FORMAL AND INFORMAL SCHISMS: WHICH IS WORSE?

Of course formal schisms are worse. The Great Schism began processes back in 1054 that have evolved in disastrous ways to this day. But most of the schismatic Churches of the East maintain until this day the main teachings and dogmas of the Church and most importantly all of the Sacraments especially Holy Orders and Apostolic Succession. 

Schism, though, in Catholic usage means rejection of the universal authority of the pope over the Church in the areas of the revealed faith and morals of the Church, as well as canonical discipline and her perennial magisterium which the pope must uphold. 

Today, we have some manifest schisms. A small group of Poor Clare nuns in Spain are in schism. A few groups in America who have ordained women are in schism. The former bishop of Lincoln, Nebraska a few years back excommunicated a few liberal groups in his diocese. I don’t think those excommunications have been lifted.

And now we have Archbishop Viganò, who in fact is the religious “Joe Biden” being used as a puppet by those who are the power behind the man. Vigano, like President Biden, is suffering from mental issues of age or worse but being used by the sane or cognitive for their own purposes. 

But the greater silent schism comprise a massive majority in the Church. They are those who have disengaged from the Church but not in a formal renouncement. Added to them are those who have joined other sects of the Protestant tradition, especially the growing non-denominational movement. A smaller group, perhaps, are those who have joined other religions, like Judaism, Islam, Buddhists and the like.

A larger group and growing exponentially are those who claim no religion although they like to say they are spiritual. Many call them the “nones.”

This silent schism comprises about 70% to 90% percent of baptized Catholics. The remaining 5% to 30% of Catholics who practice their faith by going to Mass regularly, of them, many do not accept important doctrines and moral teachings of the Church. They see no problem with abortion, birth control, LGBTQF+++ ideologies, the ordination of women or so-called “non-binary” people. 

These Catholics aren’t organized under any schismatic banner; it’s more a function of the fierce individualism that we are experiencing in our Church today.

What to do? What to do? Oh! What are we to do?

JUDEO-CHRISTIAN SENTIMENT EXPRESSED IN A SECULAR WAY

 Just saying. How much more should Catholics observe this? To whom much is given, much is expected on my most humble blog!

ON THE VERY DAY THAT CARDINAL O’MALLEY ASKS THAT THE VATICAN NOT USE RUPNICK’S ART IN VARIOUS PUBLICATIONS, VATICAN NEWS SNUBS ITS NOSE AT THE CARDINAL—IS THIS NOW OPEN WARFARE BETWEEN A CARDINAL OF THE CHURCH AND A LAYMAN WHO IS A HIRED HAND?

 I don’t think we should minimize this disgrace and contempt for Cardinal O”Malley, but it is emblematic of the Vatican for the past 13 years. 

Vatican News, this very day, June 28th used this artistic rendering of St. Ireneous for a Vatican News Story.

Here’s the art work of Rupnick:

You can read the snub HERE.

THIS IS AN EXCELLENT EDITORIAL WITHOUT ACTING LIKE A LOOSE SCREW…

 This is a very good opinion piece on what is happening in the Vatican as it concerns Catholics who prefer to worship in the pre-Vatican II, now post Vatican II, rites of the Church. It is published by Rorate Caeli:

The Game: What Now For the Traditional Mass Under Francis? - Op-Ed 

 Guest Op-Ed by Kevin Tierney

During the pontificate of Pope Francis, we have seen a careful game being played by the Vatican and their allies when it comes to dealing with Catholics drawn to the Traditional Latin Mass.  When they attempt to downplay traditionalists, they are an irrelevant sect, with numbers so insignificant none should take them seriously.  After this approach, they then flip, treating traditionalists as a threat to the unity of the Church, a threat so severe the ordinary rights of clerics and the faithful must be curtailed.  

Read more »

I draw your attention to the longer article that is linked above where Andrea Grillo states that it is a good thing that we have fewer seminarians, and thus by logic, fewer priests, so that we can have a non-clerical Church led by the laity and worship led by the laity. 

As we all know, the current pontificate who vociferously condemns backward looking Catholics, is the epitome of backwardness to the 1970’s! I was there in a liberal seminary in the 1970’s, so I know what I am writing. In fact everything the current pontificate condemns, the current pontificate is an emblem. 

