.....
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 “received and approved” traditional Roman Rite of the Mass.
Easter Sunday
April 5, 2026
Paschaltide, beginning on Holy Saturday and ending on the Saturday after Pentecost, forms one single feast day in which are celebrated the mysteries of our Lord’s Resurrection and Ascension and the descent of the Holy Ghost on the Church.
Easter Sunday, the greatest feast of the year, the station is kept, as on Christmas, at Saint Mary Major. The Church never separates Jesus and Mary, and today, in one and the same triumph, she honors the Mother and the Son. Before all else, the Risen Christ offers the homage of His gratitude to His Father in Heaven (Introit). In her turn the Church gives thanks to God inasmuch as by the victory of His Son, He has reopened the way to Heaven, and implores Him to assist us that we may attain this, our final goal (Collect). For this, Saint Paul tells us, just as the Jews eat the Paschal Lamb with unleavened bread, so we must feast on the Lamb of God, with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth (Epistle and Communion), that is free from the leaven of sin. In the Gospel and the Offertory we read of the coming of the holy women to the sepulcher to embalm our Lord. They find an empty tomb but an angel proclaims to them the great mystery of the Resurrection. Let us joyfully keep this day on which our Lord has restored life to us in His own rising from the dead (Easter Preface), and affirm with the Church that “the Lord is risen indeed,” and like Him, make our Easter a passing to an entirely new way of life.
INTROIT:
Ps.138. I arose, and am still with Thee, alleluia: Thou hast laid Thy hand upon me, alleluia : Thy knowledge is become wonderful, alleluia, alleluia.
Ps. Lord, Thou hast proved me and known me: Thou hast known my sitting down and my rising up. Glory be, etc. I arose, etc.
COLLECT:
O
God, who through Thine only-begotten Son hast on this day overcome death, and
opened unto us the gate of everlasting life, as by Thy helpful grace Thou dost prosper
our good desires, so do Thou accompany them with Thy continual help. Through our Lord, etc.
EPISTLE: 1 Cor. 5, 7-8
Brethren,
purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened:
for Christ our Pasch is sacrificed. Therefore let us feast, not with the old
leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened
bread of sincerity and truth.
Explanation The Apostles selected the leaven as
a type of the moral depravity from which the Christian community and every
individual Christian should be free. Let us, therefore, purge out the old
leaven of sin by true penance, that we may receive our Paschal Lamb, Jesus, in
the Most Holy Eucharist with a pure heart.
GRADUAL:
Ps. 117. This is the day which the Lord hath made: let us be glad and rejoice therein. Give praise to the Lord, for He is good : for His mercy endureth forever. Alleluia, alleluia.
1 Cor. 5. Christ our Pasch is sacrificed.
SEQUENCE:
Forth to the Paschal Victim, Christians, bring; Your sacrifice of praise:
The Lamb redeems the sheep; And Christ the sinless one,
Hath to the Father sinners reconciled.
Together, death and life; In a strange conflict strove.
The Prince of life, who died,
Now lives and reigns.
What thou sawest, Mary, say; As thou wentest on the way.
I saw the tomb wherein the living one had lain; I saw His glory as He rose again;
Napkin and linen clothes, and angels twain: Yea, Christ is risen, my hope, and he
Will go before you into Galilee.
We know that Christ indeed has risen from the grave:
Hail, Thou King of Victory, Have mercy, Lord, and save. Amen. Alleluia.
GOSPEL: Mark
16, 1-7
At that time, Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome brought sweet spices, that coming they might anoint Jesus. And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they came to the sepulcher, the sun being now risen. And they said one to another: Who shall roll us back the stone from the door of the sepulcher? And looking, they saw the stone rolled back. For it was very great. And entering into the sepulcher, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed with a white robe, and they were astonished. Who saith to them, Be not affrighted; ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified: He is risen, He is not here; behold the place where they laid Him. But go, tell His disciples, and Peter, that He goeth before you into Galilee; there you shall see Him, as He told you.
Why did the holy women desire
to anoint the body of Jesus with sweet spices?
Out of love for Jesus. This love God rewarded by sending to them an angel,
who rolled back the great stone from before the mouth of the sepulcher,
comforted them, and convinced them that Christ was really risen from the dead.
From this we learn that God always consoles those who seek Him. The angel sent
the holy women to the disciples to console them for Christ’s death, and in
order that they might make known His resurrection to the world. St. Peter was
specially named not only because he was the head of the apostles, but also
because he was sadder and more dispirited than the others on account of his
denial of Our Savior.
How did Our Savior prove that
He was really risen from the dead?
By showing Himself first to the holy women, then to His disciples, and finally
to five hundred persons at once. His disciples not only saw Him, but also ate
and drank with Him, not once only, but repeatedly, and for forty days.
It was through combat and inexpressible sufferings that Our Savior gained
victory. So it is also with us. Only by labor, combat, and sufferings shall we
win the crown of eternal life; though redeemed by Christ from the servitude of
Satan and sin, we shall not be able to enter the kingdom of Christ unless,
after His example and by His grace, we fight till the end against the flesh,
the devil, and the world; for only he that perseveres to the end shall receive
the crown (2 Tim. 2, 5).
Why did the angel send the
women to the disciples, and especially to Peter?
Because the disciples were to announce the Resurrection of Christ to the whole world, and they were now much saddened, and disturbed because of His death. Peter was the head of the apostles, and on account of having three times denied our Lord, he was greatly dejected and faint of heart, and was, therefore, above all to be comforted.
What encouragement does the
Resurrection of Christ give us?
It encourages us to rise spiritually with Him, and live henceforth a new life (Rom. 4, 4), which we do if we not only renounce sin, but also flee from all its occasions, lay aside our bad habits, subdue our corrupt inclinations, and aim after virtue and heavenly things.
ASPIRATION I rejoice, O my Jesus, that Thou hast victoriously risen from death. By Thy triumph over death, hell and the devil, grant us the grace to subdue our evil inclinations, walk in a new life, and die to all earthly things. Amen.
INSTRUCTION It is certainly true that Christ, by His death on the cross and by His resurrection, has rendered perfect satisfaction; and effected man’s redemption (Heb. 9, 12); but we must not imagine that there is no further need of doing penance, or of working out our salvation. For, as the children of Israel, though freed from Pharao’s bondage, had to fight long and against many enemies in order to gain the Promised Land, so also must we, though freed by Christ from the servitude of the devil, battle against our enemies to the end of our lives to obtain the promised, heavenly land, for no one is crowned unless he has properly fought (II Tim. 2, 5). We must apply the merits of the redemption and satisfaction of Christ to our soul by the frequent reception of the holy sacraments; by imitating His virtues; by patiently bearing our trials and sufferings, and by a penitential life.
OFFERTORY:
Ps. 75. The earth trembled and was still, when God arose in judgment, alleluia.
SECRET:
Receive, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the prayers of Thy people along with the offerings of victims, that the way opened by these paschal mysteries may lead us by Thine aid to the consolations of eternity. Through our Lord, etc.
PREFACE FOR EASTER:
It is truly meet and just, right and profitable unto salvation, that we should at all times extol Thy glory, O Lord, but more especially on this day when Christ our Pasch was sacrificed. For He is the true Lamb that hath taken away the sins of the world; who by dying hath overcome our death, and by rising again hath restored our life. And therefore with the angels and archangels, the thrones and dominions, and the whole host of heavenly army we sing a hymn of Thy glory, saying again and again: Holy, holy, holy, etc.
COMMUNION:
1 Cor. 5. Christ our Pasch is sacrificed, alleluia; therefore let us feast in the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth, alleluia, alleluia.
POSTCOMMUNION:
Pour
forth upon us, O Lord, the spirit of Thy charity, and be Thy loving kindness
make to be of one mind those whom Thou hast fed with these paschal
sacraments. Through our Lord, etc.
DISMISSAL:
Go, the Mass is ended, alleluia, alleluia.
Thanks be to God, alleluia, alleluia.
“Be not affrighted; ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, who
was crucified: He is risen, He is not here; behold the place where they laid
Him.”
PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OF APRIL 5th:
Date
Day Feast Rank Color F/A Mass Time/Notes
|
5 |
Sun |
Easter Sunday (St. Vincent Ferrer, C) |
d1cl |
W |
|
9:00 AM; Rosary of
Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 |
|
6 |
Mon |
Easter Monday |
d1cl |
W |
|
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation
before Mass |
|
7 |
Tue |
Easter Tuesday |
d1cl |
W |
|
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass |
|
8 |
Wed |
Easter
Wednesday |
sd |
W |
|
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass |
|
9 |
Thu |
Easter
Thursday |
sd |
W |
|
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass |
|
10 |
Fri |
Easter
Friday |
sd |
W |
A |
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of
Reparation before Mass |
|
11 |
Sat |
Easter
Saturday (St. Leo the Great, PCD) |
sd |
W |
|
Mass 9:00 AM; Confessions 8:30
AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM |
|
12 |
Sun |
Low Sunday |
dm |
W |
|
9:00 AM; Rosary of
Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 |
So, then, the Mystery
of Easter is to be ever visible on this earth; our risen Jesus ascends to heaven,
but he leaves upon us the impress of his Resurrection, and we must retain it
within us until he again visits us. And
how could it be that we should not retain this divine impress within us? Are not all the mysteries of our divine
Master ours also? From his very first
coming in the Flesh, he has made us sharers in everything he has done. He was born in Bethlehem: we were born
together with him. He was crucified: our
‘old man was crucified with him.’ He was
buried; ‘we were buried with him.’ And
therefore, when he rose from the grave, we also received the grace that we
should ‘walk in the newness of life.’
Such is the teaching of the Apostle, who thus says: ‘We know that Christ
rising again from the dead, dieth now no more; death shall no more have
dominion over him; for in that he died to sin, (that is, for sin,) he died
once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.’
Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year
The foundation of this power and dignity of
Our Lord is rightly indicated by Cyril of Alexandria. “Christ,” he says, “has
dominion over all creatures, a dominion not seized by violence nor usurped, but
his by essence and by nature.” His
kingship is founded upon the ineffable hypostatic union. From this it follows
not only that Christ is to be adored by angels and men, but that to him as man
angels and men are subject, and must recognize his empire; by reason of the
hypostatic union Christ has power over all creatures. But a thought that must
give us even greater joy and consolation is this that Christ is our King by
acquired, as well as by natural right, for he is our Redeemer. Would that they
who forget what they have cost their Savior might recall the words: “You were
not redeemed with corruptible things, but with the precious blood of Christ, as
of a lamb unspotted and undefiled.” We are no longer our own property, for
Christ has purchased us “with a great price”; our very bodies are the “members
of Christ.” P
ope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925
“Whom seekest thou?” It is to each one of us, as to Mary Magdalen,
that Jesus addresses this question. Can
we reply that we are seeking Him alone?
Jesus appeared to Mary who “loved Him much” before appearing to the
other holy women. If we wish to find the
Lord quickly we must love Him much and seek Him with great love.
Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary
Magdalen, Divine Intimacy
“A new commandment I
give unto you : ‘that you love one another’ as I have loved you, that you also
love one another” (Jn. 13). Jesus
revealed to us the perfection of fraternal charity on the same evening that He
instituted the Eucharist, as if to indicate that such perfection should be both
the fruit of the Sacrament of the Eucharist and our response to this great
gift.
Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, Divine Intimacy
...the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for
the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor
hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and
which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the
world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and
force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.
...Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor
innovators: they are traditionalists.
St. Pius X, Notre
Charge Apostolique , 1910
Grant, O good Jesus, that
my soul may always fly toward You, that my entire life may be one continual act
of love. Make me understand that any
work which is not done in Your honor is a dead work. Grant that my piety may not become just a
habit, but a continual elevation of my heart!
O my Jesus, supreme
Goodness, I ask of you a heart so enraptured with You that nothing can distract
it. I wish to become indifferent to
everything that goes on in the world, and to want You alone, to love everything
that refers to You, but You above everything else, O my God! And my spirit, O Lord, my spirit - grant that
it may be zealous in seeking You and may succeed in finding You, O sovereign
Wisdom!
St. Thomas Aquinas
The word “heliotropium” is the Latin name
for an ancient plant which had the unique habit of turning to face the sun at
all times. The plant’s name is derived from two Greek words: helio, meaning
“sun,” and tropos, meaning “turn.” The Roman writer Pliny wrote of this plant,
“I have often spoken of the wonderful property of the heliotrope, which turns
itself round with the sun, even on a cloudy day, so great is its love of that
luminary. But at night it closes its azure flower, as if from missing its
rays.”
Thus the heliotrope excellently represents
the attitude of the faithful soul toward the Will of God, which is represented
by the sun. This sun must ever be gazed upon by us with fixed and unshrinking
eye, in whatever direction its course may bend; and this one thing must we ever
resolve in our mind: “As it pleases God, so does it please me. The Will of God
alone is to me the rule of life and death. As it hath pleased the Lord so shall
it be done. Blessed be the Name of the Lord.”
Fr. Jeremias Drexelius,
Heliotropium, Conformity of the Human Will to the Divine
INSTRUCTION ON
EASTER
What is the festival of Easter?
