..... this missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used ..... Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. ..... Accordingly, no one whatsoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, direction, will, decree and prohibition. Should any person venture to do so, let him understand he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
Pope St. Pius V, Papal Bull, QUO PRIMUM,
Tridentine Codification of the traditional Roman Rite of the Mass.
Fourth Sunday after Pentecost
St. Silverius, Pope, Martyr
June 20, 2021
The leading thought in today’s liturgy is again that of trust in God in the midst of struggles and trials. This thought springs from the reading of the story of David in the Breviary as well as from an incident in the life of St. Peter, these being the two elements very different in themselves, from which are drawn the various parts of the Mass.
When almighty God had rejected Saul because of his pride, He told Samuel to anoint as king, the youngest son of Jesse, still a young boy. Samuel anointed him in the midst of his family, while from that day the spirit of God departed from Saul and descended upon David.
Soon after, the Philistines wishing to renew the war, assembled their army on the slope of a mountain while Saul drew up his in a similar position, in such a way that they were separated only be a valley with a mountain stream. From out of the Philistines’ camp came the giant, Goliath, having “a helmet of brass upon his head and he was clothed with a coat of mail. And he had greaves of brass on his legs and a buckler of brass covered his shoulders. And the stall of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and the head of his spear weighed six hundred sicles of iron. And standing he cried out to the bands of Israel and said to them: ‘Am I not a Philistine and you the servants of Saul? Choose one a man of you and let him come down and fight hand to hand. If he be able to fight with me and kill me we will be servants to you; but if I prevail against him, and kill him, you shall be servants, and shall serve us.’ And Saul and all the Israelites hearing these words of the Philistines were dismayed and greatly afraid.”
For forty days the Philistine came forward morning and evening, renewing his challenge which not one had the courage to accept. At this juncture young David visited Saul’s camp, where his brothers were, and hearing Goliath and witnessing the terror of Israel cried out full of faith: “Who is this uncircumcised Philistine, who hath dared to curse the army of the living God? Let not any man’s heart be dismayed in him. I, thy servant, will go and will fight against the Philistine.” And Saul said to David: “Go, and the Lord be with thee.”
Then David, taking his staff and sling, crossed the bed of the stream and choosing five smooth stones went boldly forward to meet the Philistine Goliath, who seeing a mere lad coming towards him exclaimed with great contempt: “Am I a dog that thou comest to me with a staff?” And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. And David said to the Philistine: “I came to thee in the name of the Lord of Hosts, the God of the armies of Israel which thou hast defied. And all this assembly shall know, that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear; for it is His battle and He will deliver you into our hands.”
“The Children of Israel,” says St. Augustine, “had been for forty days face to face with the enemy. By these forty days, because of the four seasons and four quarters of the world, is represented this present life during which the Lord’s people are never without the necessity of fighting a Goliath and his army, that is the devil and his angels. Nonetheless, they would never gain the victory, if Christ, the true David, had not come down to earth with His staff, that is the mystery of His Cross. For David, a type of Christ, stepped from the ranks, took his staff in his hand and went forth against the giant so that in his person we see prefigured what came to pass later on in the case of our Lord Himself. For Christ, the true David, who came to fight the spiritual Goliath, that is the devil, Himself carried His cross. Observe the precise spot where Goliath was struck by David. It was on his forehead where he had not the sign of the cross. In the same way that the staff represented the cross, so the stone which struck Goliath was a figure of Christ, our Lord (2nd Nocturn).
The army of Israel is the Church who endured the humiliations inflicted upon her by her enemies. She groans while waiting for her deliverance (Epistle). She asks the Lord who is “a refuge of the poor in tribulation” (Alleluia). And who is “a refuge” and “deliverer” (Communion) to come to her assistance, lest the enemy say: “I have prevailed against her” (Offertory). With confidence she cries: “Help us O Lord our Savior, and for the honor of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us” (Gradual). “The Lord is my light and my salvation: whom shall I Fear? The Lord is the protector of my life, of whom shall I be afraid? If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. My enemies that trouble me have themselves been weakened and have fallen” (Introit).
It is that under the guidance of Providence, that the Church renders “glad service” to God “in peace” (Collect). This is also clear from the Gospel, chosen because of the nearness of the feast kept on the 29th of June; in fact a Gospel book (Evangeliarium) of Wurtzburg actually calls this Doininica ante natalem Apostolorum (Sunday before the heavenly birthday of the Apostles).
It was from Peter’s boat that our Lord chose to preach; it was Simon Peter that He told to launch out into the deep, and it was he who, at the Master’s word of command, laid down the nets which became so full that they broke. Finally, it was Peter who overcome with astonishment and fear, adored His Master and was chosen by Him as a fisher of men.
“St. Matthew,” St. Ambrose tells us, “describes this boat as tossed by the waves, while St. Luke describes it as full of fish; here we have a picture of the Church’s vicissitudes in her early days and of her wonderful prosperity later on. The vessel which carries divine Wisdom and which is wafted by the wind of Faith runs no danger. What indeed can it fear, when for its pilot it has Him who is the very strength of the Church? Peril is encountered when Faith is rare; but here there is safety since love is perfect (3rd Nocturn).
Commenting on a Gospel which is very similar to this, in which St. John records a miraculous drought of fishes which took place after our Lord’s resurrection, St. Gregory writes: “What does the sea represent, if not the present age in which the changes and chances of this mortal life are like waves which unceasingly dash and break against each other? Of what is the firm ground of the shore a figure if not the permanence of eternal rest? Because the disciples were still surrounded by the waves of this mortal life, they toiled on the sea; and as our Redeemer had put off the corruptibility of the flesh after His resurrection, He stood on the shore.”
Again in St. Matthew, our Lord compares the Kingdom of heaven to “a net cast into the sea and gathering together all kinds of fishes. Which, when it was filled they drew out; and sitting by the shore, they chose out the good fishes but the bad they cast forth.”
In the same way Baptism was represented in the Catacombs by a fisher drawing a fish out of the water. Here then, is the function of the Church whose head is Peter, “to fish for men”, to free souls from the dangers they encounter in the world represented by the sea. “Certainly a new method of fishing,” says St. John Chrysostom. “For fishers drew their fish from the water to kill them, but we cast our nets into the water and those whom we take are made alive.” And St. Gregory says, in today’s homily: “The apostles’ net do not destroy those whom they catch, but preserve them, bringing them from the bottom of the abyss to the light; raising to the heights those who are tossed about in the lower depths.”
In St. Peter’s bark, tossed by the angry waves and the storms of the world, let us put all our trust in Christ. Through His Church He will save us from the attacks of “the strong man armed,” who is the devil, and as by David He saved the hosts of Israel, when they defied the giant Goliath.
Ps. 26. The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the protector of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? My enemies that trouble me have themselves been weakened and have fallen.
Ps. If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. Glory be, etc. The Lord etc.
Grant, O Lord, we pray, both that the course of this world may be peaceably ordered by Thy governance, and that Thy Church may joyfully serve Thee in tranquil devotion. Through our Lord, etc.
Being appeased, turn to Thy flock, eternal Shepherd, and through blessed Silverius Thy Martyr and Supreme Pontiff, whom Thou didst make the Pastor of the whole Church, guard and protect it forever. Through our Lord, etc.
From all perils of soul and body defend us, O Lord, we beseech Thee, and by the intercession of the blessed and glorious Virgin Mary, Mother of God, of blessed Joseph, of Thy blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and all the Saints, graciously grant us safety and peace, that all adversities and errors being overcome, Thy Church may serve Thee in security and freedom. Through our Lord, etc.
EPISTLE: Rom. 8, 18-23.
Brethren, I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us. For the expectation of the creature waiteth for the revelation of the Sons of God. For the creature was made the subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him that made it subject in hope; because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that every creature groaneth, and travaileth in pain, even till now; and not only it, but ourselves also, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even as we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body; in Christ Jesus Our Lord.
There is no better consolation under crosses and afflictions than the thought that all the troubles of this world are not to be compared with the glory to come, and "that which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory" (2 Cor. 4, 17). And, therefore, St. Bede says: "If we had to bear for awhile the pains of hell, it would not appear so hard, if thereby we might merit to see Christ in His glory, and to be added to His saints."
Ps 78. Forgive us our sins, O Lord, lest the Gentiles should at any time say, where is their God? Help us, O God our Savior; and for the honor of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us. Alleluia, alleluia.
Ps.9, 10. O God, who sitteth upon the throne, and judgeth justice, be Thou the refuge of the poor in tribulation. Alleluia.
GOSPEL: Luke 5, 1-11.
At that time, when the multitude pressed upon Jesus to hear the word of God, He stood by the lake of Genesareth. And He saw two ships standing by the lake; but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets; and going up into one of the ships that was Simon's, He desired him to draw back a little from the land: and sitting He taught the multitudes out of the ship. Now when He had ceased to speak, He said to Simon: Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught. And Simon, answering, said to Him: Master, we have labored all the night, and have taken nothing, but at Thy word I will let down the net. And when they had done this, they enclosed a very great multitude of fishes; and their net broke: and they beckoned to their partners that were in the other ship, that they should come and help them; and they came, and filled both the ships, so that they were almost sinking. Which when Simon Peter saw, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord. For he was wholly astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of fishes which they had taken: and so were also James and John the sons of Zebedee, who were Simon's partners. And Jesus saith to Simon: Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And having brought their ships to land, leaving all things, they followed Him.
What may we learn from the
multitudes who pressed on Jesus to hear the word of God?
That we, also, should hear the word of God with great zeal, since it conveys to men the life of the soul and eternal happiness.
Why did Our Saviour teach the
multitude out of the ship of St. Peter?
That, as the ship is the figure of the Church, so we can receive the true doctrine from that Church only of which Peter was the head (John 21, 15-17). Amid all storms Jesus has preserved, and will preserve, this ship of His Church, till the end of time (Matt. 16, 18). Peter yet stands at the helm, in the unbroken line of his successors; Jesus yet teaches from the ship the same doctrines as before, by the mouth of bishops and priests, the assistants of St. Peter's successors, and whoever hears them hears Him. Hear them, therefore, with willingness and docility.
What was signified by the
great draught of fishes which the apostles took, by the command of Jesus, after
they had labored the whole night in vain?
To the disciples it was a type of their vocation, a pledge of their successful labors, and at the same time a lesson how to labor so as to gain fruits. The exceeding and wonderful abundance of the draught of fishes was to assure them that their zealous labors to save souls should, in like manner, be crowned with rich success. That, after laboring all the night in vain, they should at once take so many fish, when they let down their nets at the word of Jesus, was to be to them a lesson never to be forgotten, that they could work with blessing and success only by relying, not on their own skill and painstaking, but only on the might and blessing of the Lord.
What other lessons are to be
drawn from this gospel?
We learn that nothing has any value before God which is done from mere natural inclination and human respect, that our labors are without merit if not undertaken in the name of God, but that He does not permit the least work to be in vain when undertaken without hesitation, relying on His assistance and for His sake. That the disciples obeyed so quickly, teaches us to obey God at once, to spare no sacrifice, to leave all quickly, and not to put off till tomorrow what is to be done today. Finally, we may learn not to be proud of the success of our labor, but, like Peter, to give glory to God, Who does such great things, by cheerfully leaving all earthly things to follow Him.
Ps.12. Enlighten my eyes, that I may never sleep in death; lest at any time my enemy say, I have prevailed against him.
Receive, we pray, O Lord, our offerings, and even though our wills rebel, mercifully compel them to follow the behests of Thy will. Through our Lord, etc.
By the offered gifts, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that Thou kindly enlighten Thy Church, so that Thy flock may everywhere progress and prosper, and Thy shepherds, under Thy guidance, may be pleasing to Thy name. Through our Lord, etc.
Hear us, O God, our salvation, that through the power of this sacrament Thou mayest defend us from all enemies of soul and body and bestow upon us grace here and glory hereafter. Through our Lord, etc.
Ps. 17. The Lord is my strength, and my refuge, and my deliverer; my God is my helper.
May the mysteries we have received, O Lord, purify us, and guard us as befits such a gift. Through our Lord, etc.
Being appeased, O Lord, guide Thy Church, which has been nourished by holy refreshment, that under Thy direction and powerful rule it may receive increase of liberty and may continue in religious integrity. Through our Lord, etc.
May the offering of this divine sacrament cleanse and protect us, O Lord, we beseech Thee; and by the intercession of the blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, of blessed Joseph, of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and all the saints, may it purify us from all sin and free us from all adversity. Through our Lord, etc.
When Simon Peter saw, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord… And Jesus saith to Simon: Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And... leaving all things, they followed Him.
PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OF JUNE 20th:
4th Sunday after Pentecost
St. Silverius, PM
9:00 AM; Members Ss. Peter & Paul; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
Ss. Aloysius Gonzaga, C
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
St. Paulinus, BpC
(St. John Fisher, MBp)
(St. Thomas More, M)
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
Vigil of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist
(St. Joseph Cafasso, C)
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
Nativity of St. John the Baptist
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
St. Willaim, Ab
Within the Octave
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
Ss. John & Paul, Mm
Within the Octave
Mass 9:00 AM, Rosary of Reparation & Confessions 8:30 AM
5th Sunday after Pentecost
Within the Octave
9:00 AM; Members Ss. Peter & Paul; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
“If anyone despises or rejects either written or unwritten ecclesiastical tradition, let him be anathema.”
Canon 4, Ecumenical Council of Nicea in 787 A.D
“I am a crooked piece of iron and am come into religion to be made straight by the hammer of mortification and penance.”
Novena in honor of our blessed patrons begins today June 20
O glorious SS. Peter and Paul, filled with compassion for those who invoke you, with love for those who suffer, heavily laden with the weight of my troubles, I kneel at your feet and humbly beg you to take my present need under your special protection (mention intention). As disciples of Christ and the first pastors of the early Church you both knew disappointment and suffering. Lead me out of my troubles as you have so many to Christ our Lord. Cease not to intercede for me until my request is granted. Above all, obtain for me the grace to one day meet God face to face, and with you and Mary and all the angels and saints praise Him through all eternity.
O most powerful SS. Peter and Paul, do not let me lose my soul, but obtain for me the grace of winning my way to heaven.
O holy Apostles, Peter and Paul, I choose you this day and forever to be my special patrons and advocates; thee, Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, because thou art the Rock, upon which Almighty God hath built His Church; thee, Saint Paul, because thou wast fore-chosen by God as the Vessel of election and the Preacher of truth in the whole world. Obtain for me, I pray you, lively faith, firm hope and burning love; complete detachment from myself, contempt of the world, patience in adversity, humility in prosperity, attention in prayer, purity of heart, a right intention in all my works, diligence in fulfilling the duties of my state of life, constancy in my resolutions, resignation to the will of God and perseverance in the grace of God even unto death; that so, by means of your intercession and your glorious merits, I may be able to overcome the temptations of the world, the flesh and the devil, and may be made worthy to appear before the chief and eternal Shepherd of souls, Jesus Christ, who with the Father and the Holy Ghost liveth and reigneth for endless ages, to enjoy His presence and love Him forever.
Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory be.
V. Thou shalt make them princes over all the earth,
R. They shall be mindful of Thy name, O Lord.
OF THE POPE
What is the Pope to the Catholic?
The representative of Jesus Christ, and the visible head, appointed by Him, for the government of His Church.
Did Christ actually appoint such a supreme head?
Yes, and that in the person of Saint Peter. He gave him the significant name Peter - the rock, distinguished him always above the other apostles, and laid upon him the charge to feed His lambs, that is, the faithful, and His sheep, that is, the bishops themselves; and this power Peter uniformly exercised.
Why did Christ appoint a visible head for the Church?
Because the Church is an outward, visible society, united together not only by inward faith in Christ, but also by outward, visible signs. Such a visible head is as necessary for the Church as for a body, a family, a society, a state, to prevent disunion, confusion, and the consequent destruction of the whole; this supreme head is the center of the whole, the final judge, the authoritative teacher.
Who is now this supreme head?
