Boston Catholic Journal

“Salus animarum supemus lex esto” — the salvation of souls … must be the supreme law in the Church.” Canon Law (1752)

Suggested Reading:

The Problem
of Evil

The Problem of Evil: Exonerating God

Exonerating God


CCD: Crisis in Catholic Doctrine

Crisis in
Catholic Doctrine:

the Grave State of Religious Education in America

Boston Catholic Journal

Write us:

Boston Catholic Journal
PO Box 80171
Stoneham, MA 02180 US

Go ahead ... try it!

Boston Catholic Journal

Todays Martyrology


Welcome Home to the One, True, Holy, Catholic Church


Home ... the One, True, Holy, Catholic Church

 “That understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church once declared; and there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious name of a deeper understanding
(Blessed Pope Pius IX, 1st Vatican Council, S.3, C.2 on Revelation, 1870 ex cathedra)


Season of Lent 2017

Holy Season of Lent 2018


The Church we once knew and recognize no longer




Franciscus non compos mentis est


 Francis is not of a sound mind

Francis is not of a sound mind

... or a good will

and both are very alarming

For many months now we have provided commentary on the dismal — even scandalous — exercise of the Petrine Ministry within Holy Mother Church, and the coterie of disaffected cardinals and bishops that have contributed to the present sad state of affairs. We have come to the conclusion that there is nothing we can do. We are a little voice in a vast, dark, and forbidding forest of primeval things that are contending for the souls of men.

We are a little thread in the incomprehensible fabric, spun and woven onto the sacred Body of Christ, His Church and His Bride of unimaginable beauty who has been marred and stained with the abuses heaped upon Her from within — and without. But Her beauty cannot be eclipsed in this mere fraction of ages, centuries and millennia. The faithlessness and corruption around Her and within Her will be a testimony of this age of desolation before the Throne of God in the last assizes. Under the cruel and corrupt papacy of Francis the Church is torn asunder while fear and silence echoes in the halls of Saint Peter’s lest an imposturous autocrat exact retribution for instantiating the obvious: Franciscus non compos mentis est. Francis is not of a sound mind. Or a good will.  Given his numerous incoherent statements — those not yet officially revised — we are left with this as the most charitable interpretation of the litany of his bizarre and rhapsodic statements — many of them shameful. We will not stain this page with them. You can find a sampling of them at LifeSite News, one of the few reputable sources of outstanding and reliable news concerning the Church.

The corrosive atmosphere subverting and disintegrating the very identity itself of the Church is not the work of the Holy Ghost, but of the Adversary. Mary, Mother of God protect the Church. Saint Michael defend her. Faithful Catholics hold fast to what was and will ever be: the Sacred Deposit of Faith zealously guarded and fearlessly proclaimed by the Church for 2000 years despite the encroaching evil that lurks at the gates and even coils around vestments within. Pray!

We have no authority and know that we are a whisper in a whirlwind. Canon lawyers we have none. Do you look for our credentials? Look upon the Crucifix — you will find them there. Puissance as the mighty of the world? We have a greater: Mary, Mother of God who throws her mantle about us — who will withstand Her? Indica nobis!

No — we turn away now from fruitless contention and tortuous logic that avails us nothing. On the stained steps of Saint Peter’s we toss down our emptied pens and broken souls. The world has prevailed there. It is our home, but we are not welcome. Not now. Not in this grayscale age that has no definitions and nothing of beauty. Once it was majestic and worthy of honor. It will be again. You can close the doors in our faces, but we know Who lies hidden within the Tabernacle, concealed from all who come to worship themselves. Ages past and ages to come He dwells within and never ceases to call us.
Sequere Me

Ita, Domine! Ita!

Do not despair that our beloved Holy Church has so many unworthy pastors who have abandoned the flock of the Lord for the ways of the world — even at the highest levels. It will not always be so. God Himself promised:

 Woe to the pastors that destroy and tear the sheep of my pasture - Jeremiah 23.1-2

And I will gather together the remnant of my flock, out of all the lands into which I have cast them out: and I will make them return to their own fields,
and they shall increase and be multiplied. And I will set up pastors over them, and they shall feed them: they shall fear no more, and they shall not be
dismayed: and none shall be wanting of their number, says the Lord.
(Jeremiah 23.1-4)


Recommended reading:  Francis Laments Hypocritical Catholics? from OnePeterFive
                                      German [Catholic] Bishops Hail Arch-Heretic Luther as “Teacher of the Faith” from OnePeterFive
                                      New Light on Martin Luther from CatholicCulture




A Brief Encounter with Absurdity

We hear the Penitential Act intoned at Mass: “Let us call to mind our faults and failings

                                                                                                             — but Heaven forbid! — not our SINS!

One mere second passes for sincere reflection on our “faults and failings” — SINS — a length of time insufficient for me to even begin to so much as to review them that I may repent of them — before: “Lord have mercy”. On what? I have not even had time to recall my sins, let alone plead God's mercy in light of them! But it cuts deeper — much deeper:

Everyone has “faults” (chronic shortcomings like habitual bad grammar, poor color coordination) and “failures” (despite using virtually every Element in the Periodic Table I could not remove the stain from my shirt) — but we do not prostrate ourselves before God in sorrow for them! Nor does He expect us to. In fact, we do not so much as apologize to others for our “faults and failures”. What is conspicuously absent concerning sin is absent concerning sorrow ... contrition.

For that act alone we reserve to SIN — to something grave, serious, and perhaps even mortal.

But for 50 mindless and euphoric years of being sin-free and in an illusory state of perpetual grace, we have expunged SIN from our lexicon and speak of it no more — for  .... ♫“We are the light of the world”! ♫

Imagine ... impugning to mere “faults and failures” the nails that fastened Christ to the Cross!

It has come to this effete and ultimately meaningless state of affairs: we do not know our sins — only our pitiful "“faults and failures”.

Did we mention that it is Lent?


February 16, 2018




Surely you have heard the term, but who and what is the “Devil’s advocate”?

“The Advocatus Diaboli (Latin for Devil's Advocate) was formerly an official position within the Catholic Church: one who “argued against the canonization (sainthood) of a candidate in order to uncover any character flaws or misrepresentation of the evidence favoring canonization.  In common parlance, the term devil's advocate describes someone who, given a certain point of view, takes a position he or she does not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. Despite being ancient, this idiomatic expression is one of the most popular present-day English idioms used to express the concept of arguing against something without actually being committed to the contrary view.” (Wikipedia)

Does this describe Francis’s position in the Synod on the Family which resulted in the heretical “Apostolic Exhortation” Amoris Laetitia which audaciously presumed to legitimize what God Himself forbade — that is to say, adultery — reiterated in Christ’s explicit condemnation of it?

NO! But the Devil’s Advocate Literally!

Francis did not convoke the Synod as “a Devil’s advocate” in the way understood above — but as  The Devil’s advocate indeed: that is to say, as one who — advocating  acceptance of  “certain cases of adultery” — explicitly against Christ’s unequivocal teaching — is condoning, and in condoning, advocating sin. This ... this ... is the domain of darkness — and the provenance of the father of evil. To say that this is appalling is an understatement. We are speaking of the pope of the Roman Catholic Church — essentially advocating adultery!

Radix Malorum

But let us go to the root of this evil (literally the radix malorum) by adverting to things in the beginning — to the basics, if you will.

