The Disastrous Legacy of the Pre-Conciliar Popes

Modernism was revealed in the Church when Pius IX (+1878) said “La Tradition, c’est moi!” [The Tradition – that’s me!] – writes Eck (Caminante-Wanderer.Blogspot.com, August 10).

• From then on, the outward appearance was traditional, but the content was revolutionary.

• Worship of the person replaced respect for the office.

• Roman centralism, which the Curia had avoided for millennia, set in.

• A juridical conception of the Church and the sacraments replaced a theological one.

• Pius IX turned the papacy into an autocracy in traditional garb.

• Leo XIII entered into politics - like a bull in a china shop.

• For purely political reasons with no benefit to the Church, he tried to make a deal with the corrupt, colonialist, and Masonic French Third Republic.

• Eck, “The most anti-Masonic and traditionalist Pope wanted to join the most Masonic and revolutionary regime there was.”

• Leo XIII meddled in the conscience and internal politics of French Catholics where the Pope had no say because it wasn't his competence.

• He left the legacy that doctrine and practice go separate ways [until they clashed] and that the Church is an instrument of a political party (the Holy See).

• With Pius X, traditionalism became the monkey of the revolution.

• We owe the Vatican II revolution almost entirely to Pius X who stuck his spoon into plates his predecessors had carefully avoided.

• He subverted the liturgy by changing the Breviary, sacred music, sacramental practice, and Latinising the Orientals.

• He established canon law in the form of the Napoleonic revolutionary codes, and even imitated secular states by creating a body of clerical espionage (Sodalitium pianum).

• He established the belief that a pope can do whatever he wanted, which is now being exploited fully by Francis.

• Pius XI backstabbed the Mexican Catholics when they were about to defeat the anti-Church Masonic government.

• He failed in the affair of the Action Française which cost the great Cardinal Billot his cardinalate, brought suffering to the French Catholicism and demonstrated Rome’s falsehood.

• Pius XII was a great phenomenon of papolatry.

• When John XXIII convened Vatican II, the work of a hundred years of revolutionary pontiffs had been completed.

• Papolatry was so firmly established that whatever a pope said was accepted as “divine truth.”

• The Catholic Faith was so weakened that it only needed to be touched by a pope to bring down the whole edifice.

• All was based on the tragic attempt to fight the revolution with a counter-revolution.

#newsSrtsewfzyf

LikeShare

en.news links to this post

Aug 20, 2023

foward

2Aug 14, 2023

However, I do consider it a great mistake in the government of the Church to turn its back on the Cristeros, to sanction Action Française, to sell the Papal States to Mussolini, and a few others.

V.R.S.

Aug 14, 2023

Resigning from valid claims to Patrimoni Sancti Petri was IMHO the greatest blunder.

foward

Aug 14, 2023

"and even imitated secular states by creating a body of clerical espionage (Sodalitium pianum).
" It was logical to have people who could be trusted in the face of the advance of modernism.

3 more comments from foward

foward

Aug 14, 2023

"Worship of the person replaced respect for the office." Grave offence to the papacy. Those who attacked the Pope were Napoleon's troops who drove him out of Rome several times. It was logical for Catholics to rally behind the Pope.

foward

Aug 14, 2023

"He subverted the liturgy by changing the Breviary, sacred music, sacramental practice, and Latinising the Orientals." On the contrary, he did a great deal for the liturgy, protected Gregorian chant, facilitated communion for children in the face of the Jansenists, and so on.

foward

2Aug 14, 2023

To compare what followed the Second Vatican Council and its documents and the work of that council with previous governments in the Church is the height of hypocrisy.

Simon North

Aug 14, 2023

This nut job sounds like the Captain of the Titanic if he had said, about an hour after the iceberg collision, "Thank God the myth of an unsinkable ship has been dispelled."

V.R.S.

