations.
          Typically they attack people, rather than provide official Church documentation to support their claims. Names of Docs, paragraph numbers, and links can easily be provided by those tell the truth.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “…Typically they attack people, rather than provide official Church documentation to support their claims. Names of Docs, paragraph numbers, and links can easily be provided by those tell the truth.”

            No doubt this is why you just attacked persons instead of substantiating your line of argumentation. I understand that that is what you have been trained to do, but maybe just this once you may want to try assessing your broken logic.

            Look to what the Church has always taught as compared to VII passages. Easily researched online. You know how to use the internet. Time for all big people to pluck up their courage and look to the realities of the discussion instead of crying boo hoo.

            Or would you ask a doctor you suspect…

          • Ann Malley says:

            …to provide you the official documentation of his misdeeds.

            Good grief, man. ALL with eyes to read and a mind to think can see your backpedaling nonsense for what it is. If the comparative documentation of VII disconnects doesn’t show you a shift in teaching then there is no taking off your blindfold. Because you choose not to see.

          • Ann Malley are you a Sedevacantist or an SSPXer ?

            Don’t be ashamed of what you are. Just tell the truth.
            This will help us all understand your rants better.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Ted, don’t be ashamed of your being new here or not understanding what you are speaking about in its entirety. Your CCC studded, pseudo-instructional rants would go over far better if you had the historical context in which to apply them properly. (Good reason for you to pay particular heed to Steve Phoenix’s posts as they are dense in accurate historical analysis.)

            I currently attend a Society chapel if that helps you. But I do not lash out at those in the FSSP. And while I am no Sedesvecantist, I will not sit in judgement of them either as this time of unprecedented crisis is precisely that. Considering there was a time when Holy Mother Church had 3 claimants to the See of Peter, I’d say cooling one’s jets and not excoriating…

          • Ann Malley says:

            … others is the best road to take. That is precisely what other news outlets have been doing and without the grace of state or a license to kill.

            But again, there are traceable historical reasons why we are now having to write articles such as these regarding Our Lady. Look to history, friend, our own Catholic history and you will learn. Don’t be afraid. God bless.

          • Malley, why do you refuse to answer TedB’s question?

            What are you hiding?

            Are you a Sedevacantist or an SSPXer ?

          • Abeca Christian says:

            Paul she has posted before that she belongs to SSPX.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Abeca, I belong to the Catholic Church and attend a Society chapel. Let’s try not to conflate issues. Enjoy your weekend 🙂

          • Ann, are you afraid to come out in the open and fully state that you are an SSPXer unequivocally,
            and that you read the junk (anti-Catholic) stuff they sell in their chapel bookstores?

          • Ann Malley says:

            You have deserted by refusing to engage God given logic and the Catholic Faith, Anonymous. That is why education, not ‘indoctrination’, or ego-stroking, is what is necessary to address the current crisis. Otherwise, you can turn into little more than a warm body filling pew space.

            Again, try to put together the reality that there are reasons why Our Lady was downplayed after VII. Much like there were factors leading up the United States involvement in WWII before Pearl Harbor.

            And pay heed to the reality that the truth can come from sources that surprise you. Be not afraid, friend. Have faith.

          • Anonymous says:

            I don’t remember Mary being “up-played” before VII. I remember being confirmed and my godmother being shocked that I did not know the Hail Mary. (Those were the Baltimore Catechism days when you memorized questions and answers.) Young people who attend the TLM now think that it was like that before V2.
            Why did Mary have to come so often to ask people to pray the Rosary? Because Catholics were so Marian?

          • Anonymous says:

            You are always so sure that people are refusing to look at what you see when really they see everything that you see and they respond to it appropriately rather than inappropriately.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Now, Saturday, Sept 12th is the feast of the Holy Name of Mary, a once-prominent feast, now an “optional memorial” in the N.O. Church (“optional memorial” = “de-emphasized, demoted, discarded”). This also, we are sure, will be prominently featured in your typical N.O. parish.

            When the great Polish general and king, John Sobieski, stopped the Muslim advance and defeated the vastly superior Muslim army at the gates of Vienna in 1683, he immediately attributed his victory to the feast of the Holy Name of Mary.

            But all the Rahnerian “Anonymous Christians” know all this. It is so good we have preserved the tradition of special reverence due the BVM as called for by Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, Ch. 8. Especially her…

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            It is so good we have preserved the tradition of special reverence due the BVM as called for by Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, Ch. 8. Especially her “Divine Maternity” (#62-63, Lumen Gentium). Which feast day was then eliminated

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Today, Sept. 19th, was in the pre-Vatican II calendar, the feast of Our Lady of Lasalette—of course, eliminated in the “revision of the books” by the Consilium of Vatican II.

            No surprise: because it, an approved revelation, warns that “the Church will be eclipsed” and “the wicked will indulge in all kinds of sins.:”

            In order to venerate more the Blessed Virgin, we must eliminate her feast days, especially of her special revelations and devotions, which might other guide us. You understand, of course.

          • http://cardinaldolan.org/index.php/category/blog/

            Go to the 6th video down for the feast of the Holy Name of Mary. I think you will like it.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Today, Sept. 24th, is the traditional feast day of Our Lady of Ransom, which dates back to an apparition to St Peter Nolasco (1218), founder of the Order of Our Lady of Mercy, in which she urged him to take up the vocation of ransoming captives from the Muslims. It had been extended to the whole Catholic Church in 1696.

            Now, this feast day had to be suppressed in the “revision of the calendar” purportedly authorized by Sacro. Concilium of Vatican II, in order to extend greater devotion to the Bl. Virgin Mary. (Ch. 8, SC).

          • Ann Malley says:

            Paul, there is nothing anti-Catholic to be found in examining Catholic history and doctrine. Please, disabuse yourself of the false notion that there is such a thing as an ‘sspxer’. There are Catholics who want Catholic teaching, whole and entire, without the name calling and ambiguous cover-up that equates the understanding the Faith in full as junk. Have faith, Paul. That is Faith in Christ Jesus that He will bring good from what you have been whipped up to shout down with abuse and no argumentation.

          • Ann Malley – hope this helps you –
            ” In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society (SSPX) 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.
            http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
            Only a Pope can change this.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            I agree PAUL. You are correct.

          • I hope you thumped your little gavel after that comment abeca and said this court is closed.

      • Abeca Christian says:

        Thank you DOTTIE

  19. Vatican II secularized the Church. There were many feast days that were dropped, but under Pope John Paul II, many new feasts were created, and the feast of St. Simon Stock restored. There is a book concerning Our Lady, and it contains a feast day for her for all 365 days of the year. There are so many feast days we could celebrate and honor, but they do not fit into the ecumenical scene.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      Every Sunday is, and should be, a little Easter.

      Every Mass is a Memorial of Our Lord.

      And every Saint’s day is a reminder of the great work Christ did in his faithful servants, and seeks to do in us today.

      However, if every day is a memorial or feast day, then one tends to lose sight of my first two points.

  20. Our Lady is not a god. She is the Mother of God, and our tainted nature’s solitary boast. When we ‘honor’ Our Lady, she gives all that respect to her Son. Both St. Louis Marie de Montefort and St. Maxmillan Kolbe preached that we should give more honor to Our Lady. Vatican II repressed this idea because it would not be ecumenical, and it would offend the Protestants. Meanwhile, the Orthodox Christians also hold Our Blessed Mother in high esteem.

    • Abeca Christian says:

      Pilar gives some excellent points but I disagree with her notion to state that V2 repressed and states what she perceives to be true. In reality V2 has helped many converts return to the faith because of how its lay faithful has better helped remove the false notions that we worship Mary. Pilar mentions two excellent saints. They have excellent books too. Scott Haun and other excellent converts came to the faith, came to love Mary because of V2 and understanding it and its true purpose. There are many false perceptions blamed at V2. Its time to correct them. The troubles we face today have roots that go back further than we care to acknowledge or even comprehend. Modernism began before V2. The sins we face today are not new. They go…

      • Ann Malley says:

        “… Vatican II repressed this idea because it would not be ecumenical, and it would offend the Protestants.”

        This is absolutely correct, Pillar. This coincided with the repression of the Third Secret of Fatima. Understanding this is understanding the crisis effecting the Church.

        “…There are many false perceptions blamed at V2. Its time to correct them. The troubles we face today have roots that go back further than we care to acknowledge or even comprehend. Modernism began before V2.”

        Absolutely, the roots go long before VII to heresies that were condemned. VII, however, with it’s ambiguous compromise language and pastoral playing with that which was ‘new’, gave free vent to those heresies. Like watering a seed…

        • Ann Malley says:

          …and boy did it flower. The resulting fruit has been nothing but rotten and compromised.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            Ann Malley i disagree completely with you.

          • Ann Malley says:

            …whether you or I agree on the subject is immaterial, Abeca. The facts of the council and the subsequent fruit speak for themselves.

            The October Synods and all they imply didn’t happen in a vacuum or without precipitating causes. Best to accept the situation and deal with it. Denial only facilitates the perpetuation of problems.

            Time to pluck up one’s courage, acknowledge, and move forward.

          • Anonymous says:

            Anne, bless you for attempting to open people’s spiritual eyes but there are none so blind as those who will not see. I see the fruits of the deceit promulgated in the 1960’s all around me…so snug and comfortable as they are they are…though being made a tad uncomfortable lately with the latest news about selling babies body parts …but as long as they support the local pregnancy center and feel outrage about abortion in general, all is well. Their response to you is an echo of abeca’s refrain…”I’m blessed, all is well you malcontents and troublemakers”. If all is so well, why don’t I feel the least love or genuine concern from any of these people? Why the hostility and condemnation?