Among all that God has created who among them is quintessentially the “advocate of sin”?

satan. (we do not capitalize the name lest we dignify it) — he who is “a liar and a murderer from the beginning” — the serpent who whispered to Eve that the injunction to obey one thing only in the Garden of Eden was not fair and should be broken.  Not only did Eve break the one Command that God had given, but she propagated it to Adam (Gen. 3 1-5) — and from Adam it was transmitted to the entire human race.

Sounds like a current state of affairs in the Church, yes?


A Pope Gone Rogue

Francis, we must sadly recognize, is not just a loose cannon. He is much more dangerous.  He is a rogue pontiff far more radical — and despotic — than those who machinated his election could have possibly anticipated.

As we have argued elsewhere, he may be non compos mentis (not of a sound mind). Why would we suggest so extreme, and yet viable a possibility?  Consider his spontaneous utterances — not those revised  and made (with great effort and imagination) to be textually and contextually comprehensible by the official organ of Vatican publications — but those which are  rambling, disconnected, profoundly ambiguous, and often verge on being rhapsodic.  Let us examine just a few:

  • Francis, in an excess verging on the ecstatic, called Cardinal Walter Kasper’s approach “profound theology,” “serene theology,” saying “it did me good” and called it “theology on one’s knees.”

What, we ask, is “serene theology”? What is theology on ones knees”? These are meaningless terms apart from the mind of the one who utters them. They possess a “pathos” of meaning: an emotional sense of meaning to which nothing rational can be ascribed. They sound nice, but mean nothing. This is not an unkind assessment; only a logical one.

Another disturbing — and more troubling — statement is the following:

  • “The Church will have to initiate everyone—priests, religious and laity—into this “art of accompaniment” which teaches us to remove our sandals before the sacred ground of the other.” (cf. Ex 3:5).

The “sacred ground” of the adulterer? Really? The bedroom of your neighbor’s wife as Mount Sinai?

And who, we must ask with an exacting determination, do we acquire this “art” from? Who are the “Artists” that will teach us? What is more, according to Francis, we will be have to be “initiated” into it, as into a Masonic Lodge or a pagan cult. Invoking the notion of “initiation” is particularly troubling. Catholics have religious rites (the Rite of Baptism, Confirmation, Last Rites, etc.). We are not “initiated” into the Church as into some occult organization; we undergo the “Rite of Baptism”. Still less are we initiated into a questionable “Art” of any kind. The connotation — apart from material, visual, or performing arts, of course — is historically antagonistic to Christianity, and is particularly associated with the “Dark Arts”.  In a word, Religion is not an “Art” — but an expression and exercise of Faith.

Francis goes on further to say:

  • “The pace of this accompaniment must be steady and reassuring, reflecting our closeness and our compassionate gaze which also heals, liberates and encourages growth in the Christian life. (Evangelii Gaudium, 169).

What in the world is he saying? That we should “compassionately gaze” upon adulterers?  Such a notion is surreal and behaviorally absurd.

How does one do that? Does one stare into their face with an excruciatingly painful expression of sympathy, a factitious and eerie sense of radiant warmth, unconditional love, and heart-wrenching compassion — without frightening the adulterer — or any sane person — in doing so — and that such an affected sympathy will do …. what?

Are we to imply that we understand and “compassionately” sympathize with what the adulterer did — is still doing — and which our odd behavior suggests is really not wrong at all? 

Having developed that “art of listening” — without, of course, “judgmentally” talking  in the way of counseling  him to refrain from his sin — would you really “accompany” him to his neighbor’s wife to see that he arrives safely, and perhaps fend off her husband?

 “That is absurd!” you say.

 We agree!

But “That is Francis”.

You connect the dots …. and arrive at the conclusion.

Are You an “Artist” and a “Gazer” — a “Serene Theologian”?

Then please contact Francis with your portfolio of human “artwork” wrought through your grasp of “serene theology” and your sympathetic, penetrating , and “compassionate gaze” that led adulterers to continue sinning while esteeming their behavior as holy and pleasing to Almighty God.

Or … you could contact your local office of the American Psychiatric Association ( ) and make an appointment.


Boston Catholic Journal
January 28, 2018

   Printable PDF Version

Comments? Write us:



Against Pharisees


Bishop Athanasius Schneider


A Stunning Interview with Bishop Athanasius Schneider
concerning the Corruption in Amoris Laetitia



The Church and the world urgently need intrepid and candid witnesses of the whole truth of the commandment and of the will of God, of the whole truth of Christ’s words on marriage. Modern clerical Pharisees and Scribes, those bishops and cardinals who throw grains of incense to the neo-pagan idols of gender ideology and concubinage, will not convince anyone to either believe in Christ or to be ready to offer their lives for Christ”, said + Athanasius Schneider Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan in an interview : (This interview with Izabella Parowicz was published in the latest issue of Polonia Christianamagazine)


Izabella Parowicz: Your Excellency, what is Your Excellency’s opinion about the Synod? What is its message to families?

Bishop Schneider: “During the Synod there had been moments of obvious manipulation on the part of some clerics who held key positions in the editorial and governing structure of the Synod. The interim report (Relatio post disceptationem) was clearly a prefabricated text with no reference to the actual statements of the Synod fathers.

 In the sections on homosexuality, sexuality and “divorced and remarried” with their admittance to the sacraments the text represents a radical neo-pagan ideology. This is the first time in Church history that such a heterodox text was actually published as a document of an official meeting of Catholic bishops under the guidance of a pope, even though the text only had a preliminary character.

 Thanks be to God and to the prayers of the faithful all over the world that a consistent number of Synod fathers resolutely rejected such an agenda; this agenda reflects the corrupt and pagan main stream morality of our time, which is being imposed globally by means of political pressure and through the almost all-powerful official mass media, which are loyal to the principles of the world gender ideology party.

 Such a synod document, even if only preliminary, is a real shame and an indication to the extent the spirit of the anti-Christian world has already penetrated such important levels of the life of the Church. This document will remain for the future generations and for the historians a black mark which has stained the honour of the Apostolic See.

Izabella Parowicz: Those groups of people who had been expecting a change in the Church’s teaching with regard to the moral issues (e.g. allowing divorced and remarried people to receive Holy Communion or granting any form of approval for homosexual unions) were probably disappointed by the content of the final Relatio. Isn’t there, however, a danger that questioning and discussing issues that are fundamental for the Church’s teaching may itself open doors for serious abuses and for similar attempts to revise this teaching in the future?

Bishop Schneider: “In fact a Divine commandment, in our case the sixth commandment, the absolute indissolubility of the sacramental marriage, a Divinely established rule, means those in a state of grave sin cannot be admitted to Holy Communion. This is taught by Saint Paul in his letter inspired by the Holy Spirit in 1 Corinthians 11, 27-30, this cannot be put to the vote, just as the Divinity of Christ would never be put to a vote.  A person who still has the indissoluble sacramental marriage bond and who in spite of this lives in a stable marital cohabitation with another person, by Divine law cannot be admitted to Holy Communion. To do so would be a public statement by the Church nefariously legitimizing a denial of the indissolubility of the Christian marriage and at the same time repealing the sixth commandment of God: “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. No human institution not even the Pope or an Ecumenical Council has the authority and the competency to invalidate even in the slightest or indirect manner one of the ten Divine commandments or the Divine words of Christ: “What therefore God has joined together, let man not separate.” (Mat. 19:6).

