PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.”
St. Paul, Letter to the Galatians, 1:8-9
The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict on the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world, and instead of their saintly call to holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people, and is visiting His dreadful wrath upon them.
St. John Eudes
“And if Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand?”
“Mutual respect… Freedom to practice one’s religion… Freedom to follow one’s conscience without suffering ostracism or persecution,” is extended to every error but, has and will never be extended by the Novus Ordo hypocrites toward Catholic tradition and truth.
Ever since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church has placed special emphasis on the importance of dialogue and cooperation with the followers of other religions. In order to be fruitful, this requires reciprocity on the part of all partners in dialogue and the followers of other religions. I am thinking in particular of situations in some parts of the world, where cooperation and dialogue between religions calls for mutual respect, the freedom to practise one’s religion and to engage in acts of public worship, and the freedom to follow one’s conscience without suffering ostracism or persecution, even after conversion from one religion to another. Once such a respect and openness has been established, peoples of all religions will work together effectively for peace and mutual understanding, and so give a convincing witness before the world.
Pope Benedict XVI, St. Mary’s University College, London, September 17, 2010
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Pope Francis Believes:
In the call to be evangelisers, all the Churches and Ecclesial Communities discover a privileged setting for closer cooperation. For this to be effective, we need to stop being self-enclosed, exclusive, and bent on imposing a uniformity based on merely human calculations. Our shared commitment to proclaiming the Gospel enables us to overcome proselytism and competition in all their forms. All of us are at the service of the one Gospel.
In this moment of prayer for unity, I would also like to remember our martyrs, the martyrs of today. They are witnesses to Jesus Christ, and they are persecuted and killed because they are Christians. Those who persecute them make no distinction between the religious communities to which they belong. They are Christians and for that they are persecuted. This, brothers and sisters, is the ecumenism of blood.
Mindful of this testimony given by our martyrs today, and with this joyful certainty, I offer a cordial and fraternal greeting to His Eminence Metropolitan Gennadios, the representative of the Ecumenical Patriarch, His Grace David Moxon, the personal representative in Rome of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and all the representatives of the various Churches and Ecclesial Communions gathered here to celebrate the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul.
Pope Francis to ecumenical gathering
The Catholic Infallibly Teaches:
The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the “eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino (1441)
Ire may be understood in two ways. In one way, as a simple movement of the will that inflicts punishment not through passion, but by virtue of a judgment of the reason: and in this case, without a doubt, lack of ire is a sin. This is how Chrysostom understands ire when he says: “Ire, when it has a cause, is not ire but judgment. For properly speaking, ire is a movement of passion. And when a man is irate with just cause, his ire does not derive from passion. Rather, it is an act of judgment, not of ire.”
In another way, ire can be understood as a movement of the sensitive appetite agitated by passion with bodily excitation. This movement is a necessary sequel in man to the previous movement of his will, since the lower appetite naturally follows the movement of the higher appetite unless some obstacle prevents it. Hence the movement of ire in the sensitive appetite cannot be lacking altogether, unless the movement of the will is altogether lacking or weak. Consequently, the lack of the passion of ire is also a vice, as it is the lack of movement in the will to punish according to the judgment of reason.
St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae
The Novus Ordo: Fulfilling both the genus and species of true Sacrilege
As the student of moral theology is aware, there are many difficult questions concerning the doctrine of sacrilege. Doctors are not agreed even upon the definition of the term. Sir Henry Spelman, who was deeply read in the scholastic theologians and canonists, defines it as “an invading, stealing, or purloining from God, any sacred thing, either belonging to the majesty of His Person, or appropriate to the celebration of His divine service.” Thus there are two kinds of sacrilege; the first kind is committed “when the very Deity is invaded, profaned, or robbed of Its glory,” says Sir Henry. And so the sin of Lucifer and his angels, of our first parents, of Cain (who offered the ‘fruits of the earth and the work of human hands’), of those destroyed by the flood, of the builders of the tower of Babel, of Nimrod, and of others, was a sin of sacrilege. “In this high sin,” he further says, “are blasphemers, sorcerers, witches, and enchanters; and as it maketh the greatest irruption into the glorious majesty of Almighty God, it maketh also the greatest divorce betwixt God and man.” In other words, as modern theologians say, all sins against the virtue of religion may be called sacrilege in the wider sense of the term. In this sense it is not a specific sin, but rather a genus containing under it many different species of sin.
Sir Henry admits that this meaning of the term was not the common one with the schoolmen and canonists. “I come now,” he says, “to the second part, which indeed is that which the schoolmen and canonists only call sacrilege, as though the former were of too high a nature to be expressed in the appellation: so exorbitant a sin, as that no name can properly comprehend it: the Greek word meaning, a warring against God, and a Greek word meaning, a direful violence upon Divine Majesty, a superlative sacrilege.” In the strict sense of the term, the specific sin of sacrilege is “a violating, misusing, or a putting away of things consecrated or appropriated to divine service or worship of God: it hath many branches time, persons, function, place: and materially. All (saith St. Thomas Aquinas) that pertains to irreverent treatment of holy things, pertains to the injury of God, and comes under the character of sacrilege. . . . Sacrilege of time is, when the Sabbath or the Lord’s day is abused or profaned: this God expressly punished in the stickgatherer.”
Rev. Thomas Slater, S.J., Questions of Moral Theology, Doctrine on Sacrilege in Moral Theology
Believe Dogma as it was once declared
There is only one way to believe dogma: as holy mother Church has once declared.
Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870, ex cathedra:
“Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be
perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Churchhas once declared; and
there must never be a recession from that meaning under the specious
name of a deeper understanding.”[xviii]
This definition of the First Vatican Council is critically important for dogmatic purity, because the primary way the Devil attempts to corrupt Christ’s doctrines is by getting men to recede (move away) from the Church’s dogmas as they were once declared. There is no meaning of a dogma other than what the words themselves state and declare, so the Devil tries to get men to “understand” and “interpret” these words in a way that is different from how holy mother Church has declared them.
Many of us have dealt with people who have attempted to explain away the clear meaning of the definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation by saying, “you must understand them.” What they really mean is that you must understand them in a way different from what the words themselves state and declare. And this is precisely what the First Vatican Council condemns. It condemns their moving away from the understanding of a dogma which holy mother Church has once declared to a different meaning, under the specious (false) name of a “deeper understanding.”
Besides those who argue that we must “understand” dogmas in a different way than what the words themselves state and declare, there are those who, when presented with the dogmatic definitions on Outside the Church There is No Salvation, say, “that is your interpretation.” They belittle the words of a dogmatic formula to nothing other than one’s private interpretation. And this also is heresy.
Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #22:
“The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.”- Condemned[xix]
Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabile, The Errors of the Modernists, July 3, 1907, #54:
“The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to the reality, are nothing but interpretations and the evolution of Christian intelligence, which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.”- Condemned[xx]
Dogmas of the faith, like Outside the Church There is No Salvation, are truths fallen from heaven; they are not interpretations. To accuse one who adheres faithfully to these truths fallen from heaven of engaging in “private interpretation” is to speak heresy.
The very point of a dogmatic DEFINITION is to DEFINE precisely and exactly what the Church means by the very words of the formula. If it does not do this by those very words in the formula or docuмent (as the Modernists say) then it has failed in its primary purpose – to define – and was pointless and worthless.
Anyone who says that we must interpret or understand the meaning of a dogmatic definition, in a way which contradicts its actual wording, is denying the whole point of the Chair of Peter, Papal Infallibility and dogmatic definitions. He is asserting that dogmatic definitions are pointless, worthless and foolish and that the Church is pointless, worthless and foolish for making such a definition.
Also, those who insist that infallible DEFINITIONS must be interpreted by non-infallible statements (e.g., from theologians, catechisms, etc.) are denying the whole purpose of the Chair of Peter. They are subordinating the dogmatic teaching of the Chair of Peter (truths from heaven) to the re-evaluation of fallible human docuмents, thereby inverting their authority, perverting their integrity and denying their purpose.
Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (#7), Aug. 15, 1832: “… nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.”[xxi]
Thus, there is no “strict” or “loose” interpretation of Outside the Church There is No Salvation, as the liberal heretics like to emphasize; there is only what the Church has once declared.
Most Holy Family Monastery, Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation
Vatican II and the Leap of Faith Facing the Hermeneutics of Continuity
Vatican II pastoral opinion:
And we now ask: What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?... This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (Unitatis Redintegratio) the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world. On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!
Pope Benedict XVI, addressing Protestants at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005
… the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it… Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos
Vatican II pastoral opinion:
The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person... This right to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it is to become a civil right. Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis Humanae
And from this wholly false idea of social organization they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by our predecessor, Gregory XVI, insanity, namely that the liberty of conscience and worship is the proper right of every man, and should be proclaimed by law in every correctly established society... Each and every doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic authority We reject, proscribe and condemn; and We wish and command that they be considered as absolutely rejected by all the sons of the Church. Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura
3. ON SALVATION
Vatican II pastoral opinion:
The separated churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church. Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio
The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with her... Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence
Vatican II pastoral
May the faithful, therefore, live in very close union with the men of their time. Let them strive to understand perfectly their way of thinking and feeling as expressed in their culture. Let them blend modern science and its theories and the understanding of the most recent discoveries with Christian morality and doctrine.... Thus their religious practice and morality can keep pace with their scientific knowledge and with an ever - advancing technology... Decree on the Church in the Modern World, Gaudium et Spes
The Roman pontiff can and must reconcile himself with human progress, with liberalism and with modern and human culture. – condemned. Blessed Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors
Vatican II pastoral opinion:
Upon the Moslems, too, the Church
looks with esteem...They adore the one God...though they do not acknowledge
Jesus as God they revere Him as a prophet.... In addition they await the day of
judgment when God will give each man his due.... and give worship to God
especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. Decree on the Relation
of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate
...that false opinion which considers all religions more or less good and praiseworthy... Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism...from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold on these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos
COMMENT: Below is Abp. Viganò’s latest public letter and it is the best appraisal of the Vatican II church and its man-made Bugnini liturgical worship published since the council! A lot of conservative Catholics are not going to like hearing the truth but for the faithful it is grounds for rejoicing to hear a Catholic bishop defend the faith and the true worship of God.
Abp. Viganò: The Latin Mass and Novus Ordo cannot coexist, this is a ‘battle between Christ and Satan’
I would not be 'surprised' if those 'abusing apostolic authority' soon 'prohibit' the Latin Mass 'altogether.'
“THE ONE THREAD BY WHICH THE COUNCIL HANGS”
A response to Reid, Cavadini, Healy, and Weinandy.
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Et brachia ex eo stabunt,
et polluent sanctuarium fortitudinis,
et auferent juge sacrificium:
et dabunt abominationem in desolationem.
And arms shall stand on his part,
and they shall defile the sanctuary of strength,
and they shall take away the continual sacrifice:
and they shall place there the abomination unto desolation.
Dan 11: 31
I have followed with interest the ongoing debate about Traditionis Custodes and Father Reid’s comment here (here) in which he refutes Cavadini, Healy, and Weinandy, without however reaching a solution to the problems identified. With this contribution, I would like to indicate a possible way out of the present crisis.
Vatican II, not being a dogmatic Council, did not intend to define any doctrinal truth, limiting itself to reaffirming indirectly – and in an often equivocal form – doctrines previously defined clearly and unequivocally by the infallible authority of the Magisterium. It was unduly and forcibly considered as “the” Council, the “superdogma” of the new “conciliar church,” to the point of defining the Church in relation to that event. In the conciliar texts there is no explicit mention of what was later done in the liturgical sphere, passing it off as the fulfillment of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. On the other hand, there are many critical issues with the so-called “reform,” which represents a betrayal of the will of the Council Fathers and of the pre-conciliar liturgical heritage.
We should rather ask ourselves what value to give to an act that is not what it wants to seem: that is, if we can morally consider as “Council” an act that, beyond its official premises – that is, in the preparatory schemes formulated at length and in detail by the Holy Office – showed itself to be subversive in its unmentionable intentions and malicious in the means to be employed by those who, as it turned out, intended to use it for a purpose totally opposite to what the Church instituted the Ecumenical Councils for. This premise is indispensable in order to be able to evaluate objectively also the other events and acts of governance of the Church that derive from it or that refer to it.
Allow me to explain. We know that a law is promulgated on the basis of a mens, that is, of a very precise purpose, which cannot be separated from the entire legal system in which it is born. These at least are the foundations of that Law which the wisdom of the Church acquired from the Roman Empire. The legislator promulgates a law with a purpose and formulates it in such a way that it is applicable only for that specific purpose; he will therefore avoid any element that could make the law equivocal with respect to its addressee, its purpose, or its result. The convocation of an ecumenical Council has as its purpose the solemn convocation of the Bishops of the Church, under the authority of the Roman Pontiff, to define particular aspects of doctrine, morals, liturgy or ecclesiastical discipline. But what each Council defines must in any case fall within the scope of Tradition and cannot in any way contradict the immutable Magisterium, because if it did so it would go against the purpose that legitimizes authority in the Church. The same applies to the pope, who has full, immediate and direct power over the whole Church only within the confines of his mandate: to strengthen his brothers and sisters in the Faith, to feed the lambs and sheep of the flock that the Lord has entrusted to him.
In the history of the Church, until Vatican II, it has never happened that a Council could de facto cancel the Councils that preceded it, nor that a “pastoral” Council – a ἅπαξ of Vatican II – could have more authority than twenty dogmatic Councils. Yet it happened, amidst the silence of the majority of the episcopate and with the approval of five roman pontiffs, from John XXIII to Benedict XVI. In these fifty years of permanent revolution, no pope has ever questioned the “magisterium” of Vatican II, nor has he dared to condemn its heretical theses or clarify its equivocal ones. On the contrary, all the popes since Paul VI have made Vatican II and its implementation the programmatic fulcrum of their pontificates, subordinating and binding their apostolic authority to the conciliar diktats. They have distinguished themselves through a clear distancing from their predecessors and a marked self-referentiality from Roncalli to Bergoglio: their “magisterium” begins with Vatican II and ends there, and the successors proclaim their immediate predecessors as saints for the sole fact of having convoked, concluded, or applied the Council. Theological language has also adapted to the ambiguity of the conciliar texts, going so far as to adopt as defined doctrines things that before the Council were considered heretical: we may think of the secularism of the State, today taken for granted and praiseworthy; the irenic ecumenism of Assisi and Astana; or the parliamentarism of the Commissions, the Synod of Bishops, and the “synodal path” of the German Church.
All this stems from a postulate that almost everyone takes for granted: that Vatican II can claim the authority of an ecumenical council, before which the faithful are supposed to suspend all judgment and humbly bow their heads to the will of Christ, infallibly expressed by the Sacred Pastors, even if in a “pastoral” and not dogmatic form. But this is not the case, because the Sacred Pastors may be being deceived by a colossal conspiracy that has as its purpose the subversive use of a Council.
What happened on the global level with Vatican II took place locally with the Synod of Pistoia, in 1786, where the authority of Bishop Scipione de’ Ricci – which he was able to legitimately exercise by convoking a diocesan Synod – was declared null and void by Pius VI for having used it in fraudem legis, that is, against the ratio which presides over and directs every law of the Church: because authority in the Church belongs to Our Lord, who is its Head, who grants it in vicarious form to Peter and his legitimate Successors only within the framework of Sacred Tradition. It is therefore not an impudent hypothesis to suppose that a gathering of heretics could have organized a real coup d’état in the ecclesial body, in order to impose that revolution that with similar methods was organized by Freemasonry, in 1789, against the monarchy of France, and that the modernist Cardinal Suenens praised as having been realized at the Council. Nor is this in conflict with the certainty of Christ’s divine assistance to His Church: non prævalebunt does not promise us the absence of conflicts, persecutions, apostasies; it assures us that in the furious battle of the gates of hell against the Bride of the Lamb, they will not succeed in destroying the Church of Christ. The Church will not be defeated as long as she remains as Her Eternal Pontiff commanded her to be. Moreover, the special assistance of the Holy Spirit upon papal infallibility is not in question when the pope has no intention of using it, as in the case of the approval of the acts of a pastoral Council. From a theoretical point of view, therefore, the subversive and malicious use of a Council is possible; also because the pseudochristi and pseudoprophetæ of which Sacred Scripture speaks (Mk 13:22) could deceive even the elect themselves, including most of the Council Fathers, and with them a multitude of clerics and faithful.
If, therefore, Vatican II was, as is evident, an instrument whose authority and authoritativeness was fraudulently used to impose heterodox doctrines and protestantized rites, we can hope that sooner or later the return to the Throne of a holy and orthodox pontiff will cure this situation by declaring it illegitimate, invalid, and null, like the Conciliabolo of Pistoia. And if the reformed liturgy expresses those doctrinal errors and that ecclesiological approach that Vatican II contained in nuce, errors whose authors intended to make manifest in their devastating scope only after their promulgation, no “pastoral” reason – as Dom Alcuin Reid would like to maintain – can ever justify any maintenance of that spurious, equivocal, favens hæresim rite, so utterly disastrous in its effects on God’s holy people. The Novus Ordo therefore does not deserve any amendment, any “reform of the reform,” but only suppression and abrogation, as a consequence of its irremediable heterogeneity with respect to the Catholic Liturgy, to the Roman Rite of which it would presumptuously claim to be the only expression, and to the immutable doctrine of the Church. “The lie must be refuted, as Saint Paul insists, but those who are entangled in its traps must be saved, not lost,” writes Dom Alcuin: but not to the detriment of revealed Truth and of the honor due to the Most Holy Trinity in the supreme act of worship; because in giving excessive weight to pastorality we end up putting man at the center of sacred action, when he should instead place God there and prostrate himself before Him in adoring silence.
And even if this may arouse astonishment in the proponents of the hermeneutic of continuity conceived by Benedict XVI, I believe that Bergoglio is for once perfectly right to consider the Tridentine Mass as an intolerable threat to Vatican II, since that Mass is so Catholic as to disavow any attempt at peaceful coexistence between the two forms of the same Roman Rite. Indeed, it is an absurdity to be able to conceive of an ordinary Montinian form and an extraordinary Tridentine form for a Rite that, as such, must represent the only voice of the Roman Church – una voce dicentes – with the very limited exception of the venerable rites of antiquity such as the Ambrosian Rite, the Lyonese Rite, the Mozarabic Rite, and the minimal variations of the Dominican Rite and similar rites. I repeat: the author of Traditionis Custodes knows very well that the Novus Ordo is the cultic expression of another religion – that of the “conciliar Church” – with respect to the religion of the Catholic Church of which the Mass of Saint Pius V is a perfect prayerful translation. In Bergoglio there is no desire to settle the disagreement between the lineage of Tradition and the lineage of Vatican II. On the contrary, the idea of provoking a rupture is functional to the exclusion of traditional Catholics, whether clerics or laity, from the “conciliar church” that has replaced the Catholic Church and that barely (and reluctantly) keeps its name. The schism desired by Santa Marta is not that of the heretical synodal path of the German Dioceses, but that of traditional Catholics exasperated by Bergoglian provocations, by the scandals of her Court, by her intemperate and divisive declarations (here and here). To obtain this, Bergoglio will not hesitate to carry to their extreme consequences the principles laid down by Vatican II, to which he unconditionally adheres: to consider the Novus Ordo as the only form of the post-conciliar Roman Rite, and to consistently abrogate any celebration in the ancient Roman Rite as completely alien to the dogmatic structure of the Council.
And it is very true, beyond any possible refutation, that there is no possibility of reconciliation between two heterogeneous, indeed opposed, ecclesiological visions. Either one survives and the other succumbs, or one succumbs and the other survives. The chimera of a coexistence between Vetus and Novus Ordo is impossible, artificial, and deceitful: because what the celebrant does perfectly in the Apostolic Mass leads him naturally and infallibly to do what the Church wants; while what the president of the assembly does in the Reformed Mass is almost always affected by the variations authorized by the rite itself, even if in it the Holy Sacrifice is validly realized. And it is precisely in this that the conciliar matrix of the new Mass consists: its fluidity, its ability to adapt to the needs of the most disparate “assemblies,” to be celebrated both by a priest who believes in transubstantiation and manifests it with the prescribed genuflections and by one who believes only in transignification and gives Communion to the faithful in their hands.
I would not be surprised, therefore, if, in the very near future, those who are abusing apostolic authority in order to demolish the Holy Church and provoke the mass exodus of “pre-conciliar” Catholics do not hesitate not only to limit the celebration of the ancient Mass, but also to prohibit it altogether, because in that prohibition the sectarian hatred against the True, the Good, and the Beautiful is summarized, which animated the conspiracy of the Modernists since the first Session of their idol, Vatican II. Let us not forget that, consistent with this fanatical and tyrannical approach, the Tridentine Mass was casually abrogated with the promulgation of the Missale Romanum of Paul VI, and that those who continued to celebrate it were literally persecuted, ostracized, made to die with broken hearts, and buried with funerals in the new rite, as if to seal a miserable victory over a past to be definitively forgotten. And in those days no one was interested in the pastoral motivations to derogate from the harshness of canon law, just as today no one is concerned with the pastoral motivations that could induce many bishops to grant that celebration in the ancient rite to which clerics and faithful show particular attachment.
Benedict XVI’s conciliatory attempt, praiseworthy in its temporary effects of liberalization of the Usus Antiquior, was destined to fail precisely because it arose from the illusion of being able to apply the synthesis of Summorum Pontificum to the Tridentine thesis and the antithesis of Bugnini: that philosophical vision influenced by Hegelian thought could not be successful because of the very nature of the Church (and of the Mass), which is either Catholic or not. And which cannot be at the same time firmly anchored to Tradition and also jolted by the waves of the secularized mentality.
For this reason, I am greatly dismayed to read that the Apostolic Mass is considered by Dom Reid as the “expression of that legitimate plurality that is a part of the Church of Christ,” because the plurality of voices is legitimately expressed in an overall symphonic unity, not in the simultaneous presence of harmony and screeching noise. There is a misunderstanding here that must be clarified as soon as possible, and which in all probability will be healed not so much by the timid and composed dissent of those who ask for tolerance for themselves while giving the same tolerance to those who hold diametrically opposed principles, but rather by the intolerant and vexatious action of those who believe they can impose their own will in opposition to the will of Christ the Head of the Church, presuming to be able to govern the Mystical Body like a multinational corporation, as Cardinal Müller correctly pointed out in his recent speech.
And yet, on closer inspection, what is happening today and what will happen in the near future is nothing other than the logical consequence of the premises established in the past, the next step in a long series of more or less slow steps, each of which many have been silent about and have been blackmailed into accepting. Because those who celebrate the Tridentine Mass habitually but continue to celebrate the Novus Ordo from time to time – and I am not talking about priests subject to blackmail but those who were able to decide for themselves or had the freedom to choose – have already yielded in their principles, accepting to be able to equally celebrate either one, as if they were both equivalent, as if – precisely – one was the extraordinary form and the other the ordinary form of the same Rite. And is not this what has transpired, with similar methods, in the civil sphere, with the imposition of restrictions and the violation of fundamental rights, accepted in silence by the majority of the population, terrorized by the threat of a pandemic? Also in those circumstances, with different motivations but with similar purposes, citizens have been blackmailed: “Either get vaccinated or you cannot work, travel, or go to restaurants.” And how many, although knowing that this was an abuse of authority, have obeyed? Do you think that the systems of manipulation of consensus are very different, when those who adopt them come from the same enemy ranks and are led by the same Serpent? Do you think that the Great Reset plan devised by Klaus Schwab’s World Economic Forum has different purposes than those set by the Bergoglian sect? The blackmail will not be about health, but rather doctrinal: one will be asked to accept only Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Missae in order to be able to have rights in the conciliar church; the traditionalists will be branded as fanatics just like those who are called “no-vax.”
If Rome were to proscribe the celebration of the ancient Mass in all the churches of the world, those who believed that they could serve two masters – the Church of Christ and the conciliar church – will discover that they have been deceived, just as happened to the conciliar Fathers before them. At that point they will have to make the choice that they deluded themselves into believing that they could avoid: a choice which will force them either to disobey an illicit order in order to obey the Lord, or else to bow their head to the will of the tyrant while failing in their duties as ministers of God. Let them reflect, in their examination of conscience, about how many have avoided supporting the few, very few of their brother priests who have been faithful to their own Priesthood even though they have been singled out as disobedient or inflexible simply because they foresaw the deception and the blackmail.
Here it is not a question of “dressing up” the Montinian Mass like the Ancient Mass, trying to use vestments and Gregorian chant to hide the pharisaical hypocrisy that conceived it; it is not a question of cutting out the Prex eucharistica II or celebrating ad orientem: the battle must be fought over the ontological difference between the theocentric vision of the Tridentine Mass and the anthropocentric vision of its conciliar counterfeit.
This is nothing other than the battle between Christ and satan. A battle for the Mass, which is the heart of our Faith, the throne onto which the Divine Eucharistic King descends, the Calvary on which the immolation of the Immaculate Lamb is renewed in an unbloody form. It is not a supper, not a concert, not a show to display eccentricities or a pulpit for heresiarchs, and it not a podium for holding rallies.
