Today is the last day of October, the month of the Holy Rosary, and marked out especially in this year 2014 for being the 800th anniversary of the heavenly gift of the Holy Rosary to St. Dominic, and through him to the whole Church.
By Fr. Daniel Couture
Why does the Blessed Mother insist so much on the daily recitation of this prayer? There is admirable divine wisdom in it. It is truly a hidden treasure. Let us first recall the exact words of Our Lady in answering St. Dominic’s prayer (words found in the 2nd Rose of St. Louis de Montfort’s Secret of the Rosary), and then make some applications.
The year was 1214; St. Dominic had already founded the Order of Preachers, later called the Dominicans, and he was immediately faced with the Albigensian heresy which was spreading especially through the south of France where St. Dominic was. Our Lady appeared to him after he had been praying seriously and doing severe penance for many days in order to know how to fight the heretics. She said to him:
Dear Dominic, do you know what weapon the Most Holy Trinity wants to use to reform the world?
St. Dominic replied:
O my Lady, you know it much better than I do, because, next to your Son, Jesus Christ, you have always been the instrument of our salvation.
Our Lady continued:
I want you to know that in this kind of warfare the ‘battering ram’ has always been the Angelic Psalter which is the corner stone of the New Testament. So, if you want to reach these hardened souls and win them to God, preach my Psalter!
Our Lady gave a means “to reform the world”. Indeed, the heretics at the time of St. Dominic were not only denying the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, but were attacking the family and the civil institutions of the state, thus undermining the spiritual and temporal orders of Christendom—this was in 1214 A.D. in France. This expression, “reform the world,” is not different from that of St. Paul “to restore all things in Christ”.
It is not, therefore, surprising to find that popes and kings have requested crusades of rosaries against all kinds of plagues threatening both Church and State—threatening ultimately the salvation of innumerable souls.
St. Dominic did indeed listen to his Queen, and thousands of heretics were converted.
The first Dominican Pope, St. Pius V, used the Rosary in the crusade against the Muslim Turks who were dangerously threatening to invade Europe. And the Rosary won again. It was October 7, 1571. Less than one hundred years later, Louis XIII of France, also heeded Our Lady in a war against the Protestants, and, in thanksgiving for the victory, he built the famous church of Our Lady of Victories, in Paris. The feast of Our Lady of Victories is on October 7th! And the list of the victories of the Rosary is long and continues until our own days. There have been a number of national victories against the ills of communism in the last 100 years (Hungary, Brazil, Austria, Philippines and others) thanks to the Holy Rosary. However, communism as a whole has not yet been defeated.
Whether it is against the Albigensians, the Protestants, the Muslims or the Communists, “in this kind of warfare, our ‘battering ram’”, the Rosary, must always be used.
The Holy Rosary is an eminently Catholic prayer. In it we find our Creed, and all the great mysteries from the Incarnation until “life everlasting.” We proclaim by it the unique prerogatives of the Immaculate Virgin, always “strong as an army in battle array”: her divine Motherhood, her Immaculate Conception, her Co-Redemption, her role as Mediatrix of all graces, her glory in Heaven.
The Rosary has been used to save the family, attacked from all sides, whether by divorce, abortion, contraception, sex education, or by what is now called “the theory of gender”. This latest insanity is presently raging in the entire western world and is aggressively promoted in the schools. This crazy theory states that we are not born men or women, we become men or women by our choice or by our environment and education!
“[We must] reach these hardened souls and win them to God,” said Our Lady. The Rosary is not just a prayer like other devotions; it is concerned with bringing souls into the fold of the only true Church to “win them to God” means to convert them to the true Church, which is exactly what the Rosary has done throughout all its history.
As we leave the month dedicated to the Holy Rosary behind us, let us make a firm resolution to continue to pray our daily Rosary, and thus rain down graces and blessings upon all members of our Holy Catholic Church, and the whole burdened and suffering world.
Catholicism Pure & Simple 
You don’t have to worry about the Albigensians any more, the Popes army killed every last one of them. That’s what they get for not praying the rosary. Thank you Mary
LikeLike
@ Bosco,
Our Blessed Mother Mary is united entirely to the Will of God. So if you have any complaints about the workings of Divine Justice you should direct them to Our Blessed Lord!
The Albigensian heresy was extremely menacing and destructive to Christianity. Besides, many cities were sacked and thousands murdered by the Albigensian heretics initially, including a Papal legate, before Pope Innocent III issued his bull against them. However, the crusade was only undertaken after all attempts to convert the Albigensians back to the Faith first through preaching and prayer had failed.
The wars taken up by the Albigensians, crusaders and the French king’s army lasted 20 years and it is true that over this long period of conflict there were an incalculable number of deaths – a tragic period of European history.
We must remember that in the Middle Ages heresy was seen as a cancerous threat to the salvation of souls. It was held to be even more dangerous than the faraway Muslim heresy, because it harmed the body of Christ from within.
LikeLike
Don’t worry Bosco, Daniel Couture isn’t in communion with the Pope and Holy Catholic Church any more than you are. He’s SSPX, which is a form of ‘High Church’ protestantism
LikeLike
Yes Tom, that is correct that Fr. Daniel Couture is a member of the SSPX. I decided to leave out the latter part of his above article that went on to include what I thought was unnecessary criticism of the Pope and Magisterium. (Besides it was off topic – the post being about the Rosary). Up to that point however, his sermon on the Holy Rosary, its history and the great graces brought to the Church through praying it, and the evocative title, “Mary’s Battering Ram”, are nothing but pure Catholic teaching.
Personally, I would not call the SSPX “High Church Protestantism” – for the SSPX hold to nothing more than everything the Catholic Church has always taught prior to Vatican II. Also, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI lifted the ban against their bishops (as I’m sure you know) and one can legitimately attend Holy Mass in the Extraordinary Form celebrated by their priests.