Regardless of this lucid truth which was taught constantly and unchangingly — because unchangeable — through all the ages by the Magisterium of the Church up to our days as for instance in “Familiaris consortio” of Saint John Paul II, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church and by Pope Benedict XVI, the issue of the admissibility to Holy Communion of the so called “divorced and remarried” has been put to the vote in the Synod. This fact is in itself grievous and represents an attitude of clerical arrogance towards the Divine truth of the Word of God. The attempt to put the Divine truth and the Divine Word to a vote is unworthy of those who as representatives of the Magisterium have to hand over zealously as good and faithful rules (cf. Math 24, 45) the Divine deposit.

 By admitting the “divorced and remarried” to Holy Communion those bishops establish a new tradition on their own volition and transgressing thereby the commandment of God, as Christ once rebuked the Pharisees and Scribes. (cf. Math 15: 3) And what is still aggravating, is the fact that such bishops try to legitimize their infidelity to Christ’s word by means of arguments such as “pastoral need”, “mercy”, “openness to the Holy Spirit”. Moreover they have no fear and no scruples to pervert in a Gnostic manner the real meaning of these words labeling at the same time those who oppose them and defend the immutable Divine commandment and the true non-human tradition as rigid, scrupulous or traditionalist.

In fact the bishops who support Holy Communion for “divorced remarried” are the new Pharisees and Scribes because they neglect the commandment of God, contributing to the fact that out of the body and of the heart of the “divorced remarried” continue to “proceed adulteries” (Math 15: 19), because they want an exteriorly “clean” solution and to appear “clean” as well in the eyes of those who have power (the social media, public opinion). [It is] a sad reflection on the spiritual quality of the Catholic episcopacy in our days.

 It will surely only increase the doctrinal confusion among the priests and the faithful, being in the air, that Divine commandments and Divine words of Christ and those of the apostle Paul are put at the disposal of human decision making groups. One Cardinal who openly and strongly supported the issue of Holy Communion for “divorced and remarried” and even the shameful statements on homosexual “couples” in the preliminary Relatio, was dissatisfied with the final Relatio, and declared impudently: “The glass is half-full”, and analogously he said that one has to work that next year at the Synod it will be full. We must believe firmly that God will dissipate the plans of dishonesty, infidelity and betrayal. Christ holds infallibly the rudder of the boat of His Church in midst of such a big storm. We believe and trust in the very ruler of the Church, in Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the truth.


Izabella Parowicz: We are currently experiencing a culmination of aggression against the family; this aggression is accompanied by a tremendous confusion in the area of science about human and human identity. Unfortunately, there are certain members of Church hierarchy who, while discussing these matters, express opinions that contradict the teaching of Our Lord. How should we talk with those people who become victims of this confusion in order to strengthen their faith and to help them towards salvation?

Bishop Schneider: “We have to encourage ordinary Catholics to be faithful to the Catechism they have learned, to be faithful to the clear words of Christ in the Gospel, to be faithful to the faith their fathers and forefathers handed over to them. We have to organize circles of studies and conferences about the perennial teaching of the Church on the issue of marriage and chastity, inviting especially young people and married couples.

We have to found and promote youth groups of pure hearts, family groups, groups of Catholic spouses, who will be committed to the fidelity of their marriage vows. We have to organize groups which will help morally and materially broken families, single mothers, groups who will assist with prayer and with good counsel separated couples, groups and persons who will help “divorced and remarried” people to start a process of serious conversion, i.e. recognizing with humility their sinful situation and abandoning with the grace of God the sins which violate the commandment of God and the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage.


Izabella Parowicz: During the Synod, Archbishop Gądecki from Poznań and some other distinguished prelates were publicly expressing their disagreement with the fact that the results of the discussions departed from the perennial teaching of the Church. Is there a hope that, amid this confusion, there will be an awakening of members of clergy and those faithful who were so far unaware of the fact that, in the very Church’s bosom, there are people who undermine the teaching of Our Lord?

Bishop Schneider:Cardinal George Pell characterized the liberal sexual agenda and the alleged merciful and pastoral support of Holy Communion for “divorced remarried” during the Synod very aptly, saying that this is only the tip of the iceberg and a kind of a Trojan horse in the Church. That in the very bosom of the Church, there are people who undermine the teaching of Our Lord became an obvious fact and one for the whole world to see thanks to the internet and the work of some Catholic journalists who were not indifferent to what was happening to the Catholic faith which they consider to be the treasure of Christ.

I was pleased to see that some Catholic journalists and internet bloggers behaved as good soldiers of Christ and drew attention to this clerical agenda of undermining the perennial teaching of Our Lord. Cardinals, bishops, priests, Catholic families, Catholic young people have to say to themselves: I refuse to conform to the neo-pagan spirit of this world, even when this spirit is spread by some bishops and cardinals; I will not accept their fallacious and perverse use of holy Divine mercy and of “new Pentecost”; I refuse to throw grains of incense before the statue of the idol of the gender ideology, before the idol of second marriages, of concubinage, even if my bishop would do so, I will not do so; with the grace of God I will choose to suffer rather than betray the whole truth of Christ on human sexuality and on marriage ... Modern clerical Pharisees and Scribes, those bishops and cardinals who throw grains of incense to the neo-pagan idols of gender ideology and concubinage, will not convince anyone to either believe in Christ or to be ready to offer their lives for Christ. ... We can add: the revealed and unchangeably transmitted Divine truth about human sexuality and marriage will bring true freedom to the souls inside and outside the Church. In midst of the crisis of the Church and the bad moral and doctrinal example of some bishops of his time Saint Augustine comforted the simple faithful with these words: “Whatsoever we bishops may be, you are safe, who have God for your Father and His Church for your mother” (Contra litteras Petiliani III, 9, 10).

+ Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana, Kazakhstan.


This interview was published in the latest issue of “Polonia Christiana” magazine.

 Note: All emphases in the way of bold text have been added.,31907,i.html 


Read more:,31907,i.html#ixzz540RCGkM6

Boston Catholic Journal
January 12
, 2018

   Printable PDF Version

Comments? Write us:




At every Holy Sacrifice of the Mass let us utter, ex toto corde,

I die with Thee, O Christ — on Calvary!
Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen


How do I become holy, Lord?


How do I become Holy?


Let us begin anew with the most pertinent question of our lives. Everything else is either within it or worthless. How do I become holy?can I become holy? Dare I presume to become holy, for to be holy is to be like unto God!”  

Tonight, this night, we have asked the question.


Holiness is simply this: perfect conformity to the will of God in all things, at all times, and in all places.

It is to will what God wills.

It is to act as God would have you act.

It is the perfect correspondence between who and what you are, and who and what God wants you to be.

It is that simple.

“Be you therefore perfect …”

“Estote ergo vos perfecti, sicut et Pater vester Caelestis perfectus est”
“Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.” (St. Matthew 5.48)

“And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.” (St. Luke 9.23)

Attending a seminary will not make you holy — although if you are a straight, heterosexual male who possesses clear masculine attributes, it is likely that you will never be permitted to be ordained. That is reserved for the effeminate or homosexual male only. While this is not Catholic policy (and in fact is contradictory to, and in open defiance of very clear Church teaching), it is nevertheless the actual state of affairs.

One does not take “courses” or
sign up for workshops in being holy — although there are many good books that will help lead you into holiness — and virtually all of them were published prior to 1960. After the decadent 1960s and the cataclysmic collapse of the Church following Vatican II within that same decade, quite nearly everything published under the auspices of the title “Catholic” — was not.