It is a battle that will be strengthened spiritually in the clandestinity of priests who are faithful to Christ, who are considered to be excommunicated and schismatics, while inside the churches, along with the reformed rite, infidelity, error, and hypocrisy will triumph. And also the absence: the absence of God, the absence of holy priests, the absence of good faithful souls. The absence – as I said in my sermon for the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome (here) – of the unity between the Chair (Cathedra) and the Altar, between the sacred authority of the Shepherds and their very reason for being, following the model of Christ, ready to be the first themselves to ascend Golgotha, to sacrifice themselves for the flock. Whoever rejects this mystical vision of his own Priesthood ends up by exercising his authority without the ratification that comes only from the Altar, the Sacrifice, and the Cross: from Christ Himself who reigns from that Cross over both spiritual and temporal sovereigns as King and High Priest.
If this is what Bergoglio wants in order to assert his overwhelming power amidst the clamorous silence of the Sacred College and the episcopate, may he know that he will face firm and decisive opposition from many good souls who are willing to fight for love of the Lord and for the salvation of their own souls, who, at a moment that is so dreadful for the fate of the Church and the world, are determined not to give in to those who wish to cancel the perennial Sacrifice, as if to facilitate the rise of the Antichrist to the leadership of the New World Order. We will soon understand the meaning of the terrible words of the Gospel (Mt 24:15), in which the Lord speaks of the abomination of desolation in the temple: the abominable horror of seeing the treasure of the Mass proscribed, our altars stripped, our churches closed, and our liturgical ceremonies forced into clandestinity. This is the abomination of desolation: the end of the Apostolic Mass.
When the 13-years old Agnes was led to her Martyrdom on January 21, 304, many among the faithful and priests had apostasized the Faith under the persecution of Diocletian. Should we fear the ostracism of the conciliar sect, when a girl has given us such an example of fidelity and fortitude before the executioner? Her heroic fidelity was praised by Saint Ambrose and Saint Damasus. Let us ensure that we, unworthy though we may be, will be able to merit the future praise of the Church while we prepare ourselves for those trials in which we testify that we belong to Christ.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
21 January 2023
Unconfirmed unedited version from our Vatican insider sources:
Pope Francis the CEO of the HOMOLOBBY, apologizing to the people of when another of his homopriests caught in the crime of pederasty. January 2022 | Chile
"I am one with my brother (homo) bishops, for it is right to ask for forgiveness (whenever our internal system of abuse and cover-up breaks down) and make every effort to support the victims (by paying generous bribes to their impoverished relatives to hush up everything as quickly as possible), even as we commit ourselves to ensuring that such things (as these careless slip-ups) do not happen again."
Pope Francis says homosexuality is ‘not a crime’ in interview with the Associated Press
Pope Francis appears to contradict the teaching of saints and Church Fathers in his latest comments regarding homosexuality.
LifeSiteNews | VATICAN CITY | January 25, 2023 — In a new interview conducted with the Associated Press, Pope Francis has once again issued brief, confusing comments on the issue of homosexuality, which seem to firmly contradict the Catholic Church’s teaching through the centuries.
“Being homosexual is not a crime,” the Pontiff said, “but it’s a sin.”
He made the remarks in a sit down interview he gave to the Associated Press (AP) on Tuesday, which was published just before the weekly general audience on Wednesday, January 25.
The AP wrote that Francis acknowledged some Catholic bishops “support laws that criminalize homosexuality or discriminate against the LGBTQ community,” but the Pope reportedly styled such positions as stemming from cultural backgrounds.
“Bishops in particular need to undergo a process of change to recognize the dignity of everyone,” the AP wrote, paraphrasing Francis’ comments.
“These bishops have to have a process of conversion,” Francis declared, calling for “tenderness, please, as God has for each one of us.”
Going further, the 86-year-old Pope called any laws which criminalize homosexuality “unjust,” adding that the Catholic Church must be involved in ending such laws. “It must do this. It must do this,” he stated.
“Being homosexual is not a crime,” Francis stated, before continuing: “It’s not a crime. Yes, but it’s a sin. Fine, but first let’s distinguish between a sin and a crime.”
Immediately following this, Francis added that “it’s also a sin to lack charity with one another.”
Expanding on his comments on LGBT-identifying individuals, Francis declared that “we are all children of God, and God loves us as we are and for the strength that each of us fights for our dignity.”
Francis’ comments were perhaps predictably praised by notorious LGBT advocate Father James Martin S.J., who called the interview “An immense step forward.”
His opinion was not universally shared, however. In a statement provided to LifeSite, a Dominican theologian commented that “while not all sins should be made into crimes, Christian nations have generally treated homosexual activity as something harmful to society, which therefore needed to be declared illegal.”
“Recent experience shows the wisdom of this, since the repeal of laws against such activity has led everywhere to a general confusion and decline of sexual morality, and even to the scarcely credible situation of people being uncertain about the nature of men and women,” the theologian added.
However, the Holy Father’s statements – while brief in the AP’s report – come into conflict with certain key points of Catholic teaching. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s 1975 document, Persona Humana, reads: “There can be no true promotion of man’s dignity unless the essential order of his nature is respected.”
Under Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in 1986, the CDF then issued a document instructing bishops on the pastoral care of homosexual persons. The CDF admonished bishops to ensure they, and any “pastoral programme” in the diocese, are “clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral.”
Such an authentic pastoral approach would “assist homosexual persons at all levels of the spiritual life: through the sacraments, and in particular through the frequent and sincere use of the sacrament of Reconciliation, through prayer, witness, counsel and individual care,” stated the CDF.
The instruction added:
But we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.
Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not.
The saints and Fathers of the Church are also equally explicit in their call for public action to be taken against acts of homosexuality, no matter whether the acts themselves were private.
The saints’ writings, though often misquoted by modern society, do not call for punishment for the mere temptation of homosexuality which one might experience, but rather for homosexual actions. This forms the basis for what the CDF wrote in 1986: namely, that a homosexual inclination is not a sin in itself, but is nevertheless “a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.”
In his Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas writes that acts of homosexuality are among the most weighty, and thus the worst kind of all the sins of lust. Styling it the “unnatural vice,” St. Thomas writes:
Therefore, since by the unnatural vices man transgresses that which has been determined by nature with regard to the use of venereal actions, it follows that in this matter this sin is gravest of all.
The saint adds that homosexual acts are a violation of natural reason, while other immoral, sexual actions “imply a transgression merely of that which is determined by right reason.”
Aquinas drew from St. Augustine’s “Confessions,” (Bk. 3, Ch. 8), highlighting that through Augustine the Church had defended the state’s right to punish homosexual acts. Aquinas quotes St. Augustine thus:
Those foul offenses that are against nature should be everywhere and at all times detested and punished, such as were those of the people of Sodom, which should all nations commit, they should all stand guilty of the same crime, by the law of God which hath not so made men that they should so abuse one another. For even that very intercourse which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature, of which He is the Author, is polluted by the perversity of lust.
So also did St. Peter Damian, in his Liber Gomorrhianus addressed to Pope Leo IX, advocate for public punishment for acts of homosexuality. He wrote that, regarding clerics, any monk who practices such acts “should be removed in all ways from his office.”
The saint’s forthright text continues:
Just as Saint Basil establishes that those who incur sins… should be subjected not only to a hard penance but a public one, and Pope Siricius prohibits penitents from entering clerical orders, one can clearly deduce that he who corrupts himself with a man through the ignominious squalor of a filthy union does not deserve to exercise ecclesiastical functions, since those who were formerly given to vices… become unfit to administer the Sacraments.
St. Peter Damian himself drew from the Early Church Father St. Basil of Caesarea, who also outlined retributions for homosexual acts. St. Basil stipulated that:
Any cleric or monk who abused adolescents or children or is caught kissing or committing some turpitude, let him be whipped in public, deprived of his crown [the tonsure] and, after having his head shaved, let his face be covered with spittle; and bound in iron chains, condemned to six months in prison, reduced to eating rye bread once a day in the evening three times per week. After these six months living in a separate cell under the custody of a wise elder with great spiritual experience, let him be subjected to prayers, vigils and manual work, always under the guard of two spiritual brothers, without being allowed to have any relationship… with young people.
Another Early Church Father and contemporary of St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, echoed this call for some earthly punishment for such actions. In his commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, St. John writes about homosexuals:
So, I say to you that they are even worse than murderers, and that it would be better to die than to live in such dishonor. A murderer only separates the soul from the body, whereas these destroy the soul inside the body.
In his first letter to the Corinthians, St. Paul states that homosexual actions are sinful, explaining that “neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers” will “inherit the kingdom of God,” but rather, according to his letter to the Romans, those who practice homosexuality will receive “in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”
“I consider it my duty to warn Christian society against those Jews who intoxicate our people in the tavern and destroy them with usury; against those who maintain houses of debauchery in the towns; who trade in live goods [i.e. selling women into prostitution], who poison our young people with pornographic prints and periodicals.”
Blessed Josef Sebastian Pelczar, (1842-1924), Archbishop of Przemysna in Poland and co-founder of the Sister Servants of the Sacred of Jesus.
Quotation from B. A. Porter: Faith and the Fatherland: Catholicism, Modernity and Poland
‘Gay clubs’ run in seminaries, says Pope Benedict in posthumous attack on Francis
New book by the late pontiff makes extraordinary claims about the Catholic Church under his progressive successor
The Telegraph | Nick Squires | January 23, 2023
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Gay “clubs” operate openly in Catholic seminaries, the institutions that prepare men for the priesthood, the late Pope Benedict XVI has claimed in a posthumously published book scathing of Pope Francis’ progressive agenda.
In a blistering attack on the state of the Catholic Church under his successor’s papacy, Benedict, who died on Dec 31 at the age of 95, said that the vocational training of the next generation of priests is on the verge of “collapse”.
He claimed that some bishops allow trainee priests to watch pornographic films as an outlet for their sexual urges.
Benedict gave instructions that the book, What Christianity Is, should be published after his death.
It is one of a handful of recent books by conservative Vatican figures which have poured scorn on the decade-old papacy of Francis, who was elected after his predecessor’s historic resignation in 2013.
The outpouring of new books contributes to “impressions of a mounting civil war in the Church following the death of Benedict XVI”, according to John Allen, a leading Vatican analyst who writes for Crux, the Catholic news outlet.
The existence of “homosexual clubs” is particularly prevalent in the US, Benedict said in his book, adding: “In several seminaries, homosexual clubs operate more or less openly.”
He cited the example of an American bishop who allegedly allowed his seminarians, or trainee priests, to watch porn films “presumably with the intention of rendering them capable of resisting behaviours contrary to the faith”.
Benedict, whose conservative position on doctrinal matters contrasted with Francis’ more compassionate approach, complained that his previous books were regarded as dangerously traditionalist by some elements of the Church.
“In not a few seminaries, students caught reading my books are considered unworthy for the priesthood. My books are concealed as dangerous literature and are read only in hiding.”
Despite their many differences, Pope Francis also warned recently that priests and even nuns regularly watch porn.
He made the remarks in October, saying that indulging in porn is a danger to the soul and a way of succumbing to the malign influence of “the devil”.
COMMENT: This posthumous confession is a little late if the intention is to obtain forgiveness of sins. What he complains about is common knowledge. Did Benedict/Ratzinger forget that he not only gave the Church Francis the Homo, he is largely responsible for Francis’ Vatican II formation? Nothing cited in this article was not long ago an established practice under John Paul II and Benedict/Ratzinger’s watch. The only thing this publication changes is the Novus Ordo canonization date of Benedict/Ratzinger. His source of ‘miracles’ may just have dried up.
Abp. Viganò: We must ‘celebrate’ the papacy despite the ‘heretical tyrant’ on the throne of St. Peter
Let us pray that the Lord will deign to grant us a holy pope and holy rulers.
LifeSiteNews | Jan 18, 2023 —
<![if !vml]><![endif]>The following is Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s sermon on the Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter in Rome.
PRAISED BE JESUS CHRIST! Today the Church in Rome celebrates the feast of the Chair of Saint Peter, with which the authority that Our Lord conferred on the Prince of the Apostles finds in the Chair its symbol and ecclesial expression. We find traces of this celebration since the third century, but it was in 1588, at the time of the Lutheran heresy, that Paul IV established that the feast of the Chair qua primum Romæ sedit Petrus would take place on January 18, in response to the denial of the presence of the Apostle in the City of Rome. The other feast for the Chair of the first Diocese founded by St. Peter, Antioch, is celebrated by the universal Church on February 22.
Let me point out this important aspect: just as the human body develops antibodies when disease arises, so that it can be defeated when it is infected; so too the ecclesial body defends itself from the contagion of error when it occurs, affirming with greater incisiveness those aspects of dogma threatened by heresy. For this reason, with great wisdom, the Church proclaimed Truths of the Faith at certain times and not before, since those Truths were hitherto believed by the faithful in a less explicit and articulated form and it was not yet necessary to specify them. The sacred Canons of the Ecumenical Council of Nicaea respond to the Arian denial of the divine nature of Our Lord, and are echoed by the splendid compositions of the ancient liturgy; the denial of the sacrificial value of the Mass, transubstantiation, suffrages and indulgences are answered by the sacred Canons of the Council of Trent, and along with them also the sublime texts of the Liturgy. Today’s feast responds to the anti-papal denial of the foundation of the Diocese of Rome by the Apostle Peter, a feast that was desired by Paul IV precisely in order to reiterate the historical truth contested by Protestants and to strengthen the doctrine that derives from it.
The heretics and their neo-modernist followers, who have infested the Church of Christ for the past sixty years, act in the opposite way. And where they do not brazenly deny the Catholic magisterium, they attempt to weaken it by being silent about it, omitting it, and formulating it in such a way as to make it equivocal and therefore acceptable even by those who deny it.
This is exactly how the heresiarchs of the past also acted; this is how the innovators acted at Vatican II; and this is how those who, in order not to be accused of formal heresy, seek to cancel those “immune defenses” with which the Church had endowed herself, so as to make the faith fall into error and infect those defenses with the plague of heresy. Almost everything that the Mystical Body had wisely developed over the centuries – and particularly during the second millennium of the Christian era – growing harmoniously like a child who becomes an adult and strengthens himself in body and spirit, has now been willfully obscured and censured, with the deceptive excuse of returning to the primordial simplicity of Christian antiquity, and with the unspeakable purpose of adulterating the Catholic Faith in order to please the enemies of the Church.
If you take the Montinian missal, you will not find explicit heresies in it; but if you compare it with the traditional missal, you will find that the omission of so many prayers composed in defense of revealed Truth was more than enough to make the reformed Mass acceptable even to Lutherans, as they themselves admitted after the promulgation of that fatal and equivocal rite. To confirm this, even the feasts of the Chair of St. Peter in Rome and Antioch have been combined into one, in the name of that cancel culture that the modernist sect adopted in the ecclesiastical sphere well before the woke left appropriated it in the civil sphere.
Today we celebrate the glories of the papacy, symbolized by the Cathedra Apostolica that the genius of Bernini artistically composed on the altar of the apse of the Vatican Basilica, which is dominated by the alabaster window depicting the Holy Spirit and guarded by four Doctors of the Church: Saint Augustine and Saint Ambrose for the Latin Church, Saint Athanasius and Saint John Chrysostom for the Greek Church. In the original project, which has remained intact through the centuries, the Chair was located above an altar, which the devastating fury of the innovators did not spare, moving it between the apse and the baldacchino of the Confession. Yet it is precisely in the architectural unity of altar and chair – which today has been deliberately erased – that we find the foundation of the doctrine of the primacy of Peter, which is founded on Christ, He who is the lapis angularis, just as the altar of sacrifice, which is also a symbol of Christ, is made of stone.
We celebrate the papacy in a historical phase of grave crisis and apostasy, which has risen even to the level of the Throne on which Peter first sat. And while our hearts are broken in contemplating the ruins caused by the devastation of the innovators to the detriment of so many souls and the glory of the divine Majesty; while we implore from Heaven a light that will allow us to understand how to combine Our Lord’s promise Non prævalebunt with the steady stream of heresies and scandals spread by the one whom Providence has inflicted on us at the head of the ecclesial body as punishment for the sins committed by the hierarchy in these decades; while we see the division between those who deluded themselves that they still had a pope segregated in the monastery … and the schism in the dioceses of northern Europe with their wicked synodal journey strongly desired by Bergoglio, we remember the prophecy of Leo XIII of happy memory, who wanted to insert in the prayer of the Exorcism against Satan and the apostate angels those terrible words that at the time must have sounded almost scandalous, but that today we understand in their supernatural sense:
Ecclesiam, Agni immaculati sponsam, faverrimi hostes repleverunt amaritudinibus, inebriarunt absinthio; Ad omnia desiderabilia ejus impias miserunt manus. Ubi sedes beatissimi Petri et Cathedra veritatis ad lucem gentium constituta est, ibi thronum posuerunt abominationis et impietatis suæ; ut percusso Pastor, et gregem disperse valeant.
Terrible enemies have filled the Church, bride of the immaculate Lamb, with bitterness, they have poisoned her with absinthe; they have laid their wicked hands on all desirable things. There where the See of Blessed Peter and the Chair of Truth was established to enlighten the nations, there they have placed the throne of their abomination and impiety, so that by striking the Shepherd they might also scatter the flock.
These are not randomly written words: they were written after Leo XIII, at the end of Mass, had a vision in which the Lord granted Satan a period of time of about a hundred years to test the men of the Church. They echo the message of the Blessed Virgin at La Salette, fifty years earlier: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist,” and precede by little more than a decade that third part of the Secret of Fatima in which, in all likelihood, Our Lady predicted the apostasy of the hierarchy with the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform.
Every believer down the centuries has been able to look to Rome as a beacon of truth. No pope, not even the most controversial popes in history like Alexander VI, ever dared to usurp his sacred Apostolic authority in order to demolish the Church, adulterate her magisterium, corrupt her morality, and trivialize her liturgy. In the midst of the most shocking storms, the Chair of Peter has remained unshaken and, despite persecution, it has never failed in the mandate conferred on it by Christ: Feed my lambs. Feed my sheep (Jn 21:15-19). Today, and for ten years now, feeding the lambs and sheep of the Lord’s flock is considered as a “solemn foolishness” by the one who now occupies the Throne of Peter, and the command that the Lord has given to the Apostles – Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you (Mt 28:19-20) – is seen as deplorable “proselytism,” as if the divine mission of the Holy Church were comparable to the heretical propaganda of sects.
He said so on October 1, 2013; January 6, 2014; September 24, 2016; May 3, 2018; September 30, 2018; June 6, 2019; December 20, 2019; April 25, 2020, and again just a week ago on January 11, 2023. And here collapses the last, gasping vestige of what was Vatican II, which made “mission” [missionarietà] its watchword without understanding that in order to proclaim Christ to a paganized world it is necessary first of all to believe in the supernatural Truths that He taught the Apostles and that the Church has the duty to guard faithfully. Watering down Catholic doctrine, silencing it, and betraying it in order to please the mentality of the age is not the work of Faith, because this virtue is based on God who is the Supreme Truth; it is not a work of Hope, because one cannot hope for the salvation or help of a God whose revealing authority and saving love one rejects; it is not a work of Charity, because one cannot love Him whose very essence is denied.
What is the vulnus that has struck the ecclesial body, making possible this apostasy of the leaders of the hierarchy, to the point of causing scandal not only in Catholics, but also in the people of the world? It is the abuse of authority. It is believing that the power connected with authority can be exercised for the very opposite purpose of that purpose which legitimizes authority itself. It is taking God’s place, usurping His supreme power to decide what is right and what is not, deciding what can still be said to people and what is to be considered old-fashioned or outdated in the name of progress and evolution. It is to use the power of the Holy Keys to loose what ought to be bound and bind what ought to be loosed. It is not to understand that authority belongs to God and to no one else, and that both the rulers of nations and the prelates of the Church are all hierarchically subjected to Christ the King and High Priest. In short, it is separating the Chair from the altar, the authority of the Vicar and the Regent from that of the One who makes that authority sacred, ratified from above, because He possesses its fullness and is its divine origin.
Among the titles of the roman pontiff, there recurs, along with Christi Vicarius, also that of Servus servorum Dei. If the first has been disdainfully rejected by Bergoglio, his choice to retain the second sounds like a provocation, as his words and his works demonstrate. The day will come when the prelates of the Church will be asked to clarify what intrigues and conspiracies may have led to the Throne one who acts as the servant of Satan’s servants, and why they have fearfully assisted his excesses or made themselves accomplices of this proud heretical tyrant. Let those tremble who know and yet are silent out of false sense of prudence: by their silence they do not protect the honor of the Holy Church, nor do they preserve the simple from scandal. On the contrary, they plunge the Bride of the Lamb into ignominy and humiliation, and drive the faithful away from the Ark of Salvation at the very moment of the Flood.
Let us pray that the Lord will deign to grant us a holy pope and holy rulers. Let us implore Him to put an end to this long period of trial, thanks to which – like every event permitted by God – we are now understanding how fundamental it is instaurare omnia in Christo, to recapitulate everything in Christ; how hellish – literally – is the world that rejects the Lordship of Christ, and how much more infernal is a religion that strips itself with contempt of its royal garments – robes dyed with the Blood of the Lamb on the Cross – to become the servant of the powerful, of the New World Order, of the globalist sect. Tempora bona veniant. Pax Christi veniat. Regnum Christi veniat. And so may it be.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
By his teaching on the impossibility of continency either in celibacy or In marriage, he paves the way to the sanction of a bigamic marriage, at least In the case of the Landgrave Philip von Hessen. In union with Melanchton and Bucer, Luther acts the spiritual adviser, with counsel pertinent to the matter in hand. On account of the sensation caused by the bigamic marriage, the Landgrave Is recommended to deny it, but secretly he may keep the trull—”Metze”—as a “conjugal concubine.” In principle, Luther had already enunciated these tenets after his interior apostasy from the Church. They only prove his bent and readiness with regard to lying, cunning, and deception.
Rev. Heinrich Denifle, O.P., Luther and Lutherdom
I firmlly admit and accept the Apostolic and Ecclesiastical Traditinos and all the other observances and constitutions of the Church.... I also accept and admit the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church in the solemn administratin of all the Sacraments.
Tridentine Profession of Faith
Dogmas are not Precepts – They are Divinely Revealed Truths
The dogmas of the Faith are to be held only according to their practical sense; that is to say, as preceptive norms of conduct and not as norms of believing, Condemned Proposition. St. Pius X, Lamentabili Sane
Why is John Henry Cardinal Newman regarded by Modernists as their Spiritual Father? – Because he was! So why do “Conservative Catholics” admire Newman? Because he explained how dogma can be discarded.
“Dr. Newman is the most dangerous man in England. And you will see that he will make use of the laity against your Grace. You must not be afraid of him. It will require much prudence, but you must be firm, as the Holy father sill places his confidence in you; but if you yield and do not fight the battle of the Holy See against the detestable spirit growing up in England, he will begin to regret Cardinal Wiseman, who knew how to keep the laity in order.”
Msgr. George Talbot, Papal Chamberlain, Letter to Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, after Pope Pius IX suppressed a plan for Dr. John Henry Newman going to Oxford to establish an inter-faith oratory.
An English Catholicism, of which Newman is the highest type, is the old Anglican, patristic, literary, Oxford tone transplanted into the Church... In one word, it is a worldly Catholicism, and it will have the worldly on its side, and will deceive many.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, on Dr. John Henry Cardinal Newman
Another influential writer during the last century was Lord Acton (Sir John Dalberg), who was famous for his critical historicism and also renowned for his friendship with (Rev. Johann von) Dollinger (a Munich priest and professor at the University, excommunicated for rejecting the dogma of papal infallibility). Acton was almost excommunicated, as Dollinger was, but managed to maintain the appearance of orthodoxy and remain in the Church. As liberal as Lord Acton was, and although he sided with Newman in fighting the dogma of Infallibility, he came to the same conclusion as (Cardianl Henry Edward) Manning regarding Newman’s heterodox position. In a letter written by Acton a few weeks before Manning’s death, after mentioning the ‘personal aversion to Manning’ displayed by Newman he said, “Many will wonder how anybody who saw much of him (Newman) could remain a Catholic — assuming that Newman really was one.” Acton, although an ally of Newman in editing the liberal journal The Rambler, was not baffled by Newman’s prosaic tact. Acton went much further than Manning in his strictures on his old ally. He described Newman as “a sophist, the manipulator and not the servant of truth.” When men of diametrically opposed beliefs, as Acton and Manning, agree in their judgment of another man whom they so well knew, the assumption that they are not both in error is not unreasonable.
John Edward Courtenay Bodley, On Cardinal John Henry Newman
DOGMA IS THE PROXIMATE RULE OF FAITH; DOGMA is revealed doctrine formally defined by the Church. The pope is the necessary but insufficient means by which DOGMA is declared.