LikeLike
Personally, I would not call the SSPX “High Church Protestantism” – for the SSPX hold to nothing more than everything the Catholic Church has always taught prior to Vatican II.
But Vatican II involved no change in the immutable teachings of the Church. — And more importantly, Catholics don’t get to simply say “I like everything before X or Y but nothings since, so I’ll not submit to the authority of the Pope”. — The Church just doesn’t work that way!!
LikeLike
Yes, that is what the whole problem with the SSPX is all about – their refusal to accept Vatican II. But can we honestly blame them?
Although in theory VII did not change any of the Church’s “immutable teachings”, it is plain to see that numerable changes in the life of the Church did take place after the Council. Blame that on the interpretation of some of the more ambiguously worded documents, the initiative of Modernist-minded liberals within the Church, those Catholics who were caught up unknowingly with the “spirit of the world”, etc., etc., but the fact remains that everything that enriched the life of the flourishing, expanding Catholic Church prior to VII disappeared in a matter of a few years in its aftermath. Ask anyone who lived through those times,
The biggest change of all of course (and IMO its greatest mistake) was the changing of the sublime Mass of the Ages for the banal, community-focused (as opposed to God-focused) Novus Ordo Mass. Once the lex orandi had been tampered with, the lex credendi i.e. greatly weakened belief, followed suite.
Much more could be said about this, and I must go now, but I just want to conclude with saying that it is thanks to the SSPX that the fullness of Our Glorious Faith has been treasured and preserved. There are now a growing number of Catholic groups following in their footsteps, reawakening all the piety and devout practices New Church had buried in years of social justice and community-based talk! All that would have been better left to the NGO’s and local Churches’ pastoral work, rather than the hierarchy of the Church whose mission should be the preservation and the teaching of undiluted Catholic Truth.
LikeLike
Tom: Try educating your self. Your comments about the SSPX are Bone ignorant.
Kathleen makes very astute observations. Most Novus Ordo masses are a disgrace.
The NOM said piously is valid. sadly many, many are not said piously and therein lies the problem.
Hang on… maybe your just kidding to get a rise
LikeLike
Hi Geoff,
The SSPX is a schismatic group who refuse to accept the full authority of the Pope in a host of ways. — It doesn’t matter if you agree with some of their ideas or not, the problem is their rebellion, and lack of obedience. They are welcome to reconcile themselves with the Catholic Church (as are all people) by submitting to the authority of the Church. Your opinions about Vatican II or the Novus Ordo have nothing to do with it.
LikeLike
“The Albigensian heresy was extremely menacing and destructive to Christianity. Besides, many cities were sacked and thousands murdered by the Albigensian heretics initially, including a Papal legate, before Pope Innocent III issued his bull against them. However, the crusade was only undertaken after all attempts to convert the Albigensians back to the Faith first through preaching and prayer had failed.”
Let’s explain Kathleen’s comment in fewer, and somewhat less unsuccinct, words: “Albigensians didn’t agree with us Cathoics, so we killed them all.”
And we burned all their books, (if they actually had any) as usual.
Way to go, Catholics! Perfectly logical behaviour.
…What a rattling good “thread,” this is.
“We must remember that in the Middle Ages heresy was seen as a cancerous threat to the salvation of souls, “ …Kathleen very properly reminds us.
…and so any horrible action to stop it was considered regrettable, but reasonable: Beheading, burning, disembowelling. Much like today, in fact.
Except that, now it’s equally mad Muslims who see all dissent as heretical.
Nevertheless, we can’t allow anything that constitutes “…a cancerous threat to the salvation of souls,” to exist, untortured, and unchallenged, can we?
No! Damn right!
(And also damn right: Most Norvo Ordus Masses are a disgrace. As are most Satanic Masses. Not all. of course.)
God, this is nuts.
(One question to Kathleen: If you had your druthers – would blasphemy be a crime again?)
LikeLike
“The SSPX is a schismatic group…”
Hmm, I guess that depends on what is meant by “schismatic”, Tom. My understanding is that while the SSPX is not in full communion with the pope, and thus does indeed exhibit a schismatic attitude, the ordinary lay members thereof are not now and never have been in full formal schism; and further, that the former excommunication of their ecclesiastics, including that of their loose canon [sic], Richard Williamson, now expelled from the Society, is no longer in force.
Despite the problematic canonical status of the SSPX, it performs a valuable service by holding the feet of liberal modernists to the fire. Quite apart from its obviously important role in helping preserve the Tridentine Rite, we may come to be very grateful for its defence of Catholic doctrine, because even princes of the Church (but probably not the Vicar of Christ himself) can be guilty of heresy, as we may come to learn about a year from now. Personally, I’ve never set foot in an SSPX chapel, but reading their monthly magazine, The Angelus, in the early 2000s is what finally pushed me into the arms of Holy Mother Church.
LikeLike
” …because even princes of the Church (but probably not the Vicar of Christ himself) can be guilty of heresy, “</I.
Well, they're only human after all, aren't they, these "princes"?
Dunno about the "Vicars," Well, how can we?
To paraphrase JH his very self, “If we don’t make no mistakes, we don’t make nuffink, do we?”
Dead right, squire. (I reckon.)
LikeLike
Doh.
LikeLike
“Despite the problematic canonical status of the SSPX, it performs a valuable service by holding the feet of liberal modernists to the fire.”
Fie, JH! Let's not pussyfoot around merely holding the feet of liberal modernists to the fire – let's tie them to stakes, and hold them to the fire from head to foot – until they are cinders (and their books along with them, of course, eh, Kathleen?)