When I was in the major seminary from 1976 to 1980, there were theologians and bishops suggesting that a priest was not necessary for the Sunday Eucharist as it was called back then. Any Catholic, properly trained and with charisms or skills, could lead the Eucharist, confect the meal and proclaim the homily. 

Thus, fewer priests is an infallible sign of the Holy Spirit’s freshness for the Church of tomorrow led by laity who could confect the Eucharistic meal.

And there was no need for a uniform liturgy, just a loose structure but everything ad libbed from the heart as a sign of the freshness of the Holy Spirit.

Neo-Gnosticism has returned to the Vatican as it concerns blasphemy of the Holy Spirit when anyone from the pope to his henchmen say that such and such is definitely the work of the Holy Spirit who surprises us with heterodoxy. 

A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER—A PRIEST’S OPINION PIECE

The presidential debate confirmed for the country what the country already knows. President Biden is suffering from progressive dementia.  He has been suffering with this organic disease related to age for some time. He is not fit for office due to his declining cognitive abilities. 

This poses a threat to the security of the world in general and the United States in particular.

But deeper questions need to be asked. Who is the puppet master? Who is in charge of the country behind the scenes. Most do not believe it is the Vice President, VP Harris. She’s simply over her head and incompetent for the position she holds. 

It could be Dr. Jill Biden. 

More than likely it is President Obama. 

Who knows, but someone is the puppet master as President Biden is mentally incompetent sad to say and can’t be the one who is in charge. It’s not plausible. Having someone behind the scenes leading the USA as a non-elected official is a clear and present danger to American democracy. 

But let’s talk about the religious aspect of the second “Catholic” president of the USA. The impotence of the Vatican or the Cardinal of Washington, DC or the Bishop of Wilmington, Delaware to place a canonical censure or public excommunication against President Biden is breathtaking as it concerns simply two moral issues. 

They are his promotion of abortion and the LGBTQF+++ ideologies and desiring to codify these in law. I don’t know if the puppet master has manipulated President Biden to abdicate Catholic moral principles in favor of demonic political ideologies, but he has done it and no one who has religious authority over President Biden in the Catholic Church from the pope to his two bishops have done anything to stop it for the sake of President Biden’s salvation and his immortal soul.

A dereliction of duty by the Church’s hierarchy concerning President Biden’s eternal salvation is breathtaking. But not only President Biden’s personal salvation is at stake but all those who have drunk the Democratic Party’s immoral ideologies, to include scores of Catholics, have their salvation at risk too and the bishops of the Church, not all, but those who count, standby as the world’s salvation is on fire!

CARDINAL O’MALLEY ONCE AGAIN TO THE RESCUE TO DEMAND THAT THE VATICAN WAKE UP AND NOT BE TONE DEAF

Cardinal O’Malley once again is calling out the Vatican for its tone deafness as it concerns not judging serial abusers. 

This time Cardinal O’Malley indirectly called out the director of Vatican Communications about his unbelievably rigid, silly and tone deaf discussion of the use of  Rupnick’s art in Vatican Communications, the last time on June 9th and the Solemnity of the Most Sacred Heart.

This is what the good Cardinal said:

"We must avoid sending a message that the Holy See is oblivious to the psychological distress that so many are suffering," read the letter sent by Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston to the heads of Vatican dicasteries on June 26. 

"Pastoral prudence would prevent displaying artwork in a way that could imply either exoneration or a subtle defense" of alleged abuse perpetrators "or indicate indifference to the pain and suffering of so many victims of abuse," the letter stated.

Read the full article from the National Catholic Reporter HERE.

Please recall that Cardinal O’Malley wrote a similar letter about Pope Francis’ support of a bishop he appointed in Peru who was a serial abuser and continued to defend him until the pope’s absolutely disastrous visit to Chile.

WHAT A TRAGIC ECCLESIAL FIGURE—EVEN THE SSPX DISAVOWS HIM!