Hence, the distinction is made betewen the Remote and the Proximate Rule of Faith. The remote Rule of Faith is the Objective Deposit, [Scripture and Tradition], It contains revealed truths which - for some reason or other - were forgotten, obscure, or not sufficiently understood. Hence, they were broght into discussion, or denied without injury to the Faith until they became clear or were defined by the Church. The Proximate Rule of Faith is the teaching of the Church sufficiently proposed and manifestly promulgated to the Faithful, [DOGMA]. If this Proximate Rule of Faith proclaims anything as belonging to the Remote Rule of Faith, it can no longer be challenged without shipwreck of the Faith. For unity of faith is whole and entire only while there is no dissent with the Proximate Rule of Faith. On this point Gregory of Valentia declares: "The Church has from darkness brought to light wth her infallible authority some doctrines which, through human negligence or malice or perversity of mind, remained concealed. And mayhap there are some still hidden in the Church." Msgr. George Agius, D.D., J.C.D., Tradition and the Church
Worth Repeating: The SCHISM is already HERE!
COMMENT: This book in the article below provides an interpretation of Chapter 8 of Amoria Laetitia. It is addressed to bishops with a “merciful heart” and offers an interpretation that is consistent with the interpretation approved in the private letter sent by Pope Francis to the bishops of Argentina as well as with the interpretation of Cardinal Schornborn who Pope Francis has publically identified as its ‘official interpretor.’ These bishops say that the proper understanding and application is that any Catholic living in public adultery based upon their own private judgment in the internal forum can declare themselves worthy to receive Holy Communion and absolution in the sacrament of Penance and therefore cannot be denied these sacraments. It is given semi-official approval by its publication in L’Osservatore Romano.
Now in the Novus Ordo which may be nothing more than a memorial meal as initially defined by Pope Paul VI, perhaps giving the Novus Ordo communion wafer to a person in objective mortal sin is not a real problem. But what is certainly a grave sin it that these persons can expect to be absolved by a confessor in the sacrament of Penance without confessing or repentance of mortal sin. Pope Francis and his CDF puppet, Cardinal Muller, will not be answering the Dubia in any official capacity. This does not represent a change in the Church’s teaching. It represents the active effort of a Francis and his minions to destroy the Catholic doctrine and morality. As we announced during the synod, the schism has long been present. It is more evident each passing day and every Catholic will have to pick sides. God cannot let an open attack upon the sacrament of marriage go unpunished. Their hypocrisy is oozing from every pore. Imagine if a Catholic with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” arrives at traditional Catholicism, what kind of response can be expect from the local bishop and Rome? If you want to know read our OPEN LETTERS!
If, as a result of the process of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more perfect response to it” (Amoris Laetitia 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new relationship manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351).
Bishops Charles J Scicluna and Mario Grech, Guide for the Interpretation of Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia: An Invitatiion to the Bishops of Merciful Hearts. This received semi-official approbation by being featured in the publication, L’Osservatore Romano, 1-2017
When I consider the words which Jesus Christ addressed to His heavenly Father in prayer, saying that He did not pray for the world,” I pray not for the world” [John xviii, 9]-----and again that, when praying for His disciples that His prayer might be more efficacious, He emphasized the fact that they were not followers of the world, “They are in the world, but they are not of the world”-----I confess that no words of our Saviour in the whole Gospel terrify me more than these. For I perceive that it is necessary for me to separate myself from the world, so that Jesus Christ may intercede for me. And if I am a lover of the world, I shall be excommunicated by Jesus Christ and shall have no part in His intercessions and prayers. These are the words of Christ Himself: “I pray not for the world, but for those who are not of the world.”
Let us really understand these words: that
Jesus Christ excludes us from His kingdom if we belong to the world, that is to
say if we wish to follow the maxims of the world which are nothing but vanity
and deceit and fill man with pride; the maxims of the world which the prophet
says “turn aside the way of the humble.” [Amos ii, 7] Meanwhile Jesus Christ is
our advocate with the Father in so far as, renewing our Baptismal vow, we
renounce the world and accept the maxims of the Gospel which are true and tend
to make man humble. To serve both God and the world is impossible, because we
could never please both-----”he will hold to the one and despise the other.”
[Luke xvi, 13]
To pretend to serve God and the world is the same as to imagine that we can be both humble and proud at the same time. Vain dream!
Fr. Cajetan Mary da Bergamo, Humility of Heart
ON THE FEWNESS OF THOSE WHO FIND SALVATION
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“Only a few will be saved; only few will go to Heaven. The greater part of mankind will be lost forever.”
St. John Neumann
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“There are a select few who are saved.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“The number of the Elect is so small - so small - that, were we to know how small it is, we would faint away with grief. One here and there, scattered up and down the world!”
St. Louis Marie de Montfort
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“I tremble when I see how many souls are lost these days. They fall into Hell like leaves from the trees at the approach of winter.”
St. John Mary Vianney
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“So vast a number of miserable souls perish, and so comparatively few are saved!”
St. Philip Neri
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“How narrow is the gate and how strait the way that leads to life, and few there are who find it.”
Jesus Christ, Mt. 7, 13-14
“Perhaps for the first time that there are magisterial decisions which cannot be the final word on a given matter as such but, despite the permanent value of their principles, are chiefly also a signal for pastoral prudence, a sort of provisional policy.”
Cardinal Ratzinger, as head of CDF, The Nature and Mission of Theology
COMMENT: The Magisterium of the Church is one thing. It is the teaching authority of the Church conferred upon her by her founder, Jesus Christ, so that His Church could teach authoritatively and infallibly in the name of God. Only the pope in the office of the papacy stands in potentia to this power but when any pope throughout the history of the Church engages this power in actu, he is engaging one and the same thing as every other pope who preceded him. “Magisterial decisions” are therefore the “final word on a given matter” because they are the word of God. Benedict/Ratzinger denies this Catholic truth. He claims that there exists “permanent value of … principles” and human “provisional policy” in magisterial judgments. He is affirming the heresy of Neo-modernism that postulates that in a given dogma there exists a disjunction between the form and matter. The former is the truth from God and the latter is a human approximation of that truth that must constantly change in a continuous refinement to distill away the human accretions from the divine truth. Thus for the Neo-modernist truth lies in a subjective process and has objective value only for the historian. The definition of heresy is the denial of a “magisterial decision”. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary ends theological debate on the question. Those who hold that the dogma is “a sort of provisional policy” are heretics and the possibility of salvation absent any repentance is impossible.
Catholic Dogma: Only the sacrament of Baptism received by those who hold the true faith can make men “children of God” and members of His Church!
“In this crowd, in this range of religious, there is only one certainty we have for all: we are all children of God. I hope you will spread my prayer request for this month: That sincere dialogue among men and women of different faiths may produce the fruits of peace and justice. I have confidence in your prayers.”
Pope Francis the Indifferent, Prayer intention for January 2016
COMMENT: The entire Vatican II ecumenical dialogue process with Jewry is based upon two erroneous presuppositions. The first is that Jews today believe and practice the religion of Abraham and Moses. They do not. And everyone knows it yet the Modernists in Rome pretend otherwise. The Jewish religion is governed by the traditions codified in the Talmud and not the Old Testament scripture. There is no “spiritual patrimony common to Christians and Jews” and it is utterly false and deceptive to claim that, “Christianity has its roots in Judaism; (and Judaism) constitutes the nucleus of (Christian) identity.” The reason that the Catholic Modernists and Jews “share a spirit of friendship and esteem”, even camaraderie, is because the “common patrimony” they both share is a mutual rejection of Jesus Christ. This friendship is evidence of their apostasy. The second erroneous presupposition is that the Jews, because they are Jews, have their own operative covenant with God whereby they obtain salvation. Again, they do not. God is not impressed by “Jewish DNA”. As Jesus Christ said, “And think not to say within yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’. For I tell you that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham” (Matthew 3:9).
St. Paul said of the Jews of his day that they are they, “Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men” (1Thess 2:15). The relationship between those who “killed the prophets” and those who “killed the Lord Jesus” is not a literal but a spiritual one. The analogous imputation is clear. There exists today and historically a spiritual relationship between the Jews who literally “killed the Lord Jesus” and their descendants who follow them in their rejection of Jesus as the true and only Messias and persecute Him in His Church, the Mystical Body of Christ.
Modernists Rome denies that Jews must accept Jesus Christ and be members of His Church to obtain salvation. They deny what St. Peter, explaining the miraculous cure of a cripple, affirmed to the Jewish high priest in the Temple that, “by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him this man standeth here before you whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:10-12). Or as St. John simply said, “He that hath the Son, hath life. He that hath not the Son, hath not life” (1 John 5:12). The Modernists believe the absurd Jewish racial theory that Jews, because of “Jewish DNA”, irrespective of what they believe or of what they do, are still in a salvific relationship with God without Jesus Christ. The attribution of historical “persecution” of Jews is likewise adapted to the Jewish racial theory and thus historical opposition to Jews is always seen as being motivated by racial hatred and not what in fact Jews have historically done. Catholics, according to their estimation in a clear example of Jewish racial projection, are therefore racists guilty for “a two millennium rift during which the ‘teaching of contempt’ by many Christian clergy on all levels planted the seeds of hatred that nourished repeated persecutions, pogroms, and helped create a climate that led to the unfathomable crimes of the Shoah.”
Modern Jewish messianic theology holds that the Jews as a people constitute a collective Messias, the Holocaust is their passion, and the establishment of the State of Israel their resurrection. They believe in fact that the collective Jewish Messias will one day rule the world from Jerusalem. The Jews have followed many false Messiasse since their rejection of Jesus Christ and every one of these has invariably led to ruin. This false Messias will be no different and perhaps, much worse.
Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews because of their race. This is a sin. There is no greater manifestation of anti-Semitism, and thus no greater sin, than refusing to tell a Jew, because and only because he is a Jew, that that there is no hope of salvation outside of Jesus Christ and His Church. This racial theory of salvation is a door that will necessarily lead to abject ruin.
When burdened with a worthless bishop, Catholics could only blame themselves!
“Let no bishop be given to a community against its will; the consent and desire of the clergy, people, and nobility is required.”
Pope St. Celestine I (422-432)
Synod on Synodality: Welcome to the ‘Big Top’
The Catholic Church must free itself from this ‘toxic nightmare’
By Cardinal George Pell
The Catholic Synod of Bishops is now busy constructing what they think of as ‘God’s dream’ of synodality. Unfortunately this divine dream has developed into a toxic nightmare despite the bishops’ professed good intentions.
They have produced a 45-page booklet which presents its account of the discussions of the first stage of ‘listening and discernment’, held in many parts of the world, and it is one of the most incoherent documents ever sent out from Rome.
While we thank God that Catholic numbers around the globe, especially in Africa and Asia are increasing, the picture is radically different in Latin America with losses to the Protestants as well as the secularists.
With no sense of irony, the document is entitled ‘Enlarge the Space of Your Tent’, and the aim of doing so is to accommodate, not the newly baptised —those who have answered the call to repent and believe — but anyone who might be interested enough to listen. Participants are urged to be welcoming and radically inclusive: ‘No one is excluded’.
What is one to make of this potpourri, this outpouring of New Age good will?
The document does not urge even the Catholic participants to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:16-20), much less to preach the Saviour in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:2).
The first task for everyone and especially the teachers, is to listen in the Spirit. According to this recent update of the good news, ‘synodality’ as a way of being for the Church is not to be defined, but just to be lived. It revolves around five creative tensions, starting from radical inclusion and moving towards mission in a participatory style, practicing ‘co-responsibility with other believers and people of good will’. Difficulties are acknowledged, such as war, genocide and the gap between clergy and laity, but all can be sustained, say the Bishops, by a lively spirituality.
The image of the Church as an expanding tent with the Lord at its centre comes from Isaiah, and the point of it is to emphasise that this expanding tent is a place where people are heard and not judged, not excluded.
So we read that the people of God need new strategies; not quarrels and clashes but dialogue, where the distinction between believers and unbelievers is rejected. The people of God must actually listen, it insists, to the cry of the poor and of the earth.
Because of differences of opinion on abortion, contraception, the ordination of women to the priesthood and homosexual activity, some felt that no definitive positions on these issues can be established or proposed. This is also true of polygamy, and divorce and remarriage.
the document is clear on the special problem of the inferior position of women
and the dangers of clericalism, although the positive contribution of many
priests is acknowledged.
What is one to make of this potpourri, this outpouring of New Age good will? It is not a summary of Catholic faith or New Testament teaching. It is incomplete, hostile in significant ways to the apostolic tradition and nowhere acknowledges the New Testament as the Word of God, normative for all teaching on faith and morals. The Old Testament is ignored, patriarchy rejected and the Mosaic Law, including the Ten Commandments, is not acknowledged.
Two points can be made initially. The two final synods in Rome in 2023 and ’24 will need to clarify their teaching on moral matters, as the Relator (chief writer and manager) Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich has publicly rejected the basic teachings of the Church on sexuality, on the grounds that they contradict modern science. In normal times this would have meant that his continuing as Relator was inappropriate, indeed impossible.
The synods have to choose whether they are servants and defenders of the apostolic tradition on faith and morals, or whether their discernment compels them to assert their sovereignty over Catholic teaching. They must decide whether basic teachings on things like priesthood and morality can be parked in a pluralist limbo where some choose to redefine sins downwards and most agree to differ respectfully.
Outside the synod, discipline is loosening – especially in Northern Europe, where a few bishops have not been rebuked, even after asserting a bishop’s right to dissent; a de facto pluralism already exists more widely in some parishes and religious orders on things like blessing homosexual activity.
Diocesan bishops are the successors of the apostles, the chief teacher in each diocese and the focus of local unity for their people and of universal unity around the Pope, the successor of Peter. Since the time of St Irenaeus of Lyon, the bishop is also the guarantor of continuing fidelity to Christ’s teaching, the apostolic tradition. They are governors and sometimes judges, as well as teachers and sacramental celebrants, and are not just wall flowers or rubber stamps.
‘Enlarge the Tent’ is alive to the failings of bishops, who sometimes do not listen, have autocratic tendencies and can be clericalist and individualist. There are signs of hope, of effective leadership and cooperation, but the document opines that pyramid models of authority should be destroyed and the only genuine authority comes from love and service. Baptismal dignity is to be emphasised, not ministerial ordination and governance styles should be less hierarchical and more circular and participative.
The main actors in all Catholic synods (and councils) and in all Orthodox synods have been the bishops. In a gentle, cooperative way this should be asserted and put into practice at the continental synods so that pastoral initiatives remain within the limits of sound doctrine. Bishops are not there simply to validate due process and offer a ‘nihil obstat’ to what they have observed.
None of the synod’s participants, lay, religious, priest or bishop are well served by the synod ruling that voting is not allowed and propositions cannot be proposed. To pass on only the organising committee’s views to the Holy Father for him to do as he decides is an abuse of synodality, a sidelining of the bishops, which is unjustified by scripture or tradition. It is not due process and is liable to manipulation.
By an enormous margin, regularly worshipping Catholics everywhere do not endorse the present synod findings. Neither is there much enthusiasm at senior Church levels. Continued meetings of this sort deepen divisions and a knowing few can exploit the muddle and good will. The ex-Anglicans among us are right to identify the deepening confusion, the attack on traditional morals and the insertion into the dialogue of neo-Marxist jargon about exclusion, alienation, identity, marginalisation, the voiceless, LGBTQ as well as the displacement of Christian notions of forgiveness, sin, sacrifice, healing, redemption. Why the silence on the afterlife of reward or punishment, on the four last things; death and judgement, heaven and hell?
So far the synodal way has neglected, indeed downgraded the Transcendent, covered up the centrality of Christ with appeals to the Holy Spirit and encouraged resentment, especially among participants.
Working documents are not part of the magisterium. They are one basis for discussion; to be judged by the whole people of God and especially by the bishops with and under the Pope. This working document needs radical changes. The bishops must realise that there is work to be done, in God’s name, sooner rather than later.
Cardinal George Pell, written shortly before he died suddenly after undergoing hip arthroplasty at Salvator Mundi Hospital in Rome, often referred as the ‘pope’s hospital’.
The Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary, to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, whether temporal, or above all, spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families, of the families of the world or of religious communities, or even of the life of peoples and nations that cannot be solved by the Rosary. There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Rosary! With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves. We will sanctify ourselves. We will console our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.
Sr. Lucy of Fatima to Fr. Fuentes
The decadence which exists in the world is without any doubt the consequence of the lack of the spirit of prayer. Foreseeing this disorientation, the Blessed Virgin recommended recitation of the Rosary with such insistence, and since the Rosary is, after the Eucharistic liturgy, the prayer most apt for preserving faith in souls, the devil has unchained his struggle against it . . . The Rosary is the most powerful weapon for defending ourselves on the field of battle.
Sr. Lucy of Fatima to Dom Umberto Pasqual
“I have always something to repent for after having talked, but have never been sorry for having been silent.”
St. Arsenius, a Desert Father, d. 445 at 95 years of age
The Eucharist is sustenance rather than a remedy. Food does not reduce fever or drive out humours; it maintains and improves the health. The remedy for our sins and defects is in the Sacrament of Penance, in acts of contrition and expiatory works. Quite other is the effect of the Eucharist: it nourishes, it sustains, it strengthens, it develops the good qualities which it encounters; it augments faith, hope, and love; the more strongly these virtues are implanted in the soul, the more growth and the more life will it derive from the Sacred Food.
Abbe A. Saudreau, director of the mother-house of the Good Shepherd at Angers, The Way that Leads to God
Where is the United States headed? An immoral people cannot be free. Therefore, the deep state promotes immorality because they do not want a free people!
“The domestic spying, impeachment, and election irregularities of the Trump presidency matter because of what they tell us about the managerial system. All the public talk of democracy is for show; the whole point of the bureaucracy and the party system is to prevent any popular, democratic movement that would threaten the ruling class’ privileges. As President Trump put it, ‘They don’t hate you because they hate me. They hate me because they hate you’.”
Christopher Roach, Political Commentary
THIS ARTICLE OFFERS INSIGHT INTO THE FUDAMENTAL DOCTRINAL CORRUPTION OF THE POPE FRANCIS’ VATICAN
Pope Francis and Infallibility
Vatican Insider | Paolo Scarafoni and Filomena Rizzo | 11 November 2020
The infallibility of the Pope was proclaimed as a dogma 150 years ago in Vatican Council I. We know well problems and difficulties that it has generated within the Church and the Christian world and the political crises in relations with States, threatened in sovereignty; but little thought has been given, even in theology, to the innovative scope.
Beyond that historical moment, from an anthropological point of view, the real novelty of this dogma was universality. The real awareness of being able to challenge the totality of humanity today is called “globalization”. Something unthinkable until then, that the Catholic Church first had the courage to propose around the figure of the Pope. We are faced with a prophecy of what will be an irreversible journey of humanity: a global world where everything is connected. The great powers of the world will try to imitate this path, in the political, military, economic, financial, cultural field, also living the same limits and the same difficulties experienced in the Church.
At that time the two great limits of the interpretation of infallibility and universality were: the claim of the dominion of all minds with the submission of all men; and the attainment of the univocity of the expressions of faith. Universality as uniformity, demanding the renunciation of freedom and cultural diversity. The Pope was seen as an absolute monarch.
The other powers of the world have moved and still move along the same line: to achieve universal domination and to standardize the life and mentality of all men, making us believe that universality is not possible without imposing these two limits. Such premises have been made to pass as the only condition for world development. Today, we all experience it in the digital world, which asks us to abdicate our privacy, to allow ourselves to be tracked everywhere, and to be influenced in the choices of almost all aspects of our lives.
A second providential moment of experience of universality was the Second Vatican Council, which perhaps could never have been realized without the beautiful awareness of John XXIII, who willingly called himself “the pope of all”: “The whole world is my family. This sense of universal belonging must give tone and vivacity to my mind, to my heart, to my actions” (Il Giornale dell’Anima 29 November - 5 December 1959).
The presence in Rome of the bishops of all the peoples of the world, of the delegated observers of the Orthodox Churches and of the other Christian confessions, the guests of the secretariat of Christian unity, the contribution of the experts, especially the laity, the auditors and the parish priests, have illuminated even more the path of universality and consequently of infallibility. In that interweaving of relationships and knowledge it was immediately evident to everyone that infallibility and universality could not mean renunciation of freedom and elimination of diversity for uniformity. On the contrary, the Council was lived as collegiality, freedom, and appreciation of the many Christian traditions in the various cultures, also inevitably creating frictions and difficult moments. An experience of the Church that has radiated so many hopes to all humanity.
The Council in fact largely modified the guidelines of the previous papal magisterium. The events channeled the exercise of infallibility into collegiality. The Pope gave his support to the change, and his figure was further valued, not mortified, as many feared. Collegiality is not understood only as the feeling of living bishops, but also as a patrimony left by all those who preceded them.
The epochal change that we live today, accentuated by the pandemic, where everything is connected, refines even more like gold the service of infallibility as a journey in the truth: the infallibility of the people of God, the sensus fidei, shines out, to which recourse has already been made in the proclamation of the two Marian dogmas (Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary into Heaven). Pope Francis identifies in the sense of the faith of the people of God the element of balance and discernment between the controversies of pastors. He is insisting precisely on this point: it is time to learn to walk by referring to the people of God. It is a matter of teaching having listened and learned from the people that is the source, especially in difficulties: it is capable of “rising up” together also in faith. It is the path of synodality, which accompanies collegiality and the Petrine ministry. Many people find it impossible to take this route from a practical point of view and prefer paths already known.
It is the work of the Holy Spirit, but success is not taken for granted. History has already experienced it. Some prelates, from what can be seen in the media, try to bring the Church back to the post-Tridentine climate, creating tensions in view of the upcoming papal election. It was at the time of the Council of Trent that the succession to the papal throne was decided by casting suspicion on the candidate.
For the first time in a conclave (1549-1550) the charge of heresy was launched against the English cardinal Reginald Pole, which reflected the divisions in the Church in the face of Protestantism. He was a great defender of the papacy, moderate and mediator, and personally paid for the commitment to the unity of the Church in England. In his book De Summo Pontifice, written a few years before, he presented the role of the successor of Peter as an imitator of Christ, and formulated “infallibility” as a guarantee of freedom before the power of States. Probably with his election the face and history of the Church would have had a turning point.
Precisely on the infallibility maneuver those who oppose Pope Francis. But now it is no longer synonymous with power, but of service in love to all humanity for a truly universal Church of Christ.
* Fr. Paolo Scarafoni and Filomena Rizzo teach theology together in Italy and Africa, in Addis Ababa. They are authors of books and articles of theology.
COMMENT: What colossal tripe is this Vatican Insider (therefore, authorized by Pope Francis) publication offering an apologetic for the ‘Great Reset’, the new world order globalization, as a work of the Holy Spirit, while identifying its enemies as those who would endorse a return “to the post-Tridentine climate, creating tensions in view of the upcoming papal election” by accusations of “heresy” against the new pope.
The authors are the kind of people that Francis the Apostate surrounds himself with and therefore parrot his thinking. This article is grounded upon thoroughly non-Catholic presuppositions. It is the stuff from which fables lacking any foundation are constructed. The corrupted world has infected the Church with its habit of mistaking fantasy for imagination. While imagination is the disciplined power to innovative vision within the possibilities of the real, fantasy is mental sloth fermented in a soup of moral degradation to escape from any and every challenge, burden or suffering. It is a refusal to carry the cross.
The authors argue that the declaration of infallibility was a type of “prophecy” that, with “courage,” proposed an “irreversible journey of humanity” toward a “global world where everything is connected.” “From an anthropological point of view,” (anthropology being comparative sociology from a historical perspective), all human endeavors became universal in scope directed by the “great powers of the world”: Politics became oriented to a one world authority, military to a one world police state, finance to a one world bank, economics to a one world control of exchange, religion to a one world church, etc., etc. The Jewish Satanist, Karl Marx, would appreciate this argument.
They continue. Vatican II providentially “channeled the exercise of infallibility into collegiality” and universality brings any and every form aberro-catholicism under the tent, so no one should be worried about a one world abuse of authority or imposition of strict conformity. John XXIII claimed to be “the pope of all”: “The whole world is my family. This sense of universal belonging must give tone and vivacity to my mind, to my heart, to my actions.” Therefore, the authors conclude, “it was immediately evident to everyone that infallibility and universality could not mean renunciation of freedom and elimination of diversity for uniformity.” The new world order is certainly our friend!
Without any sense of shame or danger these dreamers affirm that this new modernist gospel “is the work of the Holy Spirit, but success (for its implementation) is not taken for granted.” After all, the new world order has already called for universal access to abortion and reduction of the world population to 500 million that would eliminate 5.5 billion people. This is a demonic program and to attribute this evil to the Holy Ghost is a sin that “shall not be forgiven... neither in this world, nor in the world to come” (Matt 12:32).
Setting aside for the moment “the upcoming papal election,” an examination of the ideological presuppositions can be instructive. The pope is held as the rule of faith in that he personally discerns and exemplifies the sensus fidei by the direct guidance of the Holy Ghost through the process of collegial synodality. He discerns the shifting winds and infallibly guides the Church in a new direction and everyone is called upon to follow him wherever he goes. Catholic ‘faithful’ are those who follow the pope. Those Catholics who want to keep the faith and return to a “post-Tridentine” climate where dogma is taken as revealed truth do not possess the sensus fidei and are its enemies. Collegiality and synodality are really just for appearance sake. The pope ends up doing whatever he “discerns” as was evident in the previous carefully scripted synods of Pope Francis.