…It's the only logical and decent thing to do.
It says here.
LikeLike
“One question to Kathleen: If you had your druthers – would blasphemy be a crime again?”
Toadbreath, blasphemy has always been a punishable offence under Canon Law (Can. 1369) and always will be; but if you’re asking Kathleen if she supports this, are you really that thick? Get a life, why don’t you?
LikeLike
“But can we honestly blame (the SSPX)?” asks Kathleen.
What an extraordinarily perceptive question.
Pity it’s not asked every 10 minutes.
Who, then, can we blame? Muslims? Mormons? Methodists? Muggletonians?
Surely not ourselves?
.
…I’d suggest Original Sin. Possibly.
LikeLike
“Get a Life” Toad.
Thanks for the rather trite bumper-sticker sentiment, JH – but I’m a bit too old and stupid to consider becoming a lawyer.
I was surprised to find out (which, yes, I should have done before – idle Toad!) that blasphemy is still a crime in England. But the last case was in 1921, it seems
We live and learn, as JH often sagely remarks..
LikeLike
“Thanks for the rather trite bumper-sticker sentiment, JH-“
Not one of my more brilliant retorts, Toad; I admit that and I apologize. Matter of fact, I told Father (our Ordinary Bishop I think, but can’t say for sure because of the grill) at Confession yesterday that I was guilty of committing cutting sarcasm sometimes with my inferiors. My confession took place here yesterday at 21:00 GMT, and as my insult to you occurred at 17:30 GMT, I’m still in a state of grace 😉
Then you say: “I was surprised to find out…that blasphemy is still a crime in England.”
Is blasphemy “still a crime in England”, Toad? I didn’t know that and didn’t say that. My subscription to the All England [Law] Reports expired 35 years ago. I never admired Lord Denning (RIP) even though I’ve got an autographed (paperback) copy of one of his scribbles given me by my pupilmaster; but I thought Lord Palm Tree Justice (as he is commonly known) or one of his ilk struck it down a long time ago. Whatever, when I said blasphemy is still a punishable offence, I wasn’t referring to the laws of your Perfidious Albion.
LikeLike
Hi Tom (and sorry for the delay in getting back to you – I’ve been busy),
I’ve been thinking about your comments on the SSPX – and where you say that the problem lies in their rebellion and lack of obedience. Some time ago I might have held the same sort of views, for this was the opinion of most people in the Church during the eighties and nineties when the SSPX’s on-going dialogue with St. John Paul II continually ended in failure – presumably due (we were told) to their obstinacy. Meanwhile, at the same time, I was becoming increasingly disturbed by the growing ‘rebellion and lack of obedience’ to Catholic beliefs and teachings that I was witnessing all around me. (This I learnt later was simply ‘Modernism in action’, but I didn’t know much about that sort of thing then.)
It’s a long story, but once my eyes were opened to the truth of what was happening, I began to realise that it was thanks to the SSPX that the Tridentine Mass and all the richness of Catholic piety and tradition was still ‘alive’ and thriving; yet it was still believed then that the SSPX were ‘in schism’ until, to the great delight of many, the excommunication ban was lifted from their bishops by Pope Benedict XVI.
Anyone can attend their EF Masses, or read any of their books, pamphlets etc. (as JH tells us he had done, with such a positive outcome! 😉 ) without fear of committing a schismatic action, though it is sad that many still do see it as this. The SSPX consider that they have been simply “guarding the deposit [of Faith] entrusted to [their] care” during these last 50 years, although there are now also resurgent groups of Catholic tradition within the framework of the Church. When I was a youngster none of these groups existed, the Church was in disarray, and we were not allowed to attend the SSPX chapels. At least there are some very positive things happening in our day – thank you Holy Spirit – amongst so much turmoil (re Deacon Nick Donnelly’s article).
LikeLike
Hi Kathleen,
I am firmly convinced that the suppression of the Tridentine Mass was a grave injustice, and I am very aware that the Documents of Vatican II have been misused and twisted to serve modernist agendas that were never intended by the Fathers of the Council.
But that does not alter the fact that the way to bring about genuine reform and healing is always to stay within the Church and full communion with the pope. At the time of the reformation men like Erasmus and Thomas More knew that there was much that had to change, but they also knew that to separate themselves from the Church would be to cast themselves into confusion and darkness.
There are many people and groups within the Church who have made the same arguments that the SSPX have, and they have done great good. But the SSPX have chosen the path of self assertion and self righteousness, like Martin Luther (thus far, they may return).
LikeLike
reawakening all the piety and devout practices New Church had buried in years of social justice and community-based talk! All that would have been better left to the NGO’s and local Churches’ pastoral work, rather than the hierarchy of the Church
I absolutely affirm that we must support the many expressions of piety and devotion that have been sidelined in the last 50 years., but I strongly disagree that the Church has done anything that would be “better left to NGOs”. The Church is the presence of Christ on earth, and, properly understood, social justice is her concern at every level, including the hierarchy.
We must never ever fall into the old trap of making saints out of those who feed the poor but disparaging those who ask why anyone is poor at all.
And there must be not clash between our moral, liturgical, and cultural heritage, and our demand for the social justice demanded in the Gospels
LikeLike
The SSPX may be the black lambs spoken of in Genesis 30:32 (RSV). Jacob’s father-in-law, Laban, thinks they’re expendable, but they and the other speckled and spotted sheep and goats end up being the capital Jacob needs to raise up the people listed in Chapter 1 of Matthew. Pope Francis – good cop. SSPX – bad cop.
LikeLike
Tom: Re yours of the 2/11/14 at 0857 hours. Firstly let me say the Kathleen has nailed it in one.
I agree with your 1st paragraph, however…..
