INTROIT: Gal. 6
It behooves us to glory in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, in whom
is our salvation, life, and resurrection, by whom we are saved and delivered,
alleluia, alleluia.
Ps. 66 May God have mercy on us
and bless us; may he cause the light of his countenance to shine upon us, and
may he have mercy on us. Glory be etc.
COLLECT:
O God, who in the glorious finding of the cross of salvation didst
renew the wonders of Thy Passion, grant that through the ransom brought us by
this tree of life we may obtain election unto life eternal. Who livest and reignest, etc.
O God, who makest the minds of the
faithful to be of one accord, grant unto Thy people to love what Thou
commandest and to desire what Thou dost promise; that amidst the various
changes of the world our hearts may there be fixed where true joys abide. Through our Lord, etc.
Grant, we pray, almighty God, that we, who keep the birthday of Thy
saints Alexander, Eventius, Theodulus, and Juvenal, may by their intercession
be delivered from all the evils that threaten us. Through our Lord, etc.
EPISTLE: Philipp. 2, 5-11
Brethren: For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But emptied himself, taking the form of a
servant, being made in the likeness of men, and in habit found as a man. He humbled himself, becoming obedient unto
death, even to the death of the cross.
For which cause God also hath exalted him, and hath given him a name
which is above all names: That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of
those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth: And that every tongue
should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.
GREAT ALLELUIA:
Alleluia, alleluia, Ps. 95. Say
ye among the gentiles, that the Lord hath reigned from the wood, alleluia.
Sweet wood, sweet nails, bearing a sweet weight, which alone wast
worthy to bear the King of heaven and the Lord, alleluia.
GOSPEL: John 3, 1-15
At that time: There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a
ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night, and said to him: Rabbi, we
know that thou art come a teacher from God; for no man can do these signs which
thou dost, unless God be with him. Jesus
answered, and said to him: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born
again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
Nicodemus saith to him: How can a man be born when he is old? can he
enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born again? Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee,
unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which
is born of the Spirit, is spirit. Wonder
not, that I said to thee, you must be born again. The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou
hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth:
so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Nicodemus answered, and said to him: How can these things be done? Jesus answered, and said to him: Art thou a
master in Israel, and knowest not these things?
Amen, amen I say to thee, that we speak what we know, and we testify
what we have seen, and you receive not our testimony. If I have spoken to you earthly things, and
you believe not; how will you believe, if I shall speak to you heavenly
things? And no man hath ascended into
heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in
heaven. And as Moses lifted up the
serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him, may not
perish; but may have life everlasting.
OFFERTORY:
Ps. 117 The right hand of the
Lord hath wroght strength, the right hand of the Lord hath exalted me; I shall
not die, but live, and shall declare the works of the Lord, alleluia.
SECRET:
Look mercifully, O Lord, upon the sacrifice we offer Thee, that it may
save us from the evils of war, and, through the standard of the holy cross of
Thy Son, establish us so securely under Thy protection that we may crush all
the snares of the enemy. Through the
same Lord, etc
O God, who by the august communion
of this sacrifice hast made us partakers of one sovereign Godhead, grant, we
beseech Thee, that as we know Thy truth, so we may follow it up by worthy
behavior. Through our Lord, etc.
We ask, O Lord, that an abundant blessing may descend upon this
oblation, that it may mercifully work our sanctification on the feast-day of
Thy saints. Through our Lord, etc.
PREFACE OF THE HOLY CROSS:
It is truly meet and just, right and profitable unto salvation, that we
should at all times and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O holy Lord,
Father almighty, everlasting God. Who
didst set the salvation of mankind upon the tree of the Cross, so that whence
came death, thence also life might rise again, and he that overcame by the
tree, on the tree also might be overcome through Christ our Lord. Through whom the angels praise Thy majesty,
the dominions adore it, and the powers are in awe. Which the heavens and the hosts of heaven
together with the blessed seraphim joyfully do magnify. And do thou command that it be permitted to
us to join with them in
confessing Thee, also, while we say with lowly praise: Holy, holy, holy, etc.
COMMUNION:
By the sign of the cross deliver us from our enemies, O Thou our God, alleluia.
POSTCOMMUNION:
Refreshed plentifully with heavenly food and strengthened with
spiritual drink, we ask, almighty God, that Thou wouldst defend from the wicked
enemy those whom Thou hast bidden to triumph by the wood of the holy cross of
Thy Son, which is the armor of righteousness for the salvation of the
world. Through the same Lord, etc.
Stand by us, O Lord our God, that
by what we have faithfully received we may be cleansed from our vices and
rescued from all dangers. Through our
Lord, etc.
We who have been refreshed by partaking of Thy holy gift, ask, O Lord
our God, that, through the intercession of Thy saints Alexander, Eventius,
Theodulus, and Juvenal, we may enjoy the fruit of the worship we pay. Through our Lord, etc.
LAST GOSPEL: John 16, 5-14.
At that time Jesus said to His
disciples: I go to Him that sent Me; and none of you asketh Me: Whither goest
Thou? But because I have spoken these things to you, sorrow hath filled your
heart. But I tell you the truth: it is expedient to you that I go; for if I go
not, the Paraclete will not come to you: but if I go I will send Him to you.
And when He is come, He will convince the
world of sin, and of justice and of judgment. Of sin, because they believed not
in Me; and of justice, because I go to the Father, and you shall see Me no
longer; and of judgment, because the prince of this world is already judged. I
have yet many things to say to you: but you cannot bear them now. But when He,
the Spirit of truth, is come, He will teach you all truth. For He shall not
speak of Himself: but what things soever He shall hear He shall speak, and the
things that are to come He shall show you. He shall glorify Me: because He
shall receive of Mine and shall show it to you.
INSTRUCTION
As the disciples, in their grief at Christ's going to His passion and
death, after the accomplishment of which He was to return to His Father, never
once asked Him: "Whither goest Thou?" many Christians, because of
their attachment to this world and its pleasures, never ask themselves: Whither
am I going, whither leads my way? By my sinful life I am perhaps going towards
hell, or will my little fervor for the right, my lukewarm prayers take me to
heaven? Ask yourself in all earnestness, dear Christian, whither leads the way
you are going? Is it the right path? If not, retrace your steps, and follow
Jesus who by suffering and death entered heaven.
Why could the Paraclete
not come before the Ascension of Christ?
Because the work of Redemption
had first to be completed, Christ had to die, reconcile man to God, and enter
into His glory, before the Spirit of truth and filial adoption could abide in
man in the fulness of grace. From this we may learn that we must purify our
hearts, and be reconciled to God, if we wish to receive the gifts of the Holy
Ghost.
How will the Holy Ghost
convince the world of sin, of justice and of judgment?
He will convince the world, that
is, the Jews and Gentiles, of sin, by showing them through the preaching, the
sanctity and the miracles of the apostles, as well as by gradual inward
enlightenment, the grievous sins which they have committed by their infidelity
and their vices; of justice, by unveiling their error, and showing them that
Christ whom they unjustly rejected, is the fountain of justice; of judgment, by
showing them their condemnation in their prince and head, the devil, whom they
served. This prince is now driven from idols and from the bodies of men, and
his kingdom is destroyed in the name of Jesus by the apostles.
Why did not Christ tell
His apostles all He had to tell them?
Because they could not yet
comprehend, and keep it in their memory; because they were still too weak, and
too much attached to Jewish customs, and also because they were depressed; He
therefore promised them the Holy Ghost, who would fit them for it by His
enlightenment, and would teach them all truth.
How does the Holy Ghost
teach all truth?
By guiding the Church, that is,
its infallible administration, by His light to the knowledge of the truth
necessary for the salvation of souls, preserving it from error; and by
advancing those members of the Church who seek His light and place no obstacle
in its way, in the necessary knowledge of truth.
What is meant by: He shall
not speak of himself, but what things so ever he shall hear, he shall speak?
That the Holy Ghost will teach
us only that which He has heard from all eternity from the Father and Son; His
teaching will, therefore, perfectly agree with Christ's teachings, for the Holy
Ghost proceeds from the Father and Son and is equal God to them, and that which
He teaches is also their doctrine, which is expressed in the words: He shall
receive of mine.
ASPIRATION
Ah, my Lord and my God! direct my feet in the way of Thy commandments and
preserve my heart pure from sin, that Thy Holy Spirit may find nothing in me
deserving of reproach, that He may teach me all truth, and lead me to Thee, the
eternal Truth, in heaven. Amen.
In order that the
oblation [of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass] by which the faithful offer the
divine Victim to the heavenly Father may have its full effect, still one thing
more is necessary; it is necessary that they immolate themselves as victims….
together with the Immaculate Host, a victim acceptable to God the Father.
Pope Pius XII, Mediator
Dei
Amen, amen I
say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God.
PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OF MAY 3rd:
Date Day Feast Rank Color F/A
Mass Time/Notes
|
3
|
Sun
|
Finding of the Holy
Cross
4th Sunday
after Easter
St. Alexander I, Pope
& Comp. Mm
|
d2cl
|
R
|
|
9:00 AM; Rosary of
Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
|
|
4
|
Mon
|
St. Monica, W
|
d
|
W
|
|
Mass 8:30 PM; Rosary
of Reparation before Mass
|
|
5
|
Tue
|
St. Pius V, PC
|
d
|
W
|
|
Mass 8:30 PM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass
|
|
6
|
Wed
|
St. John, ApEv, before the
Latin Gate
|
dm
|
R
|
|
Mass 8:30 PM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass
|
|
7
|
Thu
|
St. Stanislaus, BpM
|
d
|
R
|
|
Mass 8:30 PM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass
|
|
8
|
Fri
|
Apparition of St. Michael
the Archangel
|
dm
|
W
|
A
|
Mass 8:30 PM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass
|
|
9
|
Sat
|
St. Gregory Nazianzen,
BpCD
|
d
|
W
|
|
Mass 9:00 AM; Confessions
8:00 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:30AM
|
|
10
|
Sun
|
5th
Sunday after Easter
St. Antoninus, BpC
Ss. Gordian &
Epimachus, Mm
|
sd
|
W
|
|
9:00 AM; Rosary of
Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
|
Forty years after the crucifixion, Jerusalem was destroyed by the
Romans, the instruments of God’s vengeance.
The Holy Places were desecrated by the idolaters. A small temple to Venus was erected on
Calvary, and another to Jupiter over the Holy Sepulchre. By this, the pagans intended derision;
whereas, they were perpetuating the knowledge of two spots of most sacred
interest. When peace was restored under
Constantine, the Christians had but to remove these pagan monuments and their
eyes beheld the holy ground that had been bedewed with the Blood of Jesus, and
the glorious Sepulchre.
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Finding of the Holy Cross
During his sojourn on
earth, our Redeemer thus explained the mystery of baptism to Nicodemus, who was
a ruler among the Jews, and a master in Israel: Unless a man be born again of water and the
Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Here he foretells what he intends to do at a
future time; he prepares us for the mystery by telling us that as our first
birth was not pure, he is preparing a second for us; that this second
birth will be holy, and that water is to be the instrument of so great a
grace.
Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year, Fourth Sunday after Easter
The Holy Ghost tells
us, in the sacred Volume, that a threefold cord is not easily broken
(Eccles. 4, 12). Now we have such a
one; and it keeps us in the glorious unity of the Church: hierarchy, dogma, and
sacraments, all contribute to make us one Body. Everywhere, from north to south, and from
east to west, the sacraments testify to the fraternity that exists amongst us;
by them we know each other, no matter in what part of the globe we may be, and
by the same we are known by heretics and infidels.
Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year, Fourth Sunday after Easter
"I know
very well that it is they, and I can very well tell them apart!"
St. Joan of
Arc, to her judges regarding St. Catherine and St. Margaret
Feast of the
Finding of the Holy Cross
Why is this day so called?
Because on this day the Church
celebrates the finding, by Saint Helena, mother of the Emperor Constantine, of
the cross on which Christ died, after it had been for a long time lost.
Where had the holy cross been
up to the time that it was thus found again?
At Jerusalem, near the holy
sepulchre, hidden under a mass of rubbish. For the Emperor Adrian endeavored
not only to desecrate the holy places of the death and burial of Jesus Christ,
but also to hide the very knowledge of them. The cave of the holy sepulchre was
filled up, and by the erection of a temple of Venus, built over the spot, came
to be quite lost sight of.
Salutation of the Church to the
Holy Cross
O glorious and venerable cross! O precious wood! O wonderful sign, by which
sin, the devil, and hell were overcome, and the world redeemed through the
blood of Christ, thou art exalted above all the cedars of the forest, for on
thee hung the life of the world! On thee Christ gained the victory, and by His
dying overcame death forever. Alleluia.
O Lord Jesus Christ, we
adore and bless Thee; for through Thy cross Thou hast redeemed the world.
On the Sign of the
Cross
Why do we sign ourselves with
the sign of the cross?
1. To testify that we are Christians
and worshippers of the Crucified.
2. To profess our faith in the
Most Holy Trinity.
3. In honor and thankful
remembrance of the sufferings and death of Christ.
4. In order to overcome the devil
and his temptations, inasmuch as he is by nothing more easily driven away than
by the sign of the cross.
Is it an old custom to make the
sign of the cross?
The earliest fathers of the Church
make mention of this custom, and say that it came to them from the apostles;
nay, they charge Christians to make the sign of the cross at eating and
drinking, at walking and rising, at sitting and speaking, and, in a word,
before every undertaking.
Why do the priests at divine
service make the sign of the cross over the people?
That therewith there may be
imparted to Christians the abundant blessing of grace which Christ has obtained
for us by His cross, as Saint Paul says, "Blessed be the God and Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ, Who hath blessed us with spiritual blessings in heavenly
places in Christ" (Ephesians 1:3). This custom is of great antiquity in
the Church. The Council of Agde, for example, in the year 506, directed that
after prayers the people should be dismissed by the priest with a blessing.
When, lying on his bed of death, and just
before breathing his last, he took a parting look at the Church on earth, which
he was leaving for that of heaven, he wished to make a final prayer for the
flock which he knew was surrounded by danger; he therefore recited, but with a
voice that was scarcely audible, the following stanza of the Paschal hymn: ‘We
beseech Thee, O Creator of all things! That in these days of Paschal joy, Thou
defend Thy people from every assault of death!’
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year,
Feast St. Pius V
Rome was the scene of
thy glorious confession, O holy Apostle, St. John! She is most dear to thee; join, then, with
Peter and Paul in protecting her. If the
palm of martyrdom be in thy hand as well as the pen of the Evangelist, remember
it was at the Latin Gate that thou didst obtain it. It was in the East that thou didst pass the
greater part of thy life; but the West claims the honour of counting thee as
one of her grandest martyrs. Bless our
Churches, reanimate our faith, rekindle our love, and deliver us from the Antichrists
against whom thou didst warn the faithful of thine own times, and who are
causing such ravages among us. Adopted
son of Mary! Thou art now enjoying the sight of thy Mother’s glory: present to
her the prayers we are offering to her during this month, which is consecrated
to her, and obtain for us the petitions which we presume to make to her.
Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year, Prayer to St. John on the Feast of St. John before the
Latin Gate
The very name of
Michael urges us to honour this glorious spirit; it is a cry of enthusiasm and
fidelity, for it signifies: ‘Who is like unto God?’ Satan trembles at hearing this name, for it
reminds him of the noble protest wherewith the bright Archangel answered the
call of the rebel angels. Michael proved
his strength and prowess when he fought the great battle in heaven. On that account, he was made the guardian and
protector of God’s people; first of the Jews, and afterwards of the Christian
Church, for the Synagogue has forfeited all her honours. Michael now watches over Jesus’ Spouse, our
mother; he supports her in her trials and she wins no triumph in which he has
not had some part.
Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year, Apparition of St. Michael
St. Gregory, canst thou forget the city of which thou wast once the
pastor, and where thy name is still held in veneration? Oh! Help her to throw off the shackles of
schism and heresy. Her being a slave to
the infidel is the punishment of her having revolted against the Vicar of
Christ… Pray, O Gregory, that the more
dangerous and humiliating error of heresy and schism may be broken… obtain by
thy powerful intercession that the East… may be once more united to the fold,
and under the one shepherd before our Risen Jesus returns to separate the cockle
from the good seed, and lead back to heaven the Church, his Spouse and our
Mother, out of whose pale there is no salvation.
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Feast of St. Gregory
Nazianzen
CONSOLATION IN
TRIALS AND ADVERSITIES
You shall lament and weep (John 16, 20).
That Christian is, most foolish
who fancies that the happiness of this world consists in honors, wealth, and
pleasures, while Christ, the eternal Truth, teaches the contrary, promising
eternal happiness to the poor and oppressed, and announcing eternal affliction
and lamentation to those rich ones who have their comfort in this world. How
much, then, are those to be pitied who as Christians believe, and yet live as
if these truths were not for them, and who think only how they can spend their
days in luxury, hoping at the same time to go to heaven where all the saints,
even Christ the Son of God Himself, has entered only by crosses and sufferings.
PRAYER IN TRIBULATION
O good Jesus! who hast revealed, that we can enter heaven only by many
tribulations (Acts 14, 21 ), hast called them blessed who in this world are
sad, oppressed, and persecuted, but patiently suffer, and who hast also taught
us, that without the will of Thy Heavenly Father, not one hair of our head can
perish (Luke 21, 18): I therefore submit entirely to Thy divine will, and beg
Thy grace to endure all adversities for Thy sake, that after this life of
misery I may enjoy eternal happiness with Thee in heaven.
The Church does not know of any
means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she
takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see
that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, On the
Necessity of Baptism
The secret things belong to
the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever,
that we may observe all the words of this law.
Deuteronomy 29:29
When the Holy Ghost
is come, he will convince the world of sin, because they believed not in
me. How great must, indeed, be the responsibility
of them that have been witnesses of Jesus’ wonderful works, and yet will not
receive his teaching! Jerusalem will be
told that the Holy Ghost has come down upon the disciples: and she will receive
the news with the same indifference as she did the miracles which proved Jesus
to be her Messias. The coming of the
Holy Ghost will serve as a sort of signal of the destruction of the deicide
city. Jesus adds: The Paraclete will convince the world of
justice, because I go to the Father, and ye shall see me no longer. The Apostles, and they that believe their
word, shall be just and holy by faith: they will believe in him that is gone
to the Father in him whom they are to see no longer in this world.
Jerusalem, on the contrary, will remember him only to blaspheme him; the
holiness, the faith, the justice of them that shall believe, will be her
condemnation, and the Holy Ghost will leave her to her fate. Jesus continues: The Paraclete will convince the world of
judgment, because the prince of this world is already judged. They that follow not Christ Jesus, follow
Satan: he is their prince, but his judgment is already
pronounced. The Holy Ghost warns the
followers of the world that their leader is already in eternal
torments. Let them reflect well upon
this; for, the pride of man has no right to reckon upon indulgence; let
it but think of the hell into which even the angels were cast because
they were proud.
St. Augustine
Liberalism is
the belief that there could exist any part of God’s creation that is not
subject to His dominion.
Fr. Dennis
Fahey
What Liberalism Is?
Protestantism naturally begets toleration
of error. Rejecting the principle of authority in religion, it has neither
criterion nor definition of faith. On the principle that every individual or
sect may interpret the deposit of Revelation according to the dictates of
private judgment, it gives birth to endless differences and contradictions.
Impelled by the law of its own impotence, through lack of any decisive voice of
authority in matters of faith, it is forced to recognize as valid and orthodox
any belief that springs from the exercise of private judgment. Therefore
does it finally arrive, by force of its own premises, at the conclusion that
one creed is as good as another; it then seeks to shelter its inconsistency
under the false plea of liberty of conscience. Belief is not imposed by a
legitimately and Divinely constituted authority, but springs directly and
freely from the unrestricted exercise of the individual's reason or caprice
upon the subject matter of Revelation. The individual or sect interprets as
it pleases-----rejecting
or accepting what it chooses. This is popularly called liberty of conscience.
Accepting this principle, Infidelity on the same plea rejects all Revelation,
and Protestantism, which handed over the premise, is powerless to protest
against the conclusion; for it is clear that one, who under the plea of
rational liberty has the right to repudiate any part of Revelation that may
displease him, can not logically quarrel with one, who on the same ground
repudiates the whole. If one creed is as good as another on the plea of
rational liberty, on the same plea no creed is as good as any. Taking the field
with this fatal weapon of Rationalism, Infidelity has stormed and taken the
very citadel of Protestantism helpless against the foe of its own making.
As a result, we find amongst the people of
this country [excepting Catholics of course] that authoritative and positive
religion has met with utter disaster, and that religious beliefs or
unbeliefs have come to be mere matters of opinion, wherein there are always
essential differences, each one free to make or unmake his own creed-----or accept no creed.
Such is the mainspring of the heresy
constantly dinned into our ears, flooding our current literature and our press.
It is against this that we have to be perpetually vigilant. The more so as it
insidiously attacks us on the grounds of a false charity and in the name of a
false liberty. Nor does it appeal only to us on the ground of religious
toleration.
The principle ramifies in many directions,
striking root into our domestic, civil, and political life, whose vigor and
health depend upon the nourishing and sustaining power of religion. For
religion is the bond which unites us to God, the source and End of all good;
and Infidelity, whether virtual as in Protestantism or explicit as in
Agnosticism, severs the bond which binds men to God, and seeks to build human
society on foundations of man's absolute independence. Hence we find Liberalism
laying down as the basis of its propaganda the following principles:
·
The absolute sovereignty of the individual in
his entire independence of God and God's authority.
·
The absolute sovereignty of society in its
entire independence of everything which does not proceed from itself.
·
Absolute civil sovereignty in the implied
right of the people to make their own laws in entire independence and utter
disregard of any other criterion than the popular will expressed at the polls
and in parliamentary majorities.
·
Absolute freedom of thought in politics,
morals, or in religion. The unrestrained liberty of the press.
Such are the radical principles of
Liberalism. In the assumption of the absolute sovereignty of the individual,
that is, his entire independence of God, we find the common source of all the
others. To express them all in one term in the order of ideas, they are
RATIONALISM or the doctrine of the absolute sovereignty of human reason. Here
human reason is made the measure and sum of truth. Hence we have individual,
social and political Rationalism, the corrupt fountain head of liberal
principles [which are]: absolute freedom of worship, the supremacy of the
State, secular education repudiating any connection with religion, marriage
sanctioned and legitimatized by the State alone, etc.; in one word, which
synthesizes all, SECULARIZATION, which denies religion any active intervention
in the concerns of public and of private life, whatever they be. This is
veritable social atheism.
Don Felix Sarda Y Salvany, Liberalism is a Sin
O my Savior, in union
with the offering and the sacrifice of Yourself which You made to the Father
and in His honor, I offer myself to You to be a bloody victim of Your will, a
victim immolated for Your glory and that of Your Father. Unite me to Yourself, O good Jesus, draw me
into Your sacrifice, so that I may be sacrificed with You and by You. Since the victim must be sacrificed,
slaughtered, and consumed by fire, make me die to myself, that is, to my vices
and passions, to all that is displeasing to You. Consume me entirely in the sacred fire of
Your divine love, and grant that hereafter my whole life may be a continual
sacrifice of praise, glory, and love for Your Father and for You. St. John Eudes
THE GREAT
PROMISE FOURTH SUNDAY AFTER EASTER
PRESENCE
OF GOD ‑
O Jesus, prepare my heart to receive the Holy Spirit whom You have promised and
merited for me.
MEDITATION:
1.
Since last Sunday, the Church has been preparing us for the Ascension of Our
Lord. Today, taking up the subject again, she goes a step further. She mentions
the coming of the Holy Spirit, and in so doing, makes use of a passage from
Jesus' discourse after the Last Supper. Our Lord is speaking to the Apostles
and preparing their souls for His departure. Sad and thoughtful, they listen to
Him, without courage to question Him. Like a kind father, the Lord breaks the
painful silence. "And now I go to Him that sent Me, and none of you asketh
Me: `Whither goest Thou?'" He hastens to console them: "It is
expedient to you that I go, for if I go not, the Paraclete will not come to
you; but if I go, I will send Him to you" (Gosp : Jn 16,5‑14).
Only Jesus' death could merit this great gift for us, and it was not until
after His Ascension into heaven that the Holy Spirit, the Envoy of the Father
and the Son, could descend upon the Church. The Apostles were about to lose the
sensible, physical presence of their adored Master. However, He would not leave
them orphans and would continue to help them invisibly by His Spirit, who would
take up His work with them. Jesus did His work in a visible manner in their
midst; the Holy Spirit would do His in a secret, hidden way, but in one no less
efficacious and real. Furthermore, as Jesus Himself said, the action of the Holy
Spirit would complete His. "I have yet many things to say to you: but you
cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit Truth, is come, He will teach you
all truth.... He shall receive of mine and shall show it to you." The
hearts of the Apostles, still dulled by sin, could not, really comprehend these
profound truths; it was necessary that Jesus, by dying on the Cross, destroy
sin‑ the great obstacle to the action of the Holy Spirit‑ and then,
when He had ascended into heaven, He would send the divine Paraclete whom He
merited for them and for us by His Passion.
The sending of the Holy Spirit to our souls is
the principal fruit of the Passion of Jesus.
2.
We can draw some practical applications from today's Gospel. First of all, we
must fervently prepare ourselves for Pentecost, so that the coming of the Holy
Spirit will be renewed in us in all its plenitude. Since sin is the obstacle to
the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, our preparation must consist in a very
special purity of conscience. Sin must be destroyed in us, not only in its
actual manifestations, even though they are slight, but also in its deepest and
most hidden roots.
We must be convinced, furthermore, that a
certain action of the Holy Spirit is never interrupted in a soul in the state
of grace; this is even more true of a soul who tries to correspond faithfully
to the divine motions. This action does not necessarily have to be perceived
and consoling. In aridity and despondency the Holy Spirit also works in the
faithful soul; His action is secret and hidden, but also real and effective.
Its chief purpose is to purify the soul and dispose it for union with God. If
the soul is convinced of this, it will remain confident, even in difficulties,
and, if it neither understands nor sees its path, it will trust in the Holy
Spirit, who sees and knows well the goal to which He is leading it.
Finally, today's Gospel invites us to invoke
the action of the Holy Spirit on the Church and on the whole world; on the
Church, to govern and direct her in the accomplishment of her mission; on the
world, to convince it of the truth which it rejects. "And when He is
come," said Jesus, "He will convince the world of sin, and of
justice, and of judgment" that is, He will make it see that it is the
slave of sin because it has not believed in Christ. He will make it understand
that justice and sanctity are found only in Him, the Redeemer, and He will show
it that the devil, the "prince of this world," is henceforth overcome
and condemned.
COLLOQUY:
"Ah! eternal Word, tell me, I beg You,
what prevents the Holy Spirit from accomplishing all His work in the soul? You
tell me that the first impediment is malice; another impediment is the self‑will
of those who want to serve You, but in their own way. We want Your Spirit, but
we want Him in the way that pleases us, and as much as pleases us; in this way
we make ourselves incapable of receiving Him. At other times, lukewarmness is
the hindrance; we think we are serving You and do not realize we are serving
ourselves. But You, O Lord, want to be served with humility and sincerity,
without self-love. Thus Your Spirit takes no rest but in a soul which He finds
plunged in humility. Alas! O loving Word, I should like to know what I ought to
do about these hindrances, for what good will it do me to understand them, if I
do not know the cure for them? Now, I see plainly that the remedy for malice is
a simple right intention; the remedy for self‑will is a will so dead to
self that it wills only what You will. The cure for lukewarmness is the ardor
of charity, which like fire, comes into our hearts and burns up all
tepidity" (St. Mary Magdalen dei Pazzi).
"Come, O Holy Spirit, sanctify me! Come,
O Spirit of Truth, fill me! Your divine Wisdom will establish me in the truth.
I am thirsting for truth, and wish it to rule over my mind, my words, my
affections, and my actions, avoiding everything that is opposed to it, not only
lies, but also dissimulation, duplicity, and lack of sincerity with myself.
"Come, O Spirit of Peace, bring me Your
peace! That profound peace which dilates the soul and prepares it for Your
operations, that peace which calms and dominates all the sensible part of the
soul and even the superior part.
"Come, O Spirit of Charity, inflame me
and inspire me with Your love, so that I can pour it out over the souls whom I
would bring to You! Oh! transform me into love; only thus shall I be able to
fully respond to Your call, and be of use to the Church" (Sr. Carmela of the Holy Spirit, O.C.D.).
THE ONE THING NECESSARY
As everyone can easily
understand, the interior life is an elevated form of intimate conversation
which everyone has with himself as soon as he is alone, even in the tumult of a
great city. From the moment he ceases to converse with his fellow men, man
converses interiorly with himself about what preoccupies him most. This
conversation varies greatly according to the different ages of life; that of an
old man is not that of a youth. It also varies greatly according as a man is
good or bad.
As soon as a man
seriously seeks truth and goodness, this intimate conversation with himself
tends to become conversation with God. Little by little, instead of seeking
himself in everything, instead of tending more or less consciously to make
himself a center, man tends to seek God in everything, and to substitute for
egoism love of God and of souls in Him. This constitutes the interior life. No
sincere man will have any difficulty in recognizing it. The one thing necessary
which Jesus spoke of to Martha and Mary consists in hearing the word of God and
living by it. Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., The Three Ages of the
Interior Life
Last Words of
Catholic Martyrs
Whosoever dieth out of the
Catholic Church he dieth in the state of damnation.
St. John Shert, English Catholic
priest and martyr, executed during the reign of Elizabeth I on May 28, 1582
Benedicat nos omnipotens Deus, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, Father Roberts has told you the reason why
we are to suffer death, and so it is not necessary that I should repeat more
than one thing. I did not refuse to take the oath because I refused any sort of
allegiance that her Majesty the Queen could justly demand of me. I refused on
account of the matters of Faith included in that oath, and that is why it has
been forbidden by His Holiness the Pope, whom all of us who are sheep of Christ
are bound to obey in matters of Faith. I pray you all therefore and exhort you
to be obedient to the chief Shepherd of the Church of God. Out of the Church there
is no salvation.
St. Thomas Somers, English
Catholic priest and martyr, executed on the same day as St. John Roberts
Memorare novissima tua
— Let man remember his end. Quia nos omnes manifestari oportet ante
tribunal Christi — We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ
there to render an account of our Faith and of our deeds. Those who have done
well will have eternal life, and those who have done evil will suffer eternal
torments. Extra ecclesiam nulla est salus — Outside the true Church of
Christ there is no salvation.
St. John Roberts, English
Catholic priest and martyr, executed on December 10, 1610
What, then, is purity
of intention? Purity of intention is having God alone as our object, free from
all self-interest. …. The truth is, of course, that only God knows us through
and through; above all in the most essential thing, namely whether we are
worthy in His eyes of love or hatred. We cannot be absolutely certain that any
of our actions are pleasing to Him, and this uncertainty will remain with us
all our life; we will never be able to pronounce with certitude on the purity
of our intentions. For if we were sure on this point, we would be equally sure
that our actions were holy, and consequently that we were in a state of grace.
For this reason, we must always say with David: From my secret sins, cleanse
me, O Lord. And who knows fully his own frailty? The truth is in itself very
painful, and particularly grievous to self-love, which is always seeking for
assurance. According to God's designs, however, it should humble us, but not
drive us to despair. If in this matter we cannot arrive at absolute certitude,
yet by learning to know ourselves and by humbly asking it of God, we can obtain
sufficient moral certitude to give us peace. But we must do all that lies in
our power.
Rev. John Nicholas
Grou, S.J., Spiritual Maxims
"...for men are not bound, nor are they able to read hearts, but
when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works they judge him to
be a heretic, pure and simple and condemn him as a heretic."
St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, II, 30
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
“The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI
and the last edition prepared under Pope John XXIII, are two forms of the Roman
Liturgy, defined respectively as ordinaria
and extraordinaria: they are two
usages of the one Roman Rite, one alongside the other. Both are the expression
of the same lex orandi of the
Church.” Benedict XVI, Universae Ecclesiae,
May13, 2011, (n. 6)
“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… definitively fixed by the Council of
Trent.” Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani,
Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith, September 3, 1969,
Brief Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci
“The analysis of the Novus Ordo made by these
two cardinals has lost none of its value nor, unfortunately, of its relevance….
The results of the reform are considered by many today to be devastating. It
was to the credit of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci that they discovered very
quickly that the change of the rites led to a fundamental change of doctrine.”
Cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler, Librarian of the Holy Roman Church and
Archivist of the Secret Archives of the Vatican, November 27, 2004, on the
occasion of the reprinting of the Brief Critical Study by Cardinals Ottaviani
and Bacci
The most fashionable
philosophy today is Deconstructionism, and that’s the explicit denial of the
very essence of language: “intentionality”.
That’s the technical, traditional term for the quality that words have
that makes them meaningful, significant, signs
that point beyond themselves to objective reality. There is no objective reality to these
Deconstructionists, no world beyond texts.
Texts are worlds, and worlds are texts.
It makes morality as arbitrary as penmanship.
Peter Kreeft, Ph. D., A Refutation of Moral Relativism
The queen bee never takes wing without being surrounded by all her
Subjects; even so Love never enters the heart but it is sure to bring all other
virtues in its train; marshalling and employing them as a captain his soldiers;
yet, nevertheless, Love does not set them all to work suddenly, or equally, at
all times and everywhere…. there are virtues of universal account, which must
not only be called into occasional action, but ought to spread their influence
over everything. We do not very often come across opportunities for exercising
strength, magnanimity, or magnificence; but gentleness, temperance, modesty,
and humility, are graces which ought to color everything we do. There may be
virtues of a more exalted mould, but at all events these are the most continually
called for in daily life. Sugar is better than salt, but we use salt more
generally and oftener. Consequently, it is well to have a good and ready stock
in hand of those general virtues of which we stand in so perpetual a need. In
practicing any virtue, it is well to choose that which is most according to our
duty, rather than most according to our taste.
St. Francis de Sales, Introduction to a Devout Life
Q: But would it not be enough
for one to be a Catholic in heart only, without professing his religion
publicly?
No, for Jesus Christ has solemnly declared that, “He who shall be
ashamed of Me and My words, of him the Son of Man shall be ashamed when He
shall come in His majesty, and that of His Father, and of the holy angels.”
(Luke 9:26)
Fr. Michael Muller, C.SS.R, Questions and Answers on Salvation
And
since Jesus Christ, the Son of God, morally obliges every Catholic the duty to
profess his faith in the public forum, every Catholic possesses by right the
use of the ecclesiastical traditions of our Church which constitute the perfect
outward expression of our holy faith.
“He
will convince the world of sin”
The Four Sins That Cry To Heaven For
Vengeance - Are Protected Acts under Law.
1. Willful murder. -
Unjust war
2. Defrauding the
laborer of his wages. - Confiscatory Taxation
3. Oppression of the
poor. - Usury
4. Sin of Sodom. - "Hate crimes", Homosexual
“marriage”, etc.
Such is the civilization that
never knew Christ! - What will the one be like that has known and rejected Him?
St. Paul, addressing
the Romans, whose triumphant civilization had absorbed all the strength and all
the vices of the conquered peoples, tells them to their face with that intrepid
firmness which fears no contradiction: You are without affection, without
fidelity; you are filled with malice, with iniquity, with bitterness; hateful,
hating one another; finally, you are without mercy (Rom. 1 and 3; Tit. 3). And
yet St. Paul is the most reserved of all the writers of that time. Plato,
Aristotle, Aristophanes, Plautus, Titus, Livy, Tacitus, Juvenal, Suetonius,
Plutarch, Seneca, relate the horrors of pagan society with a good faith and
indifference which make one shudder. It is evident this was the accepted and
public morality of the most civilized nations. Strangers, prisoners, the
vanquished, slaves, debtors, the sick, the poor, the aged, children, women, all
who were weak, all who suffered, all who labored----in a word, the great majority
of the human race was hated, despised, and oppressed. The rest wallowed in the
mire of vice. Vice itself was deified; it had its temples, its priests, its
altars in every city of the world; disorder became a social obligation, and
immorality a public worship. Such was the pagan world before the coming of
Christ…."It is estimated," says Loudun in his work L'Antiquite,
"that the spectacle of the gladiators cost, on an average, thirty thousand
men a year."
Fr. W. Devivier, S.J., Christian Apologetics: A Defense of the
Catholic Faith, Christian Civilization
Pacem in
Terris - John XXIII's last encyclical published on Holy Thursday, April 4,
1963 shortly before he died, established the false doctrine of Religious
Liberty adopted by Vatican II in Dignitatis
Humanae
'Pacem in Terris' had radical impact on church teaching
National Catholic Reporter | Jerry Filteau | Apr. 18, 2013
[....] One of the beauties of Pacem
in Terris, (Fr. J. Bryan) Hehir said, was the fact that against centuries
of Catholic thought and practice asserting the primacy of truth over conscience
in religious matters, John (XXIII) simply asserted, without laying out detailed
arguments, that civil authorities have an obligation to protect the freedom of
their citizens to worship and practice religion as they see fit in their own
conscientious belief. It took
three more council sessions after John's death in June 1963 for the fathers of
Vatican II to struggle to consensus on the same conclusion and adopt their
Declaration on Religious Freedom (Dignitatis Humanae) in 1965, he
said. [....]
Admission of Heretical Ambiguity introduced
into Vatican II Documents
In many places, [the
Council Fathers] had to find compromise formulae, in which, often, the
positions of the [conservative] majority are located immediately next to those
of the [modernist] minority, designed to delimit them. Thus, the conciliar
texts themselves have a huge potential for conflict, open the door to a
selective reception in either direction.
Walter Cardinal Kasper,
April 12, 2013, L'Osservatore Romano
Remember: All heretics are schismatics
and All schismatics are heretics. We pray that
they be "delivered from their errors" and that God would "recall
them their holy Mother, the Catholic and Apostolic Church." So lets us
pray in particularly for those heretics and schismatics that unjustly occupy
ecclesiastiacal positions in the Church!
Let us pray
for heretics and schismatics, that our Lord and God may deliver them from all
their errors, and vouchsafe to recall them to their holy Mother, the Catholic
and Apostolic Church. Almighty, eternal God, Who dost save all, and willest not
that any should perish, look upon the souls deceived by diabolical fraud, that,
abandoning all heretical depravity, the hearts of the erring may regain sanity
and return to the unity of truth. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who livest and
reignest, with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God, world
without end. Amen.
The World of
Instability that Vatican II Attempts to Conform the Church: “Artificial and
Mechanical”
Western civilization at the present day is passing through a crisis
which is essentially different from anything that has been previously
experienced. Other societies in the past have changed their social institutions
or their religious beliefs under the influence of external forces or the slow
development of internal growth. But none, like our own, has ever consciously
faced the prospect of a fundamental alteration of the beliefs and institutions
on which the whole fabric of social life rests ... Civilization is being
uprooted from its foundations in nature and tradition and is being
reconstituted in a new organisation which is as artificial and mechanical as a
modern factory.
Christopher Dawson, (1889-1970), Catholic Historian, Enquiries into
Religion and Culture
St.
John Cassian: The inspiration for St. Benedict's monastic foundation in the
West
"We must, with God's help, eradicate the deadly poison of the
demon of anger from the depths of our souls. So long as he dwells in our hearts
and blinds the eyes of the heart with his somber disorders, we can neither
discriminate what is for our good, nor achieve spiritual knowledge, nor fulfill
our good intentions, nor participate in true life; and our intellect will
remain impervious to the contemplation of the true, divine light; for it is
written, 'Man's anger does not bring about the righteousness of God' (James.
1:20)."
St. John Cassian
"The
thief on the cross certainly did not receive the Kingdom of Heaven as a reward
for his virtues but as a grace and a mercy from God. He can serve as an
authentic witness that our salvation is given to us only by God’s mercy and
grace. All the holy masters knew this and unanimously taught that perfection in
holiness can be achieved only through humility."
St. John
Cassian, who was an Eastern monk, theological writer and Church Father.
He went to Palestine in 380 with a companion, Germanus, and became a
monk in Egypt. In 400 he entered into the discipleship of St.
John Chrysostom, going to Rome to defend the much-oppressed saint
before Pope Innocent I. Ordained in Rome, John started monasteries in
southern France, near Marseilles, thus helping to pioneer monasticism in
Europe. His two main writings, Institutes of the Monastic Life and
Conferences on the Egyptian Monks, were much praised by St.
Benedict and were long influential; the former had a direct impact upon
Benedict during the time that he was composing his famed
Rule. John also authored the work De Incarnatione Doniini, in seven
books, at the behest of Pope Leo I the Great so as to inform the Western Church
of the details of the teachings of the heresiarch Nestorius who denied the
blessed Virgin Mary her title, Mother of God. St. John Cassian died in 435.
“O
God, come to my assistance; O Lord, make haste to help me.”
Not without reason has this verse been selected out of the whole body
of Scripture. For it takes up all the emotions that can be applied to human
nature and with great correctness and accuracy it adjusts itself to every
condition and every attack. It contains an invocation of God in the face of any
crisis, the humility of a devout confession, the watchfulness of concern and of
constant fear, a consciousness of one's own frailty, the assurance being heard,
and confidence in a protection that is always present and at hand, for whoever
calls unceasingly on his protector is sure that he is always present. It
contains a burning love and charity, an awareness of traps, and a fear of
enemies. Seeing oneself surrounded by these day and night, one confesses that
one cannot be set free without the help of one's defender. This verse is an
unassailable wall, an impenetrable breastplate, and a very strong shield for
those who labour under the attack of demons.
St. John Cassian, The Conferences, Commentary Psalm 69
"The first and most
excellent of these aids (for strengthening and ordering the human will) is the
power of God’s Divine Grace, whereby the mind can be enlightened and the will
wholesomely invigorated and moved to the constant pursuit of moral good, so
that the use of our inborn liberty becomes at once less difficult and less
dangerous. Not that the divine
assistance hinders in any way the free movement of our will, just the contrary,
for grace works inwardly in man and in harmony with his natural inclinations,
since it flows from the very Creator of his mind and will, by whom all things
are moved in conformity with their nature.
As the Angelic Doctor points out, it is because Divine Grace comes from
the Author of nature, that it is so admirably adapted to be the safeguard of
all natures, and to maintain the character, efficiency, and operations of
each."
Pope Leo XIII, Libertas
The Devil
Reads a "Book" by its Cover
Nobody doubts that unclean
spirits can influence the character of our thoughts, but this is by affecting
them from without by sensible influences, that is, either from our inclinations
or from our words, and those likings to which they see that we are especially
disposed.
St. John Cassian, Seventh Talk
to Monks
Penance then is as it were, a salutary weapon placed in the hands of
the soldiers of Christ, who wish to fight for the defense of and restoration of
the moral order in the universe. It is a
weapon that strikes right at the root of all evil, that is, at the lust of
material wealth and the wanton pleasures of life. Be means of various works of penance, the
noble-hearted Christian subdues the base passions that tend to make him violate
the moral order. But if zeal for the
divine law and brotherly love are as great in him as they should be, then not
only does he practice penance for himself and his own sins, but he takes upon
himself the expiation of the sins of others, imitating the saints who often
heroically make themselves victims of reparation of the sins of whole
generations, imitating even the divine Redeemer, Who became the Lamb of God,
'Who taketh away the sins of the world,' (1 john 1:29).... The divine Heart of
Jesus cannot but be moved at the prayers and sacrifice of His Church, and He
will finally say to His spouse, weeping at His feet, under the weight of so
many griefs and woes: 'Great is thy faith, be it done to thee as thou wilt'
(Matthew 15:28).
Pope Pius XI, Caritate Christi
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
A
Illustrative Example of the Heresy of Neo-Modernism
It is not enough to find a new language in which to articulate our
perennial faith; it is also urgent, in the light of the new challenges and
prospects facing humanity, that the Church be able to express the ‘new things’
of Christ’s Gospel, that, albeit present in the word of God, have not yet come
to light.
Pope Francis the Destroyer, Address, October 11, 2018
A
Illustrative Example of the Catholic Faith
If there are any present-day teachers making every effort to produce
and develop new ideas, but not to repeat “that which has been handed down,” and
if this is their whole aim, they should reflect calmly on those words which
Benedict XV proposes for their consideration: “We wish this maxim of our elders
held in reverence: Nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum — let nothing new be introduced,
but only what has been handed down; it must be held as an inviolable law in
matters of faith, and should also control those points which allow of change,
though in these latter for the most part the rule holds: non nova sed noviter—not new
things but in a new way.”
Pope Pius XII,
Si Diligis, Allocution to
Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops on the Canonization of St Pius X, May 31,
1954.
Neo-Modernism
Postulates the grave error that there exists a disjunction between DOGMA and
the Words used to formulate the dogmatic definition. This error became the
overarching theme of Vatican II!
[…..] In theology some (i.e., Neo-Modernists) want to reduce to a minimum the meaning
of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the
Church and from philosophical concepts held by Catholic teachers, to
bring about a return in the explanation of Catholic doctrine to the way of
speaking used in Holy Scripture and by the Fathers of the Church. They cherish
the hope that when dogma is stripped of the elements which they hold to be
extrinsic to divine revelation, it will compare advantageously with the
dogmatic opinions of those who are separated from the unity of the Church and
that in this way they will gradually arrive at a mutual assimilation of
Catholic dogma with the tenets of the dissidents.
Moreover, they assert that when Catholic doctrine has been reduced to
this condition, a way will be found to satisfy modern needs, that will permit
of dogma being expressed also by the concepts of modern philosophy, whether of
immanentism or idealism or existentialism or any other system. Some more
audacious affirm that his can and must be done, because they hold that the
mysteries of faith are never expressed by truly adequate concepts but only by
approximate and ever changeable notions, in which the truth is to some extent
expressed, but is necessarily distorted. Wherefore they do not consider it
absurd, but altogether necessary, that theology should substitute new concepts
in place of the old ones in keeping with the various philosophies which in the
course of time it uses as its instruments, so that it should give human expression
to divine truths in various ways which are even somewhat opposed, but still
equivalent, as they say. They add that the history of dogmas consists in the
reporting of the various forms in which revealed truth has been clothed, forms
that have succeeded one another in accordance with the different teachings and
opinions that have arisen over the course of the centuries.
It is evident from what We have already said, that such tentatives not
only lead to what they call dogmatic relativism, but that they actually contain
it. The contempt of doctrine commonly taught and of the terms in which it is
expressed strongly favor it. […..]
Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis
"Human
beings are created to praise, reverence, and serve God our Lord, and by means
of this to save their souls. The other
things on the face of the earth are created for human beings, to help them in
working toward the end for which they are created. From this it follows that I should use these
things to the extent that they help me toward my end, and rid myself of them to
the extent that they hinder me. To do
this, I must make myself indifferent to all created things, in regard to
everything which is left to my freedom of will and is not forbidden. Consequently, on my own part I ought not to
seek health rather than sickness, wealth rather than poverty, honor rather than
dishonor, long life rather than a short one, and so in all matters, I ought to
desire and elect only the thing which is more conducive to the end for which I
am created."
St.
Ignatius of Loyola, Principle and Foundation of the Spiritual Exercises
Whatever the future brings, we won't have to see Pope
Francis in another Seder celebration with the Jews!
“In like manner, the ceremonies of the Old
Law prefigured Christ as having yet to be born and to suffer; whereas our
Sacraments signify Him as already born and having suffered. Consequently, just
as it would be a mortal sin now for anyone, in making a profession of faith, to
say that Christ is yet to be born, which the fathers of old said devoutly and
truthfully; so too, it would be a mortal sin now to observe those ceremonies
which the fathers of old accomplished with devotion and fidelity. Such is the teaching of St. Augustine.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
Modernist
Definition: Pastoral = The teaching that the truths revealed by God and the
moral duty He imposes can be ignored if they constitute a physical or
psychological imposition to our self-love.
Catholic members of royal couples won't have
to raise kids Catholics By Catholic News Service
LONDON (CNS) -- Church leaders have told the British government that members of
the royal family who marry Catholics under recently passed legislation will not
be obliged to bring up their children in the Catholic faith.
Lord Wallace of Tankerness, speaking
on behalf of the government, said he had been assured personally by Msgr.
Marcus Stock, general secretary of the Bishops' Conference of England and
Wales, that the canonical requirement of Catholics to raise their children in
the faith was not always binding.
"I have the specific consent of
Msgr. Stock to say that he was speaking on behalf of Archbishop (Vincent)
Nichols (of Westminster) as president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of
England and Wales and can inform the House that the view taken by the Catholic
Church in England and Wales is that, in the instance of mixed marriages, the
approach of the Catholic Church is pastoral," he said.
"It will always look to provide
guidance that supports and strengthens the unity and indissolubility of the
marriage," Lord Wallace said.
"Friend,
I am ready and you take courage… I warn you that I have a short neck and
therefore be attentive to strike correctly so that you do not have a blot on
your good reputation."
St. Thomas
More, to his executioner, July 6, 1535
More people
have been imprisoned for Liberty, humiliated and tortured for Equality, and
slaughtered for Fraternity in this century, than for any less hypocritical
motives, during the Middle Ages.
Roy Campbell,
poet, journalist, Catholic convert
"First
Things" may be the last to know – the “Subversion” began a long, long,
long ago!
"The
mission of the Church is to keep man mindful that he has another life to live.
When the Church maneuvers to be counted a player among the principalities and
powers, the subversion of Christian truth and charity has begun."
Maureen Mullarkey, First Things, Notes on
an Idol, April 21, 2015
Sin of Envy
From a nomadic jungle tribe, to a Catholic Civilization, to a nomadic jungle tribe
Those who gave promise of no particular aptitude in any special
direction became agriculturists, and were sent out to labour in the fields.
Those who bade fair to become expert craftsmen were apprenticed to a suitable
trade.
The range of these was sufficiently wide to give scope to an ingenuity
considerably greater than that of the Guarani, notable enough though this
proved itself. According to a contemporary Jesuit writer: "There are
everywhere workshops for gilding, painters, and sculptors; gold, silver, and
other smiths; clockmakers, carpenters, joiners, weavers, and founders — in a
word, for all the arts and trades that can be useful to them." In their
dealings with the Indians the missionaries realized the value of the
specialist, and it was undoubtedly due to this fact and to the early training
accorded to their converts that such meritorious results were obtained. [……]
It became evident…. that they (Guaranis) possessed the power of
imitation to an extraordinary degree. On this the Jesuits worked with a fervour
that afforded really brilliant results.
In the course of time each town became possessed not only of its skilled
craftsmen, but of a certain number of artists and sculptors as well. It is
remarkable to think that the decorations, pictures, and sculpture in all the
churches and in every place throughout the settlements were the work of the
Indians alone. No object, apparently, was too elaborate in design for them to
imitate with the utmost success. The most decorative candlestick, the costliest
piece of furniture, or the finest morsels of carving — all these were
faithfully reproduced by the ingenious converts.
Their claim to distinction as builders is sufficiently proved by the
fact that all the churches themselves in the land of the missions were the work
of their hands. They were no crude and makeshift buildings these. Bias Garay
(an extreme critic of the Jesuits) protests that they were the largest and most
beautiful in South America, and that their ornaments rivalled those of Madrid
and Toledo — a bold statement that is not so very wide of the mark, as the
crumbling ruins in the midst of the forests will testify to to-day. [……..]
Behind such fabrications the real position
was simple enough. Working with most unpromising material, and almost certainly
with no motives beyond those of conversion and civilization of the native
races, the Jesuit missions in Paraguay had, while making men of the Guarani
Indians, established a semi-communism which left the practical, fortune-hunting
colonist altogether out of the reckoning. It is true that this went far to
deprive the latter of unlimited free labour, and came perilously near reducing
him to working for a living. Beyond the influence of the Jesuit Reductions, his
fellow-colonists had slaves in plenty — subject, of course, to the plastic
regulations framed in Spain for the welfare of the natives — and the settler
who found himself placed at a disadvantage in this manner sought, in the
expulsion of the hated Order, his only means of redress. It took two hundred
years to bring about this redress, but in June 1767 the order was sent to Don
Francisco de Paula Bucareli y Ursua, Governor of Buenos Aires, to accomplish
the expulsion of the Jesuits from Paraguay. [………]
From the departure of Cardenas up to 1767, the mission work went on,
though always the Jesuits were hated by the Spanish colonists for refusing to
lend themselves to the enslavement of the Indians, and suspected of concealing
rich mines for their own advantage, though independent search had proved the
baselessness of this suspicion. At last the decree for the expulsion of the
Jesuits from Spain and all her colonies was signed, and in June 1767, Bucareli,
Governor of Buenos Aires, received an order to put the decree in force in
Paraguay. In July of that year he deported all the Jesuit priests of
Corrientes, Cordoba, Santa Fe and Monte Video, and then he set about removing
the missionaries of Paraguay.
Fearing resistance, and knowing what a strong hold the Jesuits had on
their Guarani converts — who numbered at that time over a hundred and fifty
thousand, Bucareli prepared and armed a military expedition, with which he
embarked for Paraguay on 24th May 1768. At Salto on the Uruguay he disembarked
and divided his forces into three bands, setting out as to a conquest.
The Jesuits, however, made no resistance, but delivered up their keys
and authority and suffered to be bound like sheep. Seventy-eight mission
leaders went prisoners to Buenos Aires, and thence to Spain. Their places were
filled by Franciscan and Dominican priests, who had had little or no experience
of mission work.
