I am a convert to the One, True Faith. I am also what is called a Traditional Roman Catholic (or prior to 1965, just a regular, every day Catholic). But contrary to what you may have been taught, I, like most Traditionalists, am not a sedevacantist. I am loyal to the Magisterium and to the Holy Father; I believe that the Second Vatican Council was a true Church council and that the Novus Ordo Missae (Mass of Paul VI) can confect a true Eucharist when the rubrics are followed by a properly ordained Catholic priest. However, I believe that the massive destruction over the past fifty-one years has NOT been due to a misinterpretation of the Council’s documents, but is due to the documents themselves. I also believe that the Novus Ordo is grossly inferior to the Traditional Latin Mass (the True Mass, "the most beautiful thing this side of Heaven"), is Protestant in its orientation, and is grievously harmful to the Faith.

I support all Traditional Latin Mass orders (non-Sedevacantists), to include the SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP, and all diocesan priests who struggle to celebrate the True Mass under often terrible conditions.

Lastly, I hope all Roman Catholics who believe, as Holy Mother Church has taught these past 2,000 years, that there is Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus, take up the Cross & the Sword, and claim the title of “Faithful Knight.”

--I believe that Christ founded One Church, and that there is NO salvation outside Her.

--I believe that Irish monks saved Western civilization.

--I believe that the Crusades were a good thing.

--I believe that Islam is still the greatest threat to Western civilization.

--I will never apologize for the Catholic Church and Her mandate by Christ to spread the Gospel.

--I believe that at the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), Luther won.

--I believe that homosexuality has devastated the Catholic priesthood.

--I believe that many Novus Ordo bishops are direct successors to only one Apostle, Judas Iscariot.

--I believe that Dante was correct: The floor of Hell is littered with the skulls of bishops.

--I believe the "Reform of the Reform" is a toothless dog.

--I believe that Communion in the hand, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, removal of the altar rails, and removal of our tabernacles from the altar of sacrifice, has destroyed Catholic belief in the Real Presence.

--I believe that Traditional Catholics are at war with Roman-Protestants for the very soul of Holy Mother Church....and We will win!

--I believe that Russia has not been consecrated to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart by any Pope, and that parts of the Third Secret are still hidden by Rome.

--I believe that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre will be raised to the altar as a Saint.

--I believe that if it were not for the Society of St. Pius X, Tradition would have died long ago.

--I believe that the Society of St. Pius X is the Marine Corps of Catholicism.

--I believe that the term "in full communion" is a sham. After all, per Rome, heretics like Cardinal Mahony and sodomites like Archbishop Weakland are "in full communion."

--I believe that the Republican Party is no different from the Democrat Party...and that they deserve each other.

--I believe that the U.S. Military produces the finest young men and women on the face of the earth.

--I believe that America has done more good for others around the world than any nation in history.

--I believe that our current Commander in Chief is a Marxist.

--I believe in the 2nd Amendment, just as the Fathers of our Nation did.

--I believe that the Death Penalty is a good thing.

--I believe in restoring all things in Christ.

Soldier of Christ-Defender of the True Church

Soldier of Christ-Defender of the True Church

Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Band of Brothers: German General's speech

The Devil's Brigade - The Canadians Arrive

“Why are you waiting to fight back?"

The following is the January 2014 editorial from Radicati nella Fede. The call to arms for Catholic priests and seminarians whom know tradition but haven't fully embraced it is especially important:

Practically everything is allowed, everything except Tradition that is.