The self-inflicted wound that came to be called “Ecumenism” simply meant repudiating, renouncing, and even vilifying what is authentically, historically, and uniquely Catholic in a failed effort to assuage the animus of those hostile to us — or, as happened more often, simply to apostatize to religious indifferentism (all religions are equally good and all lead to the same God) … and eventually came to mean little more than a thinly veiled pantheism. 1 In effect, we became
them who refused to become us.


Tearing Christ from the Cross — the Imperative of “Horizontal Worship

In other words, following Vatican II, Christ was torn from the Cross and for Modernist Catholics the Cross became a token of shame — an embarrassing vestige of their once thoroughly supernatural religion which has been "corrected and rehabilitated by "enlightened
and Modernist theologians, bishops, priests, and Religious. Religion is far more horizontal (pertaining to people, politics, economies, and the new goddess of environmentalism, Mother Earth) than it is vertical (pertaining to worshipping, loving, and serving God alone and preeminently above all else). We really worship God best by focusing on the socio-sexual and political needs of others — not by (vertically) worshipping God in Himself as we had done for over 2000 years in the Dark Ages preceding Aggiornamento in 1963.

To be a (traditional) Catholic (that is to say, one faithful to the historical Magisterium and teaching of the Catholic Church … in other words, a Catholic) was to be “intolerant” — although this intolerance oddly did not apply to Judaism, Protestantism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Islam (which did not and still does not accept or tolerate most Catholic dogma) — or even Atheism and Secularism within that same period … and even now. Only Catholics, apparently, have the capacity for and susceptibility to “intolerance”. Anyone, of course, who holds fast to a teaching, doctrine, or dogma, does not accept as licit anything to the contrary and vigorously opposes what conflicts with that teaching: for it is what of necessity differentiates ideas, concepts and, yes, religions, rather than conflating them into a contradictory and irreconcilable pudding that is meant to be agreeable to everyone (but God) however much it flies in the face of reason and logic (demigods in modern theology's pantheon of gods of a lesser nature than the real God, but equally repudiated in favor of emotivism — that is to say, how we feel and what makes us feel good).

The impediment of logic

Even logic itself is tossed aside as an impediment to the countless irreconcilable contradictions inherent in Ecumenism. To wit, the Law of the Excluded Middle holds that two things cannot both be and not be at one and the same time. You are reading this column or you are not reading this column. You cannot be both reading and not reading this column. It is an inescapable contradiction. The Holy Eucharist is really and truly the Body and Blood of Christ and The Holy Eucharist is not really and truly the Body and Blood of Christ are reciprocally contradictory and mutually exclusive statements (and beliefs). It either is, or it is not, really and truly the Body and Blood of Christ. It logically (and even existentially) cannot be both. Perhaps logic itself was the first casualty of Vatican II and Ecumenism.

Capitalists, as another example, have very distinct and differing concepts of economies from Communists. Each will argue that its own ideology is incompatible with and contradictory to the others’. Ideologically there can be no Capitalist Communists, or Communist Capitalists. They are not just different, or even contrasting, but opposing ideologies.

Pro-Lifers and Pro-Abortionists also have distinct and differing concepts that logically conflict with one another. Ideologically there can be no Pro-life Pro-Abortionists, or Pro-Abortion Pro-Lifers. Once again, they are not just different, but opposing ideologies. Each is subtended by differing and opposite views on life, conception, death, and murder.

However … and oddly enough, only Pro-life advocates are intolerant, while Pro-Abortion advocates are not … hmmmm….

But to return to holiness: as we have seen, Christ calls us to perfection, and this entails denying oneself daily (very difficult, but doable), taking up the Cross (not a very pleasant thing to do) and following Him (the success of which alone is afforded by both Sanctifying Grace and Actual Grace — century-old terms no longer used because they are no longer taught or understood).


The hard work of holiness

This is the work of holiness, of personal sanctification — and there is no more urgent need in our lives.

Forget about:

  •  “oppressive and sinful ‘structures’ in the world”

  • “inclusivism”

  •  feminist “language neutering”

  • structural sin"

  • “collaborative ministry”

  • “oppressive patriarchal structures”

  • “social justice”  (this comes with holiness, not before it)

  • “social and political activism'”

This is the language of the world, of liberal academia, of militant feminism — not of Christ. It is the language of those who detest the Church but remain within her for “a living”; it is the childish and neologistic ravings of dissident theologians and radical feminists (also making a living off the Church). They are “catholic” in being “universally” contemptible of the Church and Her teachings. They have left being “Catholic” long ago.

None of this will lead you to holiness. None of it.

Only Christ can. And He does:

  • If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.” (St. Luke 9.23)

  • Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.” (St. Matthew 5.48)

An intimate affair

Holiness is an intimate affair — between you and God.

He does not ask you, anywhere in the Gospels, to change the world … but to change yourself — to take up your Cross and to follow Him ... not the world. 2

He is our paradigm of Holiness ... as is His Holy Mother Mary who gave us that beautiful, immemorial utterance, "Be it done to me according to thy word." (St. Luke 1.37) In other words, as we said earlier, only conformity to the will of God — not the world — is the essence of holiness.

Imitate them. Not the world, just as Saint Paul did: “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.” 3

Please God, let us now also say with Saint Paul, “I live, now not I; but Christ liveth in me.” 4

Saint John, perhaps, sums it up best:

Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world passeth away, and the concupiscence thereof: but he that doth the will of God, abideth for ever. (1 John 2.15-17)

Whom and what, then, will you follow if you seek to be holy?  Christ or the world? It is absolutely clear that you cannot follow both. Each path diverges totally from the other, and the longer you remain on one path the farther you will be from the other.

Boston Catholic Journal
January 1, 2018


   Printable PDF Version

Comments? Write us:


“Pope Benedict XVI leads an interfaith peace meeting in the Basilica of St. Mary of the Angels in Assisi, Italy, Oct. 27. Pictured, from left, are: Archbishop Norvan Zakarian of the Armenian Apostolic Church, Anglican Archbishop Rowan Williams of Canterbury and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, Pope Benedict, Rabbi David Rosen, representing the chief rabbinate of Israel; Wande Abimbola, president of a Nigerian institute that promotes the study of the culture and traditional religion of the Yoruba people; and Shrivatsa Goswami, a Hindu delegate”. 
“ASSISI, Italy (AP) – “Pope Benedict XVI joined Buddhist monks, Islamic scholars, Yoruba leaders and a handful of agnostics in making a communal call for peace Thursday, insisting that religion must never be used as a pretext for war or terrorism. Benedict welcomed some 300 leaders representing a rainbow of faiths to the hilltop Italian town of Assisi to commemorate the 25th anniversary of a daylong prayer for peace here called by Pope John Paul II in 1986 amid Cold War conflicts. Standing on the altar of St. Mary of the Angels basilica, Wande Abimbola of Nigeria, representing Africa's traditional Yoruba religion, sang and shook a percussion instrument as he told the delegates that peace can only come with greater respect for indigenous religions."We must always remember that our own religion, along with the religions practiced by other people, are valid and precious in the eyes of the Almighty, who created all of us with such plural and different ways of life and belief systems," he said. 
Blessed John Paul II, on the contrary, intuited the public force of religions, despite secularization. He knew that religions could be attractive to war-like passions. Worried about the cold war, he invited leaders of Christian religions and other world religions to Assisi.