Easter, in Latin Pascha, signifies passing over, and has the following historical origin: Under Pharao, King of Egypt, the Jews in that country groaned under intolerable bondage. God had mercy on His people, and the hour of deliverance came. By His command the first-born of all the Egyptians was killed by an angel. The Jews had been ordered by God to be ready for emigration, but first to kill a lamb, eat it in their houses in common, and sprinkle the doorposts with its blood. And the angel of death, by order of God, passed the doors sprinkled with the blood of the lamb, and did no harm to any child of the Israelites, whilst he slew all the first-born sons of the Egyptians. In grateful memory of this passing their doors, the Jews observed the festival of Easter, the Pasch, or Passover. After the death of Jesus, the apostles introduced the same festival into the Church in grateful remembrance of the day on which Jesus, the true Easter Lamb, took away our sins by His blood, freed us from the angel of eternal death, and passed us over to the freedom of the children of God.
Where, during this time, was
Christ’s holy soul?
In Limbo, that is, the place where the souls of the just who died before Christ, and were yet in original sin, were awaiting their redemption.
What have we to expect from the
resurrection of Christ?
That our bodies will rise again from death. (Rom. 7, 2) For if Christ our head is alive, then we His members must also become reanimated, because a living head cannot exist without living members.
What is meant by the Alleluia
sung at Easter time?
In English Alleluia means Praise the Lord, and expresses the joy of the Church at the Resurrection of Christ, and the hope of eternal happiness which He has obtained for us.
Why does the Church on this day
bless eggs, bread, and meat?
To remind the faithful that although the time of fasting is now ended, they should not indulge in gluttony, but thank God, and use their food simply for the necessary preservation of physical strength.
God is a Lamb that avails you not, my
Christian,
If you become not also a lamb of God.
The cross on Golgotha redeems not from evil,
If it is not also erected in thee;
The dear Christ’s death aids you not, my Christian,
Until in Him and for Him you also have died.
Angelus Silesius
“There is one
that humbleth himself wickedly, and his interior is full of deceit.”
Ecclus. 19:23
Rights Are Derived From
Duties and Every Catholic Has A Duty to Profess His Faith
The “External Profession of
Faith” is Manifested Through Our Ecclesiastical Traditions
Both God and the Church
command the external profession of faith.
The Divine precept to profess one’s faith externally is easily gathered
from the words of St. Paul: “The heart has only to believe, if we are to be
justified; the lips have only to make confession, if we are to be saved” Rom
(10, 9-10), and it follows from the very nature of man himself who must worship
God not only with his mind but also with his body…. According to St. Thomas the
divine precept obliges man to make an external profession of his faith when
failure to do so would detract from the honour due to God or cause injury to
the spiritual welfare of one’s neighbour.
Rev. Dominic Prummer, Handbook of Moral Theology
Regina
Coeli - ANTHEM TO THE BLESSED VIRGIN
There is a venerable tradition connected with this joyous anthem. It is
related that a fearful pestilence raged in Rome, during one of the Easters of
the pontificate of St. Gregory the Great.
In order to propitiate the anger of God, the holy Pope prescribed a
public procession of both people and clergy, in which was to be carried the
portrait of our blessed Lady painted by St. Luke. The procession was advancing in the direction
of St Peter’s; and as the holy picture, followed by the Pontiff, was carried along,
the atmosphere became pure and free from pestilence. Having reached the bridge which joins the
city with the Vatican, a choir of angels was heard singing above the picture,
and saying: ‘Rejoice, O Queen of heaven, alleluia! for He whom thou didst deserve
to bear, alleluia! hath, as he said risen from the grave, alleluia!’ As soon as the heavenly music ceased, the
saintly Pontiff took courage, and added these words to those of the angels:
‘Pray to God for us, alleluia!’ Thus was
composed the Paschal anthem to our Lady.
Raising his eyes to heaven, Gregory saw the destroying angel standing on
the top of the Mole of Hadrian, and sheathing his sword. In memory of this apparition the Mole was
called the Castle of Sant’ Angelo, and on the dome was placed an immense statue
representing an angel holding his sword in the scabbard. Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Easter
Bright Queen of Heaven! thy joy declare;
Alleluia. For He, whom thou deserved to
bear; Alleluia.
Hath, as He said, rose from the grave;
Alleluia. Petition God our souls to
save; Alleluia.
V. Rejoice and be glad O Virgin Mary. Alleluia.
R. For He is truly risen. Alleluia.
Let Us Pray
O God, Who by the resurrection of our Lord
Jesus Christ, Thy Son, hast vouchsafed to rejoice the world, grant, we beseech
Thee, that by the intercession of His Virgin Mother, Mary, we may receive the
joys of eternal life, through the same Christ, our Lord. Amen
They shall look on him whom they pierced (John 19, 37).
Who shall
render account to him, who is ready to judge the living and the dead (1 Peter 4, 5).
“There was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an
emerald. . . And from the throne proceeded lightnings, and voices, and
thunders; and there were seven lamps burning before the throne” (Apoc. 4, 3-5).
Such are the images whereby Holy
Scripture portrays the judgment-seat of Jesus Christ. Who of all mankind can
venture to raise his eyes to this fiery throne? Will it not be more dazzlingly
bright than the lightnings and fiery flashes of a tempest?
The Divine Judge will seat Himself
upon this throne and His grave countenance will be visible to men and Angels.
All created beings will tremble with awestruck reverence. St. John declares
this in the Apocalypse: “I saw a great white throne, and One sitting upon it,
from whose face the earth and Heaven fled away, and there was no place found
for them” (Apoc. 20, 11). In these words the prophet of the New Testament
appears to indicate that the Heavens and the earth will not be able to bear to
meet the eye of their Judge; that all rational beings, both Angels and men,
will quake at the sight of His stern countenance.
That the Angels also will fear and
tremble, is asserted by St. Augustine, in the following passage from his
writings: “When Our Lord says that the powers of Heaven shall be moved, He
alludes to the Angels; for so terrible will the judgment be, that the Angels
will not be exempt from fear; they too will tremble and be afraid. For just as when
a judge sits in judgment his grave countenance not only strikes terror into the
culprits before him, but over-awes the officials standing around, so when all
mankind are brought to judgment the celestial ministers will share the
universal horror and alarm.”
St. John Chrysostom corroborates this
statement, when he says: “Every one will then be filled with astonishment, with
apprehension, with terror, for even the Angels will be sore afraid.”
Many other Fathers of the Church and
commentators upon Holy Scripture express a similar opinion.
Rev. Martin Von Cochem,
OSFC, The Four Last Things – Death, Judgment, Hell and Heaven
THE
RESURRECTION OF THE LORD EASTER
SUNDAY
PRESENCE
OF GOD ‑
O risen Jesus, make me worthy to share in the joy of Your Resurrection.
MEDITATION:
I. “This is the day which the
Lord hath made; let us be glad and rejoice therein” (RB). This is the most
excellent day, the happiest day in the whole year, because it is the day when
“Christ, our Pasch, has been sacrificed.” Christmas, too, is a joyous feast,
but whereas Christmas vibrates with a characteristic note of sweetness, the
Paschal solemnity resounds with an unmistakable note of triumph; it is joy for
the triumph of Christ, for His victory. The liturgy of the Mass shows us this
Paschal joy under two aspects: joy in truth (Epistle: I Cor. 5, 7-8) and
joy in charity (Postcommunion).
Joy
in truth: According to the vibrant admonition of St. Paul, “Let us celebrate
the feast, not with old leaven . . . but with the unleavened bread of sincerity
and truth.” In this world there are many ephemeral joys, based on fragile,
insecure foundations; but the Paschal joy is solidly grounded on the knowledge
that we are in the truth, the truth which Christ brought to the world and which
He confirmed by His Resurrection. The Resurrection tells us that our faith is
not in vain, that our hope is not founded on a dead man, but on a living one,
the Living One par excellence, whose life is so strong that it vivifies, in
time as in eternity, all those who believe in Him. “I am the Resurrection and
the Life; he that believeth in Me, although he be dead, shall live” (Jn 11,
25). Joy in truth: for only sincere and upright souls who seek the truth
lovingly and, still more, “do the truth” can fully rejoice in the Resurrection.
We are sincere when we recognize ourselves for what we are, with all our
faults, deficiencies, and need for conversion. From this knowledge of our
miseries springs the sincere resolve to purify ourselves of the old leaven of
the passions in order to be renewed completely in the risen Christ.
Truth,
however, must be accomplished in charity‑veritatem facientes in
caritatem, doing the truth in charity (Eph 4, 15); therefore the
Postcommunion prayer that is placed on our lips is more timely than ever: “Pour
forth upon us, O Lord, the spirit of Thy love, to make us of one heart.”
Without unity and mutual charity there can be no real Paschal, joy.
2.
The Gospel (Mk 16, 1‑7) places before our eyes the faithful holy women
who, at the first rays of the Sunday dawn, run to the sepulcher, and on the
way, wonder: “Who will roll back the stone from the door of the sepulcher for
us?” This preoccupation, although it is well justified on account of the size
and weight of the stone, does not deter them from proceeding with their plans;
they are too much taken up with the desire of finding Jesus! And behold! hardly
have they arrived when they see “the stone rolled back.” They enter the tomb
and find an Angel who greets them with the glad announcement : “He is risen; He
is not here.” At this time, Jesus does not let Himself be found or seen; but a
little later when, in obedience to the command of the Angel, the women leave
the tomb to bring the news to the disciples, He will appear before them saying,
“All hail!” (Mt 28, 9), and their joy will be overwhelming.
We,
too, have a keen desire to find the Lord; perhaps we have been seeking Him for
many long years. Further, this desire may have been accompanied by serious
preoccupation with the question of how we might rid ourselves of the obstacles
and roll away from our souls the stone which has prevented us thus far from
finding the Lord, from giving ourselves entirely to Him, and from letting Him
triumph in us. Precisely because we want to find the Lords we have already
overcome many obstacles, sustained by His grace; divine Providence has helped
us roll away many stones, overcome many difficulties. Nevertheless, the search
for God is progressive, and must be maintained during our whole life. For this
reason, following the example of the holy women, we must always have a holy
preoccupation about finding the Lord, a preoccupation which will make us
industrious and diligent in seeking Him, and at the same time confident of the
divine aid, since the Lord will certainly take care that we arrive where our
own strength could never bring us, because He will do for us what we cannot do
for ourselves.
Every
year Easter marks a time of renewal in our spiritual life, in our search for
God; every year we reascend the path toward Him in novitate vitae, in
newness of life (Rom 6, 4).
COLLOQUY:
“Lord
Jesus, good and gentle Jesus, who deigned to die for our sins and to rise for
our justification, I beg You, by Your glorious Resurrection, to bring me out of
the sepulcher of my vices and sins, so that I may merit to have a real share in
Your Resurrection. O most kind Lord, who ascended to Heaven in the triumph of
Your glory and are seated at the right hand of the Father, You who are
all-powerful, raise me up to You, so that I may run in the odor of Your
ointments, run without slackening, while You call and guide me. My soul
thirsts; draw me to the divine spring of eternal satiety; lift me out of the
abyss toward this living spring, so that I may drink as much as I can of it,
and live on it forever, O my God, my Life.
“I
pray You, Lord, give my soul the wings of an eagle, that I may fly without
weakening, fly, until I reach the splendor of Your glory. There, You will feed
me on Your secrets at the table of the heavenly citizens, in the place of Your
Pasch, near the celestial fount of eternal satiety. Let my heart rest in You,
my heart which resembles a great ocean, agitated by tumultuous waves.
“When shall I see You, O precious, long‑desired,
amiable Lord? When shall I appear before Your face? When shall I be satiated
with Your beauty? When will You take me out of this dark prison, that I may
confess Your Name, without being confused any longer? What shall I do, a wretch
loaded down with the chains of my human condition? What shall I do? As long as
we are in the body, we are journeying toward the Lord. We have not here a
lasting dwelling, but we seek a future city, for our homeland is in heaven.
“As
long as I carry about with me these fragile members, give me the grace, O Lord,
to cling to You, for he who adheres to the Lord is one spirit with Him” (St.
Augustine).
"Your were all invited, generally and in particular, by My Truth,
when He cried in the Temple, saying; 'Whosoever thirsteth, let him come to Me
and drink, for I am the fountain of the water of life.'... So that you are
invited to the fountain of living water of grace, and it is right for you, with
perseverance, to keep by Him who is made for you a bridge, not being turned
back by any contrary wind that may arise, either of prosperity or adversity,
and to persevere till you find Me, who am the giver of the water of life, by
means of this sweet and loving Word, My only-begotten Son."
God the Father addressing St. Catherine of Siena, The Dialogue of St. Catherine of Siena
“Since they deny the Gospel and
contradict the Creed, they cannot celebrate with us. And, although they dare to claim the name of
Christ, every creature whose head is Christ scorns them.”
Pope St. Leo the Great
Dogma is the End of Theological Speculation
But according to a long-standing usage a dogma is now understood to be a
truth appertaining to faith or morals, revealed by God, transmitted from the Apostles
in the Scriptures or by tradition, and proposed by the Church for the
acceptance of the faithful. It might
be described briefly as a revealed truth defined by the Church. Catholic Encyclopedia
"I give You thanks, who illumine me and deliver me, for You have
enlightened me and I have known You.