Bucareli framed laws for the maintenance of the missions on the lines
followed by their original founders, but with the passing of the Jesuits passed
the spirit that had made for success. Corruption and selfish ends on the part
of these new masters alienated the confidence of the Guaranis, who seceded from
the Reductions at such a rate that in thirty years from the expulsion of the
Jesuits the missions had fallen into decay, and the work was at an end.
W. H. Koebel, In Jesuit Land, The Jesuit
Missions in Paraguay
The Lord hath
given us our power unto edification, and not for your destruction. St. Paul, 2
Cor. 10:8
Commentary: The Pope does not have the power to destroy. Therefore, if there is evidence that he is
doing so, it is licit to resist him. The
result is that if the Pope destroys the Church by his orders and actions, he
can be resisted and the execution of his mandates prevented. Fr. Francisco de Vitoria, O.P.
The great interest here is the Passion
Relics. The full name of the basilica is Holy Cross in Jerusalem, because when
the Empress Helena returned from Palestine with the relics of the Passion she
had discovered there, in the course of her son Constantine's reclaiming of the
site of Calvary, she adapted several rooms of the Sessorian Palace as a church
and packed the floor with soil from the Holy City which she had brought home as
ballast in her ship. Santa Croce, therefore, however baroque and
eighteenth-century its appearance today, is structurally a Roman building older
than 325 A.D., the approximate date of its adaptation as a church. You may
convince yourself of this by taking a walk round to the left of the basilica,
where the walls of Roman brick are clearly to be seen, full of alarming
cracks.... The story of the finding of the Cross is fairly well documented in
Fourth-century writing. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, who was a young man at the
time, in his catechism classes a few decades later refers to particles of the
true Cross already being scattered throughout Christendom. The two thorns
strike one as surprisingly large and, oddly enough, the plant from which they
come has not been identified. They do agree, however, with many other relics of
holy thorns. The Crown for which the Sainte Chapelle at Paris was built
comprises only a thornless base. The nail is of Roman type, and although one
may correctly observe that more such nails are venerated here and there than
were ever used at the crucifixion it is certain, historically, that many copies
were cast by Popes containing filings from an original. The nail at Santa Croce
is surely more likely to be authentic than doubtful copies preserved elsewhere.
The 'Title' is a most interesting relic. It came to light in 1492, built up in
the wall of the basilica behind a mosaic that was under repair. The brick,
inscribed TITULUS CRUCIS, which covered it, is preserved in the outer relic
chapel.
S.G.A. Luff, The Christian's Guide to Rome
Usury:
Making fertile what is by nature sterile!
Antonio: Or is your gold and silver ewes and rams?
Shylock: I cannot tell. I make it breed as fast.
Shakespeare, The Merchant of
Venice
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Martin Luther:
“God does not save factious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but
believe and rejoice in Christ every more boldly. No sin will separate us form
the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.” Martin Luther
“When I awoke last night the Devil came and wanted to debate with me
arguing that I was a sinner. To this I replied, “Tell me something new, Devil!
I already know that perfectly well; I have committed many a solid and real sin.
Indeed there must be good honest sins not fabricated and invented ones for God
to forgive.” Martin Luther
In translating St. Paul, “We account a man to be justified by faith”
(Romans 3:28), Luther added the word, “alone.”
In answer to those who objected to his mutilating Sacred Scripture, he answered: “If your Papist annoys you with the word
(alone), tell him straightway: Dr. Martin Luther will have it so. Whoever will
not have my translation, let him give it the go-by; the devil’s thanks to him
who censures it without my will and knowledge. Dr. Martin Luther will have it
so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.”
Pope Francis the Lutheran:
“I think that Marin Luther's intentions were not mistaken. He was a reformer.... And today, Luther and
Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On
this point which is very important, he did not err.”
Pope Francis, public interview, June 26, 2016
Catholic
Faith: Council of Trent: Selected Canons on Justification
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is
justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate
in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any
way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will;
let him be anathema.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but
confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that
this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for
the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without
any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are
forgiven him; let him be anathema.
CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins
and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and
justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself
justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are
effected; let him be anathema.
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and
justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of
the predestinate; let him be anathema.
CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in
the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor
prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to
Christians; let him be anathema.
CANON XXIX.-If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is
not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to
recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament
of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and universal Church-instructed by
Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be
anathema.
CANON XXXIII.-If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching
Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory
of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from,
and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of
Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.
Ecumenism
with Lutherans requires abandoning both Reason and Free Will which helps
explain why Modernists are both stupid and reckless!
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes
to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against
the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”
Martin Luther
“This error of free will is a special doctrine of the antichrist.”
Martin Luther
“The
liturgical reform has made a giant step forward and we have drawn quite close
to the liturgical forms of the Lutheran Church.” Fr. Annibale Bugnini, L’Osservatore Romano, October 13, 1967
The Novus Ordo has destroyed the faith in
countless Catholics over the last 50+ years. No Catholic is obliged to attend a
service that damages his faith or corrupts morality!
Catechism of St. Pius X
teaches (No. 217), anyone who “without a real impediment” fails to
hear Mass on days of obligation commits a mortal sin; otherwise, “any
moderately grave reason suffices to excuse one from assistance at Holy Mass,
such as considerable hardship or corporal or spiritual harm either to oneself or another.”
Fr. Heribert Jone, Moral Theology,
No. 198
How did Pope
Francis become a heretic? The Novus Ordo Mass and its Lutheran “mode of
liturgy”?
“There was corruption and worldliness in the (Catholic) Church; there
was attachment to money and power. That was the basis of his (Marin Luther’s)
protest. He was also intelligent, and he went ahead, justifying his reasons for
it. Nowadays, Lutherans
and Catholics, and all Protestants, are in agreement on the doctrine of
justification: on this very important point he was not mistaken. He
offered a ‘remedy’ for the Church, and then this remedy rigidified in a state
of affairs, a discipline, a way of believing, a way of acting, a mode of
liturgy.”
Pope Francis the Lutheran, 2017, commenting on the Joint Declaration on
the Doctrine of Justification by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic
Church (signed October 31, 1999). Once the “mode of liturgy” was changed to the
Novus Ordo, the heretical Protestant doctrine of Justification by “faith alone”
followed.
“...the Novus Ordo Missae—considering the new elements susceptible to
widely different interpretations which are implied or taken for
granted—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. The ‘canons’ (i.e.: dogmas) of the rite definitively
fixed at that time erected an insurmountable barrier against any heresy which
might attack the integrity of the Mystery.” Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, A
Brief Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Mass (The Ottaviani Intervention), written after seeing the ‘reverent’
version of the Novus Ordo in Latin celebrated at the Sistine Chapel
“Of all divine things, the most godlike is to co-operate with God in
the conversion of sinners.”
St. Denis the Areopagite
Catholics
Faithful to Immemorial Traditions
Divine Providence often allows, owing to seditions or disturbances
stirred up by carnal men, even good men to be driven out from the assembly of Christians.
When for the peace of the Church such men endure this insult and injustice with
all patience, and do not give their support to any novelty of heresy or schism,
they furnish a lesson to mankind of the true affection and sincere charity with
which God should be served. The aim of such men is either to resume their
voyage when the waves have grown calmer, or if that is impossible, either
because the same storm continues, or because the like or some worse would be
roused if they ventured to return, they keep at least the will to help those to
whose turbulent clamour they have yielded, defending unto death and helping by
their witness, without forming factious groups, that faith which they know to
be found in the bosom of the Catholic Church. These the Father seeth in secret,
and in secret rewards. This kind of man seems rare, but examples are not
wanting; indeed, there are more than may well be credited.
St. Augustine, (De vera relig. 6, 11. P.L., xxxiv, 128)
Dogma is the answer to their "senseless questions and
elaborate arguments"!
"During this period the
Wisdom of God guides the Church in several ways:
1)
by chastising the Church so that riches may not corrupt her completely;
2) by interposing the Council of Trent
like a light in the darkness, so that the Christians who see the light may know
what to believe... They will ridicule Christian simplicity; they will call it folly
and nonsense, but they will have the highest regard for advanced knowledge, and for the skill by which the axioms of
the law, the precepts of morality, the Holy Canons and religious dogmas are
clouded by senseless questions and elaborate arguments. As a result, no
principle at all, however holy, authentic, ancient, and certain it may be, will
remain free of censure, criticism, false interpretations, modification, and
delimitation by man."
Ven. Bartholomew Holzhauser, 8-24-1613 to 5-20-1658, Priest, Confessor, Prophet
Pope Leo: The Church needs
you. The contribution that the Christian East can offer us today is immense! We
have great need to recover the sense of mystery that remains alive in your
liturgies, liturgies that engage the human person in his or her entirety, that
sing of the beauty of salvation and evoke a sense of wonder at how God’s
majesty embraces our human frailty! It is likewise important to rediscover,
especially in the Christian West, a sense of the primacy of God, the importance
of mystagogy and the values so typical of Eastern spirituality: constant
intercession, penance, fasting, and weeping for one’s own sins and for those of
all humanity (penthos)! It is vital, then, that you preserve your traditions
without attenuating them, for the sake perhaps of practicality or convenience,
lest they be corrupted by the mentality of consumerism and utilitarianism.
Pope Leo addressed the Jubilee of Eastern
Churches, May 14, 2025
Francis/Bergoglio: In the
Orthodox Churches they have kept that pristine liturgy, so beautiful. We have
lost a bit the sense of adoration. They keep, they praise God, they adore God,
they sing, time doesn’t count. God is the center, and this is a richness that I
would like to say on this occasion in which you ask me this question. Once,
speaking of the Western Church, of Western Europe, especially the Church that
has grown most, they said this phrase to me: “Lux ex oriente, ex occidente
luxus.” Consumerism, wellbeing, have done us so much harm. Instead you
keep this beauty of God at the center, the reference. When one reads
Dostoyevsky – I believe that for us all he must be an author to read and
reread, because he has wisdom – one perceives what the Russian spirit is, the
Eastern spirit. It’s something that will do us so much good. We are in need of
this renewal, of this fresh air of the East, of this light of the East. John
Paul II wrote it in his Letter. But so many times the luxus of the
West makes us lose the horizon. I don’t know, it came to me to say this. Thank
you.
Pope Francis, at the beginning of his
pontificate, posted by Rorate Caeli
COMMENT: What Pope Leo has to say is good but
what the late heretic Francis/Bergoglio said was, although muddled, good as
well. Regarding Pope Leo we have a pope
that has no track record of ever defending the Catholic faith against her
enemies. The best we can say is that his
record of failing to defend the faithful from homosexual predators is not as
bad as others but nothing to recommend him. It is now documented that he shared
Francis/Bergoglio's devotion to the pagan goddess Pachamana. This is a man who
owes his ecclesiastical preferment to Francis/Bergoglio. It was Francis/Bergoglio who made him a
bishop, a cardinal, and appointed the cardinals who elected him pope. It is
very unlikely that his success occurred without him being thoroughly vetted. We
must pray for Pope Leo as we did for Francis/Bergoglio but always remember the
primacy of the faith and our obligations to God.
SSPX
and the Evolution of Catholic Dogma: CCC goes from ‘NOT engraved in stone’
to ‘engraved in stone’ in 28 years! Is the SSPX ‘maturing’ or growing
senile?
“The Catechism of the
Catholic Church is a non-Catholic catechism.” SSPX position,
1994
“Cardinal Reinhard Marx declared in an interview published on March 31,
2022 in the newspaper Stern, that The Catechism of the Catholic Church ‘is
not engraved in stone’ and that, consequently, ‘one can doubt what it says.’ In
itself, this proposition is aberrant….
The catechism is nothing other than the teaching of the Church, dogmatic
and moral, made available to the faithful.” SSPX position 2022
MAY MAGNIFICAT
May is Mary's month, and
I
Muse at that and wonder why:
Her feasts follow reason,
Dated due to season—
Candlemas, Lady Day;
But the Lady Month, May,
Why fasten that upon her,
With a feasting in her honour?
Is it only its being brighter
Than the most are must delight her?
Is it opportunest
And flowers finds soonest?
Ask of her, the mighty mother:
Her reply puts this other
Question: What is Spring?—
Growth in every thing—
Flesh and fleece, fur and feather,
Grass and greenworld all together;
Star-eyed strawberry-breasted
Throstle above her nested
Cluster of bugle blue eggs thin
Forms and warms the life within;
And bird and blossom swell
In sod or sheath or shell.
All things rising, all things
sizing
Mary sees, sympathising
With that world of good,
Nature's motherhood.
Their magnifying of each its kind
With delight calls to mind
How she did in her stored
Magnify the Lord.
Well but there was more than this:
Spring's universal bliss
Much, had much to say
To offering Mary May.
When drop-of-blood-and-foam-dapple
Bloom lights the orchard-apple
And thicket and thorp
are merry
With silver-surfed cherry
And azuring-over greybell makes
Wood banks and brakes
wash wet like lakes
And magic cuckoocall
Caps, clears, and clinches all—
This ecstasy all through
mothering earth
Tells Mary her mirth till Christ's birth
To remember and exultation
In God who was her salvation.
Rev. Gerard Manley
Hopkins, S. J.
Remember in your charity:
Gene Peters asks our prayers
for the spiritual welfare of Bev Wood
and Bonnie Cormesser,
Mr. & Mrs. Hall request
prayers for the health of their daughter, Erika
Smith,
Drews request your prayers
for Phyllis Virgil, for her
health and spirital welfare,
For Anthony Niekrewicz, spiritual and temporal welfare is the
petition of all the members of Ss. Peter & Paul,
Mary Lou Loftus' aunt, Susan Hendricks, who is gravely
ill after emergency surgery,
Fred Holder, for his spiritual and physical welfare,
Thomas Soul, a nursing home patient who has suffered a
stroke,
Donna Kallal, a dear friend of the Schiltz family who is
dying,
Philip Thees requests our
prayers for the heath of Mary Glatz
and Lenny and Agnus Messineo,
For the welfare of Aaron, a York resident in need
of conversion,
For the spiritual welfare of Margaret Connelly is the
petition of Camilla Meiser,
Linda Boyd, for her health,
Pete Schiffbauer, a cousin of Monic Bandlow
who is gravely ill,
Joan R. Barr, the widow of F. Donald Barr who died March
7, they were married 70 years
Cole Schneider, prayers for his welfare are
requested by Camilla Meiser,
JoAnn Niekrewicz, for her recovery from a
recent fall and shoulder injury,
The Drews ask prayers for the
spiritual and physical welfare of Robert
Carballo,
Conversion of Jack Gentry, the nephew of
Camilla Meiser,
For Sr. Maria Junipera, who took her final vows as a nun with
the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, New Hampshire April 8,
Stephen Bryan, the brother of a devout Catholic religious,
for his spiritual welfare,
Marie Kolinsky, for her health and spiritual welfare is the
petition of her family,
Gene Peters requests our
prayers for the conversion of Shirley
Young and Carl Loy
who are dying, the conversion of Dawn
Keithley and Nate Schaeffer,
Rev. Leo Carley, an eighty-nine year old priest faithful to
Catholic tradition, who is seriously ill,
For the recovery of Hayden Yanchek, the grandson of
Francis Yanchek, injured in a farming accident,
Maureen Nies, for the recovery of her health is the petition
of Camilla Meiser,
Daniel Vargs, for his health is the petition of his parents,
Art Noel, for the restoration of his health,
For the welfare of Peg Berry and her husband, Bill,
Marianne Connelly asks
prayers for Chris Foley, who is
gravely ill, and the welfare of his wife, Mary
Beth,
The spiritual welfare of the Sal & Maria Messineo family
is the petition of the Drew’s,
Liz Agosta, who is seriously ill, for her spiritual and
temporal welfare,
Warren Hoffman, a long time member of our
Mission who is in failing health,
Patrick Boyle, for the recovery of his health and his
spiritual welfare,
For the spiritual welfare of
the Drew children,
Monica Bandlow request our
prayers for the welfare of Ray who
is recovering from a MVA, and his daughter, Sonya, and Tera
Jean Kopczynski, who is in failing health, and for a good death for Mr. Howald, Kathy Simons, Regina Quinn, James Mulgrew, Ruth Beaucheane, John
Kopczynski, Roger & Mandy Owen
Peg Berry requests our
prayers for her brother, William
Habekost,
For the recently widowed, Maike Hickson, and her children,
For the spiritual welfare of
the Carmelite nuns in Fairfield, PA,
Geralyn Zagorski,
recovery of her health and spiritual welfare and the conversion of Randal
Pace is the petition of Philip Thees,
For
the grandson of Joe & Liz Agusta,
Fr.
Waters requests our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Elvira
Donaghy,
For
the health and conversion of Stephen Henderson,
Fr.
Paul DaDamio requests our prayers for the welfare of Rob Ward,
and his sister, Debra Wagaman,
Kaitlyn McDonald, for the recovery of her
health and spiritual welfare,
Roco Sbardella, for his health and spiritual welfare,
The Vargas’ request our
prayers for the spiritual welfare of their son, Nicholas,
Family, for the welfare of Lazarus Handley, his mother, Julia, and his brother, Raphael,
with Down’s Syndrome,
Fr. Waters requests prayers
for the spiritual and physical welfare of Frank
McKee,
Nancy Bennett, for the recovery of her
health,
For the spiritual welfare of Mark Roberts, a Catholic
faithful to tradition,
Michael Brigg requests our
prayers for the health of John Romeo,
The health and welfare of Gene Peters and his sons,
Conversion of Anton Schwartzmueller, is the
prayer request of his children,
Christine Kozin, for her health and spiritual
welfare,
Teresa Gonyea, for her conversion and health, is the
petition of her grandmother, Patricia McLaughlin,
For the health of Sonya Kolinsky,
Jackie Dougherty asks our
prayers for her brother, John Lee,
who is gravely ill,
For the health and spiritual
welfare, Meg Bradley, the
granddaughter of Rose Bradley,
Timothy & Crisara, a couple from Maryland have
requested our prayers for their spiritual welfare,
Celine Pilegaard, the seven year old daughter
of Cynthia Pilegaard, for her recovery from burn injuries,
Rafaela de Saravia, for her health and welfare,
Abbe Damien Dutertre, traditional Catholic priest
arrested by Montreal police while offering Mass,
Francis (Frank) X.
McLaughlin, for the recovery of his health,
Nicholas Pell, for his health and spiritual welfare is the
petition of Camilla Meizer,
Mary Kaye Petr, her health and welfare is petitioned by
Camilla Meizer,
The welfare of Excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò,
The welfare of Rev. Fr. Martin Skierka, who
produces the traditional Ordo in the U.S.,
For the health and welfare of
Katie Wess, John Gentry, Vincent
Bands, Todd Chairs, Susan Healy and James O’Gentry is the petition of
Camilia,
Marieann Reuter, recovery of her health, Kathy Kepner, for her health, Shane Cox, for his health,
requests of Philip Thees,
The Joseph Cox Family, their spiritual welfare,
For the health of Kim Cochran, the daughter-in-law
of Joseph and Brenda Cochran, the wife of their son Joshua,
Louie Verrecchio, Catholic apologist, who has
a health problem,
John Minidis, Jr. family, for
help in their spiritual trial,
Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual
welfare,
Regina (Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and
health,
Melissa Elena Levitt, her conversion, and welfare
of her children,
For the grace of a holy
death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,
Conversion of Annette Murowski, and her son Jimmy,
Brent Keith from Indiana has
petitioned our prayers for the Keith
Family,
The welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,
The spiritual welfare Robert Holmes Family,
For the spiritual and
temporal welfare of Irwin Kwiat,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers
for Elvira Donaghy,
Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco, for
her health and spiritual welfare,
Rende and Mary Mufide, a traditional Catholics
from India ask our prayers for her welfare and he family members, living and
deceased,
Mary Glatz, her health and the welfare of her family,
Barbara Harmon, who is ill,
Jason Green, a father of ten children, his health,
For the health and welfare of
Sorace family,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers
for the health and spiritual welfare of Brian
Abramowitz,
Thomas Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation
for their contribution to the beauty of our chapel,
John Rhoad, for his health and spiritual welfare,
Kathy Boyle, requests our prayers for her welfare,
Joyce Laughman and Robert Twist, for their conversions,
Michael J. Brigg & his family, who have helped with the
needs of the Mission,
Nancy Deegan, her welfare and conversion to the Catholic
Church,
Francis Paul Diaz, who was baptized at Ss.
Peter & Paul, asks our prayers for his spiritual welfare,
The conversion of Rene McFarland,
Lori Kerr, Cary Shipman and family, David Bash, Crystal and family, Larry
Reinhart, Costanzo Family, Kathy Scullen, Marilyn Bryant, Vicki Trahern and
Time Roe are the petitions of Gene Peters,
For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf,
Eckhard Ebert, and Fahnauer family,
Fr. Waters requests our
prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX,
and for Fr. Thomas Blute,
For the welfare of Fr. Paul DaDamio and Fr. William T.
Welsh,
The Drew’s ask our prayers
for the welfare of Joe & Tracey
Sentmanat family, Keith & Robert Drew, Christy Koziol & her children,
Fred Nesbit and Michael Nesbit
families, and Gene Peters Family, the John Manidis Family, the Sal Messinio
Family, Michael Proctor Family,
Ryan Boyle grandmother, Jane Boyle, who is failing health,
Mel Gibson and his family, please remember in our
prayers,
Rev. Timothy A. Hopkins
requested our prayers for the welfare of
his friend, Fr Jean-Luc
Lafitte,
Ebert’s request our prayers
for the Andreas & Jenna Ortner
Family,
Joyce Paglia has asked
prayers for George Richard Moore Sr.
& his children, and her brother, George Panell,
Philip Thees asks our prayers
for his family, for McLaughlin Family,
the welfare of Dan & Polly Weand,
the conversion of Sophia Herman,
Tony Rosky, the welfare Nancy Erdeck, the wife of
the late Deacon Erdeck, John Calasanctis, Tony Rosky, James Parvenski, Kathleen Gorry, health of mind and body of Cathy Farrar.
Pray for the Repose of the Souls:
For Jo Ann Niekrewicz, our dear friend, died March 1, for the
blessed repose of her soul is the petition of all the members of Ss. Peter
& Paul,
Shirley Rotondo, died February 2-26, and Louisa McBride, died February
27, is the petition of Monica Bandlow,
Katherine Veronica Wedel, the mother of Mary Baer,
died February 6,
James Condit, Jr., traditional Catholic
activist, died December 27,
Beverly Harmon, died December 16, requested
by the Sentmanat family,
Rev. Nicholas DeProspero, a faithful Ruthenian Eastern
rite Catholic priest, died December 10,
Monica Bandlow petitions our
prayers for her friend, Patricia
Messineo, died November 28,
Guy Berthault, died November 23, a great Catholic scientist
whose work in sedimentology destrooyed Lyellian geology and the theory of
evolution,
Thomas Soul, died November 8 after receiving the last rites
of the Church,
Etta Van Der Werken, a dear friend of Barbara
Taffe, died 10-21-2025,
Gary Potter, Catholic writer and apologist and great long
time defender of Catholic doctrine and tradition, died 9-9-2025,
Elizabeth Gorska, who died September 9, a
relative of Lidia Gjec,
Camilia Meiser request our
prayers for the souls of Peggy
Cummings and Elizabeth Genter,
Thomas A. Nelson, founder of TAN Books and
Publishers, died August 16,
Juan D. Gonzalez, our former sacristan,
choir director, and dear friend, died July 23,
Sal Messineo, a faithful traditional Catholic, died
Augsut 14,
Patricia Askew, a friend of Camilla Meiser,
died July 3,
Joseph Kerney, a young man whose family
provided the statues of the Sacred Heart, Mary and Joseph in our sanctuary,
died May 30,
Louis Richard Ajlouny, the father of Randa Sharpe,
died May 15,
Rene Guidicessi, died April 25, an old
friend of the Drews,
F. Donald Barr, died March 7 at 94 years of
age, co-founder of Robert Francis Religious Goods, in Philadelphia,
Dr. David Allen White, a well known defender of the
Catholic faith, died February 11,
Bishop Richard Williamson, a renowned defender of the
Catholic faith and most charitable gentleman, died January 29,
Rodolfo Alberto Lacayo, a cousin of Claudia Drew,
died January 4,
Genieve Wallace, died Christmas day,
Ruth Marion Beaucheane, died
December 8, is the petition of Monica Bandlow,
Ana Maria Salcedo, the sister of
Mario Fiol, died November 26,
Fr. Johin Cardaro, a traditional Catholic priest who was found dead in
his home November 2,
Robert Carballo asks that we remember his parents, Roberto & Aida
Carballo, and his friend, David Duclos, who died April 15,
Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais who may have been responsible for
preventing the SSPX's public reconciliation with Rome in 2012, died October 8,
Lorna Edwards, our dear friend and loyal supporter of this
Mission, died August 10,
Lois Petti, died July 28 two hours after receiving the
Last Sacraments from Fr. Waters,
Wolfgang Smith, a renowned Catholic scholar,
mathematician, scientist, philosopher, who helped the Kolbe Center for the
Study of Creation, died July 19,
Willaim Glatz, a good and faithful Catholic, died July 17,
Alicio Gonzalez, a Catholic who asked for the
sacrament of Extreme Unction, unfortunately did not receive, died July 9,
John Zavodny, a
faithful Catholic who died wearing the scapular of Mt Carmel on the first
Saturday of May, requested by Phyllis Virgil,
Catherine Martel, a lapsed Catholic, received
the last sacraments in a good disposition from Fr. Waters on March 25 and died
on April 4,
Father Basilio Méramo, a faithful priest, died
March 5, removed from the SSPX for opposing their accommodation with Rome,
Julia McDonald, the mother of Kyle McDonald, died March 1,
Agnus Melnick, died February 28, a long time faithful
Catholic and mother of eight children, including a traditional priest,
Kathryn (Drew) Lederhos, of
Wellesley, MA, died February 3, 2024,
Chris Foley, the brother of Mary Lou
Loftus, died February 1,
Louis Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, died January
30,
Fr. James Louis Albert Campbell, a faithful priest who died
December 18 at 91 years of age, and her mother and father, Teresa and Thomas Maher,
Charles Harmon, the father of Tracey Sentmanet, died October
1, after receiving the rites of the Church,
Fr. Waters requests prayers
for Elvira Donaghy, his
friend and former secretary a for Bishop Gerado Zendejas, died September 9,
Robert Hickson, a faithful Catholic apologist who died
Septembber 2,
Monica Bandlow requests
prayers for her parents, Thomas &
Teresa Maher, her husband, William
Bandlow, her brother-in-law, Richard
Bandlow, her sister, Mary
Maher, Fr. Christopher Darby,
SSPX, who died March 17, Robert Byrne, Michelle Donofrio McDowell,
her cousin, Patricia Fabyanic,
the Prefect of Our Lady’s Sodality, March 8, for John Pfeiffer who died August 20, Theresa Hanley, died July 23, Fr. Juan-Carlos Iscara, SSPX, who died December 20, John Kinney, died December 21, Willaim Price, Jr., and Robert Arch Ward,
died January 10, and Myra,
killed in a MVA June 6,
John Sharpe, Sr., died July 20,
Maria Paulette Salazar, died June 6,
Dale Kinsey requests prayers
for his wife, Katherine Kinsey,
died May 17,
Richard Giles, who died April 29, the father of Traci
Sentmanat who converted to the Catholic faith last All Saints' Day,
Joseph Sparks, a devout and faithful Catholic to tradition
died February 25,
Joyce Paglia, died January 21, and Anthony Paglia, died January 28,
who were responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,
Joe Sentmanet request prayers
for Richard Giles and Claude Harmon who converted to
the Catholic faith shortly before their deaths,
Rodolfo Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew,
died January 9,
Elizabeth Agosta petitions
our prayers for Joseph Napolitano,
her brother, who died January 2,
Michael Dulisse, died on December 26,
Michael Proctor, a close friend of the Drews,
died November 9,
Richard Anthony Giles, the father-in-law of Joe
Sentmanat converted to the Catholic faith on All Saints Day, died November 5,
Robert Kolinsky, the husband of Sonja, died September 18,
Gabriel Schiltz, the daughter of Thomas & Gay Schiltz,
died August 21,
Mary Dimmel, the mother –in-law of
Victoria Drew Dimmel, died July 18,
Michael Nesbit, the brother-in-law and dear friend of the
Drew's, died July 14,
Thomas Thees, the brother of Philip, died
June 19,
Carmen Ragonese,
died June 22,
Juanita Mohler, a friend of Camella Meiser,
died June 14,
Kathleen Elias, died February 14,
Hernan Ortiz, the brother of Fr. Juan
Carlos Ortiz, died February 3,
Mary Ann Boyle, the mother of a second order Dominican nun, a
first order Dominican priest, and a SSPX priest, died January 24,
John DeMarco, who attended this Mission in
the past, died January23,
Charles O’Brien, the father of Marlene Cox,
died December 30,
Mufide Rende requests our
prayers for the repose of the souls of her parents, Mehmet & Nedime,
Kathleen Donelly, died December 29 at 91
years of age, ran the CorMariae website,
Matthew O'Hare, most faithful Catholic, died at age 40 on
November 30,
Rev. Patrick J. Perez, a
Catholic priest faithful to tradition, pastor Our Lady Help of Christians,
Garden Grove, CA, November 19,
Elizabeth Benedek, died December 14, requested
by her niece, Agnes Vollkommer,
Dolores Smith and Richard Costello, faithful
Catholics, died November,
Frank D’Agustino, a friend of Philp Thees,
died November 8,
Fr. Dominique Bourmaud, of
the SSPX, Prior of St. Vincent in Kansas City, died September 4,
Pablo Daniel Silva, the brother of Elizabeth
Vargas, died August 18,
Rose Bradley, a member of Ss. Peter &
Paul, died July 14,
Patricia Ellias, died June 1, recently returned
to the Church died with the sacraments and wearing the brown scapular,
Joan Devlin, the sister-in-law of Rose Bradley, died May
18,
William Muligan, died April 29, two days after
receiving the last sacraments,
Robert Petti, died March 19, the day after receiving
the last sacraments,
Mark McDonald, the father of Kyle, who died
December 26,
Perla Otero, died December 2020, Leyla Otero, January 2021, cousins of Claudia Drew,
Mehmet Rende, died December 12, who was the
father of Mary Mufide,
Joseph Gravish, died November 26, 100 year
old WWII veteran and daily communicant,
Jerome McAdams, the father of, died November 30,
Rev. James O’Hara, died November 8, requested by
Alex Estrada,
Elizabeth Batko, the sacristan at St. John the
Baptist in Pottstown for over 40 years, died on First Saturday November 7
wearing the brown scapular,
William Cox, the father of Joseph Cox, who
died September 3,
James Larson, Catholic apologists, author
of War Against Being publication,
died July 6, 2020,
Hutton Gibson, died May 12,
Sr. Regina Cordis, Immaculate Heart of Mary
religious for sixty-five years, died May 12,
Leslie Joan Matatics, devoted
Catholic wife and mother of nine children, died March 24,
Victoria Zelaya, the sister-in-law of Claudia
Drew, died March 20,
Ricardo DeSilva, died November 16, our
prayers requested by his brother, Henry DeSilva,
Rev. Fr. Joseph F. Collins, died April 27, 2019 to whom
we are indebted for establishing our traditional pre-Bugnini Holy Week in all its beauty,
Roland H. Allard, a friend of the Drew’s, died
September 28,
Stephen Cagorski and John Bogda, who both died wearing the brown scapular,
Cecilia LeBow, a most faithful Catholic,
Rose Cuono, died Oct 23,
Patrick Rowen, died March 25, and his brother, Daniel Rowen, died May 15,
Sandra Peters, the wife of Gene Peters, who died June 10
receiving the sacraments and wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Rev. Francis Slupski, a priest who kept the
Catholic faith and its immemorial traditions, died May 14,
Martha Mochan, the sister of Philip Thees, died April 8,
George Kirsch, our good friend and supporter of this
Mission, died February 15,
For Fr. Paul J. Theisz, died October 17, is the petition of Fr.
Waters,
Fr. Mecurio Fregapane, died Jan 12, was not a
traditional priest but always charitable,
Fr. Casimir Peterson, a priest who often offered
the Mass in our chapel and provided us with sound advice, died December 4,
Fr. Constantine Bellasarius, a
faithful and always charitable Eastern Rite Catholic Melkite priest, who left
the Roman rite, died November 27,
Christian Villegas, a motor vehicle accident,
his brother, Michael, requests our prayers,
John Vennari, the former editor of Catholic Family News,
and for his family’s welfare, April 4,
Mary Butler, the aunt of Fr. Samuel Waters, died October
17,
Joseph DeMarco, the nephew of John DeMarco, died October 3,
John Fergale, died September 25 after receiving the traditional
sacramental rites of the Church wearing the brown scapular,
John Gabor, the brother of Donna Marbach, died September
9,
Fr. Eugene Dougherty, a faithful priest, fittingly
died on the Nativity of the BVM after receiving the traditional Catholic
sacraments,
Phyllis Schlafly, died September 5,
Helen Mackewicz, died August 14,
Mark A. Wonderlin, who died August 2,
Fr. Carl Cebollero, a faithful priest to
tradition who was a friend of Fr. Waters and Fr. DeMaio,
Jessica Cortes, a young mother of ten who died June 12,
Frances Toriello, a life-long Catholic faithful
to tradition, died June3, the feast of the Sacred Heart, and her husband Dan, died in 1985,
John McLaughlin, a friend of the Drew’s, died
May 22,
Angela Montesano, who died April 30, and her
husband, Salvatore, who died
in July 3, 2013,
Charles Schultz, died
April 5, left behind nine children and many grandchildren, all traditional
Catholics,
Esperanza Lopez de Callejas,
the aunt of Claudia Drew, died March 15,
Fr. Edgardo Suelo, a
faithful priest defending our traditions who was working with Fr. Francois
Chazal in the Philippines, died February 19,
Conde McGinley, a
long time laborer for the traditional faith, died February 12, at 96 years,
The
Drew family requests your prayers for Ida Fernandez and
Rita Kelley, parishioners at St. Jude,
Fr. Stephen Somerville, a traditional priest who
repented from his work with the Novus Ordo English translation, died December
12,
Fr. Arturo DeMaio, a priest that helped this
Mission with the sacraments and his invaluable advice, died December 2,
J. Paul Carswell, died October 15, 2015,
Solange Hertz, a great defender of our Catholic faith, died
October 3, the First Saturday of the month,
Paula P. Haigh, died October 22, a great defender of our
Catholic faith in philosophy and natural science,
Gabriella Whalin, the mother of Gabriella
Schiltz, who died August 25,
Mary Catherine Sick, 14 year old from a large
traditional Catholic family, died August 25,
Fr. Paul Trinchard, a traditional Catholic
priest, died August 25,
Stephen J. Melnick, Jr., died on August 21, a long-time
faithful traditional Catholic husband and father, from Philadelphia,
Patricia Estrada, died July 29, her son Alex
petitions our prayers for her soul,
Fr. Nicholas Gruner, a devoted priest &
faithful defender of Blessed Virgin Mary and her Fatima message, died April 29,
Sarah E. Shindle, the grandmother of Richard
Shindle, died April 26,
Madeline Vennari, the mother of John Vennari,
died December 19,
Salvador Baca Callejas, the uncle of Claudia Drew,
died December 13,
Robert Gomez, who died in a motor vehicle accident
November 29,
Catherine Dunn, died September 15,
Anthony Fraser, the son of Hamish Fraser, died August 28,
Jeannette Rhoad, the grandmother of Devin Rhoad, who died
August 24,
John Thees, the uncle of Philip Thees, died August 9,
Sarah Harkins, 32 year-old mother of four
children, died July 28,
Msgr. Donald Adams, who offered the Indult Mass,
died April 1996,
Anita Lopez, the aunt of Claudia Drew,
Fr. Kenneth Walker, a young traditional priest
of the FSSP who was murdered in Phoenix June 11,
Fr. Waters petitions our
prayers for Gilberte Violette,
the mother of Fr. Violette, who died May 6,
Pete Hays petitions our
prayers for his brothers, Michael,
died May 9, and James, died
October 20, his sister, Rebecca, died March17, and his mother, Lorraine Hayes who died May 4,
Philip Marbach, the father of Paul Marbach who was the
coordinator at St. Jude in Philadelphia, died April 21,
Richard Slaughtery, the elderly sacristan for
the SSPX chapel in Kansas City, died April 13,
Bernedette Marie Evans nee Toriello, the daughter of Daniel
Toriello, died March 31, a faithful Catholic who suffered many years with
MS,
Natalie Cagorski, died march 23,
Anita Lopez de Lacayo, the aunt of Claudia Drew,
who died March 21,
Mario Palmaro, Catholic lawyer, bioethicist and professor,
apologist, died March 9, welfare of his widow and children,
Daniel Boyle, the uncle of Ryan Boyle,
died March 4,
Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died on January 25,
Arthur Harmon, died January 18,
Fr. Waters petitions our
prayers for the soul of Jeanne
DeRuyscher, who died January 17,
Joseph Proctor, died January 10,
Susan Scott, a devote traditional Catholic who made the
vestments for our Infant of Prague statue, died January 8,
Brother Leonard Mary, M.I.C.M., (Fred Farrell), an early supporter and
friend of Fr. Leonard Feeney, died November 23,
John Fergale, requests our prayers for his sister Connie,
who died December 19,
Jim Capaldi, died December 15,
Brinton Creager, the son of Elizabeth Carpenter, died December
10,
Christopher Lussos, age 27, the father of one
child with an expecting wife, died November 15,
Jarett Ebeyer, 16 year old who died in his sleep, November
17, at the request of the Kolinsky’s,
Catherine Nienaber, the mother of nine children,
the youngest three years of age, killed in MVA after Mass, 10-29,
Nancy Aldera, the sister of Frances Toriello, died October
11, 2013 at 105 years of age,
Mary Rita Schiltz, the mother of Thomas
Schiltz, who died August 27,
William H. (Teddy) Kennedy, Catholic author of
Lucifer’s Lodge, died August 14, age 49, cause of death unknown,
Alfred Mercier, the father of David Mercier, who died August
12,
The Robert Kolinsky asks our
prayers for his friend, George
Curilla, who died August 23,
John Cuono, who had attended Mass at our Mission in the past,
died August 11,
Raymond Peterson, died July 28, and Paul Peterson, died February 19,
the brothers of Fr. Casimir Peterson,
Margaret Brillhart, who died July 20,
Msgr. Joseph J. McDonnell, a priest from the diocese
of Des Moines, who died June 8,
Patrick Henry Omlor, who
wrote Questioning The Validity of the
Masses using the New, All English Canon, and for a series of newsletters
which were published as The Robber Church, died May 2, the feast of St Athanasius,
Bishop Joseph McFadden, died unexpectedly May 2,
Timothy Foley, the brother-in-law of Michelle Marbach
Folley, who died in April,
William Sanders, the uncle of Don Rhoad, who died April 2,
Gene Peters ask our prayers
for the repose of the soul of Mark
Polaschek, who died March 22,
Eduardo Gomez Lopez, the uncle of Claudia Drew,
February 28,
Cecelia Thees, died February 24,
Elizabeth Marie Gerads, a nineteen year old, the
oldest of twelve children, who died February 6,
Michael Schwartz, the co-author with Fr.
Enrique Rueda of “Gays, Aids, and You,” died February 3,
Stanley W. Moore, passed away in December 16,
and Gerard (Jerry) R. Pitman, who died January 19, who attended this Mission in
the past,
Louis Fragale, who died December 25,
Fr. Luigi Villa, Th.D.
author of Vatican II About Face! detailing the heresies of Vatican II, died
November 18 at the age of 95,
Rev. Michael Jarecki, a faithful traditional
Catholic priest who died October 22,
Jennie
Salaneck,
died September 19 at 95 years of age, a devout and faithful Catholic all her
life,
Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,
Cynthia (Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the mother of nine
children, four who are still at home, died August 19,
Stanley Spahalski, who died October 20, and his
wife, Regina Spahalski, who
died June 24, and for the soul of Francis
Lester, her son,
Julia Atkinson, who died April 30,
Antonio P. Garcia, who died January 6, 2012
and the welfare of his teenage children, Andriana and Quentin,
Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who died February 27,
Fr. Timothy A. Hopkins, of the National Shrine of
St. Philomena, in Miami, November 2,
Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the welfare of his
wife, Delores,
Eduardo Cepeda, who died January 26,
Larry Young, the 47 year old father of twelve who died
December 10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their family,
Sister Mary Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the
Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, died December 16,
Joeseph Elias, who died on September 28,
William, the brother of Fr. Waters, who died September 7,
Donald Tonelli, died August 1,
Rev. Fr. Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great
defender of Catholic Truth, died January 25, 2006,
Emma Colasanti, who died May 29,
Mary Dullesse, who died April 12, a Catholic convert who
died wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre Ebert, who died
April 7, Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,
Philip D. Barr, died March 5, and the welfare of his
family,
Judith Irene Kenealy, the mother of Joyce Paglia,
who died February 23, and her son, George Richard Moore, who died May 14,
For Joe Sobran who died September 30,
Fr. Hector Bolduc, a great and faithful priest,
died, September 10, 2012,
James & Jean Rowan and their sons, Patrick & Daniel,
John Vennari asks our prayers
for Dr. Raphael Waters who
died August 26,
Stanley Bodalsky, the father of Mary Ann
Boyle who died June 25,
Mary Isabel Kilfoyle Humphreys, a former York resident and
friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6,
Rev. John Campion, who offered the traditional
Mass for us every first Friday until forbidden to do so by Bishop Dattilo, died
May 1,
Joseph Montagne, who died May 5,
For Margaret Vagedes, the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died
January 6,
Fr. Michael Shear, a Byzantine rite Catholic
priest, died August 17, 2006,
Fr. James Francis Wathen, died November 7, 2006,
author of The Great Sacrilege and Who Shall Ascend?, a great defender of
dogma and liturgical purity,
Fr. Enrique Rueda, who died December 14, 2009,
to whom our Mission is indebted,
Fr. Peterson asks to
remember, Leonard Edward Peterson,
his cousin, Wanda, Angelica
Franquelli, and the six priests ordained with him.
Philip Thees petitions our
prayers for Beverly Romanick, Deacon
Michael Erdeck, Henry J. Phillips, Grace Prestano, Connie DiMaggio, Elizabeth
Thorhas, Elizabeth Thees, Theresa Feraker, Hellen Pestrock, and James &
Rose Gomata, and Kathleen
Heinbach,
Fr. Didier Bonneterre, the author of The
Liturgical Movement, and Fr. John Peek, both were traditional priests,
Brother Francis, MICM, the superior of the Slaves
of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, NH, who died September 5,
Rodolfo Zelaya Montealegre, the father of Claudia Drew,
who died May 24,
Rev. Francis Clifford, a devout and humble
traditional priest, who died on March 7,
Benjamin Sorace, the uncle of Sonja Kolinsky.
In 2022 there were 42,000 nuns left
in the United States with an average age of over 80 years. Only 1% of these
nuns were under 40 years of age.
"Love Cannot Be Silenced"? - With a decline of
73% since Vatican II and an average age of 74 years, we will soon be
entertained by the silence of the grave!
The Vanishing of the Nuns
Michael Winerip | December 2, 2012
In 1965, when the average age of a baby boomer
was 10, there were 180,000 nuns in the United States. Today there are about
56,000. But even more dramatic than this decline is the age of the average
Roman Catholic sister — 74 years old.
Will there even be nuns in the church by the
time the millennials reach middle age? Will the boomers be the last generation
to know nuns as a large and powerful force in American Catholicism?
Sister Kathy Sherman of LaGrange Park, Ill.,
at 60, a young nun by today’s standards, came of age during the Vietnam War,
playing antiwar protest songs on her guitar. These days, Sister Sherman — whose
voice sounds a lot like Judy Collins — has become known for a protest song
she’s written (Love Cannot Be Silenced),
aimed at the Vatican’s efforts to rein in American nuns.
Soldier from the Israeli Army desecrates image of Jesus Christ during
their current invasion of southern Lebanon.
This is what they do when not killing women and children and other
non-combatants.
Novus
Ordo "Saint" John Paul II taught the novel doctrine that by the
Incarnation, when the "Word was made flesh," all men became
"Son(s) of the living God" regardless of faith or reception of the
sacraments.
All of you who are still seeking God, all of you who already have the
inestimable good fortune to believe, and also you who are tormented by doubt:
please listen once again, today in this sacred place, to the words uttered by
Simon Peter. In those words is the faith of the Church. In those same words is
the new truth, indeed, the ultimate and definitive truth about man: the son of
the living God—"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
John Paul II, first homily, October 27, 1978
“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes,
professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not
only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal
life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and
his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their
lives.., and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in
alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has
persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441, ex cathedra
On
the Necessity of the Sacrament Baptism for Salvation: St. Gregory Nazianzen
“If you were able to judge a man who intends to commit murder solely by
his intention and without any act of murder, then you could likewise reckon as
baptized one who desired baptism. But, since you cannot do the former, how can
you do the latter? If you prefer, we will put it this way: If, in your opinion,
desire has equal power with actual baptism, then make the same judgment in
regard to glory. You would then be satisfied to desire glory, as though that
longing itself were glory. Do you suffer any damage by not attaining the actual
glory, as long as you have a desire for it? I cannot see it!”
St. Gregory Nazianzen, Bishop, Confessor, Father & Doctor of the
Church, Oration on Divine Light
Doctrine
may develop in itself in "due proportion".... with "no variety
of its definition." Dogma cannot develop in itself because its
"proportion" and "definition" are fixed by God. It can only
develop in its implications!
“Shall we then have no advancement of
religion in the Church of Christ? Let us have it indeed, and the greatest . .
. But yet in such sort that it be truly
an advancement of faith, not a change (sed
ita tamen ut vere profectus sit ille fidel, non permutatio), seeing that it
is the nature of an advancement, that in itself each thing (severally) grow
greater, but of a change that something be turned from one thing into another.
. . . Let the soul’s religion imitate
the law of the body, which, as years go on, develops indeed and opens out its
due proportions, and yet remains identically what it was. . . . Small are a baby’s limbs, a youth’s are
larger, yet they are the same. . . . So
also the doctrine of the Christian religion must follow those laws of
advancement; namely, that with years it be consolidated, with time it be
expanded, with age it be exalted, yet remain uncorrupt and untouched, and be
full and perfect in all the proportions of each of its parts, and with all its
members, as it were, and proper senses; that it admit no change besides,
sustain no loss of its propriety, no variety of its definition. Wherefore,
whatsoever in this Church, God’s husbandry, has by the faith of our fathers
been sown, that same must be cultivated by the industry of their children, that
same flourish and ripen, that same advance and be perfected.”
St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium, nfl. 28, 29
“The
doctrine which God has revealed has not been proposed as some philosophical
discovery to be perfected by the wit of man, but has been entrusted to Christ’s
Spouse as a Divine deposit to be faithfully guarded and infallibly declared.
Hence sacred dogmas must ever be understood in the sense once for all (semel) declared by Holy Mother Church;
and never must that sense be abandoned under pretext of profounder knowledge
(altioris intelligentiae).”
Vatican Council I, Sess. iii. chap. 4
DOGMA AND DEVOTION or the Worshop of God 'in Spirit and
in Truth'
Now our Divine Lord, speaking to the woman of Samaria, said, ‘You adore
that which you know not;’ because they were ‘an idolatrous people, of mixed
race, partly of Israel, partly of the nations brought and planted in a portion
of the Promised Land. They had intermarried with the people of Israel, they had
received the books of the Pentateuch, and they had a sort of fragmentary
knowledge of the old revelation; but they did not rightly know the True God; and so much as they did know of
the True God, they did not know truly. Therefore they could not worship Him ‘in
spirit and in truth.’ For this cause our Divine Lord said, ‘You worship
that which you know not;’ and He then further said, ‘We adore that which we
know, for salvation is of the Jews.’ The full and pure light of revelation is
in Jerusalem. The true knowledge of the True God is with us; and yet the time
is coming when ‘they that adore shall adore neither in this mountain nor in
Jerusalem, but everywhere in spirit and in truth.’
From these words I draw one
conclusion, namely, that knowledge is the first and vital condition of all true
worship. You will remember how S.
Paul at Athens found an altar ‘to the unknown God,’ and how he commended the people
for their intentions of piety, but reproved them for their ignorance. He said,
‘Him whom you ignorantly worship, Him I declare unto you.’ Without knowledge
there can be no adoration ‘in spirit and in truth;’ and just in the measure of
our knowledge will our adoration be more or less perfect, that is, intelligent
and spiritual. If our knowledge be full and perfect, so will our adoration be.
From this let us draw two consequences, and then pass on.
The first is this. How great is the superstition of those who for
centuries have pleased themselves by accusing the Catholic Church of teaching
that ‘ignorance is the mother of devotion.’ The other consequence is: that the
mother of all true knowledge relating to God, and therefore the mother of all
true worship, is the Holy Catholic Church alone. Is it not a masterpiece of
craft that the father of lies should have so darkened the understandings of our
adversaries as to lead them into the profound superstition of believing that we
keep people in ignorance in order to make them devout? My purpose, then, will be to trace out the
connection between what the world scornfully calls dogma and devotion, or the
worship of God ‘in spirit and in truth.’
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, The Glories of the Sacred Heart, Chapter
3, Dogma, the Source of Devotion
DOGMA: "A
genuine message from the First Cause of the universe"
If the teaching proposed by the Church as dogma is not actually and
really the doctrine supernaturally revealed by God through Jesus Christ Our Lord,
[........]then there could be nothing more pitifully inane than the work of the
Catholic Magisterium. [........]
This common basis of the false doctrinal Americanism and of the Modernist
heresy is, like doctrinal indifferentism itself, ultimately a rejection of Catholic
dogma as a genuine supernatural message or communication from the living God
Himself. It would seem impossible for anyone to be blasphemous or silly enough
to be convinced, on the one hand, that the dogmatic message of the Catholic Church
is actually a locutio
Dei ad homines, and to
imagine, on the other hand, that he, a mere creature, could in some way improve
that teaching or make it more respectable. The very fact that a man would be so rash as to attempt
to bring the dogma of the Church up to date, or to make it more acceptable to
those who are not privileged to be members of the true Church, indicates that
this individual is not actually and profoundly convinced that this dogmatic
teaching of the Catholic Church is a supernatural communication from the living
and Triune God, the Lord and Creator of heaven and earth. It would be the
height of blasphemy knowingly to set out to improve or to bring up to date what
one would seriously consider a genuine message from the First Cause of the
universe.
Fr. Joseph C. Fenton, American Ecclesiastical Review, Sacrorum Antistitum and the Background of the Oath Against
Modernism
DOGMA, the proximate rule of faith for all the faithful:
According to Fr. Joseph Fenton, editor of
the American Ecclesiastical Review:
·
Dogmas
are “truths,” not precepts.
·
Dogmas
are “teachings we are obliged to believe with the assent of divine and Catholic
faith.”
·
Dogmas
are defined “truths” which the “apostles of Jesus Christ preached to His
Church.”
·
Dogmas
are “truths” that have been “supernaturally communicated or revealed by God
Himself.”
·
Dogmas
“constitute the central or primary object of the Church’s infallible teaching
activity.”
A dogma is by definition immutable and
unchangeable. The denial of any dogma makes one a heretic by definition.
·
Hence,
also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained,
which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession
from that meaning under the specious name of deeper understanding.
Therefore... let the understanding... be solely in its own genus, namely the
same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding. Vatican I, Dei Filius
·
Let
nothing of the truths that have been defined ( i.e.: dogmas) be lessened,
nothing altered, nothing added; but let them be preserved intact, in word and
meaning. Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari
Vos
·
[Dogma
must be understood] by the very sense by which it is defined and must be held to
be by itself a sufficient demonstration, very sure and adapter to all the
faithful. Ven. Pope Pius IX, Inter
Gravissimas, 1870
·
If anyone
shall have said that it is possible that to the dogmas declared by the Church a
meaning must sometimes be attributed according to the progress of knowledge,
different from what the Church has understood and understands: let him be
anathema. Vatican I, Dei Filius
·
[Regarding
dogma] nothing else is to be believed other than the words; and I hold that
this absolute and unchangeable truth, which was preached by the Apostles from
the earliest times, is to be understood in no other way than by the
words. Oath Against Modernism
Sources of the corruption of Catholic DOGMA:
Baptism is Necessary for both justification and salvation!
By which words, a description of the
Justification of the impious is indicated, as being a translation, from that
state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and
of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our
Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be
effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is
written; unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot
enter into the Kingdom of God. [.....]
The
instrumental cause (of justification) is the sacrament of baptism, which is the
sacrament of faith, without which (faith) no man was ever justified. We
must believe that to those justified nothing more is wanting from being
considered as having satisfied the divine law by those works which have been
done in God according to the state of this life, and as having truly merited
eternal life to be obtained in its own time (if they shall have departed this
life in grace) [Rev. 14:13] (Denz. 809).
Council of Trent, Decree on Justification, copied from Vatican source
Comment: Neo-modernist as a
rule habitually take Catholic doctrinal teaching out of context. They even do
this with dogma which never admits to contextualization. Doctrinal examples can
be easily provided where Neo-modernist have taken a single sentence out of a
paragraph and given it a meaning that contradicts the paragraph from which it
was taken. In this example they take a word out of context to imply an
overturning of the intentional meaning of the sentence from which it is taken.
