Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter  (Read 1972 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online josefamenendez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Reputation: +2950/-199
  • Gender: Female
Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
« on: September 09, 2021, 10:02:52 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Taylor Marshall comments on Ecclesia Dei appeal to Consiliar Church regarding Francis' restriction on TLM.
    Although I can stand back and with slight amusement at the 'scuffle" and I feel TM is an opportunist, I think he is right on this one.




    • Response from Rorate Caeli

    https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-statement-of-superiors-general-and.html#more
    The Statement of the Superiors General (and Taylor Marshall)

    Cross-posted on LMSChairman.org

    The Superiors General of the Fraternity of St Peter, the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the Institute of the Good Shepherd, and a number of other Superiors General of priestly institutes and religious communities attached to the Traditional Mass (including three communities of women), have issued a joint letter in response to Traditionis Custodes. Here it is, on the FSSP website. It is addressed to the Bishops of France, not, as some have assumed, to the Holy See.
    As befits such a docuмent, it is carefully worded. In principle, Traditionis Custodes creates an impossible situation for the signatories. They are founded on the charism of the Traditional liturgy, and the Letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes tells us that it is the intention of the docuмent that in the longer term this liturgy should entirely disappear. Furthermore, the justification for this given in the Letter is that the clergy and faithful (who are not distinguished) are detached in some sense from the unity of the Church.

    The argument which needs to be made to the Bishops of France at this point is thus a delicate one. Negatively, it should be obvious that to strike a defiant attitude, to threaten disobedience to Traditionis Custodes or the Bishops, or to suggest that they might go over to the Society of Pius X, would serve to confirm the purported justification of Traditionis Custodes. It would be directly counter-productive.
    On the other hand, to make a direct argument against Traditionis Custodes, to insist that it should be rescinded, is pointless, because the French Bishops do not have the power to do that. To make such an argument to the Holy See would be pointless in another way, because there is absolutely no chance that an important docuмent such as this would be cancelled, or modified in a significant way, by the very Pope who promulgated it, so soon after its publication.
    Instead, the statement approaches the problem in two ways. First, it emphasises the key-hole of concession offered by Traditionis Custodes and the Letter, through which the Traditional Mass can continue to be celebrated: time. Traditionis Custodes gives the French Bishops (like all bishops) the right to permit the Traditional Mass now. It is now that it needs to be permitted if the spiritual life of the Traditional Institutes, and of Traditional laity, is to continue as before. No limit to this time is set by the docuмents. The first thing to secure, then, is that the Traditional Mass will continue.
    The second approach is to draw attention to a very serious problem created by Traditionis Custodes. In confirming the establishment of the Institutes and communities represented by this statement, the Holy See has over the years since 1988 allowed and encouraged men and women to commit themselves by vows to lives of a particular character: as do all priests and religious. A fundamental aspect of this character for these particular religious associations is the Traditional liturgy. If this liturgy is to be abolished, the vows and commitments made to these associations would become impossible to fulfill.
    The implications of this fact are not drawn out. It is for the French Bishops to ponder the problem as they apply Traditionis Custodes. They must implement the legislation with regard to the good of souls: as it is when they apply any aspect of the law of the Church. For those bishops inclined to be sympathetic, this consideration will be a powerful one.
    To summarise, what this statement does is to try to create a space in which the French Bishops may, without disobedience, make possible in practice the continuation of the life the of the Priestly Institutes and communities and of lay Catholics attached to the Traditional Mass. The Latin Mass Society did the same thing, in a some different way, when we issued our Canonical Guidance on Traditionis Custodes.
    ------------------------------
    Taylor Marshall, a man I usually ignore, has insulted the signatories of this statement, as lacking the "brave and bold" spirit which, he claims, animated the late Archbishop Lefebvre. He is, in a video far too tedious to link to, claiming that they are cowards.
    This is a contemptible accusation, which reveals Marshall to be, as I expressed it on Twitter, an ignorant fool. I stand by that judgement, and I call on Marshall to apologise to these good men and women, who have a fearful responsibility both to their professed members, and also, in most cases, to the lay faithful for whom they have pastoral care.
    Marshall appears to imagine that the Superiors General should react to their complex situation with the subtlety of some Hollywood action-hero: an attitude, in fact, completely at odds with the historical reality of Archbishop Lefebvre himself. What, Marshall seems to be asking, would Rambo do? What would be the reaction of some knuckle-headed character played by Mel Gibson? Well, if he wants to base his understanding of ecclesial politics on Braveheart, he should remember the advice given by the Duke of Argyle (in the 1995 film) to the young William Wallace: "First learn to use this" (pointing to his head), "and then I will teach you to use this" (lifting his sword).
    It is an interesting fact about social media that some people who witnessed Marshall's insult of the Superiors General, and my own criticism of Marshall for making this insult, concluded that I was the one to be blamed for dividing Traditional Catholics. This is an attitude completely detached from reality. The restoration of the Church is carried out through the sacraments offered by Traditional priests, and through the lives of prayer and sacrifice represented by the Traditional Institutes and communities, not by monetised social-media clicks. We need to show solidarity, in this moment of crisis, with the Superiors General, not with the man who likes to remind his viewers "I'm just a dad with a webcam".
    To the Superiors General, I say: genuine Traditional Catholics have your back. If this separates me from Taylor Marshall and his more deranged fans, so much the better.