The Bishop of Rome, or the Pope. It is undeniable that Peter occupied the bishop’s see at Rome, and that he died there. Equally indisputable is it that the successor of Saint Peter entered upon possession of his rights, and, together with the episcopal see of Rome, inherited also the office possessed by him. From the first centuries this has ever been acknowledged by the faithful, who have accordingly called the Bishop of Rome Pope - that is, the father of the faithful. And how clearly does history show that Peter and his successors are the rock upon which the Lord has immovably founded His Church! What storms have not broken upon the Church! Persecutions from without and within, heresies and schisms without number, and infidelity in its most hideous form, have raged against the Church, and what has been the consequence? Nations have often fallen away from the Church, single bishops have proved betrayers of their flocks, the sees of the apostles themselves have been subject to the vicissitudes of time. And amid all these storms Rome alone has, for over eighteen hundred years, stood firm. She has come out of every contest victorious, has remained the center of faith and discipline, and has preserved the unbroken succession of bishops from Peter. Who does not see herein the assistance of Him Who forever fulfils that promise of His, “Upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates I of hell shall not prevail against it”? The Pope is, therefore, the visible supreme head of the Church, appointed by Christ for all time; the invisible, all-governing head is Christ Himself.
O Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, Who hast built Thy Church on Saint Peter, as on a rock, Who hast confided to him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and constituted him and his successors Thy representatives upon earth, grant us Thy grace, that in all the laws we may obey them as Thyself, that, resting upon the rock of truth, we may be immovable in all storms, and steadfastly persevere in the way of good works.
“He who wishes to love God does not truly love Him if he has not an ardent and constant desire to suffer for His sake.”
St. Aloysius Gonzaga
PRESENCE OF GOD ‑ O Lord, make me understand that I am nothing, that I can do nothing by myself, and that only in You can I accomplish anything.
I. Two ideas dominate the liturgy of today’s Mass great confidence in God and an acute awareness of human misery and insufficiency. These two ideas are closely connected, for it is the consciousness of our nothingness which leads us to put all our confidence in God, and the greater this confidence becomes in us, the more convinced we are of our nothingness.
The Mass begins with a cry of unshakable hope
“The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?” (Introit). The Lord is with me in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar, the Lord comes to me in Holy Communion. What can separate me from Him? What can make me fear?
Yet I know my weakness; I have ever before my eyes the remembrance of my failures and infidelities. How great, then, is my need to humbly repeat the beautiful prayer of the Gradual: “Save us, O Lord, and pardon our sins .... Help us, O God, our Savior, for the glory of Your Name.” Yes, in spite of the continual help of divine grace, in spite of so many confessions and communions, I have to acknowledge new failures every day; daily, I must begin anew. The struggle is arduous and painful, but in today’s Epistle (Rom 8, 18‑23), St. Paul reminds us that “the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come that shall be revealed in us.” This thought is one of consolation, hope and confidence; it does not, however, prevent us from longing for freedom and complete redemption. This is what the Apostle experienced when he said: “We also, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body in Christ Jesus.” The more we suffer because of our wretchedness, the more we should run to Jesus, with full confidence in the power of His Redemption.
2. Today’s Gospel (Lk 5, 1-11) is a practical demonstration of the words of Jesus: “Without Me, you can do nothing” (Jn 15, 5). Simon and his companions had been fishing all night and had caught nothing; that is all they had been able to do by themselves. If we have had some little experience in the spiritual life, we will recognize that this is often our situation too. How many efforts we have made to rid our self of this or that attachment, to forget injuries, to adapt our self to our neighbor’s way of doing things, to subject our will to another’s! And yet, after all these attempts, we find our hands empty, like Peter’s nets. Let us not be discouraged; if we can humbly acknowledge our failure instead of feeling annoyance because of it, the failure itself will turn into victory. So it happened to Peter after he had admitted publicly that he had “taken nothing.” St. Therese of the Child Jesus comments: “Had the Apostle caught some small fish, perhaps our divine Master would not have worked a miracle; but he had caught nothing, and so through the power and goodness of God his nets were soon filled with great fishes. Such is Our Lord’s way. He gives as God, with divide generosity, but He insists on humility of heart” (L ).
In spite of our good will to advance in virtue, Our Lord will not permit us to have any success until He sees that we are thoroughly convinced of our own weakness and inability; to give us this conviction, He lets us, as He let Peter, “work all night without catching anything.” But afterwards, as He sees our growing awareness of our poverty and our willingness to admit it openly, He will come to our aid. We must, then, have great faith in Him, never allowing ourselves to give up through lack of success. Every day, relying “on His word,” we must begin anew. If we have learned not to trust in our own strength, we must also learn to have complete confidence in the divine aid. If we have caught nothing until now, perhaps it is our lack of unshakable confidence that is the cause, and this deficiency, besides being displeasing to Jesus, paralyzes our spiritual life. Then let us repeat with Peter in a similar cry of confidence “in verbo tuo laxabo rete,” Lord, at Thy word, I will let down the net. And let us repeat it every day, every moment, without ever growing weary.
“O Lord, You are my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? You are the protector of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? ... If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. If a battle should rise up against me, in this will I be confident. One thing do I ask of You, O Lord, that I may dwell in Your house all the days of my life .... Then, in the day of evils, You will protect me in the secret place of Your tabernacle, You will exalt me upon a rock....
“Hear, O Lord, my voice with which I have cried to You : have mercy on me and hear me.... Turn not away Your face from me; decline not in Your wrath from Your servant; be my helper, forsake me not; do not despise me, O God my Savior. Although my father and my mother should abandon me, I am sure that You will never abandon me.... O my soul, expect the Lord, do manfully, and let your heart take courage, and wait for Him” (Ps 26).
“O Lord, You have done great things in me, and the greatest of all is that you have shown me my littleness, and how of myself I am incapable of anything good.
“Lord, You see how often I fail, but I am never astonished at it... I enter into myself and say: `Alas, I am once more at the first step as before!’ But I say this in great peace without sadness, because I know that You know perfectly how fragile is our nature and You are always ready to help us. What, then, shall I fear? As soon as You see me fully convinced of my nothingness, You stretch out Your hand to me; but if I should try to do something great, even under the pretext of zeal, You desert me. So all I have to do is to humble myself, to bear with meekness my imperfections. Herein lies, for me, true holiness” (T.C.J. St, 9. NV ‑ C).
“Envy conceals itself under every possible pretext, and takes pleasure in secret and treacherous schemes. Hinted slanders, calumnies, betrayal, every kind of fraud and deceit, are its work and portion.”
Bishop Jacques-Benigne Bossuet
It’s called ‘She Guardian,’ by Russian artist Dashi Namdakov who spent the last two years sculpting the towering figure out of four massive tons of bronze. The statue measures 36-feet high. Mr. Namdakov says the attention-grabbing piece is intended to express a sense of “maternal protectiveness.” The feminist work is “symbolic of female strength and a desire to care for the young.” But, with a mother like this, it is not surprising that there are no pups being cared for in the sculpture for the vast majority of feminists are sterile. The demonic statue by an odd coincidence has been erected in a place of precedence at the Marble Arch located opposite the North-East corner of Hyde Park in London (Buckingham Palace opposite the South-East corner of the park). The Marble Arch is where the infamous Tyburn gallows was located for the public execution of common criminals along with faithful Catholics. It is to Tyburn that Catholic recusants, such as St. Edmund Campion, Blessed Ralph Sherwin, Blessed Alexander Briant, St. Oliver Plunkett, etc., etc., etc., were literally dragged from Newgate Prison to be ‘hung, drawn and quartered.’ This rabid feminist bitch is directly overlooking the hallowed ground of Catholic martyrs. It only needs a sign warning the public not to pet or feed the animal.
Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle? St. Paul, II Thessalonians 2:1
These “sacred symbols” are necessary attributes of the Faith whereby it can be known & communicated!
“In the actual life of the Church, most sacred symbols are not understood by most believers in an explicit, intellectual way, but are nonetheless apprehended as having meaning…. The total effect of these symbols is to sustain a strong belief in God, even though specific symbols may not always convey specific religious meanings.”
James Hitchcock, The Recovery of the Sacred, 1974
Augustus Welby Pugin on Sacred Architecture
or why Novus Ordo Churches look the way they do!
“There is no higher act in the Christian religion,” says Father Le Brun, “than the Sacrifice of the Mass; the greater portion of the other sacraments, and nearly all the offices and ceremonies of the church, are only the means or the preparation to celebrate or participate in it worthily.” Such being the case, it is but natural that the place where this most holy sacrifice is to he offered up, should be set apart and railed off from less sacred portions of the church, and we find this to have been the case in all ages, in all styles, and in all countries professing the Catholic faith down to a comparatively very recent period, when in many places all feelings of sanctity, tradition, and reverence, seemed to have been superseded by ignorant innovation and love of change.
It will be shown in this work that the idea of room-worship, and the all-seeing principles, is a perfect novelty. Those indeed who would make the mass a sight, are only to be compared to the innovators of the l6th century, who made it essential to be heard; those who compiled the Book of Common Prayer converted the mass into all-hearing service ; this was the great object of the vernacular change, that people might hear the priest; they were to be edified by what he said, more than what he did; the sacrificial act was merged into the audible recitation of prayers and exhortations; for this reason the altars, in the reign of Edward the Sixth, were to be moved down from their eastern position to the entrance of the chancel, to enable the people to hear ; this led to the demolition of stone altars and the substitution of tables. For this reason the whole congregation crowd into the choirs of the cathedrals, leaving the rest of the church deserted. For this reason, in large parochial churches, the chancel has been often entirely cut off, and a portion of the nave glazed in and reduced to such a size that the people could hear the clergyman; these were all natural consequences of the change of principle consequent on the translation of the mass, and the altered nature of its celebration. That churches are now built after the old tradition for the service of the separated portion of the English Church, is purely owing to an internal revival of Catholic feelings and traditions in that body: the cause is a return to Catholic truth and reverence; the effect is the erection of churches in accordance with those feelings, it has been a charge and reproach made by Catholics against their separated countrymen, that the old fabrics were unsuited to their service, and unquestionably, on the principle that it was essential for every one to hear, they were so. But I will ask these new-fashioned men if it is indispensable for every one to see, how much better are they adapted for modern Catholic rites? They become as unfit for one as the other, for it is unquestionable, that comparatively very few persons in these cruciform churches could obtain a view of the altar, and this independent of any screen-work, the disposition of the pillars intersecting and shutting out all those who are stationed in the aisles and transepts.
I have always imagined that one great distinction between the Protestant and Catholic services was this, that the former was essentially a hearing service, at which only a comparatively few persons could assist, while at the latter many thousands, or, indeed, hundreds of thousands could unite in one great act of adoration and praise, concentrating their thoughts and intentions with the priest who is offering at God’s altar, although he is far shut off from their vision. [……]
Christians of the present time have but little idea of the solemnity of the ancient worship of the Catholic church; ordained ministers were alone permitted to fill the humblest offices about the sanctuary, every object connected with the sacred rites were considered deserving of the most loving care; even in the very early ages, the vessels of the altar were usually of precious metals, and studded with jewels. The books of the holy gospels were written in golden text on purple vellum, bound in plates of silver encasing ivory diptychs, and deposited in portable shrines, like relics. Though all this should fill us with admiration, there is nothing to excite surprise, when we reflect on the very sacred nature of the Christian mysteries—no sign typical and prophetic, as under the Mosaic law, but our blessed Lord truly present and abiding in the temple in the holy sacrament of the altar, - it is by no means wonderful that the Christian worship should assume a form of solemnity formerly unknown, and we are only astounded that with the perpetuation of the doctrine the practice of external solemnity should have so lamentably become decayed in the latter times; indeed, so sacred, so awful, so mysterious is the sacrifice of the mass, that if men were seriously to reflect on what it really consists, so far from advocating mere rooms for its celebration, they would hasten to restore the reverential arrangements of Catholic antiquity, and instead of striving for front seats and first places, they would hardly feel worthy to occupy the remotest corner of the temple. The form and arrangement of the ancient churches originated from the deepest feelings of reverence; the altar, or place of sacrifice, was accessible only to those who ministered, it was enclosed by pillars and veils; the sanctuary was veiled, the choir was enclosed, and the faithful adored at a respectful distance. All this, and the custom of every succeeding century, is in utter opposition to the modern all-seeing principle, and which, if it is carried out, ends in an absurd conclusion; for if it be essential for every worshipper to see, even a level room would not answer the purpose, and the floor must be raised like an amphitheatre to elevate the receding spectators, for unless the people be thus raised, they form a far greater barrier than any screen-work; and even at St. Peter’s itself, when the Pope celebrates, there is a living screen of Swiss troops and noble guards that effectually shuts out the sight of what is going on, except to those taking part in the functions, or a favoured few, who by means of gold or interest are seated in raised loggia. If religious ceremonies are to be regarded as spectacles they should be celebrated in regular theatres, which have been expressly invented for the purpose of accommodating great assemblages of persons to hear and see well. It has been most justly said, that there is no legitimate halting-place between Catholic doctrine and positive infidelity, and I am quite certain that there is none between a church built on Christian tradition and symbolism and Covent Garden Theatre with its pit, boxes, and gallery. It is only by putting the question in this forcible contrast that persons can really understand the danger of these new notions, or the lengths to which they may eventually lead; and I trust it may be the means of raising a feeling of the greatest repugnance to them in the hearts of every true Catholic.
Augustus Welby Pugin, A Treatise on Chancel Screens and Rood Lofts: Their Antiquity, Use, and Symbolic Signification, 1851
Remember the argument for legalized abortion that the fetus at 14 weeks was only a “blob of tissue”?
Twin fetuses start
playing at 14 weeks
Examining 3D ultrasound images of five pairs of in-utero twins, a team at the University of Padova, Italy, found that fetuses started deliberately interacting at 14 weeks, reaching out and touching each other through the uterine wall. By 18 weeks, they spent more time stroking each other than themselves, and were equally careful when touching their co-twin’s sensitive eye areas. The results are “astonishing,” says Jean-Philippe Rivière at Doctissimo. At 14 weeks, “they were already socializing with their sibling in the womb.”
Abp. Viganò discusses ‘failure’ of Vatican II, Novus Ordo Mass
The next Pope will have to restore all the liturgical books and banish from Catholic churches their unseemly parody, in whose realization notorious modernists and heretics collaborated.
LifeSiteNews | Jun 15, 2021
Excerpt: Abp. Carlo Maria Viganò interviewed by Abbé Claude Barthe
Barthe: The liturgical reform, which began in
1964 and produced a new missal in 1969, may seem more radical than its
programmatic document, the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred
Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium. Do
you think that Archbishop Bugnini’s Consilium betrayed Vatican II, as some say,
or that it developed it, as others suggest?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Archbishop Annibale Bugnini was one of the collaborators in the drafting of the Ordo Hebdomadae Sanctae instauratus promulgated during the pontificate of Pius XII. The serious deformations of the new Missal are in nuce [essentially] contained in the rite of Holy Week, demonstrating that the demolition plan had already begun. There is therefore no betrayal of the Council, so much so that none of its architects ever considered the liturgical reform inconsistent with the mens of Sacrosanctum Concilium. A careful study of the genesis of the Ordo Hebdomadae Sanctae instauratus allows us to understand that the innovators’ demands were only partially accepted but were re-proposed with Montini’s Novus Ordo.
However, it must be clearly said that, unlike all the other Ecumenical Councils, this Council deliberately used its authority to sanction a systematic betrayal of faith and morals, pursued through pastoral, disciplinary and liturgical means. The transitional Missals between the 1962 rubrics and the 1970 Editio typica, and the one that immediately followed — the Editio typica altera of 1975 — show how the process was carried out in small steps, accustoming clergy and faithful to the provisional nature of the rite, to continuous innovation, and to the progressive loss of many elements that initially made the Novus Ordo closer to the last Missale Romanum of John XXIII. I am thinking, for example, of the recitation submissa voce of the Roman Canon in Latin, with its sacrificial Offertory and the Veni Sanctificator, which in the course of adaptation led to the recitation of the Roman Canon aloud, with its Talmudic Offertory and the suppression of the invocation of the Holy Spirit.
Those who prepared the conciliar documents to have them approved by the Council Fathers acted with the same malice that the drafters of the liturgical reform adopted, knowing that they would interpret ambiguous texts in a Catholic way, while those who were to disseminate and utilize them would interpret them in every sense except that.
