(Comment withdrawn)

.

Here we go again!  

...who, whilst lifting the restrictions and condemnations which had been previously imposed on modernists and purveyors of error, famously rebuked those who had misgivings as “prophets of gloom,” declaring in his opening speech of the Council that:

“Nowadays, the spouse of Christ prefers to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than the arms of severity. She considers that she meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by issuing condemnations.”

John XXIII was the Pope who presided over the putsch by which the modernists took over the Council; he allowed the traditional schemas to be arbitrarily thrown out, even though they had been prepared earlier in his own Pontificate under the supervision of Cardinal Ottaviani’s Holy Office (Archbishop Lefebvre was one of the Commission who prepared them).

Ed. has managed to quote the most damning sentence (M.D.S.) in the M.R.S.* of John XXIII, the one that started the whole mess we're in now.  

Good eye, man!


No sooner this Issue #16 goes to press and already we have bad fruits of these Newcanonizations hitting the fan:  Harvard University will host a black Mass on Monday May 12th, found in THIS thread, and an abominable statue of Baphomet cast in bronze announced by the Satanists in Oklahoma to be erected next to the Ten Commandments at the state courthouse (for "balance" like Fr. Pfluger says of +Fellay).

The blasphemies continue apace, thanks to the "intercession" of our 'Newsaints'.  These are things that JPII the Great Patron of Child Molesters would have approved, no doubt.  They're so 'Ecuмenical'.


Issue #17 might need extra pages like #15 did (44).



*Most Regrettable Speech
.

Each time I read the Recusant, I "feel" that I have been given something that I don't deserve.  While I have supported them over time with a pittance it now seems to me,  the information they keep before us is worth so much more to me than I have given.  The facts are encapsulated in such a way so that we cannot allow it to fade from memory as the modernists wish it to be.  So, Thank You, Recusant, for your continuing gift of love to the Traditional Church.  My prayer is that everyone reading it supports your efforts in some way with a gift.

The opening message from the Editor is worth the price of admission to any theater in town or dinner for two to the finest restaurant in town.  I pray you will be given the graces of our Blessed Lord to continue your work for a good long while as God grants it to be.  
 

Neil Obstat said:
"Should I keep sharing copies, or should I just share select articles?  Should I look for specific topics dear to these priests and give them what they can appreciate, which will probably be LESS than an entire Issue?  

I think it's unfortunate that some trad priests are not ready for the full course intellectual meal that each Issue provides.  

These various issues are going to be collector's items in the future.  There is something about having a hard copy in hand that's more convincing than a PDF version.  I don't know why but it's true. "



I agree Neil. I print out each issue because, as you have stated, the hard copy just reads better and for me, can be taken anywhere. It prints like a magazine and is impressive with page bordering, headings and the like.  

This issue has an interesting article by Fr. Pheiffer wherin he writes about modernism, its causes, and remedies. Fr. Pheiffer notes the approach of the SSPX, as stated in its website, regarding modernism.  They refer to it as a "philosophical trend" of our times and do so without any reference to St. Pius X's treatment of it in Pascendi Dominici Gregis where modernism is spoken of as the "heresy" of our times.  Quite a difference, I would say.

The priest or layman who ignores truth and the causes of modernism, dismissing it as simply a "philosophical trend" is in the midst of the lack of truth, influenced by the causes of modernism. Fr. Pheiffer refers to Pascendi which notes the two moral causes of modernism as vain curiosity and pride and the intellectual causes of ignorance and the "marriage between faith and false philosphy"  Amazing the encyclical was written in 1907 and not last week!  

My encouragement to you Neil Obstat is to keep giving out the whole unvarnished truth.  Modernism must by its nature get more liberal as time passes which makes truth that much more desirable to one who will listen to it.  

.

I agree Neil. I print out each issue because, as you have stated, the hard copy just reads better and for me, can be taken anywhere. It prints like a magazine and is impressive with page bordering, headings and the like.

How do you print it out -- just one page per full sheet, two sided prints, or do you get a booklet format with half pages and 4 pages per leaf, stapled in the middle, like the ones that Ed. mails out?

(The British format is about 8-3/16" x 11-5/8" while American is 8-1/2 x 11")

.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Reading Pascendi is not easy, but if you stick with it, it can be done and done well.  There is a book titled "A Catechism of Modernism" by Fr. Lemius (first issues were titled A Catechism on Modernism).  It was reprinted by TAN Books in 1993 or so, just before +F started doing his damage.  

