{With my priestly blessing to the readers, +Father José Miguel}
What with the postconciliar crisis in the Church going full steam ahead, with blasphemy, heresy, and apostasy being propagated unashamedly and practically unhindered at all levels (but for brave traditionalist {aka Catholic} bloggers here and there)—and all indications are that things are going to get much worse before they get any better—from time to time it’s good to take a breather and cherish what the Holy Catholic Church really is… and what it sounds like when she, the Spouse of Christ, prays to her Lord and God.
Thought to share with the kind readers of akaCatholic this rather magnificent Antiphon taken from Psalm 80, in Gregorian Chant, beautifully sung by a boys’ choir, accompanied by the gentle chords of the organist, in honor of the Most Blessed Sacrament, for the Feast of Corpus Christi, the Mystery of Faith:
Cibávit eos ex adípe fruménti, Allelúia.
Et de petra melle saturávit eos, Allelúia.
Exultáte Deo adiutóri nostro,
Iubiláte Deo Iacob.
Glória Patri et Fílio et Spíritui Sancto,
Sicut erat in princípio et nunc et semper
Et in sæcula sæculórum. Amen.
He fed them from the fat of the wheat, Alleluia,
And filled them with honey out of the rock, Alleluia.
Rejoice in God our help,
Be joyful in the God of Jacob.
Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit,
As it was in the beginning and now and forever,
And unto ages of ages. Amen.
Thank you, Father Campo.
Thank you Father, for looking after us and for providing us with glimpses of otherworldly truth and beauty in these darkest times.
May we all persevere in the Holy Catholic Faith.
Amen.
Ditto!
I have a question for Father Campo if he has the time to answer: I’m from Philly and we have, thanks be to God, a pretty strong Latin Mass contingent consisting of devoted laypeople and faithful priests who put a lot of time and effort into promoting it and making it more widespread, where as for me, I pretty much do nothing in those areas other than attending whenever possible and supporting financially so I’m hesitant about causing any unnecessary waves or problems due to others constant efforts which I realize is not an easy task at all these days considering the liberal, modernist pressure against the Latin Mass since VII. Also, I’m no liturgical expert on the Latin Mass. Anyway, my question is about the sung Solemn High Mass which I believe is the ultimate Honor and Glory that could possibly be given to Almighty God since that’s the primary point of Mass and that’s what I prefer to attend it. But the problem that has been bothering me for a while is this: the Mass I usually attend on Sunday has a women in the choir singing all the parts of the Mass. Now someone told me they do not attend this Mass because of that even though this person does attend a High Latin Mass that has protestants in the choir singing though I do believe that 2 out of the 4 (or5) are Catholic. So wondering what Father’s take is on having either women or protestants singing at the Traditional? Latin Mass or am I making a mountain of of a molehole. Any other answers would be appreciated also.
Dear Father Campo,
I look forward to your response to Johnjobilee because I have a similar situation. The High Mass that I attend (there is no Low Mass on Sundays) has a woman choir director with a very high pitched loud voice. In solo, she chants the Gradual in Gregorian which at times seems to go on forever. I hope I’m not being disrespectful, lacking in charity, or ungrateful, but I feel this situation interferes with my peacefulness at Holy Mass. I wish this choir sounded like the beautiful video you have blessed us with. Music should offer a soothing aspect to Holy Mass, not an irritant. Thank you, Father. God bless you.
Thank you, johnjobilbee and my2cents. First of all, thank the Lord you have Traditional Latin Masses readily available. And solemn High Masses at that! Regarding the suitability for women singing in a choir…
It appears that St. Pius X had prohibited it in 1903, except for women in convents and monasteries. The norm was generally not followed in Europe and in the United States. Indults however were granted simultaneously until Pius XII granted permission for women to sing in scholas cantorum.
Vatican celebrations continued the long-standing tradition (not Tradition) of having only boys and men singing in scholas, since these, viewed as important liturgical functions, seemed more clerical in nature, and thus scholas reserved for males. Liturgical singing had fallen to the perception of being a mere aesthetical addendum instead of being an integral part of the liturgy, which St. Pius X tried to correct by affirming the practice of not singing during Mass, but rather singing the Mass.
