Monday, 15 August 2011

Assumpta est Maria...

I wish readers who follow the Gregorian Kalendar a blessed festival of the Assumption...well that is, those of you who are using the traditional propers. I'm not going to repeat what I said last year, and earlier this year; it's quite simple: either you remain faithful to the Catholic Tradition as it has been passed on from the age of the Fathers and use the orthodox Office and proper prayers of the Mass, or you exchange the Word of God for the Ultramontane lie. If the former, I wish you all the temporal and spiritual blessings in the Lord and His Mother; if the latter, then may you all be damned by Jesus Christ and suffer worse torments in Hell than Judas Iscariot and his chum Im-Pius XII.

''The wicked shall be turned into Hell.'' Psalms 9:17.


  1. Thank you for the good wishes , and I too wish you a happy Assumption Day (if you follow the gregorian calender...) Today I celebrated a private Mass (private, in the sense of not announced), after which i sang in the schola during the High Mass. In singing my own Mass, I followed the pre-Pius-XII Missal, thus, Missa '''Gaudeamus omnes in Domino''. Alas, the High Mass was Missa ''Signum magnum''. So i'll hopefully go not to hell, but to purgatory. :)

  2. Dear Fr. Albertus,

    I am sure the former will stand you in good stead with regard to the latter and will be taken into account by the Judge.

    Happy feast!

  3. Albertus, euge serve bone et fidelis! Although if I were you I'd have boycotted church altogether on this day. If people are concerned for my salvation then they can do as I say before I return to church. Until then I shall simply say my 1570 Roman Office and maybe retire to some remote corner and speak nothing but Latin and Old Mercian.

    There is always the Julian Kalendar.

  4. Look, I know this is going to get me booted from Liturgiae Causa, but I actually prefer missa Signum Magnum over missa Gaudeamus. Pius XII's revision of Assumption Day was an improvement over the essentially intercessory rite of the old Assumption Day. Pius' propers do a fairly good job at presenting the dogma from the perspective of St. Mary's life. Signum also draws upon typological antecedents from the Old Testament. Gaudeamus barely mentioned the feast day! It merely presents a string of intercessions, but does not directly speak of the Assumption. Pius XII was right to clarify the jumble and daresay irrelevance of the old propers.

    C'mon everybody: the revision of Assumption Day according to Pius XII is not a cause for anathemata or damnations. Compared to the immense damage the Concilium visited on the Holy Mass in the following two decades, Signum Magnum is not that significant. The propers of the new Assumption are extremely orthodox. This change is merely a ripple in the water compared to the tsunami of postmodernism that nearly wiped out the Roman Church in the 1960's and 1970's.

    Chill, take up your rosary, and follow Him.

  5. JM, nobody is ''barred'' from reading Liturgiae Causa, though I'm afraid we'll just have to agree to disagree. As for relevance, the old Introit uses the word ''assumption,'' whereas the new one does not, and the old Epistle makes explicit reference to repose in the Lord (a vestige of the older theological idea of the end of St Mary's sojourn on earth), whereas the new one makes phoney eschatological links between St Mary and Judith, hitherto unknown as a ''type'' of the Mother of God.

    Although since none of this convinces you, let's just leave it at that. I am at the end of my teather trying to convince people.

  6. Patricius,

    "Dixit ergo eis Jesus: Amen, amen dico vobis: nisi manducaveritis carnem Filii hominis, et biberitis ejus sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis." (Jn 6:54)

    "Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portæ inferi non prævalebunt adversus eam." (Mt 16:18)

    I did not quote the latter as a defence of the Papacy, mind: but consider the word ecclesia, and consider Peter's position in it, and remember that you are not Peter.

    (And no, the usual whirlwind of invective against the Roman Pontiff will not do as a reply, since this point is, actually, not about him.)

    It is extremely foolish to try to hold your salvation to ransom.

  7. Sorry, I wrote my comment on the other post.

    Do you protest so much the transferral of St Joachim and the raising of feast ranks? Or the propers of the Dedication of St Michael? Or those of the Immaculate Conception?

  8. PS Please could you post your essay on the Immaculate Conception/liturgical praxis? Or perhaps email? My address is