Traditionalist SSPX group distances itself from Viganò, archbishop accused of schism

Money byte: 

The SSPX notes that Viganò in his responses to the accusations defends himself “in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate; rejecting neo-modernist errors; and asserting his case compares to that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, also summoned in his time to the Palace of the former Holy Office.”

Viganò in a June 20 post on Exsurge Domine recalled how 50 years ago, Lefebvre was also summoned to the Vatican to answer to allegations of schism.

“His defense is mine; his words are mine; and his arguments are mine – arguments before which the Roman authorities could not condemn him for heresy, having to wait instead for him to consecrate bishops so as to have the pretext of declaring him schismatic and then revoking his excommunication when he was already dead,” he said.

Now, “the scheme is repeated even after half a century has demonstrated Archbishop Lefebvre’s prophetic choice,” Viganò said.

The SSPX in their statement said there is one point which “significantly differentiates” Viganò from Lefebvre, and this difference is that “Archbishop Viganò makes a clear declaration of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not pope.”

• 
  
• 
  
  

WHAT THE —- ? FATHER NEIL XAVIER O’DONOHUE LEAP OF LOGIC CONDEMNS THE VERY LITURGY HE SEES AS THE UNIQUE EXPRESSION OF THE ROMAN RITE AND THAT IS THE “SENSUS FIDELIUM!”

Father Neil Xavier O’Donoghue has an interesting opinion piece at Praytell which you can read HERE.  He speaks of other Rites in the Latin/Western Rite that are allowed to remain, but no one attends. He speaks of two specifically, the Braga Rite in Portugal and another rite in Toledo, Spain. 

This is a portion of what he writes at the end of his hit piece:

This reminded me of a visit to Toledo a few years ago. There there exists a true liturgical rite, that is venerable and has a fully developed Missal renewed after the Council. Yet when I attended the Mozarabic Chapel in the Cathedral of Toledo, I was disappointed to see that apart from a few priests who served as the Cathedral Canons (whose job it is to attend and keep the rite “alive”), the handful of people attending the Mass celebrated in the Mozarabic Rite was made up exclusively of American liturgical tourists and that no local person was in attendance.  

One part of me laments the lack of historical continuity and the loss of ancient liturgical uses and rites. Yet another rejoices in this validation of the universal Roman Rite.  People have voted with their feet and have found the current Missal to be more life-giving than the various other possibilities. Could this be a manifestation of the sensus fidelium confirming what Pope Francis’ affirmation in Traditionis Custodes:

The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.

While he laments that these rites are neglected by clergy and laity, he sees that neglect as the Sensus Fidelium that the older rites are rejected and thus supports the absurd assertion of TC that the current reformed liturgy of Paul VI is the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. It is to laugh of course!

But using Father O’Donohue’s logic, he condemns the Mass of Paul VI in the same way, but he does so unwittingly! 

In many places in Europe today, if 5% of Catholics attend the Mass of Paul VI, that is considered a success! In this country, the USA, many places in the northeast are seeing about 5% of people attending the Mass of Paul VI.

In the American south, attendance is a bit higher, with upwards to 20% of Catholics attending the Mass of Paul VI on Sundays. 

Compare that to Mass attendance in the USA around 1965 or so, in this country about 90% of Catholics were attending the normal Sunday Mass at that time, what is now called the TLM! I have no idea how high it was in Europe; I suspect not as high as the USA, but certainly more than 5% of the Catholics there.

Thus according to Fr. O”Donohue, the sensus fidelium has spoken and the Mass of Paul VI should not be the unique expression of the Roman Rite, but something else more akin to the TLM!

IMPLIED IN THIS PILLAR ARTICLE IS THAT VATICAN LITURGICAL ELITISTS LACK COMMON SENSE AND DECENCY!

 Also implied in this Pillar article is the fear, the dread, the existential threat, that a new pope is posing to Vatican Liturgical Elitists, who fear, and with good reason, that the new pope will cancel the liturgical agenda of Pope Francis and his henchmen just as Pope Francis canceled Pope Benedict’s liturgical vision and legislation!

Press title for superb common sense article, something lacking in the Vatican!

Is there a secret plan to suppress the TLM — again?

And if more restrictions are coming, what could they hope to achieve?