I gather that the last legal dispositions date from Pius XII’s time, so I presume women can sing the Mass in scholas. Obviously, they should continue to be veiled. I’ve seen Eastern Divine Liturgies (spared the Novus Ordo innovations) with women and men singing sacred polyphony, and the former are naturally veiled.
In any case, liturgical singing in a solemn High Latin Mass should adhere to the books, such as the Liber Usualis. No room for improvisations since everything in the TLM is very nicely ordered.
Then it’s just a question of musical talent for singing. It shouldn’t be obtrusive at all, nor too low that it can’t be heard, nor too high as to bother the celebration.
As for Protestants singing in a TLM schola… well, it is a bit awkward to say the least. Of course, they cannot receive Holy Communion, no matter what today’s Vatican is preparing for an impossible inter-Communion…
If Protestants, though, are willing to sing at a TLM, an opportunity arises for apostolic efforts to procure their conversion, again, no matter what Francis might say against it!
Do not cease in prayer for the continuation of the TLM in your areas, for its more widespread propagation, and for its more worthy celebration. Pray especially for your bishops, priests, seminarians, and altar boys.
And no matter what nonsense or scandals beset Holy Mother Church, just carry on being Catholic… All things pass. Our very own St. Teresa of Ávila would describe our times (more than her own) as a bad night in a bad inn. 😉
Thank you, Father Campo, for your very kind response. God bless you and your Holy Priesthood.
Father, I fear you underestimate the gravity of the current situation. Pope Alexander VI was a bad night at a bad inn. This current apostasy will not correct itself. There is no Catholic prince sweeping in to set all things right again. Souls are being led astray. Waiting simply results in more lost souls. What is needed is a stand by all who see the dangers. It is time to call out Bergolio and the whole modernist brood of vipers. There is no working or coexisting with error. To think the Church is just going through a “phase” is pure naivete. Modernists are not Catholic and its time to stop pretending they are.
Tom A, oh I actually agree with you. But you see, we should take heart in the psalmist (89): “For a thousand years in thy sight are as yesterday, which is past. And as a watch in the night, things that are counted nothing, shall their years be.”
One could conclude that the ecclesial situation is even worse than you describe. So far, there has been precious little calling out Francis and his minions. It really does seem that we shall have to weather this out.
Dearest Fr. Campo,
Indeed, perhaps “even worse” to such an extent, that the inerrant words of Saint Paul in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, chapter 2, verse 7, specifically and existentially apply here and now. To quote that verse from the Douay-Rheims copy: ” For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. ” Let those with eyes see. May our Almighty and Eternal Triune Godhead have mercy on us in such a way, that all those with a receptive and tender heart, will receive His cloak of perseverance through the reception of His grace, in this time of heretofore unprecedented darkness, limiting the vision of the True Church, which can only remain, “in eclipse”, (Our Lady of LaSalette) in this time.
Holy Mother Church cannot teach error, as if She could, She simply could not “prevail” against the gates of hell, and the Son of God made man, would have erred. As error is riddled throughout the so called “Vatican Council II” documents, it cannot be a Council of the Church of Jesus the Christ, as founded by the Son of God, made true man, by the power of the Holy Ghost. Anyone who embraces VCII as a true Council of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is in apostasy, as this speaks as res ipsa loquitur. As Saint Paul inerrantly described in that same Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, those who do not freely receive love of the Truth, will receive the “operation of error”, such that they believe the lie as though it were the Truth. This would seem to be the “diabolical disorientation of the mind”, of which Our Lady of Fatima spoke to Sister Lucia. Saint Paul also spoke in his Epistle to the Romans, chapter one, in such a way that makes it clear that there simply is no excuse, as also quoted from the Douay-Rheims copy:
“[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: [19] Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.
[21] Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened.”