In fact, this concept is confirmed in everyday practice. Have you ever seen a priest who celebrates the Novus Ordo with the altar facing East, entirely in Latin, wearing the fiddleback (Roman) chasuble and distributing Communion at the Communion rail, without this arousing the ire of his Ordinary and confreres, even though, strictly speaking, this way of celebrating would be perfectly legitimate? Those who have tried — certainly in good faith — have been treated worse than those who habitually celebrate the Tridentine Mass. This demonstrates that the continuity hoped for in the Council’s hermeneutic does not exist, and that the break with the pre-conciliar Church is the norm to which one must conform, to the satisfaction of conservatives.
Lastly, I would like to point out that this awareness of the doctrinal incompatibility of the ancient rite with the ideology of Vatican II is claimed by self-styled theologians and progressive intellectuals, for whom the “Extraordinary Form” of the rite can be tolerated as long as the entire theological framework that it implies is not adopted. This is why the liturgy of the Summorum Pontificum communities is tolerated, provided that in preaching and catechesis one is careful not to criticize Vatican II or the new Mass.
On the method of Restoration:
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I ask myself: if Paul VI
had no problem recklessly abolishing the Tridentine liturgy between one day and
the next, replacing it with cobbled-together excerpts from the Book of Common
Prayer, and imposing this new rite despite the protests of clergy and laity,
why exactly should we today use any more consideration in restoring the ancient
Roman Rite to its place of honor, by prohibiting the celebration of the Novus
Ordo? Why such delicacy of
mind today, and such ruthless iconoclastic fury yesterday? And why this
cosmetic surgery, if not to hold together the last conciliatory frill by giving
it the appearance of what it did not intend to be?
The next Pope will have to restore all the liturgical books previous to the conciliar reform and banish from Catholic churches its unseemly parody, in whose realization notorious modernists and heretics collaborated.
On the Indultists who betray the faith:
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I do not believe that Bergoglio has any interest in the liturgy tout court, and a fortiori in the Tridentine liturgy, which is as alien to him and disliked as anything remotely reminiscent of Catholicism. His approach is political: he tolerates the Ecclesia Dei communities because they keep the conservatives out of the parishes, and at the same time he maintains control over them, forcing them to limit their dissent solely to the liturgical level, while ensuring their fidelity to the conciliar ideology……
The canonical position of the Ecclesia Dei communities has always been at risk. Their survival is linked to their at least implicit acceptance of the conciliar doctrine and liturgical reform. Those who do not conform, by criticizing Vatican II or refusing to celebrate or attend the reformed rite, ipso facto put themselves in a position of being expelled. The superiors of these societies of apostolic life themselves end up being the overseers of their clerics, who are strongly advised to refrain from criticism and to give tangible signs of alignment from time to time, for example, by taking part in celebrations in the “Ordinary Form.” Paradoxically, a diocesan parish priest has greater freedom of speech in doctrinal matters than a member of one of these institutes. [….]
Making the celebration of
the Catholic Mass “normal”—according to the dictates of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum — without
“liturgical reservations” and dedicated spaces, would give the impression that
it is really possible for any faithful to attend Mass without any other title
of belonging than being a Catholic. On the contrary, this Kafkaesque bureaucratic castle forces all
conservatives into an enclosure, obliging them to follow the rules of
confinement and to demand nothing more than what the sovereign grace deigns to
grant them, almost always with the ill-concealed opposition of the diocesan
Bergoglio’s actions are now clearly exposed: his latest encyclical theorizes about heterodox doctrines and a scandalous subservience to the dominant ideology, which is profoundly anti-Catholic and anti-human. From this perspective, questions about the liturgical sensitivity of this or that institute seem to me frankly negligible: not because the liturgy is not important, but because once one is willing to remain silent on the doctrinal front, the complex ceremonies of the Pontifical end up being reduced to a manifestation of aestheticism that poses no real danger to the magic circle of Santa Marta.
“Only take heed to yourself and guard your soul diligently” (Deut 4:9)
Remember in your charity the:
Remember the welfare of our expectant mother: Andrea Ebert,
Jackie Dougherty asks our prayers for her brother who is gravely ill, John Lee,
Rose Bradley asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of her granddaughter, Meg Bradley,
Timothy & Crisara, a couple from Maryland have requested our prayers for their spiritual welfare,
Roger & Mandy Owen Family, for their welfare is the request of Monica Bandlow,
Celine Pilegaard, the seven year old daughter of Cynthia Pilegaard, for her recovery from burn injuries,
Rafaela de Saravia, for her health and welfare,
Mary Mufide, requests our prayers for her family,
Rosemary Bradley, who is in failing health, for her welfare,
Abbe Damien Dutertre, traditional Catholic priest arrested by Montreal police while offering Mass,
Francis (Frank) X. McLaughlin, for the recovery of his health from a serious work injury,
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,
Thomas Thees, recently hospitalized,
Thomas A. Nelson, long time faithful traditional Catholic the founder and former owner of TAN Books & Publishing, suffered a recent stroke,
The Joseph Cox Family, their spiritual welfare,
The Thomas Dube Family, for their conversion and spiritual welfare,
Luis Rafael Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, who is seriously ill,
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,
John and Joann DeMarco, for their health and spiritual welfare,
Regina (Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and health,
Melissa Elena Levitt, her health and conversion, and welfare of her children,
For the grace of a holy death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,
The health and spiritual welfare of Tom Grow, Amanda Gardner, and Alex Estrada,
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, who is recovering from a stroke,
Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,
Mufide Rende, a traditional Catholic from India has asked our prayers for her welfare and he family members, living and deceased,
Mary and Bill Glatz, the welfare of their family,
Barbara Harmon, who is ill, and still cares for her ailing parents,
Jason Green, a father of ten children who has been seriously injured,
For the health and welfare of Robert Kolinsky and his family, and the Sorace family,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Brian Abramowitz,
Janine Mullen, for her health and help for her family,
Thomas Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation for their contribution to the beauty of our chapel,
Carlo A. De Porto, who is in failing health,
Welfare of Bishop Richard Williamson, for strength and courage in the greater battles to come,
John Rhoad, for his health and spiritual welfare,
Angelina Montesano family & Helen Snyder, for their 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, and Marilyn Bryant are the petitions of Gene Peters,
The Drews ask your intercession for the welfare of Brendan McGuire, a young father of three, who has been diagnosed with cancer,
For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf, Eckhard Ebert, and Fahnauer family,
Fr. Waters requests our prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX who has been ill, and for Fr. Thomas Blute,
For the health and welfare of Kathryn Lederhos, the aunt of David Drew,
Fr. Peterson asks our prayers for Charles Valenti, and his wife, Julia,
For the welfare of Fr. Paul DaDamio and Fr. William T. Welsh,
The Drew’s ask our prayers for the welfare of Joe & Tracy 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, prayers for his mother, the Mission of St. Philomena in Miami, and the welfare of 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,
For the welfare of Anthony & Joyce Paglia, who are responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,
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, and the welfare of Frank D’Agustino who is ill, and his brother, Thomas Thees, John Calasanctis, Tony Rosky, Maryann Reuter, James Parvenski and Kathleen Gorry.
Pray for the Repose of the Souls:
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,
Fr. Anthony Cekada, a traditional Catholic priest, died September 11,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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 Haigh, died October 21, 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,and Rev. Hector Bolduc, who died September 10,
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,
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 Wather, 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.
“The virtue of fortitude protects a person from loving his life so much that he loses it.”
Josef Pieper, A Brief Reader on the Virtues of the Human Heart
“Prayer draws its merits from charity; but its imperative efficacy comes from faith and confidence.”
“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
Modernism vs. Neo-Modernism: What is the Difference?
The overarching principle of post-conciliar theology is not modernism,
properly speaking. Let us get our terms straight.
Modernism is the idea that there are no eternal truths, that truth is the correspondence of the mind with one's lifestyle (adaequatio intellectus et vitae), and that, therefore, old dogmas must be abandoned and new beliefs must arise that meet 'the needs of modern man'. This is a radical denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth: the correspondence of the mind with reality (adaequatio intellectus et rei), which is the basis of the immutability of Catholic dogma.
No, the post-conciliar theological principle is neo-modernism, and the theology that is based on it is known as the nouvelle theologie. It is the idea that old dogmas or beliefs must be retained, yet not the traditional 'formulas': dogmas must be expressed and interpreted in a new way in every age so as to meet the 'needs of modern man'. This is still a denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth as adaequatio intellectus et rei (insofar as it is still an attempt to make the terminology that expresses the faith correspond with our modern lifestyle) and consequently of the immutability of Catholic dogma, yet it is not as radical as modernism. It is more subtle and much more deceptive than modernism because it claims that the faith must be retained; it is only the 'formulas' of faith that must be abandoned--they use the term 'formula' to distinguish the supposedly mutable words of our creeds, dogmas, etc. from their admittedly immutable meanings. Therefore, neo-modernism can effectively slip under the radar of most pre-conciliar condemnations (except Humani Generis, which condemns it directly) insofar as its practitioners claim that their new and unintelligible theological terminology really expresses the same faith of all times. In other words, neo-modernism is supposed to be 'dynamic orthodoxy': supposedly orthodox in meaning, yet always changing in expression to adapt to modern life (cf. Franciscan University of Steubenville's mission statement).
Take extra ecclesiam nulla salus as a clear example of a dogma that has received a brutal neo-modernist re-interpretation: they claim that the old 'formula' that ”there is no salvation outside the Church” must be abandoned; rather it is more meaningful to modern man to say that salvation is not in, but through, the Church; people who are not in the Church may still be saved through the Church; thus, to them the dogma that “there is no salvation outside the Church” means that there is salvation outside the Church. Hence see Ven. Pope Pius XII condemning those “reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.” (Humani generis 27).
Yet this mentality of reinterpreting everything anew in order to 'meet the needs of the times' is generally tends to be found in different degrees among different post-conciliar sources:
It tends to be (1) rampant in men like De Lubac, Von Balthasar, Congar, etc.: it is the ultimate goal of their writings, teachings, and activities as churchmen. To achieve this end, they employ the technique of 'resourcement', the neo-modernist strategy of fishing for the few dubious, questionable, or idiosyncratic teachings of some Fathers of the Church and other authoritative writers, and gather them into a massive, heterodox theological argument against the traditional understanding of the faith (which they like to relativize by giving it names such as “Counter-Reformation” Theology, “Tridentine” Theology, or “Scholastic” Theology, instead of just admitting that it is Catholic Theology plain and simple). This technique accomplishes three things that go hand-in-hand: (a) offers a refutation of traditional Catholicism, (b) defends an interpretation that meets the needs of modern times, and (c) gives it a semblance of being traditional, because it appears to be based in the Fathers et al. This type of argument is used, for example, by Von Balthasar in his nearly heretical book, Dare We Hope that All Men be Saved? to 'prove', not that Hell does not exist (that is a dogma), but that it is empty. But this technique and its neo-modernistic underpinnings is not only practiced in almost all of these men's writings; it is also defended in theory by many of them, particularly in Von Balthasar's daring little book, Razing the Bastions, where he demonstrates that “Tridentine” theology must be rejected in our times because it is 'boring'.
It also tends to be (2) present in a more moderate way in the non-binding statements by post-conciliar popes, since they themselves were deeply involved in the developing of the nouvelle theologie. Just to give one of a million possible examples, see Pope Benedict's evolutionistic re-interpretation of the Resurrection of Our Lord. Nothing here obviously contradicts the dogma of the Resurrection (it may be interpreted as a simple analogy, even if a bad one, and nothing more), but it is a novelty that can be easily understood as claiming that the Resurrection is part of the natural development of nature (thus giving credence to some of the nouvelle theologie's pet doctrines, such as De Lubac's heterodox notion of the supernatural and De Chardin's pantheistic evolutionism). This happens almost on a daily basis in what comes out of the Vatican, not to mention what comes from local bishops.
And finally, neo-modernism tends to be present (3) mostly implicitly or behind-the-scenes in the Council,
the Catechism, etc., even though it seldom comes out more explicitly.
Things are done at this level under the pretext
of 'aggiornamento', a euphemism for neo-modernism. That is
usually all the justification provided since at this authoritative level, there
is no need to justify things theologically. Hence, Vatican II and the
Catechism are not outright neo-modernistic. Rather, they (like most of
post-conciliar doctrine) tend in that direction and/or are inspired
by that mentality. In other words, most of the time
these documents do not explicitly teach neo-modernist errors (the kind of
errors you hear explicitly from neo-modernist theologians and priests).
Rather, they are full of dangerous ambiguities: statements that in a
technical sense could be interpreted as being in harmony with the traditional
faith, but that, in their natural, non-forced, interpretation are heterodox.
One clear example of this is Dignitatis humanae, par. 2; entire
monographs have been written in order to prove that, despite appearances, this
document does not contradict previous teaching. Maybe in fact it
ultimately does not, but it is obvious that the prima facie meaning
does; otherwise there would be no need to write so many volumes to prove it.
It must be noted that these are general tendencies, and that in some documents (cf. Gaudium et Spes) and every now and then in papal and episcopal statements neo-modernist principles come out more explicitly.
For a more detailed philosophical and theological critique of neo-modernism, and how it is nothing but a re-hashing of modernism, see Garrigou-Lagrange's Where is the New Theology Leading Us? and his The Structure of the Encyclical Humani Generis.
Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, Ph.D., Professor of Theology and Philosophy
“The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings..... An insincere stance of openness to the other, as well as a corporatist attitude, which reserves salvation exclusively to one’s own creed, is destructive of the same creed. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus explained this to the inquiring lawyer. Love lived in any religion pleases God. ‘Through an exchange of gifts, the Spirit can lead us ever more fully into truth and goodness.’”
Pope Francis approved Abu Dhabi document
COMMENT: “For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils” (Ps. 96:5). Pope Francis is affirming that the worship of idols is “willed by God in His wisdom.” This is blasphemy but not a surprising blasphemy from Francis the Blasphemer. What Pope Francis calls a “corporatist attitude, which reserves salvation exclusively to one's own creed” is the denial of a revealed truth of God that has been dogmatically defined by the Catholic Church on three separate occasions. It is a dogma that there is “no salvation outside the Catholic Church.” The denial of this dogma is heresy by definition and anyone holding this heresy cannot be saved. Furthermore, membership in the Catholic Church also dogmatically requires profession of the true faith and reception of the sacrament of Baptism.
In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus may very well have had in mind a specific Samaritan man who received him as the Messiah through the calling by the Samaritan Woman at the Well. Be that as it may, are good works alone sufficient for salvation? Those that affirm this are Pelagian heretics which is a favorite calumny that Francis mindlessly smears Catholics faithful to tradition. But unlike Francis, who accuses traditional Catholics of Pelagianism without a shred of evidence, our accusations are supported with the bile that flows routinely from Francis' mouth. The recognition of Logos, “which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world” (John 1:9), leads to the regulation of life according to the natural law and is an essential prerequisite to receiving the truth of the Gospel and the sacrament of Baptism, but of itself, it with all the good works in the world, insufficient for salvation. Jesus' conversation with the Samaritan Woman itself destroys this heretical claim of Francis. According to Francis, the Samaritan Woman could have been saved in her idolatrous and adulterous state.
What every faithful Catholic must know is that the faith is the necessary and sufficient cause of and the sign of unity in the Catholic Church. The pope is only secondarily and accidentally the cause and sign of unity in the Catholic Church. When the pope falls from the faith he is to be opposed to his face as St. Paul did to St. Peter (Galatians 2:11). Those who make the pope their proximate rule of faith will follow Francis in his heresy and eventual apostasy. Those who keep dogma as their proximate rule of faith will save their souls.
Jesus Christ, Highpriest according to the order of Melchisedech, both Priest and King.
It is God Himself who imparts His powers to the priest. No one can and no one may venture to exercise the priestly office, if he has not been chosen and invested therewith by God. “Neither doth any man take the honor (of priesthood) to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was” (Heb. 5, 4). It is self-evident that Christ is a priest, not according to His divine, but according to His human nature; for it is only by acts of His sacred humanity that He can perform the part of mediator and priest. “So Christ also did not glorify Himself that He might be made a highpriest” (Heb. 5, 5), but God has constituted Him a highpriest forever, and that with solemn oath: “The Lord hath sworn, and He will not repent: Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech (Ps. 109, 4).