          • That was from me Ann. I keep forgetting to put in my name after I’ve cleaned out my browser cookies. 🙂

          • Hmm. No Ann. They didn’t use my support to your argument. Sorry.

          • Anonymous says:

            Dana, people did show you love and concern and you treated them like garbage. If you really want to know. I still love you but I have given you up to the Lord because it is too painful to deal with your sharp tongue.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Thanks, Dana, for speaking up as always 🙂

            Being cozy and blind and thinking that everyone is of good will is a seemingly nice place to be, but it isn’t real. Sadly, folks on the ground don’t realize as much until it is too late and then we shockingly wonder how on earth this could have happened.

            Much like in a disaster situation, the majority of those who die are the one’s who reject the visual of horror happening in front of their faced – IOW: Deny reality – and then get swept away because they were too numb to react.

            So sad. But most certainly how life works. That’s why I’m intent on staking out where the deep rooted palm trees are situated so when the tsunami hits, I’ll be able to hold on and not drown. And while…

          • Ann Malley says:

            …those like DOTTIE will shout liar in a vacuum of disinformation, I’ll focus on the reality that God gave us an intellect and will to recognize those sturdy palms as coming from Him.

            Enjoy your weekend!!

          • Ann Malley says:

            ….don’t confuse pointed language with a sharp tongue, Anonymous, or else you’d be speaking against Christ himself who spoke very boldly.

            As for love and concern, it is neither loving nor concerned to discount reality as some manufacture of ill intent. Take your blinders off to your own sins, Anonymous, and how you contribute daily to the extortion of your brothers/sisters.

            Perhaps you should begin to give yourself to the Lord so that it will be less painful for you to behold your own deficiencies with regard to proclaiming the truth instead of hiding it.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, please see Dana’s post to learn how a Christian woman should behave when rebuked.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            Sharp tongue? Anonymous you got that right.

        • Anonymous says:

          Ann Malley, no. The facts of the council and the subsequent “fruits” do not speak for themselves. You need to be able to support your interpretations with facts and good argument. If you can’t then your statement must be presumed to be wrong.

          • Anonymous, you really touched my Achilles heel…my sharp tongue! Please forgive me if I have hurt you. Believe me, I pray about it every day and it often leads me to confession. I’m not making excuses, but my mom said (after calling me a viper- mouthed vixen) that I couldn’t help it as both my grandmothers had tongues sharper than knives. i shall really try to confine my ‘insightful, needle- sharp” ( heh) analysis to the issues, not to people here. I want all to know that I invariably pray later for any I’ve inadvertently hurt for special blessings. Sigh

          • Ann Malley says:

            It would seem you are in need of new prescription lenses, Anonymous, for your attempt to call out what is written on the black board as wrong is fooling nobody. One plus one still equals two despite what your fuzzy views decree.

          • Anonymous says:

            Dana, thank you for your admission and your apology. I will try to remember that you are working on this if it should happen again. I forgive you. I hope others do too.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          As Ann Malley observes, Vatican II relates directly to the 3rd secret of Fatima: During the 2nd session, Abp. Geraldo Proenca Sigaud of Brazil personally petitioned Paul VI,—with the signatures of 510 bishops—almost 1 out of 5—to consecrate the world, esp. Russia, to the BV Mary. (2nd Vat Council, R. DeMattei, p. 339): who blocked it? Yves Congar.
          Congar wrote: “I am campaigning, as much as I can, against a consecration of the World to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, because I can see the danger that a move in this direction would constitute.” (??)Congar’s enormous influence (he was the principle theologian on Lumen Gentium, Presbyterum Ordinis, Gaudium et Spes, Dei Verbum, and others) effectively blocked what should have…

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            been the outcome, and might well have changed Council and Church history.
            The image of many of the council adopting a reverent and prayerful posture, instead of the conspiracy and political machinations seen in Congar’s own journal, needs correction:
            Bp. Antonino Romeo of the Sacred Cong. for Rite observed disgustedly the assembly, calling it “..A sinister comedy of three thousand good-for-nothings with gold crosses on their chests, who don’t believe in the Trinity or the Virgin, at least some of them don’t.”
            (p. 425, DeMattei). Given the prevailing atmosphere, the traditional veneration of the Blessed Virgin was due to be downgraded by the council. And so it has been.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank you for your documentation. It sounds like an interesting book.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Now, it is good that we are getting some attention on the revolt that went on to set aside the schemata at V2 in Oct. 1962. P. Benedict XVI is putting the best face on the revolt that actually happened and is well-documented by such various authors as: Romano Amerio (Iota Unum), Ralph Wiltgen (The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber); R. DeMattei (Hist Vat II); and even “Xavier Rynne” (Letters From Vatican City) all of whom characterize the jettisoning of the schemata as a cleverly orchestrated revolt by the Congar-Suenens-Lienart-Schillebeeckx group and a direct repudiation of the Pius XII-school and its traditional theologians.

            There was in fact an unlawful overthrow of the planned subject matters which had been collected prior to the…

        • Malley & Pilar prove your statements.
          Here is a link to all the V II Documents. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm
          Give us the name of the V II Document(s) and the paragraph number(s).

          I am tired of all the lies about Vatican II, and it is time that everyone interested in the truth ask for official documentation proof. – Name of
          V II document and paragraph number.
          Make liars prove their statements, or stop lying.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            Thank you DOTTIE. You are noble to admonish them in Charity. They are commiting grave sins. Lets pray for one another. God bless you.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Indeed, DOTTIE, it is time for truth and proof. That’s the point.

            Read what Steve Phoenix wrote. You may also want to take a peek at:
            https://harvestingthefruit.com/nostra-aetate-and-ephesians-2/

            If you don’t want to review the material, don’t. But don’t call others liars unless you’re willing to inform yourself.

            Make useful idiots show their stripes or else you’ll just get more of the same lies.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Abeca, there is nothing noble in willful blindness and beating down those who would help one to understand the truth. You should pray about that. God bless.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Yes, Dottie, you will always be praised for name-calling when the facts cant be answered. (I’ve given you a few in notes above.)

            The Delphic-Sybil double-meanings of Vatican II’s many statements have to be tested by their results, the tree by its fruits. In fact, you would do well to read My Journal of the Council, by Yves Congar, to see that the double-meanings—on the one-hand innocent sounding, but in “paaastoral” practice, destructive, have in fact achieved the ends for which they were intended: in this case, the diminishment of Marian devotion. Ask yourself: Why wouldn’t Congar want the Council and the Church to consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary? What is the basis of his intense almost fanatical…

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, present facts and logical argument. Your whole argument is “If you don’t agree with me instead of the Church, you are willfully blind.” You have been asked over and over to back up your accusations and statements. You never do except for sending us to wacky websites. At least Steve Phoenix documents his propositions.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, your source, once again, is someone who takes a sentence from a Vatican II document out of context and spins it using his own interpretation. Stick to the teachings of the Church, the whole entire teaching of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thank you Steve Phoenix for citing your source. This is a journal actually written during Vatican II by one of the theologians involved in it. I don’t blame Yves Congar though. Or Vatican II. I blame the devil.

          • Ann Malley says:

            I cannot help it if you do not wish to look at the realities presented to you instead of labeling them ‘wacky websites’. What you are advocating, Anonymous, is the wholesale marketing of wacky work-arounds to what the Church has always taught.

            As for my needing to document, you need to tend to educating yourself instead of relying on others to do your homework. Admittedly, Steve Phoenix has far more patience than I, but then that is the glory of the Mystical Body. We all have different gifts.

            As to ‘one sentence’, Anonymous, that’s the whole point. These lovelies are currently being used to break the back of Catholic doctrine by changing praxis. Pluck up your own courage and do your duty, man.

          • Ann Malley says:

            ….if you do ascribe all this evil to the Devil, Anonymous, then pay heed to the tools he is using: Congar, VII documents that are ‘easily’ twisted, and YOU. Time to clean the tools, Anonymous, or get rid of them if the temper of the metal is such that it poses a true safety hazard.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            For some of the counter-critics regarding the infamous “fruits of Vatican II”, there is a demand for facts: yet when facts and sources are listed (as much as can be in 750 characters), then some of them quibble and reject facts—it’s been called to “strain out the gnat and swallow the camel” (Mt. 23:24) –or, alternatively, you hear silence.

            [Some of the] Anonymous and oxymoronically-named Christian position is proven to be essentially irrational then: Name-calling, finger-wagging, and screaming is one’s last resort. But it feels so good. For a while. Maybe you can get others to join you: its called a mob. Emotion in, facts out the window.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Aquinas says we have a reasonable faith: facts are not an enemy to that True Faith. So a council is not above reasoned criticism and evaluation by the facts either. As I observed before, the famed Robber Council of 449 AD had self- claimed its ecumenical status. It was later set aside. Or, there is the 8th “Ecumenical” Council of Constantinople (#2, 879-880), which for a time was accepted by the Pope (P John VIII), then later rejected.

            As for this council (V2), it merits serious questioning, as we learn more and more about it how a small, powerful conspiracy set aside the pre-approved schemata—which were actually representative of the bishops throughout the world—and imposed their own neo-modernist agenda.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, the point of the article is to contradict the teachings of the Popes. He states that clearly. Why would you expect us to take the word of some guy on the Internet over the word of the Popes?
            What kind of Catholic are you?