In this quotation from the Council of
Trent, the Vatican publication puts the word "faith" in parenthesis
after the pronoun "which" in the first sentence. Their purpose is to convey
the meaning that no man is justified without faith (which is true) but some men
are justified without baptism (which is NOT true). It is this type of word
manipulation from which Pope Francis embraced the Lutheran heresy of
"justification by faith alone." And since the Council of Trent
teaches that justification is all that is necessary for salvation therefore,
since a man is justified by faith alone, he therefore obtains salvation by
faith alone and consequently they believe that the sacraments are NOT necessary
for salvation!
The Vatican makes the prepositional phrase,
"without which no man was ever justified" modify "faith" as
if it has no other bearing on the rest of the predicate which is grammatical
non-sense! Well, what faith is the sentence talking about? It is talking about
the "sacrament of faith"! And what is the "sacrament of
faith"? The answer is the "sacrament of baptism" without which
"no man was ever justified" modifies as part of the predicate!
And thus, the Council of Trent dogmatically
declared:
If any one saith, that the sacraments of
the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that,
without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith
alone, the grace of justification; though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every
individual; let him be anathema.
Council of Trent, Canon 4
This dogma condemns three propositions: 1)
If you say that the baptism is not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema; 2) If you say
that baptism is not necessary for justification, "OR" 3) If you say
that the desire for baptism is not necessary for justification, let him be anathema.
Those like Pope Francis who follow Martin
Luther's heresy on justification and salvation claim that in this dogma, the
coordinating conjunction "or" must be taken in an exclusive sense
meaning that the "desire" for baptism makes the sacrament itself
unnecessary for justification as a necessity of means. Luther's heresy of
justification by faith alone is supposedly defended by Catholic dogma! But this
interpretation is impossible!!!
It is true that the coordinating
conjunction “or” can grammatically be used in an exclusive or inclusive sense. It
is more often exclusive, but either way, the sense is always reciprocal.
For example, if you were to win a new car and the dealer says you can have it
in red or white, if you take the white, you cannot have the red. Reciprocally, if you take
the red, you cannot have the white. This is taking the conjunction exclusively.
In the dogma cited, the assumption of the heretics is that the conjunction “or”
is exclusive in that you can have the "desire" without the sacrament
and be justified. Therefore,
if this were correct, the reciprocal would have to occur, that is, the
sacrament without the desire would then end in justification. We know
that this cannot happen. If for example, a Jew while staying a Jew, is baptized
because he wants to escape persecution and has no desire to receive the
sacrament, then the sacrament itself without the desire will not end in
justification because he has rejected the faith. Therefore, the conjunction “or” in this dogma must
necessarily be inclusive and cannot be exclusive because, only in the inclusive
sense is the relationship reciprocal. That means there must be both the
sacrament present and the desire for the sacrament present to end in
justification.
The dogma confirms the teaching of the
narrative text that both the sacrament of baptism and the desire for the
sacrament are necessary for justification, "as it is written; unless a man
be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of
God." It confirms that a state of justification is all that is necessary
for salvation. And it confirms that the sacrament of baptism is necessary for
salvation.
Heresy is the Denial of Dogma as the Rule of Faith;
Modernism is the "Synthesis of all Heresies" because it denies ALL
DOGMAS! It denies what Dogma essentially
is!
[Modernism
is the] synthesis of all heresies [whose] system means the destruction not of
the Catholic religion alone, but of all religion.... [Modernists] partisans of error are to be
sought not only among the Church’s open enemies; but what is to be most dreaded
and deplored, in her very bosom, and are all the more mischievous the less they
keep in the open.... They put themselves forward as reformers of the Church
[though they are] thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the
enemies of the Church.... They assail
all that is most sacred in the work of Christ.... [They are] the most
pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church... They lay the axe not to the
branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the Faith and its
deepest fibers.... The most absurd tenet of the Modernists, that every
religion according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be
considered as both natural and supernatural.
It is thus that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. From this they derive the law laid down as
the universal standard, according to which religious consciousness is to be put
on an equal footing with revelation, and that to it all must submit, even the
supreme authority of the Church.
St. Pius X, Pascendi
Therefore: In the Novus Ordo Church of Sweet Dreams where
harshness is always frowned upon harshly!
· Religious Liberty is the doctrinal validation of
“Religious Consciousness.”
· Ecumenism is the collectivization and synthesis through
dialogue of the individual’s “Religious Consciousness.”
· “Faith” is the affirmation of the subjective
“Religiousness Consciousness” on the authority of the believer.
· “Dogma” is the historical and transitory collective
expression of “Religiousness Consciousness” for a particular age.
· “Tradition” is the historical perceptions from which the
present “Religious Consciousness” has evolved.
The
Church at Vatican Council I (1869-70) defined that a dogma is a truth formally
revealed by God which must be believed with “divine and Catholic faith” as
necessary for salvation. A dogma is, by definition, immutable and unchangeable.
Dogmas are not maxims, nor are they axioms where they are to be understood
simply as general points of belief. Pope St. Pius X solemnly condemned this
notion in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (False Doctrines of
the Modernists, September 8, 1907: DNZ 2079-81). Rather, each dogma is a
specific truth revealed by God and proposed by the Church whose very nature
allows for no change and is the same for all time.
Adam
Miller, Catholic Apologist, Dogmatic Deception
“The time is fast approaching when the omnipotent God will punish the
world with justice and righteous anger, for the sins and crimes that stain His holy
sanctuary. The corruption of morals will reach such an extreme that the
atmosphere will be saturated with the stench of impurity, and these evil times
will bring a chastisement like no other.
Confusion will reign in the sanctuary, and many of those entrusted with the
care of souls will become lost themselves, dragging many others with them into
error. The light of true faith will seem almost extinguished, and the flock,
abandoned by many shepherds, will be scattered. In these moments of
tribulation, those who remain faithful will suffer unspeakably. They will be
persecuted, ridiculed, and oppressed, for the world will hate the truth and
those who uphold it.
But do not fear, for just when all seems lost and paralyzed, when the wicked
believe they have triumphed, this will mark the arrival of my hour, when I will
overthrow the proud and accursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and
chaining him in the infernal abyss. This restoration will be swift and
marvelous. It will bring joy to the faithful and shame to those who warred
against God and His Church.”
Our Lady of Good Success to Mother Marianna
When Pope Leo XIV denied the BVM her title of
Co-Redemtrix, he was following Francis!
Hermeneutics of Continunity/Discontinunity
Blessed Virgin Mary, Co-Redemptrix, “The Mother of all
the living”!
Pope Francis theological tripe:
“Being faithful to her Master, who is her
Son, the only Redeemer, she never wanted to take anything for herself from her
Son. She never presented herself as a co-redemptrix…. When they come to us with
the story according to which we should declare this, or that other dogma, let
us not get lost in foolishness.”
Pope Francis, denying the title of the
Blessed Virgin as Co-Redemptrix
Wisdom of Catholic Truth:
·
“Just as
Eve, wife of Adam, yet still a virgin, became by her disobedience the cause of
death for herself and the whole human race, so Mary, too, espoused yet a
virgin, became by her obedience the cause of salvation for herself and the
whole human race.” St. Irenaeus, 2nd
century
·
“Death
through Eve, life through Mary.” St.
Jerome, 4th century
·
“Through
the Blessed Virgin Mary, we are redeemed from the tyranny of the devil.” Modestus of Jerusalem, 7th century
·
“Hail
thou, through whom we are redeemed from the curse.” St. John Damascene, 8th century
·
“Through
her (the Blessed Virgin Mary), man was redeemed.” St. Bernard of Clairvaux, 12th century
·
“That
woman (namely Eve), drove us out of Paradise and sold us; but this one (Mary)
brought us back again and bought us.”
St. Bonaventure, 13th
century
·
“The
Blessed Virgin merits for us de congruo what Christ merited de condign.” Pope St. Pius X, Ad diem illum
·
“(The
Blessed Virgin Mary) offered Him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father together with
the holocaust of her maternal rights and her motherly love like a new Eve for
all children of Adam.” Pope Pius XII,
Mystici Corporis
COMMENT:
Many ignorantly date the title of the
Blessed Virgin Mary as Co-Redemptrix to the 16th century. It is actually much
older. The theological truth that the
title describes is found in Scripture, the Church Fathers and the constant
tradition of the Catholic Church. It may have become more evident in the 16th
century only because the Protestants deny it.
Pope Francis denied the title because he
had common ground with Protestant heretics. He is on public record affirming
his belief in Luther’s heretical doctrine of Justification which denies any
incorporation of the baptized into Jesus Christ with the end to share in His
sanctification and glorification. Catholic truth teaches that every Catholic
“who has been baptized in Christ, has put on Christ” (Gal 3:27). And every
Catholic who has “put on Christ” must then “deny himself, and take up his
cross, and follow (Jesus Christ)” (Matt 16:24) so that he can “fill up those
things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body,
which is the church” (Col 1:24). Every baptized Catholic is called upon to be a
co-redemtrix with Jesus Christ and this constitutes the greatest honor for any
of the faithful. Pope Pius XII said:
Because Christ the Head holds such an eminent position, one must not
think that he does not require the help of the Body. What Paul said of the
human organism is to be applied likewise to the mystical Body: “The head cannot
say to the feet: I have no need of you.” It is manifestly clear that the
faithful need the help of the Divine Redeemer, for He has said: “Without me you
can do nothing,” and according to the teaching of the Apostle every advance of
this Mystical Body towards its perfection derives from Christ the Head. Yet
this, also, must be held, marvelous though it may seem: Christ has need of His
members. First, because the person of Jesus Christ is represented by the
Supreme Pontiff, who in turn must call on others to share much of his
solicitude lest he be overwhelmed by the burden of his pastoral office, and
must be helped daily by the prayers of the Church. Moreover as our Savior does
not rule the Church directly in a visible manner, He wills to be helped by the
members of His Body in carrying out the work of redemption. This is not because
He is indigent and weak, but rather because He has so willed it for the greater
glory of His spotless Spouse. Dying on the Cross He left to His Church the
immense treasury of the Redemption, towards which she contributed nothing. But
when those graces come to be distributed, not only does He share this work of
sanctification with His Church, but He wills that in some way it be due to her
action. This is a deep mystery, and an inexhaustible subject of meditation,
that the salvation of many depends on the prayers and voluntary penances which
the members of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ offer for this intention and
on the cooperation of pastors of souls and of the faithful, especially of
fathers and mothers of families, a cooperation which they must offer to our
Divine Savior as though they were His associates.
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis
“The
salvation of many depends on the prayers and voluntary penances which the
members of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ offer for this intention.” Those
who will not “take up their cross” and enter into applying this “treasury of
the Redemption” for the salvation of others are not “worthy of Jesus Christ.”
“No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise
perish” (Luke 13:3).
Now if it can be predicated that every one
of the faithful is called upon to be a co-redemptrix, a fortiori, what can be
predicated concerning the Mother of God, the ever Blessed Virgin Mary, the new
Eve, the new Mother of all the Living who are reborn of God to the life of
grace? The Blessed Virgin, our Lady of Sorrows, is the exemplar Co-Redemptrix sine qua non. It was her fiat at the Annunciation and repeated at
the foot of the cross that brought Christ from the Father and offers Him again
to the Father as a sacrificial reparation for the salvation of all.
For Pope Francis our Lady’s title was
“foolishness.” And why? “But the sensual man perceiveth not these things that
are of the Spirit of God; for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot understand, because it is
spiritually examined” ( 1 Cor 2:14).
Cursed be the man who denies the Blessed
Virgin Mary, our Lady of Sorrows, her rightful title conferred upon her by God
as Co-Redemptrix.
Sensus fidei for the Neo-Modernist: Goal is to direct the mob and use the mob to confirm their heterodoxy!
“The Second Vatican Council highlights that ‘all human beings are
called to the new people of God’ (LG, 13). God is truly at work in the entire
people that he has gathered together. This is why ‘the entire body of the
faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of
belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole people’s supernatural
discernment in matters of faith when from the Bishops down to the last of the
lay faithful, they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals’
(LG, 12).” Vademecum on Synodality
Syndod
COMMENT: The word
“universal” is corrupted to exclude the attribute of time. A universal by
definition necessarily includes the attribute of time without which it is not a
universal. The sensus fidei that
excludes time considering only the current mass of Catholics at one specific
historical period looks only to popular trends and not Catholic truth. If every
Catholic in the Church at one given time holds a doctrine or moral position
that is contrary to the traditional teaching or practice, then it is not
evidence of the sensus fidei but
rather evidence of general apostasy and nothing more. “When the Son of man
comes, will he find faith on earth?” (Lk 18:8). The implied answer is No! He
will find apostasy and He will not call it a new sensus fidei.
“Only take heed to yourself and guard your
soul diligently.” Deut 4:9
"It is a sin to believe there is
salvation outside the Catholic Church!"
Blessed Pope Pius IX
PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTING WORTH REMEMBERING:
Novus Ordo 'Dogma': Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith Gutting Catholic Truth!
"[.....] With all this in mind, it
must be said that the dogmatic formulas of the Magisterium of the Church have
been apt from the beginning to communicate the revealed truth and, as long as
they are maintained, they will always be fit for those who interpret them
correctly. However, it
does not suggest that each of them has been or will remain so to the same
extent. For this reason theologians try to determine exactly what is the
intention to teach really contained in the various formulas, and provide with
this work a remarkable help to the living Magisterium of the Church, to whom
they (the theologians) are subordinate. For this very reason it may also
be that some ancient dogmatic formulas and others related to them remain alive
and fruitful in the habitual use of the Church, provided that new exhibitions
and statements are added in due course and that they preserve and illustrate
their primary meaning. On
the other hand, it has also happened sometime that in this same usual use of
the Church some of these formulas have given way to new expressions that,
proposed or approved by the sacred Magisterium, express their sense clearer and
more fully.
"As for the meaning of dogmatic
formulas, this remains ever true and constant in the Church, even when it is
expressed with greater clarity or more developed. The faithful therefore must
shun the opinion, first, that dogmatic formulas (or some category of them)
cannot signify truth in a determinate way, but can only offer changeable
approximations to it, which to a certain extent distort of alter it; secondly,
that these formulas signify the truth only in an indeterminate way, this truth
being like a goal that is constantly being sought by means of such
approximations. Those who hold such an opinion do not avoid dogmatic relativism
and they corrupt the concept of the Church's infallibility relative to the
truth to be taught or held in a determinate way.
"Such an opinion clearly is in disagreement
with the declarations of the First Vatican Council, which, while fully aware of
the progress of the Church in her knowledge of revealed truth, nevertheless
taught as follows: "That meaning of sacred dogmas...must always be
maintained which Holy Mother Church declared once and for all, nor should one
ever depart from that meaning under the guise of or in the name of a more
advanced understanding." The Council moreover condemned the opinion that
"dogmas once proposed by the Church must, with the progress of science be
given a meaning other than that which was understood by the Church, or which
she understands." There is no doubt that, according to these texts of the
Council, the meaning of dogmas which is declared by the Church is determinate
and unalterable." [.....]
Declaration
in Defense of the Catholic Doctrine on the Church Against Certain Errors of the
Present Day, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Mysterium
Ecclesiae, June 24, 1973
COMMENT: The word "magisterium" is used equivocally in this
document. There is the Magisterium (with a capital "M") of the Church
grounded upon the Church's divine attributes of Infallibility and Authority to
teach without the possibility of error in the name of God. This is what is meant
when Jesus Christ said, "He who heareth you, heareth Me." When a pope
engages the Magisterium of the Church he is entering into the one and same
Magisterium that every pope in the history of the Church has entered since Pope
Peter the Apostle to this present day.
There is also the magisterium (with a
lower case "m") of churchmen teaching by virtue of their grace of
state. This teaching has been deserving of a presumption of correctness and
respectful adherence throughout the history of the Church, however, this teaching
is the product of men and is capable of error. Since Vatican II the repeated
teaching by the magisterium of churchmen has been heretical more often than
not. Under Pope Francis it has not only been doctrinally heretical but at time
grossly immoral.
Ultimately, only the pope can engage the
Magisterium of the Church. The teaching that proceeds from the Magisterium is
infallible and is called Dogma and constitutes the formal object of divine and
Catholic faith. Dogma is God giving explicit clarity of definition to His
revealed doctrine. God is the formal and final cause of Dogma. The pope is the
necessary but wholly insufficient material and instrumental cause of Dogma.
Since God is the cause of Dogma, Dogma is infallible in both the truth it
teaches and the words by which that truth is taught. That is, Dogma is
irreformable in both its form (the truth) and its matter (the words) employed.
Dogma ends theological discussion on the doctrine defined. Theologians may
develop the implications that are necessarily derived from Dogmatic Truth but
the Dogma in itself remains fixed in its truth and its manner of expression.
Therefore, the proper tools for understanding Dogma are definition and grammar,
and not necessarily theological competency.
This
citation is three paragraphs from the document from the Sacred Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith published in 1973. It both defends the infallible
truth of Dogma in the second and third paragraph by citing the teaching of
Vatican I, while at the same time, it undermines and corrupts Dogmatic truth in
the first paragraph!
It corrupts Dogma when it recognizes and
presupposes that Dogma is the proper subject matter for speculation by
theologians and development by the "living magisterium," (the pope
teaching by his fallible grace of state), to articulate a different non-literal
meaning. Theologians are permitted to critically contextualize Dogma to "interpret
them correctly." Theologians are directed to examine the
"intention" of the Dogmatic formulation. Is this even possible? Well
no, it is not. The "intention" is God's and no one can know the mind
of God beyond what God has revealed. The "intention" of what is in
fact the wholly insufficient material and instrumental cause of Dogma is irrelevant
and completely immaterial to the question. Imagine asking the chisel and the
block of marble what its "intention" was in producing Michelangelo's
Pieta! So we end up with
fallible theologians and the fallible "living magisterium"
determining that "some
of these formulas (Dogmas) have given way to new expressions." We
have the fallible reformulating the infallible. This has been the rule of the
churchman for the last fifty years since the publication of this document and
the sub rosa practice for about 35
years before that. We are fortunate that God has a perfect memory. His truth is
not compromised by lying churchmen. They claim to be speaking in the name of
God to make God a liar like themselves. It will not work. The remote rule of faith is Scripture and
Tradition. The proximate rule of faith is Dogma. Heresy is defined as the
denail of Dogma! Our duty is to keep the faith inviolate and
uncompromised for which God has promised the eternal reward of His divine
presence. Those who corrupt God's revealed Truth will have their eternal reward
as well.
O Mary, Mary, bearer of the fire of love, and dispenser of mercy! Mary,
co-redemptrix of
the human race, when you clothed the Word with your flesh, the world was
redeemed. Christ paid its ransom with His Passion, and you paid it with the
sorrows of your body and soul.
St. Catherine of Siena, Doctor of the Church, Instructed by God Himself
Vatican II peritus, Hans Kung, who denied the
Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, appealed to John Henry Cardinal
Newman as his theological predecessor, invoking the same liberal modernist
principles!
In John Cardinal Newman's Grammar of Assent are found all of the
elements that determined the character of Newman's thought. The basis of
his-peculiar form of liberalism that troubled Church authorities in his day
manifests itself in this his most mature essay, written in 1870, five years
after the Apologia. The
underlying current of the entire essay reveals an aversion for the traditional
methods of philosophy and theology on account of their being, as he would say,
too abstract and impersonal.[.....]
It was also Newman's liberal personalism
that made him reluctant to accept the definition of Infallibility in its
fullest sense and import, as can be seen from a letter he wrote in 1871 (after
the dogma of infallibility was defined) to Mr. Mashell, an Oxford convert who
had published a pamphlet against Cardinal Manning. After Newman writing "I
never; expected to see such a scandal in the Church.[.....]
An entire thesis, if not a small book, is
required to do justice to the topic of Newman's position in the Grammar of
Assent; here only the chief position will be discussed and contrasted with the
philosophy of St. Thomas and those who follow him and the exigencies of
reality. The philosophical
principles which the Church from time immemorial has upheld and which Newman
rejected, or seems to reject, are as follows:
1.
that the
abstract and speculative is superior to the concrete and practical;
2.
that true
science depends upon the admission that the nature of things can be known by
the mind by abstracting from the here and the now;
3.
that the
natural order and the moral law are independent of men's perception of it and
are not based upon a man's personal characteristics;
4.
that
causation in nature is discernable by the human mind without an a priori
reference to itself;
5.
that the
existence of God is demonstrable by an investigation of nature and not merely
by examining a man's consciousness and his awareness of his conscience;
6.
that final
causes are operative in the whole of creation and that God is the final cause,
or purpose, of all things;
7.
that logic
is a noble and useful art which is grounded upon reality and aids the human
mind to understand the conspectus of reality without falsity;
8.
and that the
dogmas and doctrines of the Church are apprehended by 'believers as they are in
themselves, and not in an uncertain personalist fashion.
I hope that the reader untrained in the
fundamental principles of philosophy will be able to perceive that Newman's
thinking, however subtly and elegantly expressed, is opposed to and
incompatible with true Catholic philosophy.
Richard Sartino, Another Look at John Henry Cardinal Newman
Is
the Resurrection of Jesus Christ to be taken literally or metaphorically?
NEO-MODERNISM:
It's Formal Manifesto from Norte Dame University
What implications does the true nature of papal infallibility have for
our life and practice as faithful Catholics? We can say the following.
First, the Church has a confident humility about papal infallibility.
On the one hand, we believe that the Church does understand and declare what is
true. On the other hand,
we also believe that verbal formulations of divine truths, even the infallible
formulations, are not the Truth per
se, but limited,
conditioned expressions of the truth.
Second, it is the
real truths that are infallible, not the verbal formulations that contain them.
An infallible statement is not at all wrong, but the way it might be said, even
in an infallible definition, might not be perfectly adequate.
In the end, every Catholic can say with Augustine, “If you comprehend
it, it is not God,” and
with Vatican I, that the pope possesses infallibility. Thanks to the gift of infallibility
of the Church exercised by the Magisterium, we worship him who is beyond our
comprehension in spirit and in truth.
Christopher Baglow, Director of the Science & Religion Imitative of
the McGrath Institute for Church Life at the University of Notre Dame, Infallibility, Ideology, and the Road to
Ecclesial Harmony, January 22, 2024
COMMENT: The denial of DOGMA is the definition of Heresy. If DOGMA need
not be taken literally than neither does any Heresy and the Creed we profess at
every Mass is meaningless. The end of Neo-Modernism is no different from its
precursor, Modernism. Both seek the destruction of DOGMA and the Catholic
Faith. Taking DOGMA literally, such as, the DOGMA that Jesus Christ literally
rose from the dead on the first Easter morning, does not place God within the
comprehension of man. It places man under the obedient conformity to God's
truth and delivers him from the opinion of idiots.
St. Dominic Painting
The
picture in the vestibule is a canvas print of a painting of St. Dominic (d.
1221) by Fra Bartolomeo Della Porta (d. 1517).
Fra Bartolomeo was considered the greatest Dominican painter after the
great Blessed Fra Angelico (d. 1455). He
was brought into the Dominican Order by Jerome Savonarola, O.P. (d. 1498) and
was one of his most ardent admirers.
Tradition relates that Fra Bartolomeo was one of the armed friars and
citizens that tried to defend the convent of San Marco when Savonarola was
captured by his enemies. He most
certainly was a witness when the Borgia Pope, Alexander VI, got his revenge by
having Savonarola burned as a “heretic.”
Fra Bartolomeo gave up painting for many years after the death of
Savonarola because, with his death, also ended the elevated principles of
artistic purpose which he brought to Florence.
Only under obedience did he once more begin to paint. One of his best known paintings is that of
Savonarola. That painting hung in the
cell of St. Catherine de Ricci (d. 1589), one of the greatest Dominican saints
who bore the stigmata for 47 years. Her
body remains incorrupt to this day. The
painting of St. Dominic emphasis the spiritual importance of silence in the
Dominican life as of essential importance to fulfill the key to the Dominican
vocation “to live, defend and propagate the faith.” The axiom, “the word of the Preacher must
flow from a soul of silence.” St.
Dominic, pray for us.
Our
Lady of Good Success to the Catholics of Today
My Beloved
Daughter, I am Mary of Good Success, your Mother and your Protectress, I carry
my most Holy Son in my left arm and the scepter of the world in my right arm…. The sanctuary lamp which you just saw go
out has several meanings.
Firstly, towards the end of the
nineteenth century and during a large part if the twentieth century there will arise
various errors and the whole universe will become Republican. The precious
light of faith will be going out following on the almost complete destruction
of morals; in that time there will be many tribulations, moral tribulations
also, both public and private. The little group of people who keep the true
worship of faith and the virtues will have to suffer cruelly and indescribably.
The constant martyrdom will bring many to an early death, they will be counted
amongst the martyrs, they have sacrificed themselves for Church and country. In
order to deliver oneself from the slavery of these errors one will need great
strength of will, perseverance, courage and a great trust in God. These are
gifts of the merciful love of my Divine Son, He has provided them for the
renewal. In order to test the faith and the trust of the just and good men
there will be moments when everything seems to be lost and paralyzed but that
is the moment in which the happy beginning of the complete renewal starts.
Secondly, my communities will be
abandoned, sunk in an abyss, a deep ocean of bitterness and they will seem to
be satiated with sufferings and afflictions. How many good vocations are lost
because of lack of good and prudent spiritual direction; the Novice Mistresses
should take great care of the prayers of the novices and they should show
understanding of souls.
The Third reason for the
extinguishing of the sanctuary lamp is the spirit of impurity of those times,
the air will be filled with this unclean spirit. A flood of filth will overflow
the streets, the squares, and all public places so that there will be no
virginal souls left in the world.
Fourthly, in all layers of society
errors will strive with great cunning to penetrate into the families in order
to corrupt the youth too; Satan will congratulate himself that he can feed
himself in the fouled way on the hearts of the children. The innocence of
children will hardly exist anymore. Priestly vocations will be lost. That will
be a true misfortune and priests will turn away from their holy duties and
enter upon a false, wrong course, and therefore the Church will go dark. No
prelate and father will be watching any longer with love, strength and prudence
over this flock, and many of the prelates will lose the spirit of God and bring
their own souls into danger. Pray constantly, call upon heaven without tiring,
and weep without ceasing inwardly in your heart and pray to the Heavenly Father
through the Eucharistic Heart of my Divine Son Who has nobly shed blood.
Out of the bitterness and pains of His
sufferings and death, pray that He will have compassion upon His servants, that
He will bring an end to this terrible scourge by sending to the Church a
prelate to renew the spirit of His priests. My Divine Son and I will surround
this beloved son with a special love, we shall pour out a heap of many graces
of humility of heart and docility towards God’s inspirations, and the strength
to defend the rights of the Church so that he will know how to defend the rights
of the Church with a heart which enables him to behave like another Christ
towards the mighty people of this world and the little people of this world
without despising the unfortunate ones. He will, with a divine gentleness, lead
into the convents and monasteries souls consecrated to God for the service of
God without making the yoke of the Lord heavy upon them. He holds in his hands
the scales of sanctity in order that everything happen according to the weight
and measure so that God be glorified.
This prelate and father will form a
counter-weight against the lukewarmness of priests and religious who are meant
to be dedicated to God. As a result of the guilt of these faithless men, Satan
will gain upon earth control of this world like a dark cloud which darkens the
sky and darkens all of the people who are consecrated to the Most Holy Heart of
my Divine Son. All will have to suffer chastisements because all kinds of
crimes have been allowed. They will suffer pestilence, hunger, civil strife, degeneration
of morals and the loss of countless souls. In order to blow away the black
clouds which block the shining holiness and the freedom of the Church there
will be a fearful war in which much blood will flow of priests and religious.
This night will be so terrible that people will think that wickedness is
conquering. Then strikes my heart and in a most sudden way I shall annihilate
the pride of Satan, I shall assist and liberate the Church and country from his
cruel tyranny.
The Fifth reason why the sanctuary
lamp went out is that influential men will watch with indifference, uncaringly,
the oppression of the Church, the persecution of virtue and the triumph of
wickedness. Because these influential people will not use their position of
influence in order to combat evil or to renew the faith, the people will
gradually become indifferent to the demands of God, they will take on an evil
spirit and let themselves be swept away in all kinds of passion and vice. My
beloved daughter, were you to live that terrible time you would die of pain or
grief over the circumstances which I have described to you. The love of my Holy
Son and mine which we have for this world which is our property demand from now
on sacrifices and good works in order that the duration of this terrible
catastrophe will be shortened.
The Blessed and ever Virgin Mary, under the
title of Our Lady of Good Success, to Sister Maria Anna of Jesus, in the
Convent of the Immaculate Conception in Quito on the 2nd February,
1634. Sister was praying in front of the
Blessed Sacrament when suddenly the sanctuary lamp went out.
Pope Leo honors new female pro-abortion ‘archbishop’ of Canterbury
To pretend that this is somehow a blessed vocation and praise Mullally
in it and invoke God's blessing and the inspiration of the Blessed Virgin Mary
on it is unspeakably evil.
LifeSiteNews | Vatican City | Mar 26,
2026 - Pope Leo XIV has issued a congratulatory letter to Sarah Mullally – the first woman
ever appointed “archbishop of Canterbury” and a vocal supporter of abortion and
the LGBT agenda. In the letter, Leo praises Mullally’s “weighty”
responsibilities, and explicitly invokes the Blessed Virgin Mary as a source of
“inspiration” for her new role.
The March 20, 2026 message, published on
the Vatican website, was released after Mullally’s installation yesterday. It
makes no reference whatsoever to the Catholic Church’s perennial teaching that
Anglican orders are “absolutely null and utterly void” (Apostolicae Curae,
1896), that the ordination of women is impossible and contrary to the will of
Christ, or to Mullally’s own public record promoting grave moral evils of
abortion and homosexual acts.
Instead, Leo XIV opens with the salutation:
“To The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally Archbishop
of Canterbury”
He continues:
“I know that the office for which you have been chosen is a weighty
one, with responsibilities not only in the Diocese of Canterbury, but
throughout the Church of England as well as the Anglican Communion as a whole…
In asking the Lord to strengthen you with the gift of wisdom, I pray that you
may be guided by the Holy Spirit in serving your communities, and draw
inspiration from the example of Mary, the Mother of God.”
This invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
– the Theotokos, the model of perfect obedience to God’s Will – is particularly
scandalous. To hold up the Mother of God as inspiration for a woman pretending
to exercise a priestly and episcopal office that the Church has always declared
Christ reserved to men – not to mention for a leader who actively promotes
abortion and same-sex “marriage” – is a mind-bending scandal.
Leo XIV quotes Pope Francis saying “it
would be a scandal if, due to our divisions, we did not fulfil our common
vocation to make Christ known.”
He adds:
Dear sister, I willingly make these words my own, for it is through the
witness of a reconciled, fraternal and united Christian community that the
proclamation of the Gospel will resound most clearly.
With these fraternal sentiments, I invoke upon you the blessings of
Almighty God as you take up your high responsibilities. May the Holy Spirit
come down upon you and make you fruitful in the Lord’s service.
COMMENT: Those who praise heretics and
schismatics are heretics and schismatics. Those who seek "unity" with
heretics and schismatics are heretics and schismatics. Leo the Iceman and
worshiper of Pachamama who has publicly repudiated the titles of the Blessed
Virgin Mary as Co- Redemptrix and Mediator of All Grace now publically blasphemes
the Mother of God. We pray for his conversion and we pray that God will cleanse
His Church of these homosexual perverts. The latter is certain; the former is
unlikely.
Around four o’clock in the afternoon on January 3rd
1944, in the convent chapel of Tuy, in front of the Tabernacle, Our Lady urged
Sister Lucia to write the text of the Third Secret and Sister Lucia recounts:
“I felt my spirit inundated by a mystery of light that is God and in
Him I saw and heard the point of a lance like a flame that is detached touch
the axis of the earth and it trembles: mountains, cities, towns and villages
with their inhabitants are buried. The sea, the rivers and clouds exceed their
boundaries, inundating and dragging with them in a vortex, houses and people in
a number that cannot be counted; it is the purification of the world from the
sin in which it is immersed. Hatred, ambition, provoke the destructive war.
After I felt my heart racing and in my spirit a soft voice that said: ‘In time, one faith, one
baptism, one Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity, Heaven!’
This word ‘Heaven’ filled my heart with peace and happiness in such a way that,
almost without being aware of it, I kept repeating to myself for a long time:
Heaven, Heaven!!”
A Path Under the Eyes of
Mary (Um Caminho sob o olhar
de Maria), published in
2013 by the Carmel of Coimbra
"Know you not that the friendship of
this world is the enemy of God?"
James 4:4
UNEARTHED: 1995 photo shows Pope Leo XIV participating in Pachamama
ritual
Exclusive to LifeSiteNews, this explosive revelation will feature
prominently in Fr. Charles Murr's forthcoming book on the new pontiff.
LifeSiteNews | Wed Mar 18, 2026 — In an explosive revelation that will
feature prominently in his forthcoming book on the new Pontiff, Faith &
Reason co-host Father Charles Murr has confirmed that Pope Leo XIV – then
Father Robert Francis Prevost, OSA, actively participated in a pagan Pachamama
“Mother Earth” agricultural ritual while attending an official Augustinian theological
symposium.
The story was first brought to light by Fr. Murr, who has spent months
meticulously compiling documentation for his upcoming book on Leo XIV. Three
Augustinian priests have now independently confirmed to Fr. Murr that Robert
Prevost is clearly visible among the kneeling participants in the central
photograph. Although none of the three were present at the 1995 ritual itself,
they immediately and unmistakably recognized their confrere from the published
image.
The image appears in the official proceedings of the IV
Simposio-Taller “Lectura de San Agustín desde América Latina” (São Paulo, January 23-28, 1995), published as the book Ecoteología:
Una Perspectiva desde San Agustín (México,
1996). The official caption beneath the photo of kneeling participants reads:
Celebración del Rito de la pachamama
(madre tierra), que es un rito agrícola ofrecido por las culturas del
Sur-Andino en el Perú y Bolivia.
Celebration of the Rite of
Pachamama (Mother Earth), which is an agricultural rite offered by the cultures
of the South-Andean region in Peru and Bolivia.
The same volume includes a large group photograph explicitly captioned
“Foto de todos los participantes del Simposio Sao Paulo Brasil,” placing the future Pope squarely among the attendees of an event
that openly celebrated the Pachamama ritual as part of its “ecotheology”
program.
Fr. Murr told Faith & Reason: “The man who is now Leo XIV was documented kneeling in a pagan earth
goddess ritual in an official gathering of his own religious order. The
implications for the direction of the Church under this pontificate are
profound.”
Fr. Murr has obtained high-resolution scans of the proceedings
(including the clear kneeling Pachamama photograph) from the Salesian Central
Library in Buenos Aires, Argentina (stamped call number 276.04 ACU :504 /
30.161, Biblioteca Central Salesiana, No. 30161).
Yet another photo from the event, showing all the participants of the
symposium, also confirms Prevost’s attendance.
LifeSite confirmed the photos of Leo at the ritual were in fact him by
comparing images from the same period found in the Augustinian Spanish-language
magazine OALA, where he is
named “Roberto Prevost.”
On the Faith & Reason episode today, Fr. Murr noted how this violates the First Commandment
and how the martyrs of the Church gave their lives rather than participate even
slightly in ceremonies to false gods.
COMMENT: Everyone
has know that Leo/Prevost was cut from the same cloth as Francis/Bergoglio:
they are both worshipers of the pagan earth goddess, Pachamama. And every
faithful Catholic knows that "All the gods of the gentiles are
devils" (Psalm 95:5). And every faithful Catholic who is familiar with
knows that the punishment of God that is now upon us will soon cleanse His
Church of all the devils and their worshipers.
Pope
Leo, like his predecessor Francis, is a member of the "gay mafia," a
Defender of the Homosexual Heresy
The Homoheresy in the Church Today -- Benedict XVI Established a Clear
Ban for Their Ordination
Homoheresy is the Rejection of the Church's Teaching on Homosexuality
Introduction / Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
(Rome) The Polish Catholic
journal Fronda several years abo published a long essay, which
was also taken up by the German Catholic journal Theologisches. The
subject of the review was the "Homohäresie" and the existence of a
"gay mafia" in the Catholic Church. The author described the
existence of a network of homosexual priests at all levels of the Church
hierarchy, including the Roman Curia, who cover for each other.
The author of the explosive essay is the
Polish priest Fr. Dariusz Oko, assistant professor of philosophy at
the Pontifical Theological Academy of Cracow and
the Pontifical University of John Paul II of Krakow and pastor
at St. Hedwig's parish in this city. In his essay, Oko recalled that more
than 80 percent of the so-called pedophilia cases of clerics in the US are in
reality cases of ephebophilia and are aimed at male adolescents. The
numbers coincide with those of the CDF, which speaks of 90 percent, facts
that had been systematically suppressed in public. "Factual
investigations show that the extent of the problem in the Catholic Church is
still the lowest. Why then is she the one mainly spoken of? According
to research, in a thousand cases of pedophila or ephebophilia there is
only one is related to the Catholic Church in the United States, about 3-5 per
ten thousand," says Oko in Theologisches (42) 9-10/2012.
However Fr. Oko also showed the
difficulties of priests and seminarians, who oppose the homosexual network in
the church: "If the rector or other supervisor try to expel one, then it
may be that they themselves are expelled and not the homo-cleric. Or
should a vicar try to defend young people from the parish from a priest who commits
sexual assault, he is harassed, disciplined and treated and not the priest,
because the decisions makers to whom they refer, are themselves part of the gay
lobby."
"If some indiscretions are verified,
which is leaked from the Vatican palaces, it would be an international
network with hundreds of clerics of all rank levels," said the Vatican
expert Marco Tosatti. Tosatti conducts an interview with, Dariusz Oko on
this subject. The pontificate of Benedict XVI was kept under
continuous bombardment with the pedophile scandal. With the new
pontificate it was "completely forgotten", says Tosatti.
Marco Tosatti: Two years ago you had mapped the situation in the
Church in your thorough study. Has something changed since then?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: Certainly my study has touched on a widespread
problem that exists almost everywhere. Only in this way can it be
explained that they made the rounds around the world within a few
weeks. In many countries, translations were made: from English to German,
Italian and Czech, Slovak and Estonian ... It seems to me that the problem is
addressed in my study is perceived more consciously.
Marco Tosatti: You talk in your work of Homoheresy. What
are their characteristics?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: The Homoheresy is a rejection of the Magisterium
of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. The representatives of Homoheresy
do not accept that the homosexual inclination is a personality
disorder. They doubt that homosexual acts are unnatural. The
defenders of Homoheresy are for the ordination of homosexuals. The
Homoheresy is an ecclesiastical version of homosexualism.
Marco Tosatti: In 2005 the Congregation for Catholic Education
published an important document by Pope Benedict XVI that prohibits
the ordination of homosexuals. Why this document?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: Since the 70s of the 20th century, a new type has
entered in many seminars and monasteries around the world, who view human
sexuality contrary to the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on
homosexuality. The consequence was that it started on all continents
in so many diocesan seminaries and monasteries, to represent the idea that
there are two equivalent sexual orientations: a heterosexual and a
homosexual. Thus, it was that clerics were only chaste, to be understood
as abstaining from unclean actions, and demanded the ability to live celibacy,
without further asking about their sexual orientation or their
inclinations. In this way, it became necessary to define homosexuality as
an inclination and personality structure explicitly as an objective obstacle to
the ordination.
Marco Tosatti: Was this requirement from 2005, which prohibits
the priesthood for homosexuals, used to your knowledge?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: I am not responsible for training at
seminaries. Therefore, I do not know how this ban is handled in different
countries. This question should be directed to those responsible for the
formation of future priests.
Marco Tosatti: Since you have published your survey, the Pope
has changed. Do you see any difference in attitude between the two popes
in connection with the problem?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: It is difficult to speak of any
difference. Fundamentally, the Magisterium of the Catholic Church does not
change and the forbids the ordination of homosexuals. The Magisterium in
force led to a contrast to previous distinction between active and passive
homosexuality a distinction between a temporary homosexual inclination, which
occurs in late puberty, and the deep-rooted inclination. Both forms of
homosexuality and not only active homosexuality represent an obstacle for the
priesthood. Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly
vocation. Therefore, not only the ordination of men with homosexual
inclination, even if only temporarily, is strictly forbidden, but their
admission to the seminary as well.
Anti-Semitism’s “Working Definition”
The
International Holocaust Remembrance
Alliance (IHRA) (until
January 2013, known as the Task Force
for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research
or ITF) is an intergovernmental organization founded in 1998 which unites
governments and experts to strengthen, advance and promote Holocaust education,
research and remembrance worldwide and to uphold the commitments of the
Declaration of the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust. The IHRA has
34 member countries, one liaison country and seven
observer countries. (Wikipedia)
The
IHRA’s working definition for Antisemitism that has been adopted by member
countries:
“Antisemitism
is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews.
Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward
Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community
institutions and religious facilities.” Such
as:
·
Denying
the Jewish people their right to self-determination, such as by claiming that
the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
·
Applying
double standards by requiring of Israel behavior not expected or demanded of
any other democratic nation.
· Comparing contemporary Israeli policy to
that of the Nazis.
This “working definition,” although
worded a little differently in light of their differing perspectives, is very
close to the definition coined by Joe Sobran who said: “An
anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated Jews. Now it means a man who is hated
by Jews.” The IHRA’s definition it not grounded on any objective standard but
solely on the subjective “perception of Jews.” You can expect this “working
definition,” which has been adopted by U.S. government agencies to work its way
into the United States legal code notwithstanding any legal niceties such as
freedom of speech, equal protection under the law, etc. The Jewish religion is
a race base belief that Jews possess a special salvific relationship with God
because of their DNA irrespective of what they believe or what they do. Jesus
Christ was killed by the Jews in part because he told them that this was not
so. And like Jesus our Lord, the Catholic Church will necessarily fall under this
definition of Anti-Semitism as well. Soon enough, the Novus Ordo Church of the
New Advent will be calling faithful Catholics anti-Semites.
U.S. Politics: Jewish revolutionary, Saul Alinsky, died
6-12-1972 and will soon be celebrating his 54th year in hell. His
book, Rules for Radicals, enumerates twelve rules for effective political
organization:
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have,
but what the enemy thinks you have.”
RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of
your people.”
RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the
expertise of the enemy.”
RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own
book of rules.”
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent
weapon.”
RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people
enjoy.”
RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long
becomes a drag.”
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let
up.”
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more
terrifying than the thing itself.”
RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard
enough, it will push through and become a positive.”
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack
is a constructive alternative.”
RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it,
personalize it, and polarize it.”
The purpose of the “rules” is to impose the eight levels
of control that must be accomplished in the formation of a Godless socialist
state.
1.
Healthcare —
Control healthcare and you control the people.
2.
Poverty
—Increase the Poverty level as high as possible:’ poor people are easier to
control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to
live.
3.
Debt —
Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase
taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4.
Gun Control—
Remove the ability to defend themselves from the government. That way you are
able to create a police state.
5.
Welfare —
Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).
6.
Education —
Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children
learn in school.
7.
Religion —
Remove the belief in the God from the government and schools.
8.
Class
Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more
discontent, and it will be easier to take (tax) the wealthy with the support of
the poor.
The new kill chain: America is using AI to bomb targets in Iran
ET Online | Mar 07, 2026
When
the US launched its military campaign against Iran, called Operation Epic Fury,
the conflict quickly became something more than a conventional war. The operation is emerging as one
of the most consequential real-world tests of artificial intelligence (AI) in
modern warfare.
In
the Iran campaign, AI technology has played a critical role by supporting the
initial screening of incoming data, allowing human analysts to focus on
higher-level analysis and verification, according to Captain Timothy Hawkins, a
Central Command spokesperson. “Centcom uses a variety of AI tools, and that is
exactly what they are, tools, to assist human experts in a rigorous process
aligned with US policy, military doctrine and the law,” Hawkins said in an
interview with Bloomberg News. He declined to name the tools or the companies that provide them to the
military. [.....]
“Bottom
line, these tools help leaders -- humans -- make smarter decisions faster. The
tools do not replace them or make targeting decisions,” said Hawkins, adding
that target selection relies on a very specific, rigorous, legal process that
involves commanders and leaders.
COMMENT: The
primary company providing the AI "tool" is Palantir. Palantir's CEO
is Alex Karp, a Jewish Zionist, who said in a recent interview, "What
makes America special right now is our lethal capabilities, our ability to
fight war... and the AI revolution is uniquely American." Karp said his
company's tools are uniquely links the "U.S. and Middle East partners that
were hit by Iranian airstrikes." That "Middle East partners" is
Israel. This AI tool of Palantir was responsible for identifying Gaza targets
for the Israeli IDF which included killing tens of thousands of women, children
and the elderly. Karp vigorously opposed the college protesters against the
Gaza genocide calling their views a "pagan religion" and
"an infection inside of our society." At the AI Expo for National
Competitiveness, he remarked that "the peace activists are war
activists" and said that "protestors should be sent to North
Korea" (WIKI).
It
is the AI tool of Palantir that selected the mostly girls school in Minab, Iran
as an acceptable target that was struck by two Tomahawk missiles killing 164
adolescent girls, 14 teachers on the first strike and the killing rescue
personal and volunteered helpers on the second strike forty minutes after the
first. The school is adjacent to a military complex and most likely the
children where the daughters of military personal. A few hours after the Minab
strike a missile struck a girls gymnasium in Lamerd, Iran where "dozens of
teenage girls were attending their regular training sessions of volleyball,
basketball, and gymnastics in the main sports hall in Lamerd, a city near the
Persian coast" killing 18. Other targets include Shahid
Bahonar Middle School, Parand, Arian Pouya Elementary School, Parand, Kindergarten,
Narmak neighbourhood, and a Children's park
(called "Police Park"), Tehran. There are 13 hospitals and
other health facilities verified by the World Health Organization (WHO) that
were targeted by the US-Israeli attacks. Also struck by missiles were common
public facilities including Tehran Grand Bazaar, Ba'ath Stadium,
Tehran, and the Azadi sports complex, Tehran.
What
is now evident is that the U.S. is using Israeli programmed AI by Zionists to
implement terror on the Iranian people. These targets have no military value. These attacks are
total violations of Catholic moral teaching, international law and U.S. law.
Trump's war on Iran was launched without any moral justification whatsoever and
is being conducted without any moral constraints.
JUST
WAR RULES
"It is not
to be doubted that the world is in a certain sense a single community, and
possesses the right to prescribe equitable and appropriate laws for its
members, like those which constitute the law of nations.... It is unlawful to
kill the innocent in war.... Slavery is not a legitimate consequence of war,
that hostages cannot rightfully be put to death because of a breach of faith by
an enemy.... The violators of
international law sin mortally as well in peace as in war and that it is not
lawful for any nation to refuse to observe the law of nations."
Fra Francisco
de Vitoria, O. P. notes from his lectures
Fra Francisco
de Vitoria, O. P., a Spanish Dominican friar, Father of International Law, held
the chair of theology at the University of Salamanca where he died 1546. Fra
Francisco is credited with establishing the Three Rules of a Just War developed
from the works of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine and applying them during
the Age of Exploration, which often became under the unscrupulous, the Age of
Exploitation. He accepted without question that legitimate armed defense of
property, life and honor, but taught that offensive war must fulfill the
conditions of being declared by the right authority, being carried out in the
right manner, and having a just cause.
The unprovoked
war against Iran started by Israel and the United States fails with respect to
every criteria.
It is, therefore,
a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself
from the Conciliar Church for as long it does not rediscover the Tradition of
the Church and of the Catholic Faith.
Bishop Tissier
de Mallerais, January 1, 2015
Bishop
Williamson explains why the “XSPX,” is called the “New Society,” - “Novus
Societas”
"The Catholic Church is much broader than just the Traditional
movement. [….] We will never make Tradition attractive or convincing if we
remain stuck in the 1950’s or 1970’s. [….] Tradition cannot be confined within
the 19th and 20th century Church condemnations of liberalism. […..] Our time is
different, we cannot stand still, much that is modern is not immoral. […..] So
we must re-position ourselves, which is a practical problem and not a question
of Faith. […..] The “Resistance” movement has fabricated its own “faith” by
which to condemn the Newsociety.
[…..] SSPX HQ never betrayed Tradition
in 2012 because its actions were attacked from both sides. […..] The official Newsociety texts of 2012
were not dogmatic. […..] Rome was much less aggressive in 2012 to the XSPX than
it was in 2006. [……] The Newsociety
follows the Spirit and draws
on Tradition."
Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, SSPX First Assistant to Bishop Bernard Fellay,
critical comments addressing the “resistance” that has risen against the SSPX’s
accommodations with modernist Rome. Quotations taken from commentary by Bishop
Williamson
VATICAN
II COUNCIL: WHAT IS ITS AUTHORITY?
Vatican II Council was a "pastoral council." It was a council
of churchmen teaching by their grace of state. At no time before, during or
after the council did anyone ever teach anything by virtue of the Divine
Magisterium of the Church, that is, teach by the Holy Ghost. Every Catholic is
obligated to reject anything from this council that so much as equivocates or
undermines any Catholic dogma. The Vatican II Council is to judged by its
pastoral success or failures. The implementation of the pastoral corruptions of
this council have directly lead to the greatest apostasy in the history of the
Catholic Church. Those that claim that the "teaching of Vatican II"
is good are those whose intention is to destroy the Church.
"No
matter what may happen, since no one may justifiably command another to sin,
and since no one is permitted to obey such a command, no one may ever blame
another—even an errant pope—for his sins. Conversely, the failure of any
person—even the pope—to keep God's law or to preserve his own faith, does not
excuse any other person for his failure to do the same. Ignorance of the law or
ignorance of the Faith is never an excuse for sinning; one is bound to know
when he is being commanded to sin." -
Fr. James F.
Wathen, The Great Sacrilege
On Penance
St. Paul says: I beseech you to offer your bodies to God as a sacrifice
of mortification and penance, but in such wise that this sacrifice may be holy
and acceptable in His sight. That it may become so, he adds, this painful
sacrifice of mortification must be reasonable, that is, made with discretion
and without excess....
However, to the effect that penance may be discreet and reasonable,
conformably with the instruction left us by the Apostle of the Gentiles, it
must fulfill two conditions, according to the rules which the Holy Fathers have
prescribed for its practice. First, it should mortify the body, but not injure
the health. Secondly, it must not hinder our fulfillment of the duties attached
to our state of life. St. Basil expresses himself clearly in his Constitutions
as to the former of these conditions; he will have penance taken in a measure
proportioned to the strength of the body. Notice that by continence the holy
Doctor here means bodily austerities. We should imitate the camel, which kneels
to receive its burden, but which, when sufficiently laden, rises to its feet,
and refuses to take more. As St. Bernard says, the body must be afflicted by
penance in such degree as to prevent its unruly turning against the spirit; but
it is not to be disabled or annihilated, so as to hinder it contributing to the
exercise of the inner virtues, which are by far the most useful. St. Gregory
the Great is of the like mind, when he says that in the use of penance we
should keep within these bounds: we should not slay the flesh, but only its
unruly passions.
Rev. John Baptist Scaramelli, S.J., Guide
to the Spiritual Life
Because the life of prayer and union with God is what I love
most of all; because I find it the most perfect; because it
is a life of heaven, in a certain way, since a Carmelite is concerned only with
being united to God and contemplating Him always and singing His praises. That thirst for prayer continually grows in
me; my recollection is always continuous now, because whatever I do, I do with
my Jesus and offer it to Him with love. When, for any reason whatever I am
unable to make my prayer, I suffer at not being able to be with my God.
The solitude of Carmel helps recollection.
That isolation from creatures helps Carmelites exchange with God alone and, as
a result, to attain greater union with Him, because this is the heart of
perfection. I believe that solitude won't tire me, as I'm always searching for
it. I often become troubled when dealing with creatures, because I’m with God when
I’m alone.
The poverty of a Carmelite is very great.
She can possess nothing, which means that her whole capacity for possessing
things is filled by God alone. By being poor, she is made even more like to her
Divine Spouse who had nowhere to lay His head. A Carmelite must possess God
alone.
The penance to which she submits herself
and the austerity of her life are a greater means of having her body made
submissive to the soul in order to become more like her Divine Spouse who
became a victim for our sins. She does penance for her own sins and for those
of the world. And in this way she shows her love for God who has filled her
with so many favors.
Her sacrifice is perpetual, without
mitigation, from the time her religious life begins until she dies as a victim
according to the example of Jesus Christ. And she does all this in silence with
no one aware of it. Yet how many are there who think of this life as useless.
Nevertheless, she’s like the Lamb of God. She removes the sins from the world.
She sacrifices herself to bring back to the sheepfold those sheep who have gone
astray. But just as Christ did not know the world, neither does she know it.
This abnegation enchants me completely. There is no room for self-love. She
doesn’t even see the fruit of her prayer. In heaven alone will she know
this.
The goal she proposes to herself is very
great: to pray and sanctify herself so that the divine sap may be communicated
through the union that exists between the faithful and all the members of the
Church. She immolates herself on the cross, and her blood falls on sinners,
pleading for mercy and repentance, for on the cross she is intimately united to
Jesus Christ. Her blood, then, is mixed with His Divine Blood.
