Tradcast Express
I saw the need to underscore his declaration by invoking his supposed magisterial authority.
Here is what he said verbatim, quote,
We can affirm with certainty and with magisterial authority that the liturgical reform is irreversible, unquote.
Now, of course, this is pretty funny considering that the Novus Ordo liturgical revolution itself
basically overturned well over a thousand years of the Roman liturgy, at least,
and
it didn't even pretend otherwise.
No, we were supposedly returning to liturgical antiquity, and of course that's a good thing, right?
So much for the irreversibility of liturgical development, even from a Novus Ordo perspective.
Actually, if anything is irreversible here, it's the true Roman liturgy the way it was before the modernists took a sledgehammer to it.
In his 1947 encyclical Mediator Dei,
Pope Pilate,
Pope Pius XII declared, quote,
Clearly, no sincere Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church
under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for souls,
because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas.
No more can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of the Church
to revert to prescriptions,
based on the earliest sources of canon law.
Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who, in matters liturgical,
would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity,
discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine providence
to meet the changes of circumstances and situation, unquote.
So, if Francis wants to talk about irreversible liturgy, we can.
Make sense?
Make sure you don't miss our two blog posts on this topic,
published on August 25th and 27th, respectively,
at our blog at
Oh, by the way, just as I was preparing for this little podcast here,
I noticed that Christopher Ferreira of The Remnant and the Fatima Center
had just published his thoughts on Francis' irreversible comment.
In addition to making some of the very arguments that,
in our blog post of August 25th, we predicted he would make,
which, granted, wasn't very difficult,
he made the astonishing claim that in 1969, quote,
the new Mass was merely introduced alongside the traditional Mass,
which, as Benedict XVI affirmed in Summorum Pontificum,
was never abrogated, abolished, by Paul VI,
and, in principle, was always permitted,
contrary to the false impression so carefully cultivated,
by the bureaucratic promoters of the pseudo-magisterium
that has afflicted the Church since the Council,
until Benedict XVI finally exposed the fraud in 2007, unquote.
Now, this is nothing but bovine manure,
both on the part of Benedict XVI and of Christopher Ferreira.
The new Mass was never introduced as an alternate rite of Mass
alongside the traditional Roman Catholic Mass.
It's simply ludicrous.
It's ludicrous to claim that.
The traditional Roman rite was never abolished by Paul VI?
Whom is Benedict or Ferreira kidding?
Why do you think that for decades you needed to have a special indulge to celebrate it?
Now, let's look at what Paul VI actually said
in his official promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae on April 3rd, 1969, quote,
The Roman Missal promulgated,
in 1570, by our predecessor, St. Pius V,
by decree of the Council of Trent,
has been received by all as one of the numerous and admirable fruits
which the Holy Council has spread throughout the entire Church of Christ.
The formulas of the Roman Missal ought to be revised and enriched.
The beginning of this renewal was the work of our predecessor,
the St. Pius XII,
in the restoration of the Paschal Vigil and of the Holy Week Rite,
which,
formed the first stage of updating the Roman Missal for the present-day mentality, unquote.
That's from paragraphs 1 and 2 in the supposed Apostolic Constitution,
Missale Romanum.
So, here Paul VI is indicating that what he is about to institute is not,
at least so goes his claim,
a new, separate rite of mass,
but rather an updating or revision of the Roman Missal of St. Pius V.
There is no indication,
here,
that he is creating a new rite,
which is simply to be used alongside the old one,
which would then allow one to claim that the old rite had never been repealed or replaced,
which is what Benedict XVI and Chris Ferreira maintain today.
Moreover,
consider Ratzinger's contention about the traditional rite never having been abrogated
in light of what Paul VI says concerning Pope Pius XII's reforms.
Are we then to understand,
according to Ferreira and Benedict XVI,
that likewise Pius XII also never abrogated the previous Holy Week rites?
The idea is laughable.
It is clear that when Pius XII made the changes to the Holy Week rites,
the rites in use before then were considered superseded.
They were abrogated.
Lastly, we can simply take a look at the words of the modernist Unholy See itself.
On the issue of whether or not the new Mass was obligatory and the old Mass forbidden.
For example,
on October 20th, 1969,
the so-called Sacred Congregation of Divine Worship
issued an instruction entitled
Constituzione Apostolica,
in which it legislated,
quote,
the individual conferences of bishops are to appoint a date
on which use of the new order of Mass will become obligatory.
That date is called the New Order of Mass.
That date is not to be later than November 28th, 1971.
Unquote.