The basis for genuine healing and reform you speak of is essentially with the SSPX who adhered to Catholicism in its purest and traditional form. That this ‘genuine healing and reform’ is necessary in the first place is because of the travesty that was Vatican II and its aftermath.
Our Liberal/Modernist friend Cardinal Kasper made this comment as reported in the Newspaper L’Osservatore Romano on the 12/11/13…
“In many instances, the Council Fathers had to find compromise formulas In which the position of the major are located immediately next to those of the minority, designed to limit them. Thus the conciliar texts themselves had a huge potential for conflict and opened the door to a selective reception in either direction”
That the council was manipulated to this extent must indicate some diabolical intervention and renders a great deal of the council documents, at least, suspect.
Those of the SSPX and especially Arch Bishop Lefebvre saw through the intent of the Liberal/modernist and seeing their future and the Church’s future in jeopardy ordained and consecrated Bishops. That was certainly an error but one that was necessary in the their eyes.
That has since been rectified.
Erasmus and St Thomas Did indeed stay within the Church and in communion with the Holy Father. Those of the SSPXS and Lefebvre. given the dubious nature of Vat II, it can be argued, also stayed with in the ‘Church’, to ensure the her continuity, whilst novelty and heresy abounded among those who abided with Vat II and Pope Pauls VI ‘new mass’, the NOM.
Speaking of Pope Paul VI, (soon to be Saint Pope Paul VI) he made his now famous announcement that the “smoke of satan’ had entered the sanctuary of the Church, within only a couple of years after he ‘promulgated’ the NOM.
Pope Paul VI also stated in 1972…”
“I believed that after VII, a sunny day in the Churches history would dawn, but instead there came a day of clouds, storms and darkness.”
Pope Paul is also on record as saying (on the 60th anniversary of Fatima 13/10/1977)…
” satan is functioning in the disintegrations of the Catholic Church. The darkness of satan has entered and is spreading through out the Church even to its summit;. Apostasy and the loss of the faith is spreading into the highest levels within the Church.”
Cardinal Siri said about the same time…”If the church were not divine, the 2nd Vatican Council would have buried her”…
LikeLike
Can someone please define “Modernism,” as reviled on CP&S, for Toad?
It is clearly a dirty word, like “Socialist,” or “Liberal” or “Paedophile,” or “Vatican ll,” – but why is it so abhorred?
“Modernism, in its broadest definition, is modern thought, character, or practice. More specifically, the term describes both a set of cultural tendencies and an array of associated cultural movements, originally arising from wide-scale and far-reaching changes to Western society in the late 19th century and early 20th century. Modernism was a revolt against the conservative values of realism. The term encompasses the activities and output of those who felt the “traditional” forms of art, architecture, literature, religious faith, social organization and daily life were becoming outdated in the new economic, social, and political conditions of an emerging fully industrialized world.
Modernism rejected the lingering certainty of Enlightenment thinking, and also that of the existence of a compassionate, all-powerful Creator. This is not to say that all modernists or modernist movements rejected either religion or all aspects of Enlightenment thought, rather that modernism can be viewed as a questioning of the axioms of the previous age.”
The above is from this web site:
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Modernism.html
Presumably that explains “modernism,” up to a point.
But 200 years ago “modernists” would be anti-slavery – 100 years ago, in favour of votes for women, and 50 years ago, against jailing homosexuals.
We can no more decide not to live in the “Modern” age than we can decide to live in the age of “Mary’s Dowry,” can we?
Unless we’d rather stick with horses and carts and serfdom, rather than modern transport and democracy.
LikeLike
Toad, I know that you’re aware a particular word can mean more than one thing, depending on context. A peer can be either an aristocrat or an equal. A handicap can be either an advantage (eg: in golf) or a disadvantage. For you to suggest that Catholic anti-modernists are pro-slavery or anti-suffrage is to ignore the multiple meanings a single word can have.
The sense in which Catholics use the word modernism is explained in The Oath Against Modernism promulgated by St Pius X, which has to do with protecting Holy Scripture and Catholic dogma from what we now refer to as critical theory (cf: the Frankfurt School) and deconstructionism (cf: Jaques Derrida), but nothing to do with slavery or suffrage:
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius10/p10moath.htm
LikeLike
Some fascinating points have been brought up here…
First of all to Tom: yes, naturally I agree with you that “the way to bring about genuine reform and healing is always to stay within the Church and full communion with the pope”, but I believe the SSPX have never thought of themselves as anything other than being “within the Church” – the true Catholic Church that is – and that the Pope, when not exercising his supreme authority by permitting the many abuses and heresies spreading over the Church to continue apace (or at least in failing to boldly confront them), as being nothing other than letting the Mystical Body of Christ fall into a downward spiral. They see the post-Vatican II Church as infiltrated with Protestant-like thought and apostasy. This is not true of the whole Church of course, but this is the way the majority of institutions in the framework of the Church (not least of all the Church hierarchy) appear to their watchful eye.
Look at this recent interview with Bishop Fellay:
“The media is talking a lot about the Catholic Church’s Synod. What should we think about it? What should we expect?”
Bishop Fellay: “There is nothing to expect. There is no need to wait. The direction has been given, and it is clear. We must simply say: it is clear. It is obvious that they wish to trivialize the situation of those who live in adultery, truly in a state of sin. They wish to trivialize it, and that is very, very, very serious. When we play with morality, we are playing with God’s commandments. To have dared, for two weeks, to leave up to opinion questions that leave no room for opinion! It is God’s word. All we have to say is “Amen.” We must, of course, think about how to help these people; we must always think about that. But we certainly do not help them by telling them there is an open door when there is none. The door that is being opened is a door to hell! These prelates who have received the power of the keys, that is, of opening the gates of Heaven, are closing them, and opening the gates of hell. It is unbelievable! It is crazy! Absolutely crazy! And as I said, the direction has been laid out. It is true that this synod was not supposed to make a decision; it was supposed to be a first step, but the first steps have been taken, the direction has been laid out, and it is not hard to guess what the following synod will do. Unless there is a much stronger reaction than the one we see today, and unfortunately, I doubt that there will be. Alas, there will not be!”
http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/bishop-fellay-church-situation-catastrophic-5393
No beating about the bush there!