    By Joseph Shaw at 9/09/2021 12:14:00 PM




    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31200
    • Reputation: +27117/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #1 on: September 09, 2021, 01:37:55 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
  • Yes, he's correct about the SSPX.

    Nevertheless, Mr. "Shake hands with Pope Francis" is a complete tool himself.

    He'll do anything for more attention and $upport. He IS a grifter.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #2 on: September 09, 2021, 01:46:36 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, he's correct about the SSPX.

    Nevertheless, Mr. "Shake hands with Pope Francis" is a complete tool himself.

    He'll do anything for more attention and $upport. He IS a grifter.

    It seems the indulterers are squabbling amongst themselves.

    In any case, my own impression of the Ecclesia Dei communities' letter was that it was exceedingly effeminate:

    "Pweez, puh-weeeeez, Howee Fadah.  Puh-weeze wet us have da Math."

    But TC's plan is at least clear now:

    The PCED was dissolved a couple years ago, because the Mass is going away, and therefore the communities of the PCED are also going away:

    Their choice is now (or eventually) full Novus Ordo, or, the neo, non-combative SSPX, which Rome no longer fears, and controls (The SSPX just took the place of the old FSSP, etc.).

    Once the members of the former indult communities have made their choice, Rome will appoint a prelate to head the prelature/emasculated SSPX.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #3 on: September 09, 2021, 02:01:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    ...to make a direct argument against Traditionis Custodes... to the Holy See would be pointless in another way, because there is absolutely no chance that an important docuмent such as this would be cancelled, or modified in a significant way, by the very Pope who promulgated it, so soon after its publication.
    The obvious answer to the problem is... (which even the modernist sspx won't bring up...because they are modernist and don't want to remind anyone of the solution)...

    .
    Traditionis Custodes (TC) is null and void because it violates the law of Quo Primum, which grants the right (and further, commands) that the latin mass can be said by any priest, at any time, without permission (and further, this law commands that ONLY this rite is allowed).
    .
    TC directly contradicts and seeks to limit the power of Quo Primum, which +Benedict said was still in force in 2007, and such restrictions made by TC (which began in the 80s with +JP's illegal ecclesia dei) are not only illegal but immoral.
    .
    TC should be ignored by all the Cardinals, bishops, priests and laity who consider themselves Traditional.  It is high time that everyone woke up to the fact that Quo Primum's PERPETUAL rights, commands and allowances still exist, still have the force of law and still protect the holiness of the latin rite.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6173
    • Reputation: +3147/-2941
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #4 on: September 09, 2021, 02:12:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Who is it, exactly, who wrote the article in the OP, titled...."The Statement of the Superiors General (and Taylor Marshall)"?

