What People Are Commenting
Validity of the New Mass,
Jesuits & Homosexuality
Dear Tradition in Action,
Thank you very much indeed for publishing Stephen Hand's apology to Profs. Atila Sinke Guimarães and Marian T. Horvat. I hope that he has also dropped his anti-Society of St. Pius X website and that he shall start a new one that is occassionally critical of the SSPX.
I also hope that with Hand's apology, Richard Salbato of Unity Publishing shall follow suit before it is too late for him.
Yours in Christ,
J.C.D. from the Philippines
New Mass Is Protestant
Thank God for you. I visit your site every day.
Regarding Dr. Horvat comments on the validity of the mass: For 30+ years I attended it and always knew that something wasn't right. The grace of God finally got through to me and now I attend only the Traditional Mass, the only perfect thing on earth. I refuse to attend the Novus Ordo, whether it's valid or not, which in my opinion it isn't. I firmly believe that it is greatly displeasing to Our Lord, having been thoroughly protestantized. I feel quite badly for the many good people who attend this service but believe they have no other choice.
Do Not Go to a New Mass
Thank you again for your excellent work in defending the Traditional Catholic Faith.
I noticed that a reader recently asked whether Our Lady of Good Success ever mentioned the New Mass and discussed its validity. Your reader also asked Dr. Horvat's opinion on whether the New Mass is valid.
Dr. Horvat's response was excellent and her conclusions seemed quite reasonable and prudent. One thing, however, your reader may want to consider is that validity is not the only issue in determining whether one can assist at a Mass. For example, the Orthodox schismatic churches apparently celebrate valid Masses, but Catholics have generally been forbidden from partaking of them because they are divorced from Catholic unity. The same goes for the Masses of public heretics and, of course, Black Masses, which are valid strictly speaking.
As Dr. Horvat mentions, the New Mass "has the worst possible spirit." This is very true and one might even say that the spirit of the New Mass is schismatic and anti-Catholic in its man-centered orientation. One must also consider the many other issues, such as the bold altering of our Lord's very own words 'for many' in the form of Consecration to the phrase 'for all,' which is specifically rejected by the Catechism of the Council of Trent.
Also, the traditional Offertory language has been supplanted by a Cain-like Jewish meal blessing. According to St. Alphonsus, the offering of the victim is one of the five essential aspects of any acceptable sacrifice to God. (See A. Liguori, The Holy Eucharist, Redemptorist Fathers 1934, pp. 18-20). These are just a few of the many problems with the New Mass that make it very dangerous to a Catholic, regardless of validity. Indeed, the evident absence of grace in the Novus Ordo is due in large part, it seems, to the many bad fruits of the New Mass. Father Somerville has written some excellent articles on the dangers of the New Mass that your reader may benefit from reviewing.
Lastly, your reader chooses to assist at the Novus Ordo because there is no Traditional Mass nearby. We should recall that Archbishop Lefebvre, a very sensible man, always said that it is better to assist at the true Traditional Mass occasionally than frequently at the New Mass. Therefore, he prudently indicated that when a Traditional Mass is not available, one should remain home and pray the prayers of the Traditional Mass and say the Rosary rather than go to the New Mass and endanger one's faith.
These are certainly difficult times and this is not the place for a detailed discussion about the dangers of the New Mass, but what seems clear is that the New Mass, based on its many bad fruits, is very displeasing to God and Catholics should avoid it. These are just some thoughts I considered passing on.
In Jesus, Mary and Joseph,
Blasphemy to Our Lady
I'd like to know if you would allow me to translate to Portuguese the article about the blasphemous Gaultier's collection. Of course the article will have a link to your web site.
I have a blog that denounces the enemies of the church all around the world and I think this kind of things must be shown.
If you allow me, please answer and if you want to see my blog (in Portuguese), the address is here
With my best regards,
L.C. from Brazil
We grant you permission to translate the requested article, with pleasure, as long as due credit is given to the sources - the author and our website. We are assuming that this reproduction is intended for a non-profit use.
TIA correspondence desk
Chantecler and the Fox
We have a small newsletter that often carries stories of interest to home-schooling parents. May I have your and the author's permission to publish The Chantecler and the Fox in our next edition? Of course, I will provide reference to its source and the author's name.
Yes, we support your cause and grant the requested permission, as long as it is a non-profit newsletter.
TIA correspondence desk
Thank you, Ellyn, for your lovely article about St. Philomena. N.B. that Pope Paul's much-to-be-regretted removal of St. Philomena from the Universal Calendar was not an official withdrawal of her status as a canonized saint (although it certainly gave that impression): her Feast Day is still valid.
Here in Ireland, the former Land of Saints and Scholars, there are on average three Saints assigned to every single day. The very idea of a universal calendar of saints is actually very recent; it originated only from Pope St Pius X. Before that, every Diocese & every Religious Order had its own calendar. So a selection had to be made. Also, we may thank His Holiness Pope Benedict for re-affirming that the 1962 Missal was never abrogated. It remains in valid use alongside the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul VI.