ED. CONDON

POST VATICAN II NARCISSISTIC HUBRIS OF A DISCREDITED ARCHBISHOP IN MILWAUKEE TO BE RECTIFIED? WE CAN ONLY PRAY!

 I saw this commentary on Milwaukee’s cathedral on Facebook. If true, good news!

Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Widely considered the most infamous case of wreckovation, the Cathedral had survived a fire, the wild liturgical renewal of the 1970s, and had entered the new millennium. Not only was the renovation not asked for but numerous historical societies, the Vatican, and all of the parishioners got involved to stop this horror from taking place, sadly to no avail. Thankfully there are currently discussions to restore the Cathedral back to it's appearance before the early 2000s.

SLIGHT OF EYE FUN…

 Does it work for you and blow your mind?

MEETING WITH POPE FRANCIS INDICATES THAT THE TLM IS HERE TO STAY!

 

Institute of Christ the King’s Superior received by Pope in Audience today (Updated with communiqué: good news)

NO MATTER WHAT RITE, STYLE OR MANNER OF CELEBRATING THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS, THE MASS IS THE MASS AND CHRIST THE RISEN LORD IS MADE PRESENT/MANIFEST AS IN A NEW EPIPHANY! UNFORTUNATELY, LITURGICAL ELITISTS IN THE VATICAN DON’T GET IT!

 On Sunday I celebrated the 7 AM Modern Mass at St. Gregory the Great—all spoken, no music, full church and out in 40 minutes! It’s called the “Golfer’s Mass!” Then I went to Savannah for the 1 PM Traditional Latin Mass, all sung, all the bells and smells and it took one hour and 10 minutes. But time flies in eternity!

These are the photos of the TLM at Sacred Heart Church in Savannah:

TONE DEAFNESS ANYONE?

 

I have to say that I am conflicted about destroying artwork because the artist is or was a depraved serial sex fiend. 

But, what the Vatican press official said about Rupnick and his art really shows the tone deafness of so many in the Vatican and elsewhere. The Rupnick affair, along with the McCarrick affair and other affairs of abuse of the most depraved kind by clerics sworn to chaste celibacy seem to get a pass, but anyone wanting the liberal celebration of the Ancient Use of the Latin Rite are demonized as cultists and even worse and the Vatican tries to stamp that out while praising Jesuit Father James Martin. It truly is the upside down, inside out Church, no?

Press the title for the opinion piece:

Ruffini’s disastrous Friday points to wider, deeper problems in the Vatican

Friday was a very bad day for Dr. Paolo Ruffini, Prefect of the Dicastery for Communication, but Ruffini ought not to be the sole or even the primary focus of attention.

BOMBSHELL!

 

Archbishop Gänswein appointed Apostolic Nuncio to Baltic States

Pope Francis appoints Archbishop Georg Gänswein as Apostolic Nuncio to Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.

By Vatican News

A statement on Monday released by the Holy See Press Office said Pope Francis has appointed Archbishop Georg Gänswein, Titular Archbishop of Urbisaglia, and Prefect Emeritus of the Papal Household, as Apostolic Nuncio to Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia.

Archbishop Gänswein, who is 67, served as Pope Benedict XVI’s private secretary during his entire pontificate and retirement.

In December 2012, Pope Benedict XVI also appointed him Prefect of the Pontifical Household. He was ordained as archbishop in January 2013.

He continued to hold both positions after Benedict resigned from the papacy about seven weeks later, in February 2013. For about seven years, Archbishop Gänswein served both Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict.

Until last year, the Apostolic Nuncio in the three Baltic countries was Archbishop Petar Rajič, a Canadian of Bosnian-Croatian origin, who was appointed by the Holy Father, on March 11, as the Nuncio to Italy and San Marino. Consequently, the Apostolic See has remained vacant until now.

A LAYMAN SAYS THAT THE POPE HAS NO AUTHORITY TO SUPPRESS THE TRADITIONAL FORM OF THE PRE-VATICAN II LITURGICAL TRADITION OF THE CHURCH—I AM NOT SURE THAT I AGREE, BUT WHO AM I TO JUDGE?

This is the last part of a much too long article I read in Crisis Magazine online. It is written by Aaron Seng. You can read to full, too long article HERE. 