I do not see the SSPX as “self righteous”, although I know they are accused of this by many in the Church. I hope and pray they will one day be reconciled to the rest of the Church, where their loyal adherence to the whole of the Deposit of Faith, and Catholic tradition in liturgy and pious practices, would be of enormous benefit to all the Church Militant (on Earth). However it may be that they are wary and fear that any proximity with the Vatican (owing to the danger of what Pope Benedict referred to as “the wolves” still lurking there) could taint the purity of the Faith they have suffered so much all these years to preserve!
In no way can the actions of the SSPX be compared to those of Martin Luther. Luther not only opposed Catholic Doctrines and teachings to fit his own ideas, but he also removed some of the books of the Bible that did not suit them. Amazing arrogance! He led his church away from Catholic Truth; the SSPX want to safeguard this Truth at all cost.
Secondly, at 9:28 you say: “The Church is the presence of Christ on earth, and, properly understood, social justice is her concern at every level, including the hierarchy.”
I do not deny that; the Church has always been the first defender of the weak, the poor, the defenseless…! I simply wanted to emphasise that social justice appeared to be their ONLY concern, in the 70’s and 80’s in particular (but still with us all the same) to the detriment of all the other vital Catholic teachings, plus the virtues, devotions, practices etc. that had so enriched the pre-Council Church. Pope John Paul II recognised this as a dangerous form of Marxism, mostly promoted by the Jesuits (e.g. Liberation Theology in Latin America). He denounced this mindset in no uncertain terms, telling the Jesuits that they were priests first and foremost, and to act like priests, whose first mission should be the saving of souls; reminding them they were neither politicians nor social workers!! Some of the left-leaning priests in Latin America had even become guerillas, taking up firearms!
LikeLike
“For you to suggest that Catholic anti-modernists are pro-slavery or anti-suffrage is to ignore the multiple meanings a single word can have …
…Which is why I wouldn’t dream of doing it, JH. Haven’t I said, quoting Humpty, ’til I’m no longer green in the face – that words mean exactly what we wan’t them to mean – no more, no less?
That almost all meaning is relative? (Except some math and logic.)
“Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever …”
Well at least he doesn’t mess about.
…Just gives basic, scientific, principles, and logic – a swift smack round the side of the head.
Personally, I couldn’t work, or live, like that. Don’t see how anyone could.
But I do appreciate your prompt presentation of Pius’s pontifications.
Makes things a bit clearer.
LikeLike
JH @ 10:08
Hey, what happened there to your monocle and those “spectacular teeth” in your avatar??
Anyway, thanks for dealing with the Toad – I’ve opted out this time round in order to preserve my fragile sanity. 😉
Geoff @ 12:25
Great comment Geoff, thank you, with some very revealing and pertinent quotes in your final paragraph too.
May I repay you the compliment and say that I think you certainly “nailed it in one” here! 🙂
LikeLike
Kathleen, I was also wondering why my avatar changed. I think it was a WordPress glitch because my comment where it appears was put into moderation for awhile.
LikeLike
…Excellent comment at 19:49 btw.
LikeLike
Well, Kathleen, your “fragile sanity” may not be subjected to Toad’s idiocies much longer.
JH’s running of CP&S’s papal pin-up boy, Pius X, has really opened my eyes.
A few years late, but better than never.
It’s well worth repeating:
“Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever …”
This is the language of totalitarianism – of, “Do what Big Brother says, and don’t ask awkward questions,” of “Just shut up and obey the Führer’s orders.” It is the language of burning “unsuitable” books to stop people being “corrupted” by their contents.
And it’s plainly folly and futility for the likes of me to bother trying to hold a dialogue mentality of this stripe.
True, I should have known this years ago. But I’m thick. So now I am resolved to stop.
But I’m weak-willed, as is plain to see.
Perhaps Burrissimo (How does he, as a doctor, reliant on science, reason, and research to combat disease – feel about such a barbaric attitude to enquiry? And does Raven, or JH, as decent, civilised humans, endorse it? ) would be merciful enough as to ban me for life?
Then I can get one of my own, as JH suggests.
…I’m applying for literary euthanasia, in fact.
What a rant.
Still. This might be it.
LikeLike
“Well, Kathleen…may not be subjected to Toad’s idiocies much longer.”
Yawn…I’ve flounced off blogs before too. All the best keeping to your (qualified) exit intention. I, for one, hope you succeed. But look here: St Pius X’s words are not“the language of totalitarianism”! You’re free to ignore them, as am I. The pope will not throw Catholics in gaol if they do. That we believe them is not because we’re forced to; it’s because we’ve thought long and hard about them, and realize they are the truth, the way and the life, as someone once said.
LikeLike
Toad: Is this goodbye?. Is that what you are saying.? You have proved to be a cantankerous old toad. I can see why you have raised the hackles of not a few people . You do spruik a lot of nonsense at times, sometimes I suspect only because you could. But you did provide some entertainment also along with the aggravation.
So if this is as it seems then let me wish you well and may God bless You
LikeLike
“Perhaps Burrissimo (how does he, as a doctor, reliant on science, reason, and research to combat disease – feel about such a barbaric attitude to enquiry…?)”