All these consideration that I make,
Father, are the ones that induce me to prefer Carmel, since I believe that in
that life, I will attain holiness. I have chosen the Carmelite life because I
see that, in choosing it, I will find the cross; and I would travel, I believe,
through the whole world with God's grace in search of it and to possess it,
because on the cross is Jesus Christ.
Juana Fernández Solar (St. Teresa of the Andes), letter written at
fifteen years of age to a priest explaining why she wanted to become a
Discalced Carmelite nun.
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
Modernist
Heresy
“The medieval concept of
substance has long since become inaccessible to us. In so far as we use the concept of
substance at all today we understand thereby the ultimate particles of matter,
and the chemically complex mixture that is bread certainly does not fall into
that category.” Benedict/Ratzinger, Faith and the Future
Catholic
Truth
If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained
in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of
nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all
necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that
the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema
Vatican Council I, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Catholic Faith
Modernist
Heresy
“At this time the idea of salvation history
had moved to the focus of inquiry posed by Catholic theology and this had cast
new light on the notion of revelation, which neo-scholasticism had kept too
confined to the intellectual realm. Revelation now appeared no longer simply as a communication of truths
to the intellect but as a historical action of God in which truth becomes
gradually unveiled.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, Milestones
(Memoirs 1927-1977), published 1998
Catholic
Truth
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 pretext of a
deeper comprehension of them.
Vatican I
“Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was
handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the
same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the
heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to
another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn
every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been
given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a
philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been
developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.”
Oath Against Modernism
DOGMA
is the proximate "rule of faith"!
When
the Pope personally falls from the faith, the "Catholic religion (is
still) preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See" in her Magisterial
documents.
The first means of safety is to guard the rule of strict faith and to
deviate in no way from those things that have been laid down by the Fathers.
And indeed the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: "Thou art Peter; and upon
this rock I will build my church" [Matthey 16:18], cannot be disregarded;
these things which were spoken are demonstrated by the results, for the
Catholic religion has been preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See.
Opening sentence of the "Formula Hormisdae", the decree of
Pope Hormisdas to the Eastern Churches that had followed the Acacian Schism,
516 A.D., for their correct profession of faith. The document was cited at
Vatican I.
Synod Office releases first two Final Reports of the Study Groups
The General Secretariat of the Synod publishes the first two Final
Reports of the Study Groups established by Pope Francis following the First
Session of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops: that of Study
Group No. 3 on 'The mission in the digital environment' and that of Study Group
No. 4 on 'The revision of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis in
a missionary synodal perspective.'
Vatican News | March 3, 2026
The General Secretariat of the Synod has
today released the first two Final Reports of the Study Groups established by
Pope Francis following the First Session of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly
of the Synod of Bishops.
The reports published were that of Study
Group No. 3 on 'The Mission in the Digital Environment' and Study Group No. 4
on 'The Revision of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis in a
Missionary Synodal Perspective.'
Pope Leo XIV has directed the publication of these Final Reports to
share with the entire People of God the fruits of the reflection and
discernment undertaken during the Synod, in a spirit of transparency and
accountability. The Final Reports are published in English and Italian,
with an indication of the original language and the working translation.
A summary, available in various languages,
accompanies each Report to facilitate access. With the presentation of their
Final Reports, Study Groups No. 3 and No. 4 conclude their mandate and are
therefore to be considered dissolved.
The General Secretariat will continue to
release the Final Reports progressively, with the next publication scheduled
for 10 March 2026.
Cardinal Mario Grech, Secretary General of
the Synod, said that the Reports, “beyond the value of their content,"
"testify to the shared journey undertaken with the Dicasteries.
"It is not the first time that the Dicasteries have collaborated
on a common project, but here," he added, "there is something more:
an authentic exercise of shared listening, reflection, and discernment. It is
synodality put into practice, not merely bureaucratic cooperation.”
The Mission in
the Digital Environment
The Report of Study Group No. 3 addresses a
central question that emerged during the XVI Assembly, namely how to live the
Church’s mission within a culture increasingly shaped by the digital sphere.
The Group, drawing on a broad consultation
involving pastoral workers, experts, and ecclesial realities from all
continents, gathered experiences, analyzed challenges, and formulated concrete
recommendations.
Key themes include the need to integrate digital mission into the
Church’s ordinary structures, an in-depth analysis of territorial jurisdiction
in light of online communities, and the formation of pastors and pastoral
workers in digital culture.
The Report concludes with a series of
operative proposals articulated at three levels: the Holy See, Episcopal
Conferences, and dioceses. It also includes an extensive section on the
methodology adopted and the entities consulted.
Formation to
the Priesthood
Rather than proceeding with a revision of
the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis (2016), which is still
considered valid in its fundamental principles, Study Group No. 4 opted to
elaborate a Proposal for a Guiding Document for its implementation in a
missionary synodal key, in line with the Final Document of the XVI Assembly.
The document is structured in two parts. The Preamble offers an
ecclesiological-pastoral framework and identifies a series of necessary conversions
in priestly formation: relational, missionary, toward communion, toward
service, and toward a synodal style. At its heart lies a central insight: the
identity of the priest is formed “in and from” the People of God, not in
separation from it.
The Guidelines in the second part translate
these conversions into concrete operative pathways.
Some of the most significant proposals include alternating residence
between the seminary and parish communities or other ecclesial contexts; shared
formative experiences and moments with lay faithful, consecrated persons, and
ordained ministers, starting from the propaedeutic stage; the inclusion of
qualified and competent women as co-responsible at all levels of formation,
including within formation teams; and the acquisition of skills for
co-responsibility and communal discernment.
The Group also proposed a pathway for the
dissemination and implementation of the operative directions offered.
Nature and
publication of the Final Reports
Along with the Final Report of Study Group
No. 3, the General Secretariat also published a Note outlining the origin and
mandate of the Study Groups, the nature of the Reports, and the envisaged
operational follow-up.
In the note, it highlights that the Final
Reports are the fruit of a structured process: the listening to diverse
competencies and professional expertise, the analysis of numerous
contributions, academic research, dialogue with various ecclesial bodies, from
Episcopal Conferences to Catholic universities, and, above all, discernment and
prayer.
They are to be understood as working
documents.
Pope Leo XIV, has directed that the Final
Reports be published progressively, as they are presented to the General
Secretariat of the Synod, in a spirit of transparency.
In order that the content that has emerged
may be translated into concrete orientations, decisions and processes, the Holy
Father has requested the competent Dicasteries and the General Secretariat of
the Synod to draw up, on the basis of the Final Reports, operative proposals,
also giving an account of the choices made and of any elements not received.
This joint effort, the General
Secretariat's note continues, ensures coherence with the synodal dynamism and
rootedness in the Church’s missionary perspective.
The operative proposals thus formulated
will be submitted to the Holy Father, who will evaluate and may approve them.
With the submission of the Final Report to
the General Secretariat of the Synod, the Study Groups that have delivered it
conclude the mandate entrusted to them and are therefore to be considered
dissolved.
COMMENT: This article is
reproduced as a penitential offering for Lent. It is a collection of
bureaucratic drivel but its purpose is in fact malignant. Vatican II, the pastoral
council, that from a faithful Catholic's perspective is a pastoral failure
because since its implementation the Church has suffered the greatest apostasy
in the history of the Church. For Leo, the Vatican II Council is in fact a
wonderful success because his purpose is the destruction of the Church. That is
why for the Novus Ordites, Vatican II Council "cannot be questioned."
The important point of this publication on Synodality is the fundamental change
in the conception of the priesthood. The
heart of the Catholic priesthood is nicely summed up by St. Paul:
For every high priest taken from among men,
is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God, that he may offer up
gifts and sacrifices for sins: Who can have compassion on them that are
ignorant and that err: because he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And
therefore he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.
Neither doth any man take the honour to himself, but he that is called by God,
as Aaron was. So Christ also did not glorify himself, that he might be made a
high priest: but he that said unto him: Thou art my Son, this day have I
begotten thee.
As he saith also in another place: Thou art
a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech. Who in the days of
his flesh, with a strong cry and tears, offering up prayers and supplications
to him that was able to save him from death, was heard for his reverence. And
whereas indeed he was the Son of God, he learned obedience by the things which
he suffered: And being consummated, he became, to all that obey him, the cause
of eternal salvation. Called by God a high priest according to the order of
Melchisedech (Heb 5;1-10).
There is nothing from St. Paul that calls
for a "necessary
conversions in priestly formation: relational, missionary, toward communion,
toward service, and toward a synodal style." Don't forget that the
Novus Ordo "missionary" believes that proselytism is "solemn
nonsense" and therefore, a Novus Ordo "missionary" has no
mission from God. There is nothing from St. Paul that calls for "inclusion of qualified and
competent women as co-responsible at all levels of (priestly) formation,
including within formation teams; and the acquisition of skills for
co-responsibility and communal discernment" What is entirely absent from
the Novus Ordo synodal priest is his essence
and that is the power in "offering up gifts and sacrifices for sins."
The Novus Ordo priest is not "called by God, as Aaron was." He is not
called upon to share in the sacrificial priesthood of Jesus Christ that is in
its essence is a sacrificial and
sacrificing priesthood. This synodal intent in ordination cannot make a man a
priest any more than it can make a lady priestettes.
Explains
why Newman is now a "Doctor" of the Novus Ordites
He (Henry Cardinal
Newman) was led into his error by the false philosophy of the age, which
asserts that the mind apprehends truth only under subjective forms, and by
his Protestantism, which misapprehends the real character of those new
definitions and further explications of the faith opposed by the Church to
novel heresies and errors as they arise (i.e.:DOGMA). Confounding the
simple belief of the truth with the intellectual process of comprehending it,
he fell into the mistake of supposing that heresy has always an honest origin,
that it always springs from the necessary and laudable effort of the mind, an
effort which every true believer must make, to ascertain and comprehend the
truth, and that it always presupposes the faith on the point it contradicts was
previously unknown even to the pastors of the Church; — a sad mistake, for the
Church has never hesitated as to the faith to be opposed to the novel heresy,
which proves that she knew it prior to the heresy, and the heresy never originates
in ignorance of the faith or in an honest endeavor to ascertain it, but in the
desire to establish a favorite theory, or to follow one's own private judgment.
Orestes Brownson,
on the fundamental err of Cardinal John Henry Newman, who Modernist Heretics
regard as their principle inspiration, from Newman's theory, written as a
Protestant, Essay on the Development of Christine Doctrine
The SINS of the Novus Ordo Church:
Characterized first and foremost by its SINS against the
Theological Virtues and its SINS against the Virtue of Religion - the most
Malicious of all SINS because they have God as their direct objects!
From a theological point of view, evils may
be divided into two classes : Voluntary evils (Sins) and Involuntary evils
(Pain and Suffering). The evils of the first class are really "the"
evil, that is, objects to be avoided and hated. They are also the greatest
evils, because they injure at the same time their own author and the Author of
nature. God cannot cause, but only permit and oppose them. The evils of the
second class are only evils of the subject which naturally abhors them, yet
they are not so detestable as to be avoided in all cases. God may cause them
and use them as means to His ends; notably, as a penalty for sin. In the original
order established by Him, there was no room for evils of this class. They came
into the world with sin. As a matter of fact, then, all evils existing in this
world spring from sin, the greatest and original evil. Hence the above division
is equivalent to another which distinguishes "Evils of Guilt" and
"Evils of Penalty" (mala
culpae, mala poenae). Many evils may, however, be at the same time a guilt
and a penalty. Sin in its theological and proper sense, consists in the
conscious and voluntary transgression, lesion, or denial of the moral order
imposed upon the creature by Divine Law. The philosophical notion of sin does
not contain the element of Divine command. What to the theologian is a
voluntary transgression of the law of God is looked upon by the philosopher as
a transgression of the rational and natural order. Yet even in sound philosophy
the notion of sin ought not to be dissociated from disobedience to the
Lawgiver, for sin is always an action against the dictates of conscience, and
these are but the commanding voice of God (Rom. ii. 14-16).
Hence the essence of sin consists in the
more or less express opposition of the human will against the Divine Will, an
opposition which implies a certain neglect or contempt of the Divine Will
itself. This contempt involves an "aversion from God as the ultimate
End," that is, a refusal of the submission and love which are His due. Sin
averts or turns away the creature from God as the Highest Good in Himself, and
from God as the Highest Good of the creature itself, in Whom alone it can find
perfect beatitude. It seeks outside God a satisfaction or pleasure incompatible
with the possession and fruition of God. On God's side, the contempt of His
will by the creature constitutes an offence and an insult, according to the
saying, "The lawbreaker offends the lawmaker." And this offence
always includes an "injury;" that is, it injures or damages the
external glory of God. For this reason, Holy Scripture describes sin as
injustice, and iniquity. Again, sin being always committed under the very eyes
or in the face of God, it must needs excite His displeasure, abhorrence,
indignation, and anger. These affections in God are not accompanied by the same
feelings as in man, yet they exist in Him eminently; and it is not the defect
of malice in sin, but God's own immutability, which prevents Him from being
affected with infinite pain by the sinner. In sins against the theological virtues, and against the
virtue of religion, the aversion and offence assume a direct character, because
God is the immediate object of these virtues. Sin is clearly the
greatest of evils — and an absolute evil, because it deprives the Greatest and
Absolute Good of the honour due to Him.
Scheeben's Manual of Catholic Theology by
Rev. Joseph Wilhelm, D.D., Ph.D. and Rev Thomas B. Scannell, D.D.
Separation
of Church and State is impossible. Every
state has an established religion with a creedal profession containing articles
of faith that it demands its citizens profess.
These articles of faith cannot be proven to be true or even demonstrated
as consistent with natural law. The
U.S.A. is no exception to this rule. We have a state religion but it is called
by another name. The secular dogma,
‘Separation of Church and State’, is nothing more than a tool to prevent
competition against the state religion in the public forum. The state demands a “faith” in “general
values” that are always “relative and changing.”
All organization is action and all action is rude. […..] There is a
hierarchy of values which have been expressed in nearly every revolutionary
slogan in history…. These values are up
on top. The democratic way of life is nothing more than a process, a device, a modus operandi, designed as the best
way, we believe, of achieving those values, of growing into them so to speak.
Now, those values that I have mentioned cannot be discussed, they cannot be
argued, they cannot be debated, they are articles of faith. [..…] In a free and
open society, equality is a value you cannot discuss or debate or put on a
ballot. If you do not accept our values then you can have no voice in a
democratic process. Then get out of our system and go someplace else. [……]
These values and goals, out of necessity, are always stated in general terms. Every literate revolutionary knows that you
cannot be any more than general (in your) terms because all values are relative
and are changing.
Saul Alinsky, Jewish revolutionary, explaining the ‘religion’ of the
modern democratic state, 1/17/69, UCLA
Society
has already reached a sense of being “defeated” and “futureless.” The Novus Ordo Church is an essential cause
and contributor to this sense rather than a light of hope of union with Jesus
Christ!
[You must help] the people in the community… feel so frustrated,
so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are
willing to let go of the past and chance the future. [An] organizer must
shake up the prevailing patterns of their lives –agitate, create disenchantment
and discontent with the current values, to produce, if not a passion for
change, at least a passive, affirmative, non-challenging climate. [You
must] fan the embers of hopelessness into a flame of fight.
Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
Traditionalist Catholic group doubles down on illicit consecrations,
setting course for potential schism
Vatican News | Vatican City | Justin McLellan | February 19, 2026
The traditionalist Catholic society long a
thorn in the side of the Vatican will move forward with plans to create its own
bishops without approval from the pope. The plan escalates its standoff with
Rome and sets the group on a path toward an outright break from the Catholic
Church.
The Feb. 19 announcement marks the latest
turn in a back-and-forth between the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican that
sought to avoid a full-blown rupture between the two. Now, the situation poses
a major test for Pope Leo XIV, who has made church unity a priority of his
pontificate.
Fr. Davide Pagliarani, superior general of
the Society of St. Pius X, said in a letter that the society would not postpone
its announced bishop consecrations. The letter was sent to Cardinal Víctor
Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which
oversees the Vatican's relationship with the group.
The two met one-on-one on Feb. 12 to
discuss a resolution to the society's threat of consecrating new bishops in
defiance of Rome.
In their meeting, the cardinal offered to
engage in a theological "path of dialogue" with the society to
establish "the minimum requirements necessary for full communion with the
Catholic Church" on the condition the society suspend their planned
episcopal consecrations.
Notably, Fernández met with the pope on
Feb. 19, the day the letter was made public.
The Society of St. Pius X has long operated
in a canonical gray zone. While its priests have been granted faculties in
certain cases, including permission for the valid administration of confession
and marriage, the society continues to function without full canonical
recognition and in open defiance of church authorities.
Pagliarini wrote that the society is not
seeking canonical regularity in the church,which he said "in the current
state of affairs, is impracticable due to doctrinal divergences."
The Society of St. Pius X, which counts 733
priests worldwide according to its latest figures, rejects key teachings of the
Second Vatican Council. That includes the church's teaching on interreligious
dialogue and the postconciliar liturgical reform promulgated in 1970 and now
celebrated by nearly all Latin-rite Catholics.
Among the topics Fernández proposed for
discussion with the Society of St. Pius X were "the different degrees of
assent required by the various texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council
and their interpretation."
In response, Pagliarani wrote that the
society and the Vatican "cannot agree doctrinally" in light of the
insistence that "the texts of the Council cannot be corrected, nor can the
legitimacy of the liturgical reform be challenged."
The society's decision sets up a direct
confrontation with the Vatican ahead of its planned July 1 bishop
consecrations, a move widely interpreted as an attempt to pressure Rome into
addressing the Society of St. Pius X's shrinking number of bishops. [......]
COMMENT: It is unfortunate that the SSPX is incapable of
effectively defending the Catholic Faith against the Neo-Modernists that
control the Vatican. It is absurd to say, "we 'cannot agree doctrinally' in
light of the insistence that 'the texts of the Council cannot be corrected, nor
can the legitimacy of the liturgical reform be challenged.'" It is not a
question of exchanging legitimate theological opinions on open questions. It is
question defending the faith against the claims of heretics. Vatican II and the
Novus Ordo communion service are heretical. SSPX should confront aberrant
theological opinions and the corruption of divine worship of the Neo-Modernists
with Catholic dogma. They should begin by asking how is it possible that a
pastoral council of churchmen teaching merely by their grace of state that
called everything in the Church into question itself cannot be questioned,
especially when its implementation has caused the greatest destruction of faith
and worship in the history of the Church? Their reason for this is no mystery.
It is perfectly legitimate to conclude that the destruction of the Church is
the intention of the Neo-Modernists. That is why they will not question Vatican
II is because, in their estimation, it is magnificent success! It is doing
exactly what it was intended to do.
Pope Leo has begun a series of Vatican II
"catechesis." The most recent on February 18 was on the document,
Lumen gentium, the constitution on the Church,
and subtitled, "The mystery of the Church, sacrament of the union
with God, and the unity of all humanity," wherein he cited this Lumen
gentium teaching:
"The Church is in Christ like a sacrament or as a sign and
instrument both of a very closely knit union with God and of the unity of the
whole human race." Vatican II, Lumen Gentium
Is this true? No it is not. The Church is
the Mystical Body of Christ. This is an identity and it is heresy to obfuscate
this truth by claiming, as Lumen Gentium did, that the "Mystical Body of
Christ subsists in the Catholic
Church" implying there are other members of the Church of Chrst that are
not Catholics. The members of the Catholic Church, and therefore, the Mystical
Body of Christ, profess the one, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic faith; they
have, while professing this faith, by the sacrament of Baptism been made
members of this Body; and they as members of this Body are subject to her
ecclesiastical superiors. Those that have not been baptized are not members of
the Church; those that are baptized and reject the truths revealed by God are
apostates and/or heretics and are not members of the Church; those that reject
the universal jurisdiction of the pope are schismatics and are not members of
the Church. The Church is NOT a "sign.... of a very close knit union....
of the whole human race" because the "whole human race" is not a
member of the Church. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Those
members of the "whole human race" who reject the Catholic faith stand
only in potentia to this membership
and the possibility of salvation. The duty of the pope is to preach the gospel
message for the purpose bringing those in potentia
to membership in the Church to being members in actu. This is why for the post Vatican II Novus Ordo popes
proselytism is "solemn nonsense" because if the "whole human
race" is somehow already united to the Church they do not need to be
converted. Pope Leo in affirming this
corrupt pastoral opinion from Vatican II is joining himself with its heresy,
and as St. Thomas made perfectly clear, "all heretics are
schismatics." Furthermore, it is an absurdity, a violation of the first
principles of the understanding, to affirm that disobedience to the pope who is
a heretic, and therefore a schismatic, is a schismatic act! It would be to
claim that a schismatic pope makes the entire Church schismatic.
For the Indult Catholic Community: This is who they are
dealing with!
Is church unity worth a Latin Mass?
Religion News Service |Thomas Reese | February 6, 2026
"Paris is well worth a Mass" was
reportedly the attitude of King Henry IV when he was trying to secure the
French throne. As a result, he converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in
1593.
Today, the Eucharist, which is supposed to
be the sacrament of unity, is too often a battlefield between Catholics who
support the Traditional Latin Mass and those who want to see it disappear. Both
sides need to ask themselves whether the fight is worth something more
important than Paris: the unity of the church.
You must be my age to remember before the
Second Vatican Council, when the liturgy was entirely in Latin in Catholic
churches, except in those using Eastern Rite liturgies, where it was often in
Greek. In Rome, it had been changed from Greek into Latin in the third and
fourth centuries so the common people could understand it — a pragmatic
decision, not a theological one.
When I was young, we took it for granted
that the Mass was in Latin. It was something that made us different from
Protestants. We could go to the same Mass anywhere in the world. The Scripture
readings were in Latin, although on Sunday the priest would reread the Gospel
in English before giving his sermon. Otherwise, unless you had a translation,
you had no idea what the readings were.
The Eucharistic prayer was the priest' s
prayer, which he said with his back to us. The altar boy would ring the bells
to notify us when the priest raised the host and chalice for us to adore. The
bell also rang to call us to Communion.
Other than that, the priest did his thing
and the congregation passively watched or prayed in silence.
In high school from 1958 to 1962, I had a
St. Joseph's Missal with Latin on one side of the page and English on the other
so that I could follow what the priest was praying when I went to daily Mass,
but that was not the norm. My parents had prayerbooks they read during Mass
that had no connection to what the priest was doing. Others in the church
silently said their rosaries during Mass.
And prior to the 20th century, Communion
was infrequent. My parents were among the first children allowed to go to
Communion. Those who want
to bring back the Tridentine liturgy, if they want to be truly traditional,
should go to Communion less frequently and not allow their children to go to
Communion. Otherwise they are accepting early 20th-century innovations.
Although I entered the Jesuits prior to the
Second Vatican Council and went through a very traditional novitiate, I did not
find the liturgical changes difficult to accept. Our conservative novice master taught us a course on the
history of the Mass using Josef A. Jungmannn's "Mass of the Roman
Rite," which was published in English in 1951. It taught us that the Mass
was always changing throughout history.
The transition was also made easier by our traditional novitiate's
emphasis on obedience. If the church decided to change the liturgy, we were to
accept it without question. To do otherwise would be disobedient.
The Jesuits in charge of formation were no help during the transition.
They were clueless about what was happening. The classics professors
argued about how we should pronounce "Amen" in English. The first
time our superior said the Eucharistic prayer in English, he got as far as the
institutional narrative and switched to "Hoc est enim corpus meum."
The next day, he was able to do it all in English.
Some of my classmates had problems with the transition. Before
ordination in 1973, one confessed that it just wasn't the same because in the
old church, after ordination, he would be allowed to touch the consecrated
bread for the first time. Now anyone could receive Communion in the hand. It
was as if part of his priesthood had been taken away.
But for the most part, the liturgical changes were accepted and
implemented with excitement and joy. They were the most visible reforms
of Vatican II. And after a bit of confusion, they were accepted overwhelmingly
by Catholics in the pews.
But there were two groups of holdouts.
First, there were those who found the change difficult because they
were used to the old ways and the reforms were not well explained. Popes Paul
VI and John Paul II wanted to deal with these people with pastoral sensitivity
and patience, but the popes made clear that eventually, the old Mass was to
fade away.
The other group of holdouts was more problematic. They objected to the
new liturgy in principle and felt it was blasphemous. In truth, these
ideologues objected to all the reforms of the council, not just liturgy. They
were divisive and contentious.
Some of these dissenters were led into schism by French Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre, despite all the Vatican's efforts to appease him. To
undermine Lefebvre and win back schismatics to the church, the Vatican
permitted more frequent celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass. This
strategy was partially successful, as exemplified by Priestly Fraternity of St.
Peter, which celebrates the old Mass but is in unity with the pope.
But there was an unanticipated side effect: Some who grew up after
Vatican II began to attend these Latin Masses. Most were not ideologues, but
pious, theologically unsophisticated Catholics who were attracted by the ritual
and mysterious ceremony that allowed them to focus on adoration and private
prayer without the distraction of communal participation.
It is a mistake for liturgical reformers to
lump this third group in with the ideologues who reject Vatican II. These are
good, devout people who want to come closer to Jesus and find spiritual
nourishment in the old liturgy. Their existence is a result of our failure to better explain the
reforms and to make the new liturgy more appealing to them. We should have
encouraged them to go to Benediction and explained how it is different form
Mass.
Pope Benedict XVI erred in taking away the local bishop's control over
the Latin Mass and allowing any priest to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass
anywhere, any time. Pope Francis erred in seeing only the ideologues and not
the pious Catholics who liked the old Mass.
Now, poor Pope Leo XIV must figure out how to deal with this mess in a
pastoral way that does not empower the ideologues and affirms that the
Traditional Latin Mass must eventually fade away. This is why he gets the big
bucks.
Leo should keep in place the Francis mandate that seminarians are to be
trained and ordained for the reformed liturgy. If they prefer the old Mass,
they should not be ordained.
On the other hand, Francis' ban on the
Latin Mass in parishes could have more flexibility. It might make sense to
return the authority over this to diocesan bishops, although some may prefer to
blame the Vatican for not allowing it. And yet, this is exactly the kind of
issue that should be handled in a synodal fashion at the local level. And
diocesan bishops can more easily determine whether those asking for the Latin
Mass are pious Catholics or ideologues, and respond accordingly.
In any case, I would keep some limits on the availability of the Latin
Mass. It should be banned on major feasts like Christmas, Holy Week, Easter and
holy days, so that the entire community can gather for and take part in these
feasts. And, the Latin Mass should not be available every Sunday. Everyone
should experience the new liturgy on a regular basis, at least once a month,
especially families with children. If one totally rejects the reformed liturgy,
then one is out of step with the church.
Meanwhile, Leo should relaunch liturgical reform. The 1998 English
translation of the Roman missal by the International Commission on English in
the Liturgy should be permitted. Individual prefaces should be written for each
Sunday in the A, B and C cycles of Scripture readings. New Eucharistic prayers
that are more scriptural should be written.
Henry IV compromised his faith to win
Paris. Catholics of all stripes should be able to compromise on the liturgy to
maintain the unity of the church. We must respect and love one another, despite
our liturgical differences. And everyone should know that we are Christians by
our love, not know that we are Catholics by our fights.
COMMENT: Thomas
Reese, S.J., the author of this editorial, is a progressive liberal Jesuit who
is about 81 years of age. His entire religions life directly tied to liberal
causes. For example, he is involved with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
at the Jesuit Santa Clara University which holds as a first principle the
Vatican II humanistic philosophy of the dignity of the human person which ends
up in defending abortion rights. He is also the former editor-in-chief from
1998 to 2005 of the Jesuit magazine America.
The Jesuit order he is a member of during his religions life has become largely
a homosexual collective.
His recounting of his liturgical formation
is interesting. He was formed by his Jesuit novice master at the beginning of
Vatican II. His novice master, using Josef Jungmann, S. J. as his authority, is
credited for his liturgical views. Jungmann was a professor of pastoral
theology in Austria who wrote the two-volume The Mass of the Roman Rite, Its Origin and Development. He held
that the primary purpose of the liturgy from the beginning of the Church was
pastoral. He was active in the liturgical reform with Rev. Annibale Bugnini
from the beginning of the liturgical commission in 1948. He envisioned a Novus
Ordo Mass with a primary pastoral purpose. He was largely a self instructed
liturgical "expert" who functioned as a peritus at Vatican II and
the major contributor to its
Constitution on the Liturgy. Jungmann's idea of a pastoral liturgy was
to return to the liturgical practices around the 4th to the 6th century. Over
the last 40 years beginning in the 1980s, there has been a tremendous amount of
liturgical academic research and publications as well as the reprinting of
liturgical works. The upshot of this is that Jungmann was exposed as a fraud
selective picking and choosing anecdotal historical elements that served his
ideology and not the Catholic faith or true liturgical development. One example, he wrote that the ancient Roman
rite was offered versus populum and
not ad orientem. When real liturgical
scholars demonstrated his error he argued that versus populum may not be what was done but should be done now for
pastoral reasons. Msgr. Klaus Gamber made it clear in his work on the Roman
rite that this practice can be traced to Luther and the Protestant reformation
and nowhere before. Jungmann was an ecumenical ideologue and not ashamed to
publish lies if they helped his cause.
An ideology is a man conceived intellectual
system pertaining to some specific form of thought and/or action based upon
human presuppositions that are held be faith alone, that is, they cannot be
demonstrated or proved. A Catholic is not an ideologue because his
presuppositions rest upon divine authority. Reese, like the former Jesuit pope,
holds traditional Catholics as ideologues while it is Reese himself, like
Francis/Begoglio, who is tied to a hopeless, loosing, antiquated, boring
ideology. Francis/Bergoglio is the only one who ever tried to identify the
"traditional" ideology as a form of the Pelagian heresy. That was so stupid it
merited no intellectual exposition by anyone. Liberals like Reese effectively
deny original sin. They are faced with the reality of a fallen human nature and
thus constantly spend themselves on determining its causes and proposing their
remedies. Since their diagnosis excludes the need for divine redemption and
salvation, it is always wrong and their remedies always fail. Yet the liberal
never repents his folly. The failures are always attributed to others who did
not implement the plan with sufficient rigor, for sufficient time, and with
sufficient purity. They never take
responsibility for the ruin they cause in countless lives.
Reese is a shining example of this. He has
been a Catholic religious with the Jesuits from the beginning of Vatican II
Council and standing in the worst collapse in Catholic faith and morals in the
shortest period of time recommends a "relaunch" (of the) liturgical
reform." The PEW pole that Reese sites determined that only about 30% of
those who identify as Catholics believe in the dogma of transubstantiation. The
purpose of the American bishops poll was to bump these numbers up. They did
this by avoiding any technical terminology that would be found in a grade
school catechism and asking multiple questions to arrive at the conclusion that
the respondent, who were restricted to those who actually attended a weekly
communion service, had some sense of Catholic teaching. Reese is responsible
for this as much as any of his fellow religious and yet he still thinks his
opinions have value! This idiot will soon follow Francis/Bergoglio to his
eternal judgment. At that judgment the fruits of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo
service will condemn him because it is by these fruits that he is known. He
will plead to the just Judge that he was
only being "obedient" religious and anyway, since Francis/Bergoglio
pointed out, "time greater than space", he just did not have enough
time to see that things were going wrong? He will be told, 'No, space is
greater than time', for you, "time" is over and your
"space" is awaiting and prepared for you and it is not with the
blessed.
Letter from Father Pagliarani to Cardinal Fernández
February 19, 2026
Source: FSSPX News
Response
of the General Council of the Society of Saint Pius X to the Prefect of
the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Menzingen, 18 February 2026
Ash Wednesday
Most Reverend Eminence,
First of all, I thank you for receiving me on
12 February, and for making public the content of our meeting, which promotes
perfect transparency in communication.
I can only welcome the opening of a doctrinal
discussion, as signalled today by the Holy See, for the simple reason that I
myself proposed it exactly seven years ago, in a letter dated 17 January 2019.
At that time, the Dicastery did not truly express interest in such a
discussion, on the grounds—presented orally—that a doctrinal agreement between
the Holy See and the Society of Saint Pius X was impossible.
For the Society’s part, a doctrinal discussion
has always been—and remains—desirable and useful. Indeed, even if we do not
reach an agreement, fraternal exchanges allow us to better know one another, to
refine and deepen our own arguments, and to better understand the spirit and
intentions behind our interlocutor’s positions—especially their genuine love
for the Truth, for souls, and for the Church. This holds true, at all times,
for both parties.
This was precisely my intention in 2019, when I
suggested a discussion during a calm and peaceful time, without the pressure or
threat of possible excommunication, which would have undermined free
dialogue—as is, unfortunately, the situation today.
That said, while I certainly rejoice at a new
opening of dialogue and the positive response to my proposal of 2019, I cannot
accept the perspective and objectives in the name of which the Dicastery offers
to resume dialogue in the present situation, nor indeed the postponement of the
date of 1 July.
I respectfully present to you the reasons for
this, to which I will add some supplementary considerations.
1.
We both
know in advance that we cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the
fundamental orientations adopted since the Second Vatican Council. This
disagreement, for the Society’s part, does not stem from a mere difference of
opinion, but from a genuine case of conscience, arising from what has proven to
be a rupture with the Tradition of the Church. This complex knot has
unfortunately become even more inextricable with the doctrinal and pastoral
developments of recent pontificates.
I
therefore do not see how a joint process of dialogue could end in determining
together what would constitute “the minimum requirements for full communion
with the Catholic Church”, since—as you yourself have recalled with
frankness—the texts of the Council cannot be corrected, nor can the legitimacy
of the liturgical reform be challenged.
2.
This
dialogue is supposed to clarify the interpretation of the Second Vatican
Council. But this interpretation is already clearly given in the post-Conciliar
period and in the successive documents of the Holy See. The Second Vatican
Council is not a set of texts open to free interpretation: It has been
received, developed, and applied for sixty years by successive popes, according
to precise doctrinal and pastoral orientations.
This
official reading is expressed, for example, in major texts such as Redemptor
hominis, Ut unum sint, Evangelii gaudium, or Amoris
lætitia. It is also evident in the liturgical reform, understood in the
light of the principles reaffirmed in Traditionis custodes. All
these documents show that the doctrinal and pastoral framework within which the
Holy See intends to situate any discussion has already been firmly established.
3.
One cannot
ignore the context of the dialogue proposed today. We have been waiting for
seven years for a favourable response to the proposal of doctrinal discussion
made in 2019. More recently, we have written twice to the Holy Father: first to
request an audience, then to clearly and respectfully explain our needs and the
real-life situation of the Society.
Yet,
after a long silence, it is only when episcopal consecrations are mentioned
that an offer to resume dialogue is made, which thus seems dilatory and
conditional. Indeed, the hand extended to open the dialogue is unfortunately
accompanied by another hand already poised to impose sanctions. There is talk
of breaking communion, of schism, and of “serious consequences”. Moreover, this
threat is now public, creating pressure that is hardly compatible with a
genuine desire for fraternal exchanges and constructive dialogue.
4.
Furthermore, to us
it does not seem possible to enter into a dialogue to define what the minimum
requirements for ecclesial communion might be, simply because this task does
not belong to us. Throughout the centuries, the criteria for belonging to the
Church have been established and defined by the Magisterium. What must be
believed in order to be Catholic has always been taught with authority, in
constant fidelity to Tradition.
Thus, we
do not see how these criteria could be the subject of joint discernment through
dialogue, nor how they could be re-evaluated today so as not to correspond to
what the Tradition of the Church has always taught—and which we desire to
observe faithfully in our place.
5.
Finally, if a
dialogue is envisaged with the aim of producing a doctrinal statement that the
Society could accept regarding the Second Vatican Council, we cannot ignore the
historical precedents of efforts made in this direction. I draw your attention
to the most recent: the Holy See and the Society had a long course of dialogue,
beginning in 2009, particularly intense for two years, then pursued more
sporadically until 6 June 2017. Throughout these years, we sought to achieve
what the Dicastery now proposes.
Yet,
everything ultimately ended in a drastic manner, with the unilateral decision
of Cardinal Müller, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, who, in June 2017, solemnly established, in his own way, “the minimum
requirements for full communion with the Catholic Church”, explicitly including
the entire Council and the post-Conciliar period. This shows that, if one persists
in a doctrinal dialogue that is too forced and lacks sufficient serenity, in
the long term, instead of achieving a satisfactory result, one only worsens the
situation.
Thus, in the shared recognition that we cannot
find agreement on doctrine, it seems to me that the only point on which we can
agree is that of charity toward souls and toward the Church.
As a cardinal and bishop, you are above all a
pastor: allow me to address you in this capacity. The Society is an objective
reality: it exists. That is why, over the years, the Sovereign Pontiffs have
taken note of this existence and, through concrete and significant acts, have
recognised the value of the good it can accomplish, despite its canonical
situation. That is also why we are speaking today.
This same Society asks you only to be allowed
to continue to do this same good for the souls to whom it administers the holy
Sacraments. It asks nothing else of you—no privileges, nor even canonical
regularisation, which, in the current state of affairs, is impracticable due to
doctrinal divergences. The Society cannot abandon souls. The need for the
sacraments is a concrete, short-term need for the survival of Tradition, in
service to the Holy Catholic Church.
We can agree on one point: neither of us wishes
to reopen wounds. I will not repeat here all that we have already expressed in
the letter addressed to Pope Leo XIV, of which you have direct knowledge.
I only emphasise that, in the present situation, the only truly viable path is
that of charity.
Over the last decade, Pope Francis and yourself
have abundantly advocated “listening” and understanding of non-standard,
complex, exceptional, and particular situations. You have also wished for a use
of law that is always pastoral, flexible, and reasonable, without pretending to
resolve everything through legal automatism and pre-established frameworks. At
this moment, the Society asks of you nothing more than this—and above all it
does not ask it for itself: it asks it for these souls, for whom, as already
promised to the Holy Father, it has no other intention than to make true
children of the Roman Church.
Finally, there is another point on which we
also agree, and which should encourage us: the time separating us from 1 July
is one of prayer. It is a moment when we implore from Heaven a special grace
and, from the Holy See, understanding. I pray for you in particular to the Holy
Ghost and—do not take this as a provocation—His Most Holy Spouse, the Mediatrix
of all Graces.
I wish to thank you sincerely for the attention
you have given me, and for the interest you will kindly take in the present
matter.
Please accept, Most Reverend Eminence, the
expression of my most sincere greetings and of my devotion in the Lord.
Davide Pagliarani, Superior General
+ Alfonso de Galarreta, First Assistant General
Christian Bouchacourt, Second Assistant General
+ Bernard Fellay,
First Counsellor General, Former Superior General
Franz Schmidberger,
Second Counsellor General, Former Superior General
COMMENT: Among
Protestants there are a few doctrinal positions that unite them all: They
without exception profess that God did not establish His Church with the divine
attributes of infallibility, indefectibility and authority. Beyond this level
of agreement Protestants differ radically from one another in doctrine,
worship, and morality. The Protestant modus
vivendi then is to respect the errors of each other since none claim the
attribute of infallibility regarding truth in belief and practice. Christ's
Church is altogether different. The Church speaks with authority the truth of
God's revelation and of this truth will not be compromised one iota. The Novus
Ordo Church, like all Protestants, seeks an accommodation with the world and
its lies. The only thing they hate with one voice is the Catholic Church
because it does not. G.K. Chesterton said, 'The Catholic Church is intolerant
in principle because she believes; she tolerant in practice because she loves.
The world is tolerant in principle because it does not believe; it is
intolerant in practice because it does not love.' The Novus Ordo Church, like
the Protestants, is of the world that Jesus Christ said, "I pray not for
the world" (John 17:9). It is complete folly for the SSPX to beg from the
Novus Ordites a tolerance in belief based upon a charity in practice because
without faith, there is, and never can be, charity. The dialogue with the SSPX
began in 1997 and will go on as long as the SSPX stands upon opinion and not on
God's revealed truth.
Hermeneutics of
Continuity/Discontinuity
Explains why Novus Ordo Catholics
have dumped the season of Septuagesima and do not do penance for Lent – they
have ‘dialogued’ themselves out of Original Sin!
Original Sin:
Benedict/Ratzinger
teaches:
The account (of Genesis 3) tells us that sin begets sin, and that
therefore all the sins of history are interlinked. Theology refers to this
state of affairs by the certainly misleading and imprecise term ‘original sin’. What does this mean?
Nothing seems to us today to be stranger or, indeed, more absurd than to insist
upon original sin, since, according to our way of thinking, guilt can
only be something very personal, and since God does not run a concentration
camp, in which one’s relatives are imprisoned because he is a liberating God of
love, who calls each one by name. What
does original sin mean, then, when we interpret it correctly?
Finding an answer to this
requires nothing less than trying to understand the human person better. It must once again be stressed that no human being is closed in upon
himself or herself and that no one can live of or for himself or herself alone.
We receive our life not only at the moment of birth but every day from without
– from others who are not ourselves but who nonetheless somehow pertain to us.
Human beings have their selves not only in themselves but also outside of
themselves: they live in those whom they love and in those who love them and to
whom they are ‘present.’ Human beings are relational, and they possess their lives – themselves – only by way of relationship. I alone am not myself, but only in and with you am I myself. To be
truly a human being means to be related in love, to be of and for. But sin means the damaging or the
destruction of relationality. Sin is a rejection of relationality because it wants to make the human being a god. Sin is loss of relationship, disturbance of relationship, and therefore it is not
restricted to the individual. When I destroy a relationship, then this event – sin – touches the other person involved in the relationship. Consequently sin is always an offense that touches others, that
alters the world and damages it. To the extent that this is true, when the
network of human relationships is damaged from the very beginning, then every human being enters into
a world that is marked by relational damage. At the very moment that
a person begins human existence, which is a good, he or she is confronted by a
sin- damaged world. Each of us enters into a situation in which relationality has been hurt. Consequently each person is, from the very start,
damaged in relationships and does not engage in them as he or she ought. Sin pursues the human
being, and he or she capitulates to it.”
Benedict
XVI/Ratzinger, Catholic Understanding of the Story of
Creation and the Fall (1995)
Catholic Church teaches divine Truth with precision and
clarity:
“For
that which the Apostle has said, ‘By one man, sin entered into this world, and
by sin death, and so death passed upon all men in whom all have sinned.’ (Rom
5:12), is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread
everywhere hath always understood it. For,
by reason of this rule of faith, from a tradition of the Apostles, even infants
who could not as yet commit any sin of themselves, are for this cause truly
baptized for the remission of sins, that in them that may be cleansed away by
regeneration which they have contracted by generation. For, ‘unless a man
be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God.’” (John 3:5).
Council of Trent, Decree on Original Sin
“I was under a necessity to write unto you: to
beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints”
(Jude 1:3).
COMMENT:
Benedict/Ratzinger’s (B/R) heretical theology
presupposes modern doctrine of scientism that material reality consists of
atoms and the void in constant evolutionary progress. He therefore denies the
existence of substantial reality in
the place of substance, he offers the
accident of relationship as the
fundamental essence of all reality beginning with the reality of God. Being is rejected for becoming. The pursuit of Truth is
favored over its possession. This theology of B/R is applied to man and sin
including Original Sin. For the Catholic, sin is a transgression of the will of
God in a more or less serious degree. A serious violation of God’s will is a
mortal sin ending the life of grace in the substantial
soul of an individual man. The relationship of friendship with God is ended but
God remains in a relationship with all creatures including sinners because
without a relationship with God they would not exist. But while sin ends the
life of grace in the soul, the sin itself does not touch God.
And where does “relationality” lead? B/R’s
“essential” Christianity? It is a religion of fantasy that has no real
doctrinal or moral impediments and offers ‘dialogue’ as a nostrum for healing
all problems of “relationality.”
But who in their right mind would want to
join the ‘Church of Relationality’, which explains why the Novus Ordo Church
has massive defections and few conversions. It also explains why for
Francis/Bergoglio “proselytism is solemn nonsense.” How can you “proselytize” for a religion that
does not know what it believes or for what end it was established?
As for “relations,” if we want to
“essentialize our faith,” Jesus Christ makes perfectly clear just what is
really “essential”: “If
any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and
children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my
disciple” (Luke 14:26). The “essential… relation” is with Jesus Christ,
not man, and this “relation” is only possible by believing what Jesus Christ
has revealed and doing what Jesus Christ commands.
Seewald: “The Church prays
for Christians to be reunited. But who ought to join up with whom?”
Benedict/Ratzinger: “The formula that the great ecumenists
have invented is that we go forward together. It’s not a matter of our wanting
to achieve certain processes of integration, but we hope that the Lord will
awaken people’s faith everywhere in such a way that it overflows from one to
the other, and the one Church is there. As Catholics, we are persuaded that the
basic shape of this one Church is given us in the Catholic Church, but that she
is moving toward the future and will allow herself to be educated and led by
the Lord. In that sense we do not picture for ourselves any particular modes of
integration, but simply look to march on in faith under the leadership of the
Lord – who knows the way.”
“We can only humbly seek to essentialize
our faith, that is, to recognize what are the really essential elements in it –
the things we have not made but have received from the Lord – and in this attitude
of turning to the Lord and to the center, to open ourselves in this
essentializing so that he may lead us onward, he alone.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, God and the World, interviewed by Peter Seewald, pp 452-453
Lastly, if there is no Original Sin and the Church of
Jesus Christ lies somewhere in the unknown future, the sacrament of Baptism
becomes meaningless! What the Church has taught always and everywhere is now
regarded as “unenlightened” and “problematic” for him.
Mr. Seewald: “In
canon 849 of Church canon law it says: ‘Baptism… [is] necessary to salvation in
fact or at least in intention.’ But what happens, when a man dies unbaptized?
And what happens to the millions of children who are killed in their mothers’
wombs?”
Benedict/Ratzinger: “The question of what it means to say
that baptism is necessary for salvation has become ever more hotly debated in
modern times. The Second Vatican Council said on this point that men who are
seeking for God and who are inwardly striving toward that which constitutes
baptism will also receive salvation. That is to say that a seeking after God
already represents an inward participation in baptism, in the Church, in
Christ.
To that extent, the
question concerning the necessity of baptism for salvation seems to have been
answered, but the question about children who could not be baptized because
they were aborted then presses upon us that much more urgently.
Earlier ages had devised a teaching that seems to me
rather unenlightened. They said that baptism endows us, by means of sanctifying
grace, with the capacity to gaze upon God. Now, certainly, the state of
original sin, from which we are freed by baptism, consists in a lack of
sanctifying grace. Children who die in this way are indeed without any personal
sin, so they cannot be sent to hell, but, on the other hand, they lack
sanctifying grace and thus the potential for beholding God that this bestows.
They will simply enjoy a state of natural blessedness, in which they will be
happy. This state people called limbo.
In the course of our century, that has gradually come to
seem problematic to us. This was one way in which people
sought to justify the necessity of baptizing infants as early as possible, but
the solution is itself questionable. Finally, the Pope made a decisive turn in the encyclical Evangelium Vitae, a change already
anticipated by the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Note: Not so, even the
compromised CCC teaches the necessity of Baptism for salvation), when he
expressed the simple hope that God is powerful enough to draw to himself all
those who were unable to receive the sacrament.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, God and the World,
interviewed by Peter Seewald, pp 401-402
Catholic Church teaches divine Truth with precision and
clarity:
Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be
born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God….. Amen, amen I say to thee,
unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of God.” Jesus Christ, (John 3:3, 5)
If any one saith, that true and natural
water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some
sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born
again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema.
Council of Trent, Canon II on the sacrament
of Baptism
If anyone saith, that Baptism is optional,
that is, not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema.
Council of Trent, Canon V on the sacrament
of Baptism
Limits of Papal Authority imposed by the Faith itself!
“The gravity of
sin is determined by the interval which it places between man and God; now sin
against faith, divides man from God as far as possible, since it deprives him
of the true knowledge of God; it therefore follows that sin against faith is
the greatest of all sins.”
St. Thomas
Aquinas
“If the Faith were endangered, a subject
ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
“Were the pope to command anything against
Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the Sacraments, or the
commands of the natural or divine law, he ought not to be obeyed, but in such
commands is to be ignored.”
Juan Cardinal de Torquemada (1388–1468)
“You must resist, to his face, a pope who is openly tearing the Church
apart—for example, by refusing to confer ecclesiastical benefices except for
money, or in exchange for services… A
case of simony, even committed by a pope, must be denounced.”
Thomist Cardinal Cajetan (1469–1534)
“If the Pope lays down an order contrary to right customs one does not have to
obey him; if he tries to do something manifestly opposed to justice and to the
common good, it would be licit to resist him; if he attacks by force, he could
be repelled by force, with the moderation characteristic of a good defense.”
Francisco Suárez, S.J. (1548–1617)
“In answer to the question, ‘What should be done in cases where the Pope
destroys the Church by his evil actions?’ [I reply]: ‘He would certainly sin;
he should neither be permitted to act in such fashion, nor should he be obeyed
in what was evil; but he should be resisted with a courteous reprehension.… He
does not have the power to destroy; therefore, if there is evidence that he is
doing it, it is licit to resist him. The result of all this is that if the Pope
destroys the Church by his orders and acts, he can be resisted and the
execution of his mandate prevented. The right of open resistance to prelates’
abuse of authority stems also from natural law.’”
Sylvester Prieras, O.P. (1456–1523),
Dominican theologian, appointed master of the Sacred Palace by Pope Leo X who
wrote the rebuttal to Luther’s 95 Theses
“As it is lawful to resist the pope, if he assaulted a man’s person, so it is
lawful to resist him, if he assaulted souls, or troubled the state, and much
more if he strove to destroy the Church. It is lawful, I say, to resist him, by
not doing what he commands, and hindering the execution of his will; still, it
is not lawful to judge or punish or even depose him, because he is nothing
other than a superior.”
St. Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621), Doctor
of the Church
And then, pure papalolatry!
“There is in the world … one man in whom the greatness of God is reflected in
the most outstanding way of all. He participates in the authority and in a
certain sense in the personality of Christ. This man is the Vicar of Jesus
Christ, the Pope. … His power extends to the ends of the world and is under the
protection of God, Who has promised to confirm in Heaven whatever he will
decree upon earth. His dignity and authority, then, are almost divine. Let us
bow humbly before such greatness. Let us promise to obey the Pope as we would
Christ. … We cannot dispute or murmur against anything which he teaches or
decrees. To disobey the Pope is to disobey God. To argue or murmur against the
Pope is to argue or murmur against Jesus Himself. When we are confronted with
His commands, we have only one choice—absolute obedience and complete
surrender.”
Cardinal Antonio Bacci (1885-1971), the
Vatican’s chief Latinist under four successive popes (Pius XI, Pius XII, John
XXIII, and Paul VI) and the co-author of the Ottaviani Intervention with
Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, the head CDF.
SSPX bid farewell to Bishop Richard Williamson as only
they could do!
His defiance of the Society's authorities ultimately
made a separation inevitable. God forgive him for the errors and confusion he
caused in the years that followed with his Kyrie eleison
comments, and even more so for his episcopal
consecrations, which lacked and still lack any objective necessity and any sensus
ecclesiae.
Fr. Franz Schmidberger, former superior
general of the SSPX, published in his weekly newsletter, on the death of Bishop
Richard Williamson on January 29, 2025
COMMENT: The good bishop
Williamson has only been dead for a little over one year. At the time of his
death the SSPX judged him to be in need of God's forgiveness for the sin of
consecrating bishops
"which lacked and still lack any
objective necessity and any sensus
ecclesiae." They now threaten Rome with doing their own episcopal
consecrations because their own "sensus
ecclesiae" has now discovered that there is in fact an existing
"objective necessity"! Nothing
has changed with regard to the Church but something has changed with regard to
the SSPX. They are concerned only with their "objective necessity"!
Dicastery for
the Doctrine of the Faith issues statement following today’s meeting at the
Vatican between SSPX Superior General Fr. Davide Pagliarani & DDF Prefect
Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández on 2-12-2026
STATEMENT OF THE
DICASTERY FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH Regarding the Meeting between the
Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith and the Superior General
of the FSSPX On 12 February 2026, a cordial and sincere meeting took place at
the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith between the Prefect, His Eminence
Cardinal Victor Manuel FERNANDEZ, and the Superior General of the FSSPX,
Reverend Don Davide PAGLIARANI, with the approval of the Holy Father Leo XIV.