The authors claim that the “innovative scope” of the dogma of papal infallibility, the “real novelty of this dogma was universality.” The problem is that if anything has “universality,” it cannot at the same time have the quality of “novelty.” A true universal is a stable form in the mind of God “with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration” (James 1:17). A universal truth is always and everywhere for everyone without exception true. A dogma is a universal, therefore it is not a “novelty” nor is it proper to talk about its “innovative scope” because it is by definition already a truth revealed by God. Only in a subjective sense can such attributes be considered, such as, the authors of this article may have just discovered a universal truth but this discovery has no bearing on the truth itself. Furthermore, the pope is not infallible per se. It is the Church that is infallible per se. The pope occupies the office that stands in potentia to the Church’s divine attribute of infallibility. For dogmatically defined ends while employing dogmatically defined means, the pope can engage the Church’s attribute of infallibility in actu, but attribute remains always a power of the Church essentially and a power of the pope only accidentally.
Therefore, every dogma is an article of divine revelation that is formally and infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church and proposed to the faithful as a formal object of divine and Catholic faith. The Magisterium of the Church is the power conferred by Jesus Christ upon His Church to teach in the name of God without the possibility of error. The Magisterium is grounded upon two of the attributes of the Church: infallibility and authority (the third being indefectibility). These are properly attributes of God and God alone. They are attributes of the Church only because the Church is a divine institution. The Church is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ composed of those who are baptized, profess the Catholic faith, and are subjects of the Roman pontiff. The pope is the necessary but insufficient instrumental cause of dogma because to him alone belongs the power to engage the Church’s attribute of infallibility and to authoritatively impose on all the faithful the formal object of divine and Catholic faith. God is the formal and final cause of dogma.
The attributes of infallibility and authority that Jesus Christ endowed His Church have been known by every faithful Catholic since the time of the Apostles. Historically, divine revelation is only formally defined where there is a crisis of faith regarding a particular revealed truth. The truth is one while error is manifold. The truth of papal infallibility can be corrupted by either denying its existence (such as by, the rationalists, liberals, materialists, etc.) or by excess in claiming that the pope personally possesses the attributes of the Church making him personally infallible in all he says and does (such as by conservative Catholics today who make the pope their proximate rule of faith). The pope is only infallible accidentally. This latter error takes the attributes of God and attributes them to the pope essentially. This is idolatry.
The very definitions of universality and dogma are corrupted in this article. Dogma as the proximate rule of faith for every Catholic is replaced by the person of the pope. From this idolatry, the faith itself becomes subject to the whims of the pope and whatever he does is claimed to be the work of the Holy Spirit and an expression of the sensus fidei. So what do the authors mean by “Some prelates, from what can be seen in the media, try to bring the Church back to the post-Tridentine climate, creating tensions in view of the upcoming papal election”?
Apparently, there is already a planned “upcoming papal election” when Francis perhaps resigns and there is concern that clerics who look to dogma as their proximate rule of faith will accuse the next pre-selected candidate of being a heretic. The “post-Tridentine” Catholics will claim that it is the dogma that is “infallible” and their reply will be, “Precisely on the infallibility maneuver those who oppose Pope Francis. But now (infallibility) is no longer synonymous with power, but of service in love to all humanity for a truly universal Church of Christ.”
Infallibility is in fact “synonymous with power” because infallibility is an attribute of the All-powerful God. Those who are confused on this truth do not possess it. They do not possess the Catholic faith. The definition of heresy is the denial of a dogma. Neo-Modernists and Modernists deny dogma in its very essence. For them, heresy is the failure to follow current papal ideology. “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema” (Gal 1:8-9).
Ugly future for a country that prizes homosexual perversion!
“Population collapse is potentially the greatest risk to the future of civilization.”
Elon Musk, Billionaire
“Consider the moral and ideological baggage that sub-(population) replacement fertility regimen is likely to drag along with it. Pessimism, hesitance, dependence, self-indulgence, resentment, and division: do we really think there will be less of these in a 1.5 child America? ..... Further, would a 1.5-child America really be willing to make incessant patriotic sacrifices to defend itself and its allies, or to preserve the post-war liberal economic and political order upon which our prosperity and security so greatly depend?”
Dr. Nicholas Eberstadt, The De-Population Bomb, political economist and demographer on the implosion of U.S. population
Traditional Catholics are largely immune from “Official Propaganda” and thus, are “awkward to manage” causing “administrative problems”!
“But the utility of intelligence is admitted only theoretically, not practically; it is not desired that ordinary people should think for themselves, because it is felt that people who think for themselves are awkward to manage and cause administrative problems.”
Bertrand Russell, British atheist, mathematician, philosopher, logician and public intellectual. Lecture: Free Thought and Official Propaganda
RULE OF FAITH
The Rule of Faith was given to the Church in the very act of Revelation and its promulgation by the Apostles. But for this Rule to have an actual and permanently efficient character, it must be continually promulgated and enforced by the living Apostolate, which must exact from all members of the Church a docile Faith in the truths of Revelation authoritatively proposed, and thus unite the whole body of the Church, teachers and taught, in perfect unity of Faith. Hence the original promulgation is the remote Rule of Faith, and the continuous promulgation by the Teaching Body (i.e.: DOGMA) is the proximate Rule.
Scheeben’s Dogmatic Manuel of Catholic Theology
“Not to resist an error is to approve of it — not to defend a truth is to reject it.”
Is Pope Francis a Member of the Church he governs?
From this definition it can be easily
gathered what men belong to the Church and what men do not. For there are three
parts of this definition: the profession of the true Faith, the communion of
the Sacraments, and the subjection to the legitimate Pastor, the Roman Pontiff.
By reason of the first part are excluded all infidels, as much those who have never been in the Church, like the Jews, Turks and Pagans; as those who have been and have fallen away, like heretics and apostates.
By reason of the second, are excluded catechumens and excommunicates, because the former are not to be admitted to the communion of the sacraments, the latter have been cut off from it.
By reason of the third, are excluded schismatics, who have faith and the sacraments, but are not subject to the lawful pastor, and therefore they profess the Faith outside, and receive the Sacraments outside. However, all others are included, even if they be reprobate, sinful and wicked.
St. Robert Bellarmine
Queers Always Hang Together
“Sodomy Is a Gift from God…. Those who oppose sodomy should be debarred from church seminaries.”
Rev. Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., Pope Francis’ appointment to the Pontifical Council of Justice
Sanctity is union with the will of God. The more perfect the union, the greater the sanctity. Sin is turning away from the will of God. The more serious the sin, the greater the separation from God. Modern Evangelization fails because it is not holy, because it has turned away from the will of God! It is separated from God in both Faith and Charity!
I should say that no people has ever been converted to Christianity by a learned apologetic or by mysticism, important as these things are. The great examples of Christian evangelization are St. Paul’s apostolate in Asia Minor and Greece, St. Francis Xavier and his successors in Japan, and perhaps St. Patrick in Ireland. In all these cases it is a very simple type of evangelism, joined with miracles and works of mercy…. It is of course simply a question of spiritual dynamism: Where there is direct spiritual communication through a saint or an evangelist, you always find results, but where it is a matter of routine organizations and activities, you do not.
Christopher Dawson, Catholic Historian, Letter to his friend, John Mulloy, 1956
Trustful Surrender to God’s Merciful Providence!
But you, who do you think you, a human being, are to answer back to God? Something that was made, can it say to its maker, why did you make me this shape? A potter surely has the right over his clay to make out of the same lump either a pot for special use or one for ordinary use (Romans 9:20-21). Accuse God of greater calumny by asking Him why He said, when Esau and Jacob were still in their mother’s womb: “I loved Jacob but I hated Esau….” It is true that neither fertile Britain, nor the people of Scotland, nor any of the barbarian nations as far as the ocean knew anything about Moses and His prophets. Why was it necessary that He come at the end of those times when numerous multitudes of people had already perished? Writing to the Romans, the blessed Apostle (St. Paul) cautiously airs this question but he cannot answer it and leaves it to God’s knowledge. So, you should also deign to accept that there may be no answer to what you ask. To God be the power and He does not need you as His advocate.
“One God, One Faith, One Baptism”
For, in truth, when released from these corporeal chains, “we shall see God as He is” (1 John 3:2), we shall understand perfectly by how close and beautiful a bond divine mercy and justice are united; but, as long as we are on earth, weighed down by this mortal mass which blunts the soul, let us hold most firmly that, in accordance with Catholic teaching, there is “one God, one faith, one baptism” [Eph. 4:5]; it is unlawful to proceed further in inquiry.
Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quadam
Remedial Catechism 101: Pope Francis identifies a Pagan as a Christian “who doesn’t want to serve.”
It is an ugly thing when you see a Christian who doesn’t want to humble himself, who doesn’t want to serve, a Christian who struts about everywhere: it’s ugly, eh? That is not a Christian: that’s a pagan!
Pope Francis, General Audience, Vatican Radio, 12-18-13
Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, “unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,” as the Truth says, “enter into the kingdom of heaven” [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.
Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439
January is Dedicated to the Holy Name of Jesus
WHAT DOES THE NAME OF JESUS MEAN?
The name Jesus comes from the Greek Iesous which was derived from the Aramaic, Yeshu. It means “Yaweh is salvation.” The name was not unique, even in biblical times, and today it is common in Arabic-speaking East and in Spanish-speaking countries. From apostolic times the name has been treated with the greatest respect, as honor is due the name which represents Our Lord, himself.
The Holy Name of Jesus is, first of all, an all-powerful prayer. Our Lord Himself solemnly promises that whatever we ask the Father in His Name we shall receive. God never fails to keep His word.
When, therefore, we say, “Jesus,” let us ask God for all we need with absolute confidence of being heard. For this reason, the Church ends her prayer with the words, “through Jesus Christ,” which gives the prayer a new and Divine efficacy.
But the Holy Name is something still greater.
Each time we say, “Jesus,” we give God infinite joy and glory, for we offer Him all the infinite merits of the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ. St. Paul tells us that Jesus merited the Name Jesus by His Passion and Death.
Each time we say “Jesus,” let us clearly wish to offer God all the Masses being said all over the world for all our intentions. We thus share in these thousands of Masses.
Each time we say “Jesus,” we gain indulgences for the Holy Souls in Purgatory, thus relieving and liberating very many of these holy souls from their awful pains. Thus they may be our best friends and pray for us-----they cannot pray for themselves, however.
Each time we say “Jesus,” it is an act of perfect love, for we offer to God the infinite love of Jesus.
The Holy Name of Jesus saves us from innumerable evils and delivers us especially from the power of the devil, who is constantly seeking to do us harm.
The Holy Name of Jesus gradually fills our souls with a peace and joy we never had before.
The Holy Name of Jesus gives us strength that our sufferings become light and easy to bear. And just as this one Church cannot err in faith or morals, since it is guided by the Holy Ghost; so, on the contrary, all other societies arrogating to themselves the name of church, must necessarily, be guided by the spirit of the devil, be sunk in the most pernicious errors, both doctrinal and moral.
Catechism of the Council of Trent
Act of Reparation to the Holy Name of Jesus
This Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus is associated with the Feast of the Circumcision, for it is when a child was circumcised that he received a name and was accepted as a son of Abraham and a full member of his family. So honored is His Holy Name that devout Catholics bow their heads (men removing their hats) at the sound of “Jesus” both inside and outside of the liturgy. To protect the sacredness and honor due the Holy Name, when hearing the Name of the Lord taken in vain, it is right to pray, “Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum!” (“Blessed be the Name of the Lord”), to which the reply, if overheard, is “Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum!” (“from this time forth for evermore!”).
PRAYER TO JESUS IN DIFFICULTIES
O Jesus! Consolation of the afflicted! Thy name is indeed poured out like oil; for Thou dost illumine those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death; Thou dost disperse the blindness of the soul and dost cure its ills; Thou givest food and drink to those who hunger and thirst after justice. Be also, O Jesus! my Savior, the physician of my soul, the healer of its wounds. O Jesus! Succor of those who are in need, be my protector in temptations! O Jesus! Father of the poor, do Thou nourish me! O Jesus! joy of the angels, do Thou comfort me! O Jesus! my only hope and refuge, be my helper in the hour of death, for there is given us no other name beneath the sun by which we may be saved, but Thy most blessed name Jesus!
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>No doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless it is clearly established as such. Canon 749 § 3
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>All that is contained in the written word of God or in tradition, that is in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church and also proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium, must be believed with divine and catholic faith... Canon 750
“Living Tradition,” synonym for Immanentism of the Modernist
The term, “living tradition,” a novelty of modernist construction given official standing at Vatican II, conflates the subjective understanding with the objective truth, is part of the theological justification to replace our received traditions with novelties grounded in fantasy.
The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.
John Paul II, explaining the problems with Archbishop Lefebvre’s consecration of four bishops from his failure to understand the novel Vatican II definition of tradition
“Pearls of Great Price” – Every single one of our Immemorial Ecclesiastical Traditions which the “dogs” despise!
What are these mysteries? What are these good pearls? They are not only every doctrine of Jesus Christ and every dogma of His Church, but every holy sacrament, every pious practice, every rule and ordinance of the Church; every means of practicing and advancing virtue and good works; every means of conferring and increasing the sanctifying grace of God, consequently sanctity and holiness of life, which is a pearl of infinite value, and adorns the soul with such transcendent beauty that the mind of man can never conceive its inestimable grandeur and loveliness. Moreover, each of these heavenly gifts was purchased at the infinite price of the precious blood of Jesus, from which it derives all its beauty and virtue. The least of them is worth buying, even the risk of losing all that a man holds dear in this life. Even a drop of holy water or a blessed medal is to time pious believer a “holy thing,” a valuable pearl. “The sensual man, who perceiveth not the things that are of the Spirit of God,” despise them; they are “foolishness to him.” But the true Christian believes that “every creature is sanctified by prayer and the word of God,” and when sanctified it is a “holy thing” and not to be given to dogs — that is to say, to such as would have no more respect for them than a dog, if it were given to him.
Rev. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The Church of the Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Savior
“It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.”
Pope Francis, concluding remarks attributed to him in the Der Spiegel article on the Crisis in the Catholic Church.
COMMENT: As if that is not Pope Francis' intention and what in fact he has long been doing? The question remains as to what name in history will Francis be known? But let's leave that for later. The truth is that Conservative Catholics have never gotten anything in its right hierarchical order. They stupidly thought the “split” in the Church began when traditional Catholics were disobedient by resisting the overthrow of our Ecclesiastical Traditions by which alone the Faith can be known and communicated to others. Conservative Catholics are only now turning to face the front of this conflict but they are unarmed for the fight. Pope Francis, professing the same doctrine as his conciliar predecessors, has only driven the wedge far deeper into the Bark of Peter to “split” the Church. The Conservative Catholics are at last alarmed because the Ship is taking on massive amounts of water. Unfortunately, the poor Conservative Catholics who are raising their voices against the corruption of Francis will surely fail. Let's call them the Dubiaists. The Dubiaists have doubts but no real convictions. They will fail because they turned their backs against the literal meaning of DOGMA long ago and now have nothing from which to mount their defense for DOGMA is the one and only weapon against an abusive authority. Authority is subject only to Truth.
KEEP DOGMA AS YOUR PROXIMATE RULE OF FAITY AND YOU WILL KEEP YOUR BALANCE
This is the thrilling romance of Orthodoxy. People have fallen into a foolish habit of speaking of orthodoxy as something heavy, humdrum, and safe. There never was anything so perilous or so exciting as orthodoxy. It was sanity: and to be sane is more dramatic than to be mad. It was the equilibrium of a man behind madly rushing horses, seeming to stoop this way and to sway that, yet in every attitude having the grace of statuary and the accuracy of arithmetic. The Church in its early days went fierce and fast with any warhorse; yet it is utterly unhistoric to say that she merely went mad along one idea, like a vulgar fanaticism. She swerved to left and right, so as exactly to avoid enormous obstacles. She left on one hand the huge bulk of Arianism, buttressed by all the worldly powers to make Christianity too worldly. The next instant she was swerving to avoid an orientalism, which would have made it too unworldly. The orthodox Church never took the tame course or accepted the conventions; the orthodox Church was never respectable. It would have been easier to have accepted the earthly power of the Arians. It would have been easy, in the Calvinistic seventeenth century, to fall into the bottomless pit of predestination. It is easy to be a madman: it is easy to be a heretic. It is always easy to let the age have its head; the difficult thing is to keep one’s own. It is always easy to be a modernist; as it is easy to be a snob. To have fallen into any of those open traps of error and exaggeration which fashion after fashion and sect after sect set along the historic path of Christendom that would indeed have been simple. It is always simple to fall; there are an infinity of angles at which one falls, only one at which one stands. To have fallen into any one of the fads from Gnosticism to Christian Science would indeed have been obvious and tame. But to have avoided them all has been one whirling adventure; and in my vision the heavenly chariot flies thundering through the ages, the dull heresies sprawling and prostrate, the wild truth reeling but erect.
G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy
Vulgar Francis Surprises Seminarians
en.news | December 15, 2022
GerminansGerminabit.Blogspot.com found out what happened at Francis’ December 10 audience for the seminarians of Barcelona.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>After the meeting, Vatican.va published Francis’ beautiful speech where he emphasised perseverant prayer, the priestly rosary of Bishop Saint Manuel Gonzalez, and told the seminarians to lose themselves in the tabernacle in moments of pain.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>In reality, Francis refused to read this speech, not written by him, but called it “boring” and asked the seminarians to quiz him instead.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>He told the seminarians that a priest in confession must “forgive everything” [paedophilia? racism?] and give absolution even if the penitent has no intention to make amends.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>A prudent priest who refuses absolution when necessary is for Francis a vehicle for an “evil,” “unjust” and “moralistic” judgement.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>Francis said that there are priests who have fallen into grave sins BUT are "with the people" (Francis named homosexuals and transvestites).
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>He repeated that the seminarians should not be “rigid” and “clerical,” that they would not be good priests “just because they dress up as priests,” and that their life should not consist of climbing.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>Francis used a language which some seminarians described as “vulgar” which surprised the seminarians.
Pope warns Vatican staff an 'elegant demon' lurks among them
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>Pope Francis warned staff in Christmas speech to be wary of 'elegant demon'
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>He traditionally uses annual speech to rebuke bureaucrats to help them repent
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>Aimed to address conservative Catholic critics who are his biggest opponents
<![if !vml]><![endif]>DailyMail | 22 December 2022 | Madeleine Ross
The Pope told Vatican staff to beware the 'elegant demon' that lurks in self-righteous Catholics in his traditional Christmas speech.
Francis used his annual Christmas greeting to the Roman Curia to again put the cardinals, bishops and priests who work in the Holy See on notice that they are particularly vulnerable to evil.
Pope Francis has long used the annual speech as a chance to rebuke bureaucrats in an examination of conscience to help them repent before Christmas.
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Francis told attendees that by living in the heart of the Catholic Church, 'we could easily fall into the temptation of thinking we are safe, better than others, no longer in need of conversion.'
'Yet we are in greater danger than all others, because we are beset by the 'elegant demon', who does not make a loud entrance, but comes with flowers in his hand,' Francis told the churchmen in the Hall of Blessings of the Apostolic Palace.
But the speech was relatively gentle compared to previous Jesuit-style examinations.
Pope Francis' most blistering critique came in 2014, when he listed the '15 ailments of the Curia' that some suffered, including the 'terrorism of gossip', 'spiritual Alzheimer's' and of living 'hypocritical' double lives.
The following year, Francis offered an antidote to the sins by listing the 'catalogue of virtues' he hoped they would instead follow, including honesty, humility and sobriety.
Francis appeared to also want to take broader aim in this year's speech at arch-conservatives and traditionalists who have become his biggest o
Francis blasted their way of living the faith, insisting that being Catholic doesn't mean following a never-changing set of strict rules but is rather a 'process of understanding Christ´s message that never ends, but constantly challenges us'.
'True heresy consists not only in preaching another gospel, as Saint Paul told us, but also in ceasing to translate its message into today's languages and ways of thinking,' Francis said.
Traditionalist Catholics have denounced Francis' emphasis on mercy (sic) and openness to doctrinal wiggle room on issues such as sacraments for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics.
Some have even gone so far as to accuse him of heresy for some of his gestures and preaching, including allowing 'pagan' statues in the Vatican.
Francis dedicated the bulk of his speech this year to the need to be vigilant about the work of the devil, picking up a theme he recently discussed during his weekly catechism lessons with the general public.
He told the Vatican bureaucrats it's not enough to merely condemn evil or root it out, since it often comes back in different guises, stronger than before.
Francis used the term 'we' repeatedly, suggesting he includes himself among those in the Vatican who must remain mindful of the devil in their midst.
'Before, it appeared rough and violent, now it shows up as elegant and refined,' he warned.
'We need to realize that and once again to unmask it. That is how these elegant demons are: they enter smoothly, without our even being conscious of them.'
Francis told the story of a 17th century convent where the superior, Mother Angelica, had charismatically reformed herself and her monastery after evil crept in, but the devil came back in the form of a rigid faith.
'They had cast out the demon, but he had returned seven times stronger, and under the guise of austerity and rigor, he had introduced rigidity and the presumption that they were better than others,' Francis said.
Some of Francis' critics themselves were in the audience along with his supporters.
COMMENT: Another “merry Christmas” message to faithful Catholics from Pope Francis the Vandal. It is wondrous how a secular ideology can fill an empty head. Catholics faithful to tradition are grounded upon Catholic scholastic philosophy with a metaphysics that fully recognizes the hierarchy of substantial reality rising from a formless matter that is pure potential to the matterless form of God which is pure actuality. We know what of substantial reality that is permanent and we know what of substantial reality that can and does undergo change. Pope Francis’ progressive secular ideology, which is about a hundred years out-of-date by worldly estimations, denies all permanence; it even specifically denies substantial reality itself which Pius XII warned against (Humani generis) and Benedict XVI openly professed. This dated ideology is primarily materialistic and not only presupposes constant material change but believes without a shred of evidence that this necessary progressive change is always for the better. In the late 1960s Pope Paul VI said that after Vatican II the “smoke of Satan” had entered the Church initiating a state of “self-demolition”. After more than fifty years of ‘progressive self-demolition’ Francis, standing in the midst of the wreckage, places his ideology over reality every time. He just pipes his jingle that “time is greater than space” and long awaited springtime of Vatican II is just over the horizon. What in the world makes the arrogant Francis believe that the “process of understanding Christ´s message that never ends, but constantly challenges us' is better comprehended by himself than all his pre-Vatican II predecessors and Catholics faithful to tradition today? The necessary constant “change” that Catholics faithful to tradition perfectly understand concerns the constant renewal of the inner man in putting on Christ and living their Baptismal vows more perfectly. This is the change that Francis cannot comprehend. Faithful Catholics keep their Catholic traditions because they know that these traditions perfectly image the unchangeable truths revealed by God. They know that these traditions are not the work of man but are the work of God. They know that these images are what makes the faith known and communicable to others. That is why these traditions have been the subject of dogma and incorporated into the Tridentine profession of faith that was directly reaffirmed at Vatican I. Francis says, 'True heresy consists not only in preaching another gospel, as Saint Paul told us, but also in ceasing to translate its message into today's languages and ways of thinking. St. Paul said nothing of the sort. The moral and canonical definition of heresy is the failure to keep dogma as the rule of faith. In fact, it is the heresy of Neo-modernism that teaches that Catholic dogma is composed of divine and human components, the latter being insufficient in expressing the revealed truths of God therefore must constantly undergo change to better express the revealed truth. It is the error of Semanticists who hold that since the world is always changing, the words (and images) that express reality must always necessarily change. This is the heresy of Pope Francis. It is this heresy that formed the overall purpose of the pastoral council Vatican II as John XXIII announced at its opening ceremony. It is the one unifying principle of all post-conciliar popes. When this heresy is formally condemned the Vatican II ship will sink to the bottom of the sea never to rise again.
The SSPX hierarchy was regularized sub rosa in 2012. This little secret is not shared with their clerical members nor the faithful who support their chapels but the comment below actually constitutes additional prima facie evidence of this fact. The SSPX has compromised on critical issues of Catholic doctrine and liturgy and therefore cannot defend Catholic faith. There purpose is now to function as a long term remedial re-education camp for recalcitrant traditional Catholics and in this, there is no "reason" to "rejoice".
"For forty years, enemies of Tradition have advanced a canonical claim of schism against the Bishops and Priests of the Society of Saint Pius X and the faithful who support them.
"However, the pontificate of Pope Francis has frustrated these canonical claims; the Holy Father has granted the Superior General of the Society the permission to ordain priests, named Bishop Fellay a canonical minister of the second instance, granted global faculties for hearing confessions and ordered the bishops of the world to witness marriages in SSPX chapels (or otherwise delegate faculties, as most have done).