The charism of the infallibility of Peter and his successors, as provided for by the Holy Ghost, is as it can only remain, such that those who know the Voice of the Good Shepherd, follow Him alone, distinguishing His voice from all those false prophets who, while they dress in the robes of the Church, are Her very assassins, freely giving of their own souls to the Evil One, and leading countless others into eternal perdition with them. It is not as if the charism of infallibility somehow, “holds the hand” of the Pontiff, from committing heresy materially or formally. Either case places any human person, as heresy from its immanence only can in its opposition to the Faith, into schism and therefore outside the Church, where there is no salvation. Rather, it is that charism of infallibility which is freely accepted by a true Pontiff of Holy Mother Church, and therefore given by the Holy Ghost, at the very moment of his succession into the Chair of Saint Peter as the true Vicar of Christ in this world, regardless of the personal sins he may later commit while Christ’s Vicar, those which remain apart from heresy. This charism of infallibility is an assurance that Christ’s Church will prevail against the gates of hell until the end of time, in all matters of the teaching of the Faith and of Catholic Morality. This charism is a perfect gift which is received by any true Holy Roman Pontiff, in the moment of his free will assent into the acceptance of the Chair of Saint Peter, independent of the personality and personal sin of that same man, as the Vicar of Christ. This blanket of protection lasts thus until the moment of his death and then it is given to his successor, who freely accepts it once again. That is how, “…he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way.” May Almighty God shower His mercy on me and on His Holy Church. I pray this helps. In caritas.
It is an error (heresy?) to believe that the Roman Pontiff has a “blanket of protection (that) lasts thus until the moment of his death,” “in all matters of the teaching of the Faith and of Catholic Morality.” The charism belongs to the office and not the person.
According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows: the Roman Pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, (in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,) he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church.
I realize that the leaders of the sede movement will answer this by saying that when a Pope is not teaching ex cathedral he is covered by the ordinary magisterium, essentially implying that everything the Pope teaches is infallible. And if he does teach error? Well then he is pronounced a heretic, said to be in schism, and no longer a true pope. It is a very air tight theory but it makes a mockery of Vatican I doctrine on the true nature of this charism.
The Pope has authority from Jesus Christ to teach. You have the duty to assent to his teachings as if Christ himself were telling you so. If you beleive Bergolio is Pope then you have to believe there is salvation outside the Catholic Church. You have to believe that Muslims worship the same merciful god as we do. If you don’t the you are the heretic in their eyes. Now if Bergolio is an imposter and Vatican 2 was a false council, the you are free to continue believing what Catholics believed for centuries. If Bergolio is Pope and Vatican 2 a true Council, well then Jesus Christ Himself felt it was time the Church got with the times. Why do you comtinue to resist?
Saint Joan of Arc stated at her trial that she would obey the Church “so long as Our Lord is served first.” I could not have said it better.
Sorry Father Campo, you have been judged by Tom A, the one trick pony Sedevacantist. Or should I say, is there anyone Tom A hasn’t judged? It doesn’t matter, that while Saints and Theologians have had diverse opinions, there remains no Church approved mechanism for removing a heretical Pope.
It is sufficient for an ordinary Catholic to know that neither the Council nor the Conciliar Popes, have attempted to define a dogma. It’s too bad the Modernists took over, but they did because Pius XI and Pius XII did not comply with Our Lady’s requests at Fatima. The Tom A’s of the world will find out too late, that they should have been praying for the Pope and Bishops, instead of condemning them.
When you use that phrase “you have been judged” in a negative sense as you did against Tom A, you sound like any other liberal Francis-lover. People get judged every day, as our judicial system can attest to. I dont think Tom A judged Fr. at all, I believe he was simply stating his case.
The sede’s “trick” is that we dont believe that a heretic can either be elected pope, or remain a pope after the heresy (even if he was validly elected to begin with). The trad’s “trick” is to attempt to justify how those things are possible….even though they know deep down that these popes are lost. I guess we both have “trick’s”.
This is my rule: Never debate a sede. Their arguments are much more powerful and make more sense than a non-sede. This rule applies especially to the current Vatican occupant & co. I think John314’s quote of St. Joan says it best. Is Our Lord being served? The Apostles Creed says “I believe in the HOLY Catholic Church” Is the Modernist V2 church HOLY as an institution–not judging individual members (clergy or otherwise)? So much to ponder! Lord, help us!
Rush, I am glad we agree that there seems to be no Church approved mechanism for deposing a Pope. On V2 and Conciliar Popes defining dogma, well I disagree. They have changed the faith and they teach a different faith then what was handed to them. I hope this obvious fact does not elude your reasoning. The evidence is on display at every NO parish daily.
Rich, thank you for your support. I simply love when I am attacked personally. It means I won the argument.
John, that is the whole point. What appears to be the “Church” no longer serves Christ. It now serves Man.