          • Whatever was written in Vatican II is irrelevant as far as I’m concerned, Dottie. It may as well have been a rehash of the life of Carles Stewart Mill. The point of all of this is what was done in the name of Vatican II…heresy, rebellion of every kind, sacrilege , lying, promotion of homosexuality and pederasty, subversion, calumny and worst of all outright atheism and satanism in some cases. Have you already forgotten the looting of the churches, the emptying of convents, the priest/pedophiles scandals bankrupting the Church?

          • Just how bad does it have to get before Dottie and others get it?
            There’s a Law of Physics…for every action there’s a reaction. Just what do you attribute the cause of these myriad depredations of the Church?

          • I meant John Stewart Mill…Charles was his alter ego. ( kidding)

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, how can I educate myself in what you believe unless you tell us? I know what the Catholic Church teaches and why She believes as She does. I don’t know what you believe and why. You make a lot of really vague statements, generalized accusations against the Catholic Church but you never can be specific and you can never support your claims.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, you stated that a sentence in the VII documents was taken out of context and that is why it was confusing. You don’t seem to understand that it is precisely the result of imprecise language and sentences that can/are pulled out of context that are being misused to imply something different than what the Church has always taught.

            Nobody is asking you to take the word of some guy on the internet, but look at the relative ease with which that which should be crystal clear can be misapplied to appear to contradict Catholic teaching.

            This is why VII documents need to be CLEAR. That is not open to being able to be read to contradict perennial Catholic teaching.

          • Ann Malley says:

            As to what kind of Catholic I am, Anonymous, my answer to you is I am a Catholic who is unashamed of perennial Catholic teaching. That is why I am of a mind to be clear and not mince words to appear conciliatory.

            Talking out both sides of one’s mouth by way of making inconsistent statements is no mercy and no true charity.

            You may be okay with that, but those who can read and understand what words imply are not. The resulting fruits of division should be proof enough that that which is purposefully unclear REQUIRES correction.

          • Anonymous says:

            Pope Benedict XVI on why the pre-approved schemata was set aside:
            ” On the first day, the Commissions were to be elected and the lists and nominations were impartially prepared. And these lists were to be voted on. But soon the Fathers said, “No, are not simply going to vote on already made lists. We are the subject. “They had to move the elections – he added – because the Fathers themselves wanted to get to know each other a little ‘, they wanted to make their own lists. So it was done. “It was not a revolutionary act – he said – but an act of conscience, of responsibility on the part of the Council Fathers.”

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            So, regarding the highest Marian feasts and their due reverence, which is this topic here (the de-emphasis of the Assumption), V2 says: “The liturgical year is to be revised so that the traditional customs and discipline of the sacred seasons can be preserved or restored to meet the conditions of modern times…” (Sacro. Conc. #107)
            Another case of V2 Janus-like ambiguity: Is the purpose the preservation of the tradition of the sacred seasons? Or the needs of modern times? Aren’t these at least potentially in conflict? (A traditionalist would say, “By finding true tradition, you will find yourself as God designed you.” But the net effect has been, as we see here in 2015, the virtual elimination of the high sacred status of…

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Maleey, at what year in Church history do you consider the teachings of the Catholic Church to be finished?

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, so do you revoke your assessment of the article as being “proof and truth’?

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, all statements will seem vague to you until you remove the ether from your mouth and nose. Only you can do that. Until that time, you’ll just be hard wired to believe that nothing save what you want to believe is true. And wanting to believe something is true is not Faith. The truth is there to be believed whether we reject or accept it. It does’t need us to exist.

            I gave you a very specific example of what I believe is wrong with VII documents. You claim it is a misunderstanding. Well, Anonymous, it is the ease of misunderstanding that makes the document less than what it should be. And precisely what leads myriad interpretations to further divide the Church.

            Again, you may be okay with that. I’m not.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, at what point will the twisting of Catholic doctrine via changing practice render the Church the opposite of what the doctrine intends?

            That’s the question you need to ask yourself. Also, you need to ask yourself what your name is here. Is it agitator? Is it shill? Is it Faithful fill-in-the-blank. Is it wholly uneducated? Is it a child of Mary?

            Until such time as you know who you are, and who you want to be, your questions to me are moot. I’ve no desire to taffy pull with you. These are matters of Faith and whereas you may be playing, others are not.

          • Abeca Christian says:

            This Anonymous is correct.

          • Anonymous says:

            I hope someday you will give your heart to the Lord Jesus.

          • Anonymous says:

            When I think about some of the evil things you have written on this website, I realize that rather than arguing with you we just need to pray for your deliverance and for your children. I truly pray that you will go to confession with a priest who can absolve your sins. Please, no one knows when the bell will toll. You may be here one minute and gone the next. God has used the faithful of this website to try to lead you away from sin, but you resist Him. God is patient but we should not take advantage of His patience and His Mercy.

          • Ann Malley says:

            …then rest assured, Anonymous. The priests I have access to do indeed have the capacity to absolve my sins and those of my children. What they do not have, however, is a malformed seminary experience that has twisted their mind in order to free myself and my family from the necessary sense of sin that is square one of the the Sacrament of Penance

            As to the faithful here on CCD, yes, there are many. But there are also those who do not understand the Faith at all or the workings of Divine Providence. Be at peace.

    • Anonymous says:

      Pilar, what have you experienced both before and after Vatican II that leads you to make that comment?

      • What have you experienced, anon. ? And prove it using specific examples with empirical proof. I just did. Ann and Steve consistently use quotes, examples and cite sources and it’s like trying to show secular humanists that there is a divine plan. To them, evolution “just so happened” to quote verbatim Carl Sagan…apparent you think the terrible upheavals in the Church had no causal relationship…it just so happened.

        • Ann Malley says:

          Anonymous seems to have experienced nothing, Dana, and is one of those who refuses to believe the testimony of those who came before. You know the type. Must drive fast and break the law until they get a ticket or kill someone in a horrific accident. Must go through that crazed teen phase, run up debt, fool around and make imprudent choices until the courts and/or a pregnancy wakes them up to the reality that life is – hey – real, man.

          At this point, if you, Steve, Jesuita, Catherine, Pilar or anyone demonstrates a truth by way of example it is dismissed as wacky, crazy man. Again, just like a teen hell bent on making the same mistakes because they think in the great cosmos that everything today is so incredibly special, unique,…

          • Ann Malley says:

            … extraordinary, ‘we’ can do it this time with no regard to how cause and effect works. We can just smile and pretend until everything is better. Happy, clappy, don’t be a saddy. (It’s like Barney the Dinosaur time.)

            Sorry folks, but we can’t positive-think crisis away. That’s not being mean, that’s being real. And prayer coupled with ACTION is the only way to solve problems. Burying heads in the sand suffocates. So if you want to hide your eyes, go ahead. But don’t deride others for doing what God has called them to do – SEE.

            If you give up the attempt to hide out of fear, or pretend because it’s too scary, you’ll be able to see too. Promise. And you won’t be afraid either. God knows what He’s about.

          • Anonymous says:

            Because committing mortal sin is such a sure path of salvation?

          • Catherine says:

            Taken From New Advent

            http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/36011.htm

            CHURCH FATHERS: Pastoral Rule, Book I (Gregory the Great)
            That the unskilful venture not to approach an office of authority.

            “No one presumes to teach an art till he has first, with intent meditation, learned it. What rashness is it, then, for the unskilful to assume pastoral authority, since the government of souls is the art of arts! For who can be ignorant that the sores of the thoughts of men are more occult than the sores of the bowels? ” continued

          • Catherine says:

            continued..

            “And yet how often do men who have no knowledge whatever of spiritual precepts fearlessly profess themselves physicians of the heart, though those who are ignorant of the effect of drugs blush to appear as physicians of the flesh! But because, through the ordering of God, all the highest in rank of this present age are inclined to reverence religion, there are some who, through the outward show of rule within the holy Church, affect the glory of distinction. ” continued

          • Catherine says:

            continued…

            “They desire to appear as teachers, they covet superiority to others, and, as the Truth attests, they seek the first salutations in the market-place, the first rooms at feasts, the first seats in assemblies Matthew 23:6-7, being all the less able to administer worthily the office they have undertaken of pastoral care, as they have reached the magisterial position of humility out of elation only. For, indeed, in a magisterial position language itself is confounded when one thing is learned and another taught. ” continued….

          • Catherine says:

            continued…

            “Yet this unskillfulness of the shepherds doubtless suits often the deserts of those who are subject to them, because, though it is their own fault that they have not the light of knowledge, yet it is in the dealing of strict judgment that through their ignorance those also who follow them should stumble. Hence it is that, in the Gospel, the Truth in person says, If the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch. Matthew 15:14 “

          • Ann Malley says:

            ….you need to be educated on mortal sin, Anonymous. Your elementary view is precisely what gives the hierarchy the pass to pervert doctrine. Be not afraid, Anonymous. But if you are, do not foolishly castigate others who are called to see …. and act.

        • Catherine says:

          continued…

          “Whence to some who come to Him even after miracles He says, Depart from Me, you workers of iniquity, I know you not who you are Luke 13:27. The unskillfulness of shepherds is rebuked by the voice of the Truth, when it is said through the prophet, The shepherds themselves have not known understanding Isaiah 56:11; whom again the Lord denounces, saying, And they that handle the law knew Me not Jeremiah 2:8. ” continued….

        • Catherine says:

          continued….

