Author Topic: The Recusant - Issue 15 - MarchApril 2014 (Read 2982 times)

Ecclesia Militans · « **on:** April 09, 2014, 07:48:37 PM »

http://www.ecclesiamilitans.com/2014/04/09/the-recusant-issue-15-marchapril-2014/

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #1 on:** April 09, 2014, 08:53:28 PM »

and there it is.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #2 on:** April 10, 2014, 09:40:15 AM »

Dynamite!

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #3 on:** April 10, 2014, 11:13:12 AM »

Quote from: PerEvangelicaDicta

and there it is.

... Just when some, apparently, were beginning to lose all hope!

Post

Quote from: In "No More Monthly Paper?" SeanJohnson

Does anyone know whether The Recusant has ceased publishing a monthly newspaper? ...
I dont see a reference to a March/April 2014 edition of The Recusant anywhere on the internet (including EM's website).

This implies to me there is no such edition.

This implies to me that hope can be a fragile thing.

Don't miss all the drama!

Post

Quote

Can you please quote for me any content from this phantom March/April edition?

Can you name me one person who has received this alleged March/April Recusant edition (anonymous internet monikers don't cut it)?

Can you explain why nobody on the planet has referenced any content from this allegedly existing issue?

Can you prove such an edition exists?

Why not?

Because it doesn't?

Or is it now an underground periodical, only distributed to approved persons, and then, only on the condition they not distribute it or quote from it?

Unlikely.

This heavily implies there is no such edition, and The Recusant is no longer publishing since the February edition.

...

Thanks for admitting that as of this moment, no such issue exists.
[that was yesterday, April 9th, at 18:27 UTC]

Next question: Does the Recusant intend to publish a newsletter in the future?

And finally:

Post

Quote from: TheRecusant

What a lot of fuss.

:whistleblower: :wink:

Quote

Sean Johnson, I apologise that we are a little late getting the March/April issue out. It is late because we're not Angelus Press, we don't charge people, we don't make lots of money (we don't make any money!), I don't draw a nice handsome editor's salary (in fact I don't get any salary, not a single penny), and in the meantime real life occasionally gets in the way.

It's 'free' because it's a work offered to Almighty God, not a business.

I'll take this thread as a compliment, however. It's nice to have one's efforts appreciated now and then.

And now, if you don't mind, I haven't really time for much more discussion, interesting though it no doubt would be.

P.S. - I've sent it to Ecclessia Militans, so the pdf version ought to be online soon. I'm grateful to him for doing that for us, as I am also to our friends in the US who help with distribution over there. People in the US will probably get their well before people in GB, because although it has been printed here, it won't be for a few more days until I have time to travel to the printers, collect the 400 copies, and bring them back in a suitcase by public transport... Of course, if I were willing to pay a little extra each month, I could have them delivered to me from the printer's by courier.
But then how would that be payed for?

Maybe it's time to brush off that Donate button, dear readers!! :dancing:

(Ed. prefers that you use PayPal to avoid the enormous overseas check fees.)

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #4 on:** April 11, 2014, 02:19:42 AM »

.

Quote

People in the US will probably get their well before people in GB, because although it has been printed here, it won't be for a few more days until I have time to travel to the printers, collect the 400 copies, and bring them back in a suitcase by public transport...

400 copies in a suitcase (not folded or stapled)...

... at 22 pages per copy, and 6 pages per ounce and 16 ounces per pound, that's 92 pounds of paper in a suitcase. Plus 8 more for the suitcase, we're talking 100 pounds, on public transport. In London...

I hope Ed. has an assistant. :shocked:

.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #5 on:** April 11, 2014, 06:59:44 AM »

With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #6 on:** April 11, 2014, 02:19:30 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

If he were doing it all right, it would be pre-1954, which I suppose might be the same thing. It depends on what aspect of "Bugnini" you're referring to. There were several waves of his trash, some of which a lot of sedes, curiously, accept. Are you one of them?

There is a growing awareness that the root of our Newchurch errors emerged like a groundhog-day weasel under the auspices of tampering with the most ancient rites of the Church, those of Holy Week of Apostolic Tradition.