Good morning John314,
Please read the last paragraph of what was written once again. The “key” there is that the charism of infallibility, which is the gift given by the Holy Ghost, is “freely accepted” by the true and authentic Holy Roman Pontiff, in the moment of the acceptance of his election to the Chair, by virtue of his freely accepted position thus, as the Bishop of Rome in the Chair of Saint Peter, as the Vicar of Christ Himself. This charism of papal infallibility is part of the metaphysical “matter” of the divine office. In other words, it is not, as it cannot be, imposed upon him as a “blanket”, if you will. The term “blanket” was used as a metaphorical description of the charism of papal infallibility itself, not in some sense of its imposition upon the Holy Roman Pontiff. This charism of papal infallibility has its “active” and “passive” forms. The active form prevents the authentic Vicar of Christ from committing error, “ex cathedra”. The passive form prevents him from committing error in his own personal confrontation with accepted Church Tradition taught and understood consistently over the centuries, as the so called General, Universal Magisterium. Allow me to quote from the “Catholic Encyclopedia” here, as it relates to papal infallibility:
“•that infallibility means more than exemption from actual error; it means exemption from the possibility of error;
•that it does not require holiness of life, much less imply impeccability in its organs; sinful and wicked men may be God’s agents in defining infallibly;
•and finally that the validity of the Divine guarantee is independent of the fallible arguments upon which a definitive decision may be based, and of the possibly unworthy human motives that in cases of strife may appear to have influenced the result. It is the definitive result itself, and it alone, that is guaranteed to be infallible, not the preliminary stages by which it is reached.”
You see John314, there is not only the, “exemption from actual error”, but also, “the exemption from the possibility of error”.
In that understanding, it is impossible for the Holy Roman Pontiff to fall into personal error, as it relates to his own “ex cathedra” proclamation of the Faith in dogma and morals, and also impossible for him to fall into error, as it relates to his own understandings of the Church’s holy Tradition, as he officially communicates them to the Church, somehow placing an internal contradiction into Holy Mother Church, which would be in opposition to any teaching of the General, Universal Magisterium. If this were possible, then the gates of hell would prevail against the Church of Jesus the Christ.
In closing John314, it is the sensus fidelium of the true Holy Roman Catholic Church which allows the sheep to hear the Good Shepherd’s voice and as thus to know when a wolf, who is dressed in the clothing of the shepherd, whether he be the “pope” or any “bishop”, is speaking to them. As the so called post VCII (false ecumenical council), “conciliar church”, is not the true Church of Jesus the Christ, rather the church of the Antichrist, there is no true sensus fidelium there, and as thus they hear the voices of the wolves as though they are the voices of the shepherds, as this is the result of the “deceiving influence” or “operation of error”, that Saint Paul speaks of, which they have received in lieu of grace, by virtue of never having or having lost their love and commensurate zeal for the Truth as Love Himself. I pray this helps. In caritas.
The two Popes that caused all of this, Pius XI and Pius XII were good. Yeah right.
Pius XI ignored Our Lady and introduced massive financial corruption into the Church. Pius XII was the first to mess with the Latin Rite big time and hired Bugnini, the mastermind of the NO.
The Modernist Popes starting with John XXIII are bad. I agree.
The Sedevacantist’ arguments are much more powerful. I agree.
Rome has been completely taken over by Modernists, Satanists and worse. I agree.
But….
As to whether a Pope is a Pope or not should remain an open question for an ordinary Catholic. To judge the souls of Popes and tens of millions of people, is schismatic. “Judge not lest you be judged”. “Vengeance is mine says the Lord”.
Dear Rushintuit,
No one here, that I have born witness to, is suggesting that any particular pope is in hell, nor that Joseph Ratzinger or Jorge Bergoglio are going to hell, definitively speaking, as indeed no one can. Therefore, your suggestion that anyone who holds the position that the See of Peter is vacant, is somehow tantamount to “judging” the “soul” or “souls” of a particular man as “pope” or of, “tens of millions of people”, is in humility and charity, absurd, as it is founded in emotion and not in the intellect, as having been founded in reality and as thus rightly reasoned. In fact, of course, we are called to pray and offer sacrifice for the salvation of the souls of the “other”, whether “the other” be masquerading as an Holy Roman Pontiff, or he be actively persecuting us. In utter contradistinction to what you suggest, we are commanded by our Blessed Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, to deliberately, precisely, and with discernment, judge the objective acts of the other, as were we not to do so, we could never assist in the salvation of the other’s soul, and specific to this discussion, we simply could not know just who the wolves in sheep’s clothing are, masquerading as the shepherds of Christ’s true Church, while in reality, they are the shepherds of the “conciliar church” (aka: the church of the Antichrist, whose teaching is antichrist, and whose exegesis is from the anti-gospel).