2  St. Matthew 4.8; St. Mark 4.19; St. Luke 4.5, 12.30; St. John 7.7, 14.17, 15.19, 16.33, 17.9, 17.14, 17.16; Gal. 6.14; Colossians 2.8, 2.20; 2 St. Peter 1.4, 2.20; 1 St. John 2.15-17
3  I Cor. 11
4  Gal. 2.20

Boston Catholic Journal
December 19, 2017


Comments? Write us:





for Properly Celebrating the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: A Primer for Clueless Catholics

DO NOT DO at Mass  what you would never have done were you standing at the foot of the Cross with Christ visibly before you.

DO at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass what you would have done were you standing before Christ hanging on the Cross in front of you — for at Holy Mass you are at the crucifixion of Christ on the Cross — really and truly.

Had you closed your eyes for a moment while standing immediately before Christ upon the Cross, 
you would be where you are this day at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

DO, then, what you would have done ... and DO NOT DO what you would never have done.

is the proper disposition of the soul at every single Mass.



Complete Roman Martyrology in English

The Complete Martyrology in


for Daily Reflection

Semen est sanguis Christianorum — The blood of Christians is the seed of the Church — Tertullian, Apologeticum, 50



Saturday March 17th in the Year of Grace 2018

Season of Lent

This Day, the Seventeenth Day of March

In Ireland, the birthday of St. Patrick, bishop and confessor, who was the first to preach Christ in that country, and became illustrious by great miracles and virtues.

At Jerusalem, St. Joseph of Arimathea, noble senator and disciple of our Lord, who took his body down from the cross, and buried it in his own new sepulchre.

At Rome, the Saints Alexander and Theodore, martyrs.

At Alexandria, the commemoration of many holy martyrs, who being seized by the worshippers of Serapis, and refusing constantly to adore that idol, were cruelly murdered, in the reign of the emperor Theodosius, who afterwards issued orders that the temple of Serapis should be destroyed.

At Constantinople, St. Paul, martyr, who was burned alive under Constantine Copronymus, for defending the worship of holy images.

At Chalons, in France, St. Agricola, bishop.

At Nivelle, in Brabant, St. Gertrude, a virgin of noble birth. Because she despised the world, and during her whole life practiced all kinds of good works, she deserved to have Christ for her spouse in Heaven.

And elsewhere in divers places, many other holy martyrs, confessors, and holy virgins.

Omnes sancti Mártyres, oráte pro nobis. ("All ye Holy Martyrs, pray for us", from the Litaniae Sanctorum, the Litany of the Saints)

Response: Thanks be to God.



Roman Martyrology by Month

Why the Martyrs Matter

Each day
we bring you a calendar, a list really, of the holy Martyrs who had suffered and died for Christ, for His Bride the Church, and for our holy Catholic Faith; men and women for whom — and well they knew — their Profession of Faith would cost them their lives.

They could have repudiated all three (Christ, Church, and Catholic Faith) and kept their lives for a short time longer (even the lapsi only postponed their death — and at so great a cost!).1

What would motivate men, women, even children and entire families to willingly undergo the most evil and painfully devised tortures; to suffer death rather than denial?

Why did they not renounce their Catholic Faith when the first flame licked at their feet, after the first eye was plucked out, or after they were “baptized” in mockery by boiling water or molten lead poured over their heads? Why did they not flee to offer incense to the pagan gods since such a ritual concession would be merely perfunctory, having been done, after all, under duress, exacted by the compulsion of the state? What is a little burned incense and a few words uttered without conviction, compared to your own life and the lives of those you love? Surely God knows that you are merely placating the state with empty gestures …

Did they love their wives, husbands, children — their mothers, fathers and friends less than we do? Did they value their own lives less? Were they less sensitive to pain than we are? In a word, what did they possess that we do not?

Nothing. They possessed what we ourselves are given in the Sacrament of Confirmation — but cleaved to it in far greater measure than we do: Faith and faithfulness; fortitude and valor, uncompromising belief in the invincible reality of God, of life eternal in Him for the faithful, of damnation everlasting apart from Him for the unfaithful; of the ephemerality of this passing world and all within it, and lives lived in total accord with that adamant belief.

We are the Martyrs to come

What made them so will make us so. What they suffered we will suffer. What they died for, we will die for. If only we will! For most us, life will be a bloodless martyrdom, a suffering for Christ, for the sake of Christ, for the sake of the Church in a thousand ways outside the arena. The road to Heaven is lined on both sides with Crosses, and upon the Crosses people, people who suffered unknown to the world, but known to God. Catholics living in partibus infidelium, under the scourge of Islam. Loveless marriages. Injustices on all sides. Poverty. Illness. Old age. Dependency. They are the cruciform! Those whose lives became Crosses because they would not flee God, the Church, the call to, the demand for, holiness in the most ordinary things of life made extraordinary through the grace of God. The Martyrology we celebrate each day is just a vignette, a small, immeasurably small, sampling of the martyrdom that has been the lives of countless men and women whom Christ and the Angels know, but whom the world does not know.

“Exemplum enim dedi vobis”, Christ said to His Apostles 2  “I have given you an example.” And His Martyrs give one to us — and that is why the Martyrs matter.

Joseph Mary del Campos
Editor, Boston Catholic Journal

Note: We suggest that you explore our newly edited and revised
De SS. Martyrum Cruciatibus — The Torments and Tortures of the Christian Martyrs for an in-depth historical account of the sufferings of the Martyrs.



by J. Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore

THE ROMAN MARTYROLOGY is an official and accredited record, on the pages of which are set forth in simple and brief, but impressive words, the glorious deeds of the Soldiers of Christ in all ages of the Church; of the illustrious Heroes and Heroines of the Cross, whom her solemn verdict has beatified or canonized. In making up this long roll of honor, the Church has been actuated by that instinctive wisdom with which the Spirit of God, who abides in her and teaches her all truth, has endowed her, and which permeates through and guides all her actions. She is the Spouse of Christ, without spot or wrinkle or blemish, wholly glorious and undefiled, whom He loved, for whom He died, and to whom He promised the Spirit of Truth, to comfort her in her dreary pilgrimage through this valley of tears, and to abide with her forever. She is one with Him in Spirit and in love, she is subject to Him in all things; she loves what He loves, she teaches and practices what He commands.

If the world has its Legions of Honor, why should not also the Church of the Living God, the pillar and the ground of the truth? If men who have been stained with blood, and women who have been tainted with vice, have had their memory consecrated in prose and in verse, and monuments erected to their memory, because they exhibited extraordinary talents, achieved great success, or were, to a greater or less extent, benefactors of their race in the temporal order, which passeth away, why should not the true Heroes and Heroines of Jesus, who, imitating His example, have overcome themselves, risen superior to and trampled upon the world, have aspired, in all their thoughts, words, and actions, to a heavenly crown, and have moreover labored with disinterested zeal and self-forgetting love for the good of their fellow-men, have their memories likewise consecrated and embalmed in the minds and hearts of the people of God? If time have its heroes, why should not eternity; if man, why should not God? Thy friends, O Lord, are exceedingly honored; their principality is exceedingly exalted. Whom His Father so dearly loved, the world crucified; whom the world neglects, despises, and crucifies, God, through His Church, exceedingly honors and exalts. Their praises are sung forth, with jubilation of heart, in the Church of God for ages on ages.