Late have I known You, O ancient Truth; late have I known You, O eternal
Truth! You were in the light and I was
in darkness, and I did not know You, for I had no light without You, and
without You, there is no light!"
St. Augustine, Confessions
The
Resurrection of Jesus Christ Is a Dogma
“The dogmas of the faith
are to be held only according to a practical sense, that is, as preceptive
norms for action, but not as norms for believing.”
Condemned, St. Pius X, Lamentabili
This
condemned proposition distinguishes between “preceptive
norms for action” and “norms for believing.”
All
commands, laws, injunctions, admonitions, counsels, and other “perceptive norms for action,” are hierarchical, must
be reasonable, must be directed toward the common good, do not bind in cases of
necessity or impossibility, do not bind in cases of invincible ignorance, and
must be properly promulgated by competent authority. The science of moral theology guides us in
the formation of correct consciences to fulfill these “preceptive
norms for action.”
Dogmas
are essentially “norms for believing” and
only secondarily and indirectly, “preceptive norms
for action” in the sense that our actions must be conformable to
truth. A dogma is that part of Divine
Revelation that has been infallibly defined and constitutes a formal object of
Divine and Catholic Faith. Dogma
expresses a truth that is universally true, that is, true for all times,
places, persons and circumstances. Dogma
in itself is sufficient for all the faithful.
Dogma does not forbid elucidation but the elucidation is not necessary
to the faith. A child can profess the
Catholic Faith in the Trinity in a more perfect manner that best
theologian. We as Catholics are required
to believe in the Trinity for our salvation, no one has to understand any
theology about it. St. Augustine said,
“Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand”. St. Anselm said the same thing. We begin with the dogma, which is simple; the
understanding is not necessary but may be very beneficial because we are
rational creatures. Understanding is the
Gift of the Holy Ghost related to the virtue of Faith and can be of great
support to the faith. Still, St. Teresa
of Avila said regarding the dogma of the Holy Trinity that she more gloried in
dogmas of the faith where she understood very little because the exercise of
the faith was then far more meritorious. St.
Pius X, in Lamentabili, condemned the
modernist practice of limiting dogmatic truth with the moral restrictions that
apply to commands, laws, injunctions, admonitions, counsels, etc.
"Therefore, let
the blind and foolish subtlety of heretical impiety be despised. Whosoever continues in heresy is
unpardonable, nor can he ever attain forgiveness. They are falling into that blasphemy which
shall never be forgiven neither in this world nor in the Judgment to
come."
Pope St. Leo the Great
"We ought to carry our conformity to God’s will to the point of
accepting our death. That we shall die is a decree against which there is no
appeal. We shall die on the day and at the hour and in the manner that God
decides, and it is this particular death we should accept, because it is the
one most becoming His glory.…. It is the teaching of the great masters of the
spiritual life that a person who, at the point of death, makes an act of
perfect conformity to the will of God will be delivered not only from Hell but
also from Purgatory, even if he has committed all the sins in the world. 'The
reason,' says St. Alphonsus, 'is that he who accepts death with perfect
resignation acquires similar merit to that of a martyr who has voluntarily
given his life for Christ, and even amid the greatest sufferings he will die
happily and joyfully'."
St. Claude de la Colombiere, Trustful Surrender
We have a lesson to learn here: it is, that there are some people who
believe, but their faith is so weak that the slightest shock would endanger it;
they say they have faith, but it is of the most superficial kind. And yet,
without a lively and vigorous faith, what can we do in the battle we have to be
incessantly waging against the devil, the world, and our own selves? He who
wrestles with an enemy is desirous to have a sure footing; if he stand on
slippery ground, he is sure to be thrown. Nothing is so common nowadays as
unstable faith, which believes as long as there is nothing to try it: but let
it be put to the test and it gives way. One principal cause of this weakness of
faith is that subtle naturalism, which now fills the atmosphere in which we
live, and which it is so difficult not to imbibe. Let us earnestly pray for an
invincible and supernatural faith, which may be the ruling principle of our
conduct, which may never flinch, and may triumph over both our internal and
external enemies. Thus shall we be able to apply to ourselves those words of
the Apostle St John: ‘This is the victory which overcometh the world, our
faith.’
All who have not believed that Jesus Christ was really the Son of God
are doomed. Also, all who see the Sacrament of the Body of Christ and do not
believe it is really the most holy Body and Blood of the Lord . . . these also
are doomed!
St. Francis of Assisi
He wrought herein the
greatest work that He had ever wrought, whether in miracles or in mighty works,
during the whole of His life, either upon earth or in Heaven, which was the
reconciliation and union of mankind, through grace, with God. And this, as I say, was at the moment and the
time when this Lord was completely annihilated in everything. Annihilated, that is to say, with respect to
human reputation; since, when men saw Him die, they mocked Him rather than
esteemed Him; and also with respect to nature, since His nature was annihilated
when He died; and further with respect to the spiritual consolation and
protection of the Father, since at that time He forsook Him… Let the truly
spiritual man understand the mystery of the gate and of the way of Christ, and
so become united with God, and let him know that, the more completely he is
annihilated for God’s sake, according to these two parts, the sensual and the
spiritual, the more completely he is united to God and the greater is the work
which he accomplishes.
St. John of the Cross, Ascent
of Mt. Carmel
"The faith shall never vary in any age, for one
is the faith which justifies the Just of all ages. It is unlawful to differ even by a single
word from apostolic doctrine."
Pope St. Leo the Great
The
Church Teaches:
The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and teaches that the
matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, the Mosaic law, which are
divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they
were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited
to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified
by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that
whoever, even after the Passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and
submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ
could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that
after the Passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could
have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for
salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they
cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who
after that time [the promulgation of the Gospel] observe circumcision and the
Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, the holy Roman Church declares
alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal
salvation. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1441
The first consideration is that the ceremonies of the Mosaic Law were
abrogated by the coming of Christ and that they can no longer be observed
without sin after the promulgation of the Gospel. Pope Benedict XIV, Ex
Quo Primum, 1756
And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took
the place of the Old Law which had been abolished… on the gibbet of His death
Jesus made void the Law with its decrees [Eph. 2:15]… establishing the New Testament
in His blood shed for the whole human race. “To such an extent, then,” says St.
Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a
transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from
many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil
which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent
violently from top to bottom.” On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be
buried and to be a bearer of death….
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis
The faith of those who
live their faith is a serene faith. What you long for will be given you; what
you love will be yours forever. Since it is by giving alms that everything is
pure for you, you will also receive that blessing which is promised next by the
Lord: the Godhead that no man has been able to see. In the inexpressible joy of
this eternal vision, human nature will possess what eye has not seen or ear
heard, what man's heart has never conceived.
Pope St. Leo the Great
Then he said
to them: O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the
prophets have spoken. Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so to
enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded
to them in all the scriptures, the things that were concerning him…... And they
said one to the other: Was not our heart burning within us, whilst he spoke in
this way, and opened to us the scriptures? Luke 24:25-27, 32
‘Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the
root of David hath conquered!’
Nor does the mystery of the Lamb end here. Isaias besought God to ‘send
the Lamb’ who was to be ‘the ruler of the earth.’ He comes, therefore, not only
that he may be sacrificed, not only that he may feed us with his sacred Flesh,
but likewise that he may command the earth and be King. Here, again, is our
Pasch. The Pasch is the announcement of the reign of the Lamb. The citizens of
heaven thus proclaim it: ‘Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the root of
David hath conquered!’ But, if he be the
Lion, how is he the Lamb? Let us be attentive to the mystery. Out of love for
man, who needed redemption, and a heavenly food that would invigorate, Jesus
deigned to be as a lamb: but he had, moreover, to triumph over his own and our
enemies; he had to reign, for ‘all power was given to him in heaven and in
earth.’ In this his triumph and power, he is a lion; nothing can resist him;
his victory is celebrated this day throughout the whole world. Listen to the
great deacon of Edessa, St Ephrem: ‘At the twelfth hour, he was taken down from
the Cross as a lion that slept.’ ‘Yea, verily, our Lion slept; for his rest in
the sepulchre was more like sleep than death,’ as St Leo remarks. Was not this
the fulfilment of Jacob’s dying prophecy? This patriarch, speaking of the
Messias that was to be born of his race, said: ‘Juda is a lion’s whelp. To the
prey, my son, thou art gone up! Resting thou hast couched as a lion. Who shall
rouse him’. He has roused himself by his own power. He has risen; a lamb for
us, a lion for his enemies; thus uniting, in his Person, gentleness and power.
This completes the mystery of our Pasch: a Lamb, triumphant, obeyed, adored.
Let us pay him the homage so justly due. Until we be permitted to join, in
heaven, with the millions of angels and the four-and-twenty elders, let us
repeat, here on earth, the hymn they are forever singing: ‘The Lamb that was
slain is worthy to receive power, and divinity, and wisdom, and strength, and
honour, and glory, and benediction!’
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical
Year, Easter
Heresy
is the Denial of Dogma as the Rule of Faith; Modernism is the "Synthesis
of all Heresies" because it denies ALL DOGMAS!
[Modernism is the] synthesis of
all heresies [whose] system means the destruction not of the Catholic religion
alone, but of all religion....
[Modernists] partisans of error are to be sought not only among the
Church’s open enemies; but what is to be most dreaded and deplored, in her very
bosom, and are all the more mischievous the less they keep in the open.... They
put themselves forward as reformers of the Church [though they are] thoroughly
imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church.... They assail all that is most sacred in the
work of Christ.... [They are] the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the
Church... They lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very
root, that is, to the Faith and its deepest fibers.... The most absurd tenet
of the Modernists, that every religion according to the different aspect under
which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. It is thus that they make consciousness and
revelation synonymous. From this they
derive the law laid down as the universal standard, according to which
religious consciousness is to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and
that to it all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church. St. Pius X, Pascendi
Therefore:
In the Novus Ordo Church of Sweet Dreams where harshness is always frowned upon
harshly!
·
Religious
Liberty is the doctrinal validation of “Religious Consciousness.”
·
Ecumenism is
the collectivization and synthesis through dialogue of the individual’s
“Religious Consciousness.”
·
“Faith” is the
affirmation of the subjective “Religiousness Consciousness” on the authority of
the believer.
·
“Dogma” is the
historical and transitory collective expression of “Religiousness
Consciousness” for a particular age.
·
“Tradition” is
the historical perceptions from which the present “Religious Consciousness” has
evolved.
The
Old Evangelization: Goal of making Proselytes for the greater glory of God and
the salvation of souls.
“Father Isaac Jogues was truly a martyr before God, rendering witness to
Heaven and earth that he valued the Faith and the propagation of the gospel
more highly than his own life, and losing it in the dangers into which, with
full consciousness, he cast himself for Jesus Christ…”
Fr. Jérôme Lalemant, S.J.,
written in 1647, head of the Jesuit Mission in New France. He was the brother of fellow missionary, Fr.
Charles Lalemant, and uncle to the Fr. Gabriel Lalemant. Fr. Gabriel Lalemant was martyred with Fr. Jean
de Brébeuf.
Liberty, Equality,
Fraternity… the Masonic slogan of the French Revolution,
Religious Freedom,
Collegiality, and Ecumenism, slogan of Neo-modernist Revolution
(In the twentieth century) the
passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of customs, for Satan
will reign almost completely by means of the Masonic sects. They will focus
particularly on the children in order to achieve this general corruption. Woe
to the children of these times…. depraved priests, who will scandalize the
Christian people, will incite the hatred of the bad Christians and the enemies
of the Roman, Catholic and Apostolic Church to fall upon all priests. This
apparent triumph of Satan will bring enormous sufferings upon the good pastors
of the Church.
Our Lady of Good Success, to Mother Marianna, 1582
Ecumenical
Talking Points with Lutherans & Pope Francis the Lutheran
“And the fifth Angel sounded
the trumpet; and I saw a star fall from Heaven upon the earth, and to him was
given the key to the bottomless pit. And
he opened the bottomless pit: and the smoke of the pit ascended as the smoke of
a great furnace; and the sun was darkened, and the air with the smoke of the
pit: And from the smoke of the pit,
there came out locusts upon the earth, and power was given to them, as the
scorpions of the earth have power.” (Apoc: 9:1-3)
Luther did truly open the pit and let loose
against the Church all the fury of hell. Therefore modern interpreters almost
universally see in this fallen star, Luther.
The whole description of the locusts fits
down to the last detail the kings and princes who established by force the
heresy of the 16th Century. When Luther
propounded his heretical and immoral doctrine, the sky became as it were
obscured by smoke. It spread very rapidly over some regions of the earth, and
it brought forth princes and kings who were eager to despoil the Church of her
possessions. They compelled the people of their domains and in the territories
robbed from the Church to accept the doctrines of Luther. The proponents of
Protestantism made false translations of the Bible and misled the people into
their errors by apparently proving from the ‘Bible’ (their own translations)
the correctness of their doctrines. It was all deceit, lying and hypocrisy. Bad
and weak, lax and lukewarm, indifferent and non-practicing Catholics and those
who had neglected to get thorough instruction were thus misled; and these,
seeing the Catholic Church now through this smoke of error from the abyss and
beholding a distorted caricature of the true Church, began both to fear and
hate her.