    Is the author Taylor Marshall? I don't see his name attached to it, and Joseph Shaw's commentary at the bottom of the article doesn't seem to have anything to do with either the featured article, or the FSSP original statement (the FSSP's appeal to the bishops of France regarding Traditionis Custodes).

    For example, I don't see any mention of Archbishop Lefebvre in the OP article at all, even though Joseph Shaw says that Marshall talks about Archbishop Lefebvre. I must be missing something.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline SperaInDeo

    • Supporter
    • **
    • Posts: 343
    • Reputation: +269/-73
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #5 on: September 09, 2021, 02:13:36 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • The obvious answer to the problem is... (which even the modernist sspx won't bring up...because they are modernist and don't want to remind anyone of the solution)...

    .
    Traditionis Custodes (TC) is null and void because it violates the law of Quo Primum, which grants the right (and further, commands) that the latin mass can be said by any priest, at any time, without permission (and further, this law commands that ONLY this rite is allowed).
    .
    TC directly contradicts and seeks to limit the power of Quo Primum, which +Benedict said was still in force in 2007, and such restrictions made by TC (which began in the 80s with +JP's illegal ecclesia dei) are not only illegal but immoral.
    .
    TC should be ignored by all the Cardinals, bishops, priests and laity who consider themselves Traditional.  It is high time that everyone woke up to the fact that Quo Primum's PERPETUAL rights, commands and allowances still exist, still have the force of law and still protect the holiness of the latin rite.

    Furthermore I would like to add that NOBODY gets to abrogate Quo Primum because of the level of authority used, the context of the Council of Trent, and the language of the docuмent (“perpetuity”, etc) ESPECIALLY Modernist Rome. 

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 10312
    • Reputation: +6220/-1742
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #6 on: September 09, 2021, 02:27:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Furthermore I would like to add that NOBODY gets to abrogate Quo Primum
    True.  And no pope has ever tried. 

    So V2 resorted to the typical means which communists use - force.  They use the executive/admin branches of control (i.e. communist bishops) to "enforce" the unjust rules of the 80s Ecclesia Dei, the 2007 motu and now, the 2021 TC. 

    It's the same tactics used by corrupt police to search people in their cars or illegally enter your home - they don't care that the Supreme Court (or even state laws) say their actions are unjust...they do it anyways.  They control the situation, so they make the rules.

    Offline Prayerful

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +354/-59
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #7 on: September 09, 2021, 02:34:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Dr Joseph Shaw, Chairman of the UK Latin Mass Society called Dr Taylor Marshall an 'ignorant fool' with 'no understanding of the issues he talks about.'

    archive of tweet


    True.  And no pope has ever tried.

    So V2 resorted to the typical means which communists use - force.  They use the executive/admin branches of control (i.e. communist bishops) to "enforce" the unjust rules of the 80s Ecclesia Dei, the 2007 motu and now, the 2021 TC.

    It's the same tactics used by corrupt police to search people in their cars or illegally enter your home - they don't care that the Supreme Court (or even state laws) say their actions are unjust...they do it anyways.  They control the situation, so they make the rules.
    Quo Primum is a docuмent where the Pope demands the codified missal be issued without alteration, and is really a sort of 'boilerplate.' Fr Cekada RIP explained the matter. No Pope can bind a future Pope on any legislative.



    Offline Prayerful

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +354/-59
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #8 on: September 09, 2021, 02:37:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • deleted, see above

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #9 on: September 09, 2021, 02:42:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No Pope can bind a future Pope on any legislative.

    Does that mean Pope St. Pius V was ignorant in purporting to do that very thing?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Marion

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1867
    • Reputation: +759/-1134
    • Gender: Male
    • sedem ablata
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #10 on: September 09, 2021, 02:50:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No Pope can bind a future Pope on any legislative.

    That's what Prayerful@CI (and Cekada?) say.