After the courageous but at the same timid act by Benedict XVI when he constituted the Motu Proprio in 2007, we have witnessed a continuous effort to “confine” Tradition from the Church.
The Holy Father said that the Old Mass had never been abolished.  In some way, he confirmed that it could not be abolished, because Church Authority serves to guard Tradition as source of Revelation, just as it serves to guard Holy Scripture, and may never lord over them; if it lorded over them, the Authority [of the Church] would not be that willed by Our Lord and would take the form of authoritarianism.
Well then, after the Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, the various diocesan curia engaged themselves in an unwavering work of stopping, stemming and confining any attempt at a return of the glorious Tradition of the Church, whether it was liturgical or doctrinal.
This has been the complete boycotting of the will of the Pope which was a simple act of justice: the Mass that the Church has celebrated for fifteen centuries and which made Saints cannot be abolished.
Not even the awful lack of priests, which we have seen these past years, not even this will be able to liberate Tradition from its confinement. They would rather be without priests, they would rather close the churches, but they will not allow a traditional priest to celebrate the Mass of ages.
Many priests were ready to pass to Tradition, many were seriously interested in regaining possession of that which is the greatest patrimony in the Church, many of them asked to learn the Old Mass. 
Then, like an implacable executioners’ axe, the hatchet fell on those who with joyful simplicity had begun to celebrate it: canonical proceedings, removal from parishes, subtle accusations of schism! (etc.,). You know the story. Thus, a chill has fallen on priests, many of whom were young and who dreamt of being able to go up to the altar “Introibo ad altare Dei…”
And what is to be said about seminarians? “If you love Tradition you are dangerous and are unable to be ordained in the Church,” this is the refrain from superiors of seminaries obedient to their bishops.
A tremendous chill has thus fallen on a potential springtime for souls, first on the priests and then on the faithful. The Pope had hoped for a change of climate in the Church, but the old guard, nowadays in the diocesan curia, made up of ex-‘68ers, has allowed for nothing.
Priests who love Tradition are closed up in a prudential silence and the seminarians in an “apnea” of conscience, so that they will be able to arrive at their longed for ordination, illusorily convinced that things will change once they are priests.
Is all of this normal? Absolutely not, it is not normal in the Church!
Are all those gentlemen who are hostile to Tradition and impede it with strange Byzantinism[s] still concerned about the salvation of souls? Do they still want [to promote] Christianity? Or do they aspire to something different? And if it so, why are they occupying the Church of God?
They have been promoting a new religion with timorous references to the Christianity of the past. They have been working and spending a lot of money(!) in order to transform Catholicism into a religion fit for literary salons; they waste time in trying to restore a painting or commenting on a [literary] text, but they are absent in the field…they are not going into the confessional and they are not going up to altar every day, because they are [busily] engaged in some cultural project.
Are they still worried about souls frequenting the Sacraments? Do they still deem the Sacraments necessary for salvation, or are they only concerned about creating “community” substituting the structure to the essential, that is, to God?
We hope with all our hearts that the new year will bring two things:
1. A leap of courage from all those priests and seminarians who are suffering on behalf of a Church increasingly hostile to its past. We would like to say to them: “Why are you waiting to fight back? Yes, fight back – so as to obey God!” Consider the effects of this Church badly modernized, consider the great sadness that it has produced and obey God joyfully. It is only in this way that you will serve the Church with love, because the Church is - Tradition.
2. An amendment in those who have had such hostility to the Traditional Mass and have imprisoned it. We realize that not all of them operate in bad conscience. To them we would like to say: “Let us have the experience of Tradition,” give us the churches, allow us to look after souls and then come in all simplicity and judge the fruits. You have given churches to the schismatic Orthodox, advertised even the times of worship for the Protestant heretics, when will you release the Mass of all ages from limbo? What would your old parish priests, your grandparents and the saints of over two thousand years of Christianity say?
Forgive us if we have spoken to you with such frankness, we do not want to offend anyone but to stir up an awakening of conscience: in this dramatic situation, there is no time for ceremony.
May the year 2014 remove the torpor of many sincere souls, through the grace of God and the prayers of many.
Translated and adapted by Rorate Contributor Francesca Romana with emphasis added by Adfero.

Monday, December 30, 2013

One Roman Rite: Two Forms? BS!

The Church Year in Review 2013

Catholic Church Year in Review 2013 from Louie Verrecchio on Vimeo.

Not exactly RCIA and sharing your feelings.

From Fr. Z:
With a biretta tip to St. Louis Catholic, who did a good job with this, we should review what we believe as faithful Catholics.