After clarifying certain points presented by the FSSPX in various letters,
particularly those sent between 2017 and 2019 — including, among other topics,
the question of the divine will concerning the plurality of religions — the
Prefect proposed a pathway of specifically theological dialogue, following a
precise methodology, on issues that have not yet received sufficient
clarification. These include: the distinction between an act of faith and the
“religious submission of mind and will,” as well as the differing degrees of
adherence required by various texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council
and their interpretation. At the same time, he proposed addressing a series of
topics listed by the FSSPX in its letter of 17 January 2019. The aim of this
dialogue is to highlight, in the topics under discussion, the minimum
requirements for full communion with the Catholic Church, and consequently to
outline a canonical statute for the Fraternity, along with other aspects
requiring further study. The Holy See reaffirmed that the ordination of bishops
without the mandate of the Supreme Pontiff, who possesses ordinary, supreme,
universal, immediate, and direct power (cf. CIC, can. 331; Dogmatic
Constitution Pastor aeternus, chs. I and III), would constitute a decisive
rupture of ecclesial communion (schism), with serious consequences for the
Fraternity as a whole (John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, 2 July
1988, nn. 3 and ff.; Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Explanatory
Note, 24 August 1996, n. 1). Therefore, the possibility of undertaking this
dialogue presupposes that the Fraternity suspend the announced episcopal
ordinations. The Superior General of the FSSPX will present the proposal to his
Council and will provide his response to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the
Faith. In the event of a positive response, the steps, stages, and procedures
to be followed will be established by mutual agreement. The Church is asked to
accompany this process, especially in the coming times, with prayer to the Holy
Spirit, who is the principal agent of true ecclesial communion willed by
Christ.
Viganò Urges SSPX To Cut Off 'Dialogue' With Fernandez,
Proceed With Consecrations
'True ecclesial
communion is not measured by canonical recognition granted by a Hierarchy that
has lost the Faith, but by integral fidelity to divine Revelation.'
I cannot but note with
sorrow and indignation the Statement released today by the Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith, signed by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, at the end
of his meeting with Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Priestly
Society of Saint Pius X. After decades of humiliation, inconclusive dialogues,
partial concessions revoked by “Traditionis Custodes,” deafening silences
regarding doctrinal and liturgical deviations widespread throughout the Church,
and even more serious doctrinal and moral errors promoted by the Supreme
Throne, Rome now claims to make the suspension of the episcopal consecrations
announced by the SSPX for next July 1st a preliminary condition for dialogue. These
consecrations are not acts of rebellion, but a supreme act of fidelity to the
One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church, which has been deprived for
almost sixty years of Bishops who preach integral Doctrine and administer the
Sacraments without any compromise with error. The Dicastery’s Statement subtly
repeats the same modernist scheme seen in 1988: it offers a “theological
dialogue” on issues the Holy See has always refused to seriously
address—religious freedom, destructive episcopal “collegiality,” pan-heretical
ecumenism, the Nostra Ætate declaration that equates false religions with the
one true Faith, and the Abu Dhabi Document—while threatening “schism” for the
only gesture that is able to guarantee the certainty of Apostolic Succession.
But who wields “schism” as a weapon today? Who excommunicated the Bishops
consecrated in 1988 for defending Tradition and its beating heart, the Catholic
Mass? Who excommunicated me and silenced me, while promoting declared heretics
and covering up abuses of every kind? Who forced the faithful to submit to an
authority that has renounced immutable Catholic doctrine in the name of a “new
humanism” and a “synodality” that is nothing other than the cancer of democracy
applied to the Catholic Church in order to destroy from within its divine
hierarchical Constitution and Petrine Primacy? The true schism is not that of those who consecrate
Bishops to guard and transmit the Catholic Faith in its entirety, but rather
the schism of the conciliar and synodal Hierarchy, which has denied Apostolic
Tradition, replacing sound Doctrine with heretical ambiguities, true Catholic
Worship with a Protestantized liturgy, and legitimate Authority with a
totalitarian power exercised against the faithful who refuse to apostatize.
The Society of Saint Pius X does not need the permission of those who have
renounced the Faith to do what Providence asks of it: namely, to perpetuate the
episcopal line faithful to Tradition. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre acted not out
of schism, but out of necessity – same state of necessity that persists today,
aggravated by the systematic persecution of the Traditional Mass and the
imposition of false doctrines that contradict the perennial Magisterium.
GENERAL COMMENT: The SSPX is buried in the
Neo-modernist heresy that believes that the dogmas of our faith contain both
divine and human elements and must necessarily continually evolve by a
distillation process where the divine elements are progressively purified by
removing the historically dated human encrustations. This Neo-modernist heresy
is the unstated pre-supposition for the Vatican II pastoral council. For the
Neo-modernist, the proximate rule of faith is no longer Dogma, but however the
current pope interprets the dogma to mean. That being the case, the SSPX,
having abandoned dogma as their proximate rule of faith must turn to the
present pope to tell him the current version of the Catholic faith.
Neo-modernism is just a variation of the heresy of Modernism which St. Pius X
called "the synthesis of all heresies." It is the "synthesis of
all heresies" because it denies all dogmas as dogmas. It attacks the very
nature of what dogmas are. Dogma contains no human elements. They are divine
revelation that is formally defined by the infallible Magisterium of the
Church. They are the infallible word of
God in both the truth expressed and the words used to express that truth. The
pope is only the necessary but wholly insufficient material and instrumental
cause of dogma. It is God who is the formal and final cause of dogma.
Therefore, the pope is just as much a subject to dogma as any of the faithful.
Truth is the only weapon possessed against an abusive authority and the SSPX
has entered into a "dialogue" with an opponent that claims for itself
personally the divine attribute of infallibility and the right to dictate their
personal conceptions of truth even against the divine infallible revelation of
God. Archbishop Viganò is politely telling the SSPX that it is the FAITH
itself that is being attacked and they need to wake up. The SSPX has been in
constant interminable doctrinal discussions with Rome since 1997. The reason
Rome dialogues with the SSPX is because the SSPX is defenseless having
abandoned the infallible truth of Catholic dogma as their weapon. This dialogue
between Rome and the SSPX never raises above the level of exchanging opinions.
Because our Mission of Ss. Peter & Paul stands on the truth of Catholic
dogma, the local ordinaries will never enter into open discussions. Always
remember: A heretic is a baptized Catholic who rejects one or more Catholic
dogmas AND all heretics are schismatics! If the SSPX can learn this simple but
essential truth, then they will stop seeking a place at the table of apostates
and start defending the faith.
Modernism vs. Neo-modernism: A difference in method, an
agreement in ends
The
heresy of Modernism denies dogma directly. Neo-modernism is a more subtle
heresy. The end remains the denial of
dogma but the method of denial is indirect.
Dogma, the revelation of God that forms the formal objects of divine and
Catholic faith, is formulated in categorical propositions that are always and
everywhere true or false. There are two
methods the Neo-modernist employs to destroy dogma. The first method is to
change the category of dogma from truth-falsehood to the category of
authority-obedience. They treat dogma as
if it were laws, commands, precepts, injunctions, etc., etc., etc., and then
limit the universal truth with all the moral restrictions that apply to laws,
etc. For example, the dogma that the
sacrament of baptism is necessary for salvation is treated as a law and
therefore as a law, it does not bind in cases of impossibility, necessity,
unreasonable burden, psychological impediment, etc., etc.
The
second method is to corrupt the dogmatic proposition be changing the meaning of
the terms OR altering the universality of the copula. An excellent example of
this corruption of terminology can be seen in Benedict/Ratzinger’s treatment of
the word, substance.
“…the
medieval concept of substance has long since become inaccessible to us. In so
far as we use the concept of substance at all today we understand thereby the
ultimate particles of matter, and the chemically complex mixture that is bread
certainly does not fall into that category.”
Joseph
Ratzinger, Faith and the Future, p. 14
It
is impossible to affirm the Catholic dogma that “Lord Jesus Christ... is
consubstantial with the Father” or the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation if
the concept of “substance” is rejected in the sense as used by scholastic
theologians found in the perennial realist philosophical tradition. And so we have Benedict/Ratzinger writing:
“Eucharistic
devotion such as is noted in the silent visit by the devout in church must not
be thought of as a conversation with God. This would assume that God was
present there locally and in a confined way. To justify such an assertion shows
a lack of understanding of the Christological mysteries of the very concept of
God. This is repugnant to the serious thinking of the man who knows about the
omnipresence of God. To go to church on the ground that one can visit God who
is present there is a senseless act which modern man rightfully rejects.”
Joseph Ratzinger, Die Sacramentale
Begrundung Christliche Existenz
The Catholic Church infallibly teaches:
“By
the consecration of the bread and wine there takes place a change of the
whole substance of the bread
into the substance of the body of
Christ our Lord and of the whole substance
of the wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic
Church has fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.”
Council
of Trent, Session XIII, chapter IV
“If
anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly,
really and substantially the body and
blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a
sign, or figure or force, let him be anathema.”
Council
of Trent, Session XII, Canon I
Benedict/Ratzinger’s
affirmation of these dogmas is done within the corrupted context of mutilating
the meaning of the terms. The entire hermeneutic of discontinuity/rupture vs.
the hermeneutic of reform proposed by Benedict/Ratzinger is predicated upon
accepting or rejecting his false philosophy which ultimately elevates the
accident of relationship to overthrow
the concept of substance. Reciting
the Credo is no longer evidence of the Catholic faith without clearly defining
every term.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning – The true Revelation of
God is both a Definite and Certain participation in God’s own knowledge. IT is this fundamental truth of revelation
that our Neo-Modernist hierarchy reject!
What, then, is the knowledge which God has restored to man through
revelation but a definite knowledge, a participation of His own? The
truth which has been revealed, what is it in the mind of God who reveals it,
but one, harmonious and distinct? What was that knowledge as revealed by the
Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, but one, harmonious and distinct? What was
the conception of that knowledge in inspired men, but one, harmonious and
distinct also? And what was that knowledge when communicated by those who were
inspired to those who believed, but one, harmonious and distinct as before? And what is this unity and
harmony and distinctness of knowledge, which God revealed of Himself through
Jesus Christ, but the faith we confess in our creed? Our baptismal faith, its
substance and its letter, the explicit and the implicit meaning, article by
article, is as definite, severe, and precise, as any problem in science. It is
of the nature of truth to be so; and where definiteness ends, knowledge ceases.
Observe, then, the distinction between finite knowledge and definite knowledge.
Is not science definite? And yet it is also finite. The theory of gravitation,
definite as it is, it is finite too. [……] Go through the whole range of
physical sciences, what is it but an example of the same condition of knowledge,
definiteness in conception with finiteness of reach? [….] If we have not a definite
knowledge of what we believe, we may be sure we have no true knowledge of it.
But, further, it is evident that knowledge must also be certain.
When we speak of certainty, we mean one of two things. Sometimes we say, that a
thing is certain; at other times, that we are certain. When we say a truth is
certain, we mean, that the proofs of that truth are either self-evident, or so
clear as to exclude all doubt. This is certainty on the part of the object
proposed to our intelligence. But when we say we are certain, we mean that we
are inwardly convinced, by the application of our reason to the matter before
us, of the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the truth of it. In us,
certainty is rather a moral feeling, a complex state of mind. As light manifests itself by its
own nature, but sight is the illumination of the eye; so certainty means truth
with its evidences illuminating the intelligence, or, in other words, the intelligence
possessed by truth with its evidences.
This we call certainty. I ask, then, is there not this twofold
certainty in the revelation which God has given? Was not the revelation
which God gave of Himself through Jesus Christ made certain on His part by
direct evidence of the divine act which revealed it? Is it not also certain on
our part by the apprehension and faith of the Church? Was not God manifest in
the flesh that He might reveal Himself? Did not God dwell on earth that He
might teach His truth? Has not God spoken to man that man might know Him? Did
not God work miracles that man might believe that He was present? What evidence
on the part of God was wanting that men might know that Jesus Christ was indeed
the Son of God? And if
there was certainty on the part of God who revealed, was there not certainty
also on the part of those that heard? Look back into the sacred history.
Had not Prophets and Seers certainty of that which they beheld and heard? […..]
What, then, is the first
condition of faith but certainty? He that has not certain faith has no faith.
We are told that to crave for certainty implies a morbid disposition. Did not
Abraham, and Moses, and Daniel, the Apostles and Evangelists desire certainty
in faith, and crave to know beyond doubt that God spake to them, and know with
definite clearness what God said? Was this a morbid craving? Surely this is not
to be reproved. But rather
the contrary disposition worthy of rebuke. How can we venture to content
ourselves with uncertainty in matters where the truth and honour of God and the
salvation of our own souls are at stake? This truly is not without sin.
[…..] And yet, what is the very idea of Revelation but a Divine assurance of
Truth? Where faith begins uncertainty ends. Because faith terminates upon the
veracity of God; and what God has spoken and authenticated to us by Divine
authority cannot be uncertain.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Grounds of
Faith
"The group holding power in the SSPX
have decided to stage a drama, unfortunately not a good Shakespearean play, but
a poor play by Fernandez. They will follow two narratives: one for liberals,
the other for hardliners. Unfortunately, nothing has changed for many years –
secret meetings with the Roman hierarchy and the search for a practical
agreement without doctrinal agreement. This makes no sense. As Bishop Richard
Williamson said, it is a betrayal of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's struggle, a
betrayal of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church." -
Bishop Michal Stobnicki. Comment on the
SSPX threat to consecrate new bishops
Pope Leo XIV is continuing ‘irreversible trajectory’ of Pope Francis:
SSPX statement
In addition to spelling out the Francis/Leo crisis, the statement
addresses the silence of conservative bishops in the Church, the Traditional
Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo, and more.
LifeSiteNews | John-Henry Westen | Feb 5, 2026 — Today the Society of
Saint Pius X (SSPX) released a major statement explaining the reasons behind
their announcement of upcoming episcopal consecrations. This comes from
Superior General Davide Pagliarani, and it directly addresses the current
pontificate of Pope Leo XIV, describing it as continuing the “irreversible
trajectory” set by Pope Francis. The document outlines why the SSPX believes
these consecrations are necessary, while still expressing some hope for
dialogue with Rome.
In addition to spelling out the Francis/Leo
crisis, the statement addresses the silence of conservative bishops in the
Church, the possibility of sanctions, their hopes, the ultimate reason for
their action and their perspective on the Traditional Latin Mass. Let me read
the key portions directly from the statement, but I encourage you to read the
full statement.
They spell out the Francis and Leo crisis
Furthermore, the major orientations already
taking shape in this new pontificate – particularly through the most recent
consistory – only confirm this. An explicit determination to preserve the line of Pope Francis as an
irreversible trajectory for the entire Church is discernible.
It is sad to acknowledge, but it is a fact that, in an ordinary parish,
the faithful no longer find the means necessary to ensure their eternal
salvation. Missing, in particular, are both the integral preaching of Catholic
truth and morality, and the worthy administration of the sacraments as the
Church has always done. This deprivation is what constitutes the state of
necessity. In this critical context, our bishops are growing older, and,
as the apostolate continues to expand, they are no longer sufficient to meet
the demands of the faithful worldwide.
In what way do you believe that last month’s consistory confirms the
direction taken by Pope Francis?
DP: Cardinal Fernández, speaking in the
name of Pope Leo, invited the Church to return to Pope Francis’s fundamental
intuition expressed in his key encyclical, Evangelii gaudium. Put simply, he believes that the Gospel should
be proclaimed by reducing it to a primitive and essential expression, a series
of concise and striking formulas – the “kerygma” – with a view to eliciting an
“experience,” an immediate encounter with Christ. Everything else should be set
aside, however precious it may be.
In concrete terms, all that is Tradition is
considered as accessory and secondary. It is this method of the new
evangelization that has produced the doctrinal emptiness characteristic of Pope
Francis’s pontificate, and is keenly felt by many in the Church.
In a similar vein, one must provide new and
relevant answers to the emerging questions of our time, but, according to
Cardinal Fernández, this is to be done through synodal reform, rather than by
rediscovering the classical and ever-valid answers provided by the Tradition of
the Church. It is by these means, in the “breath of the Spirit” of this synodal
reform, that Pope Francis has been able to impose catastrophic decisions upon
the whole Church, such as authorizing Holy Communion for the divorced and
civilly remarried, or the blessing of same-sex couples.
In summary, through the “kerygma,” the
proclamation of the Gospel is isolated from the whole corpus of traditional
doctrine and morality. And through synodality, traditional answers are replaced
by arbitrary decisions, with a high risk of being absurd and doctrinally
unjustifiable. Cardinal Zen himself considers this method manipulative and
considers attributing it to the Holy Ghost blasphemous. Unfortunately, I fear
that he is right.[…]
[…] the Church is in danger of busying
herself with both everything and nothing. Ecological concerns, for example, or
the preoccupation with the rights of minorities, of women, or of migrants, risk
causing the essential mission of the Church to be lost from view. If the
Society of Saint Pius X strives to preserve Tradition, with all that this
entails, it is solely because these treasures are vital for the salvation of
souls, and because it aims at nothing else but the good of souls, and that of
the priesthood—ordered to their sanctification.[…]
[…] 2019, when Pope Francis, on the
occasion of his visit to the Arabian Peninsula, signed, together with an imam,
the well-known Abu Dhabi declaration. Together with the Muslim leader, he
affirmed that the plurality of religions had been willed as such by divine
Wisdom.
It is evident that a communion founded upon
the acceptance of such a statement, or which would include it, would simply not
be Catholic, since it would constitute a sin against the First Commandment and
the denial of the first article of the Creed.
I consider such a statement to be more than
a simple error. It is simply inconceivable. It cannot be the foundation of
Catholic communion, but rather the cause of its dissolution. I believe that a
Catholic should prefer martyrdom rather than accept such an affirmation.
They address the silence of conservative bishops in the church to the
crisis of Pope Francis and Leo
[…] the fear of breaking a fragile
stability by behavior deemed “disturbing” reduces many pastors to a constrained
silence, when they should
be raising their voices against scandalous teaching which corrupts faith or
morals. The necessary denunciation of errors that undermine the Church –
required by the very good of souls who are threatened by this poisoned
nourishment – is thereby left undone. One may enlighten another in private, if
able to discern the harmfulness of a given error, but it may be only a timid
whisper, in which truth struggles to express itself with the required freedom –
especially in the shadow of tacitly accepted, contradictory principles. Once
again, souls are no longer enlightened and are deprived of the bread of
doctrine for which they remain hungry. Over time, this progressively alters
mentalities and gradually leads to a general and unconscious acceptance of the
various reforms affecting the life of the Church. Towards these souls, too, the
Society feels a responsibility to enlighten and not to abandon.
Realistically sees possibility of sanctions
[…] Cardinal Fernández’s response does not
address the possibility of an audience with the Pope. It also evokes the
possibility of new sanctions.
What will the Society do if the Holy See decides to condemn it?
DP: First of all, let us recall that in
such circumstances any canonical penalties would have no real effect.
Nevertheless, should they be pronounced,
the Society would certainly accept this new suffering without bitterness, as it
has accepted past sufferings, and would sincerely offer it for the good of the
Church. It is for the
Church that the Society works. And there is no doubt that, should such a
situation arise, it could only be temporary, for the Church is divine and Our
Lord will not abandon her. […]
We are sure that one day the Roman
authorities will acknowledge, with gratitude, that these episcopal
consecrations providentially contributed to preserving the faith, for the
greater glory of God and the salvation of souls.
They make the comparison to the China Communist Party naming bishops
without the Pope’s approval
Let us take the current case of relations
with the Chinese government. Despite a genuine schism of the Chinese Patriotic
Church, despite the uninterrupted persecution of the underground Church
faithful to Rome, despite agreements regularly renewed and then broken by the
Chinese authorities, in 2023, Pope Francis approved, a posteriori, the
appointment of the Bishop of Shanghai by those authorities.
More recently, Pope Leo XIV himself
ultimately accepted, a posteriori,
the appointment of the Bishop of Xinxiang, designated in the same manner during
the vacancy of the Apostolic See, while the bishop, faithful to Rome—who had been
imprisoned several times—was still in office.
In both cases, these were clearly
pro-government prelates, imposed unilaterally by Beijing to control the
Catholic Church in China. It should be clearly noted that these were not merely
auxiliary bishops, but residential bishops, that is, ordinary pastors of their
respective dioceses (or prefectures), possessing jurisdiction over the local
clergy and faithful. In Rome, it is perfectly well known for what purpose these
pastors were chosen and unilaterally imposed.
The Society’s case is entirely different.
For us, it is obviously not a matter of favoring a communist or anti-Christian
power, but solely of safeguarding the rights of Christ the King and of the
Tradition of the Church, at a time of general crisis and confusion in which
these are gravely compromised. The intentions and the ends are clearly not the
same.
They lay out the request ignored by the Pope since last summer
Last summer, I wrote to the Holy Father to
request an audience. Having received no reply, I wrote to him again a few
months later, in a filial and straightforward manner, without
concealing any of our needs. I mentioned our doctrinal divergences, but also
our sincere desire to serve the Catholic Church without respite, for we are
servants of the Church despite our irregular canonical status.
To this second letter, a reply from Rome
reached us a few days ago, from Cardinal Fernández. Unfortunately, it took no
account whatsoever of the proposal we put forward, and offers nothing that
responds to our requests.
Still retains hope Pope Leo will acquiesce
A Pope is first and foremost a father. As
such, he is capable of discerning a right intention, a sincere will to serve
the Church, and above all, a genuine case of conscience in an exceptional situation.
[…]
In fact, the superior general suggests that the consecration of new
bishops will be a grace for the whole church when they happen
I would like to emphasize that this is a
time for prayer and preparation of hearts, souls, and minds. We must prepare
ourselves to receive the grace that these consecrations will occasion for the
whole Church. This should be done with recollection, peace, and trust in
Providence, which has never abandoned the Society and will not abandon it now.
The ultimate reason: for the salvation of souls
[…] it is for the Pope himself, as such,
that we preserve this treasure until the day when its value will once again be
understood and when a Pope will wish to make use of it for the good of the
whole Church. […]
[…] The very law of the Church provides for
it. In the spirit of ecclesiastical law, which is the juridical expression of
this charity, the good of souls comes before everything else. It truly
represents the law of laws, to which all others are subordinate and against which
no ecclesiastical law can prevail.
The axiom “suprema lex, salus
animarum” —”the supreme law is the salvation of souls”—is a classic maxim
of canonical tradition which is explicitly taken up by the final canon of the
1983 Code. In the present state of necessity, it is upon this highest principle
that the entire legitimacy of our apostolate and of our mission towards the
souls who turn to us depends. For us, we fulfil a role of supplying for a
deficiency, in the name of that same charity.
About the Traditional Latin Mass
As far as I am aware, Pope Leo XIV has
maintained a certain discretion on this subject, which arouses great
expectation in the conservative world. Very recently, however, a text by
Cardinal Roche on the liturgy—intended initially for the cardinals
participating in last month’s consistory—was made public. There is no reason to doubt that
it corresponds, in its broad lines, to the orientation desired by the Pope. It
is an unambiguous text, and above all, logical and coherent. Unfortunately, it is
based on a false premise.
Concretely, this text, in perfect continuity with Traditionis
custodes, condemns the liturgical project of Pope Benedict XVI, according to
whom, the ancient rite and the new rite are two more or less equivalent forms,
expressing the same faith and the same ecclesiology, and therefore capable of
mutually enriching one another. Concerned for the unity of the Church, Benedict
XVI sought to promote the coexistence of the two rites and, in 2007,
published Summorum Pontificum. For many, this occasioned a
providential rediscovery of the Mass of all time; but over time, it also gave
rise to a movement calling the new rite into question—a movement deemed
problematic and which Traditionis custodes, in 2021, sought to stem.
Faithful to Pope Francis, Cardinal Roche is
now attempting to promote an elusive unity of the Church according to an idea
contradictory to that of Benedict XVI. While maintaining the assertion of a
continuity from one rite to the other through reform, Cardinal Roche firmly
opposes their coexistence. He sees in it a source of division, a threat to
unity, which must be overcome by returning to an authentic liturgical
communion. “The primary good of the unity of the Church is not achieved by
freezing division, but by finding ourselves in the sharing of what cannot but
be shared.” In the Church, “there ought to be only one rite”, in full syntony
with the true meaning of Tradition.
This is a just and coherent principle,
since the Church, having one faith and one ecclesiology, can have only one
liturgy capable of expressing them adequately. But it is a principle applied to
a wrong conception of Tradition. Consistent with the new post-conciliar
ecclesiology, Cardinal Roche conceives Tradition as something evolving, and the
new rite as its sole living expression for our time. The value of the
Tridentine rite can therefore only be regarded as obsolete, and its use, at
most, a “concession”, and “in no way a promotion.”
That there is a present “division” and
incompatibility between the two rites now appears more apparent than ever. But
let there be no mistake, the only liturgy that adequately expresses, in an
immutable and non-evolving manner, the traditional conception of the Church, of
Christian life, and of the Catholic priesthood—that is, Tradition—is the
liturgy of all time. On this point, the opposition of the Holy See appears more
irrevocable than ever.
Direct calling into question of the Novus Ordo
[…] instead of sincerely questioning the
intrinsic deficiencies of the new Mass, and therefore the overall failure of
the reform, instead of facing the reality that churches are emptying and
vocations are declining, instead of asking why the Tridentine rite continues to
attract so many souls, Cardinal Roche sees no other solution than an urgent
preliminary formation of the faithful and seminarians.
[…] For almost two thousand years,
souls—often illiterate—were edified and sanctified by the liturgy, without the
need for any prior formation. Failing to recognise the intrinsic incapacity of the Novus
Ordo to form and edify souls and continuing to demand ever better prior
formation seems to me to be the sign of an irremediable blindness. One arrives
at shocking paradoxes: the reform was intended to foster a greater
participation of the faithful; yet the faithful abandoned the Church en masse,
because this insipid liturgy failed to nourish them—and this would supposedly
have nothing to do with the reform? […]
[…] how can it then be understood that this
Mass of all time stands in irreducible opposition to the new Mass, remains the
sole true liturgy of the whole Church, and that no one may be prevented from
celebrating it? How can it be known that the Mass of Paul VI cannot be
recognized, because it constitutes a considerable departure from the Catholic
theology of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and that no one may be compelled to
celebrate it? And how are souls to be effectively turned away from this
poisoned liturgy, to drink from the pure sources of Catholic liturgy?
COMMENT: Complaining about conservative bishops
being mute dogs is rank hypocrisy coming from the SSPX who have been dancing
the two-step with Neo-modernist Rome since 1997, nearly thirty years of
"doctrinal discussions"! Dogma is the proximate rule of faith for all
the faithful. It is immutable in both the truth it expresses and the manner in
which it is expressed. It forms the formal object of divine and Catholic faith.
The very definition of heresy is the denial of dogma. The heresy of
Neo-modernism denies this truth. They believe that dogma evolves and changes
its meaning over time as the Church develops a deeper and richer understanding
of God's revealed truth. Consequently, a Catholic must always turn to the pope
to know what any particular dogma means today. Thus, the pope becomes the
proximate rule of faith for Neo-modernists. The SSPX, just like Rome, are
Neo-modernists. The SSPX cannot call the Neo-modernist heretics because the
SSPX does not hold dogma as their proximate rule of faith. They can only offer
opinions and thus, for thirty years they have been exchanging opinions with
Neo-modernist Rome. The SSPX during the entire pontificate of Francis/Bergoglio
did and said nothing to oppose his gross heresy and immorality. Why is it
suddenly an issue now? Because at that time it was not in the interest of the
SSPX to stir the pot. Their pretense of being at the service of the Church has
never been true. From the beginning they have worked to consolidate control of
Catholic tradition imposing upon it their own distorted conceptions of doctrine
and liturgy while denying any help to those who do not conform in every detail.
Bishop Richard Williamson, since being expelled from the SSPX, helped our
little Mission. He did not agree with us entirely but his charity was not
thereby stifled. Supplied jurisdiction is entirely generated by the needs of
each individual Catholic faithful and Bishop Williamson exercised that supplied
jurisdiction in helping us at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission.
Bishop Williamson's charity extended to the needs of the faithful over the
world and he provided six bishops, at least some of which are continuing as he
did. That is really the reason the SSPX got rid of him. For the SSPX, there is
no state of necessity. They have denied it certainly over the last 15 years and
they cannot reclaim it now. If they want to get their house in order they
should ask Bishop Michael Stobnicki, consecrated by Bishop Williamson for the
eastern Slavs, and who the SSPX expelled from their seminary, to help them.
"A Dark Cloud of Fog Instead of a Head"
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 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 a laughing figure which said: 'Do build it as solid as you can; we will
pull it to the ground'.... Among the strangest things that I saw, were long
processions of bishops. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me
through images issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were
shown by external deformities. A few had only a body, with a dark cloud of fog
instead of a head. Others had only a head, their bodies and hearts were like
thick vapors. Some were lame; others were paralytics; others were asleep or
staggering.
Blessed Anna-Katarina Emmerick, Yves
Dupont, Catholic Prophecy
Purgation Now
with Merit, or Purgatory Later Without
When I look to God, I see no gate to Paradise, and yet he who wishes to
enter there does so, because God is all mercy.
God stands before us with open arms to receive us into His glory. But well I see the divine essence to be of
such purity, far greater than can be imagined, that the soul in which there is
even the least note of imperfection would rather cast itself into a thousand
Hells than find itself thus stained in the presence of the Divine Majesty. Therefore the soul, understanding that
Purgatory had been ordained to take away those stains, casts itself therein,
and seems to itself to have found great mercy in that it can rid itself there
of the impediment that is the stain of sin.
No tongue can tell nor explain, no mind understand, the grievousness of
Purgatory. But although I see that there
is in Purgatory as much pain as in Hell, I yet see the soul that has the least
stain of imperfection accepting Purgatory as though it were a mercy, as I have
said, and holding its pains of no account as compared with the least stain that
hinders a soul in its love. I seem to
see that the pain that souls in Purgatory endure because of that in them which
displeases God (that is, what they have willfully done against His great
goodness) is greater than any other pain they feel in Purgatory. And this is because they see the truth and
the grievousness of the hindrance that prevents them from drawing near to God,
since they are in grace.
St. Catherine of Genoa, Purgation
and Purgatory
All
Are Called to be Co-Redeemers with Christ
God has entrusted to each one
of us a share in the great redemptive work of Jesus. As consecrated souls, we are especially
called to cooperate in Christ’s work. First
of all, we must cooperate with grace, so that the fruits of the redemption can
be fully applied to our souls. This is
the work of our own personal sanctification.
It is not limited to this one aspect, however. We are called to sanctify ourselves in order
to be able to bring others to sanctity.
Each one of us has a mission to fulfill for the good of others and for
their sanctification. We must
collaborate with Christ in extending the fruits of the Redemption to as many
souls as possible. This work is
entrusted to us by the heavenly Father, and we must apply ourselves to it with
the interior disposition of Christ: a total, generous, exclusive dedication, a
dedication capable of making even the greatest sacrifices. All actions are of value only insofar as they
help toward the accomplishment of this work.
Anything that does not contribute to our own sanctification or to the
sanctification of other is useless, a waste of time, and should be courageously
eliminated.
Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary
Magdalen, O.C.D., Divine Intimacy
And
yet, the fathers of Vatican II professed to worship the same god as the
Mohammedans!
He [Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to
which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained
precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to
carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal
men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such
as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom.
Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with
doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in
a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration;
for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired
teacher of truth. On the contrary, Mohammed said that he was sent in the power
of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is
more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from
the beginning. Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers,
utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Mohammed forced
others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine
pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the
contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments
by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who
examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid
his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him
of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words
believe foolishly.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles
The
Principle Muslim objections to the Catholic Faith – Utterly carnal!
“We
preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumbling block, and unto the
Gentiles foolishness” 1 Cor 1:23.
These, then, are the points, which, as you affirm, are attacked and
ridiculed by the unbelievers. For the Muslims (Saraceni), as you say, ridicule
our claim that Christ is the Son of God, since God does not have a wife; and
they think us mad, assuming we profess there are three gods. They also mock our
belief that Christ, the Son of God, was crucified for the salvation of the
human race, because if God is omnipotent, He could have saved the human race
without the suffering of His Son; He could also have so constructed man that he
could not have sinned. They rebuke Christians because daily at the altar they
eat their God and because the body of Christ, were it even as big as a
mountain, should long since have been consumed.
St. Thomas, De Rationibus Fidei (The Reasons for Our Faith)
Behold, then the whole
of Christian perfection: love and sacrifice. Who cannot with
God's grace, fulfil this twofold condition? Is it, indeed, so difficult to love
Him Who is infinitely lovable and infinitely loving? The love that He asks of
us is nothing extraordinary; it is the devotedness of love - the gift of
oneself - consisting chiefly in conformity to the divine will. To want to love
is to love. To keep the commandments for God's sake is to love. To pray is to
love. To fulfil our duties of state in view of pleasing God, this is likewise
to love. Nay more, to recreate ourselves, to take our meals with the like
intention is to love. To serve our neighbor for God's sake is to love. Nothing
then is easier, God's grace helping, than the constant exercise of divine love
and through this, steady advance toward perfection.
Rev. Adolphe
Tanquewrey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life
Vatican II and the Leap of Faith for the Hermeneutics of Continuity
ON
CATHOLIC UNITY
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, to Protestants at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005
Catholic
Doctrine:
… 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
ON
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
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
Catholic
Doctrine:
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
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
Catholic
Doctrine:
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
ON
ACCOMODATION OF CATHOLIC TRUTH TO THE WORLD
Vatican
II pastoral opinion:
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
Catholic
Doctrine:
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
ON
RELATIONS WITH FALSE RELIGIONS
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
Catholic Doctrine:
...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
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 werer 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 HERE and Leo is just a dull echo of Francis/Bergoglio!
COMMENT: This
book in the article below provides an interpretation of Chapter 8 of Amoris 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 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.
Pope
Leo XIV in a message to to the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life holding
a seminar entitled, “Evangelizing
with Families Today and Tomorrow,” endorsed Amoris Laetitia by directly quoting his predecessor from Amoris
Laetitia §76, writing the “Gospel of the family also nourishes seeds that
are still waiting to grow,” praising its “basis for caring for those plants
that are wilting and must not be neglected.”
Now the Novus Ordo, which may
be nothing more than a memorial meal as it was initially and officially 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
is that these persons can expect to be absolved by a confessor in the sacrament
of Penance without confessing or repentance of mortal sin. This does not
represent a change in the Church’s teaching.
It represents the active effort of a Francis (and now Leo) and his
minions to destroy Catholic doctrine and morality. As St. Thomas said, “All
heretics are schismatics,” the schism has long been present with every
post-conciliar pope who have repeatedly denied Catholic dogma. 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! After all, a “merciful heart” has its limits!
“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
"You know Gaza is interesting. It's a phenomenal location on the
sea, the best weather—you know, everything's good. It's like some beautiful
things could be done with it. It's very interesting. Some fantastic things
could be done with Gaza."
President Donald Trump, On the rebuilding of Gaza for Israel
COMMENT:
According to the latest figures released by the Gaza Ministry of Health
on December 23, 2025, Israel had killed at least 70,937 Palestinians and
wounded 171,192; of those identified fatalities, 53% were women, children or
elderly. But the estimate is difficult to make. This estimate from the Ministry
of Health is collected from hospital records and in May of 2025 the United
Nations reported that 94% of the hospitals in Gaze had been destroyed. It is
not possible 
to know how many Palestinians are buried under the rubble, nor how many
will die from starvation and disease. There were 2.23 million Palestinians in
Gaza before the conflict and relief workers estimate the current population
requiring aid at 1.87 million. The difference is 360,000.
The picture on the right is six bags containing the remains of children
killed in the bombing of a school. The picture on the left is northern area of
Gaze with no structure left standing. This killing and destruction was
accomplished by American made planes dropping 2,000 pound American made bombs.
The specific bomb used by Israelis on the school building was a Boeing GBU-39
designed to penetrate warships and hardened targets. It splinters into small
fast moving shrapnel segments that can penetrate three feet of reinforced
concrete. In an interview Jonathan
Pollard, the Jewish spy while working as a clerk for Naval Intelligence
delivered to Israel what Scott Ritter called the "Crown Jewels" of
U.S. Intelligence Singles and was sentenced to life in prison in 1987, said that
Israel has promised President Trump tax free concessions on anything he builds
in Gaza. The picture below is the visionary Trump plan, directed by his Jewish
son-in-law Jared Kushner, for turning Gaza everything in life Trump thinks is
important. The Blessed Virgin Mary said at Fatima, "Only the Lady of the
Rosary can help you" through devotion to her Immaculate Heart, the Rosary,
and the First Saturdays of Reparation. Whatever good President Trump may
occasionally do, in the end he cannot fix anything.
Pope Leo appoints pro-LGBT archbishop as secretary for Dicastery for
Clergy
Archbishop Carlo Roberto Maria Redaelli's pro-LGBT views were recounted
in a description of his response to the same-sex 'marriage' of a Catholic scout
leader.
LifeSiteNews | Jan 22, 2026 — Pope
Leo XIV has appointed a controversial and homosexualist archbishop to a
prominent role in the Vatican.
Archbishop
Carlo Roberto Maria Redaelli of Gorizia was named today as the new Secretary
for the Dicastery for Clergy.
Raedelli and his pro-LGBT views were
mentioned in a 2020 book by Luciano Moia, a senior journalist for the Italian
Bishops’ Conference’s daily newspaper Avvenire. In his book, Moia argues that
the Church should look at “chastity” within a same-sex relationship the same
way in which it looks at chastity within marriage.
As an example of how the Church should
begin to do this, the author cited Raedelli’s response to the same-sex
‘marriage’ in 2017 of a homosexual Catholic scout leader.
In Moia’s words, Raedelli “threw everyone off. He refused the role of
the judge, he didn’t absolve, but neither did he condemn. He invited the
community to reflect together to understand if, even from such a divisive
occurrence, one can receive aspects of grace. An intervention in search of
moderation and of that invitation to welcome, discern and integrate that
impregnates the magisterium of Pope Francis.”
Contrary to the attitudes of Moia and
Archbishop Redaelli, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear on
homosexuality:
Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which
presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always
declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary
to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not
proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances
can they be approved.
Only after stating that homosexual acts
cannot be approved does the catechism move on to a discussion of chastity. In
other words, chastity for people with homosexual inclinations plainly means
absolute continence.
Redaelli has served as auxiliary bishop of
Milan from 2004 to 2012, and as Archbishop of Gorizia, in northeastern Italy,
since 2012. A canon lawyer by training, he has been at the center of several
controversies over the years. For example, the archbishop has previously
attracted attention for his positions on the Traditional Latin Mass.
During the Italian Bishops’ Conference General Assembly in Rome in
November 2018, Redaelli had questioned the legal basis of Pope Benedict XVI’s
2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.
The Pope stated that the 1962 Roman Missal had never been abrogated and
could be freely used. However, according to the Italian blog Messainlatino.it,
Redaelli stated that the Missal promulgated by Pope John XXIII had in fact been
abrogated by Pope Paul VI, rendering Summorum Pontificum juridically
ineffective. On this basis, the motu proprio was described as a “juridical
non-sense,” and the Traditional Latin Mass as not legitimately liberalized.
However, Redaelli’s claim is juridically
wrong because it rests on a false premise. No explicit act ever abrogated the
1962 Roman Missal. Under canon law (see canon 21), “in a case of doubt, the
revocation of a pre-existing law is not presumed.” Furthermore, Pope Benedict
XVI did not grant a derogation or indult but formally recognized a right that
had never been suppressed.
As Secretary of the Dicastery for Clergy,
Archbishop Redaelli will hold a key administrative role within one of the most
influential departments of the Roman Curia. Under articles 113–120 of Praedicate
Evangelium, the dicastery oversees matters relating to diocesan clergy,
including their pastoral ministry, discipline, ongoing formation, and material
support. [.....]
COMMENT: Pope Leo's appointment meets two important
criteria: He is accepting of homosexuals, and therefore, will not be a problem
for homosexuals in the clergy that he will oversee; and, he is intent in doing
away with the Indult. It is Bishop Redaelli that understands the legal standing
Summorum Pontificum while the Indult conservative Catholics cannot figure it
out. Summorum Pontificum was abrogated by Pope Francis' Traditionis Custodes so
the argument is really moot. Be that as it may, there was never a Roman Missal
published in 1962. There were several changes in the Missal in 1962 just as
there were changes before 1962 and there would be in the years that followed
1962. Each change in the Missal abrogated the previous usage. The Missal that
was in usage at the end of 1962, the last change being addition of St. Joseph's
name to the canon in December, was changed in 1965, 1967, and 1969. Redaelli's
claim that the 1962 Missal usage was juridically suppressed by Paul VI is
correct. It was Benedict/Ratzinger who was dealing from the bottom of the deck
when he said that the 1962 usage had not been abrogated or legally suppressed.
Shortly after the publication of Summorum Pontificum Benedict/Ratzinger tried
to clean up the historical record by abrogating the two documents of Paul VI
that did so. What should be recognized is that Benedict/Ratzinger implied that
the 1962 usage could be suppressed but lied in claiming that that did not
happen. What is certain is that Benedict/Ratzinger said that those who used the
1962 Missale were exercising the privilege of a "legal right" granted
by the legislator and not a moral and doctrinal right from God. He changed the
1962 usage from the Indult of JPII into a grant of legal privilege. It was
Francis/Bergoglio who returned it to an Indult in Traditionis Custodes where it
exists today. Those who have accepted the use of the 1962 Bugnini transitional
Missal by grant of Indult and/or legal privilege have no legal grounds to
complain when the grant is taken away.
Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission refused the offer to become
an Indult community for this very reason. We offer the pre-Bugnini
"received and approved" immemorial Roman rite not by grant of legal
privilege or Indult but by our rights as baptized Catholics derived from of our
duty to worship God as God Himself has determined that He wants to be
worshiped.
St. Raymond of
Pennafort: Dominican Friar, Priest, Master of the Order
A renowned doctor of canon law and notable writer, Raymond of Pennafort
(1175 – 1275) joined the Dominican Order in 1222, after a distinguished
academic career in Barcelona and Bologna. His two principal works are his Summa
Casuum on penitential discipline and his compilation of the
decretals of canon law, commissioned by Pope Gregory IX. This collection of
conciliar and papal decrees became a standard work for canon lawyers for nearly
seven hundred years. St. Raymond later became the third master of the Order.
According to Dominican tradition, he once rebuked the king of Aragon for his
immoral behavior. When St. Raymond attempted to leave the island of Majorca and
return to Spain, he could not because the kind had forbidden all sailors to
give him passage. St. Raymond placed his cappa, the black mantle of the
Dominican habit, on the water, stepped on it, and sailed to the mainland.
CANON LAW and the Judgment of a heretical
pope
Comment:
The Decretals of Gratian is a collection of canonical
texts compiled in the 12th century. Pope Gregory IX in 1230 directed St.
Raymond of Pennafort, the distinguished Dominican, to organize an addendum
to the code to include legal codes adopted since the time of Gratian but the
work became a much more extensive revision. Working from
the Decretals of Gratian, St. Raymond wrote a five volume edition of
the Decretals that became
the Corpus iuris canonici which served as the legal code
for the Latin Church’s canon law from that time until the promulgation of the
Code of Canon Law in 1917.
Decretum Gratiani, which was included in the
old Corpus Iuris Canonici, affirmed that a Pope who deviates
from right doctrine (i.e.: a notorious public heretic) can be
judged. The canon states that the "pope judges all and is judged by
no-one, unless he is found to have departed from the faith":
‘Hujus culpas redarguere præsumit mortalium nullus, quia cunctos ipse judicaturus a nemine est judicandus,
nisi
deprehendatur a fide devius (dist. XL, C. 6)’.
When the revised Code of Canon Law
(Codex Iuris Canonici 1917) came into force, the Church
eliminated from the new legislation the phrase "unless he is found to have departed from the
faith." This deletion was continued in the 1983 code. Although the
phrase, "unless he is found to have departed from the
faith," was not included in the 1917 and the 1983 codes, the canonical
commentary still regards the phrase as legally binding:
‘Canon 1404 – The
First See is judged by no one.‘
COMMENTARY: "Canon 1404 is not a
statement about the personal impeccability or inerrancy of the Holy Father.
Should, indeed, the pope fall into heresy, it is understood that he would lose
his office. To fall from Peter’s faith is to fall from his chair."
New Commentary on
the Code of Canon Law, John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, and Thomas J. Green
eds. (New York: Paulist, 2000), p. 1,618.
The code is the compilation of laws governing the Church as social
institution. Most of the laws in the code are of ecclesiastical positive human
laws grounded upon human authority, however, many of the legal codes are divine
positive laws grounded upon divine authority or upon natural law. If a human
law is deleted from the code, the law ceases to bind. If a law of divine
authority is deleted from the code, the law continue in force for the human
authority of the Church cannot overturn the law of God. This self-evident
principle is stated in the code itself. Consequently, the commentary cited above is a recognition
that the pope cannot be judged "unless he is found to have departed from
the faith" is of divine origin. It is necessarily a divine law
because the papacy is a divine institution established directly by Jesus Christ
and therefore governed in its essence only by divine laws. In other words,
if it were not a divine law, the Church could not propose a human law to judge
what was established by God.
Therefore, it is of divine law that permits a heretical pope to be
judged. Importantly, although the law permits a heretical pope to be judged, it
says nothing about who and how a pope is to be judged regarding heresy and it
does not address penalties. It says nothing about removal from office. If the
law intended the removal from office the law itself would have to state the
penalty and provide a mechanism for its determination and enforcement.
So now it falls to opinions regarding the judgment of a heretical pope.
Most theologians believe that it is "understood" that the removal
from office necessarily follows from a judgment of heresy often citing the
scriptural and traditional admonition to avoid heretics:
"A man that
is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid: Knowing that he,
that is such a one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own
judgment" (Titus 3:10-11).
They argue that since the faithful cannot avoid a pope as head of the
Church therefore the heretical pope must lose his office. A serious problem
with this argument follows, that is, if the faithful cannot "avoid" a
pope, then there must necessarily be a pope who in fact cannot be
avoided. Therefore, those who would make the papacy vacant must also be
able to fill the office with a true pope.
But can a heretical pope be avoided? It really becomes a problem for
those who hold the pope as their proximate rule of faith and not, as they
should, dogma. For if dogma is not the proximate rule of faith then the pope
must be and he then can never be a heretic for whatever the pope holds the
dogma or doctrine to mean is what it then means and only those who disagree
with the pope are heretics. For a Catholic, dogma is the proximate rule of
faith and although a heretical pope can do immeasurable damage to the Church he
cannot touch individual souls of the faithful.
If we adhere to what the law says and nothing more we can say this: The
definition of heresy is the denial of dogma. The heretic denies dogma and the
faithful keep dogma. Those who can judge a heretical pope are the faithful. The
law does not distinguish or discriminate among the faithful as to the judgment.
Dogma is articulated for all the faithful. Its understanding does not require
any theological competence. It requires proper definition and correct grammar.
Any of the faithful, that is those who hold dogma as their proximate rule of
faith, can judge a manifestly heretical pope such as Pope Francis was. Any of
the faithful can know when a dogma is directly contradicted for the first
principles of the understanding, such as the principle of non-contradiction,
are innate in human nature. Thus all the faithful can judge, in fact must
judge, a heretical pope and so that they may not follow him in his heresy for
God has said that 'it
is not possible to deceive His elect' (Matt. 24:24). The law does
not specify the judge because the judgment rests with all the faithful, it is
universal. The law does not specify a penalty because none of the faithful have
the competency to impose a penalty and remove a heretical pope from office. It
is God who is the formal and final cause of the pope and the office of the
papacy. It is God who 'marries' the designated candidate to the papal office
and only God can remove him from it just as God removed the High Priest and
destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem and the Levitical priesthood which
can never be reconstituted.
Those who hold dogma as their proximate rule of faith recognize Pope
Francis as a heretic because he denies dogmatic truth. He preaches a different
gospel so we "receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed
you" (2 John 10). Since he preaches a different gospel, "Let him be
anathema" because we are first "servants of Christ" (Gal 1: 8).
For in dogma, the Church has spoken and the heretic Pope Francis "will not
hear the church, (therefore) let him be to thee as the heathen and publican
(Matt 18:17).
The job of the faithful is to keep the faith.
Dogmas
“are to give light, not to receive light from human reason”!
I answer: The obligation to
believe what God says is a natural duty, it is a natural law, dictated by the
common sense of reason which the Creator has deposited in every human soul. The
Church only enforces this law, which existed before she herself existed, because
from all eternity it was a truth that the creature is bound to believe the word
of the Creator. If the Church allows no denial, no doubt, no alteration or
misconstruction of any of her dogmas, it is because the veracity of the Son of
God, who has revealed these truths, is attacked when any of His doctrines are
denied or doubted. These dogmas are so many fixed stars in the firmament of
holy Church. They cannot be reached by the perversity and frivolity of man. He
may close his eyes against them and deny their existence; he may misrepresent
them and look at them through glasses stained the color of every prejudice; but
he cannot do away with them altogether, nor change in any way their natural
brightness and brilliancy. Like the stars that deck the vault of heaven, they
are to give light, not to receive light from human reason. They are the word of
God, and what God says is truth, that cannot be made untruth. The mind that
receives truth is enlightened thereby; the mind that denies or misrepresents it
is darkened and corrupted.
Besides, every dogma of faith is
to the Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also
an incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and
derive other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that
the beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear
of exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which
if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, world not be able to
contain the books that should be written.”
The Catholic Church, by
enforcing firm belief in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were
given by Jesus Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it
from going astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the
mind from exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine
truth, and a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a
man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things
and old.” …. They are new because newly enacted, declared, defined; they are
old because they contain no new revelation or any assumption of power never
granted by Christ, but simply old truths under new forms, the old power
exercised under new circumstances.
Rev. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The
Church of the Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Savior
When Pope Leo XIV met with cardinals and bishops residing in Rome at
Christmas, his Master of Ceremonies, Monsignor Marco Agostini, outed them by
identifying them on an open microphone as “culattoni tutti insieme” (all the
faggots together).
Anyone who questions Agostini’s statement is encouraged to read In
the Closet of the Vatican
by Frédéric Martel who estimated that around 80% of the
clergy working in the Vatican are homosexuals. The 555-page work is the
result of over 1,500 interviews with people in the Vatican and in 30 countries:
among them, 41 cardinals, 52 bishops and monsignors, 45 apostolic nuncios and
foreign ambassadors.
Some of Martel’s conclusions include:
·
The
Vatican has one of the biggest gay communities in the world….it is one huge
closet.
·
The
Church has become sociologically homosexual. It is responsible for countless
instances of sexual abuse that are undermining it from within.
·
The
priesthood is (now) the ideal escape route for young homosexuals. Homosexuality
is one of the keys to their vocation.
·
There are
more and more homosexuals as one rises through the Catholic hierarchy. In the
College of Cardinals and at the Vatican, the preferential process is said to be
perfected; homosexuality becomes the rule, heterosexuality the exception.
Gene Thomas Gomulka, is a sexual abuse victims’ advocate,
investigative reporter, author, and screenwriter. A former Navy Captain
Chaplain Corps, seminary instructor, and diocesan Respect Life Director.
Gomulka was ordained a priest for the Altoona-Johnstown diocese and later made
a Prelate of Honor (Monsignor) by JPII.
COMMENT: Apparently Msgr. Agostini did not realize that the microphone
was on when he said, "All the faggots together." For his indiscretion
he has been dismissed from his position. While not knowing anything about
Martel's book that is recommended by Rev. Gomulka, it is just another addition
to the a long list, and growing longer, of documentation of the Homosexual
Lobby's infiltration and control of the Novus Ordo Church. Traditional
Catholics have been exposing this crime for a long time. One of the priests
that help in the establishment of Saints Peter & Paul Roman Catholic
Mission was the late Rev. Enrique Rueda authored The Homosexual Network
published in 1982. Rev. Rueda inspired the work of Randy Engel who continued
his work with her book, Rite of Sodomy published in 2006. The late Rev. John
O'Connor, O.P., a traditional Dominican, exposed in detail the homosexual
takeover of the Dominican Order in the United States and the failure of Rome to
do anything about it. The Polish priest, Rev. Dariusz Oko, a theology professor at the Pontifical
University of John Paul II in Krakow, was fined in Germany in 2022 along with
his published, for "hate speech" in an article that referred to
homosexual priests as "a colony of parasites", "a cancerous
growth" and "a homosexual plague" in the Church. He also called
the "gay-affirming movement" a "homo-heresy." The book
Goodbye, Good Men by Michael S. Rose is another work that documents the
homosexual infiltration of the Church. Should we be surprised? Remember Bella Dodd who was
a teacher, lawyer, and labor union activist, member of the Communist Party of
the U.S.A. and New York City Teachers Union in the 1930s and 1940s. She became
a vocal anti-communist after she underwent a conversion to the Catholic Church
upon meeting Rev. Fulton J. Sheen, Bishop of Rochester, New York. Bella Dodd, under sworn testimony before
Congress in the 1950s, claimed that she had helped place 1,500 committed
communists into Catholic seminaries. None of these homosexuals will ever give
up their sinecures in the Novus Ordo church network. Jesus Christ began and
ended His public life with the 'cleansing of the Temple' driving the profane
from the house of God. Call to mind what God did to Rome in 1527 when the
mercenary Protestant army of Charles V sacked Rome. The destruction and death
lasted about nine months. This cleansing of Rome made possible the rebuilding
and reformation accomplished by the Council of Trent. The punishment that is at
the door today will be a pitiless destruction of the entire Novus Ordo
structure and make possible the great restoration that will follow.
"All ceremonies are professions of
faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make
profession of his inward faith, by deeds as well as by words: and in either
profession, if
he makes a false declaration, he sins mortally."