The wisdom of the Church of God in honoring her Saints is equaled only by the great utility of the practice thus consecrated. The Saints are not merely heroes; they are models. Christ lived in them, and Christ yet speaks through them. They were the living temples of the Holy Ghost, in whose mortal bodies dwelt all the riches of His wisdom and grace. They were in life consecrated human exemplars of divine excellence and perfection. Their example still appeals to our minds and to our hearts, more eloquently even than did their words to the men of their own generation, while they were in the tabernacle of the flesh. Though dead, they still speak. Their relics are instinct with sanctity, and through them they continue to breathe forth the sweet odor of Christ. The immortality into which they have entered still lingers in their bones, and seems to breathe in their mortal remains. As many an ardent, spirit has been induced to rush to the cannons mouth by reading the exploits of earthly heroes, so many a generous Christian soul has been fired with heavenly ardor, and been impelled to rush to the crown of martyrdom, by reading the lives and heroic achievements of the Saints and Martyrs of Christ. Example, in its silent appeal, is more potent in its influence on the human heart and conduct than are words in their most eloquent utterances.

The Church knows and feels all this, in the Spirit of God with whom she is replenished ; and hence she sets forth, with holy joy and exultant hope, her bright and ever-increasing Calendar of Sanctity of just men and women made perfect and rendered glorious, under her unearthly and sublime teachings. In reading this roll of consecrated holiness, our instinctive conclusion is, precisely that which the great soul of St. Augustine reached at the very crisis of his life, the moment of his conversion If other men like me have attained to such sanctity, why not I? Shall the poor, the afflicted, the despised of the World, bear away the palm of victory, the crown of immortality, while I lie buried in my sloth and dead in my sins, and thus lose the brilliant and glorious mansion already prepared for me in heaven? Shall all the gifts, which God has lavished upon me, be ingloriously spent and foolishly wasted, in the petty contest for this worlds evanescent honors and riches, while the poor and contemned lay up treasures in heaven, and secure the prize of immortal glory? Shall others be the friends of God, whom He delights to honor, while I alone remain His enemy, and an alien from His blessed Kingdom?

It is a consoling evidence of progress in the spiritual life in this country to find the Martyrology here published, for the first time, in English, and thereby made accessible, in its rich treasures of Sanctity, to all classes of our population. It will prove highly edifying and useful, not only to the members of our numerous religious Communities of both sexes, but also to the laity generally. Every day has here its record of Sanctity; and there is scarcely a Christian, no matter how lowly or how much occupied, who may not be able to daily peruse, with faith and with great profit, the brief page of each day’s models of Holiness. These belong to all classes and callings of life; from the throne to the hovel, from the Pontiff to the lowest cleric, from the philosopher to the peasant, from the busy walks of life to the dreary wastes of the desert.

Let all, then, procure and read daily the appropriate portions of this Martyrology. Its daily and pious perusal will console us in affliction, will animate us in despondency, will make our souls glow with the love of God in coldness, and will lift up our minds and hearts from this dull and ever-changing earth to the bright and everlasting mansions prepared for us in Heaven!

Imprimatur,  J. Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop Baltimore, Maryland 1916

   Printable PDF Version


1   The Lapsi were early Catholics who renounced the Faith and either sacrificed to the Roman gods by edict from the emperor, or offered incense to them to escape Imperial persecution and death, and who later returned to the Faith when persecution subsided. However, Christ warns us,
    “Every one therefore that shall confess Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in Heaven. But he that shall deny Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father Who is in Heaven.”
(St. Matthew 10.3-33)

2 St. John 13.15

Comments? Write us:




Traditional Catholics


the ONLY Religious group —  of ALL religious groups in ALL Religions — vilified by the Post-Conciliar Church


The Extraordinary Question is — WHY?


Have you ever considered recovering your 2000 year old religious heritage before it was effectively — but not legitimately — abolished following Vatican II?

Give it a shot ...


Go ahead ... try it!





The Perpetual Authority of the Latin Mass

The Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

What part of the word Forever do we no Longer Understand?


(Pope St. Pius V - July 14, 1570)


April 3, 1969: When forever came to mean only 399 years

On the third day of April 1969 the temporal concept of forever was astonishingly and arbitrarily quantified by Pope Paul VI — much to the perplexity of historians and physicists — as 399 years—  or to be precise, 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days.

On that day Pope Paul tampered with time and eternity by expurgating or otherwise expunging the ancient Latin rite of the Mass known as Quo Primum — which unambiguously states that this present Constitution … will be valid henceforth, now, and forever — and replacing it, by a tour de force, with his own Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, otherwise known as the Novus Ordo, or The New Mass.

This does not mean, of course, that Pope Paul VI explicitly stated that:

“Henceforth the word, the concept, and the notion of forever now — as of this third day of April 1969 — only means 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days.”

However — and this is vital to understand — it is the inescapable logical consequence of replacing the Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum — which unambiguously states that the Tridentine Mass (as we have come to call it) is, and always will be, the only valid Mass, incapable of being altered, modified, or changed in any way by any person whomsoever — “henceforth, now, and forever”.

Pretty clear, yes?

But this unalterable Mass had, in fact, been superseded by the Novus Ordo Missae (New Order Mass) following Vatican II, despite the fact that Quo Primum was to be in force “forever” and in no way “altered”. What was decreed to remain both unalterable and forever … was neither, following Vatican II.

We were left asking ourselves what, in fact, the word “forever” had suddenly come to mean, together with all the ramifications of this re-definition of a clearly understood concept. In other words, if “forever” does not mean “for all time and into eternity” … what, precisely does it mean?

If what is held to be “forever” is abrogated in its intension by the introduction of something that re-defines it in such a way that it is nullified. Why is that?  Simply put,  anything “other than” our understanding of the intensionality of “forever” eo ipso nullifies it, for it must be less and cannot be greater than “forever” as we had always understood the concept “forever”— and what is less is already understood in other temporal terms, in which case the re-definition of “forever” becomes merely redundant of other and already existing temporal concepts such as “now”, “past”, “present”, and “future”.

In other words, if “forever” is in any way abbreviated to something less, then it is determinate and if it is determinate it is quantifiable. In the present case it is reduced to 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days, or the period between Quo Primum (the Latin Mass) in 1570 and its being superseded by Missale Romanum  (Mass in the vernacular) in 1969. What was deemed as binding “forever” in 1570 and the following 400 years was breached by something new (novus) and different in 1969. But how is this possible if what was binding “now, henceforth, and forever” in 1570 was replaced in 1969? How could “forever” come to mean, “only in force for 400 years — after which it is susceptible to being abrogated”? Logically such a breach cannot occur without somehow re-defining the concept of “forever”. But this is fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions that make any effort of the sort possible.

Consider the following verse: “I am the living bread that came down out of Heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he shall live forever (St. John 6.51) What do we understand by this? That those who “eat of this bread” shall live for 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days? Of course not. We understand that they shall live forever, which is to say, for all time into eternity. The word “forever” or “for ever” occurs 472 times in Holy Scripture and it is always spoken of or understood in terms of limitless perpetuity, e.g. “for his mercy endureth forever.” (Ps. 135.20) By what possible warrant can we understand God’s mercy as enduring for a finite quantum of time, say, 160 years, 6 months and two days? In other words, how do we quantify forever? We cannot. It is not a quantifiable sum.