          “And therefore the Truth complains of not being known of them, and protests that He knows not the principality of those who know not Him; because in truth these who know not the things of the Lord are unknown of the Lord; as Paul attests, who says, But if any man knows not, he shall not be known 1 Corinthians 14:38. ” continued…

  21. When Cardinal McIntyre was archbishop of Los Angeles, we had Mary’s Hour each May at the LA Coliseum. The event was very well attended. When Cardinal Manning took over, the event ceased. There was a revival brought about by the United Marian Committee. but the event was not successful. There used to be religious processions in many areas as well, but these have also stopped. The laity need daily signs of religion, but by making the Church more worldly works against a Catholic society. Ave Maria Purrissima !

  22. Steve Phoenix says:

    And Pilar, you are correct, no one “worships” the BV Mary “as a god”: such an old saw. St Louis de Monfort addresses that effectively: how can anyone claim to love the Son and yet disdain, or even downgrade, devotion to, the Mother?

    Yet many worship the 2nd Vatican Council as a god: V2 to them has mysterious powers—don’t pay attention to the 3 or more million US Catholics who have left the Church since 2010 (Pew Survey) or 14 million since 2000, or the fact that only 12% US Catholics regularly attend Sunday Mass—Vatican II, whatever it said, is infallible (What exactly did it teach infallibly, by the way?) and our lost reverence for the Blessed Virgin, Mother of Perpetual Help, OL of the Assumption, Virgin Most…

    • Anonymous says:

      Actually, there are people who worship Mary as a godess. Catholics do not.
      You can google it if you want to but …

  23. So Ann, have you joined us Roman Catholics who follow traditional Catholicism? IF not, sounds like you are ready for it!

    • Ann Malley says:

      Jeanie, Our Lady has been very good to me and has seen me safely to where I am. And where I am contributes 100% to why I post what I do.

      God bless.

      • Anonymous says:

        Why would the Blessed Mother of Jesus Christ remove you from communion with Him?

        • Ann Malley says:

          She hasn’t, Anonymous. I’m precisely where Our Lord and Our Lady have deemed I should be. This is something for you to ponder, even if it seems at odds with what you have been led to believe.

          God bless 🙂

          • Abeca Christian says:

            I see that your using a smilie face too Ann Malley. Good for you.

          • Anonymous says:

            Ann Malley, you are deluding yourself. God does not remove people from the Catholic Mass and send them to an illicit Mass. It just does not happen. You made that choice.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Anonymous, you are deluding yourself in stepping outside your station and duties of state to engage in something you do not understand. If you persist in depriving yourself of the qualifications to enter such a discussion and be credible, that is on you.

            That said, God does provide when his shepherds drive the flock away from the Church. I am entirely thankful to Him and Our Lady. That is why I have corresponded fully to the graces given instead of shunning them. So, absolutely, that was a choice.

  24. Abeca Christian says:

    The Glories of the Virgin Mother
    From the homilies of St Bernard

    She was prepared by the Most High and prefigured by the patriarchs

    There was only one mode of birth that was worthy of God, and that was to be born of a Virgin. Equally, who could come from a Virgin birth except God himself? The maker of mankind, if he was to be made man and destined to be born of man, would have to choose, to create a mother whom he knew to be worthy of him, who he knew would be pleasing to him.

    It was his will that she should be a virgin, so that he could proceed from an unstained body, stainless, to purify mankind of its stains.

    It was his will that she should be meek and humble of heart, since he was to become the outstanding example of…

  25. Steve Phoenix says:

    By the way, did not one of the oxymoronically-named posters castigate another person as “being unchristian” for using the term “useful idiot” [a term coined by V.I. Lenin, of course, for those who are unwitting collaborators in the destruction of their own institution(s)]?

    But now, we praise calling people liars? Because we have the truth, and they don’t? Isn’t that double-speak? But V2 says those attain salvation also who “…yet sincerely seek God, and moved by grace, strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them, through the dictates of conscience?” (Lum. Gent. #16)

    Sounds like its OK to follow your conscience to me, hmm?

    • Ann Malley says:

      God bless you, Steve Phoenix. I pray all is well with you.

      All is great with me, most especially when given the opportunity to read your posts. Thank you!

  26. Anonymous says:

    Steve Phoenix, you complain because no one argued so….
    As for Yves Congar, it does not matter what his intentions were. All that matters is what the Holy Spirit tells us. By the time the documents went through the Council and were promulgated by the Pope, they are trustworthy.
    I have questions. I have questions about things in documents before Vatican II, also. The book on Vatican II that I am reading is Reliving Vatican II: It’s All About Jesus Christ by Cardinal Justin Rigali. He has confidence in it. If you have ever met him, you know that he is wholeheartedly Catholic without wavering on anything.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      It does in fact matter, what Congar’s (and others’) motivations were, since he was the principal theologian (according to DeMattei) of: Dei Verbum, Lumen Gentium, Gaudium et Spes, & almost all the decrees of the final session (1965) that undid religious life, priestly orders, and the role of the laity. This is a direct denial of reality and fact, to proceed as though Congar and those who actually coined the clever turn-of-phrase “The Spirit of Vatican II” (meaning, the text is irrelevant, we shall impose whatever meaning we wish on Vatican II,” as his collaborator Schillebeeckx famously said).

      By doing so, you will never come to an understanding of what was the source of the blow striking the shepherd and scattering the…

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        …By doing so, you will never come to an understanding of what was the source of the blow striking the shepherd and scattering the sheep; you will never comprehend why traditional orders have vocations and priests, and “modern” orders continue to die out; you will never understand why converts come to the Catholic Church, but soon leave, because there is “no there, there”, in unprecedented numbers; or understand that Catholics in the US (esp. Hispanics) are departing the Church in record numbers; you will never understand where the damage began and what must be done to go back and repair it. You will never understand: and that will be your choice.

        • Anonymous says:

          Steve Phoenix, I want to understand what happened but it is really just curiosity and for historical accuracy.. You at least try to understand the players. Blaming Vatican II is for people who don’t understand very much. The “smoke of Satan” was the after effect of Vatican II. Satan is real. It was people who did it, unknowingly most of them. So I appreciate that you are posting the information and book titiles.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Blaming Vatican II is for people who have done the reading, Anonymous, and understand that there are historical reasons why things are the way they are today within the Church. So do the historical reading and look at Vatican II documents as compared to the Church teaching which preceded the council.

            You may not believe in the reform of the reform, but that could very well be due to the fact that you do not have the historical facts to understand the situation.

          • Anonymous says:

            There is no difference between the Vatican II documents and the Church teaching which preceded the Council. Not one. Vatican Ii was a restating of the Church teachings. Some disciplines and practices were changed after the Council. But not teachings.

        • Anonymous says:

          I say curiosity and historical accuracy because I don’t believe it is necessary for the reform of the reform. I think we can do that, and have, with just the documents (pre and post Vatican II). But it is interesting (although gossipy) to find out who did what and why. It may help with some who are stubborn in changing though.

        • Anonymous says:

          Steve, the fallacy is that “if there had been no Vatican II, nothing would have changed.” Vatican II was not necessary for the change in the Missal, the changes in the Divine Office, the changes in orders or the changes in customs. It is not responsible for people not believing they will go to hell or thinking that sins are not punished. People have minds of their own and people in a large part have rejected the Catholic Church, not because of how much it changed but because of how much has not changed.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Well said, Anon, and I completely agree with you: “People have minds of their own and people in a large part have rejected the Catholic Church, not because of how much it changed but because of how much has not changed.”

            And the proof is that the flight from the Church has only accelerated the more we see the retrograde neo-cons gain strength. We now have some openness thanks to thisPope, but if his call for more attentiveness to the role of women in the Church, for example, and to divorced catholics, as another, then we will continue the long slow march to irrelevance.

          • YFC if you believe the Church is irrelevant then leave, as fast as you can…’Smaller but Holier…’

          • Ann Malley says:

            Your conflation with retrograde neo-cons and the Catholic Church is laughable, YFC. Especially as you personally and quite publicly refute those changeless Church teachings which present a serious obstacle for you.

            This talking out both sides of your mouth is, however, entertaining.

            The openness you advocate is precisely that which allows the ‘deposit’ to fall out of the gaping hole created by those who have no love of Church teaching and are busy undermining with every post.

      • Anonymous says:

        Vatican II and “the Spirit of Vatican” are different things. You have heard of the “reform of the reform.”

      • Anonymous says:

        What in Dei Verbum is wrong?
        What in Guadium et Spes is wrong?
        What in Luen Gentium is wrong?

        • Ann Malley says:

          Do a search online of heresies and/or errors of Vatican II. You can read and discern yourself, Anonymous.

          • Anonymous says:

            Thanks. I searched. If I am ever in need of a long list of sedevacantist and schismatic websites, I know now what to google.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You’ve always known where to look for the inconsistencies, Anonymous, in the documents. You just cannot bring yourself to admit that all is not as it should be. That is your problem no matter what names you call others.

          • Anonymous says:

            It is absolutely bizarre to me that a person who claims to hold true to “what the church has always taught”, now goes on websites teaching that Church teaching is wrong,over and over and over again, without ever saying WHAT is wrong. All we hear are “inconsistencies” or “questions” or – what did she used to say? “Unclear” teachings. What teachings? Let us help you with your questions and your inconsistencies. We don’t see them. Maybe we can help you.

          • Ann Malley says:

            You can begin helping me by helping yourself, Anonymous.

            That may be bizarre to you, but that may also be why there are those who seem to have come to the erroneous conclusion that the Church prior to VII had gotten too focused on Our Lady.

            But God bless you just the same.