"Consequently, the criticism of the Society has shifted from canonical to moral grounds. On the one hand, friends of Tradition and supporters of the work of the saintly Archbishop Lefebvre have reason to rejoice; the shifting strategies seem an implicit acknowledgement that the four-decade long campaign against the SSPX has been definitively resolved."
Jeff Cassman, supporter of the SSPX article, Anti-SSPX Critics do not Follow the Holy See
United States Use of Nuclear Weapons Policy is a Godless Trashing of Catholic Just War Standards!
“The United States (already) has a theory of a ‘preventive strike’…Now they are developing a system for a ‘disarming strike’. What does that mean? It means striking at control centers with modern high-tech (nuclear) weapons to destroy the opponent’s ability to counterattack.”
President Vladimir Putin
“The Biden administration’s unclassified Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) is, at heart, a terrifying document. It not only keeps the world on a path of increasing nuclear risk, in many ways it increases that risk. The only viable U.S. response is to rebuild the entire U.S. nuclear arsenal, maintain an array of dangerous Cold War-era nuclear policies, and threaten the first use of nuclear weapons in a variety of scenarios.”
Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), commenting on the Biden Administration Nuclear Posture Review that adopts a nuclear policy that, as a Biden representative said, “establishes a strategy that relies on nuclear weapons to deter all forms of strategic attack. This includes nuclear employment of any scale, and it includes high-consequence attacks of a strategic nature that use non-nuclear means.”
"You that love the Lord, hate evil: the Lord preserveth the souls of his saints, he will deliver them out of the hand of the sinner." Psalm 96:10
From those who are Planning Nuclear Preemptive strike against everyone else President Biden hates:
'Newspeak'; Even perverts must adopt the language of the good in the defense of their perversity.
Because they (sic) support LGBQT children and families, we have to speak out, we must stop the hate and violence like we just saw in Colorado Springs (where a shooter who identifies as "nonbinary" and uses the they/them pronouns recently killed innocent people), where a place of acceptance and celebration was targeted for violence and terror. We need to challenge hundreds of callous and cynical laws introduced in states targeting trans-gender children, terrifying families and criminalizing doctors who give children the care they need. We have to protect these children so that they know they are loved and we will stand up for them and say I can speek for themselves (sic). Folks, racism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, they are all connected. But the antidote to hate is love. This law and the love it defends will strike a blow against hate in all its forms and that is why law matters to every single American no matter who you are or who you love. This should not be about conservative or liberalism, red or blue. No this is about realizing the promises of the Declaration of Independence. The promises rooted in the sacred and secular beliefs. A promise that we are all created equal.
President Joe Biden, December 13, 2022, bill signing ceremony for "Respect for Marriage Act"
Death, Judgment, Heaven and Hell
In the divine judgment, the examination of the case is instantaneous, because it needs neither the testimony of witnesses, for or against, nor the least discussion. God knows by immediate intuition, and at the moment of separation, the soul knows itself without medium. It is enlightened, decisively and inevitably, on all its merits and demerits. It sees its state without possibility of error, sees all that it has thought, desired, said, and done, both in good and in evil. It sees all the good it has omitted. Memory and conscience penetrate its entire moral and spiritual life, even to the minutest details. Only then can it see clearly all that was involved in its particular vocation, for instance, that of a mother, of a father, of an apostle.
Secondly, the pronouncement of the sentence is also instantaneous. It does not come by a voice to be heard by the ear, but in a manner entirely spiritual. Intellectual illumination awakes all acquired ideas, gives additional infused ideas, whereby the soul sees its entire past in a glance. The soul sees how God judges, and conscience makes this judgment definitive. All this takes place at the first instant of separation. When it is true to say of a person that he is dead, it is also true to say that he is judged.
Thirdly, the execution of the sentence is also immediate. There is nothing to retard it. On the part of God, omnipotence accomplishes at once the order of divine justice, and on the part of the soul merit and demerit are, as St. Thomas says, like lightness and heaviness in bodies. Where there are no obstacles, heavy bodies fall, light bodies rise. Thus separated souls go without delay, either to the recompense due to their merit (unless perhaps they have to undergo a temporary punishment in purgatory), or to the eternal punishment due to their demerits. Charity, like a living flame, ascends on high, whereas hate always descends.
Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, Life Everlasting
The pope is NOT the proximate 'rule of faith' nor is he the "master of the evolution of the catechism".
As for homosexuality, it was described in 1992 as "intrinsically disordered" acts that reflected an era. Thirty years later, we must undoubtedly return to it (the subject of sodomy) with greater respect. It is the pope who is master of the evolution of the catechism.
Archbishop Laurent Ulrich, Pope Francis' newly appointed bishop of Paris
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity – Even JPII did not deny this dogma!
Pope Francis Teaches:
We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom.11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the Sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom. 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes. 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word. Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
The Church officially recognizes that the People of Israel continue to be the Chosen People. Nowhere does it say: “You lost the game, now it is our turn.” It is a recognition of the People of Israel. Pope Francis, On Heaven and Earth
The Catholic Church Teaches:
Hebrews 7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews 10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2 Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away”;
Hebrews 8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians 2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross”;
The Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council of Florence: [This council] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosiac law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord's coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino
Council of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St. John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on Galatians, Ch 3);
St. Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin Martyr: “Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
John Paul II: “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.” (Redemptoris Mater)
Taken from Robert Sungenis, The Old Covenent: Revoked or Not Revoked?
Pope Francis Declares: ‘Pro-Life Christians Have No Humanity’
By Shoebat | November 15, 2022
Pope Francis recently stated that he nominated Mariana Mazzucato, a pro-choice professor, to the Pontifical Academy of Life, to “bring some humanity” to the Academy, implying that the pro-Life Christians have no humanity. As we read in wPolityce:
“While returning to Rome from an apostolic pilgrimage in Bahrain, journalists on board the plane asked Francis about the matter that has outraged many Catholics around the world. It is about the recent nomination to the Pontifical Academy of Life of atheist and avowed supporter of abortion, Mariana Mazzucato. Francis replied that it was his personal decision because he wanted to ‘bring some humanity’ to the Academy.”
In truth and with anger, I find it a daunting task to see how people could take the Vatican in a serious manner. With the thousands of sexual predators who call themselves priests, to the Pope calling for gay “civil unions”, to the appointing of a pro-choice professor to an academy meant to be against abortion, it would not be a far-fetched thing to say that the fox is ruling the hen house, and the hens have all been slaughtered, and all that is left are foxes dressed as hens.
Its official, for the first time in Catholic history, a pope has come out in support of homosexual “civil unions” which is really just secular marriage under a state. During an interview for a documentary which premiered at the Rome Film Festival, Francis stated:
“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God… You can’t kick someone out of a family, nor make their life miserable for this. What we have to have is a civil union law; that way they are legally covered.”
Of course, the priests who are acolytes of Sodom are praising Pope Francis for this, with priests of Sodom like Fr. James Martin saying: “The pope’s speaking positively about civil unions also sends a strong message to places where the church has opposed such laws”. This is coming from a priest who for years has been pushing for the idea of ‘building bridges’ between the Church and Sodom. Well, its obvious that that bridge has been built… and that it has been crossed. […..]
DOGMA AS THE PROXIMATE RULE OF FAITH
"We teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman pontiff speaks ex cathedra, that is, when,
1. in the exercise of his office
as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
2. in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
3. he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the church, irreformable."
VATICAN I COUNCIL
The ‘Remote Rule of Faith’ is Scripture & Tradition constitute; The ‘Proximate Rule of Faith’ is Dogma!
of the church have something of the character of criminal jurisprudence. They
are not a part of the revelation,—are not necessary to her positive enunciation
of the word, or essential to its life and operation; but they are required to
vindicate it from error, as criminal courts pass sentences to vindicate the law
which has been violated. Nobody who comprehends any thing of the matter
restricts the word to the definitions of the church, or supposes that the
definitions either make the faith or cover the whole of the revealed word. It
is not to be supposed that nothing is believed, or to be believed that is not
formally defined by the church, for her definitions touch only so much of the
faith as has been controverted or denied. But all theological questions, however unsound they may
be, that have
not been condemned or declared to be contrary to the faith, may be held
without incurring the note of heresy, and be freely discussed,
pro and con. according to
the judgment or prejudices of theologians.
Orestes Brownson, Faith and Theology
COMMENT: Heresy has both a legal and moral definitions. A legal heretic is a baptized Catholic who denies a revealed doctrine of faith that has been formally defined (i.e.: a Dogma). Few of the revealed truths of the Catholic Faith have been dogmatically defined. The dogmatic definition of Jesus Christ's divinity was made at the Council of Nicaea in 312. Therefore, the arch heretic Arius was a legal and moral heretic after the dogmatic declaration at the Council. Before the Council Arius was a moral heretic. Could an Arian be saved before the Council of Nicaea while denying the divinity of Jesus Christ? No, but all determinations of moral culpability are in the hands of God and known to Him alone. On the other hand, a legal heretic is guilty of manifest sin because the imputability of guilt has been revealed to all by God in the dogma itself. “And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican” (Matt 18:16-17).
All the “daughters” of “Sodom” and the “daughters” of “Samaria” will suffer the same punishment!
“However, I will restore the fortunes of Sodom (homosexuality) and her daughters, and of Samaria (religious syncretism) and her daughters, and your fortunes (Phariseeism) along with them, so that you may bear your disgrace and be ashamed of all you have done in giving them [Sodom and Samaria] comfort. And your sisters, Sodom with her daughters and Samaria with her daughters, will return to what they were before; and you and your daughters will return to what you were before. You would not even mention your sister Sodom in the day of your pride, before your wickedness was uncovered.”
For Catholics, Advent is the Penitential Season of preparation for the celebration during the seasons of Christmas and Epiphany. For the modern world, Advent is a season of celebration followed by a state of drunken stupor, depression and spiritual desolation during Christmas and Epiphany.
IF our holy mother the Church spends the time of Advent in this solemn preparation for the threefold coming of Jesus Christ; if, after the example of the prudent virgins, she keeps her lamp lit ready for the coming of the Bridegroom; we, being her members and her children, ought to enter into her spirit, and apply to ourselves this warning of our Saviour: “Let your loins be girt, and lamps burning in your hands, and ye yourselves be like unto men who wait for their Lord !” The Church and we have, in reality, the same hopes. Each one of us is, on the part of God, an object of mercy and care, as is the Church herself. If she is the temple of God, it is because she is built of living stones; if she is the bride, it is because she consists of all the souls which are invited to eternal union with God. If it is written that the Saviour hath purchased the Church with His own Blood, may not each one of us say of himself those words of St. Paul, “Christ hath loved me, and hath delivered Himself up for me”? Our destiny being the same, then, as that of the Church, we should endeavour during Advent, to enter into the spirit of preparation, which is, as we have seen, that of the Church herself.
And firstly, it is our duty to join with the saints of the old Law in asking for the Messias, and thus pay the debt which the whole human race owes to the divine mercy. In order to fulfill this duty with fervour, let us go back in thought to those four thousand years, represented by the four weeks of Advent, and reflect on the darkness and crime which filled the world before our Saviour’s coming. Let our hearts be filled with lively gratitude towards Him who saved His creature man from death, and who came down from heaven that He might know our miseries by himself experiencing them, yes, all of them excepting sin. Let us cry to Him with confidence from the depths of our misery; for, notwithstanding His having saved the work of His hands, He still wishes us to beseech Him to save us. Let therefore our desires and our confidence have their free utterance in the ardent supplications of the ancient prophets, which the Church puts on our lips during these days of expectation; let us give our closest attention to the sentiments which they express.
This first duty complied with, we must next turn our minds to the coming which our Saviour wishes to accomplish in our own hearts. It is, as we have seen, a coming full of sweetness and mystery, and consequence of the first; for the good Shepherd comes not only to visit the flock in general, but He extends His solicitude to each one of the sheep, even to the hundredth which is lost. Now, in order to appreciate the whole of this ineffable mystery, we must remember that, since we can be pleasing to our heavenly Father only inasmuch as He sees within us His Son Jesus Christ, this amiable Saviour deigns to come into each one of us, and transform us, if we will but consent, into Himself, so that henceforth we may live, not we, but He in us. This is, in reality, the one grand aim of the Christian religion, to make man divine through Jesus Christ: it is the task which God has given to His Church to do, and she says to the faithful what St. Paul said to his Galatians: “My little children, of whom I am in labour again, until Christ be formed within you!”
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, excerpt from Practice During Advent
“Only a misguided mind would seek to afford equal rights to both good and evil.”
Conservative Catholics are double losers. Now that Summorum Pontificum is revoked and with it their grant of legal privilege, they are now at the Indult and have renounced any legal or moral grounds to complain because they accepted the legitimacy of the Novus Ordo and Vatican II!
In the civil sphere, the deep state has managed political and social dissent by using organizations and movements that are only apparently opposition, but which are actually instrumental to maintaining power. Similarly, in the ecclesial sphere, the deep church uses the moderate “conservatives” to give the appearance of offering freedom to the faithful. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum itself, for example, while granting the celebration in the extraordinary form, demands saltem impliciter that we accept the Council and recognize the lawfulness of the reformed liturgy. This ploy prevents those who benefit from the Motu Proprio from raising any objection, or risk the dissolution of the Ecclesia Dei communities. And it instills in the Christian people the dangerous idea that a good thing, in order to have legitimacy in the Church and society, must necessarily be accompanied by a bad thing or at least something less good. However, only a misguided mind would seek to afford equal rights to both good and evil. It matters little if one is personally in favor of good, when he recognizes the legitimacy of those who are in favor of evil.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Book on Pope Francis the Humbler than Thou
Father (Peter Hans) Kolvenbach (superior general of the Jesuits from 1983 to 2008) accused Bergoglio of a series of defects, ranging from habitual use of vulgar language to deviousness, disobedience concealed under a mask of humility, and lack of psychological balance; with a view to his suitability as a future bishop, the report pointed out that he had been a divisive figure as Provincial of his own order. It is not surprising that, on being elected Pope, Francis made efforts to get his hands on the existing copies of the document, and the original filed in the official Jesuit archives in Rome has disappeared.
Marcantonio Colonna, The Dictator Pope
“Family Ties” within the Homosexual Lobby
Notorious homosexual Cardinal Terrance (“Blanche, 'call-me-Uncle Teddy'“) McCarrick was ordained by the notorious homosexual Cardinal Francis (“Franny”) Spellman of New York who also ordained the notorious homosexual Cardinal Terence (“Cookie”) Cooke who took the notorious homosexual McCarrick as his “personal secretary” and consecrated McCarrick an auxiliary bishop. Cardinal Donald (Whirly Girl) Wuerl was ordained by the notorious homosexual Bishop Francis Fredrick Reh of Charleston, SC who was consecrated a bishop by the notorious homosexual Spellman. Wuerl became the “private secretary” to the notorious homosexual Cardinal John Wright who was Prefect for the Congregation of the Clergy and represented Wright at the conclave that elected John Paul II who consecrated Wuerl a bishop and made McCarrick a cardinal. It was Benedict/Ratzinger, formally head of the CDF responsible for cleaning up the Homosexual Lobby, who made Wuerl a cardinal. The homosexual Wuerl ultimately followed in the line of the homosexual Wright as Archbishop of Pittsburg and was himself followed the homosexual McCarrick in Washington. The Pennsylvania Grand Jury report, 900 plus pages citing Wuerl's name more than 200 times, charges that Wuerl as Archbishop of Pittsburgh for eighteen years repeatedly covered for the Homosexual Lobby.
The mansion that housed Wuerl and the local branch of the Homosexual Lobby in the Diocese of Pittsburgh was obtained by his homosexual predecessor Cardinal Wright and was appraised twenty years ago for $1.5 million. It was sold after Wuerl's departure. The Jacobethan Revival house along Fifth Avenue, at 9,842 square feet (914.4 m2) with 39 rooms including 11 bedrooms, six full baths, and a half-bath is one of the largest homes in the Shadyside neighborhood of Pittsburgh. It housed an extensive collection of antiques, Oriental rugs and art during Wuerl's residency.
Just as Wuerl had covered up for the Homosexual Lobby in Pittsburgh, he did the same for McCarrick in Washington claiming to know nothing about McCarrick's perversion. McCarrick was Cardinal Archbishop of Washington 2001 to 2006. Homosexual McCarrick's “personal secretary” was the current Archdiocesan Vicar General Monsignor Charles Antonicelli who subsequently became the “personal secretary” to Homosexual Cardinal Wuerl. When Antonicelli was McCarrick's “personal secretary” in Washington, the Dioceses of Trenton, Metuchen, and Newark in 2004 and 2006 paid settlements for $100,000 and $80,000 to two men who had been abused by McCarrick while they were in the seminary as well as after they had become priests. It is, believe it or not, Antonicelli who now claims that he and Wuerl knew nothing about the homosexual escapades of McCarrick.
Compiled from information from Randy Engel, Rite of Sodomy, published in 2006, and recent articles from LifeSiteNews and WikiPedia
Those who contribute partake of the sin!
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Catholic Campaign for Human Development contributed $17 million (or 30.4% of its budget) to groups supporting abortion, Marxism, and the LGBT ideology and social agenda.
Lepanto Institute, November 14, 2022
The “received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the administration of the sacraments”:
…..Because, as we will see, Catholics must celebrate only the “received and approved rites” of the Church as a matter of Divine Law.
God revealed this truth in Scripture through St. Paul. Before St. Paul teaches the Corinthians liturgical and theological details concerning the Holy Mass (consecration formula, Real Presence), he prefaces his teaching by affirming: “For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you…” (I Cor 11:23). St. Paul says again: “For I delivered unto you first of all, which I also received” (1Cor 15:3). In these and other verses, St. Paul emphasizes that we must believe and practice only what we have “received” from Christ and the apostles which has been “delivered” unto us, and which includes the liturgical rites of the Church. This is a divinely revealed truth and a matter of Faith.
The Church has
taught this divine truth throughout her history. For example, in the Papal Oath
of Coronation, which originates at least as far back as Pope St. Agatho in 678
A.D. (and which was set aside by Paul VI), every Pope swore to change nothing
of the “received tradition.” Pope Pius IV’s
Tridentine Profession of Faith, which is binding on the souls of all Catholics,
likewise expresses this principle by requiring adherence to the “received and approved rites of the
Catholic Church used in the solemn administration of the sacraments.” The “received and approved rites of the Church”
originate from the Spirit of Christ and the traditions of the apostles which
have been handed down to us through the ages.
Because the “received and approved rites” are part of the Church’s infallible expression of the unchanging Deposit of Faith, as inspired and nurtured by the Holy Ghost, they cannot be set aside or changed into new rites. This is why the Ecumenical Council of Trent (1545-1563) infallibly declared:
“If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the administration of the sacraments, may be despised or omitted by the ministers without sin and at their pleasure, or may be changed by any pastor of the churches to other new ones, let him be anathema.”
Council declares anathema (that is, condemned, or severed from the Body of
Christ) anyone who would set aside or change into new rites the already “received and approved rites” of the
Church, proves that adherence to the “received
and approved rites” is a matter of Divine Law. The absolute necessity to
preserve the substance of the Church’s ancient liturgical rites is a
requirement of the Faith because the rites preserve and express that Faith. To
hold that the Church’s rites can change implies a belief that the Church’s
doctrines can change, because the rites preserve and express the doctrines.
Hence, those who do not preserve the Church’s rites (by omitting or changing
them) are objectively anathema
because they sin against the Faith itself.
In light of the foregoing condemnation, the Holy Council of Trent directed that the Roman Missal be restored so that the faithful would know once and for all what is the “received and approved rite” of Mass. To that end, Pope St. Pius V issued his papal bull Quo Primum Tempore to legally codify “the decrees of the Holy Council of Trent” and render a definitive application of the Divine Law dogmatized by the Council. This judgment mandated a single usage of the Roman rite for the Latin Church, with some minor exceptions for usages greater than 200 years old, “in order that what has been handed down by the most holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the rest of the churches may be accepted and observed by all everywhere.” Hence, the sainted Pope declared the oft-called “Tridentine Mass” to be the “received and approved rite” of the Church, and which precluded the creation of any “new rite” of Mass in the future. Further, because Quo Primum is an infallible application of Divine Law (that is, we must use only the “received and approved rites”), St. Pius V rightly declared the decree to be irreformable and valid forever.
This brings us to the inevitable and troubling question: Is the Novus Ordo a “new rite” of Mass that comes under the anathema of the Council of Trent, as definitively interpreted by St. Pius V in Quo Primum? The name of the rite itself (Novus Ordo which means “new order” or “new ordinary” of the Mass) certainly suggests the same. More importantly, so do the words of Pope Paul VI. In his November 19, 1969 General Audience address, Paul VI refers to the Novus Ordo as a “new rite” of Mass several times, for example: “We wish to draw your attention to an event about to occur in the Latin Catholic Church: the introduction of the liturgy of the new rite of the Mass.” He also says, “In the new rite you will find the relationship between the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist...”
We also consider the statements of the members of Paul VI’s liturgical commission that created the New Mass, such as the secretary and head of the commission, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, who said: “It is not simply a question of restoring a valuable masterpiece, in some cases it will be necessary to provide new structures for entire rites…it will truly be a new creation.” Bugnini’s assistant, Fr. Carlos Braga, also stated that the New Mass has “an entirely new foundation of Eucharistic theology” and whose “ecumenical requirements” are “in harmony with the Church’s new positions.” Fr. Joseph Gelineau, one of the most influential members of the commission, also said: “To tell you the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman rite as we knew it no longer exists.” Therefore, both Paul VI and his appointed authors of the Novus Ordo admitted that the New Mass is not the rite “received” from tradition, but rather a rite created by innovation – an entirely unprecedented act in the history of the Church.
But we should not rely on these statements alone. While they may reveal the intent of the innovators, it is still necessary to look at the substance of the Novus Ordo rite itself. As we have seen, the Council of Trent and St. Pius V intended to preserve the substantial identity of the Roman rite forever. If the New Mass does not preserve this identity, then it cannot be considered the “received and approved rite” of the Catholic Church no matter what anyone says. Even the Second Vatican Council, which did not (and could not) mandate the creation of a new rite of Mass, recognized this truth by directing that the rites “be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition” with “due care being taken to preserve their substance.”
The Council of Trent’s condemnation of omitting or changing the “received and approved rites” into “new rites” is best understood by referring to one of the oldest maxims of the Church’s sacred theology: “legem credendi statuit lex orandi.” This is a Latin phrase which means “the rule of prayer determines the rule of faith” (often referred to as “lex orandi, lex credendi”). In other words, the way we pray determines what we believe. If a liturgical tradition which expresses a doctrine of the Faith is altered or removed altogether, the underlying doctrine will necessarily be compromised. This is why the “received and approved rites” must be faithfully preserved and never transformed into “other new ones” as declared by Trent.
…… However, the Novus Ordo Missae deviates
from the Roman Missal of St. Pius V to such an extent that it no longer retains
the substantial identity of the Roman rite. Even before the introduction of
such abuses as audible canons, vernacular and versus populum (toward the people) celebrations,
lay ministers, Communion under both species, Communion in the hand to standing
communicants and the like, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci advised Paul VI that “the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in
its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it
was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent.” Consequently,
Cardinal Ottaviani (who, as head of the Holy Office, was responsible for
safeguarding the doctrine of the Faith), in his famous intervention, concluded
that the Novus Ordo was indeed a different rite of Mass.
For example, Ottaviani says: “To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division – a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith – is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.” He also says, “It is obvious that the New Order of Mass has no intention of presenting the Faith taught by the Council of Trent. But it is to this Faith that the Catholic conscience is bound forever.” Accordingly, Ottaviani appealed to Paul VI “not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the integral and fruitful Missal of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness, and so deeply venerated by the whole Catholic world.” Therefore, both the critics and the creators of the New Mass, including Paul VI himself, agree that the Novus Ordo differs in substance from the Tridentine Missal and, hence, constitutes a “new rite” of Mass.
John Salza, J.D., The Novus Ordo Mass and Divine Law, excerpt from Catholic Family News
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Jesus Christ: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matt. 28:19)
Pope Francis the Adjudicator: “Never, never bring the gospel by proselytizing. If someone says they are a disciple of Jesus and comes to you with proselytism, they are not a disciple of Jesus. In front of an unbeliever, the last thing I have to do is try to convince him. Never! The last thing I have to do is speak.” (Pope Francis addressing students at Rome’s classical secondary school, Pilo Albertelli, 2020)
“A sentence declaratory of the offence is always necessary in the forum externum, since in this tribunal no one is presumed to be excommunicated unless convicted of a crime that entail such a penalty.”
Pope Benedict XIV, De syndod, X, I, 5
When the Church is restored, Neo-Modernism condemned, it will not be just Vatican II that is trashed but the utter uprooting of its foundations laid by Pius XII!
In the hope of making the seemingly incredible not only credible but obvious, this study will ignore the Second Vatican Council as a cause and treat it as an effect, the inevitable effect of a dedicated, single minded line of actions begun decades before. John XXIII called the bishops of the world to assemble; His summons will be seen not so much as a call for consultations as a demand for signatures. With many of the transformations already in place and many of the others well worked out on paper, John’s welcome to the long, slow procession of high-mitered prelates on that October morning in 1962 will be seen as the fulfillment of an extended, persistent undertaking.