And, as in everything else that followed like an effect does a cause, there was absolutely no reason to do so. There was no reason to truck out the Newmissal of John XXIII in 1962. There was no good reason not to read the Third Secret in 1960. There was no reason to convene Vatican II. There was no good reason to squelch the condemnation of the greatest threat to Holy Mother Church, Communism, at the Council. There was no good reason to not use the assembly of all the world's bishops to make the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the IHM as Our Lady requested decades before that. There was no reason to abandon the Oath Against Modernism in 1966. There was no reason to change the form of Episcopal Consecration in 1968, the year they say man walked on the moon (even though the Van Allen Belts would have delivered roast turkey-astronauts to the lunar surface). There was no good reason to pretend that the NovusOrdoNewmass was being "promulgated" in 1969. There was no reason to turn the altar around or remove the tabernacle from the center or to rip out the confessionals or the communion rail or the Faith of Catholics by the roots.

There is a great new book out, from which I have quoted at length, in another thread; a thread, curiously, which has had extremely little views and apallingly no replies.

.

Marlelar · « **Reply #7 on:** April 11, 2014, 04:39:46 PM »

Thank you to all who work on putting together "The Recusant", we in the bleachers are grateful for your publication whenever it comes out.

Marsha

Marlelar · « **Reply #8 on:** April 11, 2014, 04:42:42 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

What do you mean?

Marsha

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #9 on:** April 11, 2014, 07:20:11 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: ultrarigorist
With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

If he were doing it all right, it would be pre-1954, which I suppose might be the same thing. It depends on what aspect of "Bugnini" you're referring to. There were several waves of his trash, some of which a lot of sedes, curiously, accept. Are you one of them?

No, I'm not one of them, because it's not my place to pass judgment on pontiffs. But a future valid pontiff will judge these claimants.

There were several waves of Bugnini's filth, but the changes of 1956 were the big ones, which substantially corrupted the Rite. Previously he changed hours and stuff, things which could be objectively tolerated. That Bp. Williamson is taking this courageous step is a great grace, and I hope many if not all resistance priests follow his wise course.
I trust this answers Marelar's question too?

hugeman · « **Reply #10 on:** April 11, 2014, 08:49:16 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

If this is true, which I hope and prsy it is, then,,...

Deo Gratias!

Finally!!

Maybe the Catholics are realizing that all the problems with the
Catholic Church (which the enemy has converted to the conciliar church),
began with the denial of Jesus Christ, and the perpetual renewal of His Sacrifice
which He ordered for all times in His Holy Mass. Bugnini wanted to destroy the Mass to
remove from it the sacrificial nature, and make it a picture of Luther's protestant service.
To do this, the truth of the murder and h0Ɩ0cαųst of Jesus Christ had to be clouded; it became
necessary to not let the "faithful" know that the enemies of Christ had actually conspired to
Kill the God of the world. The one annual season which memorialized this murder is Lent, capstoned by Holy Week.
To change the conception, or perception, of Holy Week, therefore, became job number
One. In addition, because of the absolutely normal solemn and
penitential nature of the entire week, and the faithful's preparations in the background for the
great feast to come, what better time to introduce subtle changes in liturgical practices that can lead to a new faith-- following the well established law of prayer is the law of belief ??
This is why the SSPX masters deemed it so important to abandon the liturgical books of 1945-1958, and adopt the books of john XXIII of 1962. Bear in mind that the holy priest,
Father Hector Buldoc, may He Rest in Peace, tossed into the trash can any missal he found in his chapels dated 1962 or later.
If anyone wants a good, excellent, reliable Missal from the 1950's, with all the correct Liturgical rubrics, while they are still available, you can PM me-- we know someone who will supply them at their cost.Holy Resurrection!

Matto · « **Reply #11 on:** April 11, 2014, 08:57:46 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

With all the discussion about the weight of paper, I guess nobody noticed that Bp. Williamson's Holy Week will be pre-Bugnini. I wonder who will follow his lead.

That is very interesting. I prefer the pre-Bugnini holy week (although I have never seen in person any holy week), though some posters here, especially Ambrose will think it is wrong to use the pre-Bugnini holy week because the Bugnini holy week was ordered under pope Pius XII.