The charism of papal infallibility does not protect the authentic and true Holy Roman Pontiff from errors in his judgement, as it relates to the selection of people that he may appoint, as per your example of the Freemason Bugnini. Lucifer uses misunderstandings of this papal charism of infallibility, on both sides of the coin, either understanding it to be too broad or to be too narrow in its scope, as the gift of the Holy Ghost to His Papacy, to lead souls astray from the Truth. Whether Pius the XI and XII were so called, “good popes”, in your or anyone’s estimation of them is immaterial to anything but an assessment of the quality of men that they were, as they served our Blessed Lord as His Vicar. Not every pope, of course, has been a Saint, but they have all been free of committing heresy (see Saint Robert Bellarmine’s treatise on this subject, included in his five books on the Papacy). I pray this helps. In caritas.
Thank You for your time and answer Father Campo. Would love to know the reason why Pope Pius XII granted the permission for women. Imo, it’s as bad or maybe even worse than when PJPII allowed altar girls. On a positive note at least they do wear veils. As far as the protestants in the choir I understand they are well paid professionals that do other sung services or whatever for episcopolians, lutherans etc. in the area, but regardless of how excellent they are, and they really are very good, imo, it’s just as ridiculous to having people sing the Mass that don’t believe a darn word they are singing as having protestant altar boys/men serving at the Mass. It’s frustrating because everything seems to be done perfectly but in the back of my mind I know they’re not because of these couple things that seem could be fixed pretty easily even if it meant maybe not having the A-One Top of the Notch choir in the area.
The strength of a sedes arguments has absolutely nothing to do with how bad Pope Francis or any other Pope has been. That’s irrelevant. The jist of the whole argument still and always will come down to the question of , not how bad a Pope may be , but were ordinary laypeople like you or myself given the power or authority by God to declare to the world that a Pope is excommunicated or deposed from his office. And from reading both sides of view I disagree that “their arguments are much more powerful.” I would say both sides have some equally good arguments but the way I see it the “burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt” (and NOT on whether Pope Francis is a bad Pope or not but on whether you or me can declare him excommunicated ) is with the accusers or sedes and they haven’t accomplished the “beyond reasonable doubt” part yet as far as I can see.
John, based on everything you know about the pre V2 Church and the current V2 conciliar church, you are telling us that you cannot reasonably ascertain that they are two different faiths? This fact is still doubtful to you? All a sede has to do to prove Bergolio is not Pope is to prove he doesnt hold the Catholic faith. Bergolio provides you that evidence everytime he opens his mouth. In fact he mocks the Catholic faith just about every chance he gets. Truth is the authority that declares Bergolio an anti-Pope, not me.
Again, like I said above I’m not even arguing about how bad this Pope or any VII Pope is or was. That is irrelevant. I’m arguing about who has the power and authority from God to represent and speak for the Catholic Church throughout the whole world by declaring Pope Francis excommunicated.
No one has the authority over a true Pope. And no one is expecting you or anyone else to declare Francis excommunicated. You simply need to recognize that Francis can not be Pope based on his words and deeds. You have a duty to defend the Truth and to reject all who profess a false gospel. This is the danger of Satan’s latest masterstroke heresy, modernism. You, the victim are left in a continuous contradiction which can only be broken when you accept the fact that the conciliar church is not Catholic and the conciliar popes were not Popes. In order to preserve your Catholic sense of obedience to authority you must destroy the Catholic teaching of the Papacy. You rather live a diabolical contradiction than live without a Pope. Someday Christ will either restore the Church and the Papacy or He will come again. Till that day we must resist modernist Rome and battle against her lies, but we must NEVER blaspheme God by calling these heretics Catholic!