In perspective, the Council appears to have been a bringing of the hierarchy to Rome in order to show them what was already happening, to give them the satisfaction of a very limited amount of participation and then to exert strong moral pressure on them to put their names to each and every document emerging from the skillfully managed deliberations. Signatures were of the greatest importance, giving as they would, credibility to the transformations, thus making it easier for the bishops to face their flocks when they returned with a bag full of novelties. [….]
Probably no pope in history has been as misunderstood (as Pope Pius XII). He has been revered and scorned, loved and hated for all the things he never did and never was. No pope in history did as much to change the Church; yet, Catholic conservatives look on him as the last firm pillar of orthodoxy. No pope in history ever did as much for the Jews; yet Jewish writers continue to accuse him of indifference to their fate. No pope did as much to oblige the Marxists; yet he is hailed in the West as an anti-Communist hero of the Cold War. In his long years as Vatican diplomat when he pioneered what has bome to be called Ostpolitik, in his decade as Secretary of State to Pius XI, in his nearly twenty years as Supreme Pontiff to followed in extension through the pontificate of his protégé and chosen heir, Giovanni Battista Montini (Paul VI), the work of Pius XII spanned nearly a century.
Mary Ball Martinez, The Undermining of the Catholic Church
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.” (Matt. 28:19)
Pope Francis the Adjudicator on the Word of God:
“Never, never bring the gospel by proselytizing. If someone says they are a disciple of Jesus and comes to you with proselytism, they are not a disciple of Jesus. In front of an unbeliever, the last thing I have to do is try to convince him. Never! The last thing I have to do is speak.” (Pope Francis addressing students at Rome’s classical secondary school, Pilo Albertelli, 2020)
Peace Plan of Our Lady of Fatima
1. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA REQUEST?
At Fatima Our Lady said that God wished to establish in the world devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Our Lady said that many souls would be saved from Hell and the annihilation of nations averted if, in time, devotion to Her Immaculate Heart were established principally by these two means:
A) the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope together with the world’s bishops in a solemn public ceremony,
B) the practice or receiving Holy Communion (and other specific devotions of about 1/2 hour in duration) in reparation for the sins committed against the Blessed Virgin Mary, on the first Saturdays of five consecutive months--a practice known to Catholics as “the First Saturday” devotion.
2. HAVE THESE REQUESTS OF OUR LADY OF FATIMA BEEN HONORED?
No, not entirely. A number of the Faithful practice the “First Saturday” devotion, but Russia has yet to be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in a solemn public ceremony conducted by the Pope together with the world’s Catholic bishops.
In 1982 the last Fatima seer, Lucia, when a cloistered nun living in Coimbra, Portugal, was asked if an attempted consecration by Pope John Paul II had sufficed. She replied that it did not suffice, because Russia was not mentioned and the world’s bishops had not participated. Another attempted consecration in 1984 likewise did not mention Russia or involve the participation of many of the world’s bishops, and Sister Lucia stated immediately afterwards that this consecration, too, had failed to meet Our Lady’s requirements.
3. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA WARN?
It warns that if the requests of Our Lady of Fatima for the Consecration of Russia and the First Saturday devotion are not honored, the Church will be persecuted, there will be other major wars, the Holy Father will have much to suffer and various nations will be annihilated. Many nations will be enslaved by Russian militant atheists. Most important, many souls will be lost.
4. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA PROMISE?
The Message of Fatima promises that if the requests of Our Lady of Fatima are carried out “My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will Consecrate Russia to Me, which will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to mankind.”
There is no difference between this example of Jewish “truth” and Novus Ordo theology and praxis?
Lying is now a “heightened
version of reality” because it may be “true in a higher metaphysical sense”!?
. . . . What anti-Semites keep insisting are “fake Holocaust stories” need to be seen in a more positive light as “the truth of imagination,” to quote the famous phrase of the poet John Keats. If something is perceived as true by the mind, though strictly speaking it may not have happened, and if that event is subsequently seen as a living truth in the minds of millions of other good people who have been exposed to that same heightened version of reality, then it must on no account be dismissed as a “lie” ( . . . ) All such stories are true in a higher metaphysical sense, and to deny them is a sacrilege ( . . . ) We have a sacred obligation to the six million who died under the tyranny of the evil Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler to remember the dead and dismiss with contempt all attempts to deny the Holocaust by referring to “fake Holocaust stories.” I repeat: there is no such thing as a fake Holocaust story. Every Holocaust story is true, 100 per cent true, whether it happened or not. ( . . . ) In the sublime words of Elie Wiesel: “In literature, certain things are true though they didn’t happen, while others are not true, even if they did happen.”
Seymour Zak, defending “fake Holocaust stories” after Herman Rosenblat’s holocaust story, An Angel at the Fence, was publically exposed as a pure fabrication. Hollywood was unmoved. The film production based upon the book proceeded as planned.
“The New Evangelization” – Without a foundation of repentance, prayer, and penance, there will be no fruit, for “The Interior Life is the Soul of the Apostolate.”
The purpose of the struggle against our passions, the practice of the virtues, recollection, prayer, the practice of the presence of God, and frequent reception of the Sacraments, is to foster union with God and the growth of charity. The interior life is a secret hearth where a soul in contact with God is inflamed with His love, and precisely because it is inflamed and forged by love, it becomes a docile instrument which God can use to diffuse love into the hearts of others. Therefore, it is very important to recall frequently this great principle: the interior life is the soul of the apostolate. A deep interior life therefore, from it will spring a fruitful apostolate, a true sharing in Christ’s work of saving souls… Where there is little or no interior life, charity and friendship with God are in danger of being extinguished; and if this interior flame be extinguished, then the apostolate will be emptied of its substance and reduced to mere external activity which may make a great noise, but will not bring forth and fruit.
Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, O.C.D., Divine Intimacy
Is Fr. Sheehy the last Catholic Priest in Ireland?
Irish priest insists deputy PM will go to hell
Father Sean Sheehy has been condemned by his own bishop for giving a homily against abortion, homosexuality, and transgenderism
RT | World News | 3 Nov, 2022
An Irish Catholic priest has refused to back down after he was censured by his own bishop for condemning the “mortal sins” of abortion and homosexuality. The priest maintains that his views are in line with the Church’s teachings, and that Ireland’s deputy prime minister, Leo Varadkar, will burn in hell for being gay.
Father Sean Sheehy, a resident of Listowel in County Kerry, came out of retirement on Sunday to fill in for a local priest currently on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Churchgoers were shocked, with several dozen walking out of mass, when Sheehy took to the pulpit to denounce the “rampant” sin in Irish society.
“What is so sad today is you rarely hear about sin, but it’s rampant,” he declared.
“We see it, for example, in the legislation of our governments,” Sheehy continued. “We see it in the promotion of abortion. We see it in the example of this lunatic approach of transgenderism. We see it, for example, in the promotion of sex between two men and two women.”
“That is sinful, that is mortal sin,” he continued, adding that “sin leads to hell.”
Once a staunchly Catholic society, Ireland legalized gay marriage in 2015 and lifted its constitutional ban on abortion in 2018. Both decisions were made following popular referendums.
Bishop Ray Browne of Kerry later apologized “to all who were offended” by Sheehy’s fiery homily. In a statement published on the diocesan website, Browne said that Sheehy’s views “do not represent the Christian position.” Browne later told Radio Kerry that Sheehy had been banned from giving mass in the diocese.
In an interview with the same radio station on Tuesday, Sheehy insisted that he did nothing wrong, and that his views on sin were in line with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Speaking to RTE Radio on Wednesday, Sheehy said that gay politicians like Varadkar would “absolutely” go to hell if they didn’t repent.
Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney called on Sheehy to retract his remarks, while a spokesperson for Varadkar said that although the deputy PM “profoundly disagrees with Father Sheehy's views” he “respects his right to express his religious beliefs freely.”
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which summarizes the Church’s main beliefs, describes homosexual acts as “acts of grave depravity” that run “contrary to the natural law.”
“And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it’ a Bishop dressed in White – ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father.’ Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way.”
Sister Lucia of Fatima, the Third Secret, as she transcribed it.
COMMENT ON THE MODERN MIND DEVOID OF GOD’S GRACE
“But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given [the common man] a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of tabloids and the profundities of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man's rubber stamp is the twin of millions of others, so that when these millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. [...] The amazing readiness with which large masses accept this process is probably accounted for by the fact that no attempt is made to convince them that black is white. Instead, their preconceived hazy ideas that a certain gray is almost black or almost white are brought into sharper focus. Their prejudices, notions, and convictions are used as a starting point, with the result that they are drawn by a thread into passionate adherence to a given mental picture.”
Edward Bernays, from his book, The Minority Rules, 1927. Bernays was a Jewish double nephew of Sigmund Freud and a pioneer in public relations and propaganda. He was called "the father of public relations" in his obituary. Bernays was named one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century by Life Magazine. He was the subject of a full-length biography called The Father of Spin (1999) and later an award-winning 2002 documentary for the BBC called The Century of the Self. (Wiki)
The world is governed by very different personages to what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.... That mighty revolution which is at the moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is yet known in England, is developing entirely under the auspices of the Jews. [.....]
One can trace Jewish influence in the last revolutionary explosions in Europe (1848). An insurrection has taken place against traditions, religion and property, the destruction of the semitic principle, the extirpation of the Jewish religion, either under its Mosaic or Christian form, the natural equality of men and the annulment of property are proclaimed by the secret societies which form the provisional government, and men of Jewish race are found at the head of each of them. The People of God cooperate with atheists, the most ardent accumulators of property link themselves with communists. The select and chosen race walks hand in hand with the scum of the lower castes of Europe. And all this because they wish to destroy this Christianity which owes them its very name and whose tyranny they can no longer bear.
Benjamin Disraeli, Jewish Prime Minister of Great Britain, from Vicomte Leon De Poncins, The Secret Powers behind Revolution, Freemasonry and Judaism, 1929
And, lastly, to sum all up in a word. As the Incarnation is God’s Book of Life, the knowledge of his Sacred Heart is the interpretation and the unfolding of that Book. The whole mystery of God and of man, and the relations of God and man in grace and in glory, are all written in the Sacred Heart. They that know the Sacred Heart know God; they that love the Sacred Heart love God; and they that are made like to the Sacred Heart are made like to God. It is the compendium of the whole science of God, of the whole way of salvation, of the whole gospel of eternal life.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Sacred Heart, God's Way of Love
Religious Liberty from Vatican II has its root in the Americanist Heresy
On every side the dread phantom of war holds sway: there is scarce room for another thought in the minds of men. The combatants are the greatest and wealthiest nations of the earth; what wonder, then, if, well provided with the most awful weapons modern military science has devised, they strive to destroy one another with refinements of horror. There is no limit to the measure of ruin and of slaughter; day by day the earth is drenched with newly-shed blood, and is covered with the bodies of the wounded and of the slain. Who would imagine as we see them thus filled with hatred of one another, that they are all of one common stock, all of the same nature, all members of the same human society? ....We implore those in whose hands are placed the fortunes of nations to hearken to Our voice. Surely there are other ways and means whereby violated rights can be rectified. Let them be tried honestly and with good will, and let arms meanwhile be laid aside.
Benedict XV, Ad beatissimi apostolorum, November 1, 1914
“We consider the establishment of our country’s independence, the shaping of its liberties and laws, as a work of special Providence, its framers ‘building better than they knew,’ the Almighty’s hand guiding them. We believe that our country’s heroes were the instruments of the God of nations in establishing this home of freedom; to both the Almighty and to His instruments in the work we look with grateful reverence. And to maintain the inheritance of freedom which they have left us, should it ever–which God forbid—be imperiled, our Catholic citizens will be found to stand forward as one man, ready to pledge anew ‘their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.’”
Archbishop (soon to be Cardinal) James Gibbons, addressing the American bishops at the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884 attended by 14 archbishops and 61 bishops.
Moved to the very depths of our hearts by the stirring appeal of the President of the United States, and by the action of our national Congress, we accept whole-heartedly and unreservedly the decree of that legislative authority proclaiming this country to be in a state of war. Inspired neither by hate nor fear, but by the holy sentiments of truest patriotic fervor and zeal, we stand ready, we and all the flock committed to our keeping, to cooperate in every way possible with our President and our national government, to the end that the great and holy cause of liberty may triumph and that our beloved country may emerge from this hour of test stronger and nobler than ever. Our people, as ever, will rise as one man to serve the nation.
Pledge of U.S. Catholic Archbishops, April 18, 1917; sent to President Woodrow Wilson by Cardinal James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, the leading Catholic prelate in the United States.
“The primary duty of a citizen is loyalty to country. It is exhibited by an absolute and unreserved obedience to his country’s call.”
Cardinal James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore (1877-1921), April 1917 in support of the U.S. declaration of war against Germany and Austria-Hungary. The Balfour Declaration agreement committed the British to deliver Palestine into Jewish hands in return for the Jews bringing the United States into WWI in support of the British. Cardinal James Gibbons was the chief propagator of the heresy of Americanism which became settled Novus Ordo doctrine after Vatican II (religious liberty) primarily by the work of Fr. John Courtney Murray who greatly admired Cardinal Gibbons. Gibbons did his best to align American Catholics with Jewish interests to bring the United States into the Great War. In doing so Gibbons worked directly to undermine the peace plans of Pope Benedict XV. Pope Benedict devised a generous peace plan and contacted Cardinal Gibbons to do what he could to influence the United States government to back his offer of a negotiated peace. Gibbons did nothing of the sort. While giving lip service to the Pope's peace plan six months too late, he in fact never contacted President Wilson or any official of the government to even mention Pope Benedict's peace plan. Gibbons was too busy building the National Catholic War Council (NCWC) and supporting the call of universal military service. The purpose of the NCWC as Gibbons said in a letter to all American bishops was to form “the mental and moral preparation of our people for the war.”
To Congar's credit, he at least told the truth about what he helped destroy!
It cannot be denied that the Declaration on Religious Liberty does say materially something else than the Syllabus of 1864; it even says just about the opposite of Propositions 15 and 77 to 79 of this document..... I collaborated on the final paragraphs which left me less satisfied. It involved demonstrating that the theme of religious liberty was already contained in Scripture. Now, it isn't there.
Cardinal Yves Marie Joseph Congar, O.P., forbidden to teach by the Church and whose books were suppressed in the early 1950s, made a peritus at Vatican II by Novus Ordo St. John XXIII, and is considered by many to have been the most influential of all the periti. He was raised to the cardinalate by Novus Ordo St. John Paul II. He rejected the dogmatic teaching of Trent which his teacher and mentor, Fr. Marie-Dominique Chenu, O.P., derisively called “Baroque theology”.
Excerpts from the Diary of Msgr. Joseph Fenton:
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“He [Cardinal Ottaviani] remarked that we were on the eve of the Council, and that no one knew who the Council’s theologians were to be.” (Sept. 28, 1962)
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“It is a crime that we did not take the Anti-Modernist Oath. Poor O[ttaviani] must have failed to have our own profession passed by the central commission. It contained his condemnation of [Fr. John Courtney] Murray [the Americanist heretic who structured the Council teaching on Religious Liberty].” (Oct. 9, 1962)
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“I had always thought that this council was dangerous. It was started for no sufficient reason. There was too much talk about what it was supposed to accomplish. Now I am afraid that real trouble is on the way.” (Oct. 13, 1962)
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“I started to read the material on the Liturgy, and I was shocked at the bad theology. They actually have been stupid enough [to say] that the Church is ‘simul humanam et divininam, visibilem et invisibilem’ [at the same time human and divine, visible and invisible]. And they speak of the Church working ‘quousque unum ovile fiat et unus pastor’ [until there be one fold and one shepherd], as if that condition were not already achieved.” (Oct. 19, 1962)
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“I do not think that any little work on our part is going to bring good to the Church. We should, I believe, face the facts. Since the death of [Pope] St. Pius X the Church has been directed by weak and liberal popes, who have flooded the hierarchy with unworthy and stupid men. This present conciliar set-up makes this all the more apparent. [Fr.] Ed Hanahoe, the only intelligent and faithful member of [Cardinal] Bea’s secretariat has been left off the list of the periti. Such idiots as [Mgr. John S.] Quinn and the sneak [Fr. Frederick] McManus have been put on. [Fr. George] Tavard is there as an American, God help us. From surface appearance it would seem that the Lord Christ is abandoning His Church. The thoughts of many are being revealed. As one priest used to say, to excuse his own liberalism, which, in the bottom of his heart he knew was wrong, ‘for the last few decades the tendency in Rome has been to favor the liberals.’ That is the policy now. We can only do what we can to overt an ever more complete disloyalty to Christ.” (Oct. 19, 1962)
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>“[Fr.] Ed Hanahoe gave me two books on Modernism. In one of them I found evidence that the teaching in the first chapter of the new schema on the Church [that became the Vatican II dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentium] and the language are those of [the excommunicated Modernist Fr. George Tyrrell [who died outside the Catholic Church and was denied ecclesiastical burial]. May God preserve His Church from that chapter. If it passes, it will be a great evil. I must pray and act.” (Sept. 24, 1963)
If the damned were asked 'Why are you in hell?', they would answer: 'For having resisted the Holy Ghost.' If the Saints were asked: 'Why are you in heaven?', they would answer: 'For having listened to the Holy Ghost.'
St. John Mary Vianney, Cure d'Ars
Paul VI declared Novus Ordo Saint. So just what is a “Novus Ordo Saint”?
A Novus Ordo Saint is a man-made saint. Contrasted with Catholic saints who are God-made saints. In virtue of their union with God they are sanctified, and therefore, Catholic Saints exhibit heroic virtue in their lives. God confirms their sanctity by working miracles through their intercession and thus, a cult of veneration (dulia) develops and spreads throughout the Church. The Church recognizes God's evidence that they are saints and declares this fact to the universal Church. Contrary to this, Novus Ordo Saints are man-made saints and their elevation to the title of sainthood is for the purpose of promoting the human ideology exemplified in their lives. There is no real cult of veneration (dulia) among the faithful to Novus Ordo Saints. Since God does not work true miracles through the intercession of man-made saints, only man-made miracles are required for the beatification of man-made Novus Ordo Saints. Finally, the Novus Ordo beatification process does have a promotor fidei, the so-called “devil’s advocate,” although his role has been change as the promotor ideologiae. The greatest difference between Catholic Saints and Novus Ordo Saints is that the former are in heaven and the latter, very well may not be.
The day when society, forgetting her (the Church’s) doctrinal decisions, has asked the press and the tribune, newspapers and assemblies, what is truth and what is error, on that day error and truth are confounded in all intellects, society enters on the regions of shadows, and falls under the empire of fictions….. The doctrinal intolerance of the Church has saved the world from chaos. Her doctrinal intolerance has placed beyond question political, domestic, social, and religious truths, - primitive and holy truths, which are not subject to discussion, because they are the foundation of all discussions; truths which cannot be called into doubt for a moment without the understanding on that moment oscillating, lost between truth and error, and the clear mirror of human reason becoming soiled and obscured… Doubt perpetually comes from doubt, and skepticism from skepticism, as truth from faith, and science from truth.
Donoso Cortes, Essays
The necessary first act of liturgical corruption is the 'Dialogue Mass' whose end is to destroy liturgical recollection and contemplation!
In recollection and contemplation - kindred but not identical attitudes - we encounter two more basic constituents of religious life. Recollection is a condition of all truly wakeful and deep modes of living, and hence indispensable for our transformation in Christ. Contemplation, again, is the source that feeds all life in Christ, and at the same time, the end in which that life finds its fulfillment.
Dietrich Von Hildebrand, Transformation in Christ
“If you love me you will keep my commandments… He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him… If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father’ s commandments, and do abide in his love… In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (John 14:15; 14:21; 15:10; 1 John 5:2)
Pope Francis will learn, souls are “condemned for ever” who teach the Lutheran heresy of justification & deny the Catholic dogma that to abide in “true charity” is “conditional” upon keeping the commandments!
The way of the Church is not to condemn anyone for ever; it is to pour out the balm of God’s mercy on all those who ask for it with a sincere heart… For true charity is always unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous….
It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial com-munity and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!
Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, paragraphs 296 and 297
The Ideology of Pope Francis whose "utopian future" requires the evolution of Dogmatic Truth
“Time is Greater than Space: A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.”
Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, “Time is Greater than Space”
“God manifests himself in historical revelation, in history. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in history, in the processes. We must initiate processes, rather than occupy spaces.”
Pope Francis, Interview with Anthony Spadaro
Since “time is greater than space,” I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral, or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle… needs to be inculterated, if it is to be respected and applied.”
Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia
Modernists and Neo-modernists "corrupt the origin and nature of dogma"!
Thus, We have reached one of the principal points in the Modernists' system, namely the origin and the nature of dogma. For they place the origin of dogma in those primitive and simple formulae, which, under a certain aspect, are necessary to faith; for revelation, to be truly such, requires the clear manifestation of God in the consciousness. But dogma itself they apparently hold, is contained in the secondary formulae.
To ascertain the nature of dogma, we must first find the relation which exists between the religious formulas and the religious sentiment. This will be readily perceived by him who realises that these formulas have no other purpose than to furnish the believer with a means of giving an account of his faith to himself. These formulas therefore stand midway between the believer and his faith; in their relation to the faith, they are the inadequate expression of its object, and are usually called symbols; in their relation to the believer, they are mere instruments.
Hence it is quite impossible to maintain that they express absolute truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sentiment in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his relation to the religious sentiment. But the object of the religious sentiment, since it embraces that absolute, possesses an infinite variety of aspects of which now one, now another, may present itself. In like manner, he who believes may pass through different phases. Consequently, the formulae too, which we call dogmas, must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. An immense collection of sophisms this, that ruins and destroys all religion. Dogma is not only able, but ought to evolve and to be changed. This is strongly affirmed by the Modernists, and as clearly flows from their principles. For amongst the chief points of their teaching is this which they deduce from the principle of vital immanence; that religious formulas, to be really religious and not merely theological speculations, ought to be living and to live the life of the religious sentiment. This is not to be understood in the sense that these formulas, especially if merely imaginative, were to be made for the religious sentiment; it has no more to do with their origin than with number or quality; what is necessary is that the religious sentiment, with some modification when necessary, should vitally assimilate them. In other words, it is necessary that the primitive formula be accepted and sanctioned by the heart; and similarly the subsequent work from which spring the secondary formulas must proceed under the guidance of the heart. Hence it comes that these formulas, to be living, should be, and should remain, adapted to the faith and to him who believes. Wherefore if for any reason this adaptation should cease to exist, they lose their first meaning and accordingly must be changed. And since the character and lot of dogmatic formulas is so precarious, there is no room for surprise that Modernists regard them so lightly and in such open disrespect. And so they audaciously charge the Church both with taking the wrong road from inability to distinguish the religious and moral sense of formulas from their surface meaning, and with clinging tenaciously and vainly to meaningless formulas whilst religion is allowed to go to ruin. Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself.
....... To finish with this whole question of faith and its shoots, it remains to be seen, Venerable Brethren, what the Modernists have to say about their development. First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of Evolution. To the laws of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death.
St. Pius X, Pascendi
May 13, 1820: I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . . I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome). The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness. . . Then, the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches close down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took to violent action. But it did not last long.
Once more I saw that the Church of Peter was undermined by a plan evolved by the secret sect, while storms were damaging it. But I saw also that help was coming when distress had reached its peak. I saw again the Blessed Virgin ascend on the Church and spread her mantle [over it]. I saw a Pope who was at once gentle, and very firm. . . I saw a great renewal, and the Church rose high in the sky.
Sept. 12, 1820: I saw a strange church being built against every rule. . . No angels were supervising the building operations. In that church, nothing came from high above. . . There was only division and chaos. It is probably a church of human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the new heterodox church of Rome, which seems of the same kind. . .
I saw again the strange big church that was being built there (in Rome). There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints and other Christians. But there (in the strange big church) all the work was being done mechanically (i.e. according to set rules and formulae). Everything was being done according to human reason. . .
I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed to be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of a cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said: “Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it to the ground.”
Blessed Anna Katherina Emmerich, Catholic Prophecy by Ives DuPont
Moreover, one baptism regenerating all baptized in Christ, just as “one God and one faith”, is to be faithfully confessed by all, which, celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, we believe to be the perfect remedy for salvation for both adults and children…... one is the universal Church…. Outside of which absolutely no one is saved, one is the Lord, one is the faith and one is the baptism of all.
Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312
Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,” as the Truth says, “enter into the Kingdom of Heaven’ (John 3:5). The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.
Pope Eugene IV, Exultate Deo, Council of Florence
Dogma is the Proximate Rule of Faith for all the faithful including the Pope!
Infallibility is essentially and necessarily an attribute of the Church; Infallibility is only secondarily and accidentally an attribute of the pope which he alone can enter into under dogmatically specified conditions for dogmatically specified ends! God is the Formal and Final cause of Dogma. The pope is the simply the necessary Material and Instrumental cause of Dogma.