Perhaps he knows there’s more to medicine than science, reason and research. Even Catholic people unfamiliar with medicine know you cannot justify abortion (for example) through science, reason or research. Perhaps he’s of a generation that took the Hippocractic Oath seriously, or perhaps he said it silently when his fellow graduates did not.
But what barbaric attitude to inquiry are you talking about? Do you think medical men need to be disavow dogma to be good doctors? Do you think Doctor David Livingstone and Doctor Albert Schweitzer were good doctors or not? Do you think Louis Pasteur (a mere microbiologist, I admit) was hindered in his research because he believed “[a] bit of science distances one from God, but much science nears one to Him.” Do you believe they, and others I could name, were worse physicians and scientists for being religious? You suggest they would have been better but for their “barbaric attitude to inquiry”. Do come back, Toad, and tell us why your studies of Popper and a couple of others have convinced you of that.
LikeLike
Can you justify human cloning through “science, reason and research”,Toad? Can you justify euthanasia through “science, reason and research”? Can you justify same-sex marriage through “science, reason and research”? No, you cannot. Go ahead and try. Whether or not you support those things, they all require religion (philosophy, if you like) in order to be addressed, which is why your beleif that religion is “barbaric” and that “science, reason and research” can answer all of our problems is childish.
LikeLike
Let’s explain Kathleen’s comment in fewer, and somewhat less unsuccinct, words:
“Albigensians didn’t agree with us Cathoics, so we killed them all.”
And we burned all their books, (if they actually had any) as usual.
I cannot seem to remember killing any Albigensian(s), nor for that matter anyone else.
Nor have I burned any of their books.
Nor am I particularly impressed by such one-sided Catholic-bashing travesties of History such as this one.
LikeLike
This is the language of totalitarianism – of, “Do what Big Brother says, and don’t ask awkward questions,” of “Just shut up and obey the Führer’s orders.” It is the language of burning “unsuitable” books to stop people being “corrupted” by their contents.
Of course it jolly well is NOT, Toad …
Unless of course you can point out one instance of books being burned or people being directly oppressed on the basis of those “totalitarian” statements ???
WHY do you insist on making up so much nonsense like this ?
LikeLike
A typical idiotic, CP&S answer above.
“Can you justify human cloning through “science, reason and research”,Toad?”
No. Why clone humans, anyway?. There are far too many around already.
“Can you justify euthanasia through “science, reason and research”?”
No. And why should anyone need to? It should be a sane, personal, decision.
“Can you justify same-sex marriage through “science, reason and research”? “
No. Nor can you justify stamp-collecting, tap-dancing, beheading infidels, burning heretics, and listening to late Beethoven quartets.
“…which is why your belief that religion is “barbaric” and that “science, reason and research” can answer all of our problems is childish.”
I believe no such thing. I doubt if anything will ever do that. In fact. I’m confident that nothing can, or ever will. But I might be wrong.
But I do think we should at least kick stuff around, without preconceptions. Which apparently is not possible. What is barbaric is the attitude of mind.
There is no room for serious debate in light of the kindly old Pope’s admonition – no room for any debate, actually.
Which is why I must be going, as Marx once said.
LikeLike
That video clip of good old Groucho made me laugh. However….
“But I do think we should at least kick stuff around, without preconceptions.”
Perhaps you are right Toad… But do you honestly think we should be doing this FOREVER and EVER without ever discerning the light of Truth? (For the Truth of the claims of the Catholic Church are there if you humbly seek it.) Without ever making a CHOICE?
Because that is exactly what you are saying… and doing! Travelling through life on a type of eternal merry-go-round (that is not really so merry – doubt can never be ‘merry’) that never ever comes to an end, but just keeps going on round and round and round and round…..
LikeLike
We all have doubts, Kathleen, but there is no reason to be down about that. Enjoy the mysteries of life!
LikeLike
hmmmmmm, Kathleen, to try and be fair, I’d hardly describe the dusty streets of Moratinos, nor the Toad’s daily life there, as a “merry-go-round” …
LikeLike
@ Jabba…. 😆
The merry-go-round was a metaphor for Toad’s continual Relativism.
But no, I’m sure you’re right dear Jabba… after all the hounds will need their walkies, the chickens their corn, the weary pilgrims some plasters for their blisters and to be fed their ‘menu del dia’, etc. and Toad seems quite happy offering his haven on the Camino to one and all.
It was just my way of chucking a few ‘buns’ at our resident amphibian in our never-ending bun fight – no harm meant. 😉
It’s really good to have you back with us after the trials and sufferings of your marathon Camino. I followed it closely via your friend’s blog (as I think you know) right up till your phone got stolen and you disappeared into the Galician mists.
May we look forward to a post from you filling us in with the rest of your pilgrimage? I hope so.
LikeLike
hmmmm, I think that the Toad is one of our rare batracians who is a Modernist without being a Relativist …
🙂
I’m sure I’ll post something, though there has been an unwanted and unwelcome and unhappy event of fraternal cyberstalking (calling a spade “a spade“) that has piled insult onto various injury.
LikeLike
… and I continue to be unhappy with the sheer degree of the confusion that is spread by some of both the clergy and lay supporters of the SSPX
The Mass is the Mass is the Mass — but once people start setting themselves up as being special ones that celebrate a special rite superior to whichever other Mass, then it seems clear that their Catholicity is no longer behind the steering wheel
Those who have never experienced the beauty of the Latin or Latinate Novus Ordo Mass & Liturgy, with its Reverence and its Gregorian Chant, are cast adrift by a faction of the clergy more interested in worldly politics than in the supernatural love for souls
LikeLike
hmmmm, I think that the Toad is one of our rare batracians who is a Modernist.
When Toad asked what modernism is I made a quick brief addition to my “to do list”: fedex mirror to Toad.