This is the formula that I used when I was admitted to Holy Church as a convert, though I did it in Latin.  We did this at Vespers on the 4th Sunday of Advent.
The “Professio fidei Tridentina”, also known as the “Creed of Pope Pius IV”, is one of the four authoritative Creeds of the Catholic Church. [Can you name the other 3?] It was issued on November 13, 1565 by Pope Pius IV in his bull “Iniunctum nobis” under the auspices of the Council of Trent (1545 – 1563). It was subsequently modified slightly after the First Vatican Council (1869 – 1870) to bring it inline with the dogmatic definitions of the Council. The major intent of the Creed was to clearly define the Catholic faith against Protestantism. At one time it was used by Theologians as an oath of loyalty to the Church and to reconcile converts to the Church, but it is rarely used these days.
I, N, with a firm faith believe and profess each and everything which is contained in the Creed which the Holy Roman Church maketh use of. To wit:
I believe in one God, The Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God. Born of the Father before all ages. God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God. Begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father. By whom all things were made. Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven. And became incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary: and was made man. He was also crucified for us, suffered under Pontius Pilate, and was buried. And on the third day He rose again according to the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom will have no end. And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of life, Who proceeds from the Father and the Son. Who together with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, and who spoke through the prophets. And one holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and I await the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.
The Apostolic and Ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of that same Church I firmly admit to and embrace.
I also accept the Holy Scripture according to that sense which holy mother the Church hath held, and doth hold, and to whom it belongeth to judge the true sense and interpretations of the Scriptures. Neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.
I also profess that there are truly and properly Seven Sacraments of the New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and necessary for the salvation of mankind, though not all are necessary for everyone; to wit, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and Matrimony; and that they confer grace; and that of these, Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders cannot be repeated without sacrilege. I also receive and admit the accepted and approved ceremonies of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of the aforesaid sacraments.
I embrace and accept each and everything which has been defined and declared in the holy Council of Trent concerning original sin and justification.
I profess, likewise, that in the Mass there is offered to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead; and that in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and substantially, the Body and Blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ; and that a conversion takes place of the whole substance of the bread into the Body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood, which conversion the Catholic Church calls Transubstantiation. I also confess that under either species alone Christ is received whole and entire, and a true sacrament.
I steadfastly hold that there is a Purgatory, and that the souls therein detained are helped by the suffrages of the faithful. Likewise, that the saints, reigning together with Christ, are to be honored and invoked, and that they offer prayers to God for us, and that their relics are to be venerated. I most firmly assert that the images of Christ, of the Mother of God, ever virgin, and also of other Saints, ought to be kept and retained, and that due honor and veneration is to be given them.
I also affirm that the power of indulgences was left by Christ in the Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome to Christian people.
I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church as the mother and teacher of all churches; and I promise true obedience to the Bishop of Rome, successor to St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and Vicar of Jesus Christ.
I likewise undoubtedly receive and profess all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred Canons, and general Councils, and particularly by the holy Council of Trent, and by the ecumenical Council of the Vatican, particularly concerning the primacy of the Roman Pontiff and his infallible teaching. I condemn, reject, and anathematize all things contrary thereto, and all heresies which the Church hath condemned, rejected, and anathematized.
This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved, which I now freely profess and to which I truly adhere, I do so profess and swear to maintain inviolate and with firm constancy with the help of God until the last breath of life. And I shall strive, as far as possible, that this same faith shall be held, taught, and professed by all those over whom I have charge. I N. do so pledge, promise, and swear, so help me God and these Holy Gospels of God.
Somewhat more that most RCIA demands.

O’ Council, where is thy infallibility?

“That an ecumenical council which satisfies the conditions above stated [convoked by the pope, presided over by him or his legate, the decrees of which receive the pope’s approbation] is an organ of infallibility will not be denied by anyone who admits that the Church is endowed with infallible doctrinal authority.”

This according to the Catholic Encyclopedia’s entry on Infallibility; the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia that is.

So, what does this say about the doctrinal weight of the decrees of the Second Vatican Council, an ecumenical council that met each of the conditions thus mentioned?

Absolutely nothing, and it is precisely for this reason that it is so instructive.