  27. Steve Phoenix says:

    One other thing, on the post-Vatican II de-emphasis on the cult due the BV Mary: Besides the solemn holy day of obligation, the Octaves of the two major Marian feasts (Assumption and Immaculate Conception) were kept in the Tridentine Calendar: 7 additional days to emphasize in the Divine Office and in the daily liturgy the profound meaning of the two feasts: Mary as sinless in conception of body and soul at birth, and sinless at death or dormition.

    Juan Diego was in fact keeping the Octave of the Immaculate Conception, with a daily walk of several miles for early morning Mass, to the church in Tlatelolco in Mexico City, when the first apparition occurred. Just to show: the religious calendar matters: and this also was wiped out as an…

    • Anonymous says:

      I think those octaves were actually surpressed in 1955,10 years before Vatican II.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Absolute rubbish.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          Which I should clarify—it was Bugnini who convinced Pius XII to drop the 8th day itself of the Immaculate Conception, not the Assumption—Bugnini, the quintessential V2 wreckovater and instrumental de-mphasizer of BV Mary in the liturgy—but the 7 days were still kept in both the Missal and the Divine Office. Aug. 22nd, today, is still the octave day in trad rite as the Immaculate Heart of Mary (Queenship in New Rite).

          • Anonymous says:

            Ok so it did happen before Vatican II.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            I don’t think you understood: what was left of the two octaves were effectively erased (except for the Queenship of BV Mary, Apr. 23) in both the Missal and the Breviary: and that happened by the instrumentality of the Consilium at Vatican II. Each day was an octave-day of special veneration. The only pre-V2 change was a Bugnini-initiated one, dropping the 8th day after Immaculate Conception. It was predictable: Bugnini never displayed any love for the Marian cult.

            If you are trying to save Vatican-II “face,” you will have a hard time of it: there is no doubt V2 completed the wrecking ball of the cult of Marian veneration. The V2 calendar proves it, overwhelmingly, and the octaves and their individual days are now…

          • Anonymous says:

            Because Marian feasts had taken over th ecalendar, and therefore the spiritual life of the Church, and Christ had gotten lost in the mix. Perfectly appropriate for the Church to refocus on the Redeemer.

          • Ann Malley says:

            “….Because Marian feasts had taken over th ecalendar, and therefore the spiritual life of the Church, and Christ had gotten lost in the mix.”

            Anonymous has official drunk the Kool Aid.

          • Catherine says:

            ” Because Marian feasts had taken over the calendar, and therefore the spiritual life of the Church, and Christ had gotten lost in the mix. ” = Spoken like a true Protestant!…..by design

            Man plans and God laughs.

            “My Soul Doth Magnify the Lord”

            “In the End My Immaculate Heart Will Triumph”

  28. Steve Phoenix says:

    Now, it is good that we are getting some attention on the revolt that went on to set aside the schemata at V2 in Oct. 1962. P. Benedict XVI is putting the best face on the revolt that actually happened and is well-documented by such various authors as: Romano Amerio (Iota Unum), Ralph Wiltgen (The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber); R. DeMattei (Hist Vat II); and even “Xavier Rynne” (Letters From Vatican City) all of whom characterize the jettisoning of the schemata as a cleverly orchestrated revolt by the Congar-Suenens-Lienart-Schillebeeckx group and a direct repudiation of the Pius XII-school and its traditional theologians.

    There was in fact an overthrow of the planned subjects which had been collected prior to V2.

  29. Steve Phoenix says:

    And, as much as I respect P. BXVI, at that time (V2), he was one of the members of the revolt-faction (Kung, Congar, Rahner, Schillebeeckx: he later famously split with them, and especially Hans Kung is very bitter to this day about BXVI’s “traitorousness”): I would expect for him to put the best face on the Oct 1962 revolt, when Card. Ottoviani’s mike was turned off in mid-sentence, and the Congar et al. faction applauded, laughed and celebrated. At this point, Lienart, Suenens, and Lercaro took over the council, and John XXIII, despite being implored to intervene, was either too frightened or too ill to do so.

    Ratzinger is not a liar and not a hypocrite: so he has committed himself to undoing as best he can, the disaster he…

    • Anonymous says:

      If you have not seen this, I think it will interest you. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/yves-congar-and-the-meaning-of-vatican-ii-2205/

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        I have read this article by the way (on Congar & V2), thank you.

        During my collegiate days, Congar was cited over and over again by many USF Jesuit and other profs as the new Aquinas. Not. A man with a notable anti-Marian, anti-establishment (esp. against the Vatican itself) agenda, his years in Nazi imprisonment appear to have changed him (as well as his years at the Le Saulchoir Dominican theology school: a school once renowned for its orthodoxy, which became a redoubt of the modernist and socialist movement from the 1940’s on.). After the war, he shows a bitter, vengeful streak—and a brilliant intellect, make no mistake.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Ann Malley, a while ago, you wrote that it did not matter if what you said was true. As long as you said it with confidence, people would believe you. It turns out that the people here at CCD aren’t quite as stupid as you thought they were. Repent of your evil and turn back to the the Truth. Abandon your own will and throw yourself on the mercy of God before it is too late.

    • Ann Malley says:

      Anonymous, repent of your love of ignorance and despising of the truth. Ponder the reality that I have very much abandoned my own will and thrown myself on the mercy of God. THAT is why I am merely conveying here what the Church has always taught to the best of my ability. If you have chosen to follow blind guides and/or soak up the poison of believing that altered doctrine is not altered, that is your choice.

      As to writing with confidence, that tactic is precisely what is being employed within the Church to calm the fears of the sheep who are ‘seeing’ that the grass is no longer green, but brown. They dismiss the rank smell, too. It is tactic, Anonymous. One that is being used against you.

      Church doctrine speaks clearly for…

      • Ann Malley says:

        … itself – calling out what passes as doctrine today as inferior and not what it should be. If you don’t believe the teachings of the Church outside of “obey, obey, obey” minus any discernment, it is you who should be wary.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Attending illicit Masses is not part of God’s plan for any baptized Catholic. Just as contracting a civil Marriage is not. or shopping on a Sunday is not. When you receive baptism in a Catholic Church, you have duties and responsibilities and they include attending your assigned parish for Sunday Mass. If you are not doing this, you have left the path God intended you to walk. You can return to the path any Sunday.

    • Ann Malley says:

      Anonymous, you exercise absolutely no authority with which to speak on the matter as pertains to God’s flock. You can return to your path any Sunday or today by ceasing to pretend that you have any authority with which to speak on behalf of others.

      When one is baptized, one indeed has duties and responsibilities. That is why I post as I do and why I do not negate the graces God has given me.

      A true Catholic is a humble son or daughter that understands that one is to obey in all matters except sin.

  32. Anonymous says:

    If you want to attend the Extraordinary Form and it is not available at your assigned parish, you should make your desire for it known to the pastor. If there is a licit TLM close enough to get to, it is not necessary to get the pastor’s permission to attend it, but it is a courtesy to tell him you would like to attend it and ask him about where to tithe. A true Catholic is a humble son or daughter of the Church.

  33. Steve Phoenix says:

    I also want to address the Congar conspiracy, which did occur to set aside the actual Vatican II schemata under rules approved by John XXIII himself:

    On Sept 16/17, 1962, two weeks before the Council had actually convened, Congar met with Hans Kung at Tubingen: Kung’s purpose: the schematas, he said, “must not be amended, but rejected.” (p. 81, My Journal of the Council)—even though this was a violation of the rules approved by the pope himself. From that point on, Kung, Chenu, and Congar, over the next 4 weeks, were working on a plan to displace the true pre-agreed plan of the Council and create a true hidden agenda of their own.

    Congar had already written and been in contact with the most progressive council members…

  34. Steve Phoenix says:

    Congar had already written and been in contact with the most progressive council members in mid-September, as they worked on a declaration by Chenu which was designed to take over the leadership of the agenda.

    Who were the others? Their names should be remembered as the progressive brain-trust: Cards. Lienart of France, Alfrink of Utrecht, Konig (Vienna), Dopfner (Berlin); Frings (Cologne), Suenens (Malines-Brussels, who Robert De Mattei says was the single-most influential “council father”)—and one recently named career diplomat, now cardinal of Milan: Montini. (p. 81, Congar’s Journal) Also involved were Protestant “observers” Oscar Cullman, Max Thurian, and others from the World Council of Churches.
    During the…

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      During the 4 weeks leading up to the Council’s first day (Oct. 11, 1962), these individuals, along with Kung, worked under wraps to derail the approved agenda and to take over the leadership positions on the ten commissions. It is important to note that Ratzinger was not a part of this group, and, unless he reads Congar’s journal, he is not informed about the depth and detail of the conspiracy to set aside the true plan of the Council.

      On Oct. 13, 1962, the plan to hijack the Council went into effect:
      Congar states the council fathers had already gathered in the plenary sessions, and had even started to vote to confirm commission leaders preparatory to addressing the original schemata. The original subject matter…

  35. Steve Phoenix says:

    At this point [progressive] Card. Achille Lienert of Lille, France, a member of the praesidium, strode to the mike and began reading from a prepared text.
    In it, Lienert announced that the schemata should be put aside while the Council Fathers [supposedly] “get to know each other better.” (p. 92, Journal) This was no sudden whim on Lienert’s part: the text had been prepared by Toulouse progressive Bp. Garrone some time before and was the first step to set aside regular order at the Council. It was successful, and the original schemata were never brought forward. Congar proudly declaims in his diary: THIS IS THE FIRST CONCILIAR ACT (emphasis, Congar’s).” (10/13/1962, p. 92)

  36. Steve Phoenix says:

    Some days later, the nearly blind orthodox Cardinal Ottaviani came to the mike to speak out, particularly against the hijacking of the new schemata on the Liturgy. It was at this time, Alfrink, no friend of Ottaviani, had his mike turned off in mid-sentence (his pretext: “he had taken too much time”) —showing once and for all who controlled the council. Humiliated in front of everyone, the prefect for the Sacred Congregation for the Faith was crushed: the progressives applauded and some cheered; the conspiracy had gained momentum: the original schemata were in the trash for good.