LikeLike
Jabba’s quite right that Toad’s not a relativist. I’ve been reading his comments for years (originally on J.P’s blog). He’s no relativist, he’s a general skeptic. Sometimes he places two equally incredible (in his eyes) suggestions together to encourage us to doubt them both — but that’s not relativism.
LikeLike
@ Jabba
I’m very sorry to hear about the “fraternal cyberstalking” you are suffering – that sounds horrible, and I hope it will soon be over. I remember you once mentioning that your brother was an avowed atheist.
Toad is not a Relativist you say? I don’t know if even Toad himself would agree with that assertion! And what is worse: to be a Relativist or a Modernist? 😉 .
“… and I continue to be unhappy with the sheer degree of the confusion that is spread by some of both the clergy and lay supporters of the SSPX”
Of whom I am one! Not a member – simply a “lay supporter” at a distance, whilst leaving the “political” side of their situation for others to argue about.
But where is that “confusion” you talk of? The confusion is being caused by false Catholics (even bishops) in our midst who are betraying the Church by denying, or watering down, or attempting to twist its teachings. I believe it is all the innovations introduced into the life of the Church since VII that have caused the current “confusion”.
Then there are the Novus Ordo Masses where any number of unchecked abuses take place, the liturgy messed around with, noise, chattering, etc. and little, if any, focus on giving honour and glory to God. It causes great confusion.
This is what makes me very “unhappy”.
I agree we should never deny that the Novus Ordo Mass, when celebrated according to “the rubrics” and with devotion, is not a truly valid Mass, but some NO Masses I have attended over the years have been so shambolic, I seriously doubt whether they were valid!
Yes I have “experienced the beauty of the Latin or Latinate Novus Ordo Mass & Liturgy” too, but only once in a blue moon unfortunately, because where I live Novus Ordo Masses in Latin are just not available anywhere.
LikeLike
For someone who isn’t a relative, he certainly does like to claim the relativity of things with startling frequency though 🙂
However, I would agree that Toad is not a consistent relativist – there are some things in his arguments taken as axiomatic, even if they are then used to deny the objectivity of everything else.
LikeLike
I meant, ‘for someone who isn’t a relativist…’ of course. I was already pretty sure he’s not my relative!
LikeLike
Well I maintain he’s skeptic (pessimistic about the possibility of certainty) not a relativist (thinking “truth” simply depends on perspective). — I think a careful reading of his comments would show him to play the relativist to get across his skeptical point 🙂
LikeLike
*I maintain he’s a skeptic (dropped word).
for someone who isn’t a relative the effect of that wee mistake is hilarious mkenny 🙂
LikeLike
‘the effect of that wee mistake is hilarious’ it certainly is! 🙂
As for Toad’s being either a sceptic or a relativist, I don’t think it is an either/or here – I think his scepticism about the possibility of being certain about truth is what leads him into relativism. He certainly made the point that what one says is not really truth but only their perspective on many an occasion, and he may well have done this to get across a wider point about pessimism regarding certainty, but I get the feeling that the scepticism eventually led into relativism (albeit an inconsistent relativism – as is common; it is hard to be a consistent relativist!) which does happen a lot I guess – the one tends to feed into the other.
LikeLike
Also, it is a bit late now, but regarding the earlier question from Toad about Modernism, I came across this useful ‘little’ list:
http://www.stpeterslist.com/12690/lamentabili-the-65-errors-of-the-modernists-condemned-by-the-church/
LikeLike
Thanks for the “little list, they’d got a little list”. Michael – not so little, but.
W.S. Gilbert had been upstaged.
Actually, the list was a modern miracle of dogmatic relativism, wasn’t it, Micheal, which has since managed to become coldly “authoritarian”, not to mention a “tyranny”, in our day.
May I be the latest to claim being a possible relative of yours, Michael? My mother’s mother was a Kenny from Co. Clare,.
LikeLike
Yes, not a little list indeed GC, and the errors outlined in it have indeed become increasingly influential (and indeed, those same principles are increasingly being used as a stick with which to beat those who do not concur with them) in our culture – yet another prophetic document from the Holy See (c.f.; Humanae Vitae as another good example)!
I am glad to see my family tree expanding day by day 🙂 My family hail (a few generations back now) from Co. Galway, so a bit further north from your mother’s mother, but pretty close!
LikeLike
I’ll expand it a bit further Michael! 🙂
My Chóplainn, Kerr and Bailey ancestors hail from parts of Ireland that are north and east of yours and GC’s… But hey, we are all distant cousins, aren’t we?
Fada beo an Oileán Emerald!
LikeLike
Completely of the subject. my great Grand Father came out to Australia from Ireland about 1883.
I don’t suppose anyone happens to know any Kiernan’s over there?
LikeLike
Geoff – you’ll have to ask our faithful visitor/commenter Mimi. Neither Michael (Kenny), GC, Brother Burrito nor I, live in Ireland. We are all either descendants, or part descendants, of the vast Irish diaspora – all living in differing countries of the world – but all with a tiny bit of Ireland tucked away in our hearts. 🙂
Here’s a lovely quote that is right on-topic (the original topic of the Holy Rosary that is)…
“The great power of the Rosary consists in the fact that it translates the Creed into Prayer. Of course, the Creed is already in a certain sense a prayer and a great act of homage towards God, but the Rosary brings us to meditate again on the great truth of His life and death, and brings this truth close to our hearts. Even Christians, although they know God, usually fear rather than love Him. The strength of the Rosary lies in the particular manner in which it considers these mysteries, since all our thinking about Christ is intertwined with the thought of His Mother, in the relations between Mother and Son; the Holy Family is presented to us, the home in which God lived His infinite love.” Card. J.H. Newman
LikeLike
Kathleen @ 13:38 – Excellent! I suggest a diaspora reunion, perhaps via a picket line in New York on Saint Patrick’s Day 🙂
LikeLike
No dear friend, you won’t see me there on St. Patrick’s Day…. 😦
A wonderful annual event, that once brought great joy to the Catholic Irish diaspora, has been hijacked by the bully boys (and girls…. and, er, inbetweens) of the LGBT groups who have been given permission to flaunt their distorted lifestyles in the parade!! Not only that, innocent Catholic pro-life groups have been refused permission to walk in it!