You see, John XXIII’s idea of employing an ecumenical council, this most profound and solemn expression of the infallible magisterium, when nary a doctrinal crisis beset the Church, for purposes strictly pastoral, deliberately devoid of any intent whatsoever to either define doctrine or condemn error, is in itself a novelty that in a healthier ecclesial age could not but reflect poorly upon his cause.

What then is one to make of Pope John’s stewardship of the authority vested in the Petrine Office?

Analogies fail, but imagine choosing a battering ram to pass through a door that you claim to have no intention of destroying, and this when the key is right in your pocket. Not only would such a decision be entirely illogical, it would be a violation of the nature of the instrument chosen.

The nature of the battering ram is to gain entry by way of destruction; likewise, the nature of the ecumenical council is to teach infallibly by way of ruling, definition and condemnation. Based on John XXIII’s stated purposes, surely he could have employed any number of other readily available instruments that more closely fit the pastoral intent of the Council such as it was proposed.

For instance, he could have queried the bishops of the world for suggestions as to what topics might be addressed (as he did), disposed of the bishops’ more traditional concerns (as ultimately took place in the Council sessions), taken up the progressive cause (as did the majority of the Council Fathers moving forward), and simply promulgated an Apostolic Exhortation similar in stature to the one Pope Francis just gifted to the Church.

But no; Pope John XXIII, and likewise his successor, chose instead to leverage the force, or better stated, the illusion of the force, of an ecumenical council wherein novelties, ambiguities and outright falsehoods that have absolutely no standing whatsoever within the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine could pose as solemn teaching.
This, my friends, was either a well-conceived plot hatched in minds diabolical, or the ignorant machinations of Pontiffs so utterly incompetent as to be truly mad. What it is not is heroic virtue.
In any event, what we now have before us in the conciliar decrees is a nearly 200,000 word exposition (in the English translation) wherein authentic Catholic doctrine (the majority of the text) is commingled with propositions that would have been condemned outright less than a decade earlier.

So, what shall we do now?

Well, if you’re a modernist hell bent on constructing the church-of-man, or an ill-formed and under-nourished Catholic who just doesn’t know any better, the answer is obvious:

Canonize the pope who lit the match to God’s House, fast track the cause of the successor who doused it with gasoline, treat the entire regrettable disaster as if it fell to earth like rain from Heaven, and await the coming of a new springtime.

Monday, December 23, 2013


Enjoy a good battle on this Monday before Christmas.

Christmas in the Trenches, The True Story

From The Remnant:

A Christmas Truce at the World War I Front

  On December 7, 1914, Pope Benedict XV suggested a temporary hiatus of the war for the celebration of Christmas. Though Germany readily agreed, the other powers refused.
(  Though World War I had been raging for only four months, it was already proving to be one of the bloodiest wars in history. Soldiers on both sides were trapped in trenches, exposed to the cold and wet winter weather, covered in mud, and extremely careful of sniper shots. Machines guns had proven their worth in war, bringing new meaning to the word "slaughter."

In a place where bloodshed was nearly commonplace and mud and the enemy were fought with equal vigor, something surprising occurred on the front for Christmas in 1914. The men who lay shivering in the trenches embraced the Christmas spirit. In one of the truest acts of peace to men of goodwill, soldiers from both sides in the southern portion of the Ypres Salient set aside their weapons and hatred, if only temporarily, and met in No Man's Land.

Digging In
After the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand on June 28, 1914, the world was plunged into war. Germany, realizing they were likely to face a two-front war, attempted to defeat the western foes before the Russians were able to mobilize their forces in the East (estimated to take six weeks), using the Schlieffen Plan.
Though the Germans had made a strong offensive into France, French, Belgian, and British forces were able to halt them. However, since they were not able to push the Germans out of France, there was a stalemate and both sides dug into the earth creating a large network of trenches.

Once the trenches were built, winter rains tried to obliterate them. The rains not only flooded the dug-outs, they turned the trenches into mud holes – a terrible enemy in and of itself.