    The more accurate report in the French newspaper France-Soir 10/16/65 read: “Rebellion of the French bishops!” in bold type. It upset Congar,…

  37. Steve Phoenix says:

    If the “Robber Council” of Ephesus (2nd Council Ephesus, 449 AD) was set aside as an untrue council, in large part because of the dishonest dealings of its presiding prelate, Dioscurous of Alexandria, and the council’s hidden agenda to rehabilitate Eutyches, the evidence is plentiful that the true purpose of V2 was derailed quite deliberately by revolutionary theologians and cardinals (at least one of whom, Hans Kung, now doesn’t believe he is Catholic anymore, as a matter of fact) whose purpose was to break with the Church’s tradition and past.

    • Anonymous says:

      Sweetheart, we also know that the proceedings of the council were endorsed by the Roman Pontiff. You somehow keep forgetting that little detail! You neglect it every time you post. Have a great day!

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        Fatuous condescending comment noted, rather instead of focusing on the facts.

        The 8th Council Of Constantinople (2nd session, 879-880) was also approved by the Pope at the time, John VIII—and later rescinded. The Western Latin Church no longer accepts it. Just as a later Pope will set aside this utterly destructive Council: the tree is known by its fruits. A Pope can be deceived about a council: or also a Pope, such as Pope Honorius (d. 638), for example, may be deceived by heresy (the Monothelites) and later condemned by an ecumenical council (3rd Constantinople ecumenical council, 680 AD). So, fatuous comments aside, councils once approved by popes can be later corrected and rejected. Popes can also be anathematized for…

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          …for tolerating heresy, as did Honorius. (Are you listening, P. Francis?) So, no, approval later of a council by a Pope doesn’t necessarily mean anything.

          And you have a great day, too! 🙂

          • Anonymous says:

            Promulgation by a Pope means it’s authentic Catholic teaching.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Willful ignorance must be painful to live with (“Promulgation by a Pope means it’s authentic Catholic teaching.”). Again the facts:

            Again, [at least the] 8th Council of Constantinople (869-870), accepted by the Eastern Church, was, at first, accepted by P. John VIII (d. 882). For nearly 3 centuries, it was an accepted “ecumenical” council—until in the 11th century, during the East-West split of the Churches, the Latin Church rejected it.

            So, even if a pope for a time “accepts” a council, it may later be rejected. Please don’t deny the objective facts: councils are measured by their later effects and an evaluation of their teaching: Nicaea, Ephesus, Chalcedon. On the other hand, Vatican II, having a…

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            …Vatican II, its ambiguous double-meanings written into its very texts causing a destructive force on our Church for 5 decades now, likely some day will follow the same path. The tree is known by its fruits (Mt. 12:33). By the way, in context, this passage from Matthew is where Jesus gives the means of discerning true teaching from the false teaching of the Pharisees.

          • Anonymous says:

            Steve Phoenix, It seems to me that you are talking about 2 different Councils. The 4th Council of Constantinople which was in the years that you mentioned and as is considered the 8th Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church. This was the last ecumenical Council where both the West and East were present. The 4th Council of Constantinople that is recognized by the Eastern Orthodox Church was held in 879-880. This is the one where the Greek Fathers rejected the addition of “and the Son” to the Nicene Creed.

          • Anonymous says:

            I think you are referring to the Fourth Council of Constantinople, which made 27 decrees over 2 years. The part of the Council which Rome rejected later was the part continued for the next decade by the Eastern Patriarchs, and the whole thing was a power struggle between Rome and Constantinople that ended up with the Great Schism. Besides, I’m sure Yves Congar was at that council too.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            No, the 4th Council of Constantinople (869-870) is an accepted Latin Church Council. 10 years later, the Council reconvened (879-880 AD) for a 2nd session (called the 8th Council/Constantinople in the Eastern Churches). The proceedings involved the Filioque controversy, and P. John VIII accepted the canons and validated the Council.

            This Council WAS accepted as “ecumenical” for about three centuries, until the time of the Great Schism. It was then rejected as an ecumenical council for having condemned the Latin Trinitarian formula (Filioque).

            The point: there is precedence for papal acceptance of a council yet later being rejected and invalidated as “ecumenical”. So too with terminally ambiguous Vatican II.

          • Steve Phoenix says:

            Mr. Anonymous, at this point, I really don’t think you want to understand this issue—that a council can be later rejected as valid and “ecumenical”, even when it has been approved by the pope, even when it was in the canonically valid teachings for almost three centuries.

            It is clear you are not familiar with the history (4th Council/Constantinople, part I, 869-870 vs. 8th Council Constantinople, part II,879-880). But it really did happen. And, knowing the history helps us to critically evaluate V2.

            Now also, you may want to reconsider that Golden Calf on your altar called Vatican II, which for some seems to have supplanted the Trinity, as they so easily allowed it to downgrade the BV Mary and her devotion. Where V2…

  38. Anonymous says:

    Paul, we appreciate your comments. You don’t have to be quiet just cause Ann malley got irritated with you. You are welcome here, faithful Catholic.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      So you are advocating name-calling (and mis-spelled names at that) as a means of “faith-seeking-understanding?” So much for the judge-not-and you will-not-be-judged rubbish (Lk. 6:37). Have at it, then. It says more about oneself than about the accused.

      V2 was supposed to have a separate constitution pronouncing the BV Mary as Mediatrix of the Church. That constitution was set aside, and a watered-down chapter was tacked-on (#55-69) to Lumen Gentium. Even that extols “the divine maternity” of the BVM (#62-63) and venerated as Theotokos from the time of Ephesus (#66). Yet the post-V2 Church eliminated (among others) the Divine Maternity of the BVM and down-graded the 7-days of veneration for both Assumption and the Immaculate…

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        ..Immaculate Conception to the virtual status of “optional memorial”. Most people in the (yes: Novus Ordo) parishes I frequent (about 3 of them) did not even know about the Assumption. Yet the double-speak, double-talk of V2, claiming to profess devotion to the BV Mary,while at the same time “tacking on” (the phrasing isn’t mine: it was the late Fr. Daniel O’Hanlon, SJ’s, of USF, an actual peritus of V2 in systematics and who worked on Lumen Gentium) an ignored chapter as an afterthought, showed the downgrade of devotion and the mentality of Congar and Kuhn. And that effect we still deal with today.

  39. Paul,
    Based on your comments, and typical modernist thought and shallow knowledge of the true faith, I doubt you even know what a real Catholic is or stands for. Funny thing, we traditionalist can’t leave, we are woven into the fabric of the Roman Catholic Church, we are practicing the faith receiving the sacraments of our ancestors, in the manner which Christ Himself taught them, not revised 50 years ago by radicals, rabbis, and protestant clergy. Bet your under 50 years old and haven’t a clue about what the Roman Catholic Church truly looks like.

    • Sorry, Jerry, but I attend the EF Mass every Sunday, and holy day.
      I’m 68 years old, went to Catholic elementary School, High School, and University. I used the original Baltimore catechism.
      – – – – – – I am just sick of all the lies about VII by Sedevacantists and SSPXers.
      Legitimate and constructive comments are fine. The lies have to stop.
      Again as others have stated prove your Statements by providing the V II Document name and paragraph #. Or do you only want to promote lies as well?

      • Ann Malley says:

        Indeed, the lies need to stop, Paul. That is why we need constructive conversation, not the belief that because we are 68 years old we are above understanding the politics behind VII and our current crisis.

        Stop promoting blindness and calling it Catholic, Paul. The strong arm doesn’t work anymore. Do your own online research. That would demonstrate a desire to learn instead of the blustering stonewalling of just going along to get along.

  40. Anonymous says:

    Pay no attention to those who try to fool you into thinking that Catholic teaching has changed. They know it hasn’t. Look in the archives and you can find where this same person said that Vatican II did not change doctrine. This person changes their tune all the time. But the old saw is the same. Blasphemy against God’s Church, heresy and schism.

    • Steve Phoenix says:

      That is a self-congratulatory twisting of what was said: Paul VI, JP2, and Benedict XVI at various times have said themselves that there was no new definition of doctrine at V2: yet everyone has heard clergy and (in my case) bishops state openly, “Well, that was what we used to believe, but Vatican II changed all that.”

      The point Ann Malley was making at that time is that we are told all the time “you must accept V2” but they never define what that means. Is there a new dogma to which we must adhere? Well, then, what unique new teaching, dogma, canon, definition did it infallibly define that is binding on faith? And don’t try the “ordinary magisterium” ploy—true doctrine is “that which the Church has always taught,…

      • Anonymous says:

        Not all doctrine that is required to be believed has been defined infallibly. You apparently don’t understand Vatican I, let alone Vatican II.

        But I think Anonymous Aug 25 1:37 AM is correct saying that in one post someone will say, we reject Vatican II because we believe what the Church has always believed and now the Church does not believe what it has always believed. Yet in another post same person says no new doctrines came out of VII and that is why we don’t have to believe it.