    Most people will prefer to believe what St. Pius V decreed, and what had been reprinted by Popes for centuries in the Missal.
    That meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church. (Dei Filius)


    Offline Prayerful

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +354/-59
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #11 on: September 09, 2021, 03:03:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Does that mean Pope St. Pius V was ignorant in purporting to do that very thing?
    You should try consider the purpose of Quo Primum rather than reacting emotionally. Popes used this language in their laws, but could never presume to bind their equals, that is, their successors. Missals contain the most relevant disciplinary laws as introduction. Pius V would not have legislated against altering the Mass, as it would have seem ludicrous. Quo Primum was about published transmitting a faithful text and would still bind insofar as a faithful text should be printed, having regard to the full right of Popes on the matter, which was constrained by tradition, not by urban legend.

    The Holy Father said as much (on the printing):
    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.

    Fr Cedaka said it well:

    Traditionalists should stop using the Quo Primum argument. It’s a canon law urban legend — as in “alligators in the sewers,” rather than Urban VIII!

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 31200
    • Reputation: +27117/-494
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #12 on: September 09, 2021, 03:38:26 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0

  • Quote
    Quo Primum is a docuмent where the Pope demands the codified missal be issued without alteration, and is really a sort of 'boilerplate.' Fr Cekada RIP explained the matter. No Pope can bind a future Pope on any legislative.





    This makes sense.

    However, the Pope was within his rights to call down a curse on anyone who would try to abrogate the Tridentine Mass -- that he "would incur the wrath of Sts. Peter and Paul".
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    Paypal donations: matthew@chantcd.com

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #13 on: September 09, 2021, 03:44:31 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • You should try consider the purpose of Quo Primum rather than reacting emotionally. Popes used this language in their laws, but could never presume to bind their equals, that is, their successors. Missals contain the most relevant disciplinary laws as introduction. Pius V would not have legislated against altering the Mass, as it would have seem ludicrous. Quo Primum was about published transmitting a faithful text and would still bind insofar as a faithful text should be printed, having regard to the full right of Popes on the matter, which was constrained by tradition, not by urban legend.

    The Holy Father said as much (on the printing):
    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.

    Fr Cedaka said it well:

    Traditionalists should stop using the Quo Primum argument. It’s a canon law urban legend — as in “alligators in the sewers,” rather than Urban VIII!

    I prefer Vigano:

    “But the Society is not affected by the Motu Proprio, and has always celebrated using the 1962 Missal precisely by virtue of that inalienable right which Benedict XVI recognized, which was not created ex nihilo in 2007.”

    An inalienable right is one which cannot be rescinded.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Merry

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 628
    • Reputation: +362/-99
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Rorate Caeli calls Taylor Marshall a "Grifter"on Twitter
    « Reply #14 on: September 09, 2021, 03:54:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • We would not have had the Holy Mass until 1969, except that the Church was obeying Quo Primum. 

    And Quo Primum not only protects the Tridentine Mass - it also forbids any other "Mass" in the Latin/Western/Roman Rite!

    ("I am only the Pope - who am I to touch the Canon?" asked Pius IX one time, when dealing with a liturgical/theological issue.)

    As for Taylor Marshall, he unfortunately seems the go-to guy for all things orthodox Catholic on War Room with Bannon and Jack Posobiec's Twitter account (which involves thousands if not millions of people).  He is among other things, they say, "DOCTOR" Taylor Marshall - and is lionized for being in tight with Arch. Vigano.  His influence and notoriety on these accounts is a little maddening - a Johnny-come-lately, another protestant convert making money with a religious career who is not thoroughly traditional and makes a point to put his very face on everything marked "Taylor Marshall."  (Meaning, as opposed to a Catholic symbol or picture.)  Some find it easy to get tired of looking at him everywhere.    
    If any one saith that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and on that account wrests to some sort of metaphor those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost...,"  Let Him Be Anathama.  -COUNCIL OF TRENT Sess VII Canon II “On Baptism"