Luther did everything to instill hatred of
the [Catholic] Church into the hearts of his followers. The princes of Germany eagerly took up
Lutheranism to become the spiritual heads of the churches in their domains and
to plunder the Church. Their assumed jurisdiction in spiritual matters was
usurpation... In Denmark, Norway and Sweden the Kings imposed Lutheranism upon
the people by the power of the sword and by lying, deceit and hypocrisy. They
left the altars in the churches and had apostate priests use vestments and
external trappings of the Catholic Church to mislead the people. They crushed
out the Catholic faith by terrorism, by making it a felony and treason to
remain a Catholic. Each monarch made himself the spiritual head of the church
in his kingdom. They had so-called historians falsify history to arouse hatred
against the Church in the hearts of the people. They pretended to prove the
truth of Lutheranism by false translations of the Bible made by Luther and by
others and by still falser interpretations of it. Those princes and kings were
the locusts appearing in the vision of St. John. They had the teeth of lions to
terrify lukewarm Catholics into submission.
Rev. Fr. Herman Bernard Kramer,
The Book of Destiny
The Church at Vatican
Council I (1869-70) defined that a dogma is a truth formally revealed by God
which must be believed with “divine and Catholic faith” as necessary for
salvation. A dogma is, by definition,
immutable and unchangeable. Dogmas are
not maxims, nor are they axioms where they are to be understood simply as
general points of belief. Pope St. Pius
X solemnly condemned this notion in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (False
Doctrines of the Modernists, September 8, 1907: DNZ 2079-81). Rather, each dogma is a specific truth
revealed by God and proposed by the Church whose very nature allows for no
change and is the same for all time.
Adam Miller, Catholic
Apologist, Dogmatic Deception
For
Those defending Catholic Tradition and the divine Worship of God
"Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after justice for they
shall be filled" (Matt 5:6). This beatitude is the fruit of the virtue and
gift of Fortitude which in turn forms the necessary bedrock for the virtue of
Justice to grow and flourish. St. Thomas says, "The Lord wishes us to
thirst after that justice which consists in rendering.... to God first of all
what is His due. He wishes us never to be satiated on earth... but rather that
our desire should grow always... Blessed are they that have this insatiable
desire; they will receive eternal life and here below an abundance of spiritual
goods in the accomplishment of the precepts, according to the words of the
Master: 'My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, that I may perfect His
word.'"
The first and essential subsidiary virtue under Justice is the virtue
of Religion which is giving "to God first of all what is His due."
The virtue of Religion itself governs the virtue of Obedience. Any act of
obedience that violates the virtue of Religion is a sin and itself manifests an
evident absence or serious defects of the virtues of Justice, Fortitude, and
Temperance. Those Catholics faithful to tradition who have born the insults,
calumny and ridicule of Novus Ordites should remember that the gift of Piety
corresponds to the virtue of Justice and the fruit of this virtue and this gift
is the beatitude, 'Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth'. We are not going anywhere, we are not
changing anything, and our victory is foreordained.
“The time is fast approaching when the omnipotent God will punish the
world with justice and righteous anger, for the sins and crimes that stain His
holy sanctuary. The corruption of morals will reach such an extreme that the
atmosphere will be saturated with the stench of impurity, and these evil times
will bring a chastisement like no other.
Confusion will reign in the sanctuary, and many of those entrusted with the
care of souls will become lost themselves, dragging many others with them into
error. The light of true faith will seem almost extinguished, and the flock,
abandoned by many shepherds, will be scattered. In these moments of tribulation,
those who remain faithful will suffer unspeakably. They will be persecuted,
ridiculed, and oppressed, for the world will hate the truth and those who
uphold it.
But do not fear, for just when all seems lost and paralyzed, when the wicked
believe they have triumphed, this will mark the arrival of my hour, when I will
overthrow the proud and accursed Satan, trampling him under my feet and
chaining him in the infernal abyss. This restoration will be swift and
marvelous. It will bring joy to the faithful and shame to those who warred
against God and His Church.”
Our Lady of Good Success to Mother Marianna
When
Pope Leo XIV denied the BVM her title of Co-Redemtrix, he was following
Francis!
Hermeneutics
of Continunity/Discontinunity
Blessed
Virgin Mary, Co-Redemptrix, “The Mother of all the living”!
Pope
Francis theological tripe:
“Being faithful to her Master, who is her Son, the only Redeemer, she
never wanted to take anything for herself from her Son. She never presented
herself as a co-redemptrix…. When they come to us with the story according to
which we should declare this, or that other dogma, let us not get lost in
foolishness.”
Pope Francis, denying the title of the Blessed Virgin as Co-Redemptrix
Wisdom
of Catholic Truth:
·
“Just as
Eve, wife of Adam, yet still a virgin, became by her disobedience the cause of
death for herself and the whole human race, so Mary, too, espoused yet a
virgin, became by her obedience the cause of salvation for herself and the
whole human race.” St. Irenaeus, 2nd
century
·
“Death
through Eve, life through Mary.” St.
Jerome, 4th century
·
“Through
the Blessed Virgin Mary, we are redeemed from the tyranny of the devil.” Modestus of Jerusalem, 7th century
·
“Hail
thou, through whom we are redeemed from the curse.” St. John Damascene, 8th century
·
“Through
her (the Blessed Virgin Mary), man was redeemed.” St. Bernard of Clairvaux, 12th century
·
“That
woman (namely Eve), drove us out of Paradise and sold us; but this one (Mary)
brought us back again and bought us.”
St. Bonaventure, 13th century
·
“The
Blessed Virgin merits for us de congruo what Christ merited de condign.” Pope St. Pius X, Ad diem illum
·
“(The
Blessed Virgin Mary) offered Him on Golgotha to the Eternal Father together
with the holocaust of her maternal rights and her motherly love like a new Eve
for all children of Adam.” Pope Pius
XII, Mystici Corporis
COMMENT:
Many ignorantly date the title of the Blessed Virgin Mary as
Co-Redemptrix to the 16th century. It is actually much older. The theological truth that the title
describes is found in Scripture, the Church Fathers and the constant tradition
of the Catholic Church. It may have become more evident in the 16th century
only because the Protestants deny it.
Pope Francis denied the title because he had common ground with
Protestant heretics. He is on public record affirming his belief in Luther’s
heretical doctrine of Justification which denies any incorporation of the
baptized into Jesus Christ with the end to share in His sanctification and
glorification. Catholic truth teaches that every Catholic “who has been
baptized in Christ, has put on Christ” (Gal 3:27). And every Catholic who has
“put on Christ” must then “deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow
(Jesus Christ)” (Matt 16:24) so that he can “fill up those things that are
wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the
church” (Col 1:24). Every baptized Catholic is called upon to be a co-redemtrix
with Jesus Christ and this constitutes the greatest honor for any of the
faithful. Pope Pius XII said:
Because Christ the
Head holds such an eminent position, one must not think that he does not
require the help of the Body. What Paul said of the human organism is to be
applied likewise to the mystical Body: “The head cannot say to the feet: I have
no need of you.” It is manifestly clear that the faithful need the help of the
Divine Redeemer, for He has said: “Without me you can do nothing,” and
according to the teaching of the Apostle every advance of this Mystical Body
towards its perfection derives from Christ the Head. Yet this, also, must be
held, marvelous though it may seem: Christ has need of His members. First,
because the person of Jesus Christ is represented by the Supreme Pontiff, who
in turn must call on others to share much of his solicitude lest he be
overwhelmed by the burden of his pastoral office, and must be helped daily by
the prayers of the Church. Moreover as our Savior does not rule the Church
directly in a visible manner, He wills to be helped by the members of His Body
in carrying out the work of redemption. This is not because He is indigent and
weak, but rather because He has so willed it for the greater glory of His
spotless Spouse. Dying on the Cross He left to His Church the immense treasury
of the Redemption, towards which she contributed nothing. But when those graces
come to be distributed, not only does He share this work of sanctification with
His Church, but He wills that in some way it be due to her action. This is a
deep mystery, and an inexhaustible subject of meditation, that the salvation of
many depends on the prayers and voluntary penances which the members of the
Mystical Body of Jesus Christ offer for this intention and on the cooperation
of pastors of souls and of the faithful, especially of fathers and mothers of
families, a cooperation which they must offer to our Divine Savior as though
they were His associates.
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis
“The salvation of many depends
on the prayers and voluntary penances which the members of the Mystical Body of
Jesus Christ offer for this intention.” Those who will not “take up their
cross” and enter into applying this “treasury of the Redemption” for the
salvation of others are not “worthy of Jesus Christ.” “No, I say to you: but unless
you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3).
Now if it can be predicated that every one of the faithful is called
upon to be a co-redemptrix, a fortiori, what can be predicated concerning the
Mother of God, the ever Blessed Virgin Mary, the new Eve, the new Mother of all
the Living who are reborn of God to the life of grace? The Blessed Virgin, our
Lady of Sorrows, is the exemplar Co-Redemptrix sine qua non. It was her fiat
at the Annunciation and repeated at the foot of the cross that brought Christ
from the Father and offers Him again to the Father as a sacrificial reparation
for the salvation of all.
For Pope Francis our Lady’s title was “foolishness.” And why? “But the
sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God; for it
is foolishness to
him, and he cannot understand, because it is spiritually examined” ( 1 Cor
2:14).
Cursed be the man who denies the Blessed Virgin Mary, our Lady of
Sorrows, her rightful title conferred upon her by God as Co-Redemptrix.
Sensus fidei for the Neo-Modernist: Goal is to direct the mob and use the mob to confirm their heterodoxy!
“The Second Vatican Council highlights that ‘all human beings are
called to the new people of God’ (LG, 13). God is truly at work in the entire people
that he has gathered together. This is why ‘the entire body of the faithful,
anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of belief. They
manifest this special property by means of the whole people’s supernatural
discernment in matters of faith when from the Bishops down to the last of the
lay faithful, they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals’
(LG, 12).” Vademecum on Synodality
Syndod
COMMENT: The
word “universal” is corrupted to exclude the attribute of time. A universal by
definition necessarily includes the attribute of time without which it is not a
universal. The sensus fidei that
excludes time considering only the current mass of Catholics at one specific
historical period looks only to popular trends and not Catholic truth. If every
Catholic in the Church at one given time holds a doctrine or moral position
that is contrary to the traditional teaching or practice, then it is not
evidence of the sensus fidei but
rather evidence of general apostasy and nothing more. “When the Son of man
comes, will he find faith on earth?” (Lk 18:8). The implied answer is No! He
will find apostasy and He will not call it a new sensus fidei.
Novus
Ordo 'Dogma': Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Gutting Catholic
Truth!
"[.....] With all this in mind, it must be said that the dogmatic
formulas of the Magisterium of the Church have been apt from the beginning to
communicate the revealed truth and, as long as they are maintained, they will
always be fit for those who interpret them correctly. However, it does not suggest that each of them has
been or will remain so to the same extent. For this reason theologians try to
determine exactly what is the intention to teach really contained in the
various formulas, and provide with this work a remarkable help to the living
Magisterium of the Church, to whom they (the theologians) are subordinate.
For this very reason it may also be that some ancient dogmatic formulas and
others related to them remain alive and fruitful in the habitual use of the
Church, provided that new exhibitions and statements are added in due course
and that they preserve and illustrate their primary meaning. On the other hand, it has also
happened sometime that in this same usual use of the Church some of these
formulas have given way to new expressions that, proposed or approved by the
sacred Magisterium, express their sense clearer and more fully.
"As for the meaning of dogmatic formulas, this remains ever true
and constant in the Church, even when it is expressed with greater clarity or
more developed. The faithful therefore must shun the opinion, first, that
dogmatic formulas (or some category of them) cannot signify truth in a
determinate way, but can only offer changeable approximations to it, which to a
certain extent distort of alter it; secondly, that these formulas signify the
truth only in an indeterminate way, this truth being like a goal that is
constantly being sought by means of such approximations. Those who hold such an
opinion do not avoid dogmatic relativism and they corrupt the concept of the
Church's infallibility relative to the truth to be taught or held in a
determinate way.
"Such an opinion clearly is in disagreement with the declarations
of the First Vatican Council, which, while fully aware of the progress of the
Church in her knowledge of revealed truth, nevertheless taught as follows:
"That meaning of sacred dogmas...must always be maintained which Holy
Mother Church declared once and for all, nor should one ever depart from that meaning
under the guise of or in the name of a more advanced understanding." The
Council moreover condemned the opinion that "dogmas once proposed by the
Church must, with the progress of science be given a meaning other than that
which was understood by the Church, or which she understands." There is no
doubt that, according to these texts of the Council, the meaning of dogmas
which is declared by the Church is determinate and unalterable." [.....]