This is the last part of Aaron Seng’s much too long article:

Is the pope obliged to faithfully maintain the Church’s traditional liturgical rites?

Yes. The early medieval Papal Oath affirms: “I promise to keep inviolate the discipline and the liturgy of the Church as I have found them and as they were transmitted by my holy Predecessors,” and the Papal Oath decreed by the Council of Constance echoes: “I will follow and observe in every way the rite handed down of the ecclesiastical sacraments of the Catholic Church.”15

Can a pope abrogate a liturgical rite of immemorial custom in the Church?

No. Just as a pope cannot forbid or abrogate the Apostles’ Creed or Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed or substitute a new formula for them, neither can he abrogate traditional, millennium-old rites of Mass and the sacraments or forbid their use. This applies as much to Eastern as to Western rites.16

Could the traditional Roman Rite ever be legitimately forbidden for the entire Church?

No. It rests upon divine, apostolic, and ancient pontifical usage, and bears the canonical force of immemorial custom; it can never be abrogated or forbidden.17

Must we comply with the prohibition of traditional Catholic liturgical rites?

No. “What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.” The rites of venerable antiquity form a sacred and constitutive part of the common patrimony of the Church, and not even the highest ecclesiastical authority has power to proscribe them.18

Is any act of disobedience to a command of the pope by itself schismatic?

No. One is not schismatic if he resists a pope or refuses to obey a particular teaching or command of his that is manifestly contrary to natural or divine law, or that would harm or undermine the integrity of the Catholic Faith or the sacredness of the liturgy. In such cases, disobedience and resistance to the pope is permissible and sometimes obligatory.19

For decades, Catholic and non-Catholics20 alike have been confused by a strange and imposed sense of “forbidding” made to surround the traditional Roman Rite—the same rite once universally treasured as most holy, most praiseworthy, most worthy of devotion; the love of countless saints and mystics, “the most beautiful thing this side of Heaven.”21

Thankfully, if a Catholic should ever need to defend his sacred heritage from misguided attempts to suppress it in the future, he now has a reliable Catholic catechism to reference for support.

My astute commentary: I do think that the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church has no authority to change defined doctrine and dogmas nor does an Ecumenical Council in union with the pope. As St. Pope John Paul II taught in a definitive way by saying the pope has no authority to ordain women as men only are validly ordained to Sacred Orders and is to be definitively held as a part of the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church, so too, no pope can change the Apostles Creed. No Pope can change the Nicene Creed. Future creeds build upon each creed but no creed is ever suppressed or forbidden to be prayed if the Church has approved it in Council

The same would be true of the form of the Liturgy of the Council of Trent. Even at Trent, it was declared that certain forms of the liturgy prior to that Council with a certain number of years behind it could not be suppressed. 

Thus I do tend to believe that the previous liturgy of the Church which in fact predates even the Council of Trent, which simply codified it and made it universal for the Latin Rite, cannot be suppressed. 

One might argue though, that the intent of the Liturgy of the Church, meaning its doctrine and dogmas were not changed in the new form after Vatican II, just the form and canonical order were changed and new prayers added.

I am not calling into question Vatican II’s reforms, but can a pope declare the liturgical tradition before the Second Vatican Council or any council no longer allowed? I would tend to believe that if one says yes, then any pope could suppress the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed and replace it with others more developed or less developed. 

A LOVELY EPISCOPAL ORDINATION FOR THE ORDINARIATE IN LONDON, CARDINAL FERNANDEZ CELEBRANT

 

YOUNG PRIESTS AND LAITY WERE THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE PROLIFERATION OF THE TLM DURING THE GLORIOUS PERIOD OF SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM!

POPE FRANCIS CELEBRATING MASS AD ORIENTEM IN THE SISTINE CHAPEL:

WHY ARE NOT THEY THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE RE-ENCHANTMENT OF THE MODERN OR NOVUS ORDO OF THE MASS?????

 I don’t know if the final solution for the TLM will take place under this papacy or not. But let’s say they succeed in suppressing the TLM altogether.

What then?

Young priests and laity must start reenchanting the modern Mass.

Chant the propers in Latin as well as the parts of the Mass.