When Saint Paul says of Christ: “Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today; and the same forever”, how are we to hold “yesterday” as meaning, “the day before this present day”, and “today” as “this present day” — but “forever” as meaning “399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”? After that limited duration of time does Christ become something different? Why did Saint Paul not say “Jesus Christ, yesterday, and today; and for 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days”?

In other words, does the word “forever” in Sacred Scripture, and in ordinary discourse, mean something different than it meant in Quo Primum, and if it does, why just Quo Primum? If we re-define the concept of “forever” it must apply to each and every iteration of it, wherever it occurs, sacred or profane. Are we prepared to do this? Is it even logically possible? In a word, no.

Moreover, we must then ask, what then is the periodicity of the concept “forever” once it acquires a terminus, an end — and what is more, and of far greater importance, what lies beyond it? If it is merely the most extensive temporal concept in an array of other lesser, but equally determinate temporal concepts, then its durability is finite — notwithstanding that the notion of time itself is indefinite (for being discretely, and however arbitrarily enumerated, it is at least conceptually infinite by mere addition). As Saint Augustine pointed out in broaching the concept of eternity (in which there is no time as we understand it) it is pointless to ask “what preceded eternity?” for the notion of precedence is itself a temporal notion, and to ask “what preceded eternity?” (in which there is no time) is to ask “what preceded time before there was no time.” We are now asking, “what succeeds forever when “forever” as a determinate time frame expires?” What do we call it? Can we concatenate a series of “forevers” indefinitely? And if we do, what shall we call it? Forever? We cannot — for “forever”, as we had said, has become a determinate time frame following the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum of Vatican II. Perhaps you begin to see the inconsistency, the absurdity really, of tampering with the notion of “forever”.

Even if we argue that the Pope has the authority and the ability to re-define and abbreviate the notion of “forever” by invoking Christ’s pronouncement to Saint Peter: “Whatever you bind on earth is bound in Heaven” (St. Mat. 18.18), we still have not circumvented the problem. Heaven itself is the paradigm par excellence of “forever” (and so, too, is Hell). Time and logic are not in the arena of “Faith and Morals” in which alone the Pope is competent and infallible. (Nor, incidentally is economics). Even if a pope repeals a former pope’s Apostolic Constitution, he cannot repeal logic nor re-define the intensionality of a concept, in this case “forever”. To say that St. Pius V did not “intend” to use “forever” in the way we, and all our predecessors understood it, is absolutely without warrant or justification. 1 He meant that The Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum would be binding forever. If not, why the severest admonition at the end of Quo Primum?

 “Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

Further consider the force, extent, clarity, and absolute perpetuity of the following twelve excerpts from Quo Primum:


  • It is most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass

  • This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever

  • This new rite alone is to be used

  • This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.

  • This present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever

  • Nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it

  • We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us

  • They must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal

  • This Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used.

  • This present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remains always valid and retain its full force

  • The Missal [must] be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free of flaws and errors

  • Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

Since Vatican II, however,
forever”, it appears, has a terminus after all ... and does not mean ... well ... forever … at least in the reinterpreted and novel concept of time enunciated by Pope Paul VI in his Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum — which abolished, or more properly expurgated the notion of “forever” to accommodate changes that could not be reconciled with that concept. Quo Primum leaves absolutely no room for ambiguity as you will see in the document itself which accompanies this article. If the proposal on the table is in open conflict with the concept of “forever”, then one must go: the proposal or “forever”.  Paul VI opted for the latter. It must either be redefined or abolished. He did both.

From a purely philosophical point of view, this quantification of the temporal category that we understand as “forever” poses not simply significant, but insuperable problems in any discussion concerning the nature of any conceivable temporal discourse. Let us look at a few instances.

If “forever” does not mean "uninterrupted continuity without end", then by that same logic it simultaneously and necessarily abrogates every other temporal permutation:

  • Never does not mean at no time — either in the past, the present or the future.

  • Now does not mean at this moment or in this present time

  • Before no longer means preceding or anteceding the present

  • And by the Past we no longer understand what had preceded the present

Altering the connotation or intension of any of these five categories (forever, never, now, before, past — but especially “forever”), not simply alters, but abolishes the connotation or meaning of each and all of them.

Consider the following diametrically polar concepts of temporal permutations which — if "forever" no longer means "absolute perpetuity — no longer connote, or mean, what we had erstwhile understood them to mean in the temporal ordering of any state of affairs:

  • FOREVER / never, periodicity

  • NOW / before or after

  • PRESENT / past, future, soon

  • EARLY / late

  • OLD / new

  • MODERN / ancient

  • FIRST / last, second, third, etc. (i.e. a series) — also, minute, hour, day, week, month, year, decade, century, millennium, etc.

  • ETERNAL / temporal

As we see, quite a bit follows from “forever” no longer being understood as forever but rather, as 399 years at which time “forever” expires.

We must understand that the term “forever” subsumes all the temporal categories and inflections under it, all of which are determinate and finite extensions of time relative only to “forever” (for all time and into eternity) which had erstwhile been understood as indefinite and indeterminate — as so many parts, or segments, if you will, of an infinitely extensive concept (forever) that is indeterminate by definition.

In a word, if “forever” is arbitrarily determined as a finite quantum, all that it subsumed beneath it and understood relative to it is also susceptible to arbitrary determination and we can no longer coherently enter into temporal discourse of any kind that presumes to bind any state of affairs to a determinate referent in time. A week, or month, for example, is only what we arbitrarily understand it to be according to our purpose at hand.

The implications of “implicitly” redefining the temporal concept of “forever” are enormous. Think of it. They pertain, according to the canons of reason, not only to the simplest geometric concept of a line (“A line has only one dimension: length. It continues forever in two directions.”), but to the trajectory, and ultimately, the destiny of the human soul according to the most fundamental notions of Christian doctrine: the eternity of God and the immortality of the soul.


Now as 3-minutes-27-seconds

Let us look at this more closely. If, by a pure fiat, we are no longer to understand “now" as “the present moment", but a duration of “3 minutes and 27 seconds” — what follows? Indeed, can we even ask the question, “what follows? since “following” is a temporal concept meaning “occurring after the present moment, or “now”.

What happened in the intervening “3-minutes-27-seconds”?

How do we understand that 3-minutes-27-seconds vacuum? We cannot say that it did not exist, or that what occurred within it did not occur — nor is it possible that nothing occurred within it. Such an assertion accords with neither reason nor experience. In the 3-minutes-27-seconds that intervenes between the present now and the next now (3-minutes-27-seconds later) what do we say of what we did or what had happened in that time frame? Whatever it was, it did not occur in a “now", but in the hiatus between 2 successive 3-minute-27-seconds “nows”.

When then did it occur? We do not have the apparatus to determine this, for we have created a false and illogical time narrative that involves not just inconsistencies but contradictions. By interjecting 3-minutes-27-seconds between successive “nows” we have superseded the model of time and, of course, of the notion of a clock which was ticking between, and enumerating those 3-minutes-27-second “nows”.

Before as 2-minutes-17-seconds

What logically holds true for the concept “now” equally holds true for every other category of re-interpreted time. If, for example, we reinterpret “before” as preceding “now” by 2-minutes-17-seconds, we face the same conundrum. It devolves through every other permuation of re-interpreted time until we can have no coherent discourse or discussion involving temporal characteristics. This is to say that we cannot have a discussion in which anything is spoken, for “spoken” is the past tense of the present tense “speak”. In a word, all discourse is inescapably temporal. It occurs or had occurred or will occur.