St. Thomas Aquinas, (ST, I-II, Q. 103,
Art. 4)
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., an Oxford
scholar and international celebrity appointed by Pope Francis to the Pontifical
Council of Justice and Peace in 2015. On 6 October 2024, Pope Francis announced
that Radcliffe would be created a cardinal on December 8 but was the date was
later changed to 7 December. Pope Francis, granting him a dispensation from the
current requirement that all cardinals must be bishops, made him a cardinal
deacon and assigned him to the Chiesa dei
Santi Nomi di Gesu e Maria. He participated as a cardinal elector in the
2025 conclave that elected Pope Leo as the sole elector that was not a bishop.
Pro-LGBT Cdl. Radcliffe urges ‘openness to novelty’ in address to
extraordinary consistory
Reports from inside the Vatican suggest growing unease among the
cardinals after Pope Leo’s two-day gathering opened with tightly controlled
group sessions led by liberal voices.
LifeSiteNews | Gaetano Masciullo | Thu
Jan 8, 2026
VATICAN CITY— Pro-LGBT Cardinal Timothy
Radcliffe delivered the opening meditation at the consistory in Rome by urging 
cardinals to remain “in the boat of Peter” amid global crises and
Church divisions while suggesting “memory and openness to novelty must coexist
in the life of the Church.”
On the afternoon of January 7, Pope Leo XIV
opened a two-day extraordinary consistory at the Vatican, convening cardinals
from around the world to reflect on four major themes – the mission of the
Church in today’s world, synodality, the relationship between the Holy See and
the particular Churches, and the liturgy – though only the former two were
selected for detailed discussion, a decision that, according to off-the-record
accounts reported by the Italian blog Messainlatino, prompted discouragement
and concern among several participants.
“I
am here to listen,” Pope Leo XIV told the cardinals in his opening address,
stressing that the meeting was intended not to produce documents but “to
continue a conversation that will help me in serving the mission of the entire
Church.”
According to the blog Messainlatino,
multiple unnamed cardinals described the first session as poorly prepared and
structurally restrictive, noting in particular that there were no free
interventions scheduled for the opening day. Discussions were conducted in
small, pre-assigned working groups based on language and curial affiliation, a
format some participants reportedly said did not resemble the traditional
consistory model of the past.
The same source reported that, for reasons
of time, the theme of the liturgy was effectively excluded from substantive
group discussion, despite being listed among the four initial topics. Several
cardinals allegedly lamented what they perceived as a lack of interest in the
Church understood as “mystery,” and said that the overall approach appeared to
be in continuity with the synodal processes of recent years.
The opening meditation was delivered by
Cardinal Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., a leftist prelate who has praised “gay
sexuality” in blasphemous remarks, celebrated “LGBT Masses,” supported
admitting homosexuals to the priesthood, and encouraged Catholics to watch
homosexual movies and read homosexual novels.
In his reflection on the Gospel of Mark
(6:45–52), Radcliffe urged the cardinals to “remain in the boat of Peter” amid
contemporary storms facing both the world and the Church, including war,
inequality, sexual abuse scandals, and ideological divisions.
Radcliffe warned against remaining “on the
shore” out of fear or disagreement, arguing that unity and mutual charity among
the cardinals were essential to supporting the Pope. He stated that “memory and
openness to novelty must coexist in the life of the Church,” citing Evangelii
Gaudium and Saint Augustine to argue that Tradition and renewal are
inseparable.
Messainlatino also reports that upcoming
sessions of the consistory are expected to open with reflections by pro-LGBT
Cardinal José Tolentino de
Mendonça and Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, both widely regarded as
prominent liberal voices within the College of Cardinals.
COMMENT: Cardinal Radcliffe
is a notorious homosexual. Pope Leo in selecting him as the spiritual director
of the consistory is making an open declaration that the spirit of the
consistory is NOT the Holy Spirit. The Mission of the Church was established by
its founder, Jesus Christ. It was established with a specific commission to
"make disciples of all nations." Synodality is a denial of the dogma
of the universal jurisdiction of the pope. The Church's relationship with
non-Catholic churches is established by God: "There is no salvation
outside the Catholic Church." It is the relationship is between those who
can be saved and those who are not. Finally, the liturgy is the work of God Who
dogmatically established at the Council of Trent: "Those that say that the
received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn administration of
the sacraments may be changed into other new rites... by any pastor of the
churches whomsoever: anathema sit.
Pope Leo begins a new catechism series dedicated to Vatican II
Pope Leo on Wednesday praised the ‘liturgical reform’ launched by
Vatican II that laid the groundwork for the revolutionary Novus Ordo Missae,
the new Mass.
LifeSiteNews | Emily Mangiaracina | Jan
8, 2026
VATICAN CITY— Pope Leo XIV announced
Wednesday that he is beginning a catechesis series to “closely” study the
Second Vatican Council, which many priests and scholars have affirmed to be in
need of correction.
“We are beginning a new catechesis series dedicated to the Second
Vatican Council and to a fresh reading of its Documents,” Leo wrote in an X
post on January 7. “The Council’s Magisterium remains even today the North Star
guiding the Church’s journey.”
“Closely studying the Council documents
will help us to be attentive interpreters of the signs of the times, and to
proclaim the Gospel to all,” Leo said Wednesday during his general audience.
In Leo’s strong support for Vatican II, he aligns himself with Pope
Francis, who described the Council as “a visit of God to His Church,” and as
“irreversible.”
The pope has not given further details thus far on the forthcoming
“catechesis” of Vatican II. However, during his general audience on Wednesday,
he highlighted aspects of the Council that he highly esteems.
For example, Leo praised the “liturgical reform” launched by Vatican
II, which laid the groundwork for the revolutionary Novus Ordo Missae,
the new Mass. The Council “set in motion an important liturgical reform by
placing at the center the mystery of salvation and the active and conscious
participation of the entire People of God,” Leo said in his general audience.
Liturgist and author Dr. Peter Kwasniewski
has pointed out that the idea articulated in the Second Vatican Council’s Sacrosanctum Concilium that “In the
restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active
participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else” is
backward.
“It cannot escape our notice that this text
turns things on their head,” Kwasniewski remarked in 2019. “Where Pius X had
said that what should be ‘provided for before everything else’ is the ‘sanctity
and dignity of the temple,’ Vatican II says that ‘the aim to be considered
before all else’ is ‘full and active participation by all the people.’ In doing
so, it inverts the hierarchy of goods. Now the worship of God and its right
condition becomes secondary to the people’s involvement.”
Pope Leo also on Wednesday lauded Vatican II for being responsible for
a Church committed to “seeking the truth through the way of ecumenism,
interreligious dialogue and dialogue with people of good will,” as if the
Church needs to seek truth outside of Herself. The idea that the fullness of
the truth is not found within the Catholic Church is heretical.
Leo’s description of the Second Vatican
Council during his general audience and in his social media post as the
“guiding star” of the Church’s path suggests he sees this council as surpassing
in importance every other council of the Church, which is especially
significant given that Vatican II appeared to contradict previous magisterial
councils in certain respects.
Prelates such as Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Archbishop Carlo Maria
Viganò have pointed to errors in the Second Vatican Council regarding religious
freedom and other religions, and in doing so have been supported by many
priests and scholars.
For example, Bishop Schneider has said Lumen Gentium is “wrong” and errs by suggesting that Christians and
Muslims participate together in the same act of adoration when it states that
“Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the
one and merciful God.”
It errs because Muslims worship on a
natural level, at the same level of anyone who adores God with the “natural
light of reason,” whereas Christians adore God on a supernatural level as His
adopted children “in the truth of Christ and in the Holy Spirit.”
“This is a substantial difference,”
Schneider observed. He explained that the use of the phrase “with us”
represents a relativization of the act of adoration of God and also of
Christians’ “sonship.”
In addition, Muslims reject the Trinity,
which they consider to be an idolatrous idea. Christ made clear that “whoever
rejects me rejects the one who sent me” (Luke 10:16) and “no one comes to the
Father except through me” (John 14:6).
Schneider criticized texts suggesting that
Buddhists and Hindus can attain illumination on their own, without “the grace
of Christ,” as a heresy. Nostra Aetate
claims that “in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery,” and that
Buddhism “teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be
able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own
efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination.”
The German prelate has also criticized Dignitatis Humanae for putting forth “a
theory never before taught by the constant Magisterium of the Church, i.e.,
that man has the right founded in his own nature, ‘not to be prevented from
acting in religious matters according to his own conscience, whether privately
or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due
limits.’”
Archbishop Viganò agreed with Bishop
Schneider in his criticism of the Second Vatican Council, noting that Vatican
II’s formulation of religious freedom “contradict[s] the testimony of Sacred
Scripture and the voice of Tradition, as well as the Catholic Magisterium which
is the faithful guardian of both.”
It is also noteworthy that Vatican II’s
Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis
Redintegratio, condones “prayers in common” with our “separated brethren”
in “certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers “for unity,”
and during ecumenical gatherings.”
However, the Councils of the Church have
repeatedly made clear that Catholics cannot pray with heretics or schismatics,
let alone those of other religious practices:
· “One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whoever shall
communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the Church,
whether clergy or layman: let him be excommunicated.” — Council of Carthage
· “No one shall pray in common with heretics and schismatics.” — Council
of Laodicea
· If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews
or to the meeting houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them
be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall
join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion. — II Council
of Constantinople
COMMENT: Pope
Leo is just another heretic embracing the heresies of Vatican II, a pastoral
council that has by every statistical analysis has proven to be an utter
pastoral failure. A pastoral approach to pastoral problem is comparable to a
business plan to the operation of the business. Now is a business plan leads to
financial ruin of a business the board of directors will immediately fire the
CEO, his staff and advisors, and seek another with a different business plan.
What can be said about the Novus Ordo popes is that the "pastoral
plan" they have adopted from Vatican II is not a failure but rather a
resounding success because the purpose of the plan is to destroy the Church of
Jesus Christ. What they are doing is what they have always intended to do. The
Church was established in Truth by Truth Itself and does not "seek"
truth from those who deny it.
In 2005 the Dover, PA electorate removed the School Board
members that permitted Intelligent Design to be considered in as a possible
explanation for the natural order found in the material universe. Scientists,
while affirming that the natural order in the universe must necessarily be the
result of mechanical chance, “listened with a vast radio telescopic network for
signals (from outer space) that resembled coded intelligence and were not
merely random” for evidence of intelligent life in the universe. If these scientists affirm that the DNA code
of biological life, which is clearly goal directed, is “merely random” and not
a sign of “intelligence” how can they be open to recognize any sign of
intelligible communication!? Is this WSJ article evidence that there is no
intelligence design in the Dover, PA electorate or in modern science?
Science
Increasingly Makes the Case for God
The odds of life existing on
another planet grow ever longer. Intelligent design, anyone?
Eric Metaxas: Dec. 25, 2014
In
1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted
the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is
less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors
of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case
for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.
Here’s
the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer
Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to
support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that
star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 27 zeros—planets in the
universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 24
zeros—planets capable of supporting life.
With
such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large,
expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the
1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast
radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were
not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the
universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search
continues with private funds. As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely
bubkis—0 followed by nothing.
What
happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that
there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two
parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially
life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few
thousand planets and kept on plummeting.
Even
SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece
for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it
seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly
admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”
As
factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero,
and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the
universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we
shouldn’t be here.
Today
there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support
life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls
apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw
away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds
against life in the universe are simply astonishing.
Yet
here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account
for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident?
At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the
result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these
perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining
Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?
There’s
more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing
compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For
example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental
forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear
forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang.
Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the
ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been
off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in
100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free
to gulp.
Multiply
that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds
against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the
notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like
tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row.
Really?
Fred
Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was
“greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense
interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with
the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology…. The numbers one calculates
from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost
beyond question.”
Theoretical
physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming”
and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our
universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in
credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”
The
greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is
the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined
brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself.
Mr.
Metaxas is the author, most recently, of “Miracles: What They Are, Why They
Happen, and How They Can Change Your Life” (Dutton Adult, 2014).
JP II the
'Grate' - if somehow he made it to Purgatory -
ask him to turn out the lights and lock the place up when he is the last
to leave.
John
Paul II was a pope under whose reign we had the most horrific scandal in the
Church's 2000-year history. Thousands of
children were molested by priests and bishops he ordained. By the end of his pontificate, lawsuits were
bankrupting Catholic Churches all over the world; and between one third and one
half of the clergy (sources available upon request) were admittedly homosexual,
with a significant percentage being pederasts whom the pope didn't even admit
existed when he was told of their crimes, much less did anything to stop them,
even when stark evidence was brought before him, as in the case of Legionnaires
leader Marciel Maciel. At the same time
he hid other clerics from prosecution, as in the case of Cardinal Bernard Law
of Boston.
This
was the pope who allowed the Vatican Bank's corruption that started under Paul
VI to continue with little or no reform; and who protected its chief
perpetrator, Bishop Paul Marcinkus, from prosecution. He did nothing to investigate the suspected
murder of John Paul I, the very pope who made it known in the first days of his
reign that he was going to clean up the financial misdealings of his
curia. This was the pope who took 250
million dollars of the Vatican's money and gave it to Solidarity in Poland,
thereby making the Church a political institution instead of a spiritual one. By the same token he condemned Liberation
theology because if its tendency to get involved in politics.
This
was the pope who went to the hut of an African witch doctor in 1985 and
afterward wrote, "the prayer meeting in the sanctuary at Lake Togo was
particularly striking. There I prayed
for the first time with animists."
In December 1984 he sent a
Vatican representative to the laying of the
foundation of the largest mosque in Europe.
In September 1989 he wrote to Muslim leaders and said: "In the name
of the same God we adore," without any qualifications whatsoever. In May 1999 he kissed the Koran in a public
ceremony; and in 2000 asked John the Baptist "to protect Islam." In February 1986 he received the red dust of
the Hindu religion on his forehead in honor of the goddess Shiva. In March 1986 in New Delhi he stated that
"collaboration between all religions is necessary for the good of
mankind... as Hindus, Buddhists, Jainists, and Christians, we unite to proclaim
the truth about man."
This
was the pope who invited all the world's non-Christian and pagan religions to
pray for world peace at Assisi in 1986 and Assisi in 2002 (with five additional
Assisi-like gatherings in the 1990s in various countries) and never once in
those 16 years did he preach the Gospel to them about conversion to Christ for
salvation. Instead he sent them all back
to their countries encouraging them to continue to pray to their false gods,
the very opposite that St. Paul did in Acts 17.
He paid no attention to any of his high-placed clerical advisors who
told him these acts were abominations.
This
was the pope who, against two millennia of Catholic tradition, told husbands to
be mutually submissive to women; dispensed with head coverings for women; and
allowed women and girls to be communion ministers, altar girls, and directors
of chanceries, thereby increasing the feminization of the Church amidst an
already feminized clergy who were by this time at least a third homosexual,
while another significant portion were receiving paternity suits.
This
was the pope who profusely apologized for the ecclesiastical policies of
previous popes; who had his Vatican envoy sign the 1998 Lutheran/Catholic Joint
declaration which, in direct contradiction to the Council of Trent, said
"man is justified by faith alone."
This was the pope who told the Lutherans they had a "profound
religiousness and spiritual heritage" and that Martin Luther was driven by
a "burning passion of the question of eternal salvation," and who
told the Lutheran bishops that Rome's excommunication of Luther had expired,
and that "There is a need for a new evaluation of the questions raised by
Luther and his teaching." This was
the pope who implied or taught universal salvation and that hell may not be
applicable to any human being. This was
the pope who at the very beginning of his pontificate in the 1979 encyclical Redemptor Hominis used the word
"church" 150 times but never once mentioned the word
"Catholic." This was the pope
who continually sided with liberals like Karl Rahner, Urs von Balthasar and
Raymond Brown but who would hardly give an ear to those, such as Archbishop
Lefebvre, who wanted to preserve the tradition and who decried the
anti-Catholic innovations being foisted on the Catholic populace. (Fortunately, Pope Benedict XVI saw John Paul
II's mistake and reversed the decision against Lefebvre). This was the pope who was criticized by his
own admirers for failing to discipline wayward clerics, both in their doctrinal
aberrations and moral laxity (Charles Curran, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung,
et al). Ironically, the only cleric that
was excommunicated was Lefebvre, yet he was one of the most doctrinally sound
and morally upright clerics the Church had ever known.
This
was the pope who in 1981, contrary to tradition, implied or taught that the Jewish
Old Covenant is not revoked and that Jews have a special relationship with God,
as does Paragraph 121 of his papally-signed 1994 Catechism. He continued to propagate confusing and
doctrinally fallacious teaching about the Jews and Judaism through his
cardinals who taught that the Jews did not need to convert to Christianity to
be saved since they have their own covenant with God (Kasper, Keeler,
Willebrands, George, Ratzinger, et al).
This was the first pope in history to visit Israel and who then placed
himself under Judaism by praying at the Jerusalem's Wailing Wall. This was the pope who, for the first time in
the history of the papacy, visited and prayed in Jewish synagogues - the
religion that denies more than any other that Jesus Christ is God.
Last
but not least, this was the pope who changed the Church's criterion for
sainthood, which now allows him and all his fellow 20th century popes to be
easily canonized in the face of the fact that there have been only three popes
canonized since 1294 (Pius X, d. 1914; Pius V, d. 1572; Celestine V, d.
1294). As such, the very popes who lived
and reigned during the Church's worst corruptions and scandals are now being
exonerated and place in heaven.
Robert Sungenis, Ph.D., Letter to Editor, Culture Wars Magazine
In pastoral letter, Charlotte's Bishop Martin ends altar rails for holy
Communion
National Catholic Reporter | Patricia L.
Guilfoyle | Charlotte, N.C. — December 23, 2025
Bishop
Michael Martin has established guidelines for the reception of holy Communion in the Diocese
of Charlotte to strengthen unity in worship, uphold the church's
liturgical norms and encourage active participation by the faithful.
Martin announced the new norms in a pastoral letter that affirms the
common posture of standing to receive holy Communion, encourages priests
to offer Communion under both bread and wine more often, and calls for the
broader use of trained laypeople to serve as Eucharistic ministers.
"The liturgy of the Church is the work
of God and the work on behalf of God in the life of the Church," Martin
wrote in the Dec. 17 letter. "These norms for our diocese move us together toward the
Church's vision for the fuller and more active participation of the
faithful."
In his pastoral letter, the bishop
emphasized that the celebration of the Eucharist is a communal act of worship,
not only an individual act of piety.
"Throughout the ages and within the context of our rich liturgical
traditions from the East to the West, our unity as believers in
Holy Communion is expressed through our postures and gestures that reflect
our mystical communion and unity as fellow believers," he said.
The new guidance does not replace the
diocese's general liturgical norms established in 2005, but builds upon
them and aligns closely with the Catholic Church's universal norms
(what is called the "General Instruction of the Roman Missal") and
directives set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The pastoral letter follows months of
consultation with the diocese's Office for Divine Worship and the Presbyteral
Council of priests, which represents all priests of the diocese in
administrative and policy discussions.
In his pastoral letter, Martin affirmed the "normative
posture" for receiving holy Communion in the United States is
standing, after bowing the head as a sign of reverence.
The directive instructs any parishes that currently use altar rails for
distributing Communion to discontinue the practice and remove any portable
kneelers or prie-dieus by Jan. 16, noting that such practices are "a
visible contradiction" to the prescribed posture of standing.
"Instead," his pastoral letter states, the church
"emphasizes that receiving Holy Communion is to be done as the
members of the faithful go in procession, witnessing that the Church journeys
forward and receives Holy Communion as a pilgrim people on their
way."
In many churches, altar rails are architectural elements that
differentiate the sanctuary from the nave and once were used for Communion
distribution.
Over the past decade or so, a small number
of churches in the diocese reintroduced the use of rails or kneelers to
distribute Holy Communion, but most diocesan churches already follow the
practice of receiving Communion while standing, consistent with U.S. norms.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop
reiterated that individuals may not be denied holy Communion if they
choose to kneel, yet he encouraged the faithful to "prayerfully consider
the blessing of communal witness that is realized when we share a common
posture."
Clergy and catechists, he added, "are
to instruct communicants according to the normative posture in the United
States" and "are not to teach that some other manner is better,
preferred, more efficacious, etc."
In guidance to pastors that accompanied the
bishop's pastoral letter, the diocese's Office for Divine Worship noted
that if a communicant wishes to kneel but is physically unable, the pastor
should address the situation privately.
"He is to catechize and remind the person that standing to receive
is no less reverent or worthy a way to receive Our Lord," advised Fr. Noah
Carter, diocesan liturgy director. "In both ways, the communicant
who is properly disposed to receive holy Communion gains the same graces
and gifts contained in the Eucharist, regardless of standing or kneeling."
In his letter, Martin also encouraged pastors, where and when
possible, to distribute holy Communion under the forms of both bread and
wine more often.
While affirming church teaching that Christ
is fully present — body, blood, soul and divinity — under either bread or wine,
he encouraged priests to consider the "fuller sign" of distributing
holy Communion under both kinds to foster "a deeper participation in
the Eucharistic mystery," consistent with prevailing church practice.
The bishop specifically noted that "a
significant number of parishes" did not resume distribution of the
Precious Blood in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. "To foster unity, it
is helpful that we all practice a similar way of distributing Holy Communion,"
he said.
"Parishioners who travel from parish
to parish because of their own needs may otherwise rightly question why the
Precious Blood is always available in one church and never available in
another."
The pastoral letter specifically recommends
distributing the Precious Blood for at least one Mass every Sunday and for
major solemnities, including: Christmas, the Easter Vigil, Divine Mercy Sunday,
Pentecost, Trinity Sunday, Corpus Christi, Christ the King Sunday, and Holy
Thursday. It also encourages distributing holy Communion under both kinds
for first holy Communion Masses, wedding Masses, parish patronal feast
days and church anniversaries.
It reaffirms that the consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or
in the hand, at the discretion of the communicant.
It explicitly prohibits the practice of
intinction — dipping the host into the Precious Blood before placing it on the
communicant's tongue — at public liturgies.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop also encouraged parishes to enlist more
laypeople to help clergy with distributing holy Communion.
Priests and deacons are the "ordinary
ministers of holy Communion," while laypeople may serve as
"extraordinary ministers of holy Communion" when needed, such as
when there are too many communicants for the clergy to
distribute Communion efficiently.
In many parishes, extraordinary ministers
also take Communion to the sick and homebound.
The diocese's existing
liturgical norms already call for extraordinary ministers in such situations
and provide for people to serve in three-year terms. The new guidelines
formalize practices that are already commonplace in the diocese and across the
U.S.
They set eligibility and formation
requirements, and direct parishes to have enough eucharistic ministers
"for roughly 75 communicants" at each Mass. Parishes are also
directed to invite people to serve as extraordinary ministers and offer
training at least once a year.
To be appointed as such, a layperson must:
be a practicing Catholic who has received the sacraments of initiation; be
at least 16 years old; "demonstrate a deep reverence for and devotion to
the holy Eucharist"; be "distinguished in their Christian life, faith
and morals"; and take part in the diocese's safe environment training.
COMMENT: The immemorial rule
of receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic Church is kneeling and on the
tongue from the hands of a Catholic priest or deacon. In the Latin Rite
communion is distributed only under the appearance of bread. The current
practice of the Novus Ordo Church is by Indult granted by the Vatican at the
petition from the Novus Ordo National Conference of Catholic Bishops in the
United States. An Indult is a permission to NOT obey the law. Bishop Martin's
Letter begins with a lie. It ends with imposing the norms of the Lutheran
church on the Novus Ordites and his determination to prevent anyone from
building a Catholic sanctuary. The Lutherans do not believe in the True
Presence in their services and neither does Bishop Martin. The Novus Ordo Mass
was initially defined as a memorial meal, and if that is all it is, then the
Lutheran norms are perfectly reasonable and there is no problem with Bishop
Martin's arguments. But Bishop Martin is liar and therefore we cannot expect
him to acknowledge this truth. A PEW poll in 2019 found that only 26% for all
Catholics under 40 years of age (and only 63% of all Novus Ordites who go to
Mass at least once each week) believe in the Catholic dogma of the True
Presence. These Catholics under 40 years of age were raised on the current
Indult and have lost the Catholic faith. What an established practice does in its signification is
what it was intended to do. The intention of Bishop Martin is to destroy
the belief in any remaining Catholics of the True Presence. The argument that
standing better symbolizes that we are a "pilgrim people" has been
used for more than fifty years. It was a stupid argument in the beginning and
remains a more stupid argument today because the result of the practice are
evident. The Novus Ordo church has yet to publically acknowledge that their
church is on a pilgrimage to hell!
"ALL
HERETICS ARE SCHISMATICS." St. Thomas Aquinas quoting St. Augustine
“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 was not Pope Francis' intention
and what in fact he had long been doing throughout his pontificate? 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 to legitimate exercise
of authority 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, who professed the same doctrine as his
conciliar predecessors, only drovethe 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 and his successor Leo 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 cannot
recognize heresy. They 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. and DOGMA is the most perfect expression of Truth
available to all men.
Greetings from Pope Leo to
Father Franz Schmidberger, SSPX
Pope
Leo extends his heartfelt congratulations to venerable Father Franz
Schmidberger, SSPX on the occasion of his fiftieth anniversary of his priestly
ordination and extends his apostolic blessing.
Friedrichshafen,
Germany, December 14, 2025
COMMENT: We have publically
affirmed that the SSPX was formally regularized with modernist Rome no later
than 2015 and most likely in 2012 although this is not commonly shared with its
member priests or those faithful who attend their chaples for Mass. Fr.
Schmidberger was the general superior of the SSPX after the retirement of
Archbishop Lefebvre, and after his death when Bishop Fellay became the general
superior, Fr. Schmidberger was his direct assistant. It was under the guidance
of Fr. Schmidberger that the secret negotiations with modernist Rome began in
the 1990s that would eventually lead to their regularization. This
"heartfelt" greetings and congratulations from Pope Leo is in
acknowledgment of Fr. Schmidberger's untiring commitment to betray Catholic tradition.
"There will be two worm-ridden popes".
Blessed Virgin
Mary, Our Lady of La Salette to Melanie
The idea that there would be two worm-ridden popes is an unofficial,
unpublished prophecy of Melanie, one of two children at the apparition of La Salette
in France. It pops up in one of her letters to Fr. Roubaud back on September
30, 1884, and it was brought to light by author Michel Corteville in his book, Découverte
du secret de La Salette. Some say that the phrase actually
translates to: “two shaky, servile, doubtful popes.” The original French reads:
Mais avant ce temps
(des tribulations) il y aura deux fois une paix de peu de durée, deux Papes
vermoulus, plats, douteux.*
TRANSLATION: “But
before this time (of tribulations) there will be twice a peace of short
duration, two worm-eaten, flat, and doubtful Popes.”
“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
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 Leo: Don’t let tension between tradition, novelty become ‘harmful
polarizations’
EWTN | Victoria Cardiel | October 27, 2025
Pope Leo XIV said at a Mass on Sunday that
no one in the Church “should impose his or her own ideas” and asked that
tensions between tradition and novelty not become “ideological contrapositions
and harmful polarizations.”
“The supreme rule in the Church is love. No
one is called to dominate; all are called to serve,” Leo said in St. Peter’s
Basilica on Oct. 26.
“No one should impose his or her own
ideas; we must all listen to one another,” he continued. “No one is excluded;
we are all called to participate. No one possesses the whole truth; we must all
humbly seek it and seek it together.” [.....]
COMMENT: The problem
is this: the love of novelty is an ideology, Tradition along with sacred
Scripture is divine revelation. The Church always and everywhere has condemned
novelty until Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Church of Novelty embraced it. The
conflict between novelty and tradition is the conflict between God's revelation
and demonic lies; the conflict between the Church and the World. Those who are
faithful to tradition do not "impose their own ideas" but defend
God's revealed truth against the novelty of the world. The Novus Ordo Novelty
Church is "seeking truth"; the Church of Jesus Christ possesses it.
Pope Leo like his predecessor likes to characterize tradition as rigid and dead
and the novelty of modernism as mature and hopeful. This was once an intensely
debated matter but, at this time, after all the wreckage of the last 50 years
all tradition has to do is to point at the fruit of Vatican II novelty. Both
Leo and his predecessor Francis worked in South America. The total population
of South and Central America is about 600 million. Since Vatican II about 300
million have apostatized from the Catholic Church. These last two popes have
personally presided over the greatest apostasy over the shortest period of time
in the history of the Catholic Church. Anything Leo has to say, as long as he
is not sitting in the Chair of Peter, must be examined in light of this record.
Fruit of
Vatican II - Apostasy
In Honduras,
the country of the once most powerful man in the Roman Curia under
Francis/Bergoglio, Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga, a personally corrupt and
immoral man who had been a bishop in the capital since 1978, first as auxiliary then as Archbishop for 30 years,
the hierarchy led by him managed the
amazing feat of transforming that country in the first Catholic-minority nation
in Central America, a vertiginous fall from 94% to 46% in the same period -
and the same happened in Uruguay, across the Rio de la Plata from (Bergoglio's
home) Buenos Aires.
Rorate Caeli
Data Collapse of Catholic Faith in Latin America from 2014 presided
over by Pope Leo/Provost and his predecessor Francis/Begoglio
The “received and approved rites of the Catholic Church,
accustomed to be used in the solemn 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.”
Because the 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
He failed on
two occasions, 1942 & 1952, to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of
Mary as our Lady requested! He
contributed his share in liturgical destruction by establishing the liturgical
commission under Bugnini in 1948 and having Bea, his personal confessor,
undertake a new Latin translation of the Psalms.
“I am concerned
about the messages of the Virgin to the little Lucia of Fatima. This
persistence of the Good Lady in face of the danger that threatens the Church is
a divine warning against the suicide that the alteration of the Faith, in its
liturgy, its theology, and its soul, would represent. I hear around me
innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame
of the Church, reject her ornaments, and make her remorseful for her
historical past.”
Pope Pius XII,
1933
And now, addressing the “false prophets that exploit fear
and hopelessness to sell magical formulas of hate and cruelty,” Pope Francis
again insults the Catholic Faith as known and practiced by all our forefathers!
COMMENT: Pope Francis often
referenced St. Vincent of Lérins as if his understanding of Tradition is in
accord with that of the great Church Father.
It most certainly was not which is evident to anyone familiar with his
writings. This corruption can only be attributed to malice. Francis the Lutheran and St. Vincent the
Catholic did not profess the same Faith and only one of them is the Faith
without which it is impossible to please God.
Francis characterized faithfulness to the revelation of God as
“rigidity” which was itself attributed to deeper psychological and moral
failings of traditional Catholics. “Love is not rigid,” claimed Francis while
he counseled the overthrow of God’s commandments, but St. John the Apostle of
Love and devotee of the Sacred Heart reports a very different Gospel of Jesus
Christ:
· If you love me, keep my commandments. John 14:15
· 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. John 15:10
· 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. John 14:21
· Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my
word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our
abode with him. John 14:23
· In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and
keep his commandments. 1 John 5:2
· And by this we know that we have known him, if we keep his
commandments. 1 John 2:3
Love is never lax or slothful in its pious
attention to duty. The laxism and sloth
of Pope Francis was because without Faith, he had no true love of God.
Leo the Homosexual following in the way of Francis the Homosexual.
Pictured below is Leo and Francis both greeting
homosexual "married" couples for public photo-ops. The other pictures
are Francis and Leo both slumming around with the pervert James Martin.
The Vatican is in the hands of the Homosexual Lobby. We
must pray to God to purge His Church of this gross perversion.
Preaching to the DEAF!
You gather here today, present-day apostles,
as the Church and, therefore, the world stand perched on the edge of a cliff.
And yet you who are entrusted with the keeping of souls choose to speak not a
word of the spiritual danger which abounds. Today we stand on the cusp of all that has been
prophesied about the Church and the abominations which would come forth in
these times, a time when all of hell attacks the Church of Jesus Christ, and a
time when the fallen angels of hell no longer seek entry into her sacred halls
but instead stand inside, peeking out of her windows and unlocking doors to
welcome in more diabolical destruction.
Do you not know that Our Lord will
send forth His avenging angels to heap coals of fire upon the heads of those
who were called to be His apostles and who have not guarded what He has given
unto them?
And yet almost all of you, my
brothers, stood by silently watching as the Synod on Synodality took
place, an abomination constructed not to guard the Deposit of Faith, but to
dismantle it, and yet few were the cries heard from you – men who should be
willing to die for Christ and His Church.
The Synod’s final document has
been released, yet with the sleight of hand which is so characteristic
of the Francis-controlled Vatican. By drawing attention to the issues which
worried many, they have slipped in what was always their real goal without
anyone even noticing. What they were after in the first place was the
dismantling of Christ’s Church by replacing the structure of the Church as
Our Lord instituted it with a diabolically-inspired new structure of
“synodality” which in actuality is a new church that is in no way Catholic.
Bishop Joseph Strickland, former bishop of
Tyler, TX who was removed from his office by Pope Francis the Diabolical for
preaching Catholic truth, addressing the U.S. bishops gathered at their annual
meeting
Latae sententiae crimes in the
external forum require a determination of guilt!
“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
COMMENT: Recently
a group of young men and women missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints (Mormons) were doing their required missionary work in central city
York. A friendly theological discussion took place on the steps of our Mission
chapel. The friendly exchanged ended and the climate cooled when the question
about the exact number of Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's wives was brought
up. Mormons believe that Jesus Christ founded one Church. They believe that
that Church became corrupted and God abandoned it. God then, centuries later,
reconstituted His Church when the angel Moroni lead the illiterate Joseph Smith
to a hidden book and provided him with mystical spectacles permitting him to
read it. When you ask a Mormon how is it that Jesus Christ promised to be with
His Church until the end of time and taught that marriage is between one man
and one woman until death, why is it that they believe Joseph Smith or Brigham
Young and not believe Jesus Christ? They answer by walking away. Jesus Christ
uses the metaphor of marriage to describe His relationship with His Church and
with each of the faithful individually. Every man-made heretical and schismatic
sect eventually repudiates marriage because they cannot abide the metaphor.
Luther permitted bigamy. The Orthodox permit divorce and remarriage three
times. Joseph Smith had "up to forty wives" and Brigham Young had
"fifty-six wives, twenty-one had never been married before;
seventeen were widows; six were divorced; six had living husbands; and the
marital status of six others is unknown. Nine of his wives had previously been
plural wives of Joseph Smith, and Young was sealed to them as a proxy for
Smith" (WIKI). The first clue to the Mormons that they were being lead into a spiritual desert was
polygamy but some like the desert. Mormons claim that Brigham Young saw the
light and abandoned the practice for the Latter Day Saints but this occurred
only after the U.S. government told they to give it up or get out. Although
Mormons are no longer polygamists, they permit divorce and "temple"
remarriage which is just serial polygamy. These "missionaries" now
know that Jesus Christ did not abandon His Church and will not do so no matter
how corrupt churchmen become. The Catholic Church alone offers the possibility
of salvation.
It’s Official: Mormon Founder Had Up
to 40 Wives...
Mormon leaders have acknowledged for the first time that the church’s
founder and prophet, Joseph Smith, portrayed in church materials as a loyal
partner to his loving spouse Emma, took as many as 40 wives, some already
married and one only 14 years old.... The biggest bombshell for some in the essays is that Smith married women
who were already married, some to men who were Smith’s friends and followers.
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:
·
“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)
·
“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)
·
“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)
·
“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)
·
“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)
·
“[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)
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.
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)
"Pray for the
conversion of Russia." Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima
Your must
understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They
hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured
and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The
October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian
Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More
of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any
people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be
understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact
that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global
media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators. We cannot state that all Jews
are Bolsheviks. But: without Jews there would have been no Bolshevism. For a
Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish
terrorists murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.
Aleksandr
Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Noble Prize winning novelist, historian and victim of
Jewish Bolshevism
American Catholic Apostasy: PEW POLE 2025
29% of U.S. Catholics say they attend
Mass weekly.
59% of Catholics say abortion should be
legal.
76% U.S. Catholics say society should be
accepting of homosexuality.
61% U.S. Catholics support legal
homosexual "marriage."
80% of Catholics view Pope Francis
favorably.
84% of U.S. Catholics say they have a favorable view of Leo although
67% say they know little about Leo, and 25% know nothing at all.
Pope Leo XIV commemorates Nostra Aetate anniversary with interfaith
celebrations
Catholic NewsAgency | Vatican City |Kridina
Millare | Oct 29, 2025
Pope Leo XIV joined faith leaders on
Tuesday to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, the Church’s
declaration on building relationships with non-Christian religions.
Approximately 300 representatives of world
religions and cultures joined the Holy Father for an evening ecumenical prayer
service for peace organized by the Community of Sant’Egidio and held at the
Colosseum in Rome.
“Peace is a constant journey of
reconciliation,” the Holy Father said at the Oct. 28 event.
Thanking religious leaders for coming
together in Rome, he said their interfaith meeting expressed their shared
“conviction that prayer is a powerful force for reconciliation.”
“This is our witness: offering the immense treasures of ancient
spiritualities to contemporary humanity,” he said.
“We need a true and sound era of
reconciliation that puts an end to the abuse of power, displays of force, and
indifference to the rule of law,” he added. “Enough of war, with all the pain
it causes through death, destruction, and exile!”
In his remarks, the pope urged people not to be indifferent to the “cry
of the poor and the cry of the earth” in their pursuits for peace in countries
scarred by ongoing conflict and injustice.
“In the power of prayer, with hands raised
to heaven and open to others, we must ensure that this period of history,
marked by war and the arrogance of power, soon comes to an end, giving rise to
a new era,” he said.
“We
cannot allow this period to continue. It shapes the minds of people who grow
accustomed to war as a normal part of human history,” he continued.
Pope Leo and other religious leaders lit
candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed commitment to engage in
interfaith dialogue.
Several people waved small blue banners
with the word “peace” in different languages while Pope Leo and the other
religious leaders lit candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed
commitment to engage in interfaith dialogue.
After the prayer gathering at Rome’s iconic landmark, the Holy Father
returned to the Vatican to join colorful celebrations jointly organized by the
Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue and the Dicastery for Promoting Christian
Unity.
To mark the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, several multicultural music
and dance performances were held inside the Vatican’s Paul VI Audience Hall as
well as a presentation highlighting papal initiatives to promote the Church’s
dialogue with other religions since the pontificate of Pope Paul VI.
Pope Leo’s appearance and special address
toward the end of the two-hour gathering highlighted the Church’s reverence for
all people and its desire to collaborate with others for the common good.
“We belong to one human family, one in origin, and one also in our
final goal,” he said. “Religions everywhere try to respond to the restlessness
of the human heart.”
“Each in its own way offers teachings, ways of life, and sacred rites
that help guide their followers to peace and meaning,” he said.
Emphasizing the common mission shared among people of different religions
to “reawaken” the sense of the sacred in the world today, the Holy Father
encouraged people to “keep love alive.”
“We have come together in this place
bearing the great responsibility as religious leaders to bring hope to a
humanity that is often tempted by despair,” Leo said.
“Let us remember that prayer has the power
to transform our hearts, our words, our actions, and our world,” he said.
COMMENT: Now for the third
time in his short pontificate Leo/Provost quotes Leonard Boff's Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor. Boff
is a former Franciscan priest who was censored by the liberal Cardinal
Ratzinger when he headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under
the liberal JPII for his extreme Marxist liberation theology. Boff is famous
for his development of an integrated theology of Marxism, Gaia cult earth
worship and "social justice." He was admired by Francis/Bergoglio and
he is admired thrice as much by Leo/Provost. The picture with its Satanic
imagery was reportedly published by the Vatican. Leo/Provost, like
Francis/Bergoglio, wants to restore native American culture and religious
traditions. It should be remembered that Christopher Columbus encountered
cannibalism on his second voyage of exploration and ritual murder was
widespread not only among the Aztecs and Incas but in smaller tribes across
both North and South America as reported by Jesuit missionaries. In the
interfaith celebrations at the Vatican a young native American boy half dressed
paraded an image of a snake into the assembly before Leo/Provost. Is this the
native American tradition that the Vatican wants to recover?
Doctrinal Note on Marian titles: Mother of the faithful, not
Co-redemptrix
The document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, approved
by Pope Leo XIV, offers clarifications on titles applied to the Blessed Virgin
Mary, and calls for special attention to the use of the expression, “Mediatrix
of all graces.”
Vatican News
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith
on Tuesday, 4 November 2025, published Mater populi fidelis (“The Mother of the
Faithful People”), a Doctrinal Note “On Some Marian Titles Regarding Mary’s
Cooperation in the Work of Salvation.” Signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Víctor
Manuel Fernández, and the Secretary for the Dicastery’s Doctrinal Section,
Monsignor Armando Matteo, the Note was approved by the Pope on 7 October.
Mater populi fidelis (MPF) is the fruit of
a long and complex collegial effort. It is a doctrinal document on Marian
devotion, centred on the figure of Mary, who is associated with the work of
Christ as Mother of believers. The Note provides a significant biblical
foundation for devotion to Mary, as well as marshalling various contributions
from the Fathers, the Doctors of the Church, elements of Eastern tradition, and
the thought of recent Popes.
In this positive framework, the doctrinal
text analyses a number of Marian titles, encouraging the adoption of some of
those appellations and warning against the use of others. Titles such as
“Mother of Believers,” “Spiritual Mother,” “Mother of the Faithful” are noticed
with approval in the Note. Conversely,
the title of “Co-redemptrix” is deemed inappropriate and problematic. The title
of “Mediatrix” is considered unacceptable when it takes on a meaning that
excludes Jesus Christ; however, it can used appropriately so long as it
expresses an inclusive and participatory mediation that glorifies the power of
Christ. The titles “Mother of Grace” and “Mediatrix of All Graces” are
considered acceptable when used in a very precise sense, but the document also
warns of particularly broad explanations of the meaning of the terms.
Essentially, the Note reaffirms Catholic
doctrine, which has always emphasised that everything in Mary is directed
towards the centrality of Christ and His salvific work. For this reason, even
if some Marian titles admit of an orthodox interpretation through correct
exegesis, Mater populi fidelis says it is preferable to avoid them.
In his presentation of the Doctrinal Note,
Cardinal Fernández expresses appreciation for popular devotion but warns
against groups and publications that propose a certain dogmatic development and
raise doubts among the faithful, including through social media. The main
problem in interpreting these titles applied to Our Lady, he says concerns the
way of understanding Mary's association with Christ's work of redemption
(paragraph 3).
Co-redemptrix
Regarding the title “Co-redemptrix,” the
Note recalls that “some Popes have used the title “without elaborating much on
its meaning.” Generally, it continues, “they have presented the title in two
specific ways: in reference to Mary’s divine motherhood (insofar as she, as
Mother, made possible the Redemption that Christ accomplished) or in reference
to her union with Christ at the redemptive Cross. The Second Vatican Council
refrained from using the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.
Saint John Paul II referred to Mary as ‘Co-redemptrix’ on at least seven
occasions, particularly relating this title to the salvific value of our
sufferings when they are offered together with the sufferings of Christ, to
whom Mary is united especially at the Cross” (18).
The document cites an internal discussion
within the then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which in February
1996 had discussed the request to proclaim a new dogma on Mary as
“Co-redemptrix or Mediatrix of all graces.” Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was
opposed to such a definition, arguing, “the precise meaning of these titles is
not clear, and the doctrine contained in them is not mature. […] It is not
clear how the doctrine expressed in these titles is present in Scripture and
the apostolic tradition.”
Later, in 2002, the future Benedict XVI
expressed himself publicly in the same way: “The formula ‘Co-redemptrix’
departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the
Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings… Everything comes from
Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians,
in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything that she is through Him. The
word ‘Co-redemptrix’ would obscure this origin.”
The note clarifies that Cardinal Ratzinger
did not deny the good intentions behind the proposal, nor the valuable aspects
reflected in it, but nonetheless maintained that they were “being expressed in
the wrong way” (19).
Pope Francis also expressed his clear
opposition to the use of the title Co-Redemptrix on at least three occasions.
Tuesday’s Doctrinal Note concludes: “It is
always inappropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s
cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and
can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of
the Christian faith. […] When an expression requires many, repeated
explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not
serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful” (22).
Mediatrix
The Note emphasises that “the biblical
statement about Christ’s exclusive mediation is conclusive. Christ is the only
Mediator” (24).
At the same time, MPF recognises “the fact
that the word ‘mediation’ is commonly used in many areas of everyday life,
where it is understood simply as cooperation, assistance, or intercession. As a
result, it is inevitable that the term would be applied to Mary in a
subordinate sense. Used in this way, it does not intend to add any efficacy or
power to the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man” (25).
Further, “it is clear that Mary has a real
mediatory role in enabling the Incarnation of the Son of God in our humanity”
(26).
Mother of believers and Mediatrix of all graces
Mary’s maternal role “in no way obscures or
diminishes” the unique mediation of Christ, “but rather shows its power […]
Understood in this way, Mary’s motherhood does not seek to weaken the unique
adoration due to Christ alone but, rather, seeks to enkindle it.”
Therefore, the Note states, “one must avoid titles and expressions that
present Mary as a kind of ‘lightning rod’ before the Lord’s justice, as if she
were a necessary alternative before the insufficiency of God’s mercy” (37b).
Thus, the title “Mother of Believers”
“enables us to speak of Mary’s role in our relation to our life of grace”.
However, MPF goes on to urge caution concerning the use of expressions that may
convey “less acceptable notions” (45).
“Cardinal Ratzinger already affirmed” for example, “that the title
‘Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces’ was not clearly grounded in Revelation.” So,
the Note continues, “in line with this conviction, we can recognize the
difficulties this title poses, both in terms of theological reflection and
spirituality” (45). In fact, “no human person — not even the Apostles or the
Blessed Virgin — can act as a universal dispenser of grace. Only God can bestow
grace, and he does so through the humanity of Christ” (53).
“Some titles, such as ‘Mediatrix of All Graces,’ have limits that do
not favour a correct understanding of Mary’s unique place,” MPF explains,
adding, “In fact, she, the first redeemed, could not have been the mediatrix of
the grace that she herself received” (67).
Nonetheless, the Doctrinal Note
acknowledges that “the term ‘graces,’ when seen in reference to Mary’s maternal
help at various moments in our lives, can have an acceptable meaning. The
plural form expresses all the aids — even material — that the Lord may grant us
when He heeds His Mother’s intercession” (68).
COMMENT: Amazing to hear these apostates chirping
about the lack of "precise meaning" of theological terms while
obscurity in definition is, and has been since Vatican II, the calling card of
the Novus Ordo theologian and prelates. They like to muddle what is clear.
Let's start with the title, "Mother of Believers" and "Mother of
the Faithful." These are, in fact, worthy titles of the Mother of God and
frequently occur in St. Mary of Agreda's City of God, yet the Novus Ordo
clerics would never be found offering a precise definition and meaning for the
term "faithful" and then identify exactly who the
"faithful" are.
The term "faithful" has a precise
Catholic definition. It refers to those who have been baptized into the
Catholic Church and profess the one, holy, catholic and apostolic faith. By
virtue of this incorporation by baptism they have become "children of
God." They faithfully believe all the truths that God has revealed on the
authority of God the Revealer. Only those who have become thus members of the
Mystical Body of Christ share by participation in His divine nature and become
brothers and sister of Jesus Christ and therefore, sons of His Mother. This
definition excludes all heretics, schismatics, Jews, pagans, and any other form
of idolaters. Novus Ordo clerics heretically teach that everyone is a child of
God by virtue of the Incarnation. Everyone by nature is a creature of God
created in His image and likeness with the spiritual soul with the powers of
reason and free will, but every creature is born in original sin and cut off
from the friendship of God. He is only a "child of God" in potentia. Without the sacrament of
Baptism and the Catholic faith they can never become "children of
God." This obscurity of definition as to who is a child of God and thus a
child of the Blessed Virgin Mary ultimately obscures what is necessary as a
necessity of means to obtain salvation.
The title Mediatrix of all grace is long
established and of sound and precise theological understanding. Those that
pretend otherwise are ignorant, proud, and deceitful. They have no excuse. 'The
law of prayer determines the law of belief' is, as affirmed by St. Pius X in Pascendi, a canon of faith from the time
of Celestine I, that is, a dogma of the Catholic Church. The immemorial Roman
rite has a Mass in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of all grace
celebrated on May 31 established by Pope Benedict XV. Regarding this feast, Dom
Gaspar Lefebvre, O.S.B. of the Abby of St. Andrew teaches:
"The will of God is that we should
have everything through Mary," says St. Bernard. The Father has sent us
His Son, but His will was to make His coming depend upon the Fiat of the
Virgin, which He commanded to the angel Gabriel to solicit on the day of the
Annunciation.
The Father and the Son send us the Holy
Ghost, but it is through Mary that He comes down to men. On the day of
Pentecost, according to an ancient Tradition, the heavenly fire which descended
on the Cenacle first rested on Mary, and then on the apostles. This is a figure
of what happens every day in the Church where the Holy Ghost is sent invisibly
into our souls. "All the gifts of the Holy Ghost are distributed by Mary
to those whom she chooses, whenever she wishes and as much as she wishes,"
says St. Bernardine of Siena.
The graces which the Holy Ghost pours down
on us are due to the merits of Christ on Calvary; but in order that God may
bestow them on the world, it is necessary that Mary should intervene. Having
cooperated by her divine maternity and by her sufferings at the foot of the
Cross in the Incarnation and Redemption, she has deserved to co-operate when
they are continually applied to creatures by the most High. "By the
communion of sorrows and of will between Christ and Mary," says St. Pius
X, "she has deserved to become the dispenser of all the blessings which
Jesus acquired for us by His blood" (Encyclical 2-2-1904). Such is His
will, but it is essential that she should constantly intercede for each one of
us. This she does, relying on the blood of Christ by whom she was herself
saved, and who alone saves us. This actual intervention of Mary plays a
preponderating part in the salvation of the world. It is important that we
should realize this, and it is the object of the feast of Mary Mediatrix of all
Graces. A clear idea of the fact may be obtained by simple reading the texts of
the Mass and Vespers.
"Through the Virgin," says St.
Bernardine of Siena, "life-giving graces flow from Christ, who is the
head, into His mystical body." "Through her," adds St.
Antoninus, "come from heaven all the graces granted to the world."
"What all the saints united to thee may obtain for us by their
intercession," writes St. Anselm, "thy pleading alone may obtain without
the help of their prayers." The maternal solicitude of Mary for the whole
human race is therefore continual, and it is because of this that unceasingly,
through the Mass, the sacraments, the hierarchy and other channels of grace,
the merits of Calvary are applied to our souls. "We may affirm,"
declared Pope Leo XIII, "that by the will of God, nothing is given to us
without Mary's mediation, in such a way that
just as no one can approach the almighty Father but through His Son, so
no one, so to speak, can approach Christ but through His Mother"
(Encyclical, 9-22-1891).
Let us therefore not consider as of small
importance the efforts made to establish this point of doctrine of Mary's
mediation, since this doctrine enables us to understand the divine plan, and
clearly manifests the mediation of the Son of God of which it is a corollary.
St.
Mary of Agreda at the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven,
writes that Jesus Christ addressed the entire heavenly assembly of angels and
saints saying:
"My
Father and eternal God, this is the Woman, that gave Me my human form in her
virginal womb, that nourished Me at her breast and sustained labors for Me,
that shared in my hardships and co-operated with Me in the works of Redemption.
This is She, who was always most faithful and fulfilled our will according to
our entire pleasure; She, pure and immaculate as my Mother, through her own
works, has reached the summit of sanctity according to the measure of the gifts
We have communicated to Her; and when She had merited her reward and could have
enjoyed it forever, She deprived Herself of it for Our glory and returned to
attend to the establishment, the government, and instruction of the Church
militant; and We, in order that She might live in it for the succor of the
faithful, deferred her eternal rest, which She has merited over and over again.
In the highest bounty and equity of our Providence it is just, that my Mother
should be remunerated for her works of love beyond all other creatures; and
toward Her the common law of the other mortals should not apply. If I have
merited for all infinite merits and boundless graces, it is proper that my
Mother should partake of them above all the others who are so inferior; for She in her conduct
corresponds to our liberality and puts no hindrance or obstacle to our infinite
power of communicating our treasures and participating them as the Queen and
Mistress of all that is created."
Sanctifying
grace is the created participation in the divine nature. The Blessed Virgin is
the "Queen and Mistress of all that is created." In this Mass the
Church prays:
"
O Lord Jesus Christ, our Mediator with the Father, who hast appointed the most
blessed Virgin, Thy mother, to be our mother also and our mediatrix before
Thee: Grant that whosoever draweth nigh to Thee to beseech any benefit, may
receive all things through her and rejoice.
Rev.
Gregory Alastruey's theological work titled, The Blessed Virgin Mary, says that, "There are five principle titles and offices due
Mary, the Mother of God, by reason of her cooperation in redemption: Mediatrix,
Co-redemptrix, Mother of Christians, Patroness or Advocate, and Queen and
Mistress of the universe. I would recommend those who deny this proper
honor to the Mother of God obtain a copy of the book and have their stupidity
erased. I do not say, ignorance erased because willful ignorance is stupidity. Fr. Alastruey affirms that
"Mary is truly mediatrix of the human race and this doctrine pertains to
the deposit of faith." He then draws from Scripture, the Fathers,
and theologians in support of this truth. He proves from the Church Fathers
that the word "mediatrix" was explicitly used by St. Ephrem, St.