·         It had been pouring, and mud lay deep in the trenches; they were caked from head to foot, and I have never seen anything like their rifles! Not one would work, and they were just lying about the trenches getting stiff and cold. One fellow had got both feet jammed in the clay, and when told to get up by an officer, had to get on all fours; he then got his hands stuck in too, and was caught like a fly on a flypaper; all he could do was look round and say to his pals, 'For Gawd's sake, shoot me!' I laughed till I cried. But they will shake down, directly they learn that the harder one works in the trenches, the drier and more comfortable one can keep both them and oneself.1

The trenches of both sides were only a few hundred feet apart, buffered by a relatively flat area known as "No Man's Land." The stalemate had halted all but a scattered number of small attacks; thus, soldiers on each side spent a large amount of time dealing with the mud, keeping their heads down in order to avoid sniper fire, and watching carefully for any surprise enemy raids on their trench.


Restless in their trenches, covered in mud, and eating the same rations every day, some soldiers began to wonder about the un-seen enemy, men declared monsters by propagandists.

·   We hated their guts when they killed any of our friends; then we really did dislike them intensely. But otherwise we joked about them and I think they joked about us. And we thought, well, poor so-and-sos, they're in the same kind of muck as we are.2

The uncomfortableness of living in trenches coupled with the closeness of the enemy who lived in similar conditions contributed to a growing "live and let live" policy. Andrew Todd, a telegraphist of the Royal Engineers, wrote of an example in a letter:

·         Perhaps it will surprise you to learn that the soldiers in both lines of trenches have become very 'pally' with each other. The trenches are only 60 yards apart at one place, and every morning about breakfast time one of the soldiers sticks a board in the air. As soon as this board goes up all firing ceases, and men from either side draw their water and rations. All through the breakfast hour, and so long as this board is up, silence reigns supreme, but whenever the board comes down the first unlucky devil who shows even so much as a hand gets a bullet through it.3

Sometimes the two enemies would yell at each other. Some of the German soldiers had worked in Britain before the war and asked about a store or area in England that an English soldier also knew well. Sometimes they would shout rude remarks to each other as a way of entertainment. Singing was also a common way of communication.

·         During the winter it was not unusual for little groups of men to gather in the front trench, and there hold impromptu concerts, singing patriotic and sentimental songs. The Germans did much the same, and on calm evenings the songs from one line floated to the trenches on the other side, and were there received with applause and sometimes calls for an encore.4

After hearing of such fraternization, General Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien, commander of the British II Corps, ordered:

·         The Corps Commander, therefore, directs Divisional Commanders to impress on all subordinate commanders the absolute necessity of encouraging the offensive spirit of the troops, while on the defensive, by every means in their power. Friendly intercourse with the enemy, unofficial armistices (e.g. 'we won't fire if you don't' etc.) and the exchange of tobacco and other comforts, however tempting and occasionally amusing they may be, are absolutely prohibited.5

Christmas at the Front

On December 7, 1914, Pope Benedict XV suggested a temporary hiatus of the war for the celebration of Christmas. Though Germany readily agreed, the other powers refused.

Even without a cessation of war for Christmas, family and friends of the soldiers wanted to make their loved ones' Christmas special. They sent packages filled with letters, warm clothing, food, cigarettes, and medications. Yet what especially made Christmas at the front seem like Christmas were the troves of small Christmas trees.

On Christmas Eve, many German soldiers put up their Christmas trees, decorated with candles, on the parapets of their trenches. Hundreds of Christmas trees lighted the German trenches. The British soldiers could see the lights but it took them a few minutes to figure out what they were from. British lookouts reported the anomalies to their superiors. Could this be a trick? British soldiers were ordered not to fire but to watch them closely. Instead of trickery, the British soldiers heard many of the Germans celebrating.

·         Time and again during the course of that day, the Eve of Christmas, there were wafted towards us from the trenches opposite the sounds of singing and merry-making, and occasionally the guttural tones of a German were to be heard shouting out lustily, 'A happy Christmas to you Englishmen!' Only too glad to show that the sentiments were reciprocated, back would go the response from a thick-set Clydesider, 'Same to you, Fritz, but dinna o'er eat yourself wi' they sausages!'6

In other areas, the two sides exchange Christmas carols.