Declaration in Defense of the Catholic
Doctrine on the Church Against Certain Errors of the Present Day, Sacred
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Mysterium Ecclesiae, June 24, 1973
COMMENT:
The word
"magisterium" is used equivocally in this document. There is the
Magisterium (with a capital "M") of the Church grounded upon the
Church's divine attributes of Infallibility and Authority to teach without the
possibility of error in the name of God. This is what is meant when Jesus
Christ said, "He who heareth you, heareth Me." When a pope engages
the Magisterium of the Church he is entering into the one and same Magisterium
that every pope in the history of the Church has entered since Pope Peter the
Apostle to this present day.
There is also the magisterium (with a lower case "m")
of churchmen teaching by virtue of their grace of state. This teaching has been
deserving of a presumption of correctness and respectful adherence throughout
the history of the Church, however, this teaching is the product of men and is
capable of error. Since Vatican II the repeated teaching by the magisterium of
churchmen has been heretical more often than not. Under Pope Francis it has not
only been doctrinally heretical but at time grossly immoral.
Ultimately, only the pope can engage the Magisterium of the
Church. The teaching that proceeds from the Magisterium is infallible and is
called Dogma and constitutes the formal object of divine and Catholic faith.
Dogma is God giving explicit clarity of definition to His revealed doctrine.
God is the formal and final cause of Dogma. The pope is the necessary but
wholly insufficient material and instrumental cause of Dogma. Since God is the
cause of Dogma, Dogma is infallible in both the truth it teaches and the words
by which that truth is taught. That is, Dogma is irreformable in both its form
(the truth) and its matter (the words) employed. Dogma ends theological
discussion on the doctrine defined. Theologians may develop the implications
that are necessarily derived from Dogmatic Truth but the Dogma in itself
remains fixed in its truth and its manner of expression. Therefore, the proper
tools for understanding Dogma are definition and grammar, and not necessarily
theological competency.
This citation is three
paragraphs from the document from the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith published in 1973. It both defends the infallible truth of Dogma in
the second and third paragraph by citing the teaching of Vatican I, while at
the same time, it undermines and corrupts Dogmatic truth in the first
paragraph!
It corrupts Dogma when it recognizes and presupposes that Dogma
is the proper subject matter for speculation by theologians and development by
the "living magisterium," (the pope teaching by his fallible grace of
state), to articulate a different non-literal meaning. Theologians are
permitted to critically contextualize Dogma to "interpret them
correctly." Theologians are directed to examine the "intention"
of the Dogmatic formulation. Is this even possible? Well no, it is not. The
"intention" is God's and no one can know the mind of God beyond what
God has revealed. The "intention" of what is in fact the wholly
insufficient material and instrumental cause of Dogma is irrelevant and
completely immaterial to the question. Imagine asking the chisel and the block
of marble what its "intention" was in producing Michelangelo's Pieta! So we end up with fallible theologians
and the fallible "living magisterium" determining that "some of these formulas
(Dogmas) have given way to new expressions." We have the fallible
reformulating the infallible. This has been the rule of the churchman for the
last fifty years since the publication of this document and the sub rosa practice for about 35 years
before that. We are fortunate that God has a perfect memory. His truth is not
compromised by lying churchmen. They claim to be speaking in the name of God to
make God a liar like themselves. It will not work. The remote rule of faith is Scripture and Tradition. The
proximate rule of faith is Dogma. Heresy is defined as the denail of Dogma! Our
duty is to keep the faith inviolate and uncompromised for which God has
promised the eternal reward of His divine presence. Those who corrupt God's
revealed Truth will have their eternal reward as well.
O Mary, Mary, bearer of the fire of love, and dispenser of mercy! Mary,
co-redemptrix of
the human race, when you clothed the Word with your flesh, the world was
redeemed. Christ paid its ransom with His Passion, and you paid it with the
sorrows of your body and soul.
St. Catherine of Siena, Doctor of the Church, Instructed by God Himself
Vatican
II peritus, Hans Kung, who denied the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the
dead, appealed to John Henry Cardinal Newman as his theological predecessor,
invoking the same liberal modernist principles!
In John Cardinal Newman's Grammar
of Assent are found all of the elements that determined the character of
Newman's thought. The basis of his-peculiar form of liberalism that troubled
Church authorities in his day manifests itself in this his most mature essay,
written in 1870, five years after the Apologia. The underlying current of the entire essay reveals an
aversion for the traditional methods of philosophy and theology on account of
their being, as he would say, too abstract and impersonal.[.....]
It was also Newman's liberal personalism that made him reluctant to
accept the definition of Infallibility in its fullest sense and import, as can
be seen from a letter he wrote in 1871 (after the dogma of infallibility was
defined) to Mr. Mashell, an Oxford convert who had published a pamphlet against
Cardinal Manning. After Newman writing "I never; expected to see such a
scandal in the Church.[.....]
An entire thesis, if not a small book, is required to do justice to the
topic of Newman's position in the Grammar of Assent; here only the chief
position will be discussed and contrasted with the philosophy of St. Thomas and
those who follow him and the exigencies of reality. The philosophical principles which the Church from
time immemorial has upheld and which Newman rejected, or seems to reject, are
as follows:
1. that the abstract and speculative is
superior to the concrete and practical;
2. that true science depends upon the
admission that the nature of things can be known by the mind by abstracting from
the here and the now;
3. that the natural order and the moral law
are independent of men's perception of it and are not based upon a man's
personal characteristics;
4. that causation in nature is discernable by
the human mind without an a priori reference to itself;
5. that the existence of God is demonstrable
by an investigation of nature and not merely by examining a man's consciousness
and his awareness of his conscience;
6. that final causes are operative in the
whole of creation and that God is the final cause, or purpose, of all things;
7. that logic is a noble and useful art which
is grounded upon reality and aids the human mind to understand the conspectus
of reality without falsity;
8. and that the dogmas and doctrines of the
Church are apprehended by 'believers as they are in themselves, and not in an
uncertain personalist fashion.
I hope that the reader untrained in the fundamental principles of
philosophy will be able to perceive that Newman's thinking, however subtly and
elegantly expressed, is opposed to and incompatible with true Catholic
philosophy.
Richard Sartino, Another Look at
John Henry Cardinal Newman
Is
the Resurrection of Jesus Christ to be taken literally or metaphorically?
NEO-MODERNISM:
It's Formal Manifesto from Norte Dame University
What implications does the true nature of papal infallibility have for
our life and practice as faithful Catholics? We can say the following.
First, the Church has a confident humility about papal infallibility.
On the one hand, we believe that the Church does understand and declare what is
true. On the other hand,
we also believe that verbal formulations of divine truths, even the infallible
formulations, are not the Truth per
se, but
limited, conditioned expressions of the truth.
Second, it is the
real truths that are infallible, not the verbal formulations that contain them.
An infallible statement is not at all wrong, but the way it might be said, even
in an infallible definition, might not be perfectly adequate.
In the end, every Catholic can say with Augustine, “If you comprehend
it, it is not God,” and
with Vatican I, that the pope possesses infallibility. Thanks to the gift of
infallibility of the Church exercised by the Magisterium, we worship him who is
beyond our comprehension in spirit and in truth.
Christopher Baglow, Director of the Science & Religion Imitative of
the McGrath Institute for Church Life at the University of Notre Dame, Infallibility, Ideology, and the Road to
Ecclesial Harmony, January 22, 2024
COMMENT: The denial of DOGMA is the definition of Heresy. If DOGMA need
not be taken literally than neither does any Heresy and the Creed we profess at
every Mass is meaningless. The end of Neo-Modernism is no different from its
precursor, Modernism. Both seek the destruction of DOGMA and the Catholic
Faith. Taking DOGMA literally, such as, the DOGMA that Jesus Christ literally
rose from the dead on the first Easter morning, does not place God within the
comprehension of man. It places man under the obedient conformity to God's
truth and delivers him from the opinion of idiots.
Just
as in the seduction of Eve, it began with vain promises of liberty and ended in
degredation!
“I’m a firm
believer in the principle of the slippery slope—the principle that the logic of
ideas, once accepted, will be worked out to their most extreme
consequences. Unless rejected in principle.” Marc Wauck
At the End of
the Slippery Slope By Cynthia Millen
·
Birth control is the first
important step woman must take toward the goal of her freedom. It is the first
step she must take to be man’s equal.
Margaret Sanger, Eugenicist and Founder of Planned Parenthood
·
A man who grows accustomed to
the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and
reduce her to a mere instrument of his own design. Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae
·
[Jesus] did not need anyone to
testify about man, for He knew what was in man. John 2:25
It began with the Pill. Sex became separated from reproduction. While
it was originally intended only to be prescribed to married women, the Supreme
Court quickly overruled state limitations, and the use of oral contraceptives
skyrocketed, changing a relationship with a woman forever. As predicted
by Pope Paul VI, the reverence for the sexual embrace quickly subsided as sex
became a recreational activity with no consequences or connection to the
creation of new life. “Free love” not only became popular: it became expected.
This “freedom” promoted by Sanger and others, however, came with many
unwelcome side effect for women which
still exist today: increased risks of blood clots, various cancers, migraines,
and many more. The burden of birth control fell entirely upon women, who were
tasked with denying their own uniquely feminine creative genius, in order to be
enthusiastically portrayed, both in media and in men’s minds, as sexual objects
to be used. Men altered nothing, were denied nothing, bore no risks, and
acquired all of the benefits. With windfalls of money for the pharmaceutical
companies, oral contraceptives were promoted as a liberating lifestyle
medicinal and a modern blessing for women. How could any rational woman
disagree?
Look, the days are
coming when people will say, ‘Blessed are the barren women, the wombs that
never bore, and the brest that never nursed. Luke 23:29
Abortion logically followed. The argument went that, when
contraceptives failed, women had the right to kill their unborn babies. All
children should be wanted, and no woman should be forced to carry a baby. It
was her body, after all. Again, the burdens fell entirely on women, along with
the risks of physical injury (sometimes permanent) and proven damage to mental
health.
Once again, they were expected to deny their uniquely feminine creative
genius, primarily for the benefit of men. Studies have shown that nearly 70% of all women obtain abortions
because their partners expressly or implicitly pressured them to do so, and
nearly 90% would not have obtained an abortion if their partner would have
supported them and their baby. Men altered nothing, were denied nothing, bore
no risks, and acquired all of the benefits. Abortion was promoted as a
reproductive “right” and funded by government entities to make even more money
for abortion mills. The freedom to “choose” is necessary for a happy life. How
could any progressive woman disagree?
And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
(Matt 15:3).
With the legalization of civil marriage for same-sex couples came the
acceptance of two women or two men as parents of a child. Unless a child was
adopted or brought in from a previous heterosexual relationship, the men must
hire a surrogate to be impregnated and carry their child. The higher physical
and psychological risks to surrogate mothers is well-documented. The burden of
surrogacy, even though it is entered into voluntarily, is a heavy one for
women. Women’s uniquely feminine creative genius was now commoditized and sold
to the highest bidder. Her womb was “rented” to provide a service. The baby she
has carried, and for whom she may be the biological mother (if her own eggs
were used), would be completely separated from her. The men involved, either as
sperm donors or parents, altered nothing, were denied nothing, bore no risks,
and acquired all of the benefits. Not surprisingly, the commercial surrogacy
business become more profitable each year as it is promoted as a way to support
justice for gay couples. Not wanting to be homophobic, how could any woman
disagree?
Now we have the transgender movement: the end result of the slippery
slope.
With reproduction no longer tied to biological sex, why does biological
sex matter?
With the creative genius of women being monetized, suppressed, or
denied, what is the difference between men and women, other than artificial
social constructs like hair, make-up, clothing, or pronouns? If men can look
like women, talk like women, be parents without a woman, and have the same
pronouns as women, why do we need women, other than as “rent-a-wombs”? Even
their language is not necessary, as they are no longer mothers, but simply
“birthing persons.”
Like a snowball getting larger as it rolls down the hill, men’s gains
from the Pill onward only increased until, finally, they have won all through the
transgender game. Men who wish to become “trans women” only need to suppress
their testosterone (over 70% of men have no surgery at all, yet still, have
much more than women will ever have. Thus “trans women” are larger, louder,
bolder, bigger, and dominant, sometimes dangerously so, but always unfairly.
The recent debacle at NCAA Women’s Swimming Championship, in which a
male-bodied swimmer won the 500-yard freestyle, is only one example. They have
altered nothing, are denied nothing, bear no risks, and acquire all of the
benefits. Meanwhile, the transgender industry has boomed, with several large
LGBT-oriented philanthropies donating millions of dollars each year to medical
centers, pharmaceutical companies, and university research in support of the transgender
agenda. These donors also underwrite organizations like the ACLU and Planned
Parenthood (which is now in the “gender-affirming” business) and have a huge
influence on many corporate boards and in the media.
The defeat seems to be complete. Women went from being asked to give up
their dignity and their bodies to give up their entire existence as females.
Worst of all, we women are expected to be celebrating this. Not wanting
to be transphobic, how can women disagree?
But disagree, we must. Clearly. Loudly. Strongly.
When we choose to fight back, we will win, because we have the way, the
truth, and the life on our side. It will not be easy, and we may be called all
sorts of names, or worse. But we will live in the only way that matters as
females, reclaiming our feminine genius.