Thank you for the reference. Looking forward reading this.  :reading:

You're welcome.  I knew immediately upon first sight that Pascendi was the Rosetta Stone to modern errors, but I had a hard time getting a solid handle on it until I studied A Catechism of Modernism.  Then all the pieces fit together flawlessly.  I highly recommend it.  You have to read each question and QUIZ yourself -- try to answer the question as best you can before reading the answer.  Then, when you finish a chapter, go back and take the quiz again, this time WRITING YOUR ANSWERS DOWN ON PAPER, and checking against the book answers.  It is really best if you get them correct word for word.  And if you really want to test yourself, do not read the book answers at all until you've written all your own answers down on the paper -- just as if you were taking a test in school (that's for the SECOND time through each chapter).  This process will give you a solid foundation, because all the book answers are literal quotes from Pascendi, and Fr. Lemius only composed the questions, such that the correct answers are found in the encyclical.  

What then happens is, since you've memorized the correct answers, as you read the encyclical, the questions will pop into your mind and you will experience a kind of DIALOGUE with the author going on, which makes for new insights and comprehension, even applications to present affairs that the author could not have anticipated 107 years ago.  

Modernism is indeed everywhere but it is not a new heresy. Old heresies never die. It has always been around. What afflict us deeply right now is that the modernist heresy actually triumphed against Eternal Rome in Vatican II.

I have heard it said that it was essentially Modernism that the devil used against Eve in the Garden of Eden.  If this is true, then we have come full circle in the history of the world!

What makes Modernism specially hard to defeat is that it is a giant formless mass, like an amorphous monster deforming everything in Catholic doctrine. The synthesis of all heresies, as Pope Pius X wisely defined it.

You already have a very good grasp of what this "grand sewer of all heresies" is, and I have no doubt but that you will really appreciate Fr. Lemius' book.

The danger of Modernism is that it affects the very reason of humankind. The modernist mindset leads only to the death of reason, which causes men to quickly descend to the level of beasts. When the very foundation of reason is attacked as it is happening in current times, everything is turn upside down and all coherent thought is no more.

One good translation/summary said that "Modernism is the wreck and ruin of all religion."  So it's not just the Catholic Faith that is at stake (as if that were not enough!) but also every other religion of mankind as well.  This is why 'atheism' is on the rise in our time, because human reason has been undermined.  Man's intellect has been the prime target of the devil's attacks.  In previous ages, it was universally considered lunacy for anyone to deny the existence of God.  Try explaining that to an atheist -- he'll accuse you of hate-speech and fable-mongering.  

I think we're getting off-topic here.  This really belongs in the Recusant #17 thread!

.

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Quote from: Nickolas

I agree Neil. I print out each issue because, as you have stated, the hard copy just reads better and for me, can be taken anywhere. It prints like a magazine and is impressive with page bordering, headings and the like.

How do you print it out -- just one page per full sheet, two sided prints, or do you get a booklet format with half pages and 4 pages per leaf, stapled in the middle, like the ones that Ed. mails out?

(The British format is about 8-3/16" x 11-5/8" while American is 8-1/2 x 11")

.

I download the issue first, then print it out double sided, one page per 8.5x11 inch sheet.  I then staple it along the left side, and walla, a magazine!  I have tried two pages per side of the sheet, but it is a bit too small for easy reading for me.  With the borders and all, it appears it was designed for one page per sheet side.  

PS:  I apologize for mixing up issue 17 comments on issue 16 thread.  

Thanks for the tip!  I'll have to try that.  I should have thought of it but now that you say you like the way it turns out, it's all the more interesting.  I might like to REDUCE the size about 15% so there's some blank paper around the edges where I can write notes.  I've actually WORN OUT a couple of issues with carrying them around and jotting down info and ideas and turning pages.  Now I crease a new copy at the center-fold when I get it so the staples don't wear through the outside leaf from too much page turning.  

One thing that comes to mind is a technique I've used before on other material (not The Recusant, yet) :  you add a strip of paper (preferably high rag content or vellum), to the front of the stack before you staple it all together.  So the strip is about 1" wide and 11-1/2" long.  It's set flush with the left edge of the stack and lies over the front page, and gets stapled as if it is a front sheet.   After stapling, fold the strip around the left binding and GLUE the loose edge to the back page, which thereby covers up all the staples.  It's actually presentable that way.  I've tried those plastic slip-on channels but they tend to fall off.

.