We cannot say a lot in 2-minutes-17-seconds which, by this reasoning, would qualify it as speaking “now”. Moreover, when the 2-minutes-17-seconds are up, how are they differentiated from the “following” or “previous” 2-minutes-17-seconds? Is there a hiatus between the “previous” 2-minutes-17-seconds and the “following” 2-minutes-17-seconds? What is its duration? And what can — for something must — occur within it? How then, shall we speak of it?

Once specific determinacy is predicated of temporal concepts they lose all coherence.

 You may say, “Well, a clock enumerates 60 seconds for each minute and 60 minutes for each hour, and so on — so there is a specific and determinate time frame.” Yes … for atomic clocks and the like (which are arbitrarily and artificially divided to begin with — why, for example, 60 seconds for a minute and not 136, and what is the specific duration of a second that is not already arbitrarily based on the present caesium model (“The second is the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom. The International System of Units ) that is in itself a qualified model. 2 Would the same numeric values hold true if the model were based on barium?) In other words, this may hold true for certain atomic clocks, but not for concepts.


Quo Primum and the indefeasible Concept of Forever

All this has been a rather long and roundabout way of demonstrating the most important fact that pertains to Catholics: that “forever” as it pertains to time is not a finite quantum, but means, as it has always meant, and will always be understood to mean: "uninterrupted continuity without end". This pertains to Heaven and it pertains to Hell. Therefore it intrinsically pertains to Christian Doctrine. If either Heaven or Hell are merely 399 years, 9 months, and 11 days, the question naturally arises: what happens after that? As we see ,we cannot escape the notion of “forever” without logical inconsistency — and if Quo Primum states “forever concerning the way we celebrate Mass, it was a definitive, unambiguous, and unimpeachable statement that clarified, once and for all, the manner in which the Mass was, is, and always will be celebrated — forever.

Even popes cannot change the nature of time and the consistency of logic. Quo Primum and the traditional Latin Mass prior to its enervation (or evisceration: you choose, for both apply) following Vatican II, remains binding upon all Catholics (read Quo primum which follows) — forever. It is inescapable. Pope Saint Pius V forever bound every successor to the Chair of Peter to it, together with every Catholic.

The extremely frightening question that follows is ineluctable: what does this mean concerning the validity of virtually every Mass “celebrated” since Vatican II? If we can prescind from an authentic Apostolic Constitution that binds us forever to the Mass as it was celebrated prior to 1962, from what else are we prepared to illicitly dispense with in the way of the Deposit of the Faith and authentic historical Catholic dogma? We already see it unfolding before us, especially under the papacy of Francis among those who deplore a “throw away culture” but appear to embrace a “throw away” Church.

 Somewhere in every part of the world the authentic Latin Mass is being celebrated; many under conditions similar to the underground Church in China, and the only difference is that those who police and brutally suppress these recalcitrant congregations outside of atheistic China are the heavy-handed bishops of the Church itself — many of whom appear to have lost the Faith — but not the comfort and perquisites of their office.



1  Despite the purely conjectural assertion by apologists such as Likoudis and Whitehead that, "Quo Primum [was] … not attempting to fix one particular version of the Roman Missal for all time.” And that “the ‘Tridentine Mass’ and the ‘New Order of the Mass’ constitute different versions of the same Missal” — they do not even upon the most cursory reading of both.  The Pope, the Council, and the Mass: Answers to Questions the Traditionalists Have Asked, 1981 and 2006, Emmaus Road Publishing

2  “The frequencies of all primary frequency standards should therefore be corrected for the shift due to ambient radiation, as stated at the meeting of the Consultative Committee for Time and Frequency in 1999.”

Boston Catholic Journal



What forever really means:




Pope Pius V Catechism of Trent


From the very first, upon Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind and energies and directed all out thoughts to those matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove with God's help, by every means in our power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful, by God's help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper —  for it is most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass — We deemed it necessary to give our immediate attention to what still remained to be done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.

Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses.

Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.
This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women — even of military orders — and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.

This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else to the contrary notwithstanding.

All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by
this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.

We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that
this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remains always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription — except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing.

It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority, We decree that, after We publish this constitution and the edition of the Missal, the priests of the Roman Curia are, after thirty days, obliged to chant or read the Mass according to it; all others south of the Alps, after three months; and those beyond the Alps either within six months or whenever the Missal is available for sale. Wherefore, in order that the Missal be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free of flaws and errors, the penalty for nonobservance for printers, whether mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion, and that of the Holy Roman Church, will be the forfeiting of their books and a fine of one hundred gold ducats, payable ipso facto to the Apostolic Treasury. Further, as for those located in other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication latae sententiae, and such other penalties as may in Our judgment be imposed; and We decree by this law that they must not dare or presume either to print or to publish or to sell, or in any way to accept books of this nature without Our approval and consent, or without the express consent of the Apostolic Commissaries of those places, who will be appointed by Us. Said printer must receive a standard Missal and agree faithfully with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal of the large type (secundum magnum impressionem).

Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present pronouncement to be sent to all parts of the Christian world and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We direct that it be, as usual, posted and published at the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles, also at the Apostolic Chancery, and on the street at Campo Flora; furthermore, We direct that printed copies of this same edict signed by a notary public and made official by an ecclesiastical dignitary possess the same indubitable validity everywhere and in every nation, as if Our manuscript were shown there.
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should anyone dare to contravene it, know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

Given at St. Peter
s in the year of the Lord's Incarnation, 1570, on the 14th of July of the Fifth year of Our Pontificate.


   Printable PDF Version





Search the Boston Catholic Journal


Free Catholic Audio Library
Download Catholic Prayers
and more

The End

Archbishop Fulton Sheen - The Fourth Great Crisis in the Church - The End of Christendom

of Christendom

“The Fourth Great Crisis
of the Church”

 Why the  Church
— and the West
are withering

An audio presentation

The Little Office

The Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary

of the
Blessed Virgin Mary

Saint Michael the Archangel

Prayer to Saint Michael against satan

Novena to St Jude

 Novena to St Jude Printable 4-fold with one piece of paper
Printable Booklet
on 1 sheet
of paper, 4-fold, free

With Mary in the Rose Garden
Mary Immaculate, Mother of God
Reflections on the Rosary
with a Poor Clare Nun and Padre Pio

The Baltimore Catechism

Discover what the Church really teaches
Download the PDF

Thoughts in Passing about our Holy Catholic Faith

Thoughts in Passing
on our Life in Faith

The Practice of the Presence of God
 Brother Lawrence

Complete Audio Files

Father Michael Schmitz

Father Mike Schmitz — Homilies

A Passion for Preaching

Pope Saint Pius X
Pray for us

Pope St. Pius X Pray for us

“I shall spare myself neither care nor labor nor vigils for the salvation of souls”


  Totally Faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy See in Rome

 Scio opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti verbum Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum 
I know your works ... that you have but little power, and yet you have kept My word, and have not denied My Name. (Apocalypse 3.8)


Copyright © 2004 - 2018 Boston Catholic Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise stated, permission is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal for the copying and distribution of the articles and audio files under the following conditions:
No additions, deletions, or changes are to be made to the text or audio files in any way, and the copies may not be sold for a profit. In the reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic, text, or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston Catholic Journal.