So From This Day Forward:
NO to the myth of transgenderism, a big business con game
which deludes young men and women with lies, emotional blackmail,
biological fallacies, pseudo-psychology, and surgical mutilation—and ultimately
erases women. This means fighting to protect spaces solely for biological
females, using only “male” and “female” to describe fellow humans, and refusing
to play the pronoun game.
NO to surrogacy which denigrates women to be nothing more
than uterine prostitutes.
NO to abortion which destroys one life
and dehumanizes another.
NO to hormonal birth control which denies the reverence due
to women and debases them as objects to be used.
Be a woman who says NO to this world, and YES to our feminine genius, just
as we were created to be. It’s not too late.
Do not be afraid,
for I have conquered the world. Jesus Christ
Posted on Catholic Stand, At the End
of the Slippery Slope - Catholic Stand
A Providential Man : George Kastrioti (1405-1468),
known by his Turkish pseudonym, Skanderbeg, which means, "Lord Alexander", after Alexander
the 
Great, perhaps the greatest of Catholic
Crusaders;
He Always Kept Company with Our Lady of Good Counsel
According to his contemporaries, Skanderbeg was tall and slender with a
prominent chest, wide shoulders, long neck, and high forehead. He had black
hair, fiery eyes, and a powerful voice. So warlike was his nature that he truly
needed to wage battle from time to time. He killed more than two thousand Turks
with his own hands. He was a master of all weapons, swift and ingenious, a
general with a quick and certain gaze, audacious and resolute. Naturally
possessed of a fiery temper, anger would go to his head quickly and set his
eyes ablaze. But he would dominate his anger, biting his lips until they bled.
His courage in battle stemmed from this struggle over his evil passions. All in
all, his customs were pure, his manner noble and elevated. Mary was his
strength and inspiration. Under her protection he immediately began rebuilding
Albania and preparing it for the new wars that were sure to come.
For one who has Faith, his life is a glorious
epic of a devotee of Mary.
In Prince Skanderbeg the people had found courage in battle with
certainty of victory; he was the man of Providence, the defender of the
country, the protégé of Our Lady. Monsignor Dillon writes: “He loved the
sanctuary of Mary with a devoted, enthusiastic love; and Mary in return, not
only made him a model of Christian perfection, but also gave him an invincible
power, which preserved not only Albania but also Christendom during his reign.”
João S. Clá Dias, The Mother of
Good Counsel of Genazzano
The Words and Deeds of Christ, by Joe Sobran - “Evangelizing... begins with transmitting Catholic teaching to children.”
When I was a much younger man, I almost
worshipped Shakespeare. He seemed to me almost literally “inspired,” the most
eloquent man who ever lived. And he nearly filled the place in my life that
Catholicism had briefly occupied after my teenage conversion.
When
I returned to the Catholic Church in my early thirties, I began to see him
differently. As a professional writer myself, I still admired him immensely,
realizing how impossible it was that I should ever emulate him. But I no longer
regarded him as a god. I had another god - namely, God.
I
began to marvel at the words that were truly the most inspired ever uttered:
those of Christ. As a writer I felt honored when anyone quoted me or remembered
anything I’d written. But Christ is still quoted after 2,000 years. An obscure
man, he wrote nothing; we have only a few of the many words he spoke during his
life, not in the Hebrew or Aramaic he spoke them in, but translated into Greek
and thence into English.
His
words have a unique power that sets them off from all merely human words. Even
two removes from their original language, they still penetrate us and rule our
consciences. They have changed the world profoundly. He didn’t just perform
miracles; he spoke miracles. The words we read from his mouth are miracles.
They have a supernatural effect on anyone who is receptive to them.
One
proof of their power is that we also resist them. Sometimes they are
unbearable. Like some of the early disciples who fell away, we are tempted to
say: “This is hard stuff. Who can accept it?” It’s the natural reaction of the
natural man, fallen man.
Great
as Shakespeare is, I never lose sleep over anything he said. He leaves my
conscience alone. He is a tremendous virtuoso of language, but much of his
beauty is bound to be lost in translation. (I apologize if this offends our
German readers; Germans believe that Shakespeare in English was really just raw
material for Schiller’s great translations.)
By
the same token, nobody ever feels guilty about anything Plato or Aristotle
said. They spoke important and lasting truths often enough, but never anything
that disturbs us inwardly. We are never afraid to read them. We aren’t tempted
to resist them as we are tempted to resist Christ. The sayings of Confucius and
Mohammed haven’t carried over into alien cultures with anything like the force
of Christ’s words. They may be very wise at times, or they wouldn’t have
endured for many centuries; but still, they are only human.
But
all this raises a question (and here I apologize for offending our Protestant
readers). If the Bible is to be our sole guide, why didn’t Christ himself write
it? Why didn’t he even expressly tell the Apostles to write it, as far as we
know? Why did he leave so much to chance? Yet he said: “Heaven and earth shall
pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” And so far this certainly appears
true, though we know of no measures on his part to see to it that his words
would be preserved. He seems to have trusted that they would somehow have their
effect by their sheer intrinsic power, just as he trusted that his enduring the
humiliation, agony, and death of a common criminal would confound every human
expectation and fulfill his tremendous mission.
St.
Thomas Aquinas wrote that the Redemption was an even greater miracle than the
Creation. I’ve often wondered just what he meant by that, and I think I’m
starting to see. The human imagination can readily conceive of God creating the
world. The human race has many creation stories and myths; every culture seems
to have its own. But nobody imagined, no human being could ever imagine, God
becoming a human being and redeeming the human race by submitting to utter
disgrace, unspeakable physical pain, and death, ending his life in what
appeared even to his disciples to be total futility.
The greatest genius who ever lived could never have foreseen or
supposed such a story. It was absolutely contrary to human common sense. It
came as a total shock even to the devout and learned Jews who were intimate
with the Scriptures and prayed for the coming of the Messiah. The Apostles who
had repeatedly heard Christ himself predict his Passion, his destiny on the
Cross, failed to comprehend it when it actually came to pass. When his words
were fulfilled to the letter, instead of recognizing what seems to us so
obvious, they fled in terror. (As we would have done in their place.)
The New Testament Epistles were written by men who had seen
Christ after the Resurrection. A skeptic might dismiss St. Paul’s vision as a
hallucination, but Peter, John, and James had seen Christ’s Passion and afterward
met him, conversed with him, dined with him, touched him. They didn’t deny
their own desertion and loss of faith at the time of his death, just as the
ancient Israelites didn’t play down, in their own scriptures, their many
defections from the true God; it was an essential part of the story.
Nor
did the authors of the Epistles keep reiterating that the Resurrection was a
fact, as if it were in doubt. They simply treated it as something too well
known to their hearers to need further proof. They were prepared to die as
martyrs in imitation of Christ; Christian suffering, not writing, was to be the
chief medium of the Good News for the rest of the world.
Christ’s
words, in their minds, were inseparable from his deeds. He had founded an
organization, which we call the Church, and he had told and shown the Apostles
how to go about their mission when he was no longer visibly present. It seems
to me fatally anachronistic to suppose that distributing literature, in the
form of what we now call the Bible, was to be a prominent part of this mission;
that was impossible before the printing press, surely a great technological
advance but one that had no role in the life of the Church before the fifteenth
century. The Apostles had - and could have - no conception of books as we know
them, easily mass-produced and cheaply purchased. Before Gutenberg, every book
had to be copied by hand, carefully preserved, awkwardly used. Reading itself
was a special skill.
The
life of the Church, as prescribed by Christ, was sacramental. He never told the
Apostles to write books; he told them to baptize, to preach the Gospel, to
forgive sins, and to commemorate the climactic moment of his ministry before
the Passion, the Last Supper. He delegated his own authority to them and left
much to their discretion, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That is why
Catholics give so much weight to tradition; we aren’t privy to all his
instructions to the Apostles, but we trust that they knew what they were doing
when they formed the Church in her infancy.
In
one respect Catholics are more fundamentalist than the fundamentalists. We take
the words “This is my body” and “This is my blood” very literally. So did the
first hearers who rejected the “hard saying” that eating his flesh and drinking
his blood was necessary to salvation; he didn’t correct the impression that he
meant exactly what he seemed to be saying. Even a current writer, the
professedly Catholic Garry Wills, rejects the traditional Catholic doctrine
that the priest who consecrates bread and wine converts them into the very body
and blood of Christ. Christ’s words, as I say, still provoke resistance. And
this is why I believe them.
What
greater proof of his divinity could there be than the fact that he is still resisted,
even hated, after 2,000 years? Nobody hates Julius Caesar anymore; it’s pretty
hard even to hate Attila the Hun, who left a lot of hard feelings in his day.
But the world still hates Christ and his Church.
The
usual form of this hatred is interesting in itself. For every outright
persecutor, there are countless people who pretend not to hate Christ, but
subtly demote him to the rank of a “great moral teacher,” or say they have
nothing against Christianity as long as the “separation of church and state” is
observed, or, under the guise of scholarship, affect to winnow out his
“authentic” utterances from those falsely ascribed to him - as if the Apostles
would have dared to put words in his mouth! And as if such fabricated words
would have proved as durable as “authentic” ones! (Try writing a single
sentence that anyone could mistake for a saying of Christ for even a century.)
Most secular-minded people would find it distasteful to nail a
Christian to a cross, though there have been exceptions. They prefer to create
a certain distance between themselves (or “society”) and Christ, to insulate
worldly life from the unbearable Good News, so that they feel no obligation to
respond to God’s self-revelation. An especially horrifying concrete application
of this insulation of society from Christianity is the reduction of the act of
killing unborn children to an abstract political “issue,” a matter about which
we can civilly “disagree.”
Pretending
to leave the ultimate questions moot, they actually live in denial of and
opposition to the truth we have been given at so much cost. What was formerly
Christendom - a civilization built around that central revelation of God to man
- has now fallen into a condition of amnesia and indifference.
Even
much of the visible Catholic Church itself has defected from its duty of
evangelizing, which begins with transmitting Catholic teaching to children.
Ignorance of Catholic doctrine in the “American Church” is now both a scandal
and a terrible tragedy.
The
Vatican recently offended its Protestant and Jewish partners in ecumenical
“dialogue” by reiterating the most basic claim of the Catholic Church: that
it’s the One True Church, the only sure way to salvation. Apparently the tacit
precondition of “dialogue” was that the Church stand prepared to renounce her
identity. And we can well understand why some people might get the mistaken
impression, even from certain papal statements and gestures, that this was a
live possibility. But it was a misunderstanding that had to be unequivocally
cleared up before any honest conversation could occur.
Christ
always has been, still is, and always will be too much for the human race at
large to accept or assimilate. Exactly as he said he would be. The world keeps
proving the truth of his words.
Joe Sobran, The Reactionary Utopian, copyright (c) 2010 by the Fitzgerald
Griffin Foundation, http://www.fgfbooks.com. All rights reserved. It may be forwarded or reprinted if this copyright
information is included.
Remember in your charity:
Remember the welfare of our expectant mother: Maria Castillo Gonzalez,
Drews request your prayers for Phyllis Virgil, for her health and spirital welfare,
For Anthony
Niekrewicz, spiritual and temporal welfare is the petition of all the
members of Ss. Peter & Paul,
Mary Lou Loftus' aunt, Susan Hendricks, who is gravely ill after emergency surgery,
Fred Holder,
for his
spiritual and physical welfare,
Thomas Soul,
a
nursing home patient who has suffered a stroke,
Donna Kallal, a dear friend of the
Schiltz family who is dying,
Philip Thees requests our prayers for the heath of Mary Glatz and Lenny and Agnus Messineo,
For the welfare of Aaron, a York resident in need of conversion,
For the spiritual welfare of Margaret Connelly is the petition of Camilla Meiser,
Linda Boyd, for her health,
Pete
Schiffbauer, a cousin of Monic Bandlow who is gravely ill,
Joan R.