The vocation and selection of Christ for the dignity of highpriest was already contained in the eternal decree of God that His divine Son should redeem the world by means of the Sacrifice of the Cross. His installation into the office of highpriest took place at the first moment of the Incarnation. Namely, as soon as the human nature was created and hypostatically (personally) united to the Eternal Word, the God-Man undertook, in cheerful obedience to the will and decree of His Heavenly Father, the task and mission of offering His precious life on the Cross as a sacrifice for the world, whereby the ancient sacrifices were not only replaced but far surpassed. This is touchingly expressed by St. Paul quoting and explaining the words of the Prophet (Ps. 39, 7-9; Heb. 10, 5-7).
After depicting the impotency and the inadequateness of the priesthood of the Old Law and of its sacrifices, the apostle continues: “Wherefore when Christ cometh into the world (that is, at the first moment of the Incarnation) He saith to God: Sacrifice and oblation (these empty figures of future goods) Thou wouldst not; but a body Thou hast fitted to Me (for sacrifice). Holocausts for sin did not please Thee. Then, said I, behold I come: at the head of the book it is written of Me: that I should do Thy will, O God (by the sacrifice of Myself)!” These words constitute the vow of Christ’s sacrifice, that is, the solemn formula in which He vowed to His Heavenly Father, by the Sacrifice of the Cross “to re-establish all things that are in heaven and on earth” (Eph. 1, 10). Therefore, the Apostle adds: “In this will we were sanctified once for all by the Sacrifice of the Body of Jesus Christ,” that is, by the one offering of His bloody atoning sacrifice, which was of infinite value and merit. Christ has acquired for us all grace and sanctification, in obeying with His human will the Divine will of His Father even to the death of the Cross.
Jesus Christ was infinitely worthy of being clothed and adorned with the most eminent dignity of highpriest. The priest, by his office, is mediator between God and man: it is chiefly by the offering of Sacrifice that he is to glorify God and to reconcile man to Him, and to obtain for man in return the favor and friendship of God, applying to him the fruits and graces of the Sacrifice. To be enabled to exercise, in a perfect manner, the office of mediator, he must also take a medium position, namely, be related and united to God as well as to men, in order to transact the affairs of both properly and successfully. The priest “is ordained for men in all things that appertain to God,” to appease God’s anger and to draw down His blessing upon the earth: therefore, he must be pleasing in the sight of God by being free from sin and by exalted sanctity; but he is also “ordained for men” to care for their salvation, to pray, to labor and to suffer: hence “he is taken from among men, that he may have compassion on them that are ignorant and that err; because he himself is also encompassed with infirmity” (Heb. 5, 1-2). In this twofold relation Christ unites in His person, in the most perfect manner, all that can render the priest acceptable to God and powerful with Him, full of compassion and mercy toward men.
Rev. Nicholas Gihr, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass: Dogmatically, Liturgically and Ascetically Explained
“With them that hated peace I was peaceable: when I spake unto them, they fought against me without cause.” (Ps. cxix) “Forty years long was I nigh unto that generation, and said: They do always err in their heart; and they have not known My ways to whom I swore in My wrath that they should not enter into My rest.” (Ps. xciv)
“In the later editions of the Talmud the allusions to Christianity are few and cautious compared with the earlier or unexpurgated copies. The last of these was published at Amsterdam in 1645. In them our Lord and Saviour is ‘that One,’ ‘such a One,’ ‘a fool,’ ‘the leper,’ ‘the deceiver or Israel,’ &c.; efforts are made to prove that He is the son of Joseph Pandira before his marriage with Mary. His miracles are attributed to sorcery, the secret of which He brought in a slit in his flesh out of Egypt. His teacher is said to have been Joshua, the son of Perachlah. This Joshua is said to have afterwards excommunicated Him to the sound of 800 rams’ horns, although he must have lived seventy years before His time. Forty days before the death of Jesus a witness was summoned by public proclamation to attest his innocence, but none appeared. He is said to have been first stoned and then hanged on the eve of the Passover. His disciples are called heretics, and opprobrious names. They are accused of immoral practices; and the New Testament is called a sinful book. The references to these subjects manifest the most bitter aversion and hate.”
Dr. Joseph Barclay, LL.D, Rector of Stapleford, Herts, London, The Talmud, 1878, from Introduction, p. 30
St. John Eudes: “That there is a special contract made between God and man in Baptism.”
THE name of contract is given to any agreement entered into by two or more persons, in which the parties contracting incur mutual obligations. This clearly shows that a contract. has been entered into by the most Blessed Trinity and you in Baptism; since you have incurred many obligations towards the Blessed Trinity, and the Blessed Trinity has also obliged itself in regard to you. What is the nature of this contract? It is a reciprocal contract of gifts, the highest and most entire that can “enter into the heart of man to conceive;” for in making it you are obliged to give yourself entirely and forever to God; you have renounced all things to be united to Him, and for Him, and God on his part has given Himself entirely to you. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, come to you and take up their abode in your soul, in order to confer honors and benefits on you. They enrich you ‘with spiritual treasures to render you worthy of their three divine Persons.
It is a contract of adoption, since God the Father has taken you for his child, and has conferred on you the right of his inheritance with his only Son, and you have taken God for your Father, and have promised to entertain for him all the love and respect which a child owes to a so good a parent. “Consider,” writes St. John the Evangelist, “what love the Father has testified to you in wishing that you should be called, and that you should, really, be his children.”
Behold the admirable effect of the contract which you have made with God in Baptism, from being the child of wrath and an heir of hell, you have become the child of God and an heir to heaven! What you should not do to acknowledge the infinite goodness of God in your regard?
It is a contract of alliance with the Son of God, since in receiving Baptism you have united yourself to him as to your head, your master, and your sovereign, and since the Son has taken you for His servant and one of the members of his body, which is his Church. How great is the goodness of God, says St. Paul to the newly converted Christians of Corinth; “By whom you arc called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”
What were you before Baptism but the unhappy slave of Satan, and subject like him to eternal punishment? But by Baptism you have been delivered from this unhappy subjection, through the divine alliance which you have contracted with Jesus Christ, which procures you the enjoyment of eternal happiness, if you observe all its conditions.
Finally, it is a contract of alliance with the Person of the Holy Ghost; for faith teaches us, that the Holy Ghost takes the Christian soul as his spouse, and that the Christian reciprocally takes the Holy Ghost for his spouse. In consequence of this sacred alliance, the Holy Ghost calls you “his sister and his spouse,” and as, of yourself, you are poor indeed, he adorns your soul with all the gifts necessary to render it worthy of him, and he comes to take up his abode in it, and to consecrate it as his temple and his sanctuary. […..]
When you had been presented to the church to receive Baptism, you were treated as a person in the possession of the devil, for the priest pronounced over you the exorcism of the church, commanding the wicked spirit to depart from you, and to give place to the Holy Ghost.
This ceremony teaches you that by original sin you were really in possession of the devil, and that he abided in you, but that, through Baptism, he has been cast out of you; that your soul has been purified from the horrible stain which disfigured it, and that the Holy Ghost, having sanctified and ornamented it with his grace, comes to take up his abode in it. […..]
That 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’s therefore, 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. […..]
The Priest introduced you into the Church, by saying, “Enter into the house of God, that you may have eternal life.” This ceremony teaches you that Baptism enables you to enter into the Society of Jesus Christ, and of all the faithful who compose the house or family of God. By this entry, you begin to partake of all the good works of the faithful and you acquire a right to the sacraments, to the prayers, and to all the other good works which are done in the Church. Moreover, in entering into the Church, you have become her child, and have been made a child of God, the heir of God, and co-heir of Jesus Christ; you entered into society and communion with the angels and all the blessed who are in Heaven. By this ceremony you are likewise taught that, in order to be united to Jesus Christ, and to have eternal life, it is necessary to be a member of the Church, and to persevere therein to the end, believing all she teaches, obeying all she commands.
St. John Eudes, excerpt from Man’s Contract with God in Baptism
COMMENT: St. John Eudes makes clear what every faithful Catholic should already know, that is, it is by virtue of the sacrament of Baptism received with Faith that makes a person a Child of God. The Neo-modernist popes since Vatican II heretically teach that everyone is a child of God by virtue of the Incarnation of the Logos, the Word becoming flesh, where the second Person of the Trinity, by personally uniting Himself with our human nature, thereby elevated all humanity to being children of God by virtue of this shared humanity. For them, Baptism is only an outward sign signifying what has already taken place. It reduces Baptism from a performative sign that is necessity of means for salvation to a simple necessity of precept which obligates only those who feel some inner compulsion to obey. It is this fundamental corruption of revealed truth that makes modern ecumenism with such events as the blasphemous “Prayer Meeting at Assisi” possible. For them the “spiritual character” imprinted on the soul at Baptism is meaningless. The “spiritual character” is both the sign of and cause of the adoption as Sons of God. The character is like a receptacle that makes the reception of the sacramental grace of adoption possible. Those who have the character of the sacrament without the sanctifying grace of adoption will suffer the greatest torments of all in hell.
It is an unfortunate fact that the many traditional Catholics and conservative Catholics believe this tripe and profess that any “good-willed” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. can be a child of God, a member of the Church, a temple of the Holy Ghost and an heir to heaven by virtue of being a “good” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. This error is derived essentially from the more fundamental error of denying Dogma as Dogma, by overturning Dogma in its very nature. For these Neo-modernists, Dogma is not the revealed truth of God but only a human axiom open to unending refinement and new interpretations.
But the truth is that Dogma is divine revelation formally and infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church. It is irreformable in both the truth it declares (its form) and the words that it uses to define (its matter). It constitutes the formal object of divine and Catholic faith and is the proximate rule of faith for every faithful child of God. Not until every traditional Catholic recognizes and defends this truth will any effective resistance to Neo-modernist error be effectively mounted.
Abp. Viganò offers considerations on the Great Reset
It is our duty to uncover the Great Reset's deception, because the same deception may be attributed to all the other assaults that have sought to nullify the work of Redemption and establish the tyranny of the Antichrist.
Great Reset Shutterstock
By Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
LifeSiteNews | May 18, 2021— I offer heartfelt thanks to dear Professor Massimo Viglione, who wanted to invite me to take part — remotely so to speak — in the conference he has organized as President of the Confederation of the Triarii. I also extend my warmest greetings to each of the illustrious participants in this event. Please allow me to express to you my profound esteem and my fervent thanks for your courageous testimony, for the enlightening contributions and the tireless commitment you have not ceased to display in the most pressing and incisive way, beginning in February of last year. I encourage you not to retreat and not to disarm in this deadly battle that we are called to fight in this fatal hour of history as never before.“Be strengthened in the Lord and in the might of his power. Clothe yourselves in the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. Our battle is not against flesh and blood but against the Principalities and Powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, against the spirits of evil that dwell in the high places. Take up therefore the armor of God, so that you may be able to resist on the day of evil and remain standing after having endured all trials” (Eph 6:10-13). The brief reflection I am about to offer you is in some manner a shortened preview of my presentation at the Venice Summit which will take place on May 30, organized by Professor Francesco Lamendola, in which some of you will participate.
When Stalin decided in 1932 to eliminate millions of Ukrainians in the genocide of Holodomor, he planned a famine by seizing food supplies, forbidding commerce, prohibiting travel, and censoring those who reported the facts. This crime against humanity, recently recognized as such by many nations around the world, was conducted with methods not unlike those that have been adopted during the so-called “emergency pandemic” as part of the Great Reset.
A Ukrainian peasant could have asked: “Why doesn’t Stalin send provisions, instead of forbidding shops to open and forbidding travel? Doesn’t he realize that he is making everyone starve to death?” Yet an observer who was not influenced by communist propaganda would have responded to him: “Because Stalin wants to eliminate all the Ukrainians, and he is blaming a famine he knowingly caused for this purpose.” The peasant who asked the question would have committed the same error as many today who, in the presence of an alleged pandemic, ask why governments have pre-emptively undermined public health, weakened national pandemic plans, forbidden effective cures, and administered harmful if not deadly treatments. Furthermore, they are now forcing citizens — using the blackmail of perpetual lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, and unconstitutional “green passes” — to submit to vaccines that not only do not guarantee any immunity, but rather involve serious short-term and long-term side effects, as well as further spreading more resistant forms of the virus.
Looking for any logic in what we are told by the mainstream media, government officials, virologists, and so-called “experts” is practically impossible, but this enchanting unreasonableness will disappear and turn into the most cynical rationality if we only reverse our point of view. That is, we must renounce thinking that our rulers are acting with our good in mind, and more generally we must stop believing that those who speak to us are honest, sincere, and motivated by good principles.
Of course, it is easier to think that the pandemic is real, that a mortal virus exists that is killing millions of victims, and that our leaders and doctors should be appreciated for the effort they have made in the face of an event that caught all of them unprepared; or that the “invisible enemy” has been effectively defeated by the amazing vaccine which the pharmaceutical companies, with the purest humanitarian spirit and without any economic self-interest, have produced in record time. And then there are the relatives, friends, and colleagues who look at us as if we are crazy, calling us “conspiracy theorists” or — as a certain conservative intellectual has begun to do with me — they will accuse us of exasperating the tones of a debate which, if moderated, they say, would help us to better understand the terms of the matter. And if our friends also attend our parish, we will hear them say that even Francis has recommended the vaccines, which Professor So-and-So has declared to be morally acceptable even if they are produced with aborted fetuses, since — he admonishes us — those who today criticize the COVID vaccine accept other vaccines that have been administered up until now, even if those, too, were also obtained with abortions.
The lie seduced many, even among conservatives and traditionalists themselves. We too, at times, find it difficult to believe that the traders of iniquity are so well-organized, that they have succeeded in manipulating information, blackmailing politicians, corrupting doctors, and intimidating businessmen in order to force billions of people to wear a useless muzzle and consider the vaccine as the only way to escape certain death. And yet all it takes is one read through the guidelines that the WHO wrote in 2019 — regarding the “Covid-19” that was still to come — to understand that there is a single script under a single direction, with actors who stick to the part assigned to them and a claque of mercenary journalists who shamelessly distort reality.
Let us observe the entire operation from the outside, trying to identify the recurring elements: the unconfessability of the criminal design of the elite, the need to cloak it with acceptable ideals, the creation of an emergency situation for which the elite have already planned a solution that would otherwise be unacceptable. It could be an increase in funding for weapons or a tightening of controls such as happened immediately after the attack on the Twin Towers, the exploitation of Iraq’s energy resources with the pretext that Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons, or the transformation of society and work in the wake of a pandemic. There is an always an excuse behind these actions, an apparent cause, something false that hides reality, a lie; in short: a fraud.
Lying is the trademark of the architects of the Great Reset of the last few centuries: the Protestant pseudo-reformation, the French Revolution, the Italian Risorgimento, the Russian Revolution, the two World Wars, the Industrial Revolution, the Revolution of 1968, and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Each time, if you notice, the apparent reasons for these revolutions never corresponded to the real one.
In this long series of Great Resets organized by the same elite of conspirators, not even the Catholic Church has managed to escape. Think about it: What did the liturgists of the Council tell us when they wanted to impose the reformed Mass on us? That the people did not understand, that the liturgy had to be made understandable in order to allow for a greater participation of the faithful. And in the name of that prophasis, of that false pretext, they did not simply translate the Apostolic Mass into the vernacular, but instead they invented a different Mass altogether, because they wanted to cancel the primary doctrinal obstacle to ecumenical dialogue with the Protestants, indoctrinating the faithful into the new ecclesiology of Vatican II.
Like all frauds, those that are hatched by the devil and his servants are based on false promises that will never be kept, in exchange for which we give up a certain good that will never be restored to us. In Eden, the prospect of becoming like gods led to the loss of friendship with God and to eternal damnation, which only the redemptive Sacrifice of Our Lord was able to repair. And Satan also tempted Our Lord, lying as usual: “I will give you all this power and the glory of these kingdoms, because it has been placed in my hands and I give it to whomever I will. If you will prostrate yourself before me, all this will be yours” (Lk 4:6-7). But nothing that Satan offered to Our Lord was really his, nor could he give it to whomever he wanted, least of all to the One who is Lord and Master of all. The temptation of the devil is based on deception: What can we ever expect from the one who is “a murderer from the beginning,” “a liar and the father of lies” (Jn 8:44).