Chant the Mass ad orientem or if the bishop says no to that, do so with the Benedictine altar arrangement and the choreography  of the TLM especially for servers. 

Allow for kneeling for Holy Communion.

Prior to Summorum Pontificum, this was the goal, to reenchant the Modern Mass.

We need to do so today more than ever!

TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I WONDERED WHY THE VATICAN WAITED SO LONG!

 

I am not psychiatirst, but I have felt that the Archbishop is suffering from some kind of pathology of a religious, moral, spiritual and mental kind or it is dementia and he’s being used by schismatic forces or the devil. But who am I to judge. I don’t fault the Vatican or the pope in this trial:

FROM VATICAN NEWS!

Vigano announces on X he is being tried for schism

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former Apostollic Nuncio to the United States, publishes a copy of a decree summoning him to appear before the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith to answer charges of schism. 

Vatican News

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former apostolic nuncio to the United States, has posted on his “X” account a communication from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith summoning him to Rome to face an “extrajudicial penal process” (also known as an “administrative process”) for the canonical crime of schism.

According to the social account, which reproduces a copy of a decree attributed to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, Viganò was to appear Thursday afternoon (or appoint his own defense counsel) at 3:30 p.m. to “take notice of the accusations and evidence concerning the crime of schism of which he has been accused (public statements which result in a denial of the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church; denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; a rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council).” The document warns that should he fail to appear, or to provide a written defense submitted by June 28, the archbishop “will be judged in his absence.”

In September 2018, Arcbhishop Viganò in September 2018 penned a clamorous letter concerning the case of then-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, in which he called for Pope Francis’ resignation. The McCarrick affair, which was fully clarified by the Holy See with the publication of a detailed report in November 2020 that comprehensively refutes the Archbishop, is not the subject of the document published in the X account. Rather, according to Archbishop Viganò himself, the former apostolic nuncio is accused of refusing to recognize the legitimacy of the current Pontiff and that of the last Council. The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has not commented in any way on the announcement posted on social media.

In posting the decree, the social profile connected with Archbishop Viganò attributes the following to the former nuncio: “I consider the accusations against me an honor,” and calls the Second Vatican Council an "ideological, theological, moral, and liturgical cancer,” of which “the Synodal Church” is a “metastasis.”

Commenting on the affair, Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin said, “Archbishop Viganò has taken some attitudes and some actions for which he must answer.” The Cardinal was speaking on the sidelines of a conference at the Pontifical Urbanian University, explaining that the former nuncio will be given the opportunity to defend himself.

Reflecting on his previous experience of working with Archbishop Vigano, Cardinal Parolin told journalists, “I am very sorry because I always appreciated him as a great worker, very faithful to the Holy See, someone who was, in a certain sense, also an example. When he was apostolic nuncio he did good work. 

“I don’t know what happened,” the Secretary of State concluded.

HOW DO YOU SPELL HUBRIS? READ THIS!

Andrea Grillo gave an interview to Messa in Latino  HERE and what a mess and mean-spirited man he is. He is a symbol of the terrorist liturgist who knows everything as we know academic liturgists know and that they are not to be challenged or questioned. 

What a lay clerical fool he is!

This segment of the interview captures it! I wonder what the Eastern Rites and the parallel Orthodox Churches will have to say about this man’s Latin Rite arrogance, not to mention the various Latin Rites, like the Ordinariate and Ambrosian ones!

Professor Grillo: The first question contains numerous inaccuracies that undermine the very meaning of the question. I will try to illustrate them one by one. Those you call “traditionalists faithful to Rome” are actually people who, for various reasons, are at odds with Rome, and not in a relationship of fidelity. The point of contention does not simply concern a “ritual form” but a way of understanding relations inside and outside the Church. It all begins with the misunderstanding generated (in good faith, but through a completely wrong judgement) by the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, which had introduced a “ritual parallelism” (between the Novus Ordo and Vetus Ordo) that has neither a systematic nor practical foundation: it is not theologically sound and generates greater divisions than those that were present previously. The idea of “fidelity to Rome” must be challenged: to be faithful to Rome, one must acquire a “ritual language” according to what Rome has communally established. One is not faithful if one has one foot in two shoes. Having demonstrated this contradiction, the merit of Traditionis Custodes is that it re-establishes the one “lex orandi” in force for the entire Catholic Church. If someone tells me he is faithful at the same time to the Novus Ordo and Vetus Ordo, I reply that he has not understood the meaning of tradition, within which there a legitimate and insuperable progress that is irreversible.