Barr,
the widow of F. Donald Barr who died March 7, they were married 70 years
Cole
Schneider, prayers for his welfare are requested by Camilla Meiser,
JoAnn
Niekrewicz,
for her recovery from a recent fall and shoulder injury,
The Drews ask prayers for the spiritual and physical
welfare of Robert Carballo,
Conversion of Jack
Gentry, the nephew of Camilla Meiser,
For Sr. Maria
Junipera, who took her final vows as a nun with the Slaves of the
Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, New Hampshire April 8,
Stephen
Bryan,
the brother of a devout Catholic religious, for his spiritual welfare,
Marie
Kolinsky,
for her health and spiritual welfare is the petition of her family,
Gene Peters requests our prayers for the conversion
of Shirley Young and Carl Loy who are dying, the
conversion of Dawn Keithley
and Nate Schaeffer,
Rev. Leo
Carley,
an eighty-nine year old priest faithful to Catholic tradition, who is seriously
ill,
For the recovery of Hayden Yanchek, the grandson of Francis Yanchek, injured in
a farming accident,
Maureen
Nies, for
the recovery of her health is the petition of Camilla Meiser,
Daniel
Vargs, for
his health is the petition of his parents,
Art Noel, for the restoration of his
health,
For the welfare of Peg Berry and her husband, Bill,
Marianne Connelly asks prayers for Chris Foley, who is gravely ill,
and the welfare of his wife, Mary
Beth,
The spiritual welfare of the Sal & Maria Messineo family is the petition of the
Drew’s,
Liz Agosta, who is seriously ill, for her
spiritual and temporal welfare,
Warren
Hoffman, a
long time member of our Mission who is in failing health,
Patrick
Boyle,
for the recovery of his health and his spiritual welfare,
For the spiritual welfare of the Drew children,
Monica Bandlow request our prayers for the welfare of
Ray who is recovering from a
MVA, and his daughter, Sonya,
and Tera Jean Kopczynski, who
is in failing health, and for a good death for Mr. Howald, Kathy
Simons, Regina Quinn, James Mulgrew, Ruth Beaucheane, John Kopczynski, Roger
& Mandy Owen
Peg Berry requests our prayers for her brother, William Habekost,
For the recently widowed, Maike Hickson, and her children,
For the spiritual welfare of the Carmelite nuns in Fairfield, PA,
Geralyn
Zagorski, recovery of her health and spiritual welfare and
the conversion of Randal Pace is the petition of Philip Thees,
For the grandson of
Joe & Liz Agusta,
Fr. Waters requests our
prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Elvira Donaghy,
For the health and
conversion of Stephen Henderson,
Fr. Paul DaDamio requests
our prayers for the welfare of Rob Ward, and his sister, Debra
Wagaman,
Kaitlyn McDonald, for the recovery of her health and spiritual
welfare,
Roco
Sbardella,
for his health and spiritual welfare,
The Vargas’ request our prayers for the spiritual
welfare of their son, Nicholas,
Family, for the welfare of Lazarus Handley, his mother, Julia, and his brother, Raphael, with Down’s Syndrome,
Fr. Waters requests prayers for the spiritual and
physical welfare of Frank McKee,
Nancy
Bennett, for the recovery of her
health,
For the spiritual welfare of Mark Roberts, a Catholic faithful to tradition,
Michael Brigg requests our prayers for the health of John Romeo,
The health and welfare of Gene Peters and his sons,
Conversion of Anton
Schwartzmueller, is the prayer request of his children,
Christine
Kozin, for
her health and spiritual welfare,
Teresa
Gonyea,
for her conversion and health, is the petition of her grandmother, Patricia
McLaughlin,
For the health of Sonya Kolinsky,
Jackie Dougherty asks our prayers for her brother, John Lee, who is gravely ill,
For the health and spiritual welfare, Meg Bradley, the granddaughter
of Rose Bradley,
Timothy
& Crisara, a couple from Maryland have requested our prayers for their spiritual
welfare,
Celine
Pilegaard, the seven year old daughter of Cynthia Pilegaard, for her recovery from
burn injuries,
Rafaela de
Saravia, for
her health and welfare,
Abbe Damien
Dutertre,
traditional Catholic priest arrested by Montreal police while offering Mass,
Francis
(Frank) X. McLaughlin, for the recovery of his
health,
Nicholas
Pell,
for his health and spiritual welfare is the petition of Camilla Meizer,
Mary Kaye
Petr,
her health and welfare is petitioned by Camilla Meizer,
The welfare of Excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò,
The welfare of Rev.
Fr. Martin Skierka, who produces the traditional Ordo in the U.S.,
For the health and welfare of Katie Wess, John Gentry, Vincent Bands, Todd Chairs, Susan Healy and
James O’Gentry is the petition of Camilia,
Marieann
Reuter, recovery of her health, Kathy Kepner, for her health, Shane Cox, for his health,
requests of Philip Thees,
The Joseph
Cox Family, their spiritual welfare,
For the health of Kim Cochran, the daughter-in-law of Joseph and Brenda
Cochran, the wife of their son Joshua,
Louie
Verrecchio,
Catholic apologist, who has a health problem,
John
Minidis, Jr. family, for help in their spiritual
trial,
Joann
DeMarco, for her health and spiritual
welfare,
Regina
(Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and health,
Melissa
Elena Levitt, her conversion, and welfare of her children,
For the grace of a holy death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,
Conversion of Annette
Murowski, and her son Jimmy,
Brent Keith from Indiana has petitioned our prayers
for the Keith Family,
The welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,
The spiritual welfare Robert Holmes Family,
For the spiritual and temporal welfare of Irwin Kwiat,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers for Elvira Donaghy,
Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and
Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,
Rende and
Mary Mufide, a traditional Catholics from India ask our prayers for her welfare and
he family members, living and deceased,
Mary Glatz, her health and the welfare
of her family,
Barbara
Harmon,
who is ill,
Jason Green, a father of ten children,
his health,
For the health and welfare of Sorace family,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers for the health and
spiritual welfare of Brian Abramowitz,
Thomas
Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation for their contribution to the beauty of our
chapel,
John Rhoad, for his health and
spiritual welfare,
Kathy Boyle, requests our prayers for her
welfare,
Joyce
Laughman and Robert Twist, for their conversions,
Michael J.
Brigg & his family, who have helped with the needs of the Mission,
Nancy Deegan, her welfare and conversion
to the Catholic Church,
Francis Paul
Diaz,
who was baptized at Ss. Peter & Paul, asks our prayers for his spiritual
welfare,
The conversion of Rene McFarland, Lori Kerr, Cary Shipman
and family, David Bash, Crystal and family, Larry Reinhart, Costanzo Family,
Kathy Scullen, Marilyn Bryant, Vicki Trahern and Time Roe are the
petitions of Gene Peters,
For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf, Eckhard Ebert,
and Fahnauer family,
Fr. Waters requests our prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX, and for Fr. Thomas Blute,
For the welfare of Fr. Paul DaDamio and Fr. William T. Welsh,
The Drew’s ask our prayers for the welfare of Joe & Tracey Sentmanat family, Keith
& Robert Drew, Christy Koziol & her children, Fred Nesbit and Michael
Nesbit families, and Gene Peters Family,
the John Manidis Family, the Sal Messinio Family, Michael Proctor Family,
Ryan Boyle grandmother, Jane Boyle, who is failing health,
Mel Gibson
and his family, please remember in our prayers,
Rev. Timothy A. Hopkins requested our prayers for the
welfare of his friend, Fr Jean-Luc Lafitte,
Ebert’s request our prayers for the Andreas & Jenna Ortner Family,
Joyce Paglia has asked prayers for George Richard Moore Sr. & his
children, and her brother, George
Panell,
Philip Thees asks our prayers for his family, for McLaughlin Family, the welfare
of Dan & Polly Weand, the
conversion of Sophia Herman,
Tony Rosky, the welfare Nancy Erdeck, the wife of
the late Deacon Erdeck, John Calasanctis, Tony Rosky, James Parvenski, Kathleen Gorry, health of mind and body of Cathy Farrar.
Pray for the
Repose of the Souls:
For Jo Ann
Niekrewicz, our dear friend, died March 1, for the blessed repose of
her soul is the petition of all the members of Ss. Peter & Paul,
Shirley
Rotondo, died
February 2-26, and Louisa McBride,
died February 27, is the petition of Monica Bandlow,
Katherine
Veronica Wedel, the mother of Mary Baer, died February 6,
James
Condit, Jr., traditional Catholic activist, died December 27,
Beverly
Harmon, died
December 16, requested by the Sentmanat family,
Rev.
Nicholas DeProspero, a faithful Ruthenian Eastern rite Catholic priest, died December 10,
Monica Bandlow petitions our prayers for her friend, Patricia Messineo, died November
28,
Guy
Berthault,
died November 23, a great Catholic scientist whose work in sedimentology
destrooyed Lyellian geology and the theory of evolution,
Thomas Soul,
died
November 8 after receiving the last rites of the Church,
Etta Van Der
Werken, a
dear friend of Barbara Taffe, died 10-21-2025,
Gary Potter, Catholic writer and apologist
and great long time defender of Catholic doctrine and tradition, died 9-9-2025,
Elizabeth
Gorska,
who died September 9, a relative of Lidia Gjec,
Camilia Meiser request our prayers for the souls of Peggy Cummings and Elizabeth Genter,
Thomas A. Nelson, founder
of TAN Books and Publishers, died August 16,
Juan D.
Gonzalez,
our former sacristan, choir director, and dear friend, died July 23,
Sal
Messineo,
a faithful traditional Catholic, died Augsut 14,
Patricia
Askew, a
friend of Camilla Meiser, died July 3,
Joseph
Kerney, a
young man whose family provided the statues of the Sacred Heart, Mary and
Joseph in our sanctuary, died May 30,
Louis
Richard Ajlouny, the father of Randa Sharpe, died May 15,
Rene Guidicessi, died April 25, an old
friend of the Drews,
F. Donald
Barr, died
March 7 at 94 years of age, co-founder of Robert Francis Religious Goods, in
Philadelphia,
Dr. David
Allen White, a well known defender of the Catholic faith, died February 11,
Bishop
Richard Williamson, a renowned defender of the Catholic faith and most charitable gentleman,
died January 29,
Rodolfo
Alberto Lacayo, a cousin of Claudia Drew, died January 4,
Genieve
Wallace, died
Christmas day,
Ruth Marion
Beaucheane, died December 8, is the petition
of Monica Bandlow,
Ana Maria Salcedo, the sister of Mario Fiol, died November 26,
Fr. Johin Cardaro, a
traditional Catholic priest who was found dead in his home November 2,
Robert Carballo asks that we
remember his parents, Roberto & Aida Carballo, and his friend, David
Duclos, who died April 15,
Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais who may have been responsible for preventing the SSPX's public reconciliation with Rome in 2012, died October 8,
Lorna
Edwards, our
dear friend and loyal supporter of this Mission, died August 10,
Lois Petti, died July 28 two hours after
receiving the Last Sacraments from Fr. Waters,
Wolfgang
Smith, a
renowned Catholic scholar, mathematician, scientist, philosopher, who helped
the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation, died July 19,
Willaim
Glatz, a
good and faithful Catholic, died July 17,
Alicio
Gonzalez, a
Catholic who asked for the sacrament of Extreme Unction, unfortunately did not
receive, died July 9,
John
Zavodny, a faithful Catholic who died wearing the
scapular of Mt Carmel on the first Saturday of May, requested by Phyllis Virgil,
Catherine
Martel, a lapsed Catholic, received
the last sacraments in a good disposition from Fr. Waters on March 25 and died
on April 4,
Father
Basilio Méramo, a faithful priest, died March 5, removed from the SSPX for opposing
their accommodation with Rome,
Julia
McDonald,
the mother of Kyle McDonald, died March 1,
Agnus
Melnick,
died February 28, a long time faithful Catholic and mother of eight children, including
a traditional priest,
Kathryn
(Drew) Lederhos, of Wellesley, MA, died
February 3, 2024,
Chris Foley, the
brother of Mary Lou Loftus, died February 1,
Louis Zelaya, the brother of Claudia
Drew, died January 30,
Fr. James
Louis Albert Campbell, a faithful priest who died December 18 at 91 years of age, and her
mother and father, Teresa and Thomas
Maher,
Charles
Harmon,
the father of Tracey Sentmanet, died October 1, after receiving the rites of
the Church,
Fr. Waters requests prayers for Elvira Donaghy, his friend and former secretary a for Bishop
Gerado Zendejas, died September 9,
Robert
Hickson,
a faithful Catholic apologist who died Septembber 2,
Monica Bandlow requests prayers for her parents, Thomas & Teresa Maher, her
husband, William Bandlow, her
brother-in-law, Richard Bandlow,
her sister, Mary Maher, Fr. Christopher Darby, SSPX, who died March 17, Robert Byrne, Michelle Donofrio McDowell, her cousin, Patricia Fabyanic, the Prefect
of Our Lady’s Sodality, March 8, for
John Pfeiffer who died August 20, Theresa
Hanley, died July 23, Fr.
Juan-Carlos Iscara, SSPX, who died December 20, John Kinney, died December 21, Willaim Price, Jr., and Robert Arch Ward, died January 10,
and Myra, killed in a MVA
June 6,
John Sharpe,
Sr.,
died July 20,
Maria
Paulette Salazar, died June 6,
Dale Kinsey requests prayers for his wife, Katherine Kinsey, died May 17,
Richard
Giles,
who died April 29, the father of Traci Sentmanat who converted to the Catholic
faith last All Saints' Day,
Joseph
Sparks,
a devout and faithful Catholic to tradition died February 25,
Joyce Paglia, died
January 21, and Anthony Paglia,
died January 28, who were responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,
Joe Sentmanet request prayers for Richard Giles and Claude Harmon who converted to
the Catholic faith shortly before their deaths,
Rodolfo
Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew,
died January 9,
Elizabeth Agosta petitions our prayers for Joseph Napolitano, her brother,
who died January 2,
Michael
Dulisse,
died on December 26,
Michael
Proctor, a close friend of the Drews,
died November 9,
Richard
Anthony Giles, the father-in-law of Joe Sentmanat converted to the Catholic faith on
All Saints Day, died November 5,
Robert
Kolinsky,
the husband of Sonja, died September 18,
Gabriel
Schiltz,
the daughter of Thomas & Gay Schiltz, died August 21,
Mary Dimmel, the
mother –in-law of Victoria Drew Dimmel, died July 18,
Michael
Nesbit,
the brother-in-law and dear friend of the Drew's, died July 14,
Thomas
Thees, the brother of Philip, died
June 19,
Carmen Ragonese,
died June 22,
Juanita
Mohler, a friend of Camella Meiser,
died June 14,
Kathleen
Elias, died February 14,
Hernan Ortiz, the
brother of Fr. Juan Carlos Ortiz, died February 3,
Mary Ann
Boyle, the
mother of a second order Dominican nun, a first order Dominican priest, and a
SSPX priest, died January 24,
John DeMarco, who
attended this Mission in the past, died January23,
Charles
O’Brien, the father of Marlene Cox,
died December 30,
Mufide Rende requests our prayers for the repose of
the souls of her parents, Mehmet
& Nedime,
Kathleen
Donelly,
died December 29 at 91 years of age, ran the CorMariae website,
Matthew
O'Hare,
most faithful Catholic, died at age 40 on November 30,
Rev. Patrick
J. Perez, a Catholic priest faithful to
tradition, pastor Our Lady Help of Christians, Garden Grove, CA, November 19,
Elizabeth
Benedek,
died December 14, requested by her niece, Agnes Vollkommer,
Dolores
Smith and Richard Costello, faithful Catholics, died
November,
Frank
D’Agustino,
a friend of Philp Thees, died November 8,
Fr.