·         They finished their carol and we thought that we ought to retaliate in some way, so we sang 'The first Noël', and when we finished that they all began clapping; and then they struck up another favourite of theirs, 'O Tannenbaum'. And so it went on. First the Germans would sing one of their carols and then we would sing one of ours, until when we started up 'O Come All Ye Faithful' the Germans immediately joined in singing the same hymn to the Latin words 'Adeste Fidéles'. And I thought, well, this was really a most extraordinary thing – two nations both singing the same carol in the middle of a war.7

The Christmas Truce

This fraternization on Christmas Eve and again on Christmas was in no way officially sanctified nor organized. Yet, in numerous separate instances down the front line, German soldiers began yelling over to their enemy, "Tommy, you come over and see us!"8 Still cautious, the British soldiers would rally back, "No, you come here!"

In some parts of the line, representatives of each side would meet in the middle, in No Man's Land.

·         We shook hands, wished each other a Merry Christmas, and were soon conversing as if we had known each other for years. We were in front of their wire entanglements and surrounded by Germans – Fritz and I in the centre talking, and Fritz occasionally translating to his friends what I was saying. We stood inside the circle like streetcorner orators.

Soon most of our company ('A' Company), hearing that I and some others had gone out, followed us . . . What a sight - little groups of Germans and British extending almost the length of our front! Out of the darkness we could hear laughter and see lighted matches, a German lighting a Scotchman's cigarette and vice versa, exchanging cigarettes and souvenirs. Where they couldn't talk the language they were making themselves understood by signs, and everyone seemed to be getting on nicely. Here we were laughing and chatting to men whom only a few hours before we were trying to kill!9

Some of those who went out to meet the enemy in the middle of No Man's Land on Christmas Eve or on Christmas Day negotiated a truce: we won't fire if you won't fire. Some ended the truce at midnight on Christmas night, some extended it until New Year's Day.

One of the main reasons Christmas truces were negotiated was in order to bury the dead. Though some had died recently, there were corpses out in No Man's Land that had been there for several months. Along with the revelry that celebrated Christmas was the sad and somber job of burying their fallen comrades. On Christmas day, British and German soldiers appeared on No Man's Land and sorted through the bodies. In just a few rare instances, joint services were held for both the British and German dead.

Yet many soldiers enjoyed meeting the un-seen enemy and were surprised to discover that they were more alike than he had thought. They talked, shared pictures, exchanged items such as buttons for food stuffs. An extreme example of the fraternization was a soccer game played in the middle of No Man's Land between the Bedfordshire Regiment and the Germans. A member of the Bedfordshire Regiment produced a ball and the large group of soldiers played until the ball was deflated when it hit a barbed wire entanglement.

This strange and unofficial truce lasted for several days, much to the dismay of the commanding officers. This amazing showing of Christmas cheer was never again repeated and as World War I progressed, the story of Christmas 1914 at the front became something of a legend.

·         This experience has been the most practical demonstration I have seen of 'Peace on earth and goodwill towards men.10

(The present article first appeared on the Your Guide to 20th Century History website.  It is being reproduced here with the permission of the author MJM.)


1. Lieutenant Sir Edward Hulse as quoted in Malcolm Brown and Shirley Seaton, Christmas Truce (New York: Hippocrene Books, 1984) 19.
2. Leslie Walkinton as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 23.
3. Andrew Todd as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 32.
4. 6th Division of the Gordon Highlanders Official History as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 34.
5. II Corp's Document G.507 as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 40.
6. Lieutenant Kennedy as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 62.
7. Jay Winter and Blaine Baggett, The Great War: And the Shaping of the 20th Century (New York: Penguin Books, 1996) 97.
8. Brown, Christmas Truce 68.
9. Corporal John Ferguson as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 71.
10. Oswald Tilley as quoted in Brown, Christmas Truce 97-98.


Brown, Malcolm and Shirley Seaton. Christmas Truce. New York: Hippocrene Books, 1984.

Terraine, John. "Christmas 1914, and After." History Today December 1979: 781-789.

Winter, D. "Time off From Conflict: Christmas 1914." The Royal United Service Institution Journal December 1970: 42-43.

Winter, Jay and Blaine Baggett. The Great War: And the Shaping of the 20th Century. New York: Penguin Books, 1996.