        • Steve Phoenix says:

          Do tell: then what are the canons that are not defined (such as for example, in Denzinger-Schonmetzer, and other sources), yet must be believed (since you have a fuller understanding of Vatican I than I, of course). Please tell me what they are. I am sure you can provide a short list.

      • Anonymous says:

        I am not sure what your point is? that if Michael Voris can change his mind, others can too?

        • Ann Malley says:

          Michael Voris has been compromised. If he were truly principled as he purports to be, he would cease spinning His Excellency Bishop Schneider’s prudential statements and follow them.

          Perhaps he should issue a public apology for his misstatements – if, indeed, he thinks he is now incorrect. That is a Vortex I’d pay to see.

          • Voris is not spinning anything.
            Abp Schnieder does NOT encourage anyone to attend SSPX services, and chances are extremely high that the Abp has NOT seen the heretical SSPX teaching video that states it is sinful to attend an Ordinary Form of the Mass, and that it is better to commit a Mortal Sin by missing Mass rather than go to an OF Mass.
            Until the Pope states otherwise – “the SSPX holds no ministry within the Catholic Church” – Pope Benedict. PERIOD.

          • Ann Malley says:

            Paul, God bless you, but Voris is leading you by the nose.

            Nobody but you and Voris have implied that His Excellency encouraged anyone to attend the Society. And if you think Bishop Schneider didn’t know the Societies long held position on the Novus Ordo Missae, then you must think him a neophyte. He’s not.

            For while Voris goes ape over a video in order to gin up his followers, he fails to understand that that same position has been in writing on the Society website forever. And, Paul, the Vatican knows this. (What do you think the ’12 Rome/Society talks covered? Vestment preferences?)

            The one who doesn’t seem to understand this is the “investigative” journalist who has given over accurate reporting for yellow…

          • Ann Malley says:
      • Ann Malley says:

        Excellent example of the spin, Dana. But it is just such nonsense that is proof that there is something wrong in Denmark – elsewise the kerfuffle to cover up wouldn’t be so dire. Reminds me of Hillary Clinton and servers.

    • Anonymous says:

      Steve Phoenix, it wasn’t about you.

  41. Anonymous says:

    Words are powerful.
    Words can destroy.. Words can mislead.
    Words can heal. Words can help.
    The most powerful word in the world is Jesus.
    May Jesus destroy what is evil in you and heal your wounds.
    May Jesus join Himself to you so completely that you only think and feel as He thinks and feels.
    Come Holy Spirit, who incarnated Jesus in Mary. O Jesus, living in Mary, come and live in us.

  42. Anomynous, which ever one of the two you are (I think the liberal homosexual), your 24 August comment that might have applied to me only indicates that there is a second Jerry. I am not the person you described. I spoke what I believe, no wishy washy about my comments. Unlike you, my eyes and ears are opened. I accept the Way, the Truth, and the Life, not the heresey and hypocrite actions I see going on for the last 50 years.

  43. Continued: Just to set the record straight, true Roman Catholic teaching/doctrine, the 7 Latin Sacraments, TLM and rites (like Benediction and etc.), as practiced in traditional parishes has not changed, though unfortunately there are one or two zany liberal parishes that have women clergy that claim to be traditional, don’t let them fool you. Just another example of a few bad apples can spoil the appearance of the bunch. Anyone less than 60 years old in communion with the V2 Church (they are dropping out like fly’s becoming agnostics) never really knew true Roman Catholicism, and not being on the inside of it, can’t speak as source of knowledge and expertise on the Catholic Church. Much propaganda exists today on the part of the…

    • Anonymous says:

      From the Catechism of St. Pope Pius V:
      The Church has but one ruler and one governor, the invisible one, Christ, whom the eternal Father hath made head over all the Church, which is his body; the visible one, the Pope, who, as legitimate successor of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, fills the Apostolic chair.

      It is the unanimous teaching of the Fathers that this visible head is necessary to establish and preserve unity in the Church. This St. Jerome clearly perceived and as clearly expressed when, in his work against Jovinian, he wrote: One is elected that, by the appointment of a head, all occasion of schism may be removed. In his letter to Pope Damasus the same holy Doctor writes: Away with envy, let the ambition of Roman grandeur…

  44. Anonymous says:

    Why does Ann malley never answer the questions asked of her?

  45. Anonymous says:

    All faithful Catholics give praise to the Lord and be sober and vigilant.

  46. Anonymous says:

    For those who are trying to lie and say that Michael Voris is criticizing the SSPX for saying the same thing he said 5 years ago:
    Michael Voris criticized the SSPX for saying in their video on their website that there is no obligation to attend Mass on Sunday. They also said that the Mass is an offense to God. They said that if you cannot get to a traditional Mass it is OK to substitute private prayer like the Rosary.
    The video that was posted online that is supposed to prove that he said the same thing DOES NOT say that at all. Be wary of deceivers. All lies come from Satan. And It is a MORTAL Sin to miss Mass on Sunday.

    • Ann Malley says:

      For those Catholics who love God, Holy Mother Church, and the integrity of the Faith, cease and desist the divisive antics of sidetracking. Follow Bishop Schneider’s advice, please, and do not by way of misguided zeal, or the desire to boost ratings like at CMTV, shoot those faithful Catholics who should be your closest allies.

      Your zeal is great, but when coupled with a lack of understanding, to the point of horror expressed by Anonymous above over a position well known by the Vatican since the beginning, it’s a useful means of getting you to work against yourselves.

      In defense of HOLY DAYS and in defense of the Faith, knock off the Henny Penny routine. Take a gander at the following:
      http://www.renewamerica

  47. Seems as though there are some Sedevecantist, SSPX, and SSPV haters out there amongst the liberals. This situation is just as hypocritical as the Southern Poverty Law Center claiming traditional Catholics as being hate groups. In reality, it is the SPLC, and the liberals who are the real haters. The liberals just don’t want to be told how to live their earthly lives by God. The liberals are taking away liberties given by God and encouraging sin that is offensive to God. The liberals want their sinful ways accepted, and anybody who stands in their way of reaching it, the liberals hate. Meanwhile the Sedevecantists, SSPX, and SSPV have been blessed with graces to see the light of God, they are not haters, but because they warn souls of…

    • Anonymous says:

      Just because you think someone is wrong or committing a sin or has been deluded doesn’t mean you hate them. In fact, it takes love to tell people that they are on the wrong path..

      • Ann Malley says:

        ….it also takes purity of intention to render said instruction in a charitable manner. And often, by way of that charitable attitude, the one who thought themselves to be the instructor actually learns that they are wrong.

        That is why it is imperative to tend to one’s purity of intention first and then only speak out if one is willing to go all the way. Too often it is the love of being perceived as “right” “holy” “in full communion” that is loved and not the soul of one’s brothers/sisters.

  48. Anonymous says:

    Ann Malley, why do you feel so threatened by people telling you the truth? Are you familiar with the term “spiritual abuse”?

    • Anonymous! You mean you’re familiar with spiritual abuse? Pray tell, we’re all agog. It sounds like politically correct-ese for a religious discussion wherein one side is ill- informed and losing so he accuses his opponent of it…am I close? 😉

  49. I see some real hatred toward the SSPX and sedevacantists from many of the bloggers on this article. You are all only showing your true colors!

    • Not hatred of them. But hatred of their behavior where they constantly ridicule and disagree with the Catholic Church – while pretending to be Catholics in good standing.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Leigh, the behavior of Catholics in supposedly good standing is what is reprehensible. If one has the Truth, one doesn’t behave as so many ‘choose’ to behave here while calling themselves holy. Actions speak louder than words.

        And if the words of truth or even the question of important doctrinal issues upset a person, how secure are they in that truth? Not very. That is why it would do everyone good to remember that the Truth isn’t ours, per se, to claim as if we created it. We did not. We merely pass it on. And if that is the case, being precise about the message is critical, not a matter of preening one’s fidelity feathers.

  50. It is easy to see who the haters are on this blog, they as in the rest of society are the liberals who want to have their way whether it offends God or not, they couldn’t care less, and probably would be so bold to tell God He is not politically correct and that He better get with the their agenda. You can tell by their desire to identify the SSPX and Sedevacantists much like the pagans sought to find and martyr the early Christians.

    • Anonymous says:

      Those poor Sedevantist martyrs among us. I feel so sorry for you. Saint Stephen, pray for us. Or maybe we should appeal to Saint Peter.

  51. May God continue to bless the parishes of the SSPX, SSPV, and Roman Catholic sedevacantists throughout the world. It is these groups by which the Roman Catholic Church with Our Lord standing beside Her, will preserve the Roman Catholic Faith and provide the graces through the 7 Latin-rite Holy Sacraments and TLM for the salvation of souls.

  52. Steve Phoenix says:

    Now what will the anti-SSPX crowd do, since P. Francis has granted them faculties for confessional absolution during the upcoming “Holy Year of Mercy”:

    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/09/urgent-pope-francis-grants-absolution.html

    I can hear the shrieking right now. (something like: “Well, their confessions are not valid now and their marriages are still not valid.” Now who are the Phaaaarisees? )

    Apologies to Ann Malley for any of the many singularly personal, uncharitable, and hostile attacks, may commence at any time. Misogynism is always permitted in the Novus Ordo against traditional Catholic women: they, the most feared group of all.

    • Not true Steve,
      The Pope can change things with the SSPX if he deems appropriate.
      Only the Sedevancantists, and the SSPXers think nothing can ever change – except when it comes to them.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Again, Andy, you misconstrue the Faith with individuals and those groups that would defend it. The Faith does not change. So while you have been misled to believe the issues at hand are a matter of one team vs another team, you deprive yourself of the reality of what is at the root of the seeming contest.