Then, on June 14th, 1971,
the same congregation issued the notification
Instruzione de Constituzione,
in which it stated, quote,
From the date on which the translated texts become obligatory
for celebrations in the vernacular,
only the revised form of the Mass
and the liturgy of the hours will be allowed,
even for those
who continue to use Latin.
Continued use in whole or in part
of the Roman Missal in the 1962 typical edition
is allowed with the consent of the ordinary,
that's the local bishop,
and only in celebrations without a congregation,
for all those who,
because of their advanced years or illness,
find serious difficulties in using the new order of Mass,
in the Roman Missal.
Unquote.
And finally,
in his consistorial address of May 24th, 1976,
Paul VI himself said, quote,
Use of the new order of Mass
is in no way left up to the choice of priests or people.
The instruction of June 14th, 1971
provided that celebration of Mass,
according to the former rite,
would be permitted by faculty from the ordination,
only for aged or sick priests
offering the sacrifice without a congregation.
The new order of Mass was promulgated,
get this,
in place of the old,
after careful deliberation
and to carry out the directives of Vatican Council too.
Unquote.
That is what Paul VI,
then his modernist henchman,
legislated and decreed.
And when Chris Ferreira claims
that the new Mass was never allowed,
never obligatory,
and that it was instituted
alongside the traditional Roman rite,
he is simply misleading his readers.
What I've just quoted
all appeared in the Acts of the Apostolic See,
the Acta Apostolici Sedis.
And you can find English translations,
the ones I just quoted from,
in the book Documents on the Liturgy,
1963-1979,
published by the Liturgical Press in 1982.
So, folks,
it's time to stop reading this propaganda
from Ferreira and company.
Because that's all it is, propaganda.
Ferreira has the tail wagging the dog.
He starts with a desired conclusion
and then cobbles together the necessary premises
that he thinks lead to this conclusion.
The problem is that the only way
he can get those premises together
is by being selective and misleading
in the presentation of the relevant data
and we've seen that in the book Documents on the Liturgy.
We've just seen that here.
And you can see it at greater length
in the 2015 revised edition of his book
The Great Facade,
where he uses a number of phony arguments,
including the anecdote on page 311
that Paul VI privately told
Father Jean-Marie Charles Roux
that he never forbade the traditional mass
and offered the new mass only as an alternative.
And there you can see the baloney
you get from spin doctor Ferreira.
Official Vatican documents
published in the Acts of the Apostolic See
and a public address by the Pope himself
that say that the new mass is obligatory
and has replaced the old
must be ignored
because they are not sufficiently authoritative.
But when a simple priest
publishes a story
not independently verified by anyone,
by the way,
that the Pope told him
that he had never forbidden the old mass,
then that is binding on everybody's conscience
and proves that the new mass is not authoritative.
And that proves Mr. Ferreira's case.
Folks, this is simply disgraceful.
This is a very silly double standard.
And you've got to always remember
that what we're talking about here,
this is very serious business.
We're dealing with things
that affect people's souls
and therefore their eternal salvation.
And so the last thing we need
is some intellectual shyster
making phony arguments.
So, I'm sorry,
I really don't have patience
for this garbage anymore.
In other news,
I'm going to have to be quick here
because otherwise this will no longer qualify
as an express podcast, right?
In other news,
Louis Varecchio has some critical words
for the post-Gruner Fatima Center.
In his post,
meet the Cardinal Prince
of the new Fatima Center
at akacatholic.com.
Varecchio writes today,
quote,
In spite of any good intentions
on the part of individual people,
the Fatima Center has lost its way.
Rather than remaining steadfast
in the mission of defending
the message of Fatima
from compromise and corruption,
the new Fatima Center
has chosen to engage in spin,
accentuating what may seem
to be the positive or true
while deliberately overlooking
that which is clearly negative
or false, unquote.
In particular,
Varecchio cites two examples.
The painting of former U.S. President
Ronald Reagan as a disciple of Fatima
and the uncritical praise
being heaped upon Cardinal
Raymond Burke,
both of which, by the way,
was recently done for the Fatima Center
by Christopher Ferreira.
Is a pattern emerging yet?
And lastly,
today at stumblingblock.org,
Frank Walker of Canon 212,
asks what religion
are these Francis bishops?
Well, Mr. Walker,
what do you think?
Here, I'll give you a hint.
They're the same religion as Francis.
Okay?
And I'd say we'll just leave it at that.
Tradcast Express is a production
of Novos Ordo Watch.
Check us out at tradcast.org.
And if you like what we're doing,
please consider making
a tax-deductible contribution
at Novos Ordo Watch.
NovosOrdoWatch.org
slash donate.