With the pandemic, little by little they told us that isolation, lockdowns, masks, curfews, “live-streamed Masses,” distance-learning, “smartworking,” recovery funds, vaccines, and “green passes” would permit us to come out of the emergency, and, believing in this lie, we renounced the rights and lifestyles that they warned us would never return: “Nothing will be the same again.” The “new normal” will still be presented to us as a concession that will require us to accept the deprivation of freedoms that we had taken for granted, and accordingly we will compromise without understanding the absurdity of our compliance and the obscenity of the demands of those who command us, giving us orders so absurd that they truly require a total abdication of reason and dignity. At each step there is a new turn of the screw and a further step towards the abyss: If we do not stop ourselves in this race towards collective suicide we will never go back.
It is our duty to uncover the deception of this Great Reset, because the same deception may be attributed to all the other assaults that over the course of history have sought to nullify the work of Redemption and establish the tyranny of the Antichrist. Because, in reality, this is what the architects of the Great Reset are aiming for. The New World Order — a name which significantly echoes the conciliar Novus Ordo — overturns the divine cosmos in order to spread infernal chaos, in which everything that civilization has painstakingly constructed over the course of millennia under the inspiration of Grace is overturned and perverted, corrupted and cancelled.
Each of us must understand that what is happening is not the fruit of an unfortunate sequence of chance occurrences, but corresponds rather to a diabolical plan — in the sense that the Evil One is behind all this — which over the centuries pursues a single goal: destroying the work of Creation, nullifying the Redemption, and cancelling every trace of Good on the earth. And in order to obtain this, the final step is the establishment of a synarchy in which command is seized by a few faceless tyrants who thirst for power, who are given over to the worship of death and sin and to the hatred of Life, Virtue, and Beauty because in them shines forth the greatness of that God against whom they still cry out their infernal “Non serviam.” The members of this accursed sect are not only Bill Gates, George Soros, or Klaus Schwab, but also those who for centuries have been plotting in the shadows in order to overthrow the Kingdom of Christ: the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Warburgs, and those who today have formed an alliance with the highest levels of the Church, using the moral authority of the Pope and Bishops to convince the faithful to get vaccinated.
We know that the lie is the emblem of the devil, the distinctive sign of his servants, the hallmark of the enemies of God and the Church. God is Truth; the Word of God is true, and He Himself is God. Speaking the Truth, shouting it from the rooftops, uncovering the deception and its creators is a sacred work, and no Catholic — nor anyone who has still preserved a shred of decency and honor — may shrink from this duty.
Each of us was thought of, desired, and created in order to give glory to God and to be part of a great design of Providence: from all eternity the Lord has called us to share with Him in the work of Redemption, to cooperate in the salvation of souls and the triumph of Good. Each of us today has the possibility of choosing to take sides either with Christ or against Christ, either to fight for the cause of Good or to become an accomplice to the workers of iniquity. The victory of God is most certain, as is the reward that awaits those who make the choice to enter the battle on the side of the King of kings, and the defeat of those who serve the Enemy is also certain, as is their eternal damnation.
This farce will collapse; it will collapse inevitably! Let us all commit ourselves, with renewed zeal, to return to our King the Crown which His enemies have snatched from Him. I exhort you to make Our Lord reign in your souls, your families, your communities, in the Nation, in the workplace, in the schools, in the laws and courts, in the arts, in the media, in all areas of private and public life.
We have just celebrated the anniversary of the Apparitions of the Immaculate Virgin to the shepherd children of Fatima: Let us recall Our Lady’s warning about the dangers and punishments that await the world if it does not convert and do penance. “This sort of demon is cast out only by prayer and fasting” (Mt 17:21), says the Lord. As we wait for a Pope to fully obey the requests of the Mother of God by consecrating Russia to Her Immaculate Heart, let us consecrate ourselves and our families, persevering in the life of Grace under the standard of Christ the King. May our Most Holy Mother and Queen, Mary Most Holy, also reign with Him.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
15 May 2021
Sabbato post Ascensionem
“France loses a religious building every 2 weeks – Arson, Demolition are among reasons for lost churches”
CatholicWeekly | May 11, 2021
“One religious building is disappearing in France every two weeks.” That is the conclusion of Edouard de Lamaze, president of the Observatoire du patrimoine religieux (Observatory of Religious Heritage) in Paris.
He is raising the alarm in the French media about the gradual disappearance of religious edifices in a country known as the ‘eldest daughter of the Church’ because the Frankish King Clovis I embraced Catholicism in 496.
Lamaze’s appeal for increased awareness came after a fire destroyed the 16th-century Church of Saint-Pierre in Romilly-la-Puthenaye, Normandy, northern France. The fire, deemed accidental, took place on April 15, exactly two years after the blaze that devastated Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris.
The unforgettable image of the burning cathedral, which circled the planet in 2019, pointed to a deeper issue within French society: serious shortcomings in the preservation system of religious monuments, coupled with increasing hostility toward religion.
Lamaze told Catholic News Agency in an interview that in addition to one religious building disappearing every two weeks, by demolition, transformation, destruction by fire, or collapse, two-thirds of fires in religious buildings are due to arson.
While these statistics include buildings belonging to all religious groups, most of them concern Catholic monuments, which still represent a large majority in France, where there are roughly 45,000 Catholic places of worship.
‘Although Catholic monuments are still ahead, one mosque is erected every 15 days in France, while one Christian building is destroyed at the same pace,’ Lamaze said. ‘It creates a tipping point on the territory that should be taken into account.’
Lamaze believes that on average more than two Christian monuments are targeted every day. Two-thirds of these incidents concern theft, while the remaining third involve desecration. According to the most recent figures from France’s central criminal intelligence unit, 877 attacks on Catholic places of worship were recorded across the country in 2018 alone.
‘These figures have increased fivefold in only 10 years,’ Lamaze said, noting that 129 churches were vandalised in 2008...
Although French cathedrals benefit from a special status and are owned by the state, they have not been spared in the wave of fires that have hit Catholic sites in recent years. The blaze at Notre-Dame de Paris in 2019 was preceded by a fire at the Cathedral Saint-Alain of Lavaur in Tarn, southern France, and followed by fires at the cathedrals of Rennes and Nantes in 2020.
‘The current minister of culture is seeking to establish a protection charter, but the situation is extremely serious and, alas, I don’t see any real awareness growing, nor any sense of responsibility in the face of this crucial challenge for our national heritage,’ Lamaze said.”
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Catholic Church Teaches:
“That the mystical body of Christ and the Catholic Church in communion with Rome are one and the same thing, is a doctrine based on revealed truth.”
Pius XII, Humani Generis
(Modernism teaches that) “the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.”
Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi, 1907
With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.
Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabili Sane, 1907
The Vatiacan II Church Teaches:
“Church of Christ… subsits in the Catholic Church.”
Lumen Gentium, Vatican II
NOTE: The author of this term, “subsist in,” was Pastor Wilhelm Schmidt, a Protestant minister who made the suggestion to Cardinal Augustin Bea, the ecumenist, modernist biblical scholar, patron of Fr. Annibale Bugnini, and confessor to Pope Pius XII, who in turn recruited the support of Fr. Joseph Ratzinger who then convinced Cardinal Josef Frings of Cologne to bring the matter to the Council. This story was personally verified by Fr. Franz Schmidberger, First Assistant to the Superior General of the SSPX, by directly contacting Pastor Schmidt.
The problem remains if Lumen Gentium strictly and exclusively identifies the Mystical Body of Christ with the Catholic Church, as did Pius XII in Mystici Corporis. Can we not call it into doubt when we observe that not only is the attribute “Roman” missing, but also that one avoids saying that only Catholics are members of the Mystical Body. Thus they are telling us that the Church of Christ and of the Apostles subsistit in, is found in the Catholic Church. There is consequently no strict identification, that is exclusive, between the Church of Christ and the “Roman” Church. Vatican II admits, fundamentally, that non-Catholic Christians are members of the Mystical Body and not merely ordered to it.
Yves Cardinal Congar
Church of Christ is not exclusively identical to the Roman Catholic Church. It does indeed subsist in Roman Catholicism but it is also present in varying modes and degrees in other Christian communities. (Bold face in original).
Avery Cardinal Dulles, a member of the International Theological Commission
It is difficult to say that the Catholic Church is still one, Catholic, apostolic, when one says that the others (other Christian communities) are equally one, Catholic and apostolic, albeit to a lesser degree. ---- at Vatican Council II, the Roman Catholic Church officially abandoned its monopoly over the Christian religion.
Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx
Concretely and actually the Church of Christ may be realized less, equally, or even more in a Church separated from Rome than in a Church in communion with Rome. This conclusion is inescapable on the basis of the understanding of Church that emerges from the teaching of Vatican Council II.
Fr. Gregory Baum
And we now ask: What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?... This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (Unitatis Redintegratio) the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world. On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!
Pope Benedict XVI, addressing Protestants at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Offers
QUESTION: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?
Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”.
In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church, in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.
Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, and many other Protestant groups recite the Nicene Creed professing a belief in the “one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church.” They clearly do not define the word “catholic” in the same sense as Roman Catholics do. Is the CDF giving a Catholic or Protestant meaning to the word “catholic” when it explains the words “subsist in”? Is the comment of Cardinal Congar explaining the significance of the failure to use the word “Roman” important to our understanding of the CDF’s response? Is this a cleaver corruption of dogmatic truth through corruption of language? Should we be grateful to Cardinal Congar for his open and honest comments? Since the “ecumenism of return” is rejected then, do Protestants that do not have to “return” to the Roman Catholic Church already belong to the “Church of Christ”? Is there salvation in the “Church of Christ” separated from the Roman Catholic Church? It is a Dogma, an article of divine and Catholic faith, that there is one universal Church of the faithful outside of which there is no salvation.
“The Devil is
fighting a decisive battle”
Sr. Lucy also told me:
“Father, the Devil is fighting a decisive battle against the Virgin and,
as you know, what most offends God and what will gain him the greatest number
of souls in the shortest time is to gain the souls consecrated to God. For this
also leaves unprotected the field of the laity and the Devil can more easily
“Also, Father, tell them that my cousins Francisco and Jacinta made sacrifices because they always saw the Blessed Virgin was very sad in all her apparitions. She never smiled at us. This anguish that we saw in her, caused by offenses to God and the chastisements that threaten sinners, penetrated our souls. And being children, we did not know what measures to devise except to pray and make sacrifices. …”
Referring to the vision of Hell that Our Lady showed her and Jacinta and Francisco, she said:
“For this reason, Father, it is my mission not just to tell about the material punishments that will certainly come over the earth if the world does not pray and do penance. No, my mission is to tell everyone the imminent danger we are in of losing our souls for all eternity if we remain fixed in sin.
“Father, we should not wait for a call to the world from Rome on the part of the Holy Father to do penance. Nor should we wait for a call for penance to come from the Bishops in our Dioceses, nor from our Religious Congregations. No, Our Lord has often used these means, and the world has not paid heed. So, now each one of us must begin to reform himself spiritually. Each one has to save not only his own soul, but also all the souls that God has placed on his pathway.
“Father, the Blessed Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world, but I understood this for three reasons:
“The first is because she told me that the Devil is engaging in a battle with the Virgin, a decisive battle. It is a final battle where one party will be victorious and the other will suffer defeat. So, from now on, we are either with God or we are with the Devil; there is no middle ground.
“The second reason is because she told me, as well as my cousins, that God is giving two last remedies to the world: the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. And, being the last remedies, that is to say, they are the final ones, means that there will be no others.
“And the third, because in the plans of the Divine Providence, when God
is going to chastise the world He always first exhausts all other remedies.
When He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever, then, as we say in
our imperfect way of talking, with a certain fear He presents us the last means
of salvation, His Blessed Mother.
If we despise and reject this last means, Heaven will no longer pardon us, because we will have committed a sin that the Gospel calls a sin against the Holy Spirit. This sin consists in openly rejecting – with full knowledge and will – the salvation that is put in our hands.
”Also, since Our Lord is a very good Son, He will not permit that we offend and despise His Blessed Mother. We have as obvious testimony the history of different centuries where Our Lord has shown us with terrible examples how He has always defended the honor of His Blessed Mother.
”Prayer and sacrifice are the two means to save the world. As for the Holy Rosary, Father, in these last times in which we are living, the Blessed Virgin has given a new efficacy to the praying of the Holy Rosary. This in such a way that there is no problem that cannot be resolved by praying the Rosary, no matter how difficult it is - be it temporal or above all spiritual - in the spiritual life of each of us or the lives of our families, be they our families in the world or Religious Communities, or even in the lives of peoples and nations.
”I repeat, there is no problem, as difficult as it may be, that we cannot resolve at this time by praying the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, sanctify ourselves, console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.
”Then, there is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, holding her as the seat of mercy, goodness and pardon and the sure door to enter Heaven. This is the first part of the Message referring to Our Lady of Fatima, and the second part, which is briefer but no less important, refers to the Holy Father.”
Sister Lucy of Fatima to Fr. Augustin Fuentes in 1957
Francis: 'No concession' to those who deny Vatican II teachings
National Catholic Reporter | Joshua J. McElwee | Vatican | Feb 1, 2021
Rome — Pope Francis on Jan. 30 urged those charged with passing on the principles of the Catholic faith to consider the teachings of the Second Vatican Council as sacrosanct, saying that to be Catholic one must adhere to the reforms brought about by the landmark event.
"You can be with the church and therefore follow the council, or you can not follow the council or interpret it in your own way, as you want, and you are not with the church," the pontiff said in a meeting with a group of catechists connected to the Italian bishops' conference.
"The council is the magisterium of the church," said the pope. "On this point we must be demanding, severe. The council cannot be negotiated."
"Please, no concession to those who seek to present a catechesis that does not accord with the magisterium of the church," he told the catechists.
The Second Vatican Council, called by Pope John XXIII and held in Rome from 1962 to 1965, brought about a number of reforms for the global Catholic Church, including the use of vernacular languages during liturgies and the redefinition of the church as the "People of God."
The council's effect has been hotly debated by Catholics in the decades since the event, with some movements now even choosing to go back to a Latin-language celebration of the Mass.
Francis told the catechists that the church is living through a problem of "selectivity" with regard to the council's teachings, and said it was a similar problem to one experienced after earlier church councils.
The pope mentioned a group of Catholic bishops who decided to create their own church because of disagreements after the First Vatican Council, held in Rome from 1869 to 1870, in an apparent reference to what is now known as the Old Catholic Church.
"I think often about a group of bishops who, after Vatican I, left … to continue the 'true doctrine' that wasn't that of Vatican I," said the pontiff.
"Today, they ordain women," the pope continued, adding: "The severest attitude, to guard the faith without the magisterium of the church, brings you to ruin.
COMMENT: The authority of Vatican II is no greater than of an exercise of the ordinary magisterium, that is, churchmen teaching by virtue of their grace of state. This particular council declared before, during and after its convocation that it made no greater pretensions above that of a “pastoral” council that repudiated any claim to be offering any definitive teaching on Catholic doctrine or morals. They therefore repudiated any claim to be engaging the Magisterium of the Church, that is, the power conferred on the Church by Jesus Christ to teach infallibly in His name by the power of the Holy Ghost. Pope Francis, besides being a heretic, is a shameless liar. He is using the word, “magisterium”, equivocally in an attempt to deceive conflating the magisterium of churchmen with the Magisterium of God. In equating the authority of Vatican II with Vatican I, he just adding another lie. Vatican I was an exercise of the Magisterium of the Church and engaged to Holy Ghost to definitively define Catholic doctrine. The fruit of the Vatican I was DOGMA. Those who did not accept the DOGMA were therefore heretics who left the Church. If Pope Francis wants to pretend that that the “teaching” of Vatican II constitute articles of Divine and Catholic faith they denial of which makes a person a heretic and removes them from the Church. Pope Francis is shameless liar. If he wants to impose the “teachings of Vatican II” on Catholic faithful, he must:
1) Articulate the doctrines of Vatican II in clear categorical propositions.
2) He must place himself in the “Chair of Peter” and:
a) Demonstrate that the doctrines from Vatican II that he wants to define are contained in the Deposit of Divine Revelation and have therefore, always been objects of Divine Faith.
b) He must engage the Extra-ordinary Magisterium of the Church and declare that be virtue of his apostolic authority as the Vicar of Christ he is formally defining these doctrines of Divine Faith making them articles of Divine and Catholic Faith, that is, making them DOGMAS of the Church.
c) He must declare that whoever rejects these DOGMAS as part of Divine and Catholic Faith are declared: ANATHAMA
3) Take care of his funeral arrangements for God has promised to preserve His Church from a pope ever imposing a false teaching as an article of Divine and Catholic faith.