        That, friend, is to deprive yourself of truth and true charity.

  53. Ann, You’ve fought the good fight, but it is senseless arguing with stupid, with these haters who can’t stand you. Remember what the apostles did when they weren’t accepted, they got up, walked away, and shook the dust from their feet. You did your best and tried, that is true Christian charity to show them the truth. They have been ruthless to you. Time to move on Christian Soldier. God loves you. I am so proud of Roman Catholic Parishes who practice tradition, the Holy Latin-rite Sacraments and Tridentine Latin Mass. They are warm, special people who truly love God and put Him first in all things, not like these haters who have been attacking you and act like the Pharisees and despised our Lord and you. May God bless you and…

    • Ann Malley says:

      God bless you Steve Phoenix and Jeanie! Hopefully, one day, the group that believes themselves so zealous for God will be led to see how better to serve Him in Truth. Faith is a gift and it comes through hearing. Sadly, many here are only reacting in the way that they have been taught. Pray God to send us good and HOLY priests. Fearless ones who place their trust in God first and all of His promises. 🙂

      • I join Steve and the others in supporting you Ann and I totally agree with Jeanie, don’t waste another minute trying to reason with people who are utterly without reason or love. They’re always accusing us of being haters, just as the abortionists call pro- life people haters, or pro marriage and family supporters haters. They fail to see the irony because they’re spiritually blind

      • Ann Malley,

        It is not time to move on. : ) Many years ago, Padre Pio told my friend’s husband that perseverance was the virtue that he would need to pray for the most because of the many difficult trials that were coming. Christians are now being jailed for their refusal to recognize same sex marriage. Those who truly love TRUTH will not call fellow Catholics names like slimy or witch. Moving on is exactly what infiltrators desire from those who shine a light on the Fullness of Truth. Yes, there are those who are only reacting to what they have been taught and there are pretenders who know exactly what they are doing. You can easily recognize the sulphuric source of their venom.

  54. Paul, Anomynous the homosexual, Ted B., Abecca, YFC, you act like cowards, ganging up on Ann like a wolf pack. Why do you hate the SSPX and sedevacantists? What evils have they wrought and done to you? They are only holding onto their Roman Catholic Faith that our great-grand parents and our ancestors before them held, practiced, and worshipped Almighty God by the Tridentine Latin Mass, prayers and the Sacraments. Why do you persecute those who refused to change with the V2 Council? The SSPX and sedevacantists didn’t change, the modern Vatican II church did! How can what Holy Mother the Church preserved and practiced for over 1,930 years of tradition and nearly 200 Popes be abolished by the Vatican II council be so wrong today?…

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      FIrst of all I don’t hate SSPXers and sedevacantists, and I doubt the others do either. My biggest emotional reaction to them/you is pity. Pity that you can’t see the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and that you seem confined to live in a purgatory of the past. Pity that you have been mislead and perhaps lied to.

      But I am also angry, because you don’t seem capable of simply believing what you believe, you poison the rest of the Church with division and falsehoods. You are complicit in whatever lying and deception that is going on. You sully our Roman Catholic Church.

      It is pity and anger, not hate. Big difference.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Weep for yourself and your children, YFC. Others choose to follow Christ to include the carrying of the cross. No purgatory of the past, but reality and the truth despite the smoke screen of God contradicting Himself that you purvey as Catholic teaching.

        But again, your post is a great illustration of the error in acting in accordance with emotion. It is precisely the lure of fluctuating emotion that misleads folks into believing that God has now changed and previous generations that carried their cross were somehow foolish or unenlightened in doing so.

        But considering your agenda, I can well understand your hate. For truth and lies cannot mix.

      • “Pity that you can’t see the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and that you seem confined to live in a purgatory of the past. ”

        YFC, was certainly not using the gifts of the Holy Spirit when he wanted to throw out the Christian homeschooling family from Germany. YFC said they had no legal rights to be here in the U.S. YFC, you are not only a homosexual agenda troll, you are also a multi-faceted George Soros type of infiltrator on this blog. What is truly pitiable is your very darkened intellect due to habitual mortal sin. Unless you repent YFC, you seem to desire a future confinement of eternal damnation.

      • Steve Phoenix says:

        “…You poison the rest of the Church with division and falsehoods. You are complicit in whatever lying and deception that is going on. You sully our Roman Catholic Church.”- YFC, Sept 4, 2015.

        Really, YFC, you have outdone yourself in your objectivity, balance, and discretion.

    • Amen, Doug! We must all ask ourselves, why this emphasis on Vat II constantly? There weren’t even any dogmas from this council! Enough already! What about the Council of Trent? Let’s hear more from Vat I. Otherwise, it’s pretty obvious that something really pernicious and sly is afoot, even to the most die-hard modernists here. Why this obnoxious focus on a council that didn’t even amount to much in the overall picture…this so- called spirit of Vatican II is no more than smoke !

    • Doug ….I had never heard of the SSPX before I read about it on this site. My understanding is that their issues go way beyond the Latin mass (Which by the way we have in my parish) What concerns me about them is their apparent hostility towards the Jewish people, their flirtation with Fascism (Admiration for Vichy France, one of their bishop’s Holocaust denial etc.) and their disrespect for two popes. We have room in the Church for the OF and EF masses as well as the Byzantine Rite, Charismatics and other Church traditions.

  55. Anomynous, I presume the heterosexual? (As opposed to Anomynous the homosexual? The answer to your question as why Mary came so often to ask people to pray the rosary is easy, She told them and us in reparation for our sins and it still applies today! We are offending God, no doubt much worse these days than in those old pre-Vatican II days. The rosary helps us in reparation of our sins, we receive graces for saying it; it gives us more time with Mary and God, time that God wants us to share with Him, time to talk to Them. When our Lord walked on the earth 2000 years ago was He loved by all men and women? No, not at all, most disliked Him, and many wanted to stifle or even kill Him. Our Lord said Himself He would set Father against…

  56. Dana, this court is not closed yet, I need to answer C&H’s 4 September comment on the SSPX’s changes being much deeper than converting from the Latin to the vernacular language in the Holy Mass. If you compare the Tridentine Latin Mass to the novus ordo now, prayer for prayer, word for word, you will find 2 totally different services, excuse me a Mass and a service. Look at it! Find an old Roman Catholic TLM missal pre 1962 and you will see immense changes. With changes in prayer are changes in intention and meaning. Many old prayers were deleted. Even BXVIth recognized and restored the words of consecration that were in error during the pontificates of Paul VI and JPII! But not only was the TLM changed slowly by 1969, so were all…

  57. continued from 6 September pasted mid-way in the blog chain.

    Not only was the Holy Mass drastically changed (to the point that on the surface there is a mere resemblance, deeper it has changed immensely), but all of the 7 Holy Latin-rite Sacraments changed starting with the Sacrament of Holy Orders around 1968 which probably was the easiest to get away with by the liberals as so few Roman Catholics had the distinct joy and pleasure of previously witnessing and participating as observers in this sacrament which gave us holy priests and bishops. It makes one shudder to think of the horror if the Sacrament of Holy Orders changed, what impact it had on the seminarians and priests! Are there any really out there? No priests, no…

  58. Steve Phoenix says:

    Today, Sept. 19th, was in the pre-Vatican II calendar, the feast of Our Lady of Lasalette—of course, eliminated in the “revision of the books” by the Consilium of Vatican II.

    No surprise: because it, an approved revelation, warns that “the Church will be eclipsed” and “the wicked will indulge in all kinds of sins” in the future societies of the world.

    To better venerate the Blessed Virgin as called for by Lumen Gentium, #8, we eliminated feast days which called for her veneration. You understand, of course.

  59. Steve Phoenix says:

    Today, Sept. 24th, is the traditional feast day of Our Lady of Ransom, which dates back to an apparition to St Peter Nolasco (1218), founder of the Order of Our Lady of Mercy, in which she urged him to take up the vocation of ransoming captives from the Muslims. It had been extended to the whole Catholic Church in 1696.

    Now, this feast day had to be suppressed in the “revision of the calendar” purportedly authorized by Sacro. Concilium of Vatican II, in order to extend greater devotion to the Bl. Virgin Mary. (Ch. 8, SC).

  60. Steve Phoenix says:

    Yesterday, Oct. 11th, was the feast of the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary: it was entered into the General Roman Calendar in 1931 by P. Pius XI on the occasion of the 15th centenary of the declaration of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Theotokos, “Mother of God”, at Ephesus in 431 AD.

    In Ch. 8 of Lumen Gentium, the Divine Maternity was actualy cited, 2x, as a most important commemoration to be maintained by the 2nd Vatican Council (cf. #62 & #63). As a result of the subsequent V2 “empowering” commission, the Consilium, it was eliminated. Yet another contradiction of Vatican II..

  61. Steve Phoenix says:

    During the formerly-kept Octave of the Immaculate Conception (still kept in the traditional Catholic breviary and rite), Marian feast days were also specially venerated: Dec. 10th, Our Lady of Loreto; Dec. 11th, Our Lady of Angels (the patronal feast day of Los Angeles of course, and of the Franciscan Order), and Dec. 12th, or course Our Lady of Guadalupe: because without the Immaculate Conception (thank you, Duns Scotus, when virtually everyone else was wrong), the Incarnation could not have come to pass.

  62. Awesome post.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments 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.