A blog about the life & times of Jorge Bergoglio (aka Francis)
Sanctus Pius P.P.X, ora pro nobis. Instaurare Omnia In Christo
A well-informed blogg:https://anonimidellacroce.wordpress.com/2017/02/23/ultimora-la-prima-ordinazione-diaconale-femminile-nella-chiesa-greco-ortodossa-in-congo-prove-generali-per-il-diaconato-femminile-nella-chiesa-cattolica-di-fra-cristoforo/
What a beautiful sight, like a glimpse from a long forgotten world in sharp contrast to the Bergoglian circus pontificate.
Bet $20 you all don't know that Pius X called the Roman Rite Holy sacrifice of the Mass "Squalid" and had plans on instituting MAJOR changes in the Roman Rite.
A few links to this assertion should be posted from you now...quotes from sources...something.
Look it up ClareNot being rude you have the internet
Why didn't you, and why must I?
Please pardon me for answering my own question today, Anonymous. “Something” more, like a word in quotes minus the context for example, is required to avoid misrepresentation. But never mind: it takes work and time to establish facts and to find and post authentic sources of information. Anyway, as it is, to write on an important topic without providing historically accurate information reads like mere propaganda in the end is all.
I have no need to learn what I have previously learned.If you don't believe me that's fine,it doesn't affect my life.Pius X was canonized as a deal with conservative members of the Vatican in exchange for Pius XII' liturgical and rubrical revolution from 1951-1958.I'm sorry Pius X is not what you have been led to believe.
Thank you for your reply.Sentence two and sentence four are lies. I never said either and would conclude neither. Sentence one and sentence three are irrelevant.
Sentence 3 is relevant due to BP's Sanborn & Dolan pumping up the image of Pius X and Pius XII into ultraconservative/staunch Catholic pontiffs when in reality they both (especially Pius XII) were part & parcel to the liturgical and doctrinal revolution.If you disagree I understand.
What is relevant, as I said, is the matter of an individuals’ personal responsibility to establish that something is true or in some way demonstrate it to be a fact. Why guess what I agree or disagree with? You would know when I state it.
Clare,you need to read an interview,you would enjoy it I promise.Search "Rad Trad blog interviews St.Lawrence Press Ordo"Very interesting how Traditional Catholics before the late 80's viewed Pius XII and how British priests ignored Pius XII changes in the 50's.
“Although they express their astonishment that We should number them amongst the enemies of the Church, no one will be reasonably surprised that We should do so, if, leaving out of account the internal disposition of the soul, of which God alone is the Judge, he considers their tenets, their manner of speech, and their action. Nor indeed would he be wrong in regarding them as the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church. For, as We have said, they put into operation their designs for her undoing, not from without but from within. Hence, the danger is present almost in the very veins and heart of the Church, whose injury is the more certain from the very fact that their knowledge of her is more intimate. Moreover, they lay the ax not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the faith and its deepest fibers. And once having struck at this root of immortality, they proceed to diffuse poison through the whole tree, so that there is no part of Catholic truth which they leave untouched, none that they do not strive to corrupt. Further, none is more skillful, none more astute than they, in the employment of a thousand noxious devices; for they play the double part of rationalist and Catholic, and this so craftily that they easily lead the unwary into error; and as audacity is their chief characteristic, there is no conclusion of any kind from which they shrink or which they do not thrust forward with pertinacity and assurance. To this must be added the fact, which indeed is well calculated to deceive souls, that they lead a life of the greatest activity, of assiduous and ardent application to every branch of learning, and that they possess, as a rule, a reputation for irreproachable morality. Finally, there is the fact which is all but fatal to the hope of cure that their very doctrines have given such a bent to their minds, that they disdain all authority and brook no restraint; and relying upon a false conscience, they attempt to ascribe to a love of truth that which is in reality the result of pride and obstinacy.” — Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), n. 3 —
Clare because I am nice here is a link (changed my mind)He referred to the Roman liturgy as 'squalid' in the motu proprio Abhinc duos annos. You will find 'squalore' in line 3 on p. 450 of AAS 1913.
It is difficult to distinguish between the nice Anon and the irresponsible Anon, Anonymous.
I'm both of the "anonymous" posters.I wasn't irresponsible and if you took it that way I apologize.