Epiphanius, St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil of Seleucia, St. Andrew of Crete, St
Germanus of Constantinople, St. John Damascene, St Theodore, St. Antoninus and
Denis the Carthusian. He draws richly from the divine liturgy from both Eastern
and Roman traditions. The errors of the Protestant heretics are addressed and
exposed which are curiously the same as expressed by the Novus Ordo popes.
Lastly,
it is worth asking Why do the Novus Ordo popes hate these proper titles of the Mother
of God? The answer is simple. The Blessed Virgin asked the three children at
Fatima on June 13, 1917, "Are
you willing to offer yourselves to God to bear all the sufferings He wills to
send you, as an act of reparation for the sins by which He is offended, and of
supplication for the conversion of sinners?" To which question all
answered, "Yes, we are willing." The Mother of God said on July 13
after the children had seen a vision of Hell, "Sacrifice yourselves for
sinners, and say many times, especially whenever you make some sacrifice: O
Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and in reparation
for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary." On August 19
(the apparition did not occur on the August 13 because the children were in
prison) the Mother of God continued saying, "Pray, pray very much, and
make sacrifices for sinners; for many souls go to hell, because there are none
to sacrifice themselves and to pray for them." The Blessed Virgin is
asking the children to be co-redemptors and co-mediators of grace with her in
union with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for the conversion and salvation of
sinners. If the title of Co-Redemtrix and Mediatrix of all Grace can be taken
away from the Mother of God then no one is responsible to do penance for their
own sins or the sins of others. This falls back to the Protestant heresy on the
dogma of justification and the very nature of our incorporation into the divine
nature in the Mystical Body of Christ. Leo/Provost, like his predecessor
Francis/Bergoglio, believes that proselytism is "solemn nonsense."
They attack the titles to excuse their own faithless sloth. They are working to
obscure the very means of salvation. As Jesus Christ said: "But woe to you
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; because you shut the kingdom of heaven
against men, for you yourselves do not enter in; and those that are going in,
you suffer not to enter" (Matt 23:13).
Pope
Leo is just another heretic who denies the Blessed Virgin Mary her just titles
of Mediatrix of all Grace and Co-Redemtrix. Only a few days ago, he celebrated
with heretics, schismatics, Jews, Moslems, and a variety of idolaters a shared
communion praying to their common god a united petition for peace in the world.
He continues to ignore the peace plan offered by the Blessed Virgin Mary,
Mediatrix of all Grace, at Fatima. Pope Leo will soon learn that those who
insult the Mother have made an enemy of the Son.
This
demonstrats the fruit of the “New Evangelization” - which is shameless
apostasy!
Brazil: Catholic Church on
the decline
Catholic Church loses
followers to Evangelicals
Between 2000 and 2010, the number of Brazilians
describing themselves as Catholics has dropped by 12.2%. This record fall
brings the proportion of Catholics down to 65% – the lowest share since
religious affiliations was first surveyed in 1872. In 2000, 74% of the
population had classified themselves as Catholics.
Brazilian census: Catholic population falls to 57%
Catholic News Agency | Nathália
Queiroz | Sao Paulo,
Brazil, Jun 9, 2025
The percentage of Brazilians who identify
as Catholic fell to 56.75% in 2022, a reduction of 8.4% compared with 2010,
according to data from the 2022 demographic census released by the Brazilian
Institute of Geography and Statistics. [....]
“The Rosary is the most powerful weapon for
defending ourselves on the field of battle.”
… 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 holy Eucharistic liturgy, the prayer most apt for preserving
faith in souls, the devil has unchained his struggles against it.
Unfortunately, we see the disasters he has caused.
… We must
defend souls against the errors which can make them stray from the good road. …
We cannot and we must not stop ourselves, nor allow, as Our Lord says, the
children of Darkness to be wiser than the children of Light … The Rosary is the
most powerful weapon for defending ourselves on the field of battle.
Sr. Lucy of
Fatima, Letter to Dom Umberto Pasquale
“Necessity
Knows No Law”
In 1976, the
head of the UGCC, Cardinal Josef Slipyj, living in exile in Rome after 18 years
in the Soviet gulag, feared for the future of the UGCC. Would it have bishops
to lead it, given that Slipyj himself was now over 80? So he ordained three
bishops clandestinely, without the permission of the Holy Father, Blessed (sic)
Paul VI. At the time, the Holy See followed a policy of non-assertiveness
regarding the communist bloc; Paul VI would not give permission for the new
bishops for fear of upsetting the Soviets. The consecration of bishops without
a papal mandate is a very grave canonical crime, for which the penalty is
excommunication. Blessed (sic) Paul VI—who likely knew, unofficially, what
Slipyj had done—did not administer any penalties.
Fr. Raymond J.
DeSouza
John
Henry Newman: A Novus Ordo Saint and, fittingly, a Doctor of the Novus Ordo
Church
"I see much danger of an English Catholicism
of which Newman (Cardinal John Henry Newman) is the highest type. It is the old
Anglican, patristic, literary, Oxford tone transplanted into the Church. It
takes the line of deprecating exaggerations, foreign devotions, Ultramontanism,
anti-national sympathies. In one word, it is worldly Catholicism."
Cardinal Manning, Primate of England, Letter
to Monsignor Talbot, written in 1866, the second year of his reign as
archbishop
Salvation by
“Implicit” Faith?
But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to
God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him. Heb. 1,
6
Of course charity itself is
impossible without faith and hope. Could
anyone love a man if he did not believe it was possible to be or become his
friend? Or if he despaired of ever
gaining his friendship? So it is with
man in relation to God as He is in Himself.
Man must believe it is possible to attain a perfect friendship with God
in Heaven and he must hope to attain this friendship through God’s power before
he can love God as his supernatural destiny.
Fr. Walter Farrell, O. P. and
Fr. Marin Healy, My Way of Life – The
Summa Simplified for Everyone
Looming ahead is the
Great Apostasy predicted by St. Paul to the Thessalonians when the Antichrist,
“the man of sin” (2 Thess. 2: 3), will engage mankind in wholesale flight from
God and reality. From him can be
expected perfect acquiescence to the three temptations by which the devil
failed to seduce Christ in the desert.
Turning stones into bread by substituting false teaching for true
doctrine, he will confirm the satanic religion by false miracles, (that is
“lying wonders”), as it were casting himself down from the pinnacle of the
temple to be borne up by spiritual hands.
Given “all the kingdoms of the world and all their glory” (Matt. 4: 8-9)
in return for falling down and adoring Satan, Antichrist the King will
establish a universal empire in the fallen angel’s name. Aping as closely as possible Christ’s
consummation of the law and the prophets, he will capitulate in his person the
whole of the world’s apostatic tradition.
Solange Strong Hertz, Apostasy
in America
The Reason the
Message of LaSalette is Rejected or Unknown? They Are NOT 'Her People'!
It was 1846
and France was suffering social and political upheaval. Catholic churches had
been abandoned and the Sacraments neglected… On the eve of the Feast of Our
Lady of Sorrows, eleven-year-old Maxim Giraud and fourteen-year-old Melanie
Mathieu beheld a luminous sphere, radiating like the sun, curiously unfolding
before their eyes. Gradually they made out a woman seated with her face in her
hands, weeping. She slowly arose and crossed her arms on her breast, her head
some what inclined.
The children
were drawn immediately to the lady's tears that adorned her face like perfectly
cut diamonds glimmering the in the sun's rays. Her dynamic features were framed
delicately in a white-satin headdress, on which rested a crown of roses, a
bouquet in all shades of reds and pinks. A crucifix with pincers on one end and
a hammer on the opposite end hung over her satin shawl, which was lined with
more roses. The Madonna wore a long ivory dress embroidered in precious pearls
and a yellow apron tied neatly to her waist. Wearing pearl slippers that peeked
out from underneath her satin robe, she sheltered herself atop a bouquet of
roses.
"Come to
me, my children," she tenderly addressed the two who stood afar,
motionless. "Be not afraid. I am here to tell you something of the
greatest importance."
As soon as
they were in touching distance of her, she began to speak with the urgency of
an ending world:
"If my
people will not obey, I shall be compelled to loose my Son's arm. It is so
heavy, so pressing that I can no longer restrain it."
She told the children that her Son was especially
concerned that people were not keeping holy Sunday, and that religion had lost
its place in their country…. "You will make this known to all my people;
you will make this known to all my people," she repeated to them. Solange
Hertz, Our Lady of LaSalette
"It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the
Catholic Church!"
Blessed Pope Pius IX
The Church is One, Holy, Catholic Apostolic,
and Roman : unique, the Chair founded on Peter. Outside her fold is to
be found nether the true faith nor eternal salvation, for it is impossible to
have God for a Father if one does not have the Church for a Mother.
Blessed Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem
The Great Error of Vatican
II –
The “pastoral” blunder that
there exists a disjunction between Divine Revelation and Dogma
The greatest concern of the
Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine
should be guarded and taught more efficaciously….. the authentic doctrine…
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. And it is the latter that must
be taken into great consideration with patience if necessary, everything being
measured in the forms and proportions of a Magisterium which is predominantly
pastoral in character. Pope John XXIII,
Opening Speech for Vatican II
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, and
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."
The
United States is, as much as Israel, guilty for the Genocide of the Palestinian
People.
“I love Israel. I’m with you all the way...... Thanks to
the bravery and incredible skill of the Israeli Defense Forces and Operation
Rising Lion, the forces of chaos, terror, and ruin now stand weakened,
isolated, and totally defeated.”
“The story of fierce Israeli
resolve and triumph since October 7 should be proof to the entire world that
those who seek to destroy this nation are doomed to bitter failure.”
President Donald Trump, addressing the Israeli Knesset with Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
“Donald Trump is the greatest friend that the State of Israel
has ever had in the White House. No American president has ever done more for
Israel, and, as I said in Washington, it ain’t even close. It’s really not a
match.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing Israeli
Knesset with President Trump
"It is sentiments like these (from President Trump) – backed by a long list of pro-Israel actions
over two terms, including moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing
Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, recognizing Jewish claims in Judea
and Samaria for a 'Greater Israel', brokering the Abraham Accords, striking
Iran alongside Israel, decapitation strikes against Iranian and Hamas peace
negotiators, and directly supporting the Israeli genocide of Gaza with over $30
billion direct aid, billions more in indirect air with military, intelligence,
logistical and political support both in the United States and at the United
Nations including censorship in mainstream media and suppression of free speech
at college campuses."
Catholic political commentary
“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.
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.
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
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.
“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
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:
1.
If anyone says: that the sacraments of the
New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be
anathema.
2.
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
Ladislaus, CathInfo
We will see
the same from Pope Leo!
The
end of dialogue is to produce opinion. The purpose of logical argument is to
appeal to the intellect to arrive at truth.
Rhetoric appeals to the will and poetry to the imagination. The emphasis
of the Novus Ordo Church since Vatican II on dialogue is therefore a
repudiation of any claim to truth offering in its place only the opinions of
churchmen. It is the debasement of Jesus Christ’s gospel from Truth to just
another opinion, from historical fact to mythology. It is only incidental that
Novus Ordo Church, having turned its back against the truth, has also turned
away from rhetoric and poetry which explains why it is both effeminate and
ugly.
“The Church will have to opt for dialogue as her style and method,
fostering an awareness of the existence of bonds and connections in a complex
reality. . . . No vocation, especially within the Church, can be placed outside
this outgoing dynamism of dialogue . . . . [emphasis added].”
Pope Francis’ Instrumentum
Laboris, XV ORDINARY GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF SYNOD OF BISHOPS: YOUNG
PEOPLE, THE FAITH AND VOCATIONAL DISCERNMENT
And
thus, the 'spirit of Vatican II' - dialogue so that everyone can reach an
accomodation of error and the repudiation of logical argument appealing to
truth!
“Don’t proselytize; respect others’ beliefs. We can inspire others
through witness so that one grows together in communicating. But the worst
thing of all is religious proselytism, which paralyzes: ‘I am talking with you
in order to persuade you,’ No. Each person dialogues, starting with his and her
own identity. The church grows by attraction, not proselytizing.”
Pope Francis
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.”
COMMENT: The infamous 1949 Holy Office Letter, sent privately to
Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston for the purpose of censoring Fr. Lenard
Feeney for his belief in the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the
Catholic Church, affirmed the novel doctrine of 'salvation by implicit desire'.
The "implicit desire" was to be a "member of the Church"
and the evidence of this "implicit desire" was an explicit belief in
a 'god who rewards and punishes'. The Letter teaches that the only requirement
for salvation is found in St. Paul's Letter to the Hebrews 11:13. No longer
were the belief in any revealed truth, the reception of any sacrament, or being
a subject of the Roman Pontiff necessary as necessities of means for salvation.
This Letter teaches that any "good-willed" Jew as a Jew, Hindu as a
Hindu, Mohammedan as a Mohammedan, Protestant as a Protestant, etc., etc. can
be members of the Church and can obtain salvation because they believe in a
'god who rewards and punishes'. The Holy Office response of 1703 makes it clear
that the belief in a God who rewards and punishes is only the natural philosophical
prerequisite for receiving the gospel good-news of salvation and of itself is
insufficient grounds for receiving the sacrament of Baptism.
After
40 Years of Dialogue, Rabbi identifies papal “conundrum.”
The real conundrum that faces Benedict XVI on his visit to Israel… is
should he be loyal to the Gospels which claim that only acceptance of Christ
can bring the messianic age, or should he endorse Vatican II which acknowledges
that Jews… can find the kingdom of God via a different route? Should he look inwards, backwards or
forwards?
Rabbi Jonathan Romain, The Pope’s Jewish Dilemma, The Guardian
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
Pope Leo calls for unity in climate action on 10-year anniversary of
Laudato si’
Pope Leo XIV appealed to all of humanity to unite, overcome
differences, and work together to respond to climate change and ecological
destruction
The Tablet | Aili Winstanley Channer | 02
October 2025
He was speaking to climate activists and
religious leaders commemorating the ten-year anniversary of the encyclical Laudato si’ at Castel Gandolfo
yesterday.
It was the opening of the three-day
“Raising Hope for Climate Justice” conference organised by the Laudato si’
Movement in collaboration with ecclesial and institutional partners. Pope Leo reiterated Pope
Francis’ concern about “those who deride climate change” in the 2023
Apostolic Exhortation Laudate
Deum, and asserted, “there
is no room for indifference”.
He asked, “What must be done now to ensure that caring for our common
home and listening to the cry of the earth and the poor do not appear as mere passing
trends or, worse still, that they be seen and felt as divisive issues?”
Attendees at the conference include
Christine Allen of Cafod. Bishop John Arnold, the lead bishop for the
environment for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, said, “Pope Leo reminded us that Pope
Francis had emphasised that ‘the most effective solutions will not come from
individual efforts alone, but above all from major political decisions on the
national and international levels’. More than ever, we need to work together,
to think of future generations, and take urgent action if we are to truly
respond to the scale of this climate crisis: a crisis which affects those who
are poorest and most vulnerable and have done least to cause it.”
This view reflects Pope Leo’s call for ecological conversion at all
levels of society, including by strengthening democracy: “Citizens need to take
an active role in political decision-making at national, regional and local
levels. Only then will it be possible to mitigate the damage done to the
environment.”
Pope Leo was joined by Marina Silva,
Brazil’s minister of the environment and climate change and the head of the
United Nations Global Ethical Stocktake, an initiative to foster societal
reflection on ethical responsibility for climate change ahead of the 2025 UN
Conference of Parties (COP30), which will be held in Belem, Brazil, in
November. Pope Leo expressed his hope that COP30 and other upcoming
international summits “will
listen to the cry of the Earth and the cry of the poor, families, indigenous
peoples, involuntary migrants and believers throughout the world”.
But Pope Leo also emphasised that although these challenges are “of a
social and political nature”, they are “first and foremost of a spiritual
nature: they call for conversion”. He reaffirmed the spiritual
importance of caring for the Earth as God’s creation and its inseparability
from our responsibility towards the poor and vulnerable: “We cannot love God, whom we
cannot see, while despising his creatures. Nor can we call ourselves disciples
of Jesus Christ without participating in his outlook on creation and his care
for all that is fragile and wounded.”
The film star Arnold Schwarzenegger, known for his roles in
high-profile action films as well as his climate activism as Governor of
California and head of the Schwarzenegger Climate Initiative, spoke alongside
Pope Leo and called him an “action hero” for his message on the environment.
Pope Leo smiled as he began his address. He affirmed the crucial and diverse
contributions made to mitigating the crisis by every individual at the
conference: “There is
indeed an action hero with us this afternoon: it is all of you, who are working
together to make a difference.”
As he closed, he said: “God will ask us if we have cultivated and cared
for the world that he created, for the benefit of all and for future
generations, and if we have taken care of our brothers and sisters. What will
be our answer?”
Pope Leo XIV Blesses Huge 20,000-Year-Old Chunk Of Greenland Ice
Forbes | Leslie Katz | Oct 06, 2025
Pope Leo XIV stood on stage at a climate
conference in Rome last week and laid his right hand on a massive chunk of ice,
blessing it.
This wasn’t just any ice. It had broken off
the vast Greenland Ice Sheet, a key regulator of global climate that’s
shrinking quickly as it melts due to climate change. The resulting rise in
global sea levels could flood many tens of millions of homes, scientists warn.
Danish-Icelandic artist Olafur Eliasson
transported the ice to the Raising Hope Conference with the help of Danish
geologist Minik Rosing to serve as a stark symbol of how quickly the world’s
glaciers are disappearing.
“Lord of life, bless this water,” the pope
said after touching the dripping ice. “May it awaken our hearts, cleanse our
indifference, soothe our grief and renew our hope through Christ our lord.”
Eliasson is known for his installation
art using light, water, and air. Eliasson called it “striking” to
witness the pope bless the 20,000-year-old piece of Greenlandic glacial ice.
“We felt the presence of the fragile ice underscored the importance of
recognizing that nature is not separate from humanity,” the artist wrote on
Instagram.
COMMENT: Pope Leo,
celebrating the 10th anniversary of Laudato si', the earth worshiping
encyclical of Pope Francis, blessed a block of Ice to counteract the diabolical
forces of global warming striking a grave and focused posture that was in
marked contrast to the stupidity of the gesture. The act says a lot more about
Leo than it does about climatology. Leo, like Francis, is believer in the pagan
Gaia cult of Mother Earth worship. Leo refers twice in his sermon to the
"Cry of the Earth, the Cry of the Poor." Leo took this phrase from
Francis' Laudato si' and Francis took
the quote without attribution from Leonard Boff's Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor. Boff is a former Franciscan
priest who was censored by the liberal Cardinal Ratzinger when he headed the
CDF under the liberal JPII for his extreem Marxist liberation theology. Boff is
famous for his development of an integrated theology of Marxism, Gaia cult earth
worship and "social justice." He was admired by Francis and he is
admired twice as much by Leo.
If
the ice block is 20,000 years old then the Genesis creation account and the
global flood of Noe is reduced to mythology and not divine revelation. The fact
is, ancient mythology ended with the Christian revelation of Jesus Christ but
the modern scientific world is doing its best to resurrect the cult of
mythology. The world likes to talk about the scientific fables of Big Bang,
primordial soups with lightening bubbling forth proteins that congeal into
cellular life with the teleological purpose of producing the DNA of Darwinian
man. These fables are believed and shamelessly pandered by our neo-modernists
popes. The absurdity is that the neo-modernists popes have embraced the myths
of scientology when science itself has discredited their claims. Scientists
have been predicting global flooding of coastal areas for the last fifty years
with no evidence of rising sea levels. Global warming is not science. It is liberal
ideology applied to climatology that always calls for a one-world governance to
enforce its dictatorial and anti-Catholic mandates. The alleged global warming
is always without exception a man made assault on Mother Earth that requires
the ritual murder of 6.5 billion people for a world "sustainable"
population of 500 million for expiation. Never is it considered in their
calculus that the increase of global
temperature would make available millions of more acres of arable land and
lengthen the growing season in millions of additional acres creating a massive
increase in the food supply and areas of habitable land. Scientists have no
idea whatsoever if global warming, if it is in fact happening at all, would
have overall beneficial or harmful effects. While Pope Leo is a resident in
Rome he might ask what became of Rome's ancient Port City of Ostia which was at
the time of Jesus Christ located directly on the sea at the mouth of the Tiber
River. It is today three kilometers from the coast. Citizens of Ostia may have
lost their beach front property but they are not under water.
Exsurge Domine - USA; Archbishop Carlo Maria
Viganò
The Association Exsurge
Domine is committed to provide assistance,
support and material aid for clerics, religious and consecrated persons who are
victims of the Bergoglian Regime. It is of highest importance to act, to defend
the immutable Tradition of the Catholic Faith, to preserve and promote the
Apostolic Mass, and to save Christendom. In this decisive moment, we must
choose to counter evil, or be swallowed up by its most pestilent breath. Only
those who fight as the Maccabee’s did shall merit victory.
DEFENDE ECCLESIAM TUAM
In
many nations that are no longer Catholic-such as England, Germany or the
Netherlands, for example-you can still see small chapels carved out of attics
and cellars, or home altars hidden in invisible closets or niches: they were
used for the clandestine celebration of Mass in times of persecution, when it
was a crime to be faithful to the Church of Rome and priests had to hide to
avoid imprisonment or the death sentence. Without going back to Diocletian,
even in the 16th and 17th centuries “papists” were considered a threat, and
were barely tolerated as long as they had no churches, convents, seminaries, or
schools.
These persecutions are recurring today,
in perhaps a less bloody form, and the perpetrators are not Lutherans or the
thugs of Olivier Cromwell, but Cardinals, Bishops and Prelates of the Conciliar
sect, infiltrated into the Vatican and well determined to wipe out all traces
of the “old religion” and the “old Mass” that they have replaced with the
religion of ecology, of welcome, of inclusiveness, of the New World Order.
The apostasy we are experiencing is not
very different from that of the bishops who swore allegiance to Henry VIII in
order not to lose rents and benefits: the difference is that today the act of
obedience is required toward Bergoglio, the Second Vatican Council,
the Novus Ordo, the “synodal church,” Pachamama.
Those who do not yield, those who remain
faithful to the Priesthood or Religious Vows are ostracized, mocked, vilified,
persecuted and above all deprived of ministry, a dwelling place and means of
livelihood. Without mercy, without charity, without humanity.
Exsurge
Domine is
the response of those who do not surrender to this betrayal of the modernist
Hierarchy: it joins us to our brothers of past ages, to the faithful who gave
hospitality to the monk wanted by the soldiers of Elizabeth I, a hot meal to
the nun with no convent left in revolutionary France, a hiding place to the
Mexican priest pursued by the soldiers of the Masonic government. We can help
those persecuted priests, religious men and women who in anonymity, silence,
and humble acceptance of trials show us the suffering face of Christ ascending
Golgotha.
Let us therefore prove that we know how
to accompany the Faith we profess with good works, with prayer, with charity
and almsgiving. For these priests, these friars, these nuns can stop the arm of
divine Justice and give hope for the future in our children.
“Exsurge Domine – USA”
Address: PO Box 121, Rice Lake, WI 54868
Email:
info@exsurgedomineusa.org
501(c)3 approved Tax Code: 93-3884604
EXCERPT: The Vatican has been
covering-up the crimes of homosexual pederasts since 1922 but the practice became
actively enforced policy since 1962!!!
The total payouts by the Catholic Church for sex abuse claims in the
United States have exceeded $5 billion over the past two decades with almost
all of this for homosexual crimes.
FROM FORGIVENESS, TO SILENCE... TO BETRAYAL, By
Michael Kenny
THE FEAR OF SCANDAL: A DEEPENING MOTIF
As the Church gained public visibility and
institutional structure, the fear of scandal – that is, anything that could
bring shame or doubt upon the Church – grew proportionally. This concern is not
without biblical foundation. Apparently Christ Himself warned that:
“Scandals must come, but woe to the one
through whom they come.”
In a world where the Church was often
maligned, the temptation to protect its reputation – even at the cost of truth
– grew strong.
This approach reached its most formal
expression in the 20th century.
CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS: CODIFYING SECRECY
In 1962, the Vatican issued a secret
instruction titled CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS. Which laid out procedures
for dealing with priests accused of using the confessional to solicit sexual
acts (an update of canon 904 in 1741). While its original focus was on
confessional abuse – a particularly grievous offense – it extended its
protocols to cover ALL sexual misconduct by clergy, including child abuse.
This document mandated strict secrecy:
“Cases of this nature are subject to the strictest pontifical secret –
under pain of excommunication.”
This meant the victims, witnesses, and
Church authorities were all bound by silence, ostensibly to protect the
sacrament and the dignity of the Church. But in practice, this secrecy
protected the perpetrators and silenced the victims.
The same theological instinct that once
prompted Origen to counsel forgiveness now found its legal expression in
institutional concealment.
The Church fathers were not wrong to value
forgiveness. But forgiveness without justice is not sanctity – it is surrender.
And the Church must never surrender the innocent to the sins of the powerful.
THE COST OF MISAPPLIED MERCY
What unites the early Christian response to
personal violation with the institutional culture of silence centuries later is
a tragic misapplication mercy – a prioritizing of the Church's image, or of the
offender's soul, over the immediate demands of justice and the protection of
the innocent.
In the name of forgiveness, the Church
failed to act.
In the name of avoiding scandal, it created
a greater one.
In the name of unity, it tolerates wolves
among the sheep.
The very teachings of Christ – meant to
uphold truth, protect the weak, and heal the broken – were twisted into
realizations for secrecy and inaction.
TOWARD A NEW ETHOS OF ACCOUNTABILITY
The path forward must involve more
than policy reform. It requires a re-examination of the Church's spiritual
instincts – a return to the full Gospel, where mercy and justice walk hand in
hand.
Forgiveness does not mean the abandonment
of truth.
Compassion does not mean the protection of
the predator.
The Church must rediscover the moral courage
to expose evil, even when it dwells in its own house.
EPILOGUE: A WAR ON INNOCENCE
There is a deeper layer to this crisis.
Darker than secrecy. Worse than betrayal. It is diabolical.
Satan hates God. This hatred is total,
consuming and unrelenting. But Satan can't hurt God directly – God is beyond
his reach. So he strikes where it hurts most: at what God loves – CHILDREN.
Jesus told us to let the children come to
Him. Jesus warned about the millstone. So, what then is a perfect way for
Satan's followers to do his bidding and please him, and hate God at the same
time...
VIOLATE A CHILD, and do it wearing the robes of Christ
In this perverse inversion of the
priesthood, the altar becomes a hunting ground, and the confessional, a trap.
[....]
COMMENT: The problem was
magnified in the 1983 Code of Canon Law protecting homosexual predators. Their
hypocrisy is evident when compared to the treatment given to Fr. Samuel Waters.
Homosexual predators are given the full canonical rights of due process while Fr.
Waters was denied canonical due process for the "crime" of offering
the "received and approved" immemorial Roman rite of Mass.
COMMENT: From the 1917 Code
of Canon Law, clerical homosexual predators and other sex offenders who were found guilty were laicized and
turned over to the state for suffer criminal penalties. Such a response was
necessary to restore justice, protect the faithful, and begin the hard work of
rebuilding. Everything changed in 1922 with a new canon law which required all
bishops of the world to violate mandatory reporting laws of the state by
concealing child abuse and homosexuality by clerics from criminal state law
enforcement. This document, Crimens Sollicitationis, was included in
the 1983 Code of Canon Law and remained in force until 2001.
Abp. Vigano the former apostolic nuncio to
the United States was required first by Crimens Sollicitationis and then by Sacramentum Sanctitatis
Tutela of 2001 and then by Graviora Delicta of 2010 to conceal any
knowledge of sexual crimes by clergy from public disclosure. The “Spotlight”
investigation of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in 2002 revealed that many
clerics found guilty of child sexual abuse were repeatedly returned to Catholic
ministry where they repeated their crimes on new children. Following this
investigation, the United States was the only country that received an
exemption from the Vatican policy to conceal sexual abuse from state criminal
law enforcement.
Canon 1341 of the current 1983 Code of
Canon Law, requires bishops whenever possible to ask priests to stop committing
crimes, instead of punishing them for their actions. What is perhaps worse,
Canon 1324 in the 1983 Code is used to decrease punishment for pedophiles on
the grounds that pedophiles have less freedom than non-pedophiles to control
their perverse passions. Thus, a diagnosis of pedophilia lessens culpability
and imputability of the crime of pedophilia. As a result, bishops have
concluded pedophiles should receive a lesser punishment for pedophilia than
other sex offenders.
The SSPX follows the 1983 Code and has used
it cover up sexual offenders within the SSPX. This includes the former district
superios in the United States for the SSPX, Fr. Arnaud Rostand who was
sentenced to a French prison after conviction of homosexual pederasty in
France, Spain and Switzerland against seven boys on scouting trips between 2002
and 2018. The purpose of this is not detraction of the SSPX but to point out an
ugly fact that every faithful Catholic should be aware of when receiving their
sacraments, attending their schools or participating in their supervised camps
and other summer activities. They as an organization follow the Vatican policy
to cover up any crimes of sexual abuse of children.
"Only the Prudent man can be brave."
Josef Pieper
Pro-abortion Sen. Durbin says he’s ‘overwhelmed’ by Pope Leo’s apparent
defense of his award
‘It is amazing to me. It’s quite a moment,’ Durbin said about Pope Leo appearing
to support the pro-abortion and pro-LGBT senator’s ‘lifetime achievement award’
from Cdl. Blase Cupich.
LifeSiteNews | Emily Mangiaracina | Oct
2, 2025 — Pro-abortion Senator Dick Durbin said he is “overwhelmed” by
Pope Leo XIV’s apparent support for his “lifetime achievement award” from
Cardinal Blase Cupich.
Leo on Tuesday appeared to imply that he
was not opposed to Cupich’s decision to give the award to the radically
pro-abortion and pro-LGBT Durbin, when asked about the matter by a journalist.
“I think that it is very important to look
at the overall work that a senator has done during … 40 years of service in the
United States Senate,” he stated. “I understand the difficulty and the tensions
but I think, as I myself have spoken to in the past, it is important to look at
many issues that are related to what is the teaching of the Church.”
“Someone who says I’m against abortion but
says I’m in favor of the death penalty is not really pro-life. Someone who says
I’m against abortion but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of
immigrants in the United States, I don’t know if that’s pro-life,” Leo then
said. He went on to conclude, “So, they are very complex issues, I don’t know
if anyone has all the truth on them.”
On the same day Leo appeared to defend Sen.
Durbin receiving the lifetime award from Cupich, the pro-abortion politician
announced that he will decline the award from the Archdiocese of Chicago after
facing a strong backlash, including criticism from several U.S. bishops.
Durbin told NBC News he was surprised by
“the level of controversy” over the award, and that he declined it “because the
reaction has been so controversial against the cardinal who proposed it, and I
see no point in going forward with that.”
Commenting on the pope’s defense of his
award, Durbin said, “It is amazing to me. It’s quite a moment. I didn’t expect
it. I didn’t know it was gonna happen.”
As the Lepanto Institute has pointed out on
X, Durbin’s award violates the very laws of Cupich’s archdiocese. Bishop Thomas
Paprocki of Springfield has affirmed, “The U.S. bishops have clearly taught
that support for abortion disqualifies individuals from receiving honors from
Catholic institutions.”
Durbin’s award, and Leo’s failure to
denounce his award, is even more shocking considering that since his election
to the U.S. Senate in 1997, Durbin has supported every possible brutal method
of abortion, as well as even post-abortion infanticide: He voted against the
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,
and the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
He also supported legislation aimed at
codifying and expanding Roe v. Wade – the “Women’s Health Protection Act” –
despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that it was unconstitutional.
COMMENT: Pope Leo is defending the
pro-abortion Sen. Durbin while at the same time slandering faithful Catholics.
His appeal to the 'seamless garment,' subsequently called the "consistent
ethic of life," is grounded on the Vatican II novelty that the dignity of
the human person is so great that he is not obligated to believe the truths
that God has revealed or obey the commandments God. The novelty was developed
by his Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago in 1984 who was a notorious and
clever homosexual who did as much damage to the Church as the notorious
Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. To say as Leo has that Catholics who oppose
abortion are not really pro-life if they do not oppose the death penalty for
convicted murderers is to claim that a murderer has a greater right to life
than his victim. As for opposing unjust wars the homosexual crowd and their
liberal Catholic supporters have done precious little over the last 35
years.
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.
Thence came:
1. a closer definition and more fruitful
exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and
2. the condemnation and repression of errors;
thence too,
3. the restoration and vigorous strengthening
of ecclesiastical discipline,
4. the advancement of the clergy in zeal for
·
learning and
·
piety,
5. the founding of colleges for the training of
the young for the service of religion; and finally
6. the renewal of the moral life of the
Christian people by
· a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and
· a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also
came
7. a closer union of the members with the
visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole Mystical Body of Christ.
Thence came:
1. the multiplication of religious orders and
other organisations of Christian piety; thence too
2. 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
o the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many,
or because
o 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!
Regarding the Sin of Schism
and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
There
are no manifest acts of schism with one and only one important exception which
will be identified below. This means there are no acts that are necessarily
always and everywhere evidence of a schismatic motive in the internal forum
excepting one. Contrasted, for example, with abortion and blasphemy which are
acts that are manifest sins because they can never be done with a morally right
intention; the act itself reveals the intent of the internal forum as being
vicious. These are always and everywhere necessarily mortal sins. As St. Paul
says, "Some men's sins are manifest, going before to
judgment: and some men they follow after" (1Tim 5:24). St. Paul gives
specific examples of "manifest sins": "Nor the
effeminate, nor liers with mankind (sodomites), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor
drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of
God" (1 Cor 6:10). What exactly is the schismatic motive that a
contentious canonical process must discover for conviction and attribution of
imputability of the crime?
The
canonical definition for both heresy and schism are taken directly almost
verbatim from St. Thomas Aquinas: "Schismatics are those who refuse to
submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of
the Church who acknowledge his supremacy." Schism is the repudiation of
the universal jurisdiction of Sovereign Pontiff and communion with those who
accept it. It is the burden of the canonical trial to prove the schismatic
intention for all schismatics are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff but not
all who are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff are schismatics. St. Thomas'
in his examination identifies schism as a specific species of sin. St. Thomas says, "Hence the sin of schism is, properly
speaking, a special sin, for the reason that the schismatic intends to sever himself from that unity which
is the effect of charity: because charity unites not only one person to
another with the bond of spiritual love, but also the whole Church in unity of
spirit." The genus to which
schism belongs is acts opposed to peace which is the fruit of "that unity which is the
effect of charity." Regarding peace, St. Thomas continues:
"Peace implies a twofold union... The first is the result of one's own appetites
being directed to one object; while the other results from one's own appetite
being united with the appetite of another: and each of these unions is effected
by charity." All acts that disturb the fruit of peace are directed against
the cause of peace which is charity."
Acts
of disobedience against properly constituted authority are only acts of schism
when the intention is to overturn the peace of unity caused by charity. This
intention constitutes the species
difference of schism from other acts opposed to peace, as St. Thomas says, the
schismatic "intends
to separate himself from the unity that charity makes" (Q.39, a.1.) among the faithful. St.
Thomas is offering an essential
definition of schism which is the best of all definitions because it is the
most intelligible because it identifies the essence.
Schism, just as other acts opposed to peace enumerated by St. Thomas, which
include discord, contention,
war, strife and sedition, requires contextualization. Specifically for the case
of Archbishop Viganò, St. Thomas says that morality of contention, which is the opposition to
another in speech, is determined by the intention: "As to the intention,
we must consider whether he contends against the truth, and then he is to be
blamed, or against falsehood, and then he should be praised." Archbishop
Carlo Maria Viganò's "contention" against Pope Francis is the
contention of truth against falsehood and is therefore praiseworthy and not
schismatic. This is why a canonical trial is called "contentious" for
it is intended to reveal who is contending for truth.
The
poles of contention are truth-falsehood which is the same for dogmas of faith.
As St. Jude admonishes: "I was under a necessity to write unto you: to
beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the
saints" (Jude 1:3). Schism is the rejection of the divinely revealed truth
of papal universal jurisdiction, a dogma of faith since Vatican I. Schism is
manifested by disobedience but all disobedience is not schism. Obedience to God
is unqualified. All other acts of obedience are morally good only to the degree
that they are properly regulated by the virtue of Religion which is the primary
subsidiary virtue under Justice. Any act of obedience that violates the virtue
of Religion is a sin. The virtue of Religion above all requires that we
"give unto God the things that are God's." This first and necessary
act of obedience is to believe all that God has revealed and to keep his
commandments. Without this first necessary condition, it is impossible to keep
the greatest commandment to love God above all things and it is impossible to
have "the unity that charity makes."
Archbishop
Carlo Maria Viganò was administratively "excommunicated" for
"schism" because the administrative process avoided the canonical
requirement to prove that his intent was to "separate himself from the
unity that charity makes" among the faithful. They denied the right of
Archbishop Viganò to defend himself in a contentions forum against the charge which would
obviously have included discussing the heretical acts of Pope Francis which are
manifest. The ultimate purpose of the canonical process is to determine truth
and bring those who have deviated from truth back from error. But for many the
contention itself irrespective of truth or falsehood is the manifest evidence
of schism. The reason for this will become clearer after discussing the
relationship in the context of faith and charity, and heresy and schism.
Schismatics
"refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff" because they deny that
the pope possesses universal jurisdiction conferred by God for the legitimate exercise of the
papal office which produces unity and peace. Universal jurisdiction of the pope
is a divinely revealed truth that was dogmatized at Vatican I Council. St.
Thomas says:
"Heresy and schism are distinguished in
respect of those things to which each is opposed essentially and directly. For
heresy is essentially opposed to faith, while schism is essentially opposed to
the unity of ecclesiastical charity. Wherefore just as faith and charity are different virtues, although
whoever lacks faith lacks charity, so too schism and heresy are different
vices, although whoever is a heretic is also a schismatic, but not
conversely."
Since
the universal jurisdiction of the pope has become a dogma at Vatican Council I,
a schismatic is now also conversely always a heretic. Importantly, faith
precedes charity. "Without faith, it is impossible to please God"
(Heb 11-6) because "whoever
lacks faith lacks charity." The keys of universal jurisdiction were
promised to St. Peter after his profession of faith which is its proximate
material cause. Many Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine and St. John
Chrysostom, describe an analogical identity of the rock (petra) with divine
faith, with St. Peter, with Jesus Christ the "cornerstone," and the
Church itself. The faith
proceeds and is the proximate cause of the universal jurisdiction conferred by
Jesus Christ because faith is indispensible to the bond of unity which is charity. Cardinal Henry Edward Manning wrote:
“The
interpretation by the Fathers of the words ‘On this rock; etc. is fourfold, but
all four interpretations are not more than four aspects of one and the same
truth, and all are necessary to complete its full meaning. They all implicitly
or explicitly contain the perpetual stability of Peter’s faith...:’
“In
these two promises [i.e. Lk 22:32, Mt 16:18] a divine assistance is pledged to
Peter and to his successors, and that divine assistance is promised to secure
the stability and indefectibiity of the Faith in the supreme Doctor and Head of
the Church, for the general good of the Church itself.”
Cardinal
Henry Edward Manning, “The Vatican Council and Its Definitions: A Pastoral
Letter to the Clergy”, p. 83-84, 1870
All this is nicely summed up by St. Paul who
admonishes "that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called;
With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in
charity. Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond
of peace. One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your
calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:1-5). The primary and essential cause and sign of
the unity in the Church is the faith. The pope is only secondarily and accidentally
the sign and cause of unity in the Church. If the pope falls from the faith he
is to be confronted as St. Paul did to St. Peter when he "walked not
uprightly unto the truth of the gospel" and accommodated the Judaizers
leading others into "dissimulation" (Gal. 2:11). If the pope is a
heretic he "lacks faith (and) lacks charity". Without charity he
breaks the bond of unity in the Church and necessarily becomes schismatic.
Manifest Heresy is the one and only sin that identifies a schismatic because it
manifests a schismatic intent.
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
We mustn't forget that some
of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish
Israel News | ynetnews | Sever Plocker
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
Mons. Carlo Maria Viganò: Replies to the claim that obedience is
unqualified even when the faith itself is in question!!
NON SEQUITUR
Further Clarifications in Response to the Reply of
Prof. Daniele Trabucco
I can only agree with almost everything that Professor Trabucco has stated in
response to my comment [1]. As he writes at the Duc in Altum blog [2]:
A saint who obeys a disciplinary measure that is unjust but not
contrary to faith (as in the case of Padre Pio) performs an act of heroic
self-denial, because he recognizes that even in harshness and iniquity, a
command does not break the bond with the revealed deposit of faith. The
situation, however, is different when an ecclesiastical authority commands something
that contradicts faith: in that case, the order is no longer authentically
disciplinary but is transformed into a deviation that strikes at the very
rationale of the authority. Here, refusal is not rebellion, but fidelity.
Given that this principle is valid – and
which I agree with sine glossa – I find it difficult to accept as valid the
exception that Trabucco adds immediately afterwards:
However […] such refusal can never translate into schismatic acts, nor
into attitudes that cause public scandal. For if it is true that discipline and
faith complement each other, it is equally true that discipline, as a visible
order, also serves to preserve the unity of the Church. And unity is part of
the supernatural common good of the Mystical Body. Therefore, the truth of
faith cannot be defended at the cost of tearing apart ecclesial communion.
It is true that “discipline, as a visible
order, also serves to safeguard the unity of the Church. And unity is part of
the supernatural common good of the Mystical Body.” But the unity achieved
through obedience is the effect, not the cause, of the profession of the same
Faith: the faithful are united in the Church under the authority of the Roman
Pontiff because they believe the same doctrine, not the other way around. And
this is the error that undermines Professor Trabucco’s argument on obedience.
The refusal to obey an ecclesiastical authority, when that authority commands
something that contradicts the Faith, cannot constitute an attack on unity,
because it is the illegitimate order of the Superior that is schismatic and
scandalous in nature, not the disobedience of the subject who remains faithful
to God.
If the refusal to obey an illegitimate authority or order “is not rebellion,
but fidelity”; if the Regula Fidei is the supreme principle that finds its
rationale in the Truth coessential and consubstantial with God [3]; if
obedience itself, as a moral virtue, is ordered toward the good and therefore
toward the Truth – because Faith and discipline, as Professor Trabucco states,
“though different in object, are united in purpose: the glory of God and the
salvation of souls” – how can the Professor affirm: “Therefore, one cannot
defend the truth of faith at the cost of tearing apart ecclesial communion”?
Given an absolute principle, how is it possible to derogate from it with an
exception that makes unity in obedience absolute while the Truth becomes
relative and secondary to obedience?
In fact, just the opposite is true: ecclesial communion cannot be defended at
the cost of tearing apart the Truth of the Faith, because it is obedience that
is ordered to the Faith, and not vice versa [4].
I would add that anyone who contradicts, adulterates, or silences the Faith is
the first to cause scandal, especially if he finds himself in the position of
exercising coercive force as an ecclesiastical Superior over a priest or
religious. It is the duty of every baptized person to defend and proclaim sound
doctrine and to denounce anyone in authority who abuses it, causing grave scandal
to the common people. They are rightly accustomed to obeying—instinctively, I
would almost say—the authority of the Hierarchy and consider its deviation
unthinkable under normal circuмstances. This is especially true for the
priest subject to the jurisdiction of his Superiors and the sanctions they can
impose: dutiful disobedience to an abusive and illicit order entails canonical
sanctions for anyone who dutifully resists, as Trabucco hopes. This punishment
of the disobedient is the scandal – not the act of denouncing the corruption of
ecclesiastical authority. Just as it is a scandal that heretics, schismatics,
corrupt individuals, and notorious fornicators are not prosecuted but rather
encouraged, while anyone who denounces the crisis, identifies its causes, and
identifies those responsible, who have fraudulently held power for sixty years
and can abuse it at will, is declared schismatic and excommunicated.
The Communion of Saints—which is the archetype and model of ecclesial
communion—is founded in God, who is Truth, not obedience. God is not obedient,
because that would presuppose an authority superior to Him. The obedience of
the Son—factus obœdiens usque ad mortem (Phil 2:8)—is a unity of will (idem
velle) between the Three Divine Persons, without an internal hierarchical
relationship between Them [5]. At the same time, God is the primary recipient
of all obedience, because by obeying the Superiors to whom He has granted
authority, we also obey God. But obedience cannot exist if the Superior who asks
to be obeyed does not in turn recognize God’s authority over himself. Such
obedience would accept the premise, even if only theoretical, of being able to
disobey God in order to obey men, contravening the precept of Saint Peter (Acts
5:29) and making earthly authority self-referential and therefore potentially
tyrannical. In this, the concept of synodality is shown to be absolutely
subversive of the order willed by God, in that it tampers with the monarchical
structure of the Church—on the model of Christ the King and Pontiff who is her
Head—by placing sovereignty in the hands of “the people” (even if in reality,
power, as in civil republics, is in the hands of an elite) and by affirming
“that Christ wanted His Church to be governed in the manner of a republic.” [6]
Only universal submission to a true and good God makes obedience a sure means
of sanctity for those who obey their Superiors. And this is why we have both
reason and the Sensus Fidei: to discern when obedience is a virtuous act and
when instead “it transforms into a deviation that strikes at the very rationale
of authority.”
If Professor Trabucco recognizes the possibility that ecclesiastical superiors
may issue orders contrary to Faith or Morals (a possibility confirmed by daily
abuses of authority against traditional Catholics and the equally daily
tolerance of unprecedented scandals), he must also acknowledge the possibility
that subordinates may reject the illegitimate orders of their superiors. The
Church’s hierarchical ladder allows for appeal to a higher authority when one
finds oneself in conflict with another authority subordinate to it. But if the
highest echelons of the hierarchical ladder—in this case, the Roman Pontiff and
the Roman Dicasteries—are themselves implicated in a general subversion of the
Faith (beginning with Leo’s recent declaration that “we must change attitudes”
before we can change doctrine [7]), it is clear that hierarchical recourse is
impracticable and that no earthly authority can remedy the disobedience of
those who are Superiors.
In a nutshell: amidst the obvious general disobedience of Church Authority to
God’s law at all levels, how can a priest or a simple believer subjected to
this Authority remain obedient to it, if one is still bound to continue to obey
God rather than men?
The true h0Ɩ0cαųst of the will that the mystics speak of is
this: knowing how to be obedient unto death, even death on a cross, in
obedience to God. But never, under any circuмstances, can one even
imagine sycophantically obeying heretical and schismatic Superiors, for fear of
shattering “with acts of a schismatic nature” the apparent unity of their
church. Because the unity they claim is a simulacrum, a fiction, a grotesque
imposture hiding the indifferentism of the synodal pantheon, which includes
both the conservatives of Summorum Pontificuм as well as the LGBTQ+
progressives of James Martin, both Our Lady of Fatima as well as the Pachamama,
the Mass of the ages along with the Novus Ordo. The only inalienable dogma is
that everyone must recognize the Second Vatican Council: its ecclesiology, its
morality, its liturgy, its saints and martyrs, and above all its excommunicated
people and its heretics—that is, the “radical traditionalists” who refuse to be
tamed by the new synodal demands. As for the rest of what we believe, Leo has
explicitly said that one can safely gloss over it in the name of
ecuмenical and synodal unity, including the Filioque of the Creed. But
not Vatican II: it is the founding act of a church born in 1962 which claims
the authority of the True Church, from whose Magisterium, however, it distances
itself and opposes it.
We therefore find ourselves before an Authority—the supreme authority—that is
clearly disobedient to Christ, the Head of the Mystical Body, but which,
usurping Christ’s authority, claims to decide in what respects those subject to
it must obey it, disobeying God’s commands.
Can we even imagine recognizing this authority as legitimate and owing it
obedience, lest we tear apart the “unity” that the Hierarchy has already
shattered with its own disobedience to God? How could we possibly ratify its
abuses, making ourselves accomplices of those who are betraying the Truth?
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop, 23 September 2025
NOTE
1 – Cfr. https://exsurgedomine.it/250917-trabucco-ita/
2 – Cfr. https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2025/09/21/a-proposito-di-obbedienza-note-sulle-osservazioni-di-monsignor-vigano/
3 – Saint Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII, 2: God is truth itself – ipsa veritas
–, and everything that is true comes from Him, because He is the origin of all
truth.
4 – The decree of the Holy Office of 20 December 1949 condemning the
ecuмenical movement also recalls this: This unity cannot be achieved
except in the recognition of Catholic truth.
5 – Saint Augustine, In Joannis Evangelium tractatus, 51, 8: Christ’s obedience
is not a diminution of His divinity, but an expression of His perfect union
with the Father, for the will of the Son is one with that of the Father.
6 – Pius VI, Brief Super Soliditate of 28 November 1786 condemning Febronianism.
This doctrine fits into the context of the Enlightenment and the tensions
between the temporal power of states and the authority of the Catholic Church,
promoting a vision that limited the primacy of the Pope and strengthened the
autonomy of national Churches and local bishops. Febronius (the pseudonym of
Johann Nikolaus von Hontheim, Bishop of Trier) argued that the authority of the
Pope was not absolute, but derived from the universal Church, understood as the
community of the faithful and bishops. Febronianism also influenced the Council
of Pistoia (1786), in which there appeared heretical demands that are
substantially identical to those that would re-appear in Vatican II.
7 – Cfr. https://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2025/09/papa-leone-parla-con-elise-ann-allen-di.html
8 – Cfr. https://youtube.com/watch?v=IkPJn2L9BBs&si=oGcPhGwR5nxQ6jva
TO KNOW THE FAITH, YOU MUST
KNOW THE RULE
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.
Rev. Scheeben’s
Manual of Catholic Theology
“O Timothy, keep that which is
committed to thy trust, avoiding
the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so
called. Which some
promising, have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.” St. Paul,
letter to his disciple, Bishop St. Timothy (1 Timothy 6:20-21)
... We wish to make our own the
important words employed by the Council; those words which define its spirit,
and, in a dynamical synthesis, form the spirit of all those who refer to it, be
they within or without the Church. The word “NOVELTY”,
simple, very dear to today’s men, is much utilized; it is theirs... That
word... it was given to us as an order, as a program... It comes to us directly
from the pages of the Holy Scripture: “For, behold (says the Lord), I create
new heavens and a new earth”. St. Paul echoes these words of the prophet Isaiah
(II Corinthians 5, 17); then, the Apocalypse: “I am making everything new” (II
Corinthians 21, 5). And Jesus, our Master, was not He, himself, an innovator?
“You have heard that people were told in the past ... but now I
tell you...” (Matthew 5) – Repeated in the “Sermon on the Mount”.
It
is precisely thus that the Council has come to us. Two terms characterize it:
“RENOVATION” and “REVISION”. We are particularly keen that this “spirit of
renovation” – according to the expression of the Council – be understood and
experienced by everyone. It responds to the characteristic of our time, wholly
engaged in an enormous and rapid transformation, and generating novelties in
every sector of modern life. In fact, one cannot shy away from this spontaneous
reflection: if the whole world is changing, will not religion change as well?
Between the reality of life and Christianity, Catholicism especially, is not there
reciprocal disagreement, indifference, misunderstanding, and hostility? The
former is leaping forward; the latter would not move. How could they go along?
How could Christianity claim to have, today, any influence upon life?
And
it is for this reason that the Church has undertaken some reforms, especially
after the Council. The Episcopate is about to promote the “renovation” that
corresponds to our present needs; Religious Orders are reforming their
Statutes; Catholic laity is qualified and found its role within the life of the
Church; Liturgy is proceeding with a reform in which anyone knows the extension
and importance; Christian education reviews the methods of its pedagogy; all
the canonical legislations are about to be revised. And how many other
consoling and promising novelties we shall see appearing in the Church! They
attest to Her new vitality, which shows that the Holy Spirit animates Her
continually, even in these years so crucial to religion. The development of
ecumenism, guided by Faith and Charity, itself says what progress, almost
unforeseeable, has been achieved during the course and life of the Church. The
Church looks at the future with Her heart brimming with hope, brimming with
fresh expectation in love... We can say... of the Council: It marks the onset
of a new era, of which no one can deny the new aspects that We have indicated
to you.
Pope
Paul VI, General Audience of July 2, 1969
And Then, Only Three Years
Later:
Through
some cracks the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: there is doubt,
uncertainty, problematic, anxiety, confrontation. One does not trust the Church
anymore; one trusts the first prophet that comes to talk to us from some
newspapers or some social movement, and then rush after him and ask him if he
held the formula of real life. And we fail to perceive, instead, that we are
the masters of life already. Doubt has entered our conscience, and it has
entered through windows that were supposed to be opened to the light
instead....
Even
in the Church this state of uncertainty rules. One thought that after the
Council there would come a shiny day for the history of the Church. A cloudy
day came instead, a day of tempest, gloom, quest, and uncertainty. We preach
ecumenism and drift farther and farther from the others. We attempt to dig
abysses instead of filling them.