2Aug 14, 2023

"Leo XIII entered into politics - like a bull in a china shop"
---
Due to the invasion of Rome by freemasonic Italy the "bull" imprisoned in Vatican was actually unable to visit china shops.

Malki Tzedek

3Aug 14, 2023

While there are elements of truth in these assessments, they have been unfairly skewed towards a perception which is grossly unfair to each of their legacies. There were errors, no doubt, however, the illnesses diagnosed and 'treated' by Vatican II was of the Munchausen variety of psycho-pathology. To paraphrase, 'The fault is in ourselves, dear Horatio, not our predecessors.'

foward

5Aug 14, 2023

The big difference - which Wanderer hides - is that the pre-conciliar popes failed (not in all) in the government of the Church, it seems to more than one of us, but not in doctrine as happened with the Second Vatican Council.
This difference is hidden and omitted by Wanderer.

V.R.S.

3Aug 14, 2023edited

"Roman centralism, which the Curia had avoided for millennia, set in. A juridical conception of the Church and the sacraments replaced a theological one."
"With Pius X, traditionalism became the monkey of the revolution. We owe the Vatican II revolution almost entirely to Pius X who stuck his spoon into plates his predecessors had carefully avoided. He established the belief that a pope can do whatever he wanted, which is now being exploited fully by Francis."
etc.
----
What the h/eck is this?
Musings of the democrat or the gallican?
Why not go back to 1550's with "arch-Modernist" (according to Mr. h/eck criteria) Pope Carafa (Paul IV)? He was not fond of one Sodalitium but created a much wider system of denunciation and his will or whims put him into the open war against many prelates and the Catholic king of Spain. Or Boniface VIII who contributed to the disaster of the Avignon exile and the great schism after it?
Or Urban VIII that "backstabbed" Catholics not far-far away in Mexico but in Europe not opposing actively the French support for the Protestant side during the 30 Year War?
BTW, he had also changed the Breviary and liturgy, changing even ancient hymns.
Going in such a direction we can go all the way back to Pope St. Peter who was too lenient for the judaizers and certain St. Paul had to intervene and write many letters.

Yes, I know the theory that Pius X was a precursor of the VII revolution but such a claim is spread but revolutionaries themselves.

"He failed in the affair of the Action Française which cost the great Cardinal Billot his cardinalate, brought suffering to the French Catholicism and demonstrated Rome’s falsehood."
----
The root of the problem of the Action Francaise was certain Maurras who was not a Catholic but desperately wanted to guide the Catholic people. It provided a pretext to make Pius IX go against the AF.

Carmine3

Aug 14, 2023

Bollocks.

Irishpol

3Aug 14, 2023

Every lie has an element of truth. What this character has published are the half-truths of many damnable lies. One would have thought this article was written by someone from the New York Times or The Washington Post. I wonder if Gloria TV would be so quick to publish some of the distortions that are created by the writers of those publications as well?

Kenjiro M. Yoshimori

Aug 14, 2023

As a high school teacher, my field is more Western Civ., USA History, and Asian History....not the Papacy

, but even at 28, I can see that despite their supposed faults and errors this author states for each pre-Vatican II Pope, the Church basically was healthy and flourishing under them, not destroyed under them, or dying as it has been since every post-Vatican II Pope especially under Bergoglio.
No Pope that I remember has been put on a pedestal more, and practically "worshipped" more and given the title of "the Great", like JPII.....and it is all undeserved, whereas Ven. Pope Pius XII deserved being so respected and loved by Catholics. He was a saint. JPII was not. A good man, yes...a saint, no.
I do know one fault of Pius XI.....he was instrumental in suppressing nearly a dozen religious Orders which dated from the early Medieval period simply because he and his staff thought they were irrelevant because they were small in numbers. They might have eventually gone extinct on their own, or, on the other hand, they might have grown a little. Vatican II probably would have wiped them out though in the end. But they should have been given a chance.
I'm surprised the author of the text skipped over Benedict XV. He's not mentioned. Did he have no faults he could list?