An attribute is something that must be attributed to a nature because that nature demands it. For example, the attribute of infallibility follows from the nature of the Church. For the Church is a divine institution, a work of God Himself, and, in its founding He declared that it was to speak in His name and to lead men to God. Now, such being its nature, how can it conceivably lead men astray? In other words, how can it be denied that this divinely founded and dowered institution is infallible? The fact of infallibility follows from and attends upon the nature of the Church. Precisely because the Church is the essential thing that it is, it must be infallible. Therefore, by a necessity of its nature (i. e., by natural necessity) the Church must be infallible. And so we say that infallibility is an attribute of the Church. [.....] The examples show us plainly that in creatures an attribute is something that follows from, and attends upon, the rounded and operative essence of a reality, but is, in itself, an accidental thing, not to be identified with the essence to which it belongs. The Church, for example, is not its infallibility; the Church has infallibility.
Rev. Msgr. Paul Joseph Glenn, Ph.D., S.T.D., President of College Seminary of St. Charles Borromeo, Theodicy
We see that of the four major causes two belong to the very being of the effect; they are intrinsic to the effect as such: these are the material and the formal cause. The other two causes, viz., the efficient and the final cause, are not part and parcel of the effect, but are extrinsic to it. Thus we divide the four causes as follows:
<![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>Intrinsic
<![if !supportLists]>a) <![endif]>Material (exists only for bodily effects)
<![if !supportLists]>b) <![endif]>Formal (substantial and accidental)
<![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]> Extrinsic
<![if !supportLists]>a) <![endif]>Efficient (subserved sometimes instrumental and exemplary causes)
<![if !supportLists]>b) <![endif]>Final
Rev. Msgr. Paul Joseph Glenn, Ph.D., S.T.D., President of College Seminary of St. Charles Borromeo, Apologetics
Why do Jewish leaders overwhelmingly support homosexual “marriage” for the U.S. (and Europe) and not for Israel? Is this what is meant by “hostility” and “innate fury”?
On May 21, 2013, Vice President Joseph Biden “praised Jewish leaders in the media... crediting them with helping change American attitudes on gay marriage.” In a speech at a Democratic National Convention reception celebrating Jewish Heritage Month, Biden claimed that the Jews were responsible for changing peoples' attitudes on gay marriage: “It wasn't anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’” said Biden, referring to an NBC sitcom that went off the air nine years ago. “It was the social media. Literally. That's what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace” gay marriage..... I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media, are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry... The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good.”
The liberal Jewish magazine Tikkun agreed with Vice President Biden's assessment: gay marriage was a Jewish creation. As Amy Dean put it: “In a few short years, same-sex marriage went from being an untouchable political hot potato to a broadly accepted civil right in eighteen states and the District of Columbia. Jews, and their social justice organizations, helped make that happen. [.....] The victories in the states around marriage equality owed much to local and national Jewish social justice groups who looked beyond the political consensus of the time. Even five years ago, many of these groups stood behind same-sex couples who wished to marry. National Jewish social justice organizations such as the National Council of Jewish Women, the Religious Action Center of reform Judaism, and Bend the Arc (on whose board I currently serve as co-chair), helped to galvanize the American Jewish community to support pro-marriage equality bills in the states. In fact, Jews can claim a fair share of the credit for bringing Americans to a tipping point of accepting marriage equality.”
E. Michael Jones, Why we Lost the Culture Wars
Jews have persecuted the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus Christ to this very day!
[The Jews are] a people who, having imbrued their hands in a most heinous outrage [Jesus’ crucifixion], have thus polluted their souls and are deservedly blind. . . . Therefore we have nothing in common with that most hostile of people the Jews. We have received from the Savior another way . . . our holy religion. . . . On what subject will that detestable association be competent to from a correct judgment, who after that murder of their Lord . . . are led… by. . . their innate fury?
Council of Nicaea, 325 AD
The Novus Ordo Memorial Meal begets the non-sacrificial Priesthood
The priest must be in his own way a victim. Why? Because Christ in offering himself during the sacrifice of the Mass offers also his entire Mystical Body, and especially his minister who is celebrating Mass. Therefore every priest has his own individual vocation to be a victim in order to become like to Christ. The truth of this becomes even more evident if we consider the opposite error. Take the case of a priest who shares in the priesthood of Christ by virtue of his ordination and yet refuses to share in his state of victim. Such a priest is refusing the obligation laid on all the faithful of taking up the cross; and this obligation presses all the more urgently upon a priest in view of the fact that he is intended to be another Christ amongst the faithful.
Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, The Priest in Union with Christ
Same old, same old…
“Have a care never to let the people slumber outside the influence of agitation. Surround them constantly with noise, emotions, surprises, lies, and merry-makings. Let everything be disorder: a country is not revolutionized in the midst of clam, morality, and truth; in order to draw it towards us we must make it crazy.”
Giuseppe Mazzini, 1848, “spearhead of the Italian revolutionary movement” (Wikipedia), former Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy, and father of democratic republicanism in Europe, L’Italie rouge, p. 72
“Fear nothing, God is with us.”
Countess de Spaur, (wife of the Count de Spaur, the Bavarian Ambassador to Rome): “Most Holy Father, pardon your unworthy servant if necessity has obliged her to sit at your side, an honour she does not deserve.”
Pope Pius IX: “This day you are an instrument of Providence in carrying out its mysterious designs. Fear nothing, God is with us.”
Exchange with Pope Pius IX, under disguise at night, upon entering the carriage of the Countess helping him to escape from Rome under revolutionary control to the city of Gaeta, November 24, 1848.
Pope Francis marks 60th anniversary of Vatican II opening by pleading for the church to overcome polarization
National Catholic Reporter | Rome | October 11, 2022 | Christopher White
Pope Francis on Oct. 11 marked the opening of the 60th anniversary of the Second Vatican Council — a three-year period that launched landmark reforms in the Catholic Church's relationship to the world around it and the church's own liturgy and practices — by pleading for the church to "overcome all polarization and preserve our communion."
In a Mass in St. Peter's Basilica, which served as the council's chambers during the 1962-1965 meetings, Francis said the council, which was inaugurated by Pope St. John XXIII, was "one great response" to the question "Do you love me?" posed by Christ to his disciples.
"To rekindle her love for the Lord, the church, for the first time in her history, devoted a council to examining herself and reflect on her nature and mission," said Francis. "She saw herself once more as a mystery of grace generated by love; she saw herself anew as the people of God, the body of Christ, the living temple of the Holy Spirit!"
Yet while the ecumenical council revisited many areas of Catholic doctrine, reassessed its relationship with other Christian communities and religions, revised Catholic liturgy to allow for the vernacular, and reconfigured church structures to allow for greater participation of the laity, in the 60 years that have followed, it also proved to be a flashpoint among various ecclesial circles.
During the 60th anniversary Mass, Francis lamented that those changes had sometimes led to deep divisions within the church.
"How often, in the wake of the council, did Christians prefer to choose sides in the church, not realizing that they were breaking their mother's heart! How many times did they prefer to cheer on their own party rather than being servants of all? To be progressive or conservative rather than being brothers and sisters?" he asked.
"To be on the 'right' or 'left,' rather than with Jesus? To present themselves as 'guardians of the truth' or 'pioneers of innovation' rather than seeing themselves as humble and grateful children of holy mother church?" he continued. "That is not how the Lord wants us to be. We are his sheep, his flock, and we can only be so together and as one."
While the work of the council and the years that followed radically altered the Catholic Church's relationship with the rest of the world and realigned itself with a more open posture to it, in marking its anniversary, Francis also warned against the temptation of "worldliness."
"Let us be careful: Both the 'progressivism' that lines up behind the world and the 'traditionalism' that longs for a bygone world are not evidence of love, but of infidelity," he cautioned. "They are forms of a Pelagian selfishness that puts our own tastes and plans above the love that pleases God, the simple, humble and faithful love that Jesus asked of Peter."
Throughout his homily, Francis revisited many of the central themes from his own nearly decadelong papacy, especially his call for a church committed to evangelization and prioritizing the needs of the poor.
"You are not here to shepherd yourselves," the pope said to the hundreds of clergy present in St. Peter's, "but others — all others — with love. And if it is fitting to show a particular concern, it should be for those whom God loves most: the poor and the outcast. The church is meant to be, as Pope John put it, 'the church of all, and particularly the church of the poor.' "
The council, the pope said, calls for a church that is "madly in love with its Lord and with all the men and women whom he loves" and "that is rich in Jesus and poor in assets" and "a church that is free and freeing."
"A church in love with Jesus has no time for quarrels, gossip and disputes," the pope added. "May God free us from being critical and intolerant, harsh and angry! This is not a matter of style but of love. For those who love, as the Apostle Paul teaches, do everything without murmuring."
In recent years, Francis has dedicated particular attention to continued liturgical reforms in the church, arguing that they are necessary for the embrace of the reforms of the council, which he has said are "irreversible." More recently, some of the pope's top advisers have expressed concern that some of the resistance to the Francis papacy is rooted in resistance to Vatican II.
During the Mass, the pope once more reiterated his support for the reforms of Vatican II.
"How timely the council remains!" he said. "It helps us reject the temptation to enclose ourselves within the confines of our own comforts and convictions."
As the pope concluded his homily, he again issued a clarion call for church unity.
"You who desire that we be a united flock, save us from the forms of polarization that are the devil's handiwork," he said. "And we, your church, with Peter and like Peter, now say to you: 'Lord, you know everything; you know that we love you.' "
COMMENT: Does Francis the Ideologue really believe his own rubbish? “Forms of Pelagian selfishness”? Does Francis own a dictionary of Catholic dogmatic theology? Pelagianism, among other things, denies Original Sin and professes that man can obtain salvation and the beatific vision through natural virtue alone. It denies the necessity of the sacraments and divine grace for salvation. The modern Novus Ordo Church believes and teaches that the one and only thing necessary to obtain salvation is to believe in a “god who rewards and punishes.” This is nothing more than the necessary general fundamental philosophical ground that permits a person to be open to the Gospel message and receive the grace of God. In and of itself, it is not salvific! The Novus Ordo Church believes that any “good-willed” Jew, Hindu, Moslem, Protestant, pagan, etc., etc. can obtain salvation by virtue of his own “good-will.” The Novus Ordo Church is Pelagian. And Pelagianism is just one part of the heresy of Modernism which as St. Pius X said, “is the synthesis of all heresies.” “Forms of Pelagian selfishness” is just more ideological posturing by Francis to smear his enemies with an appearance of erudition and intellectual rigor. Anyone who does not do as Francis commands is a “selfish Pelagian” who does not love God. Setting aside this stupidity, this little diatribe does make one thing clear: After 60 years the Vatican II Council has only produced schism in the Church. Jesus Christ said, “If you love Me, keep My commandments.” Francis and his Progressive Catholic buddies do not keep the commandments and they unceasingly make war against Catholics faithful to tradition that do. They do not keep the commandments; they do not love God.
“Pope appoints pro-abortion World Economic Forum speaker to Pontifical Academy for Life”
LifeSiteNews | October 18, 2022
<![if !vml]><![endif]>"The Pontifical Academy for Life on Saturday announced Pope Francis’ appointment of pro-abortion, World Economic Forum-linked economist Mariana Mazzucato as one of its new 'Ordinary Academicians.'
Mazzucato, a self-described 'atheist' and professor of economics at University College London (UCL), was first announced as one of the PAL’s new appointees in an October 15 press release...
While the PAL says this appointment is part of its larger goal of fostering an 'ethical' and 'Gospel-based' reflection to 'promote human life always and everywhere,' in addition to being a speaker at the WEF – the globalist group behind the socialist, anti-Christian 'Great Reset' agenda – Mazzucato is also enthusiastically pro-abortion, in direct contradiction to the infallible and unchangeable teaching of the Catholic Church.
In June, following the United States
Supreme Court’s overturning of the landmark 1973 pro-abortion Roe v. Wade
decision, Mazzucato tweeted 'So good!' in response to a pro-abortion
commentator making anti-Christian statements disparaging the Bible while
condemning the court’s pro-life ruling.
In 2016, Mazzucato also tweeted favorably about Pope Francis’ support of the so-called 'climate change' agenda, saying, 'As an atheist, never thought I would love a Pope this much.'
Appointing people who hold positions in direct opposition to the Catholic faith has become a trend in the Vatican during Francis’ pontificate.
Last year, Francis appointed pro-abortion population control activist Jeffrey Sachs to the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, and in 2017, appointed a pro-abortion Anglican minister to the PAL.
Outside of his appointments of non-Catholics to official positions in Rome, Francis also has a history of appointing heterodox prelates to high-ranking positions of authority within the Church’s clerical hierarchy.
In September, Francis appointed pro-LGBT Portuguese Cardinal José Tolentino de Mendonça as Prefect of the Dicastery for Culture and Education, just months after his June decision to promote a collection of pro-LGBT and anti-Latin Mass cardinals to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments."
Jews have hated & persecuted the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus Christ to this very day!
[The Jews are] a people who, having imbrued their hands in a most heinous outrage [Jesus’ crucifixion], have thus polluted their souls and are deservedly blind. . . . Therefore we have nothing in common with that most hostile of people the Jews. We have received from the Savior another way . . . our holy religion. . . . On what subject will that detestable association be competent to from a correct judgment, who after that murder of their Lord . . . are led… by. . . their innate fury?
Council of Nicaea, 325 AD
Jewish Power is inversely proportional to the spiritual health of the Catholic Church
“Jews should not be placed in public offices, since it is most absurd that a blasphemer of Christ should exercise power over Christians.”
Fourth Lateran Council
“For the Jews, ‘Anti-Semitism’ is anything that is in opposition to the naturalistic Messianic domination of their nation over all the others.” Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., B.A., D.Ph., D.D.
<![if !vml]><![endif]> On the Charge of Anti-Semitism in Our Time
“…Two reasons can be assigned to the fact that Our Lord’s faithful members will often be betrayed by those who should be on the side of Christ the King. Firstly, many Catholic writers speak of Papal condemnations of Anti-Semitism without explaining the meaning of the term, and never even allude to the documents which insist on the Rights of Our Divine Lord, Head of the Mystical Body, Priest and King. Thus, very many are completely ignorant of the duty incumbent on all Catholics of standing positively for Our Lord’s Reign in society in opposition to Jewish Naturalism. The result is that numbers of Catholics are so ignorant of Catholic doctrine that they hurl the accusation of Anti-Semitism against those who are battling for the Rights of Christ the King, thus effectively aiding the enemies of Our Divine Lord. Secondly, many Catholic writers copy unquestioningly what they read in the naturalistic or anti-Supernatural Press and do not distinguish between Anti-Semitism in the correct Catholic sense, as explained above, and ‘Anti-Semitism’ as the Jews understand it. …”
Fr. Fahey’s Preface in Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked: As the Secret Power Behind Communism by Monsignor George F. Dillon, D.D.
“One just soul can attain pardon for a thousand sinners.”
St Margaret Mary Alacoque
Good Night, Sweet Princeton! By Fr. Leonard Feeney, 1952
Maritainism is a system of thought which allows Catholics to be both Catholic and acceptable in the drawing rooms of Protestant and Jewish philosophers. Maritainism is not a seeking and a finding of the Word made flesh. It is a perpetual seeking for un-fleshed truth in an abstract scheme called Christianity. Maritainism is the scrapping of the Incarnation in favor of a God Whose overtures to us never get more personal or loving than the five rational proofs for His existence. This plot to encourage only pre-Bethlehem interest in God takes its name from its perpetrator, that highly respected religious opportunist, Jacques Maritain.
The slightest acquaintance with Maritain’s history is sufficient to indicate how awry he must be in his Catholicism. He is a former Huguenot who married a Jewish girl named Raïssa. During their student days in Paris, both Jacques and Raïssa felt a double pull in the general direction of belief. Intellectually they were attracted to the religious self-sufficiency of a Jewish intuitionist named Henri Bergson. Sociologically they were attracted to the spurious Catholicism of Leon Bloy, a French exhibitionist who made a liturgy of his own crudeness and uncleaness and tried to attach it to the liturgy of the Church. At some point in their association with an unbaptized Bergson and an unwashed Bloy, the Maritains figured out that there was a promising future ahead of them in Catholicism.
Jacques Maritain is noted for his solemn-high, holier-than-thou appearance. For this reason, more than one priest reports that by the time a Maritain lecture is over, any priest who is present has been made to feel that the Roman collar is around the wrong neck and that perhaps he, the priest, ought to put on a necktie and kneel for Maritain’s blessing.
One explanation of Maritain’s distant expression is that he fancies himself to be the Drew Pearson of the Christian social order. Judging by Maritain’s passion for the abstract, the fulfillment of all his prophecies will come in an era when mothers can sing such songs as “Rock-a-bye Baby, on the Dendrological Zenith,” and children recite such bedtime prayers as “The Hail Mariology.”
Jacques Maritain prefers Thomism to Saint Thomas Aquinas and, similarly, he much prefers the notion of the papacy to the person of the Pope. He could not, however, turn down the prestige of an appointment as French ambassador to the Vatican. Maritain went to Rome, but he protected himself against over exposure to Italian faith by visits to Dr. George Santayana. In Maritain, Santayana recognized a brother, the kind of European intellectual cast-off that is annually being grabbed-up by American Universities.
That Jacques Maritain should now be found preaching at Princeton University is not so strange. It did not require too much insight on Princeton’s part to see that a Catholic who hates Franco, speaks at Jewish seminaries, and favors “theocentricity” in place of Jesus, would be a bizarre, but harmless, addition to anybody’s faculty club.
Perhaps Princeton realized also that a Catholic’s admirers are a good measure of his militancy. Among Maritain’s more prominent sympathizers are John Wild, Charles Malik and Mortimer Adler (N.B. Adler was converted and received into the Catholic Church in 1999 only 18 months before he died at 98 years of age), who are, respectively, an Anglican, a Greek schismatic, and a Jew. Naturally Maritain could not insult intellectuals like these by telling them that although they are outside the Church they can get into Heaven because of their “invincible ignorance.” It was necessary that Maritain concoct a new way of getting around the dogma, “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.”
After a lot of abstract deliberation, Maritain decided that a man could be “invisibly, and by a motion of his heart, a member of the Church, and partake of her life, which is eternal life.” According to Maritain’s new covenant, the important salvation-actions in our world are no longer a head bowed to the waters of Baptism, a hand raised in Absolution, a tongue outstretched to receive Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. “A motion of his heart,” says Maritain, is all that is required before a man may partake of eternal life.
The Sacred Heart might have saved Himself a lot of inconvenience had He only known this, one Friday afternoon on Calvary.
COMMENT: Jacques Maritain was Paul VI’s favorite philosopher. Maritain's reputation as a great philosopher is based on his supposed integration of the Scholastic principles of St. Thomas with the modern world. He had a world-wide reputation and following that extending beyond his native France to hold visiting professorships at Princeton and the University of Chicago, as well as a visiting lecturer at Notre Dame, Yale, Harvard, and the University of Toronto. Pope Paul VI publicly confessed his profound respect and influence by Maritain’s thought on his Credo of the People of God (1968). At the close of the Second Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, the pope’s “Address to Men of Thought and Science” was dedicated to his “dear friend and mentor, Jacques Maritain.” Pope Paul offered Maritain a cardinal’s hat, but the philosopher declined it. Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom—Dignitatis Humanae—which teaches that the dignity of man is so exalted that he possesses the inalienable right to neither conform his mind to God’s revealed truth nor obey God’s commandments, drew as its inspiration Maritain’s book Man and the State (1951) which is an articulation of the language of “rights” that Dignitatis Humanae employs.
The proper literal understanding of this dogma from the Council of Trent:
Canon 4 on the sacraments in general: If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary for each one, let him be anathema.
The Dogma defines two revealed doctrinal truths:
<![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>If anyone says: that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be anathema.
<![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>If anyone says: that without the sacraments or (if anyone says) without the desire of the sacraments men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, let him be anathema.
Both the Sacrament of Baptism and the will to receive the Sacrament are necessary for salvation!
“But God desired that his confession should avail for his salvation, since he preserved him in this life until the time of his holy regeneration.” St. Fulgentius
“If anyone is not baptized, not only in ignorance, but even knowingly, he can in no way be saved. For his path to salvation was through the confession, and salvation itself was in baptism. At his age, not only was confession without baptism of no avail: Baptism itself would be of no avail for salvation if he neither believed nor confessed.” St. Fulgentius
Notice, both the CONFESSION AND THE BAPTISM are necessary for salvation, harkening back to Trent’s teaching that both the laver AND the “votum” are required for justification, and harkening back to Our Lord’s teaching that we must be born again of water AND the Holy Spirit.
In fact, you see the language of St. Fulgentius reflected in the Council of Trent. Trent describes the votum (so-called “desire”) as the PATH TO SALVATION, the disposition to Baptism, and then says that “JUSTIFICATION ITSELF” (St. Fulgentius says “SALVATION ITSELF”) follows the dispositions in the Sacrament of Baptism.
Yet another solid argument for why Trent is teaching that BOTH the votum AND the Sacrament are required for justification.
“Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that not only all pagans but also all Jews and all heretics and schismatics who end this present life outside the Catholic Church are about to go into the eternal fire that was prepared for the Devil and his angels.” St. Fulgentius
“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the ‘eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.’” Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino
Jews contextualize murder of children: It’s our “religious tradition”
Jewish women sue over Kentucky abortion laws, citing religious freedom
Washington Post | Yonat Shimron | October 10, 2022
Three Jewish women in Kentucky have filed a lawsuit arguing that a set of state laws that ban most abortions violate their religious rights.
The lawsuit, filed in Jefferson Circuit Court in Louisville, is the third such suit brought by Jewish organizations or individuals since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the right to an abortion in its ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In all three suits — the first in Flordia, the second in Indiana — the Jewish plaintiffs claim their state is infringing on their religious freedom by imposing a Christian understanding of when life begins.
Under current Kentucky laws, life begins at the moment of fertilization. Another law bans abortion after six weeks when cardiac activity is first detected.
Clerics sue over Florida abortion law, saying it violates religious freedom.
Abortion will be on the ballot next month when Kentuckians decide the fate of a proposed constitutional amendment that would eliminate the right to abortion in the state.
“There are a whole patchwork of laws, passed over the last 20 years,” said Ben Potash, one of the lawyers who filed the complaint. “They’re internally inconsistent and, put together, very vague.”
Most Jews believe abortion is allowed and, in some cases, even required.
“Judaism has never defined life beginning at conception,” the Kentucky suit says, adding that “millenia of commentary from Jewish scholars has reaffirmed Judaism’s commitment to reproductive rights.”
The Satanic Temple takes aim at Idaho, Indiana abortion bans.
The women are not the first to challenge Kentucky’s abortion bans. The American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood sued the state shortly after the Dobbs ruling was handed down.
What’s distinct about the latest suit is that all three of the Jewish women require in vitro fertilization to become pregnant but are afraid of beginning the procedure without greater clarity about what the law will permit them to do with excess frozen embryos. The suit claims the women must spend exorbitant fees to keep their embryos frozen indefinitely, and they are unsure whether they will face felony charges if they dispose of them.
Further, because pregnancies resulting from infertility treatments have a higher rate of stillbirth, the women foresee the possibility of not wanting to carry their IVF pregnancies to term if the fetus is not viable.
The law “does not impose clear standards, rules, or regulations regarding the potential experiences of potential birth givers with regards to their access to reproductive technology,” their suit says.
In this sense, the Kentucky suit is about women who want to give birth, not women who want to abort, said Sheila Katz, CEO of the National Council of Jewish Women, which is supporting and advising plaintiffs in all three states where the abortion restrictions are being challenged in court.
“It’s a scary time to be pregnant,” Katz said. “The state is telling them their life is not as valuable as the fetus. These women are saying, ‘A, that’s against our religious tradition, and B, you owe us with being less vague about what this will look like so we can start our families.’ ”
In June, a Jewish congregation in Florida filed suit arguing the state’s 15-week abortion ban — signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) — prohibits Jewish women practicing their faith free of government intrusion. In September, a group called Hoosier Jews for Choice sued, claiming, among other things, that the Indiana law banning abortion violated the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Month before midterms, abortion in focus as GOP backs Herschel Wakler.
The women in Kentucky claim the abortion ban similarly violates their state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. That law states that government “shall not substantially burden a person’s freedom of religion” unless it proves a compelling interest and uses “the least restrictive means” to do so.
“If you’re Jewish, you’re having a very narrowly defined idea of when life begins imposed on you that is incongruent with our religious beliefs of when life begins,” said Lisa Sobel, 38, one of the women in the lawsuit.
She said she met the other plaintiffs, Jessica Kalb and Sarah Barton, through Louisville’s Jewish community. They learned that all three require IVF treatments to have children.
“When Dobbs came down,” Sobel said, “we didn’t know what to do.”
“By their fruit you shall know them!”; & by their fruit you had better well know them!