Abp. Viganò: Upcoming Vatican Conference “Disturbing Departure from Catholic Orthodoxy”
Declaration of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò with regard to the “Fifth International Vatican Conference”
From May 6-8, 2021, the fifth International Vatican Conference will take place, entitled Exploring the Mind, Body & Soul. Unite to Prevent & Unite to Cure. A Global Health Care Initiative: How Innovation and Novel Delivery Systems Improve Human Health. The event is being hosted by the Pontifical Council for Culture, the Cura Foundation, the Science and Faith Foundation, and Stem for Life.
Michael Haynes of LifeSiteNews has reported on the topics to be addressed and the participants, including the infamous Anthony Fauci, whose scandalous conflicts of interest did not prevent him from taking over the management of the pandemic in the United States; Chelsea Clinton, a follower of the Church of Satan and a staunch abortion advocate; the New Age guru Deepak Chopra; Dame Jane Goodall, environmentalist and chimpanzee expert; the CEOs of Pfizer and Moderna; representatives of Big Tech; and a whole slew of abortionists, Malthusians, and globalists known to the general public. The conference has recruited five prominent journalists to be moderators, who are exclusively from left-wing media outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, CBS and Forbes.
This Conference – along with the Council for Inclusive Capitalism of Lynn Forester de Rothschild, the Global Compact on Education, and the inter-religious Pantheon to be held in June in Astana, Kazakhstan – is the umpteenth scandalous confirmation of a disturbing departure of the current Hierarchy, and in particular its highest Roman members, from Catholic orthodoxy. The Holy See has deliberately renounced the supernatural mission of the Church, making itself the servant of the New World Order and Masonic globalism in an antichristic counter-magisterium. The same Roman Dicasteries, occupied by people ideologically aligned with Jorge Mario Bergoglio and protected and promoted by him, now continue unrestrained in their implacable work of demolishing Faith, Morals, ecclesiastical discipline, and monastic and religious life, in an effort as vain as it is unprecedented to transform the Bride of Christ into a philanthropic association enslaved to the Strong Powers. The result is the super-imposition over the true Church of a sect of heretical and depraved Modernists who are intent on legitimizing adultery, sodomy, abortion, euthanasia, idolatry, and any perversion of the intellect and will. The true Church is now eclipsed, denied and discredited by her very Pastors, betrayed even by the one who occupies the highest Throne.
The fact that the deep church has managed to elect its own member so as to carry out this infernal plan in agreement with the deep state is no longer a mere suspicion, but a phenomenon which it is now essential to ask questions about and shed light on. The submission of the Cathedra veritatis to the interests of the Masonic elite is manifesting itself in all its evidence, in the deafening silence of the Sacred Pastors and in the bewilderment of the People of God, who have been abandoned to themselves.
Further demonstration of this degenerate libido serviendi of the Vatican towards the globalist ideology is the choice of speakers to give testimonials and lectures: supporters of abortion, of the use of fetal material in research, of demographic decline, of the pan-sexual LGBT agenda, and last but not least, of the narrative of Covid and the so-called vaccines. Cardinal Ravasi, the President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, is certainly one of the leading representatives of the deep church and Modernist progressivism, as well as an advocate of dialogue with the infamous Masonic sect and a promoter of the famous Courtyard of the Gentiles. It is therefore not surprising that included among the organizers of the event is the Stem for Life Foundation, which proudly defines itself as “a nonsectarian, nonpartisan, tax-exempt organization focused on creating a movement to accelerate development of cell therapies.”
On closer inspection, the sectarianism and partisanship of the Vatican Conference are made evident by the topic it addresses, the conclusions it seeks to draw, its participants, and its sponsors. Even the image chosen to promote the Conference is extremely eloquent: a close-up of Michelangelo’s fresco of Creation on the Sistine Chapel ceiling, in which the hand of God the Father reaches out towards the hand of Adam, but with both hands covered by disposable surgical gloves, recalling the regulations of the new “health liturgy” and implying that even the Lord Himself might spread the virus.
In this sacrilegious representation, the order of Creation is subverted into therapeutic anti-creation, in which man saves himself and becomes the mad author of his own health “redemption.” Instead of the purifying laver of Baptism, the Covid religion proposes the vaccine, the bearer of disabilities and death, as the only means of salvation. Instead of Faith in the Revelation of God, we find superstition and the irrational assent to precepts that have nothing scientific about them, with rites and liturgies that mimic true Religion in a sacrilegious parody.
This choice of imagery has an aberrant and blasphemous ring to it, because it uses a well-known and evocative image to insinuate and promote a false and tendentious narrative that says that in the presence of a seasonal flu, whose virus has still not been isolated according to Koch’s postulates and that can be effectively cured using existing treatments, it is necessary to administer vaccines that are admitted to be ineffective and that are still in the experimentation phase, with unknown side-effects, and whose producers have obtained a criminal shield of immunity for their distribution. The victims immolated on the altar of the health Moloch, from children dismembered in the third month of pregnancy in order to produce the gene serum to the thousands of people who have been killed or maimed, do not stop the infernal machine of Big Pharma, and it is to be feared that there will be a resurgence of the phenomenon over the next few months.
One wonders if Bergoglio’s zeal for the dissemination of the gene serum is not also motivated by base economic reasons, as compensation for the losses suffered by the Vatican and the Dioceses following the lockdown and the collapse of attendance by the faithful at Mass and the Sacraments. On the other hand, if Rome’s silence about the violation of human and religious rights in China has been paid for by the Beijing dictatorship with substantial prebends, nothing prevents the replication of this scheme on a large scale in exchange for the Vatican’s promotion of the vaccines.
The Conference will obviously take great care not to mention even indirectly the perennial teaching of the Magisterium on moral and doctrinal questions of the greatest importance. Conversely, the sycophantic praise of the worldly mentality and the prevailing ideology will be the only voice, along with the amorphous ecumenical repertoire inspired by the New Age.
I note that in 2003 the same Pontifical Council for Culture condemned yoga meditation and, more generally, New Age thought as being incompatible with the Catholic faith. According to the Vatican document, New Age thought “shares with a number of internationally influential groups the goal of superseding or transcending particular religions in order to create space for a universal religion which could unite humanity. Closely related to this is a very concerted effort on the part of many institutions to invent a Global Ethic, an ethical framework which would reflect the global nature of contemporary culture, economics and politics. Further, the politicization of ecological questions certainly colors the whole question of the Gaia hypothesis or worship of mother earth” (2.5). It goes without saying that the pagan ceremonies with which Saint Peter’s Basilica was profaned in honor of the pachamama idol fit perfectly into that “politicization of ecological questions” denounced by the 2003 Vatican document, and which today is instead promoted sine glossa by the so-called Bergoglian magisterium, beginning with Laudato Sì and Fratelli Tutti.
At La Salette, Our Lady warned us: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.” It will not be the Holy Church, indefectible by the promises of Christ, that will lose the Faith: it will be the sect that occupies the See of Most Blessed Peter and which today we see propagating the anti-gospel of the New World Order. It is no longer possible to remain silent, because today our silence would make us accomplices of the enemies of God and of the human race. Millions of faithful are disgusted by the countless scandals of the Pastors, by the betrayal of their mission, by the desertion of those who by Holy Orders are called to bear witness to the Holy Gospel and not to support the establishment of the kingdom of the Antichrist.
I beg my Brothers in the Episcopate, priests, religious, and in a particular way the faithful laity who see themselves being betrayed by the Hierarchy, to raise their voices so as to express with a spirit of true obedience to Our Lord, Head of the Mystical Body, a firm and courageous denunciation of this apostasy and its authors. I invite everyone to pray that the Divine Majesty may be moved to compassion and intervene in our aid. May the Most Holy Virgin, terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata, intercede before the Throne of God, compensating with Her merits for the unworthiness of Her children who invoke Her with the glorious title of Auxilium Christianorum.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
20 April 2021
Feria Tertia infra Hebdomadam II post Octavam Paschae
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
“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.” Martin Luther
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 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 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.
Worth Reading Again from Last Year for fans of the Indult:
Open Letter by “Papal favorite” calling for End of Summorum Pontificum
OPEN LETTER on the “State of Liturgical Exception” | Andrea Grillo, April 29, 2020
To all theologians, scholars, and students of theology:
The great liturgical tradition, which has always accompanied and supported the Church in her history of grace and sin, hears the groaning of individuals and nations in this pandemic crisis, which brings suffering and affliction to those who are sick, and fear, isolation and loneliness to everyone else. The ordinary rhythm of the Lenten and Paschal journey is altered and subverted, in solidarity with our common suffering. We would never have thought, however, that a small but not marginal suffering would also come at the same time through the exercise of ecclesial authority and through the decrees Quo magis e Cum sanctissima, which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published on 25 March 2020.
It is no surprise that This Congregation should devote its attention to the liturgy. But special and singular is the fact that it modifies the ordines, introduces prefaces and formularies for feasts, and modifies calendars and criteria of precedence. And it does this on a 1962 missal. How is this possible? The Congregation, as is known, in this case moves in the space of an exceptional authority, which dates back 13 years, in accordance with motu proprio Summorum pontificum. But since time is greater than space, what is possible on the regulatory level is not always appropriate. Therefore, it is crucial to engage in critical reflection on the logic of this development.
Time, in fact, has unveiled to us the paradox of a competence on the liturgy being taken away from the Bishops and the Congregation of Worship: this was arranged, in Summorum pontificum, with an intention of solemn pacification and generous reconciliation, but soon it changed into a serious division, a widespread conflict, and became the symbol of a “liturgical rejection” of the Second Vatican Council. The greatest distortion of the initial intentions of the motu proprio can be seen today in those diocesan seminaries where it is expected that the future ministers will be trained at the same time in two different rites: the conciliar rite and the one that denies it. All this reached its most surreal point the day before yesterday, when the two Decrees were released. They mark the culmination of a distortion which is no longer tolerable, and which can be summed up as follows:
· the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith acts as a substitute in exercising competences conferred by the Second Vatican Council on Bishops and the Congregation for Divine Worship;
· it undertakes to elaborate ”liturgical variants” of the ordines without having the historical, textual, philological and pastoral competences;
· it seems to ignore, precisely on the dogmatic level, a grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credendi, since it is inevitable that a dual, conflictual ritual form will lead to a significant division in the faith;
· it seems to underestimate the disruptive effect this “exception” will have on the ecclesial level, by immunizing a part of the community from the “school of prayer” that the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform have providentially given to the common ecclesial journey.
A “state of exception” is also happening today on the civil level, in its harsh necessity, and this fact allows us greater ecclesial foresight. To return to an ecclesial normality, we must overcome the state of liturgical exception established 13 years ago in another world, with other conditions and with other hopes, by Summorum pontificum. It no longer makes sense to deprive diocesan bishops of their liturgical powers; neither does it make sense to have an Ecclesia Dei Commission (which has in fact already been suppressed), or a Section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which take away authority from diocesan Bishops and the Congregation of Divine Worship; it no longer makes sense to enact decrees to “reform” a rite that is closed in the historical past, inert and crystallized, lifeless and without vigor. There can be no resuscitation for it. The double regime is over; the noble intention of SP has waned; the Lefebvrians have raised the barhigher and higher and then run away, insulting the Second Vatican Council and the present pope along with all three of his predecessors. Continuing to nourish a “state of liturgical exception” – one that was born to unite, but does nothing but divide – only leads to the shattering, privatization, and distortion of the worship of the Church. On the basis of these considerations, we resolve together to request that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith immediately withdraw the two decrees of 25/03/2020 and restore all powers concerning the liturgy to the diocesan Bishops and the Congregation for Divine Worship. Obviously, we ask this without prejudice to the powers that this Congregation retains in doctrinal matters.
So let us leave the “state of liturgical exception”. If not now, when?
With best wishes to all colleagues and students, besieged but not conquered in life, during these bitter yet still generous times.
“Time is greater than space” – The ideological lynchpin of Pope Francis the Great Equivocator
This liturgical OPEN LETTER structures its argument around the phrase: Time is Greater Than Space.” This slogan of Pope Francis, “Time is greater than space” (TGTS), appeared in his first two encyclicals, Lumen Fidei and Laudato Si’. It surfaced again in the apostolic exhortations, Evangelii Gaudium and Amoris Laetitia.
From Lumen Fidei:
“Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, ‘fragmenting’ time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.”
Evangelii Gaudium is more revealing as to the cryptic meaning of this phrase:
222. A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.
223. This principle enables us to work slowly but surely, without being obsessed with immediate results. It helps us patiently to endure difficult and adverse situations, or inevitable changes in our plans. It invites us to accept the tension between fullness and limitation, and to give a priority to time. One of the faults which we occasionally observe in sociopolitical activity is that spaces and power are preferred to time and processes. Giving priority to space means madly attempting to keep everything together in the present, trying to possess all the spaces of power and of self-assertion; it is to crystallize processes and presume to hold them back. Giving priority to time means being concerned about initiating processes rather than possessing spaces. Time governs spaces, illumines them and makes them links in a constantly expanding chain, with no possibility of return. What we need, then, is to give priority to actions which generate new processes in society and engage other persons and groups who can develop them to the point where they bear fruit in significant historical events. Without anxiety, but with clear convictions and tenacity.
St. Pius X said in Pascendi that Evolution is the fundamental principle of the heresy of Modernism. This error is practically applied when Modernists embrace Becoming and reject Being. This neologism of Francis, TGTS, is just a repacking of this old philosophical error of Modernism. Francis is trying to sound clever by putting a little make-up and bow-tie on the pig. But the pig remains a pig because that is his Being. Fr. Réginald Marie Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. explained this error in his great essay, Where is the New Theology Leading Us?, that was published in the Angelicum in 1946.
It should be remembered that on December 1, 1924, the Holy Office condemned 12 propositions taken from the philosophy of action, among which was number 5, or the new definition of truth: “Truth is not found in any particular act of the intellect wherein conformity with the object would be had, as the Scholastics say, but rather truth is always in a state of becoming, and consists in a progressive alignment of the understanding with life, indeed a certain perpetual process, by which the intellect strives to develop and explain that which experience presents or action requires: by which principle, moreover, as in all progression, nothing is ever determined or fixed.” The last of these condemned propositions is: “Even after Faith has been received, man ought not to rest in the dogmas of religion, and hold fast to them fixedly and immovably, but always solicitous to remain moving ahead toward a deeper truth and even evolving into new notions, and even correcting that which he believes.”
Many, who did not heed these warnings, have now reverted to these errors.
It revisits modernism. Because it accepted the proposition which was intrinsic to modernism: that of substituting, as if it were illusory, the traditional definition of truth: aequatio rei et intellectus (the adequation of intellect and reality), for the subjective definition: adequatio realis mentis et vitae (the adequation of intellect and life). That was more explicitly stated in the already cited proposition, which emerged from the philosophy of action, and was condemned by the Holy Office, December 1, 1924: “Truth is not found in any particular act of the intellect wherein conformity with the object would be had, as the Scholastics say, but rather truth is always in a state of becoming, and consists in a progressive alignment of the understanding with life, indeed a certain perpetual process, by which the intellect strives to develop and explain that which experience presents or action requires: by which principle, moreover, as in all progression, nothing is ever determined or fixed” (v. Monitore ecclesiastico, 1925. t. I; p. 194.)
The truth is no longer the conformity (of judgment) to the intuitive reality and its immutable laws but the conformity of judgment to the exigencies of action, and of human life which continues to evolve. The philosophy of being or ontology is substituted by the philosophy of action which defines truth as no longer a function of being but of action.
Thus is modernism reprised: “Truth is no more immutable than man himself, inasmuch as it is evolved with him, in him and through him. As well, Pius X said of the modernists, “they pervert the eternal concept of truth.”
The traditional definition truth is no longer for them the conformity of judgment to intuitive being and the immutable laws of non-contradiction, of causality, etc. For them, the truth is no longer that which is but that which is becoming — and is constantly and always changing.