And worse of all, Card. Timothy Dolan – highest representative of the Catholic Church in NY – doesn’t seem to care! He is walking in the parade as the Grand Marshall!!
“If a parade that is meant to honor a great saint is being used to promote a sinful agenda, it should be cancelled rather than allow it to be used in such a way. It is one thing for a parade committee to fold under pressure, but it is quite another that the Cardinal Archbishop of New York would be asked to lend his name and office to the parade. Such an action can be viewed in no other way than total capitulation to gay identity groups.”
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/pat-archbold/cardinal-dolan-and-the-nyc-st.-patricks-gay-parade
“The Catholic League, which has marched in New York City’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade for 20 years, will not do so in 2015….
[T]hey decided to include a gay group that is neither Catholic nor Irish while stiffing pro-life Catholics. As Donohue told the media, “This is as stunning as it is indefensible.””
http://www.catholicleague.org/will-march-nyc-parade-debacle-grows/
What would the great Saint Patrick have to say about all this I wonder.
We shall have to find another venue for our “reunion”! 😉
LikeLike
No, you won’t see me there either! What you mention above is what I was alluding to actually – that we should turn up and protest/picket Cardinal Dolan’s decisions on the day 🙂
I know Saint Patrick’s Day has become little more than an excuse for people to dye things green and drink to excess in many places, but for the Archbishop of New York to not only give in to demands from gay lobby groups, but join in with their celebrations is ridiculous. He justified his decision on the basis that the lobby groups will get their way eventually anyway, and to deny them access to the parade would just make the Church look bad. Apart from the fact that, as a pastor and teacher of the Faith, not wanting to look bad by standing up for Church teaching is reprehensible (as well as slightly bizarre), what good does he think this will do – does he think that by admitting such groups to the parade and joining in with them, that all of a sudden loads of people will realise how ‘merciful’ the Church is and sign up for RCIA lessons?
On that note, just read a good critique of what many of those at the Synod seemed to be angling for (which is not dissimilar from Card. Dolan’s approach):
I too wonder what Saint Patrick would have to say about all this, as well as all the other abuses of his feast day – whatever he would say though, would I’m sure be condemned as closed-minded, ‘rigorist’ and lacking in mercy! 🙂
LikeLike
Michael,
I am not sure that ++Dolan is not being wise in this. The gay-pride marchers are sure to be as welcome on the day as a turd in a swimming pool.
Bring on the grass-roots reaction!
LikeLike
“What you mention above is what I was alluding to actually – that we should turn up and protest/picket Cardinal Dolan’s decisions on the day”
Of course Michael – how silly of me not to realise that’s what you meant! 😉
@ Brother Burrito, (re ++Dolan’s decision), you’re joking, surely?…. The message the cardinal is giving to the world is clear, and in the words of Bill Donohue, “indefensible”!
A grass-roots reaction you say? Well we would like to see one to be sure – and I have plenty of traditional Irish friends and contacts who would react in no uncertain way to this infiltration of such un-Catholic participants in what has always been a truly Irish Catholic parade – but unfortunately many traditional Catholics keep well away from the NY St. Patrick’s day parade these days. (Michael has already given some of the reasons why, and now this last development is the last straw.)
LikeLike
No problem Kathleen! And I must say I have to agree that I am also a little confused re Brother Burrito’s last comment. BB – do you think Cardinal Dolan is playing some sort of game, saying to the activists ‘come on in’ and knowing all the while they will either receive a negative reaction or will just be ignored?
If so, it would certainly be quite a risk on his part, as I imagine a great number of those taking part in or watching the parade will either be supportive of the activists or unwilling to speak out against them/drown them out. Seems like another small victory against the Church as I can see – and now they’ve got their foot in the door, they’re bound to just keep chipping away (apologies for a giant melting pot of metaphors there!)
LikeLike
I think Cardinal Dolan is playing these people.
Their only power is victimhood. Remove that, and they dissolve. Matt 5:39
Risky? Well so was the Cross.
LikeLike
I forgot to add, martial arts utilize the tactic of using an aggressor’s strength and momentum against them.
LikeLike
Brother, is caving in a taekwon-do technique or a kung-fu technique 😉
The more I hear and read about His Eminence, “What A Card!”Dolan, the less favourable an impression I have. His stand-up comic shtick at the last conclave that some people found so down to earth… well… let’s just say I found it the pits.
LikeLike
Well BB, I certainly hope you’re right, and that the risk pays off, but I can’t say I’m convinced I’m afraid. Nevertheless, we shall see how it pans out in due course 🙂
LikeLike
Burrito, it is not just a case of people of a homosexual condition walking in the parade – no one could stop anyone doing that. These are active homosexuals, promotors of sodomy and gay ‘marriage’, who are walking under a banner that flaunts their gay agenda. That’s the problem!
What adds insult to injury is that pro-life groups, who only want to stand up for the protection of the lives of the unborn, are being denied the right to participate in the parade.
Cardinal Dolan’s decision to take part himself – and as Grand Marshall note! – is giving the wrong message to the world (whether he means to or not). It seems to say he is condoning the former and unconcerned about the other…. and that could hardly be more un-Catholic! 😦
LikeLike