For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his (Satan’s) ministers be transformed as the ministers of justice, whose end shall be according to their works. II Corinthians 11:13-15
The order of divine justice exacts that whosoever consents to another's evil suggestion, shall be subjected to him in his punishment; according to II Peter 2:19: “By whom a man is overcome, of the same also he is the slave.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
This is the argument made by every criminal to cover his crime. It has been the modus operandi for the HomoLobby since Vatican II. It is Satan who “counsels” and “commands” “silence” so that the homosexual perverts may continue “partaking” and “concealing” the sins of Sodomy to which they have given their “consent” by claiming, “Who am I to judge.” These are nine ways of being an accessory to another's sin and this is a sin that “cries to heaven for vengeance”:
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]><![if !vml]><![endif]>By counsel.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By command.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By consent.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By provocation.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By praise or flattery.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By concealment.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By partaking.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By silence.
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>By defense of the ill done.
Explicit Supernatural Faith in God’s Revealed Truth is Necessary as a Necessity of Means for Salvation.
If you do not believe this, you do not possess Supernatural Faith!
Responses of the Holy Office
under Pope Clement XI, 1703:
Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he may put into practice what has been commanded him.
Resp. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.
Q. Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given to him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes, especially His justice in rewarding and in punishing, according to this passage of the Apostle "He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder' [Heb . 11:23], from which it is inferred that a barbarian adult, in a certain case of urgent necessity, can be baptized although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.
Resp. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, according to the capacity of the one to be baptized.”
There is yet a time of stillness and indifference. Liberalism is a twilight state in which all errors are softened, in which no persecution for religion will be countenanced. It is the stillness before the storm. There is a time coming when nothing will be persecuted but truth, and if you possess the truth, you will share the trial.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Archbishop of Westminster
It is proper to grace to strive against nature. Therefore, we must expect that it will frequently, or rather continually, demand of us such things as are contrary to our vicious or imperfect tendencies, and that consequently nature will offer a violent resistance, and will not yield until the last moment. The will, however, must always be on the side of grace. By the word 'will', I do not mean certain ineffective desires, certain repugnances or aversions which are not free, but a firm and determined resolution - not I would, but I will, triumphant equally over likes and dislikes. .... There is a great difference, said a holy man who spoke from experience, between sacrificing one's life to God in a transport of fervour, and doing the same thing at the foot of the gallows. the true disposition of the will is to be judged at the actual moment of the sacrifice, when the temporary effect of the heavenly warmth is withdrawn, and the soul has cooled down and returned to a state of ordinary grace. Therefore we ought not lightly to imagine that we have this good will: rather we should always fear that we have it not. We are not, indeed, to be pusillanimous, but we are bound to mistrust ourselves always and rely solely on help from heaven, confident that it will never fail us in time of need.
Rev. John Nicholas Gou, S.J., Spiritual Maxims
Pope Francis, in corrupting the Sacrament of Matrimony, has perpetrated a terrible injustice to countless Catholics!
Many Catholic families had hoped that the Synod on the Family would address the serious problem of the divorce epidemic and its long-term damage to youth, innocent spouses, the sacrament of marriage, the culture, and the Church. (It did not!) The divorce plague has inflicted severe pain upon Catholic families worldwide. Married couples need to be encouraged by the Church not to give up on their marriages during stressful, unhappy times, and to persevere in loyalty to their marital vows. [.....] Over the past forty years, I have never worked with a Catholic marriage in which both spouses wanted a divorce. In the majority of marriages under stress, one spouse remains happy with the marriage, believes the conflicts can be resolved and is loyal to the sacramental bond.
The spouses who are not happy and who want to pursue divorce and a decision of nullity most often refuse to address their own weaknesses. Instead, they portray themselves as victims of insensitive treatment or emotional abuse.[......]
The majority of spouses who pursue divorce — in our experience with several thousand couples — have never worked on these issues. This explains, in part, why the national survey of divorced men and women, conducted by the Office of Survey Research at the University of Texas at Austin, found the honest response that only one in three divorced spouses claimed that both they and their ex-spouses worked hard enough to try to save their marriage. There is reason to be hopeful about the resolution of marital difficulties. In a major study from the University of Chicago among spouses who rated their marriages as very unhappy, 86 percent of those who persevered reported themselves as happily married five years later.
One grave danger to Catholic marriages and families from the changes made in canon law made by the Holy Father (without a careful study by a commission of experts) is that spouses will not be motivated to engage in the hard work of addressing personal psychological and spiritual weaknesses. Instead, they will pursue divorce and with a belief that they are entitled to a decision of nullity if they can meet the criteria cited, including the new one, “etcetera.”
With all due respect, the determination of nullity by only one priest or by a bishop after 30 to 45 days, is seriously flawed because they lack the proper mental health training to uncover and evaluate the numerous complex psychological conflicts that lead to a decision for divorce. This new process is a grave injustice and, therefore, a manifestation of a severe lack of mercy towards the sacrament of marriage, innocent spouses, children, and Catholic families.
In his closing talk at the Synod, the Holy Father criticized bishops and priests, whom he claimed hide behind rigid doctrines and ignore wounded families. In fact, his radical change in canon law in regard to annulments, made prior to the Synod, will weaken and harm Catholic marriages and families. [.....]
Rick Fitzgibbons, Psychological Science and the Evaluation of Nullity, published by “The Catholic Thing”
Pope Francis does not qualify for a Christian Burial for no “favourable construction can be found”!
“Quibus viventibus non communicavimus mortuis communicare non possumus (We cannot hold communion in death with those who in life were not in communion with us).” Pope Leo the Great
It has further been recognized as a principle that the last rites of the Church constitute a mark of respect which is not to be shown to those who in their lives have proved themselves unworthy of it. In this way various classes of persons are excluded from Christian burial — pagans, Jews, infidels, heretics, and their adherents (Rit. Rom., VI, c. ii) schismatics, apostates, and persons who have been excommunicated by name or placed under interdict. If an excommunicated person be buried in a church or in a consecrated cemetery the place is thereby desecrated, and, wherever possible, the remains must be exhumed and buried elsewhere. Further, Christian burial is to be refused to suicides (this prohibition is as old as the fourth century; cf. Cassian in P.L., XL, 573) except in case that the act was committed when they were of unsound mind or unless they showed signs of repentance before death occurred. It is also withheld from those who have been killed in a duel, even though they should give signs of repentance before death. Other persons similarly debarred are notorious sinners who die without repentance, those who have openly held the sacraments in contempt (for example by staying away from Communion at Easter time to the public scandal) and who showed no signs of sorrow, monks and nuns who are found to have died in the possession of money or valuables which they had kept for their own, and finally those who have directed that their bodies should be cremated after death. In all such cases, however, the general practice of the Church at the present day has been to interpret these prohibitions as mildly as possible. Ordinarily the parish priest is directed to refer doubtful cases to the bishop, and the bishop, if any favourable construction can be found, allows the burial to proceed.
Christian Burial, Catholic Encyclopedia
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Biden Keeps “Promise”: United States Commits Act of Terrorism Against European People!
Nord Stream Gas Lines to Germany Sabotaged by the United States who alone has the strongest motive and the material means to commit this crime against humanity!
President Biden: “If Russia invades… then there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”
Reporter: “But how will you do that, exactly, since… the project is in Germany's control?”
Biden: “I promise you, we will be able to do that.”
Joint Press Conference with President Biden and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, ABC NEWS, February 7, 2022
“If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.”
Victoria Nuland, Jewish Neo-Con Undersecretary of State, January 27, 2022
The War is getting HOT and will be getting HOTTER!
Yet as always, ‘Man preposes, God disposes!’
“This is about what we are doing here today. Why is the family an enemy? Why is the family so frightening? There is a single answer to all these questions. Because it defines us. Because it is our identity. Because everything that defines us is now an enemy for those who would like us to no longer have an identity and to simply be perfect consumer slaves. And so they attack national identity, they attack religious identity, they attack gender identity, they attack family identity. I can't define myself as Italian, Christian, woman, mother. No. I must be citizen X, gender X, parent 1, parent 2. I must be a number. Because when I am only a number, when I no longer have an identity or roots, then I will be the perfect slave at the mercy of financial speculators. The perfect consumer. That's the reason why. That's why we inspire so much fear. That's why this even inspires so much fear. Because we do not want to be numbers. We will defend the value of the human being. Every single human being. Because each of us has a unique genetic code that is unrepeatable. And like it or not, that is sacred. We will defend it. We will defend God, country and family. Those things that disgust people so much. We will do it to defend our freedom because we will never be slaves and simple consumers at the mercy of financial speculators. That is our mission. That is why I came here today. (G. K.) Chesterton wrote, more than a century ago... ‘Fires will be kindled to testify that two and two make four. Swords will be drawn to prove that leaves are green in summer.' That time has arrived. We are ready. Thank you.”
Giorgia Meloni, the new Prime Minister of Italy, which the bureaucratically appointed dictator of the European Union has threatened to punish Italy for electing.
Vatican Council I listing the beneficial Fruits of the Council of Trent which are in every detail exactly the opposite which we have seen from Vatican Council II
Now this redemptive providence appears very clearly in unnumbered benefits, but most especially is it manifested in the advantages which have been secured for the Christian world by ecumenical councils, among which the council of Trent requires special mention, celebrated though it was in evil days.
<![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>a closer definition and more fruitful exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and
<![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>the condemnation and repression of errors; thence too,
<![if !supportLists]>3. <![endif]>the restoration and vigorous strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline,
<![if !supportLists]>4. <![endif]>the advancement of the clergy in zeal for
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>learning and
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>piety,
<![if !supportLists]>5. <![endif]>the founding of colleges for the training of the young for the service of religion; and finally
<![if !supportLists]>6. <![endif]>the renewal of the moral life of the Christian people by
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and
<![if !supportLists]>· <![endif]>a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also came
<![if !supportLists]>7. <![endif]>a closer union of the members with the visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole Mystical Body of Christ.
<![if !supportLists]>1. <![endif]>the multiplication of religious orders and other organisations of Christian piety; thence too
<![if !supportLists]>2. <![endif]>that determined and constant ardour for the spreading of Christ’s kingdom abroad in the world, even at the cost of shedding one’s blood.
While we recall with grateful hearts, as is only fitting, these and other outstanding gains, which the divine mercy has bestowed on the church especially by means of the last ecumenical synod, we cannot subdue the bitter grief that we feel at most serious evils, which have largely arisen either because
<![if !supportLists]>o <![endif]>the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many, or because
<![if !supportLists]>o <![endif]>its wise decrees were neglected.
First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith, listing some of the manifold beneficial fruits from the Council of Trent!
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter Sings the Swan Song
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War
“The Motu proprio Traditionis Custodes and its accompanying letter from Pope Francis have shocked us all. We have not yet been informed of any definitive decisions regarding the future of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and its apostolates….. The Roman Congregation for Religious Orders, which in the future will be responsible for us instead of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, will also begin its work in a few weeks and will also make the first decisions concerning the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. [….] With your help, the Rosary will be prayed without interruption during the month of September. […..] Each rosary should be prayed with the following intention: We pray for our Holy Father and for all the bishops, as well as all those in authority in the Church who will have to make significant decisions regarding the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter in the near future. We pray for all the priests and seminarians of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, that they may continue to carry out their ministry in the Church with fidelity, reverence and obedience, giving guidance to the faithful through a clear ecclesial and humble attitude. We pray for all the faithful in our apostolates and for all the people attached to the traditional Mass, that they will not lose heart, but will be able to accept this time of trial and, with the help of God’s grace, come out of it stronger.”
Fr. Stefan Reiner, Chaplain General of the Confraternity of St. Peter
COMMENT: The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter knows neither itself nor the enemy. They “will succumb in every battle.” They have never understood that it is the faith itself that is under attack and that the faith itself must firstly be defended even at the cost of one’s life. They have never understood that Dogma is the proximate rule of faith and that Dogma is irreformable in both its form and matter. They have never understood that our immemorial traditions are images of the faith grounded in dogmatic canons and that the destruction of these images is heresy, a neo-Iconoclasm, already condemned. They have never understood that obedience is only a virtue when properly regulated by the virtue of Religion which under the virtue of Justice firstly “renders to God the things that are God’s”. When obedience is not directed by the virtue of Religion, it is a sin. They have never understood that subjecting what is of God in the faithful to what is of man in the faithless is not humility but the act of a groveling spineless coward.
Only the willfully blind would be “shocked” by the action of Pope Francis. Let’s suggest a more manly intention for the continual Rosary recitation for the month of September:
Grant us our good God, Thine unworthy servants, through the intercession of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Thy beloved Mother, the gift of Understanding so as to know the Truth; the gift Fortitude to defend the Truth and to withstand to the face any authority who would betray the truths of our Faith even at the cost of life; the gift of Knowledge to know the deep seated malice of any ecclesiastical authority who would destroy the immemorial images of our Faith by which alone the Faith can be known and communicated to others; the gift of Fear of God that we may give no consideration to the strength of the enemy or his malice; the gift of Piety that we may serve our good God without weight or measure but offer all to Him who has given all for us; the gift of Counsel to reject any and every voice of conciliation and accommodation with error; the gift of Wisdom to seek only the glory of God and his holy will.
The Fraternity of St. Peter was born in accommodation of error and it will be destroyed. May its priests organize themselves under Our Lady of Battles for the war they have yet to fight. Where is all this leading: Expect Rome to relent by offering the SSPX a prelature and then herd all Indultist communities into one corral. The hierarchy of the SSPX has already reached a sub rosa accommodation with Rome and will be used as reeducation camps for their followers. It is time to know yourself, to know the enemy, and to know what the fight is about.
Men have imagined that the acknowledgment of the divinity of Christ relieves them of the obligation of taking His words seriously. They have twisted certain texts of the Gospel so as to get out of them the meaning they want, while they have conspired to pass over in silence other texts which do not lend themselves to such treatment. The precept ‘render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s’ is consistently quoted to sanction an order of things which gives Caesar all and God nothing. The saying “My Kingdom is not of this world’ is always being used to justify and confirm the paganism of our social and political life, as though Christian society were destined to belong to this world and not to the Kingdom of Christ. On the other hand the saying “All power is given Me in heaven and earth’ is never quoted. Men are ready to accept Christ as sacrificing Priest and atoning Victim; but they do not want Christ the King. His royal dignity has been ousted by every kind of pagan despotism, and Christian peoples have taken up the cry of the Jewish rabble: ‘We have no king but Caesar!’ Thus history has witnessed and we are still witnessing, the curious phenomenon of a society which professes Christianity as its religion but remains pagan not merely in its life but in the very basis of that life.
Vladimir Solovyev, 1853-1900, Russian theologian, philosopher, poet who worked to bring the Orthodox into the Catholic Church. He made a profession of faith before an Eastern rite unite Catholic priest and was received into the Catholic Church in 1896. He died in extreme poverty.
“But if the faith communicated by the Church to Christian humanity is a living faith, and if the grace of the sacraments is an effectual grace, the resultant union of the divine and the human cannot be limited to the special domain of religion, but must extend to all Man's common relationships and must regenerate and transform his social and political life.”
Vladimir Solovyev, 1853-1900, Russia and the Universal Church
Looking ahead: What is the ultimate goal of the ‘color revolution’ U.S. coup that traces its support to the likes of George Soros, Norm Eisen, et al.?
“Let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder leading upward and upward: Herzl, the Zionist Congress, the English Uganda proposition (a planned temporary Jewish settlement in East Africa abandoned in 1905), the future World War, the peace conference where, with the help of England, a free and Jewish Palestine will be created.”
Max Nordau, co-founder with Theodor Herzl of the World Zionist Organization, addressing the Sixth Zionist Congress in 1903 in Basle, Switzerland
Tikkun olam (Hebrew תיקון עולם, literally, 'repair of the world') is a concept in Judaism, often interpreted as aspiration to behave and act constructively and beneficially. Documented use of the term dates back to the Mishnaic period (ca. 10-220 AD), (that is, the time when the oral traditions of the Jews were committed to the written form in the Mishna, also called the Oral Torah). Since medieval times, kabbalistic literature has broadened use of the term. In the modern era, among the post-Haskalah (Jewish enlightenment, 1770-1880) movements, tikkun olam is the idea that Jews bear responsibility not only for their own moral, spiritual, and material welfare, but also for the welfare of society at large. For many contemporary pluralistic rabbis, the term refers to "Jewish social justice" or "the establishment of Godly qualities throughout the world". Wikipedia
COMMENT: Jews repeatedly since the time of Jesus Christ are the passionate creators and principle instigators of ideological movements conceived as necessary for the moral and material improvement of political and social order. When one after the other proves to be a political and social failure, it is simply dropped and they move on to another. They recognize a ‘fall from grace’ because they recognize the ‘world needs to be repaired.’ Since they have rejected Jesus Christ, the incarnate Logos, the eternal Wisdom of the Father, they have rejected His divine plan for the ‘repair of the world’ and in its place offer what Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp. described as “Organized Naturalism” in opposition to the Supernatural Order of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that whoever is not working for God is working for the Devil. There is no middle ground. As Jesus said, “He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth” (Matthew 12:30).
Where Tikkun Olam can lead
OPINION: Stalin’s Jews
Israel News | ynetnews | Sever Plocker
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Here's a particularly forlorn historical date: More than 100 years ago, between the 19th and 20th of December 1917, in the midst of the Bolshevik revolution and civil war, Lenin signed a decree calling for the establishment of The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage, also known as Cheka.
Within a short period of time, Cheka became the largest and cruelest state security organization. Its organizational structure was changed every few years, as were its names: From Cheka to GPU, later to NKVD, and later to KGB.
We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags.
Whole population strata were eliminated: Independent farmers, ethnic minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals, artists, labor movement activists, "opposition members" who were defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party itself.
In his new, highly praised book "The War of the World," Historian Niall Ferguson writes that no revolution in the history of mankind devoured its children with the same unrestrained appetite as did the Soviet revolution. In his book on the Stalinist purges, Tel Aviv University's Dr. Igal Halfin writes that Stalinist violence was unique in that it was directed internally.
Lenin, Stalin, and their successors could not have carried out their deeds without wide-scale cooperation of disciplined "terror officials," cruel interrogators, snitches, executioners, guards, judges, perverts, and many bleeding hearts who were members of the progressive Western Left and were deceived by the Soviet regime of horror and even provided it with a kosher certificate.
All these things are well-known to some extent or another, even though the former Soviet Union's archives have not yet been fully opened to the public. But who knows about this? Within Russia itself, very few people have been brought to justice for their crimes in the NKVD's and KGB's service. The Russian public discourse today completely ignores the question of "How could it have happened to us?" As opposed to Eastern European nations, the Russians did not settle the score with their Stalinist past.
And us, the Jews? An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name "Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU's deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin's collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system. After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the "bloodthirsty dwarf."
Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his Book "Stalin: Court of the Red Star", Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women.
Stalin's close associates and loyalists included member of the Central Committee and Politburo Lazar Kaganovich. Montefiore characterizes him as the "first Stalinist" and adds that those starving to death in Ukraine, an unparalleled tragedy in the history of human kind aside from the Nazi horrors and Mao's terror in China, did not move Kaganovich.
Many Jews sold their soul to the devil of the Communist revolution and have blood on their hands for eternity. We'll mention just one more: Leonid Reichman, head of the NKVD's special department and the organization's chief interrogator, who was a particularly cruel sadist.
In 1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a "carnival of mass murder," "fantasy of purges", and "essianism of evil." Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.
The Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but rather, as Stalinists, communists, and "Soviet people." Therefore, we find it easy to ignore their origin and "play dumb": What do we have to do with them? But let's not forget them. My own view is different. I find it unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does amazingly despicable things.
Even if we deny it, we cannot escape the Jewishness of "our hangmen," who served the Red Terror with loyalty and dedication from its establishment. After all, others will always remind us of their origin.
“Don’t Jews still believe in a Messias to come?” asks the credulous Christian. “And don’t they believe in the same Biblical Heaven and Hell that we do?”
The answer to both these questions is — no. And it is an emphatic “No!” as the subsequent Jewish testimony will verify.
Concerning the Messias: The Jews of today reject the notion of a personal redeemer who will be born of them and lead them to the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. The Jews believe that the whole Jewish race is to be elevated to a position of prosperity and overlordship and that, when this happy day arrives (the Messianic Age), they will have achieved all that is coming to them by way of savior and salvation. In his recent book, The Messianic Idea in Israel, Jewish theologian Dr. Joseph Klausner explains: “Thus the whole people Israel in the form of the elect of the nations gradually became the Messiah of the world, the redeemer of mankind.”
Concerning Heaven and Hell: A succinct summary of Jewish teaching on “life after death” was given in the May, 1958 issue of B’nai B’rith’s National Jewish Monthly. Under the caption, “What Can A Modern Jew Believe?” there appeared: “Judaism insists that ‘heaven’ must be established on this earth. The reward of the pious is life and happiness in this world, while the punishment of the wicked is misery on earth and premature death … By hitching its star to the Messianic future on this earth, Israel became the eternal people.” The article goes on: “The best Jewish minds have always held that a physical hereafter is a detraction from mature belief.” And the conclusion: “There is neither hell nor paradise, God merely sends out the sun in its full strength; the wicked are consumed by its heat, while the pious find delight and healing in its rays.”
Fr. Leonard Feeney, MICM, The Point, October 1958
Pope Francis the HomoLobby CEO Church of the New Advent that "excludes no one" except Catholics
Italian LGBT advocates meet Pope Francis, discuss church 'that excludes no one'
<![if !vml]><![endif]>Vatican | Christopher White | Sep 22, 2022
Rome — Pope Francis on Sept. 21 met Italian LGBT Catholic advocates who say the pontiff encouraged their efforts to build a church "that excludes no one."
According to the daily newspaper L'Avvenire, which is published by the Italian bishops' conference, representatives from the LGBT organization The Tent of Jonathan met with Francis following his Wednesday general audience.
The organization, which was founded in 2018, aims to provide "sanctuaries of welcome and support for LGBT people and for every person affected by discrimination."
One participant, Fr. Gianluca Carrega, who heads the LGBT pastoral ministry in the Archdiocese of Turin, reportedly asked for the pope's permission to continue "building a hospitable church that excludes no one."
Other delegates gave the pope a collection of letters from parents of LGBT children who have faced "isolation and suspicion within the Christian community." [....]
In the never ending effort to impose a one-world liberal democratic governance, a new German version of “we have ways of making you talk”!
“We will see the result of the vote in Italy. If things go in a difficult direction, we have tools, as in the case of Poland and Hungary.”
Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen, September 2022, the appointed head of the European Commission, threatening the electorate of Italy if they should democratically elect the “wrong” government leaders.
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Novel theory: Dogma contains “perennial truths” and contingent accretions.
My fundamental impulse, precisely from the Council, has always been to free the very heart of the faith from under any ossified strata, and to give this heart strength and dynamism. This impulse is the constant in my life.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth
The steps taken by the Council towards the modern era which had rather vaguely been presented as ‘openness to the world’ [aggiornamento], belong in short to the perennial problem of the relationship between faith and reason that is re-emerging in ever new forms.... The Council had to find a new definition of the relationship between the Church and the modern age.... Here I shall cite only John XXIII’s well-known words, which unequivocally express this hermeneutic when he says that the Council wishes “to transmit the doctrine pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion”. And he continues: “Our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our age demands of us…” It is necessary that “adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness…” be presented in “faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another…”, retaining the same meaning and message.... It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking upon it and a new relationship with it.
Pope Benedict XVI, speech to Roman Curia on Dec 22, 2005, outlining his papal agenda
Catholic teaching: Dogma is the irreformable formal object of Divine and Catholic Faith
For the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence, also, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy Mother the Church has once declared; nor is that meaning ever to be departed from, under the pretence or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them. Vatican Council I
Ugly fact ignored by Reform of Reform – Bugnini was appointed by Paul VI, his work was approved and imposed by Paul VI, and his work accurately reflected the novel principles of liturgical innovation adopted in 1948 and approved at Vatican II
Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II document on the liturgy, is the justification for Bugnini’s Novus Ordo
The order to promote urgently a liturgical reform is in SC §§ 1, 14, 25, 31,
40, 43, 50, 63b, 128.
• The encouragement of the participation of the faithful in the liturgy is stated in §§ 11, 14, 18, 19, 21, 27, 41, 53, 114, 121, 124.
• In § 12 communitarian prayer is recommended.
• In § 30 acclamations and dances are advised.
• Inculturation is counseled in §§ 37-40, 112, 119.
• Communion under two species is counseled in §55.
• In §§ 62, 67-82 a complete change in the ceremonies of the sacraments and sacramentals is imposed.
• The reform of Divine Office is decreed in §§ 87-88, 91-93, 97.
• The reform of the liturgical year is ordered in § 107.
• The introduction of liturgical modern art is approved in § 123.
• The suppression of the statues in the churches is recommended in § 125.
• The change of sacerdotal vestments is allowed in §128.
Atila S. Guimarães, Tradition in Action
What every normal person already knows! Anyone supporting the novelty of Gender Ideology is de facto guilty of child abuse!
Gender Ideology Leads to Child Abuse: Pediatricians
Susan Yoshihara, Ph.D. | NEW YORK, Center for Family & Human Rights