For the Modernist heretic, Pope Francis, “Time is greater than space,” “Time” means the process of becoming through evolution and “Space” is the limitation of static being. A library could be filled with analyzing the implications of this error but suffice for the present there are two obvious to everyone: Firstly, the very definition of heresy is the rejection of DOGMA. For the faithful Catholic, DOGMA is NECESSARILY the proximate rule of faith. This is directly rejected by the Modernists. They replace Dogma with the person of the pope as the proximate rule of faith and he is free to corrupt the revealed truth in whatever manner he pleases. The second obvious error is that they deny the philosophical meaning of substance. They follow modern reductionist Scientism that resurrected the Greek philosopher Democritus’ (460-370 B.C.) theory that the fundamental nature of all that existed is “atoms and the void.” Since all reality is just the recombination of atoms and the void between them, then there cannot be such thing as a fixed substance in which accidents adhere. Consequently, we have Benedict/Ratzinger denying substance and making the accident of relationship the fundamental ground of all reality. It is therefore not surprising when he denies the Dogma of Transubstantiation. And what becomes of the Dogma that the Father and the Son are Consubstantial? Francis follows in the same manner and never kneels before the Blessed Sacrament. No argument can touch these blighted minds, if you call something that never thinks a “mind.” It matters not what wreckage and ruin that has followed since Vatican II because the being of the wreckage cannot overcome their ideological fantasy of becoming as Pope Francis looks to his “brighter horizon of the utopian future… for progress in building a people.”
The truth is just the opposite, ‘Space is Greater than Time.’ God revealed His name to Moses, “I AM.” Jesus applied this name to Himself. God is perfect BEING; He is perfect ACT: “Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration” (James 1:17). Ultimately time will end in a changeless eternity where the faithful will be with God in a space prepared by Him for each one of us. “In my Father's house there are many mansions. If not, I would have told you: because I go to prepare a place for you. And if I shall go, and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will take you to myself; that where I am, you also may be” (John 14:2-3).
Andrea Grillo gives as a reason for the suppression of the Latin Mass granted to the Indult crowd:
· it seems to ignore, precisely on the dogmatic level, a grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credendi, since it is inevitable that a dual, conflictual ritual form will lead to a significant division in the faith;
He too believes with Francis that TGTS. Latin Mass Catholics are stuck in space while the Catholic Church is moving in time to a new “dogmatic level” that will inevitably “lead to a significant division in the faith.”
The two rites he says represent a “grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credenda.” Are we to congratulate Grillo for this insight?Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith with his Interventionin in 1969 said the same thing! This is a truth that faithful Catholics have known for more than 50 years! Yet Indultists publicly deny this truth professing that both the Novus Ordo and the traditional Latin rite express an identity of “lex orandi /lex credendi.” This is the price they have paid for their Indult; a mind that turns its back on the first principle of the understanding cannot even be called a “mind”!
Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission’s purpose is to make a public profession of the Catholic faith before our local ordinary and Rome. Foundational to this purpose is that DOGMA IS divine revelation infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church, which is irreformable both in its truth (form) and its terminology employed (matter), IS the “formal object of divine and Catholic faith” and constitutes the proximate rule of faith for all the faithful. Furthermore, our immemorial ecclesiastical traditions are necessary attributes of the faith by which alone the faith can be known and communicated to others. Since God has imposed a duty upon His faithful to profess their faith and worship Him in the public forum, every Catholic possesses the inalienable right to our immemorial traditions by which alone these duties can be fulfilled. Those who have accepted the Latin Mass by virtue of Indult and/or grant of legal privilege want a non-confrontational modus vivendi with Modernist heretics. This has never worked in the past and it will not work now. Being neither ‘cold nor hot’, they please no one and will soon learn that having traded their birth right for bowl of pottage there is nothing left to eat.
The Church that knows how to celebrate Easter is synodal
Vatican Insider | Paolo Scarafoni and Filomena Rizzo | 4-20-21
“It is a matter of putting Jesus Christ at the centre of community life and of living a new Pentecost. The paradigm remains the Second Vatican Council: once it began, at the moment of real sharing, precisely on the subject of the «liturgical celebration», it was no longer possible to harness the Holy Spirit and keep him under the control of a few, and so the novelty could enter the world.”
COMMENT: The blasphemy never ends. These Modernist heretics have the effrontery to say that before Vatican II, that Holy Spirit was “harnessed” and “kept under control” to prevent Him from inflicting His liturgical “novelty” on the Church. The “received and approved” Roman rite of Mass is the object of Dogma. It is therefore the work of the Holy Ghost as all true worship of God is and always has been from the beginning to this day. For these heretics, the countless saints, martyrs and confessors that fill the history of the Church never “put Jesus Christ at the centre of community life and the living a new Pentecost.” The Novus Ordo Church knows nothing about the celebration of Easter because they know nothing about a penitential exercise of Lent. They want the joy of the Resurrection without the contradiction of the Cross and Passion of Jesus Christ. That is the “novelty” they pursue. It is the same that the Pharisees wanted: “Let Christ the king of Israel come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe” (Mark 15:32). These constitute the “many” who will one day hear our Lord say: “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doth the will of my Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity” (Matt 7:21-23). They have betrayed the Faith and yet promise themselves heaven as if it were possible that the Truth of Christ could be immaterial to His friendship. Jesus Christ said that there is a sin that will not be forgiven in this world or the next: the sin against the Holy Ghost. Why? It may very well be because the “many” believe they possess the grace of God and therefore cannot repent of a sin they are blind to. Pray God to deliver us sins of ignorance.
There is one other truth – that no men see the nature of sin so clearly as those who are freest from sin; just as no intelligence knows sin with such an intensity of knowledge as God Himself. Our Divine Lord Jesus Christ, the sinless Son of God, knew sin in all its hatefulness so as no other human heart has ever known it. His Immaculate Mother—because sinless—knew the sinfulness of sin by the light of her intelligence, and by a pure horror of her whole spiritual nature. So in like manner the Saints of God, each one of them in the proportion of his sanctity; and so you likewise in the measure in which you are free from sin, in that measure will you hate it, in that measure you understand and estimate its sinfulness. And if at any time in your life you have committed sin—in the measure in which you are separated from your past life, in the measure in which that old character of yours has been taken off, and you can see ‘the old man’ which you have sloughed off, that old being and nature of yours which cleaves to you no longer, which you look on as a thing hideous and horrible, belonging to you no more, belonging to your childhood, boyhood, or youth, but yours no longer now—in that measure you understand the sinfulness of sin. You can look back on your past life, and understand your sins as you did not understand Them then; and when you come to die, your present character and your present life will be seen by you in a light, brighter and more intense than that under which you see them now. Look up, therefore, into the light of God’s presence, and pray God to make you to know yourselves as He knows you, and to see yourselves as He sees you now; for when you have seen the worst of your sins, what are they compared with those which God sees in you? Therefore do not let us ever think that we know all our sins yet, do not let us imagine that we fully know our own sinfulness. We are only beginning to learn it, and we shall have to learn it all our life. There are three great depths which no human line can sound—the depth of our sinfulness, the depth of our unworthiness, and the depth of our nothingness. If you are beginning to learn those three things, happy are you. Be not afraid, the more you see your own sinfulness; and for this reason. Who is showing it to you? It is the light of the Spirit of God. It is He Who alone searches the heart, Who alone makes us know ourselves; and the more you see of your own sinfulness; the truer pledge you have of His presence; that He is with you, that He is within you, that He is busied about your salvation. He is giving you a pledge and a promise that every sin you see He will help you to repent of and every sin you repent of shall be washed away in the Precious Blood of Jesus Christ.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Sin and Its Consequences
Pope Francis calls for ‘global governance’ and ‘universal vaccines’ in letter to globalist financial summit
‘There remains an urgent need for a global plan that can create new or regenerate existing institutions, particularly those of global governance, and help to build a new network of international relations for advancing the integral human development of all peoples.’
LifeSiteNews - Michael Haynes - VATICAN CITY-April 8, 2021– Pope Francis has addressed the World Bank and International Monetary Fund at their spring meeting, calling for “global governance” in light of COVID-19, strongly advocating for universal vaccines, and bemoaning the “ecological debt” which is owed to “nature itself.”
His letter is the latest in a series of recent acts in which Francis has aligned himself with global corporations committed to anti-Catholic agendas.
The letter was delivered via Peter Cardinal Turkson, Prefect of the Holy See’s Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, to the spring 2021 meeting between the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is currently being held online from April 5 - 11.
Dated April 4, the letter mentioned God just once, in the final line.
Instead, Francis focussed on calling for a system of global government which would implement a new societal order upon the world, based upon climate change policies and universal vaccination.
Referencing “the Covid-19 pandemic,” Francis declared that the world had been forced to “confront a series of grave and interrelated socio-economic, ecological, and political crises.”
Such inter-connected crises, he placed before the World Bank and IMF, hoping that their meetings would provide the basis for a re-ordering of world affairs: “It is my hope that your discussions will contribute to a model of ‘recovery’ capable of generating new, more inclusive and sustainable solutions to support the real economy, assisting individuals and communities to achieve their deepest aspirations and the universal common good.”
Francis repeated the claim that COVID has shown how “no one is saved alone,” and hence “new and creative forms of social, political and economic participation” must be drawn up.
Quoting from his recent encyclical Fratelli Tutti, which has been described as “blasphemous” by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Francis mentioned “trust” as the “cornerstone of all relationships,” a point which he believed the World Bank and IMF would “know well” due to being “experts in finance and economics.”
He urged that the two financial giants foster such relationships, and engage in “building bridges, and envisioning long-term inclusive projects.”
Francis also renewed his frequent call for a paradigm shift in global politics, saying: “there remains an urgent need for a global plan that can create new or regenerate existing institutions, particularly those of global governance, and help to build a new network of international relations for advancing the integral human development of all peoples.”
A principal effect of the desired global government, would be the reduction of debt in order to enable easy access primarily to “vaccines,” followed by “health, education and jobs.”
AN ‘ECOLOGICAL DEBT’ TO ‘NATURE ITSELF’
However, Pope Francis did not miss the opportunity to instruct the IMF and World Bank on another of his regular areas of concern issues, namely “climate change.” He warned about overlooking “ecological debt,” a phenomena which he described as affecting the whole world, and pitting the “global north” against the “south.”
“We are, in fact, in debt to nature itself, as well as the people and countries affected by human-induced ecological degradation and biodiversity loss,” wrote Francis.
“In this regard, I believe that the financial industry, which is distinguished by its great creativity, will prove capable of developing agile mechanisms for calculating this ecological debt, so that developed countries can pay it, not only by significantly limiting their consumption of non-renewable energy or by assisting poorer countries to enact policies and programmes of sustainable development, but also by covering the costs of the innovation required for that purpose.”
These lines seem to echo the sentiments expressed by key globalist and founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, whose proposed anti-Catholics “Great Reset,” is underpinned by a focus on a green financial agenda, as he mentions the “withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies,” and a new financial system based on “investments” which advance “equality and sustainability,” and the building of a “‘green’ urban infrastructure.”
Schwab, the IMF, and scores of the world’s most influential banks (including the World Bank), have in fact already committed themselves to enforcing the green agenda of the Great Reset, and look set to make adherence to such green policies a criteria for access to finance in the future.
Francis has already signalled his intimacy with Schwab, by sending an address to the WEF four time in his eight-year pontificate, and allowing an annual Vatican roundtable at Davos, the WEF’s annual conference site in Switzerland.
A SECULAR SOCIETY POINTED TO A NEW ‘COMMON GOOD’
Francis also made reference to the “common good,” several times in his letter, which he linked intimately to finance and a form of secular fraternity of the kind described in Fratelli Tutti.
“It follows that public money may never be disjoined from the public good, and financial markets should be underpinned by laws and regulations aimed at ensuring that they truly work for the common good. A commitment to economic, financial and social solidarity thus entails much more than engaging in sporadic acts of generosity.”
Such goals, for Francis, include “a justly financed vaccine solidarity,” which he said was part of the “the law of love and the health of all.”
“Here, I reiterate my call to government leaders, businesses and international organizations to work together in providing vaccines for all, especially for the most vulnerable and needy.”
Closing his letter, Francis repeated his wish for a world focussed on a new style of fraternity, underpinned by a focus on green policies, urging the World Bank and IMF to develop solutions for “a more inclusive and sustainable future.”
It would be a future “where finance is at the service of the common good, where the vulnerable and the marginalized are placed at the centre, and where the earth, our common home, is well cared for.”
There was no mention in the letter of Christ, the Catholic Church or the Catholic teaching on the common good.
Former Pfizer VP: ‘Your government is lying to you in a way that could lead to your death.’
‘Look out the window, and think, “why is my government lying to me about something so fundamental?” Because, I think the answer is, they are going to kill you using this method. They’re going to kill you and your family.’
LifeSiteNews – Patrick Delaney - April 7, 2021 — Dr. Michael Yeadon, Pfizer's former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory who spent 32 years in the industry leading new medicines research and retired from the pharmaceutical giant with “the most senior research position” in his field, spoke with LifeSiteNews.
He addressed the “demonstrably false” propaganda from governments in response to COVID-19, including the “lie” of dangerous variants, the totalitarian potential for “vaccine passports,” and the strong possibility we are dealing with a “conspiracy” which could lead to something far beyond the carnage experienced in the wars and massacres of the 20th century.
His main points included:
· There is “no possibility” current variants of COVID-19 will escape immunity. It is “just a lie.”
· Yet, governments around the world are repeating this lie, indicating that we are witnessing not just “convergent opportunism,” but a “conspiracy.” Meanwhile media outlets and Big Tech platforms are committed to the same propaganda and the censorship of the truth.
· Pharmaceutical companies have already begun to develop unneeded “top-up” (“booster”) vaccines for the “variants.” The companies are planning to manufacture billions of vials, in addition to the current experimental COVID-19 “vaccine” campaign.
· Regulatory agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, have announced that since these “top-up” vaccines will be so similar to the prior injections which were approved for emergency use authorization, drug companies will not be required to “perform any clinical safety studies.”
· Thus, this virtually means that design and implementation of repeated and coerced mRNA vaccines “go from the computer screen of a pharmaceutical company into the arms of hundreds of millions of people, [injecting] some superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification.”
· Why are they doing this? Since no benign reason is apparent, the use of vaccine passports along with a “banking reset” could issue in a totalitarianism unlike the world has ever seen. Recalling the evil of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler, “mass depopulation” remains a logical outcome.
· The fact that this at least could be true means everyone must “fight like crazy to make sure that system never forms.”
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, Interviewed by Aldo Maria Valli
April 5, 2021
Valli: With respect to the affairs of the world and the Church there is a radically divided judgment, with a polarization that seems to admit no mutual understanding. It is as if two different cultures have emerged, two different anthropologies, and even two different faiths. Thus, how should we behave in this situation if we wish to safeguard love for the truth?
Viganò: You are right: the establishment of the New Order, begun under the pretext of the so-called pandemic, makes the loss of inner peace and serenity perceptible to many; it makes us perceive an evil that overwhelms us and before which we feel powerless; it sharpens divisions and disputes between family members, relatives, and friends. Very often we are saddened to see how the lie succeeds in convincing people close to us whom we had believed to be mature and capable of discerning good from evil. It seems incredible to us that our friends have allowed themselves to be deceived, indeed I would almost say to be hypnotized, by the drumbeat of the mainstream media: doctors whom we considered conscientious seem to have cancelled their own scientific knowledge by abdicating rationality in the name of a sort of crazy superstition; acquaintances who up until yesterday condemned the horrors of Nazism and Communism do not realize how much the horrors of those dictatorships are being re-proposed in an even more inhuman and ruthless form, replicating on a wider scale the experimentation of the concentration camps and the violation of the natural rights of the world population. We cannot understand how it can be that our parish priest speaks to us about Covid as if it were a plague, that the mayor behaves like a hierarch, that a neighbor calls the police because a family organizes a barbecue on the terrace. Elderly people who once fought valiantly and risked their lives are now literally terrorized by a treatable flu. Fathers of families with solid moral principles tolerate their children being indoctrinated into vice and perversion, as if what has been passed on to them and what they believe in no longer has any value. Speaking about love of one’s country, the defense of national borders, and national sovereignty is now considered fascist. And we ask ourselves: where is the Italy that we have loved? Where is the Church that instructed us in the Faith and made us grow in the Grace of God? Is it possible that all of this has been cancelled in just a few years?
It is obvious that what is now happening has been planned for decades, both in the civil sphere as well as the religious. And many people, very many, have been deceived: first by convincing them to grant rights to those who share neither our Faith nor our values, then by making them feel almost guilty for the fact of being Catholic, for their ideas, for their past. Today we have reached the point of being barely tolerated as retrogrades and fanatics, while there are those would like to make it a crime to do what has constituted the basis of civilized life for millennia and declare every behavior against God, against nature, and against our identity not only licit but obligatory.