This entails not simply the words of the Mass, but the whole liturgical system, including the calendar of saints. My daughters, Deo Gratias, have a lively devotion to St. Philomena. We join your prayers of thanksgiving for the safe return of your beloved son.
In JMJ & P
Protest against the L.A. Diocesan Newspaper
I'm forwarding you a response I submitted to The Tidings [Los Angeles Archdiocesan paper] for featuring pro-Hillary Clinton actress, America Ferrara, in a favorable light. I don't have a lot of time to explain since I've got to go to work this morning, so go ahead and read what I wrote and go to The Tidings website for the original article, if you're interested.
As always, it is a true honor to be writing you. God bless!
Instaurare Omnia in Christo,
To The Tidings
Dear Editor of The Tidings,
The prominent cover-page featuring "Ugly Betty" actress, America Ferrara, in the February 1, 2008 issue of The Tidings is an open assault on Catholicism and a dangerous example you set for our Catholic youth. This is the same America Ferrara who passionately supports presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who, in turn, has shamelessly vowed to appoint pro-choice judges and strongly advocate for gay rights - including but not limited to same-sex marriages. Recall, Mrs. Clinton also advocated for a hate crimes bill that would have even criminalized religious institutions from speaking out against homosexuality.
Now, for The Tidings to knowingly and gleefully present (and thereby endorse) an individual who embraces the blatantly anti-Catholic ideologies of Mrs. Clinton as somehow a "role model" and an "inspiration" to Catholic youth is, in the very least, HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND SINFUL. Is it not enough that the pro-abortion advocates rally ever so loudly with each passing day at our doorsteps to deny the unborn their right to life?
Must you, a supposedly "Catholic" paper, now offer up our Catholic youth to the wolves?
Instaurare Omnia in Christo,
234 S. Figueroa St., Apt. 436
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Jesuits and Homosexuality
In your recent article on the General Council of the Society of Jesus, at which a new superior general was elected, you mention their policies regarding Communism and Buddhism/Hinduism, but not regarding sexual perversion.
From what I have seen, the Jesuits have been pursuing a policy designed to encourage homosexuality and other sexual perversions in their members and the people influenced by them. One aspect of this is to subject young people to "diversity training."
Is there any obvious connection between this policy and the past administrations of Fathers Arrupe and Kolvenbach? And is there any expectation of how it will be affected by the recent election of Father Nicolás?
The Editor responds:
The topic of homosexuality was not mentioned in that article for three reasons:
1. Because in his first sermon Fr. Nicolás did not give any hint about it.
2. Since this vice unfortunately has contaminated the entire high and low secular clergy as well as all the religious orders and congregations, its dissemination can hardly be attributed mainly to the Jesuits.
3. During the generalship of Fr. Arrupe, perhaps the principle scandal regarding homosexuality was the McNeill case, which took place in the U.S. Indeed, with the book The Catholic Church and the Homosexual, Fr. John McNeill, SJ, became the leading theologian of the homosexuals and one of their important promoters. After an appearance of reluctance, Fr. Arrupe ordered the American Provincial to give permission for the book to be published, which was done in 1976. Neither during the term of Fr. Arrupe nor during the period in which the Society of Jesus was controlled by a Papal Delegate (1981-1983) did Fr. McNeil suffer any serious restriction for his open and constant promotion of this vice against nature. In 1986, Fr. Kolvenbach changed this general orientation and offered Fr. McNeil the option to either stop promoting homosexuality or leave the Order, which he did. So, Kolvenbach seemed less complacent than Arrupe. You may read about the entire McNeill case in my book Vatican II, Homosexuality & Pedophilia (Los Angeles: TIA, 2004, pp. 102-107).
In 2005, Fr. Thomas Reese, SJ, previous editor of America magazine, also received a sanction. In several issues of that magazine he had defended, among other things, homosexual priests and taken a general supportive line regarding homosexuality. He was released from his post pressured by the Vatican, with the due agreement of Fr. Kolvenbach. It is true that he enjoyed the tacit endorsement of Fr. Kolvenbach up to that date, and that most probably the General of the Jesuits would not have acted as he did if the principal opponent of Reese, Card. Ratzinger, had not been elected Pope the month before.
So, it is not easy to prove that a general rule regarding homosexuality was followed by Arrupe and Kolvenbach. This is another reason why the issue was not addressed in that article.
If you or any of our readers is aware of a specific document by Fr. Arrupe or Fr. Kolvenbach supporting homosexuality, I would be grateful to be informed of it.
I hope this answers your question.
Posted February 12, 2008
The opinions expressed in this section - What People Are Commenting -
do not necessarily express those of TIA
Related Topics of Interest
Desacrificing the Mass
The New Mass: A flavor of Protestantism
The Bugnini Revolution and the Reform of the Reform
Blasphemy in the Spring 2007 fashion Collection by Gaultier
The Progressivist Orientation of Pope Ratzinger
Jesuit Performs Hindu Dance
Jesuit University Hosts Drag Show
Comments | Questions |
Objections | Home |
Books | CDs |
Search | Contact Us |
Tradition in Action, Inc. All Rights Reserved