THE GREATEST THREAT TO SCHISM TODAY IS NOT THE MORE RADICAL ASPECTS OF TLM COMMUNITIES BUT FROM LIBERAL CATHOLICS IN GERMANY AND ELSEWHERE!

 

Some have commented here that the TLM and Pope Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum are what has fomented the greatest threat to schism in the Catholic Church. It is to laugh, of course, and completely false and a diversion from where a true schism is coming, from liberal, progressive Catholics. 

The threat of schism comes not from the SSPX or TLM Catholics, it comes from Germany, which by the way, led to the schism within Catholicism in the 1500’s. That was called the Protestant Reformation. Today elitist Germans are leading a new or neo reformation and it will have the same worldwide effects as the German Protestant Reformation had in the 1500’s. 

Fortunately, there are voices inside and outside of Germany demanding that liberal German Catholics return to the true Church. 

You can read the National Catholic Reporter (yes you read that correctly) article on the German Schism HERE. 

IS THE CURRENT VATICAN REGIME COMPLETELY TONE DEAF TO THE LITURGICAL CHAOS THEY HAVE CREATED?

From the heavy handed and completely unnecessary suppression of the TLM to demanding that the Syro-Malabar Rite celebrate their Liturgy of the Eucharist ad orientem, liturgical chaos and resentment has festered to new heights never seen even in the 1970’s!

Now the Archdiocese of Kerela refuses to implement ad orientem for their Eastern Rite Liturgy of the Eucharist risking going into schism with the Vatican. You can read the Curx story HERE.

It harkens back to the First Sunday of Advent, 1969 when Pope Paul VI suppressed the Ancient Liturgy of the Church (with minor exceptions) and demanded the entire Latin Rite embrace his newly created Modern Vernacular Mass and did so in a pre-Vatican II authoritarian way. 

While most Catholics who were hurt and made angry by the authoritarian way the new Mass was imposed,  the Vatican went ahead despite the damage to these Catholics’ Faith they caused, so much so a many Catholics disengaged from the Church altogether and thus did their children and grandchildren. 

Most of those liturgical dissenters are dead now, but their non-practicing progeny are still out there. After all, today in the USA, if a diocese gets 20% of their Catholics to Mass, that is considered a success. Prior to the Council nearly 90% of Catholics attended the Mass that the Vatican today denigrates.

Under Pope Benedict and his most Catholic and liberal policies, His Holiness knew the wisdom of allowing the two forms of the Mass to co-exist and to allow the Modern Mass to be celebrated in Latin or at least partially and he encouraged ad orientem for it as well as kneeling for Holy Communion. He did not impose any of this on bishops other than to insist that it be allowed where those who wanted it sought to have it. 

The Vatican would do well to learn again how Pope Benedict created liturgical peace as it concerns the chaos the Vatican has caused in India. Propose but do not demand that the Liturgy of the Eucharist be celebrated ad orientem. But allow the Liturgy of the Eucharist to be celebrated toward the people where this is important for clergy and laity. The Vatican should correct its virulent clericalism for the Vatican is the cause of all this disunity.  

In so many areas, the Vatican regime seems more concerned about their rights and that they be obeyed in this, that or the other even in areas where litigimate diversity can coexist. From Cardinal Roche to Cardinal Fernandez, we see clericalism at work and enabled by the present pope. Clericalism is always associated with authoritarianism which has found new life in the Vatican these past 13 years. 

We should all pray that the Vatican regime of today appreciate that people need to have faith in God and live the Faith and Morals of the Church. The TLM, facing ad orientem or the nave help different Catholics in different ways to be people of faith. Why is the Vatican being so rigid and authoritarian in things that can allow for legitimate diversity? Is it a mental illness linked to a rigid authoritarian personality which in church-speak is called clericalism?