In the face of this upheaval that involves our entire society, the division that emerges between the children of light and children of darkness appears increasingly clear: this is a grace that is granted to us by God in order to make a courageous and decisive choice. Let us recall the words of Our Lord: “Do not believe that I have come to bring peace upon the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword” (Mt 10:34). The pacifism we have been hearing about for decades only serves to disarm the good and set the wicked free to do their iniquitous works. Therefore even the division and polarization between those who belong to the City of God and those who serve the prince of this world is welcome, if it serves to open our eyes. Love for the truth necessarily implies hatred of lies, and it would be ill-considered and illusory to believe that two masters can be served. If today we are asked to choose between the Kingdom of Christ and the tyranny of the New World Order, we cannot avoid this choice and must carry it out consistently, asking the Lord for the strength to bear witness to Him even to the point of martyrdom. Whoever tells us that the Gospel can be reconciled with the anti-Gospel of globalism is lying, just as those who offer us a world without wars in which all religions can live together in peace also lie. There is no peace except in the Kingdom of Christ: pax Christi in regno Christi. Of course, in order to conduct our combat successfully we should be able to count on generals and commanders who guide us: if almost all of them have preferred desertion and betrayal, we can however count on an invincible Leader, the Most Holy Virgin, invoking Her protection over Her children and the entire Church. Under Her powerful guidance we should not fear anything, because it is She who will strike the head of the ancient serpent, restoring the order that the pride of Satan has broken.
Valli: We are approaching Easter: despite everything, the Lord rises. We want to find reasons for hope. This is a difficult undertaking, but can we try?
Viganò: Not only can we try: we must have Faith and also exercise the virtue of Hope, according to which we know that the Lord grants us the Graces necessary to avoid sin, carry out the good, and merit the eternal beatitude of Heaven. Let’s not forget that we are pilgrims in hac lacrimarum valle, and that our homeland is the heavenly Jerusalem, along with the Angels and Saints, in the glory of the Most Holy Trinity. Surrexit Dominus vere, the Easter liturgy proclaims: He has Risen once and for all, conquering Satan and snatching from him the chirograph that Adam signed with original sin. The present trials, the fear of being abandoned and alone against a powerful alignment that seems to crush us and overcome us, should not frighten us but spur us on to renew our trust in Him who said of Himself: “I have told you these things, so that you may have peace in Me. In the world you will have tribulation; but take courage, I have conquered the world” (Jn 16:33).
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
Many date the title of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Co-Redemptrix to the 16th century. It is actually much older than that but 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 denies the title because he is a Protestant heretic. 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 there would no others. 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 is “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 by the man who denies the Blessed Virgin Mary, our Lady of Sorrows, her rightful title conferred upon her by God as Co-Redemptrix.
Pope Francis standing before the Blessed Sacrament!
Pope Francis kneeling and kissing the feet of the political emissaries from South Sudan!
Pope Francis kissing the hand of a Jewish rabbi!
Pope Francis refusing his hand to faithful Catholics!
Pope Francis offering his hand to circus performers!
Pope Francis – his “most gentle manner”!
They (our most holy predecessors) knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error. Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor St. Celestine, who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.
Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, 1794 papal bull addressed to all the faithful condemning 85 propositions from the Council of Pistoia, 1786
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.”
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.
Francis Besmirches and Humiliates our Spotless Mother, the Holy Catholic Church
The technique is old: the criminal accuses the innocent in order to create the impression that all are to blame. “In this they are accusing the Church of something for which their own conscience plainly reproaches them,” as Saint Pius X warned about the Modernists in Pascendi.
In a meeting with the clergy of Rome in the Lateran Basilica yesterday, the Bishop of the City, Francis, had the temerity to say this while discussing the abuse crisis, of which he is surely a protagonist:
“It is saving us from hypocrisy, from the spirituality of appearances. He is blowing his Spirit to restore beauty to his Bride, surprised in flagrant adultery.” (“Ci sta salvando dall’ipocrisia, dalla spiritualità delle apparenze. Egli sta soffiando il suo Spirito per ridare bellezza alla sua Sposa, sorpresa in flagrante adulterio.”)
No, the Church is not and cannot be compared to unfaithfulness of the Old Testament chosen people, whose infidelity warranted even a writ of “divorce” (cf. Jeremiah, ch. 3). She is spotless and without wrinkle, as Saint Paul explained to the Ephesians:
Husbands, love your wives, as Christ also loved the church, and delivered himself up for it: That he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life: That he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish. So also ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself. For no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also Christ doth the Church: Because we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be two in one flesh. This is a great sacrament; but I speak in Christ and in the Church.
The One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, our Holy Mother Church, is spotless, without wrinkle and without blemish. She is holy, immaculate, absolutely untouched in her purity washed by the Blood of the Lamb by the unfaithfulness of the laity and of the clergy, in particular of the careless popes of the past few decades, who let the hierarchy be taken by a volcanic wave of immorality and debauchery.
She remains spotless! Those who besmirch her accusing her of adultery when they are the adulterers themselves -- may Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Bridegroom, who calls her “my sister, my love, my dove, my Undefiled,” punish them mightily for their horrid defamation!
Posted from Rorate Caeli
THE IDOLATRY OF VATICAN II: Francis and the War on Tradition
Similes illis fiant qui faciunt ea, et omnes qui confidunt in eis.
While nations that were once Catholic introduce laws that promote abortion and euthanasia, gender theory and sodomitical “marriages;” while in the United States a legitimately elected President is seen to be usurped in the White House by a corrupt, depraved, and pro-abortion “President” placed in power by a gigantic fraud to the sycophantic applause of Bergoglio and progressive bishops; while the world population is held hostage by plotters and conspirators who profit from the psycho-pandemic and the imposition of ineffective and dangerous pseudo-vaccines, the solicitude of Francis is focused on catechesis, in a monologue staged on January 30 for the selected audience of the National Catechetical Office of the Italian Bishops’ Conference [CEI]. The show was presented on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Catechetical Office, “an indispensable instrument for catechetical renewal after the Second Vatican Council.”
In this monologue, written in all probability by some grey functionary of the CEI in an outline form and then developed off the cuff thanks to the improvisation in which the august orator excels, all the words that are dear to the followers of the conciliar church are used: first and foremost the word “kerygma” that every good modernist can never omit in his homilies, despite the fact he is almost always ignorant of the meaning of the Greek term, which with all probability he does not even know how to decline without stumbling on accents and endings. Obviously the ignorance of those who repeat the refrain of Vatican II is the instrumentum regni ever since the Clergy were forced to set aside Catholic doctrine in order to privilege the creative approach of the new way. Certainly, using the word announcement instead of kerygma would trivialize the speeches of the initiates, and also reveal the contemptuous intolerance of this elite caste towards the majority who stubbornly cling to the forbidden post-Tridentine notionism.
It is no coincidence that the Innovators detest with all their strength the Catechism of Saint Pius X, which in the brevity and clarity of its questions and answers does not leave any margins for the catechist’s creativity. The catechist should be – but for sixty years no longer has been – the one who transmits that which he has received, not an elusive “personal recollection” of salvation history that from time to time chooses which truths to transmit and which ones to leave aside in order not to offend his listeners.
In the merciful Bergoglian church, the heir of the post-conciliar church (which are both variants of a spirit that no longer has anything Catholic about it), it is licit to discuss, contest, and reject any dogma, any truth of the Faith, any magisterial document, and any papal pronunciation prior to 1958. Since, according to the words of Francis, one can be “brothers and sisters of everyone, independently of faith.” Any believer can clearly understand the very grave implications of the present pseudo-magisterium, which brazenly contradicts the constant teaching of Sacred Scripture, the Divine Tradition, and the apostolic Magisterium. However, the naive victim of decades of conciliar reprogramming of Catholics could believe that, in this composite babel of heretics, protesters, and those given over to vice, there remains at least some space for those who are orthodox, devoted subjects of the Roman Pontiff, and virtuous.
All brothers, independently of faith? This principle of tolerant and indistinct acceptance knows no limits... except for actually being Catholic. In fact, we read in the monologue given by Bergoglio in the Sala Clementina on January 30:
This is magisterium: the Council is the magisterium of the Church. Either you are with the Church and therefore you follow the Council, and if you do not follow the Council or you interpret it in your own way, as you wish, you are not with the Church. We must be demanding and strict on this point. The Council should not be negotiated in order to have more of these... No, the Council as it is. And this problem that we are experiencing, of selectivity with respect to the Council, has been repeated throughout history with other Councils.
May the reader have the goodness not to dwell on the uncertain prose of Our orator, who in his “off the cuff” improvisation combines doctrinal chaos with the slaughter of syntax. The message of the speech to Catechists precipitates the merciful words of Fratelli Tutti into contradiction, forcing a necessary change of the title of the “encyclical” letter to: “All Brothers, with the exception of Catholics.” And if it is very true and acceptable that the Councils of the Catholic Church are part of the Magisterium, the same cannot be said for the only “council” of the new church, which – as I have stated many times – constitutes the most colossal deception that was ever carried out by the Shepherds of the Lord’s flock; a deception – repetita juvant – which occurred in the moment in which a clique of conspiring experts decided to use the instruments of ecclesiastical governance – authority, magisterial acts, papal discourses, documents of the Congregations, texts of the Liturgy – with a purpose opposed to that which the Divine Founder established when he instituted the Holy Church. In so doing, the subjects were forced to adhere to a new religion, ever more blatantly anti-Catholic and ultimately antichristic, usurping the sacred Authority of the old, despised and deprecated pre-conciliar religion.
We therefore find ourselves in the grotesque situation of hearing the denial of the Most Holy Trinity, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the doctrine of Suffrages for the dead, the purposes of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Transubstantiation, and the perpetual Virginity of Mary Most Holy without incurring any canonical sanction (if this were not the case, almost all the consultors of Vatican II and the present Roman Curia would already have been excommunicated); but “if you do not follow the Council or you interpret it in your own way, as you wish, you are not with the Church.” Bergoglio’s gloss on this demanding condemnation of any criticism of the Council leaves us truly incredulous:
It makes me think of a group of bishops who left after Vatican I, a group of lay people, groups, to continue the “true doctrine” that was not that of Vatican I: “We are the true Catholics.” Today they ordain women.
It should be noted that “a group of bishops, a group of lay people, groups” that refused to adhere to the infallibly defined doctrine of the First Vatican Ecumenical Council were immediately condemned and excommunicated, while today they would be welcomed with open arms “regardless of faith,” and that the Popes who at that time condemned the Old Catholics would today condemn Vatican II and would be accused by Bergoglio of “not being with the Church.” On the other hand, the lectresses and acolytesses of recent invention are not a prelude to anything else except the place of “Today they ordain women” where those who abandon the teaching of Christ invariably end up.
Curiously, ecumenical openness, the synodal path and the pachamama do not prevent the showing of intolerance towards Catholics whose only fault is that they do not want to apostatize from the Faith. And yet, when Bergoglio speaks of “no concession to those who try to present a catechesis that does not agree with the Magisterium of the Church,” he disavows himself and the alleged primacy of the pastoral over doctrine that is theorized in Amoris Lætitia as the conquest of those who build bridges and not walls, to use an expression dear to the courtiers of Santa Marta.
So from now on we could update the incipit of the Athanasian Creed: Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat Modernistarum hæresim.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
Excerpts from Open Letter from Catholic prelates on the morality of the Covid vaccine published in full on LifeSiteNews
On the moral illicitness of the use of vaccines made from cells derived from aborted human fetuses
'Vaccines derived from the cells of cruelly murdered unborn children are clearly apocalyptic in character and may possibly foreshadow the mark of the beast (see Rev. 13:16).'
“In the case of vaccines made from the cell lines of aborted human fetuses, we see a clear contradiction between the Catholic doctrine to categorically, and beyond the shadow of any doubt, reject abortion in all cases as a grave moral evil that cries out to heaven for vengeance (see Catechism of the Catholic Church n. 2268, n. 2270), and the practice of regarding vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines as morally acceptable in exceptional cases of “urgent need” — on the grounds of remote, passive, material cooperation. To argue that such vaccines can be morally licit if there is no alternative is in itself contradictory and cannot be acceptable for Catholics…
…The theological principle of material cooperation is certainly valid and may be applied to a whole host of cases (e.g. in paying taxes, the use of products made from slave labor, and so on). However, this principle can hardly be applied to the case of vaccines made from fetal cell lines, because those who knowingly and voluntarily receive such vaccines enter into a kind of concatenation, albeit very remote, with the process of the abortion industry. The crime of abortion is so monstrous that any kind of concatenation with this crime, even a very remote one, is immoral and cannot be accepted under any circumstances by a Catholic once he has become fully aware of it. One who uses these vaccines must realize that his body is benefitting from the “fruits” (although steps removed through a series of chemical processes) of one of mankind’s greatest crimes…”
…More than ever, we need the spirit of the confessors and martyrs who avoided the slightest suspicion of collaboration with the evil of their own age. The Word of God says: “Be simple as children of God without reproach in the midst of a depraved and perverse generation, in which you must shine like lights in the world” (Phil. 2, 15)…”
December 12, 2020, Memorial of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Guadalupe
Cardinal Janis Pujats, Metropolitan
archbishop emeritus of Riga
Bishop Tomash Peta, Metropolitan archbishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
Bishop Jan Pawel Lenga, Archbishop/bishop emeritus of Karaganda
Bishop Joseph E. Strickland, Bishop of Tyler (USA)
Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese of Saint Mary in Astana
COMMENT: Archbishop Viganò recently published a defense of the Oath Against Modernism and the crime of its suspension. Below is an excerpt censoring Benedict/Ratzinger for his part in that crime suggesting that he, in “consideration of the Divine Judgment that awaits him,” should “distance himself from those theologically erroneous positions.” But why mince words with niceties? It is not a question of “theologically erroneous positions” but rather of frank heresy for that is what Modernism is. There is no evidence whatsoever that Benedict/Ratzinger has repented from the theological errors of his youth. There is no evidence that he will make any abjuration of heresy and profession of faith necessary to be reconciled with God and His Church. Benedict/Ratzinger’s book, Introduction to Christianity, is full of heresy from its theological presuppositions to its erroneous conclusions. The book would have merited for Benedict/Ratzinger burning at the stake during a more sober period in Church history. We can be thankful that Archbishop Viganò is looking in the right direction.
RATZINGER AND THE OATH AGAINST MODERNISM
It is obvious that Joseph Ratzinger is to be counted among those who swore the Oath; that he “played a crucial role in overturning the preparatory schemas of the Council and initiating a completely new approach,” and that in doing so he violated the Oath, is equally indisputable. Whether in doing this Ratzinger had full knowledge of committing sacrilege, only God knows, who scrutinizes the depths of the heart.
It also seems to me undeniable that there are many of his writings in which both his Hegelian formation as well as the influence of Modernism emerge, as Professor Enrico Maria Radaelli has illustrated very well in his essays and as the new biography of Pope Benedict XVI by Peter Seewald confirms with an abundance of particulars and numerous sources. In this regard, I believe it is obvious that the declarations of the young Joseph Ratzinger reported by Seewald largely contradict the hermeneutic of continuity which Benedict XVI later theorized, perhaps as a prudent retraction of his former enthusiasm.
I think, however, that the passage of time, his role as Prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, and finally his election to the Throne have contributed to at least some sort of a change of heart about the mistakes he committed and the ideas he professed. It would, however, be desirable that he, above all in consideration of the Divine Judgment that awaits him, would definitively distance himself from those theologically erroneous positions – I am referring in particular to those in Introduction to Christianity – which are still disseminated today in universities and seminaries which boast to call themselves Catholic. Delicta juventutis meae et ignorantias meas ne memineris Domine (Ps 25: 7).
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
The ‘Bergoglio Business Plan’! Now that “apologetics” is nothing more than “subtle theoretical discussions” over “opinions” and “proselytism is solemn nonsense,” how do they measure “strong Christian witness,” “effective evangelization,” “fruitful ecumenical spirit,” and “constructive dialogue”? If the “Mission of the Church in the World” is the supreme law… the salus animarum, how does any of this contribute towards fulfilling this “Mission”? It is never “easy t