How
has all this come about? We confide to you our thought: there has been the
intervention of a hostile power. His name is the Devil; this mysterious being
who is alluded to even in the letter of St. Peter. So many times, on the other
hand, in the Gospel, on the very lips of Christ, there recurs the mention of
this enemy of man. We believe in something supernatural (post-correction:
“preternatural”!), coming into the world precisely to disturb, to suffocate
anything of the Ecumenical Council, and to prevent that the Church would
explode into the hymn of joy for having regained full consciousness of Herself
(!!).
Pope
Paul VI, June 29, 1972
Pope Leo on LGBTQ: ‘We have to change attitudes before we ever change
doctrine’
In this first extended interview he’s just done with Crux Now, Leo XIV
has basically said that the Church’s teaching on sexual morality could change.
LifeSiteNews
| Sep 18, 2025
Friends,
you are not going to believe this.
In
this first extended interview he’s just done with Crux Now, Leo XIV
has basically said that the Church’s teaching on sexual morality could change.
He actually even went there and implied that he could – in his words – “change
the Church’s teaching” on women’s ordination.
Take
a listen to what he said first on sexual morality. This is what he says after
having been talking about LGBT issues for a while:
People want the Church doctrine to
change, want attitudes to change. I think we have to change attitudes before we
ever change doctrine.
That’s
right, he’s strongly implying – well, he’s saying – that
Church teaching could shift, if attitudes change first.
Might
that be why we’ve had so much LGBT stuff in Rome lately, from Fr. James Martin
to the LGBT pilgrimage? Are they trying to get our “attitudes to change”?
And
what do you think the so-called “LGBT Catholics” are hearing when they hear Leo saying such a thing? It’s a very
clear invitation and instruction: work to change attitudes, then we can change
the teaching. Wow.
And
rather than stating such changes were impossible, Leo said he thought it
was unlikely that it would happen soon:
I find it highly unlikely, certainly in
the immediate future, that the Church’s doctrine in terms of what the Church
teaches about sexuality, what the Church teaches about marriage [will change].
Later,
instead of stating that the Church’s teaching could not change, he
merely said that he thought that it would remain the same:
I think that the Church’s teaching will
continue as it is, and that’s what I have to say about that for right now.
You think it’s
going to continue as it is? Aren’t you supposed to be the Pope – the one
responsible for making sure that it continues as it is?
Look
friends, this is just stunning. Catholic teaching on sexual morality –
including the sinfulness of homosexual acts, as well as fornication, adultery
and others – aren’t matters of probabilities or personal conjecture, or
contingent and waiting to be changed.
They’re
definitive, grounded in both the natural law and divine revelation – and so
they’re incapable of being changed.
Reason
alone tells us that sexual activity outside marriage – and thus, obviously, all
sexual activity between two same sex couples – is contrary to the natural law.
This
is also and separately a dogma – divinely revealed in Scripture and
proposed by the universal ordinary magisterium of the Church.
Vatican
I taught that such truths which are to be believed with divine and Catholic
faith.
Female ordination
Leo
also talked about the possibility of the ordination of women to the diaconate
in similar terms:
What the synod had spoken about specifically
was the ordination, perhaps, of women deacons, which has been a question that’s
been studied for many years now. There’ve been different commissions appointed
by different popes to say, what can we do about this? I think that will
continue to be an issue.
Ok,
so in the early Church, there was indeed an office of “deaconess” – but
everyone knows that these women were not ordained to any sacramental holy
order of the diaconate.
But
Leo calls even this into question by equating the female diaconate with that of
the permanent diaconate established after the Second Vatican Council. He gives
a long anecdote about meeting deacons and their wives in Rome before
concluding:
[T]here are parts of the world that
never really promoted the permanent deaconate, and that itself became a
question: Why would we talk about ordaining women to the diaconate if the
diaconate itself is not yet properly understood and properly developed and
promoted within the church?
He
also expressed his willingness for study and debate on the matter to continue,
saying he was “certainly
willing to continue to listen to people,” and pointing to the study
groups in Rome on the subject. “We’ll walk with that and see what comes,” he said.
But
do you know what’s even more shocking? Leo said this:
I at the moment don’t have an intention
of changing the teaching of the Church on the topic.
Friends,
if you say a thing like that, it’s clear what you think. You’re saying
you do have the power to “change the teaching of the Church.”
The immutability of dogma
But
the teaching of the Church says that this isn’t possible. Can that be changed
too?
Vatican
I denied that the Pope could change the Church’s teaching or
introduce new dogmas. It taught:
For the holy Spirit was promised to the
successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some
new doctrine.
It
goes on to say that the purpose of the papacy is to safeguard and preserve the
deposit of faith. Not to consider whether the time is right to change it.
Oh,
some will say, we’re not talking about changes. This is just a development
of dogma.
Come
on. That’s what they always say to justify this stuff. And anyway, Leo was
pretty clear: he’s the one who was talking about changing Church teaching.
And
anyway, that defense is excluded too. There’s a legitimate sense of the
development of doctrine, but changing the meanings of dogmas to something
totally different isn’t it.
Such
an idea has been condemned time and again by the Church.
Pope Pius IX condemned, in the Syllabus of Errors, the idea that divine
revelation is “subject to a continual and indefinite progress.”
Vatican I declared that the “meaning
of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained” and that “there must never be
any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more
profound understanding.”
That same
Council anathematized anyone who says dogma can be assigned “a sense
different from that which the Church has understood and understands.”
Pope St Pius X cited all these
teachings in his encyclical Pascendi
Dominici Gregis against Modernism.
In his Oath
Against Modernism, he also required clergy to profess that dogma is handed
down “in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport.”
This oath also states that the idea “that
dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one
which the Church held previously” is a – get this –
“heretical misrepresentation.”
Grave implications
“Heretical”
is a big word. But the truth is clear: homosexual acts are intrinsically
disordered, marriage is between one man and one woman, and these teachings
cannot change.
As
I said above, both the Church’s teaching on sexual morality, and the
immutability of dogma are the sorts of truths we have to believe with divine
and Catholic faith.
The
censure attached to the obstinate denial or doubt of such truths is
indeed heresy. (Can. 751 of 1983 CIC, Can. 1325 of 1917 CIC)
So,
where does that leave us?
The
hugely problematic situation of Leo XIV raising hopes for an impossible change
in the future.
And
claiming the power to change Church teaching, which he certainly does not have.
And…
publicly doubting (or even denying) these two sets of truths in a video
interview – which, as I said, is heresy.
You
know what St. Paul said about those who try to introduce new dogmas, doctrines
or Gospels:
If I, or an angel from heaven, preach to
you a Gospel different to that which we have preached to you, which you have
received: let him be anathema.
COMMENT: The very essence of the Modernist heresy is the denial of immutability
of dogma because they deny that dogma is divine revelation of an immutabile
truth from an immutable God. The Modernist believe that dogma is not a truth
revealed by God but rather a human expression of the subjective religious sentiment
and therefore dogma must change over time as the human sentiment changes. Leo
the Heretic professes that the "attitudes" of Catholics will change
only gradually. therefore, when there is a sufficient number expressing the new
attitude then the dogmas will change to express the new religious attitude. It
is absolutely impossible to hold this belief and be a faithful Catholic at the
same time. Leo is just another Bergoglian who will bring ruin to himself and
others.
Pope Leo is now the CEO of the same HomoLobby his
predecessor chaired! It is impossible to be a defender of homosexuality and a
Catholic at the same time.
Bishop Schneider: Vatican ‘LGBTQ pilgrimage’ an ‘abomination,’ Pope Leo
must make ‘public reparation’
Pope Leo must ‘urgently’ make reparation after the Vatican endorsed an
LGBT Jubilee ‘pilgrimage’ and allowed unrepentant homosexuals to pass the Holy
Doors at St. Peter’s, Bishop Schneider said.
LifeSiteNews | Sept 10, 2025— Bishop
Athanasius Schneider expressed “horror” at the Vatican’s endorsement of the
“LGBTQ Jubilee pilgrimage,” rebuking priests who support homosexuality as
“spiritual criminals” and “murderers of souls.”
“My
reaction was a silent cry of horror, indignation, and sorrow,” the auxiliary of
Astana, Kazakhstan, said regarding the Vatican’s approval of an LGBT-themed
“pilgrimage” on its Jubilee website, in an interview with Diane Montagna, a
journalist in Rome.
Montagna had highlighted the fact that
photos captured an array of rainbow paraphernalia in St. Peter’s Basilica, as
well homosexual male couple “brazenly holding hands there, one with a backpack
saying F*** the Rules,” at the conclusion of their “pilgrimage.”
What took place there could be described as
an “abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,” in the words of
Christ (cf. Mt. 24:15), said Bishop Schneider.
He pointed out that the embrace of
homosexuality by these “pilgrims” contradicted one of the very key meanings of
the Jubilee Year and the Holy Door: “Leading man to conversion and penance,” as
Pope John Paul II explained in the Bull of Indiction of the Holy Year
2000.
“There were no signs of repentance and
renunciation of objectively grave homosexual sins … on the part of the
organizers and participants in this pilgrimage,” noted Schneider. “To pass through
the Holy Door and participate in the Jubilee without repentance, while
promoting an ideology that openly rejects God’s Sixth Commandment, constitutes
a kind of desecration of the Holy Door and a mockery of God and the gift of an
indulgence.”
The bishop had strong words for the Vatican
authorities who “collaborated de facto” in this open rejection of God’s
commandment, expressed aptly in the “f*** the rules” message.
“They stood by and allowed God to be mocked
and His commandments to be scornfully cast aside,” said Schneider.
When asked to compare it to the Pachamama
scandal, he noted that while direct transgression of the First Commandment is
even more grave, the endorsement of sodomy – a sin that cries to Heaven for
vengeance – “amounts to a form of indirect idolatry.”
“Both events must be publicly repaired by
the Pope himself. This is urgently needed, before it is too late, for God will
not be mocked,” said the bishop.
Bishop Francesco Savino, vice president of
the Italian Bishops Conference, welcomed “everyone” to receive Holy Communion
at a Mass for the “pilgrims,” Montagna then pointed out. Schneider affirmed
that assent to “all of the Church’s teaching” is a precondition for receiving
Christ in the Eucharist, as was expressed by St. Paul: “Anyone who eats and
drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. (1 Cor.
11:29).
He added that this has been clearly stated
by the Catechism of the
Catholic Church: “Anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not
receive Communion without having received absolution in the sacrament of
penance” (n.1415).
Furthermore, it notes, “Sacred Scripture
‘presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, [and] tradition has
always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.… Under no
circumstances can they be approved’ (n. 2357).”
Thus, by granting these LGBT groups passage
through the Holy Door and approving their “pilgrimage,” Vatican authorities in
effect rejected “the very doctrine they are bound to uphold.”
Schneider said his message for participants
in the LGBT “pilgrimage” is one of compassion, and he called for all Christians
to show compassion towards not just those living homosexual lifestyles, but
those who support its legitimization and “persist in it unrepentant and even
proudly.”
“For when a person consciously rejects
God’s explicit commandment prohibiting any sexual activity outside a valid
marriage, he places himself in the gravest danger – that of losing eternal life
and being eternally condemned to Hell,” said the prelate.
“True love for such persons consists in
calling them, gently yet persistently, to genuine conversion to God’s revealed
will,” he continued, adding that such people are “ultimately unhappy” even when
they have suppressed their conscience.
“We must be filled with great zeal to save
these souls, to free them from poisonous deceits. Those priests who confirm
them in their homosexual activity or in a homosexual lifestyle are spiritual
criminals, murderers of souls, and God will demand a strict account from them,”
Schneider declared.
To those who defend Pope Leo XIV amid the
Vatican’s approval of the LGBT scandalous “pilgrimage” because he did not
receive a delegation from them or send them a message, Schneider said that “one
cannot reasonably presume naivety on his part,” because it was “entirely
foreseeable” that an LGBT activist group would take advantage of the Holy Door
to promote their sinful lifestyle.
Furthermore, by meeting with Father James
Martin, S.J., a heretical pro-LGBT priest, as well as pro-homosexual “marriage”
Sister Lucia Caram, Pope Leo XIV has expressed that he is not opposed to their
“heterodox and scandalous teaching and behavior – particularly since the Holy
See offered no clarification afterward and did not correct Fr. James Martin’s
triumphant messages circulated on social media,” noted Schneider.
He pointed out that in doing so, Pope Leo
XIV broke with the precedent of all popes before Francis, who “neither received
officially nor posed for photographs with those who, by word or deed, openly
rejected the doctrinal and moral teaching of the Church.”
“There is a common saying that goes: ‘Qui
tacet consentire videtur’ – ’He who is silent is taken to agree,’” Schneider
added.
The prelate called upon all Catholics to “make
a collective act of reparation for the outrage committed against the sanctity
of God’s house and the holiness of His commandments,” and implored Pope Leo XIV
to follow in the footsteps of Pope John Paul II, who Montagna noted had
denounced the first “World Pride” event in Rome during the Great Jubilee of
2000.
“Should Pope Leo XIV make public acts of
regret and even reparation, he will lose nothing; should he fail to do so, he
will forfeit something before the eyes of God – and God alone matters,” said Schneider.
“May Our Holy Father Pope Leo XIV take to
heart the following words of Our Lord which He once spoke through St. Bridget
of Sweden to one of his predecessors (Pope Gregory XI)”:
Uproot, pluck out and destroy all the vices of your court! Separate
yourself from the counsel of carnal-minded and worldly friends and follow
humbly the spiritual counsel of My friends. Get up like a man and clothe
yourself confidently in strength! Start to reform the Church that I purchased
with My Own Blood in order that it may be reformed and led back spiritually to
its pristine state of holiness, for nowadays more veneration is shown to a
brothel than to My Holy Church. My son, heed My counsel. If you obey Me in what
I told you, I will welcome you mercifully like a loving father. Bravely
approach the way of justice and you shall prosper. Do not despise the One Who
loves you. If you obey, I will show you mercy and bless and dress you and adorn
you with the precious pontifical regalia of a holy pope. I shall clothe you with
Myself in such a way that you will be in Me and I in you, and you shall be
glorified in eternity (The Book of Revelations, Book IV, chap. 149).
Argumentum ex concessis
Notes in the Margin of an Article
by Abbé Claude Barthe
For if you live according to the flesh,
you will die;
but if by the Spirit
you put to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live.
Rom 8: 13
The
essay by Abbé Claude Barthe’s, recently published in an Italian translation at
Aldo Maria Valli’s blog Duc in altum [1], deserves some attention.
What is most interesting in it is not so much his assessment of the newly
elected Leo XIV, nor the pragmatic realism with which he recognizes Prevost’s
continuity with his predecessor or calls for a loosening of restrictions on the
traditional liturgy.
Abbé Barthe writes:
There is a paradox, even a risk, for
those who invoke freedom for the traditional liturgy and catechism: that of
being granted a sort of “authorization” for liturgical and doctrinal
Catholicism. We have already cited as an example the paradoxical situation that
arose in the 19th-century French political system, when the most staunch
supporters of the monarchical Restoration, enemies in principle of the modern
freedoms introduced by the Revolution, continually fought to be granted a space
for life and expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of teaching. All
things being equal, in the ecclesiastical system of the 21st century, at least
in the immediate future, a relaxation of the ideological despotism of the
Reformation could be beneficial. But while it may be advantageous in the short
and medium term, it could ultimately prove radically unsatisfactory.
What I believe should be highlighted is
the not-so-veiled warning that Abbé Barthe addresses to those who resort to the
adversary’s arguments to gain legitimacy in the ecclesial world, applying
the argumentum ex concessis [2]. In this case, “those who invoke freedom
for the traditional liturgy and catechism” – and who condemn Bergoglian
synodality – appeal to that same synodality so that the “Summorum Pontificum communities”
may be recognized as one among the many expressions of the composite ecclesial
polyhedron.
Abbé Barthe’s denunciation reveals
not a paradox, but the paradox, the contradiction that
fundamentally undermines any claim to orthodoxy on the part of self-styled
conservatives: the acceptance of the revolutionary principles of the so-called
“synodal church” as the (incomplete, moreover) counterpart to being tolerated
by it. In reality, this exchange is far from equal. The “synodal church” merely
applies to conservatives the same legitimacy of existence it grants to any
other “movement” or “charisma” present in the multifaceted ecclesial fabric,
but it carefully avoids acknowledging that their demands might go beyond a mere
aesthetic and ceremonial concession. The unwritten contract between
conservatives and the post-Bergoglian Hierarchy stipulates that the “liturgical
preferences” of a group of clerics and faithful can be tolerated if and
only if they refrain from highlighting the heterogeneity, incompatibility,
and alienation between the ecclesiology and the entire doctrinal framework
underlying the Vetus Ordo and those expressed in the reformed
Montinian rite.
Abbé Barthe does not ignore the critical
issues: referring to Leo XIV’s Electors, he calls them “all of the conciliar
menagerie,” demonstrating a certain courage, especially considering his public
role and his dependence on those Prelates. Nor does he ignore the
deception embraced by those who exploit religious liberty to invoke
for themselves a tolerance that is not denied even to the worshippers of
Amazonian idols.
The deception is twofold: not only
because of the paradox that Abbé Barthe has rightly highlighted; but also and
above all because of a much worse trap, consisting of accepting at least
implicitly the forced, unnatural, and impossible separation between the
ceremonial form of the rite and its doctrinal substance.
This is an operation
of de-signification of the Liturgy, which consists in being
recognized with the right to celebrate in the Tridentine Rite on the condition
that the celebrant does not also accept the doctrinal and moral implications of
that rite. But if that “Summorum priest” accepts this principle, he must
also accept its inverse application. Indeed, the moment one admits that the
Liturgy can be celebrated without regard for the traditional doctrine it
expresses – a doctrine the “synodal church” does not recognize and considers to
be other than itself – one ends up accepting that even the reformed
liturgy can ignore the errors and heresies it insinuates, errors which no
Catholic worthy of the name can absolutely ratify. In doing so, however, one
plays into the hands of the adversary, under the illusion of being more cunning
than the devil. It all comes down to a question of dress and choreography, of
aesthetics and sentiment that satisfies or does not satisfy personal taste, as
Cardinal Burke’s recent words confirmed: “You don’t take something so rich
in beauty and begin to strip away the beautiful elements without having a
negative effect.” [3] Nothing could be more alien to the mindset of the
Roman Liturgy, according to which the beauty of ceremonies is such because it
is a necessary expression of the Truth it teaches and the Good it practices.
The “synodal church” includes
conservatives in its coveted pantheon not only because it gives them
what they want – solemn pontifical liturgies celebrated by influential
prelates, without doctrinal implications – but also because none of the Holy
See’s interlocutors has the slightest intention of demanding more; and even if
someone were to dare ask for more, the gatekeeper on duty –
literally, the ostiarius –would promptly intervene, calling for
“prudence” and “moderation,” more concerned with preserving his own prestige
than with the fate of the Catholic resistance. This is accompanied by the “Zip
it” [4] policy advocated by Trad Inc. [5], according to which the possible
concessions the moderates hope to obtain from Leo suggest they should not
criticize him openly so as not to alienate him.
The path of being persecuted, ostracized,
and excommunicated do not seem to be among the options for my brothers: it
seems they are already resigned to a fate of tolerance, in which they can
neither be truly Catholic nor fully synodal; neither friends of those who fight
the enemy infiltrated into the Church, nor of those who seek to replace her
with a human surrogate of Masonic inspiration. The Lord will hold these
lukewarm priests accountable with greater severity than He will many poor
parish priests who have other, more pressing pastoral priorities. Let us hope
that Abbé Barthe’s warning does not fall on deaf ears, for the hour of battle
approaches, and to be found defenseless and unprepared, in these circumstances,
would be irresponsible.
And it is precisely in times of
persecution that we must rediscover the relevance and validity of the words of
Saint Vincent of Lérins:
In ipsa item catholica ecclesia magnopere
curandum est ut id teneamus quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum
est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum. [6]
If anything does not meet these three
criteria – semper, ubique, et ab omnibus – it must be rejected as
heretical. This norm protects us from the errors spread by false pastors, in
the serene certainty of acting in accordance with Tradition and thus being able
to compensate, due to the present state of emergency, for the absence of
ecclesiastical authority.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
3 September MMXXV
S.cti Pii X Papæ, Conf.
FOOTNOTES
1 – Abbé Claude Barthe, Leone, il pompiere nella Chiesa
divorata dal fuoco della divisione. Ma quale unità ricerca?, published
at Duc in Altum on August 9, 2025 – https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2025/08/09/analisi-leone-il-pompiere-nella-chiesa-divorata-dal-fuoco-della-divisione-ma-quale-unita-ricerca/ – English translation: https://www.resnovae.fr/the-pontificate-of-leo-xiv-a-transitional-stage/
2 – Argumentum ex concessis is a rhetorical and logical
technique in which an interlocutor uses the premises, arguments, or claims
accepted by an opponent to construct their own argument, often to refute them
or demonstrate the inconsistency of their position. This strategy is based on
the idea of temporarily accepting the opponent’s claims (the “concessions”) and
using them to draw conclusions that either challenge them or support their own
thesis.
3 – Cfr. https://x.com/mljhaynes/status/1954919906492747838
4 – Cfr. https://www.radiospada.org/2025/09/leone-xiv-lipotesi-zip-e-la-contropartita-per-i-conservatori-una-strategia-gia-tentata-e-che-lascia-perplessi-in-7-punti/
5 – “Trad Inc.” is the American expression which refers to
conservative believers and blogs organized like companies, which operate
according to market logic and are dependent on their shareholders.
6 – Commonitorium, 2. “In this same Catholic Church, we must take
the greatest care to maintain what has always been believed, everywhere and by
all; this is in fact truly and properly Catholic.”
COMMENT: It is encouraging
for us who have refused the compromises of faith that conservative Catholics
have made in return for their privileged Indult to have a man of Archbishop Carlo
Maria Viganò's stature
agree and defend what we have been doing at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic
Mission for the last 25 years. We hope and pray that he may have a greater
influence on other resistance bishops and priests.
The proper 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:
3.
If anyone says: that the sacraments of the
New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be
anathema.
4.
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.’”
St. Eugene IV, Cantate Domino
Ladislaus, CathInfo
John Cardinal Newman, another Novus Ordo "saint" soon to be
declared a "Doctor" of the Novus Ordo Church, comments following the
dogmatic declaration of papal infallibility.
“But
we must hope, for one is obliged to hope it, that the Pope (Pius IX) will be
driven from Rome, and will not continue the Council (Vatican I), or that there
will be another Pope. It is sad he should force us to such wishes.”
John
H. Newman, Letter to his companion, Fr. Ambrose St. John, 22 August, 1870
“We
have come to a climax of tyranny. It is not good for a Pope to live 20 years.
It is anomaly and bears no good fruit; he becomes a god, has no one to
contradict him, does not know facts, and does cruel things without meaning it.”
John
H. Newman, The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, v. XXVI by Charles
Stephen Dessain
"This (Divine) law, as apprehended in
the minds of individual men, is called "conscience;" and though it
may suffer refraction in passing into the intellectual medium of each, it is
not therefore so affected as to lose its character of being the Divine Law, but
still has, as such, the prerogative of commanding obedience."
John Henry Cardinal Newman
"It seems, then, that there are
extreme cases in which Conscience may come into collision with the word of a
Pope, and is to be followed in spite of that word."
John Henry Cardinal Newman
COMMENT: Pope Gregory XVI
said, "This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and
erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be
maintained for everyone." Conscience is not the Divine Law. St. Thomas
says that, "Conscience is nothing else than the application of knowledge to
some action." He is referring to the knowledge of the Law of God. The Law
of God, whether the eternal law or the positive revealed law of God, is the
objective criteria by which the conscience is obligated to use as the standard
by which any judgment regarding the moral goodness or evil of any particular
act is made. All men are obligated to
obey their conscience because they are obligated to apprehend the objective
Divine Law as the proper criteria. They are not free to invent their personal
subjective criteria in determining what is the right or the wrong thing to
do. Liberalism claims the exact
opposite. It is a fundamental axiom of liberalism that the conscience is free
to establish its own moral criteria. This has been condemned by popes Gregory
XVI, PiusIX and Pius X. John Henry Cardinal Newman can be identified as the
"Spirit of Vatican II."
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
The woman saith to him: Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our
fathers adored on this mountain, and you say, that at Jerusalem is the place
where men must adore. Jesus saith to her: Woman, believe me, that the hour
cometh, when you shall neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, adore the
Father. You adore that which you know not: we adore that which we know; for
salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true
adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also
seeketh such to adore him. God is a spirit; and they that adore him, must adore
him in spirit and in truth.
John 4:19-24
Novus Ordo Doctrine: Moslems and Novus Ordo Catholics
Worship the same God!
CCC 841, quoting the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,
Lumen Gentium 16, from Vatican II, declared:
"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the
Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold
the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God,
mankind’s judge on the last day."
CCC 841 also references Vatican II’s Declaration on the Relation of the Church
to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate,
3, that makes the teaching of the Council perhaps even clearer:
"The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the
one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the
Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit
wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the
faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to
God."
Catholic Church Doctrine: Catholics and Moslems DO
NOT worship the same God.
“Now
the Samaritans had a false idea of God in two ways. First of all, because they
thought He was corporeal, so that they believed that He should be adored in
only one definite corporeal place. Further, because they did not believe that
He transcended all things, but was equal to certain creatures, they adored
along with Him certain idols, as if they were equal to Him. Consequently, they
did not know Him, because they did not attain to a true knowledge of Him. So
the Lord says, you adore that which you do not know [John 4:22], that is, you do not adore God
because you do not know Him, but rather your imagination, by which you
apprehend something as God, just as the Gentiles also walk in the foolishness
of their mind (Eph 4:17).” St.
Thomas Aquinas, Commentary On John 4:22
“How
then did the Samaritans know not what they worshipped? Because they thought
that God was local and partial; so at least they served Him, and so they sent
to the Persians, and reported that the God of this place is angry with us [2
Kings 26], in this respect
forming no higher opinion of Him than of their idols. Wherefore they continued
to serve both Him and devils, joining things which ought not to be joined.” St. John Chrysostom, Homily 33 On The Gospel
of John
COMMENT: When
Jesus said to the Samaritan Woman, "You adore that which you know
not," He is not saying that they adore the One True God that they are
ignorant of. He is saying, that in their ignorance they do not know who they
are adoring meaning that they are adoring in ignorance a devil, for "all
the gods of the gentiles are devils" (Psalm 95:5). Jesus then says, that
"true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth..... they that
adore him, must adore him in spirit and in truth." To adore in
"spirit" means that to adore God you must be baptized and made sons
of God for as Jesus said: "Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born
again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God That
which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is
spirit" (John 3:5-7). And to adore in "truth" means who must
believe what has been revealed by God. Without the true faith it is "impossible
to please God" (Hebrews 11:6). As such, right knowledge of God is
essential to true worship. This is the great sin of Modernism and
Neo-modernism: They make a right knowledge of God impossible!
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
Catholic
Faith:
Physical
substances come into being through the union of substantial form and primary
matter. The Soul is the Substantial Form of the Human Body; it is immortal and
will be judged after the death of the person and directed to Heaven or Hell for
all eternity awaiting to be joined again to its Body at the Resurrection of the
Dead for the Last Judgment.
“In order that
all may know the truth of the faith in its purity and all error may be
excluded, we define that anyone who presumes henceforth to assert defend or
hold stubbornly that the rational or intellectual soul is not the form of the
human body of itself and essentially, is to be considered a heretic.”
Council of
Vienne
Neo-Modernists
Ideology: [Ratzinger quotes provided by James Larson, War Against Being]
“The medieval
concept of substance has long since become inaccessible to us.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Faith and the Future
“The proper
Christian thing, therefore, is to speak, not of the soul’s immortality, but of
the resurrection of the complete human being [at the Final Judgment] and of
that alone… The idea that to speak of the soul is unbiblical was accepted to
such an extent that even the new Roman Missal (i.e.: the Novus Ordo) suppressed
the term anima in its liturgy for the dead. It also disappeared from the ritual
for burial.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
“‘The soul’ is our term for that in us which
offers a foothold for this relation [with the eternal]. Soul is nothing other
than man’s capacity for relatedness with truth, with love eternal.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
“The challenge
to traditional theology today lies in the negation of an autonomous,
‘substantial’ soul with a built-in immortality in favor of that positive view
which regards God’s decision and activity as the real foundation of a
continuing human existence.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
And those who
have denied the reality of substantial
being are those who are responsible for the “dictatorship of relativism.”
“Every
day new sects are created and what Saint Paul says about human trickery comes
true, with cunning which tries to draw those into error (Eph 4, 14).
Having a clear faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labelled today
as a fundamentalism. Whereas, relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed
and ‘swept along by every wind of teaching,’ looks like the only attitude
(acceptable) to today’s standards. We are moving towards a dictatorship of
relativism which does not recognise anything as for certain and which has as
its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.”
Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, Homily of the Dean of the College of Cardinals, 2005
Sacrament of Baptism: Significance of the Baptismal
Character and why it is absolutely necessary for salvation. Explains why St.
Ambrose said regarding catechumens who die before receiving the sacrament of
Baptism, they are “forgiven but not crowned”.
To be baptized is to become one with the
Church, and one with Christ. Thus
the ritual can say: “enter into the temple of God, that you may have part with
Christ, unto life everlasting.” The two ideas are correlative: to be
baptized into the Church and to be baptized into Christ; they are the visible
and invisible aspects of the same real effect. [….]
The effecting this incorporation into
Christ, Baptism marks the soul as permanently His; it stamps upon the soul a
spiritual “character”, or, as antiquity more commonly called it, a “seal”. For this reason, and putting the cause for
the effect, the rite of Baptism was itself called “the seal”, or “the seal of
faith”, or “the seal of water”, or “the seal of the Trinity” (which last
appellation endures still in the liturgical prayers for the dying, wherein God
is asked to remember His promises to the soul that in its lifetime was “stamped
with the seal of the Most Holy Trinity”).
The word “seal” derives from a group of
texts in St. Paul, which suggest this stamping of the soul at Baptism: “And in
Him (Christ), you too, when you had heard the word of truth, the good news of
your salvation, and believed in it, were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the
promise” (Eph. 1:13); “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in Whom you
were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph. 4:30). However, nowadays we are
accustomed to speak rather of the baptismal “character”, a term that suggests
the text wherein Christ is called “the brightness of His (the Father’s) glory
and the image (in Greek, character) of His substance” (Hebr. 1:3).
Basically, two words give the same meaning:
a seal imprints an image, and a “character”, in the original sense of the word,
means image. Baptism, therefore, stamps the soul with the image of Christ, Who
is Himself the image of the Father. And in the Scripture, this stamping is
attributed to the Holy Spirit, Who is the Spirit of Christ. The fact that we
are stamped with such a character is clearly defined by the Council of Trent:
“If anyone says that by the three Sacraments, to wit, Baptism,
Confirmation and Orders, there is not imprinted in the soul a Character, that
is a certain spiritual and indelible sign on account of which they cannot be
repeated; let him be anathem.” (Denz. 852).
The Council of Trent teaches that this
seal, once stamped on the soul, is indelible. Just as Baptism irrevocable makes
one a member of the Church, so also it irrevocably makes one a member of
Christ. Not the gravest sin, nor even final impenitence and self-condemnation
to eternal separation from Christ in Hell, can avail to erase this baptismal
seal. And the indelibility of the seal is the immediate reason why Baptism can
never be repeated, once it has been validly received. [….]
The sense in which Baptism stamps us with
the image of Christ is suggested in the rite itself, by the anointing which
follows the ablution. It is done with Sacred Chrism, a mixed unguent of oil and
balm, specially consecrated by the bishop on Holy Thursday. Kings and priests
in antiquity (and even today) were anointed with chrism in token of their royal
and priestly dignity. And the baptism anointing signifies, therefore, that the
new Christian has entered into the “royal priesthood” of the Christian people,
and shares in the royal Priesthood of Christ Himself. He bears the image of
Christ, inasmuch as Christ was the Priest of all humanity, Who offered Himself
in sacrifice on the Cross.
The baptismal seal or character, therefore,
endows the Christian with a priestly function, and a priestly power. It is not
that special power and function given by the Sacrament of Holy Orders to
certain selected members of the Church, who are made her official ministers,
and authorized to offer her sacrifice and dispense her Sacraments. But it is
the priestly function and power which is common to all the members of the Body
of Christ. As He was born as Priest, His whole life orientated toward the
Passion and Death which was His priestly Sacrifice, so too, they are priests
from their birth into the Christian life at Baptism; and their lives are
essentially orientated toward sacrifice, in a double sense.
First of all, they receive a function and a
power with respect to the ritual Sacrifice of the Church, which is the Mass.
[….] They are empowered to assist actively in the offering of the Mass, as
members of the Church, in whose name her specially qualified members, priests
and bishops, offer the Mass, which is the sacrifice of the whole Church through
her official ministers. In union with the Priest, the Christian offers up
Christ as a Victim Who belongs to him and to Whom he belongs. An unbaptized
person cannot do this….
Secondly, the baptismal character
consecrates the Christian to sacrifice in a wider sense: it gives him the
function, the duty, the power to lead a life of sacrifice, since He is in the
image of Christ whose life was one long sacrifice – a life of complete
obedience to the will of His Father: “I seek not My own will, but the will of
Him Who sent Me” (Jn. 3:50).The will of the Father is the supreme law of the
Christian’s life; it is all embracing and all pervasive; and constant and total
obedience to it necessarily gives a sacrificial quality to the whole of life,
since it demands the renunciation of many ideas, and a steady refusal to be led
by one’s own emotions or to seek one’s own pleasure and profit – in a word, it
demands the sacrifice of selfishness in all its forms. St. Peter, therefore,
was thinking of Baptism when he wrote:
“Lay aside therefore all malice and all deceit, and pretense, and envy,
and all slander…. Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon (i.e., on
Christ) into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual
sacrifices to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:1,5).
Rev. John J. Fernan, S.J., Theology, Christ
Our High Priest, Baptismal Seal
Pius XII - the man responsible for planting the seed of
liturgical destruction!
Fr. Annibale Bugnini had been making
clandestine visits to the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique (CPL), a progressivist
conference centre for liturgical reform which organized national weeks for
priests.
Inaugurated in Paris in 1943 on the private initiative of two Dominican priests
under the presidency of Fr. Lambert Beauduin, it was a magnet for all who
considered themselves in the vanguard of the Liturgical Movement. It would play
host to some of the most famous names who influenced the direction of Vatican
II: Frs. Beauduin, Guardini, Congar, Chenu, Daniélou, Gy, von Balthasar, de
Lubac, Boyer, Gelineau etc.
It could, therefore, be considered as the
confluence of all the forces of Progressivism, which saved and re-established
Modernism condemned by Pope Pius X in Pascendi.
According to its
co-founder and director, Fr. Pie Duployé, OP, Bugnini had requested a
“discreet” invitation to attend a CPL study week held near Chartres in
September 1946.
Much more was involved here than the issue of secrecy. The person whose
heart beat as one with the interests of the reformers would return to Rome to
be placed by an unsuspecting (?) Pope (Pius XII) in charge of his Commission
for the General Reform of the Liturgy.
But someone in the Roman Curia did know about the CPL – Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini, the acting
Secretary of State and future Paul VI – who sent a telegram to the CPL dated
January 3, 1947. It purported to come from the Pope with an apostolic blessing.
If, in Bugnini’s estimation, the Roman authorities were to be kept in the dark
about the CPL so as not to compromise its activities, a mystery remains. Was
the telegram issued under false pretences, or did Pius XII really know and
approve of the CPL? [.....]
This agenda (for liturgical reform) was set
out as early as 1949 in the Ephemerides
Liturgicae, a leading Roman review on liturgical studies of which Fr.
Annabale Bugnini was Editor from 1944 to 1965.
First, Bugnini denigrated
the traditional liturgy as a dilapidated building (“un vecchio edificio”),
which should be condemned because it was in danger of falling to pieces
(“sgretolarsi”) and, therefore, beyond repair. Then, he criticized it for its
alleged “deficiencies, incongruities and difficulties,” which rendered it
spiritually “sterile” and would prevent it appealing to modern sensibilities.
It is difficult to understand how, in the same year that he published this
anti-Catholic diatribe, he was made a Professor of Liturgy in Rome’s Propaganda
Fide (Propagation of the Faith) University. His solution was to return to the
simplicity of early Christian liturgies and jettison all subsequent
developments, especially traditional devotions.
These ideas expressed in 1949 would form the foundational principles of Vatican
II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium. For all practical purposes, the Roman Rite was
dead in the water many years before it was officially buried by Paul VI.
Dr. Carol Byrne, How Bugnini Grew Up under Pius XII
Wisdom is only
possible for those who hold DOGMA as the Rule of Faith!
Besides, every dogma of faith is to the
Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also an
incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and derive
other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that the
beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear of
exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which if
they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to
contain the books that should be written.”
The Catholic Church, by enforcing firm belief
in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were given by Jesus
Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it from going
astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the mind from
exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine truth, and
a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a man that is
a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.” He
may bring forth new illustrations, new arguments and proofs; he may show now
applications of the same truths, according to times and circumstances; he may
show new links which connect the mysteries of religion with each other or with
the natural sciences as there can be no discord between the true faith and true
science; God, being the author of both, cannot contradict Himself and teach
something by revelation as true which He teaches by the true light of reason as
false. In all these cases the householder “brings forth from his treasure new
things and old.” They are new inasmuch as they are the result of new investigations;
and old because they are contained in the old articles of faith and doctrine as
legitimate deductions from their old principles.
Fr. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The Church of
Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Saviour, on the Parable of the Scribe
Baptism imprints in your soul a
spiritual character, which no sin can efface. This character is a proof that
from this time you do not belong to yourself, but that you are the property of
Jesus Christ, who has purchased you by the infinite price of his blood and of
his death. You are not of yourself, but you are of Christ; wherefore,
St. Paul concludes, “that the Christian should no longer live for himself, but
for Him who died and rose again for him;” that is to say, that the Christian
should live a life of grace, and that he should consecrate to his Redeemer his
spirit, his heart, and all his actions. […..]
First, is true
penance; for, as the holy Council of Trent teaches, penance is no less
necessary for those who have sinned after Baptism, than Baptism is necessary
for those who have not received it. The Holy Scripture informs us, that there
are two gates by which we are to enter into heaven—baptismal innocence, and
penance. When a Christian has shut against himself the gate of innocence, in violating
the holy promises of Baptism, it is necessary that he should strive to enter by
that of penance; otherwise there is no salvation for him. On this account,
Jesus Christ, speaking of persons who have lost innocence, says to them:
“Unless you do penance, you shall all perish.”
But in order
that penance may prevent us from perishing—it must be true Penance. Confessors
may be deceived by the false appearance of conversion, and it is too often the
case; but God is never deceived. If, therefore, those who receive absolution
are not truly penitent and worthy of pardon, their sins are not forgiven before
God. In order to do true penance, it is not sufficient to confess all our sins
and to fulfill what is enjoined on us by the priest. There are two other things
which are necessary: First; to renounce sin with all your heart, and for all
your life… and second; to fly the occasions of sin, and to use the means to
avoid it.
St. John Eudes,
Man’s Contract with God in Baptism
Again, in the Office for the feasts of our Lady,
the Church applies the words of Sirach to the Blessed Virgin and thus
gives us to understand that in her we find all hope: In me is all
hope of life and of virtue. In Mary is every grace: In me is all
grace of the way and of the truth. In Mary we shall find life and eternal
salvation: Those who serve me shall never fail. Those who explain me
shall have life everlasting (Sir. 24:25, 30, 31--- Vulgate). And in the Book
of Proverbs: Those who find me find life and win favor from the Lord (8:35).
Surely such expressions are enough to prove that we require the intercession of
Mary.
St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary
THE NOVUS ORDO CHURCH OF SLOTH AND ENVY
The first effect of charity is joy in the goodness
of God. But this joy can only live through the union of man’s will with God in
charity. And charity demands that man keep all the commandments. Charity
demands a fellowship in good between God and man. When the effort to live in
this fellowship in good begins to appear too difficult to man he begins to be
sorrowful about the infinite goodness of God. This sorrow weighs down the
spirit of man and leads him to neglect good. This sorrow is the sin of sloth,
sorrow about the goodness of God. Sloth is a capital sin. It leads men into
other sins. To avoid the sorrow or weariness of spirit which is sloth men will
turn from God to the sinful pleasures of the world.
When a man falls victim to sloth and is sorrowful
because of the goodness of God it is only natural that he will begin to be
grieved also at the manifestation of the goodness of God in other men. He will
resent good men simply because they are good. This resentment is envy, hatred
of someone else’s good. Since the love of our neighbor flows from our love of
God, it is natural that when we cease to love God’s goodness, we will also
begin to hate the goodness of men. Envy, like sloth, is a capital sin. It will
lead men to commit other sins to destroy the goodness of their neighbors.
When a man’s heart is filled with sloth and envy
the interior peace of his soul which was the effect of charity is destroyed.
The loss of the interior peace leads to the destruction of the peace of
society. When a man’s heart is no longer centered in God, then his life loses
all proper direction. When the love of God is gone he has nothing left but the
love of himself. When a man loves himself without loving God then he can brook
no opposition to his own judgment or arbitrary will. He can tolerate goodness
in no one else. He will even, by the sin of scandal, by his own words and
example, lead other men into sin. He must disagree with all men. He must
dispute with them, separate himself from them, quarrel with them, go to war
with them, set the whole of the community at war with itself.
Wherever the goodness of God is most manifest,
there will the heart of the man who no longer loves God be most energetic in
sowing the seeds of discord, contentiousness, strife and war. That is why
religion and the true Church of God are so viciously attacked in the world
today. Those who do not love God are driven by sloth and envy to attack God’s
tabernacle on earth.
Fr. Walter Farrell and Fr. Martin Healy, My Way of Life, Pocket Edition of St. Thomas
Amoris Laetitia was published in
2016. No answer or corrective action to this "appeal" was ever made.
That is because no clarification was ever needed. Why? That is because the
"numerous propositions in Amoris Laetitia (that) can be construed as
heretical upon the natural reading of the text" is exactly what the author
intended! So in 2016 these "academics and pastors" did "not
accusing the pope of heresy", but what about now?
“Amoris Laetitia.... scandalous, erroneous in faith, and
ambiguous...”
Catholic academics and pastors appeal to the College of Cardinals over Amoris Laetitia
A group of Catholic academics and
pastors has submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College
of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic
Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of
erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the
post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris
laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various
languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218
living at present.
Describing the exhortation as
containing “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is
contrary to Catholic faith and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with
their appeal, a documented list of applicable theological censures specifying “the
nature and degree of the errors that could be attributed to Amoris laetitia.”
Among the 45 signatories are
Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various
pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes,
religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of
Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope’s official advisers, to approach the
Holy Father with a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document
in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of
them to be believed or considered as possibly true.”
“We are not accusing the pope of
heresy,” said a spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous propositions
in Amoris laetitia can be construed
as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional statements would
fall under other established theological censures, such as scandalous,
erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.” [......]
Atheists are really anti-theists. They oppose the God who
is God with an idol of their own making.
No atheist chooses merely to deny God. For the
atheist’s spiritual posture against God is at the same time his posture in
preference for some other Being above God. As he dismisses the true God he is
welcoming his New God. Why must this be so? Because every personal commitment
of man presupposes, deep in the metaphysical core of his being, a hunger for
being as truth and goodness. Man is intrinsically burdened with an incurable
hunger for transcendence. If being abhors a vacuum, the vacuum it most
violently shrinks from is the total absence of Infinite Being. And history
demonstrates that man is inconsolable without the True God.
Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., The Gods of Atheism
‘When men
choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they
believe in anything.’
There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin
their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale (of the
Catholic faith). This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith;
that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own
fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes. … (The atheist fanatic)
sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He
offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the
altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary
ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some
one who (he affirms) never lived at all.
G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy
“Cultivate a great desire to be firmly rooted in
the sublime virtue of
confidence. Do not fear, but be courageous in serving and loving our
Most Adorable and Amiable Jesus, with great perfection and holiness. Undertake
courageously great tasks for His glory, in proportion to the power and grace He
will give you for this end. Even though you can do nothing of yourself, you can
do all things in Him and His help will never fail you, if you have confidence in His goodness.
Place your entire physical and spiritual welfare in His hands. Abandon to the
paternal solicitude of His Divine Providence every care for your health,
reputation, property and business, for those near to you, for your past sins,
for your soul’s progress in virtue and love of Him, for your life, death, and
especially for your salvation and eternity, in a word, all your cares. Rest in the assurance that, in
His pure goodness, He will watch with particular tenderness over all
your responsibilities and cares and dispose all things for the greatest good.”
St. John Eudes, The
Life and Kingdom of Jesus in Christian Souls
Cardinal Burke offers the
correction for two mistranslations in the English publication of the Motu
proprio of Pope Francis, “TRADITIONIS CUSTODES”
Art. 1. The
liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI (sic) and Saint John Paul II
(sic), in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique only expression of
the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
Art. 4. Priests
ordained after the publication of the present Motu Proprio, who wish to
celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962, should must submit a formal
request to the diocesan Bishop who shall consult the Apostolic See before
granting this authorization.
"Not a stone upon a stone" - 9th Sunday after
Pentecost
The 'Western Wall' (Wailing Wall) in
Jerusalem is held by Jews as a remnant of Herod's Temple destroyed by the
Romans in 72 A.D. Yet, Jesus prophesized not only that the Temple would be
destroyed but also that there would not remain a "stone upon a
stone." So how is it that there remains a large wall on the western side
at the south end of the 'Temple Mount'? Some Catholics claim the prophecy of
Jesus was referring only to the edifice itself and not the entire foundation
for the Temple. Jesus words must be taken in literally unless there it is
clearly manifest that the metaphorical sense is intended exclusively.
Therefore, the 'Wailing Wall' where the Jews worship is not a remnant of the
ancient Temple, and the 'Temple Mount', on which is currently situated the
Al-Aqsa mosque and the "Dome of the Rock", is not the location of the
Temple destroyed in 72 A.D. The 36 acre 'Temple Mount' is actually the location
of the Roman fortress Antonia built by Herod.
What is the evidence for this? The current
popular claim is the fortress Antonia was located on a five-acre section on the
north-west side of the 'Temple Mount' while the Temple occupied the remaining
30 acres. Five acres is far too small to accommodate a Roman legion (6,000
soldiers plus auxiliary staff) which we know from the writings of Flavius
Josephus that the fortress Antonia did in fact hold. Many Roman fortresses have
been examined by archeologists and they typically are between 45 and 55 acres
but some are as small as 36 acres. As far as the area needed for the Temple of Herod
itself, consider this, the ancient pagan temple complex at Baalek in Lebanon
built by the Romans is less than six acres in total area and encloses the
largest temple to Jupiter in the Roman Empire as well as a smaller temple
dedicated to Bacchus and another to Venus. The Temple built by Herod was a
single temple and much smaller in overall dimensions.
Furthermore, when Solomon was designated by
King David to succeed him (3 Kings 1), King David directed the prophet Nathan
and the high priest Sadoc to take Solomon on the king's mule to be anointed
king at the "Gihon spring" with oil taken from the tabernacle. The
Gihon spring is located in the City of David directly south and adjacent to the
present-day 'Temple Mount'. There Solomon was anointed with oil taken from the
Tabernacle, proclaimed king and celebrated by the populace with great
jubilation and the sounding of trumpets that could be heard outside the city.
The Temple built by Solomon was in the same location as the Tabernacle
established by King David on the threshing floor of the land he purchased
Areuna the Jebusite as God had commanded by the mouth of Gad (2 Kings 24 and 2
Paralipomenon 3:1).
The water from the Gihon spring was
essential for the sacrificial offerings of the Temple. There is no living water
source on the 'Temple Mount' which was required in the washing of the priests
and the sacrifices offered. The water source for the Antonia fortress was
provided by large cisterns located just north of the Antonia fortress and under
the 'Temple Mount' that are still present today.
There is a Catholic tradition the there was
a church called the Church of the Judgment that was built over and enclosed the
Rock that is now enclosed under the Dome of the Rock built by the Moslems in
692 A.D. The Dome of the Rock is located directly north of the Al-Aqsa mosque
on the 'Temple Mount'. The Church of the Judgment was destroyed either by the
Persians who conquered Jerusalem in 614 A.D. with the help of 26,000 Jewish
allies during the Byzantine-Sasanian War 602-628 A.D. (during which many
churches were destroyed including the Church of the Ascension on Mount Olivet),
or the church was destroyed by the Moslems who conquered Jerusalem in 637 A.D.
No living Jew at the time would have knowledge of the exact location of Herod's
Temple because the Jews were forbidden to enter Jerusalem by the Romans since
the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 A.D. on the pain of death. Two hundred years
later, the Catholic emperor Constantine permitted the Jews to enter Jerusalem
once a year on the feast of Tisha B'Av (the ninth of Av) which is regarded as
the saddest day in the Jewish calendar because it is the anniversary of the
destruction of both the Temple of Solomon and the Temple of Herod! Be that as
it may, many of the pillars used in the construction of the interior of the
Dome of the Rock have Christian markings indicating that they were salvaged
from a destroyed Catholic church.
The Rock itself is regarded (WIKI) as
The Foundation Stone (Hebrew אֶבֶן
הַשְּׁתִיָּה, romanized: ʾEḇen
haŠeṯīyyā, lit. 'Foundation Stone'), or the Noble
Rock (Arabic:الصخرة
المشرفة, romanized: al-Saḵrah al-Mušarrafah, lit. 'The
Noble Stone') is the rock enclosed by the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. It is
also known as the Pierced Stone, because it has a small hole on the
southeastern corner that enters a cavern beneath the rock, known as the Well of
Souls. Traditional Jewish sources mention the stone as the place from
which the creation of the world began. Jewish sources also identify its
location with that of the Holy of Holies. Yet, it is not possible for a
threshing floor to be around a large rock or stone.
Before the Muslim conquest, the Rock was
enclosed in the Catholic church known as the Church of the Judgment (destroyed
by the Persians) because it is believed to have been the place where the
condemned stood to hear the judgment against them by the Roman authorities. The
Rock is held to be where Jesus stood when His official condemnation was decreed
by Pontius Pilate and thus, if it is the stone where the "creation of the
world began," it is the stone from which the creation of the world began
anew. John 19:13 says: "Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought
Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called
Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew Gabbatha." Lithostrotos in Greek refers to a
stone and Gabbatha in Hebrew an elevated place. According to St. Mary Agreda
after Jesus was condemned by Pilate the decree of condemnation, which she
quotes in its entirety, was then formally read to the Jewish mob assembled
outside the north entrance to Fortress Antonia where Jesus was taken to bear
His cross.
Of the Temple of Herod destroyed in 72 A.D.
there does not remain a "stone upon a stone".
Leo XIV Reinstates Convicted Child-Porn Priest who was protected by
Francis
Carlo Alberto Capella was
Vatican diplomat who was convicted by a Vatican tribunal of possessing and
sharing child pornography. Capella admitted guilt to the charges. He is the
only one who has served a prison sentence in the Vatican jail for this crime or
for any sexually related crime against minors.
Monsignor Capella was ordained a priest in
1993 for the Archdiocese of Milan. After studies of canon law he entered
the Vatican diplomatic corps. He was assigned to the papal nunciature in India
in 2003 and to the nunciature in Hong Kong in 2007. In 2008 he was created Chaplain of His Holiness,
which entitled him to the title of Monsignor. In 2011 he was
transferred to the Vatican to serve in the Secretariat of State. In 2016 he was
assigned to the papal nunciature to the United States.
In 2017, Capella was recalled to the
Vatican by Pope Francis after United States officials informed the Vatican
that he was under investigation for possession and sharing of child
pornography. The government of Canada has issued a warrant for his arrest,
alleging that during his time in Canada in December, 2016 he had possessed and
shared child pornography. He was returned to the Vatican which claimed
diplomatic immunity for Capella protecting him from prosecution in the United
State or Canada.
In 2018, he was convicted and sentenced to
five years in prison, which he served in the Vatican jail. As of 2021, he was
allowed out during the day to work in an office that sells papal blessings. In
2023, following the end of his prison sentence, Capella was permitted to return
to work in the Vatican Secretariat of State.
Now Pope Leo XIV has reinstated Msgr. Capella to a senior diplomatic
position in the Vatican Secretariat of State.
COMMENT: Pope Leo is protégé
of Francis to whom he owns his promotions to bishop and cardinal. It was
Francis who protected this pervert from criminal charges in the United States
and in Canada and now it is Francis' protégé who has restored him the a high
level position in the Vatican. This does not portend well for any serious
reform of the Novus Ordo Church which has become a sinecure for homosexuals and
others perverts.
From Tradition In Action:
You don't have to be a liturgical EXPERT to see that there is no essential difference in the act!
The question is: Is there any essential
difference in the actors?
Top: St. Patrick Catholic Church, Chatham, New Jersey, August 22, 2021
Bottom: First Lutheran Church, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, July 6, 2025
PREVIOUS
BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED
HOME | About Us
| Open Letters
| Make a
Contribution | Directions | Contact Us
|
Pearl of York | Mass Schedule | List of Closed
Parishes in the Diocese of Harrisburg |
| Announcements |
Why Move to
Central Pennsylvania? | Canned Answers
to Stale Objections