(This article was published in The Remnant in 2006 after having first appeared on the Your Guide to 20th Century History website. It is reproduced here with the permission of the author. The original song Christmas in the Trenches by John McCutcheon is well worth listening to as you read this incredible story from a day and age not so very far removed from our own but, alas, fading in every way from the consciousness of "grown up" and "enlightened" men who've lost sight of God, Country and even who and what they are anymore-- much less the true meaning of Christmas. MJM)

Battle Of The Isandlwana (01/22/1879)

A very bad day for the British Empire 134 years ago.

Photos from the London Oratory Carol Service this evening

From New Liturgical Movement:

The photographs below were taken at the London Oratory Carol Service this evening. The London Oratory Junior Choir made up of children aged 8 - 16 and the professional Senior Choir both sang from the Nave. The service ended with Solemn Benediction.

Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate fight back

Call Fr. Volpi's accusations "totally unfounded"
Volpi's comments "offend our entire Institute, and consequently, we refute them completely"

We have done our best to keep our readers abreast of the truth behind the unjust and unnecessary interdiction of the Franciscans of the Immaculate by the Vatican via Commissioner Fr. Volpi at the order of Pope Francis. 

Now, we bring you a letter from the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate, punching back hard at accusations made of them by Fr. Volpi, translated by Rorate’s Francesca Romana. While we urge anyone who wishes to reprint this to do so, we must request you cite Rorate Caeli as the source, and either reprint it in full or link to the full story.

To read all of Rorate’s coverage of this sad situation, click the label “FFI under intervention” at the bottom of this post:

It is with deep sadness and consternation we learn that in the circular letter of the 8th December, addressed to all the Friars of the Immaculate, the most Reverend Father Volpi, accuses some of the most prominent exponents of the Sisters of the Immaculate, “of having contributed to the creation of a ‘distorted mentality’ in the Friars, strongly influencing their lifestyle.”

We retain that such accusations are totally unfounded, and because of the generalizations, they offend our entire Institute, and consequently, we refute them completely, at the same time recalling the words of our Pope Francis “Whoever speaks badly about his brother, kills him." (2.9.2013) while “mercy changes the world.” (17.3.2013).

On our part, we endeavor to follow the invitation from the Vicar of Christ “to walk in the presence of the Lord, with the Cross of the Lord; to edify the Church with the blood of the Lord, shed upon the Cross; and to confess the only glory: Christ crucified. And like this the Church goes forth.” (14.3.2013).

Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate

CDF Prefect Müller: "Lefebvrians are de facto schismatic"

Ah, OK.  Let me see if I really understand this.

Yep, got it.  All the SSPX has to do is embrace sodomite priests and bishops (but not too closely!!); accept every single word of a “pastoral” council that is not binding on the faithful; accept post-Vatican II ecumenism that prays side-by-side with African witch doctors and asks no one to convert to the True Faith; accept the new Catechism (that teaches that we and the Muslims worship the same God); agree that the Novus Ordo is somehow good for the Faith. 

Still shaking my head at modern Rome’s complete stupidity. 

From Rorate Caeli: 

From the interview granted by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Abp. Gerhard Müller, to Italian daily Corriere della Sera, published this Sunday:

With the failure of discussions, what is the position of the Lefebvrians?

"The canonical excommunication due to the illicit [episcopal] ordination was lifted from the bishops, but the sacramental one remains, de facto, for the schism; because they have removed themselves away from communion with the Church. That being said, we do not close the door, ever, and we invite them to reconcile. But they also must change their approach and accept the conditions of the Catholic Church and the Supreme Pontiff as the ultimate criterion of belonging."

What can you say about the meeting between Francis and [Fr. Gustavo] Gutiérrez on September 11?

"Theological currents go through difficult moments, things are debated and clarified. But Gutiérrez has always been orthodox. We Europeans must get over the notion of being the center, without, on the other hand, underestimating ourselves. To broaden the horizons, to find a balance: I have learned this from him. Opening up to a concrete experience: seeing povery and also the joy of the people. A Latin American Pope has been a heavenly sign. Gustavo was overwhelmed. I was as well. And also Francis."