Dominique Bourmaud, of the SSPX, Prior of St.
Vincent in Kansas City, died September 4,
Pablo Daniel
Silva, the brother of Elizabeth
Vargas, died August 18,
Rose Bradley, a
member of Ss. Peter & Paul, died July 14,
Patricia
Ellias, died June 1, recently
returned to the Church died with the sacraments and wearing the brown scapular,
Joan Devlin, the sister-in-law of Rose
Bradley, died May 18,
William
Muligan, died April 29, two days after
receiving the last sacraments,
Robert Petti, died
March 19, the day after receiving the last sacraments,
Mark
McDonald, the father of Kyle, who died
December 26,
Perla Otero, died December 2020, Leyla Otero, January 2021,
cousins of Claudia Drew,
Mehmet Rende, died
December 12, who was the father of Mary Mufide,
Joseph
Gravish, died November 26, 100 year
old WWII veteran and daily communicant,
Jerome
McAdams,
the father of, died November 30,
Rev. James
O’Hara, died November 8, requested by
Alex Estrada,
Elizabeth
Batko, the sacristan at St. John the
Baptist in Pottstown for over 40 years, died on First Saturday November 7
wearing the brown scapular,
William Cox, the
father of Joseph Cox, who died September 3,
James Larson, Catholic
apologists, author of War Against Being
publication, died July 6, 2020,
Hutton
Gibson, died May 12,
Sr. Regina
Cordis,
Immaculate Heart of Mary religious for sixty-five years, died May 12,
Leslie Joan
Matatics, devoted Catholic wife and
mother of nine children, died March 24,
Victoria
Zelaya, the sister-in-law of Claudia
Drew, died March 20,
Ricardo
DeSilva,
died November 16, our prayers requested by his brother, Henry DeSilva,
Rev. Fr.
Joseph F. Collins, died April 27, 2019 to whom we are indebted for establishing our
traditional pre-Bugnini Holy Week in all
its beauty,
Roland H.
Allard,
a friend of the Drew’s, died September 28,
Stephen
Cagorski
and John Bogda, who
both died wearing the brown
scapular,
Cecilia
LeBow, a most faithful Catholic,
Rose Cuono, died Oct 23,
Patrick
Rowen,
died March 25, and his brother, Daniel
Rowen, died May 15,
Sandra
Peters, the
wife of Gene Peters, who died June 10 receiving the sacraments and wearing our
Lady’s scapular,
Rev. Francis
Slupski, a
priest who kept the Catholic faith and its immemorial traditions, died May 14,
Martha
Mochan, the
sister of Philip Thees, died April 8,
George
Kirsch,
our good friend and supporter of this Mission, died February 15,
For Fr.
Paul J. Theisz, died October 17, is the petition of Fr. Waters,
Fr. Mecurio
Fregapane,
died Jan 12, was not a traditional priest but always charitable,
Fr. Casimir
Peterson,
a priest who often offered the Mass in our chapel and provided us with sound
advice, died December 4,
Fr. Constantine
Bellasarius, a faithful and always
charitable Eastern Rite Catholic Melkite priest, who left the Roman rite, died
November 27,
Christian
Villegas,
a motor vehicle accident, his brother, Michael, requests our prayers,
John Vennari, the former editor of
Catholic Family News, and for his family’s welfare, April 4,
Mary Butler, the aunt of Fr. Samuel
Waters, died October 17,
Joseph
DeMarco,
the nephew of John DeMarco, died October 3,
John Fergale, died September 25 after
receiving the traditional sacramental rites of the Church wearing the brown
scapular,
John Gabor, the brother of Donna
Marbach, died September 9,
Fr. Eugene
Dougherty,
a faithful priest, fittingly died on the Nativity of the BVM after receiving
the traditional Catholic sacraments,
Phyllis
Schlafly,
died September 5,
Helen
Mackewicz,
died August 14,
Mark A.
Wonderlin,
who died August 2,
Fr. Carl
Cebollero,
a faithful priest to tradition who was a friend of Fr. Waters and Fr. DeMaio,
Jessica
Cortes, a
young mother of ten who died June 12,
Frances
Toriello, a
life-long Catholic faithful to tradition, died June3, the feast of the Sacred
Heart, and her husband Dan,
died in 1985,
John
McLaughlin, a friend of the Drew’s, died May 22,
Angela
Montesano,
who died April 30, and her husband, Salvatore,
who died in July 3, 2013,
Charles Schultz, died
April 5, left behind nine children and many grandchildren, all traditional
Catholics,
Esperanza Lopez de Callejas,
the aunt of Claudia Drew, died March 15,
Fr. Edgardo Suelo, a
faithful priest defending our traditions who was working with Fr. Francois
Chazal in the Philippines, died February 19,
Conde McGinley, a long time
laborer for the traditional faith, died February 12, at 96 years,
The Drew family requests your
prayers for Ida Fernandez and Rita Kelley,
parishioners at St. Jude,
Fr. Stephen
Somerville,
a traditional priest who repented from his work with the Novus Ordo English
translation, died December 12,
Fr. Arturo
DeMaio,
a priest that helped this Mission with the sacraments and his invaluable
advice, died December 2,
J. Paul
Carswell,
died October 15, 2015,
Solange
Hertz, a
great defender of our Catholic faith, died October 3, the First Saturday of the
month,
Paula P.
Haigh,
died October 22, a great defender of our Catholic faith in philosophy and
natural science,
Gabriella
Whalin,
the mother of Gabriella Schiltz, who died August 25,
Mary
Catherine Sick, 14 year old from a large traditional Catholic family, died August 25,
Fr. Paul
Trinchard,
a traditional Catholic priest, died August 25,
Stephen J.
Melnick, Jr., died on August 21, a long-time faithful traditional Catholic husband
and father, from Philadelphia,
Patricia
Estrada,
died July 29, her son Alex petitions our prayers for her soul,
Fr. Nicholas
Gruner,
a devoted priest & faithful defender of Blessed Virgin Mary and her Fatima
message, died April 29,
Sarah E.
Shindle,
the grandmother of Richard Shindle, died April 26,
Madeline
Vennari,
the mother of John Vennari, died December 19,
Salvador
Baca Callejas, the uncle of Claudia Drew, died December 13,
Robert Gomez, who died in a motor vehicle
accident November 29,
Catherine
Dunn,
died September 15,
Anthony
Fraser,
the son of Hamish Fraser, died August 28,
Jeannette
Rhoad, the
grandmother of Devin Rhoad, who died August 24,
John Thees, the uncle of Philip Thees,
died August 9,
Sarah
Harkins, 32 year-old mother of four
children, died July 28,
Msgr. Donald
Adams, who
offered the Indult Mass, died April 1996,
Anita Lopez, the aunt of Claudia Drew,
Fr. Kenneth
Walker,
a young traditional priest of the FSSP who was murdered in Phoenix June 11,
Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for Gilberte Violette, the mother of
Fr. Violette, who died May 6,
Pete Hays petitions our prayers for his brothers, Michael, died May 9, and James, died October 20, his
sister, Rebecca, died March17, and his mother, Lorraine Hayes who died May 4,
Philip
Marbach,
the father of Paul Marbach who was the coordinator at St. Jude in Philadelphia,
died April 21,
Richard
Slaughtery,
the elderly sacristan for the SSPX chapel in Kansas City, died April 13,
Bernedette
Marie Evans nee Toriello, the daughter of Daniel Toriello, died March 31, a
faithful Catholic who suffered many years with MS,
Natalie
Cagorski,
died march 23,
Anita Lopez
de Lacayo,
the aunt of Claudia Drew, who died March 21,
Mario
Palmaro,
Catholic lawyer, bioethicist and professor, apologist, died March 9, welfare of
his widow and children,
Daniel Boyle, the
uncle of Ryan Boyle, died March 4,
Jeanne
DeRuyscher,
who died on January 25,
Arthur
Harmon,
died January 18,
Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for the soul of Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died
January 17,
Joseph
Proctor,
died January 10,
Susan Scott, a devote traditional
Catholic who made the vestments for our Infant of Prague statue, died January
8,
Brother
Leonard Mary, M.I.C.M., (Fred Farrell), an early supporter and friend of Fr. Leonard
Feeney, died November 23,
John Fergale, requests our prayers for
his sister Connie, who died December 19,
Jim Capaldi, died December 15,
Brinton
Creager,
the son of Elizabeth Carpenter, died December 10,
Christopher
Lussos,
age 27, the father of one child with an expecting wife, died November 15,
Jarett
Ebeyer,
16 year old who died in his sleep, November 17, at the request of the
Kolinsky’s,
Catherine
Nienaber,
the mother of nine children, the youngest three years of age, killed in MVA
after Mass, 10-29,
Nancy Aldera, the sister of Frances
Toriello, died October 11, 2013 at 105 years of age,
Mary Rita Schiltz, the mother of Thomas
Schiltz, who died August 27,
William H.
(Teddy) Kennedy, Catholic author of Lucifer’s Lodge, died August 14, age 49, cause of
death unknown,
Alfred
Mercier,
the father of David Mercier, who died August 12,
The Robert Kolinsky asks our prayers for his friend, George Curilla, who died August
23,
John Cuono, who had attended Mass at
our Mission in the past, died August 11,
Raymond
Peterson,
died July 28, and Paul Peterson,
died February 19, the brothers of Fr. Casimir Peterson,
Margaret
Brillhart,
who died July 20,
Msgr. Joseph
J. McDonnell, a priest from the diocese of Des Moines, who died June 8,
Patrick
Henry Omlor, who wrote Questioning The Validity of the Masses using
the New, All English Canon, and for a series of newsletters which were
published as The Robber Church, died May 2, the feast of St Athanasius,
Bishop
Joseph McFadden, died unexpectedly May 2,
Timothy
Foley,
the brother-in-law of Michelle Marbach Folley, who died in April,
William
Sanders,
the uncle of Don Rhoad, who died April 2,
Gene Peters ask our prayers for the repose of the
soul of Mark Polaschek, who
died March 22,
Eduardo
Gomez Lopez, the uncle of Claudia Drew, February 28,
Cecelia
Thees,
died February 24,
Elizabeth
Marie
Gerads, a nineteen
year old, the oldest of twelve children, who died February 6,
Michael
Schwartz,
the co-author with Fr. Enrique Rueda of “Gays, Aids, and You,” died February 3,
Stanley W.
Moore,
passed away in December 16, and Gerard (Jerry) R. Pitman, who died January 19,
who attended this Mission in the past,
Louis
Fragale,
who died December 25,
Fr. Luigi
Villa, Th.D. author of Vatican II About
Face! detailing the heresies of Vatican II, died November 18 at the age of 95,
Rev. Michael
Jarecki,
a faithful traditional Catholic priest who died October 22,
Jennie Salaneck, died September 19 at 95
years of age, a devout and faithful Catholic all her life,
Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,
Cynthia
(Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the mother of nine children, four who are still at
home, died August 19,
Stanley
Spahalski, who died October 20, and his wife, Regina
Spahalski, who died June 24, and for the soul of Francis Lester, her son,
Julia
Atkinson,
who died April 30,
Antonio P.
Garcia,
who died January 6, 2012 and the welfare of his teenage children, Andriana and
Quentin,
Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who
died February 27,
Fr. Timothy
A. Hopkins,
of the National Shrine of St. Philomena, in Miami, November 2,
Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the
welfare of his wife, Delores,
Eduardo
Cepeda,
who died January 26,
Larry Young, the 47 year old father of
twelve who died December 10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their
family,
Sister Mary
Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, died
December 16,
Joeseph
Elias,
who died on September 28,
William, the brother of Fr. Waters,
who died September 7,
Donald
Tonelli,
died August 1,
Rev. Fr.
Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great defender of Catholic Truth, died January 25, 2006,
Emma
Colasanti, who died May 29,
Mary
Dullesse,
who died April 12, a Catholic convert who died wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre
Ebert, who died April 7, Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,
Philip D.
Barr,
died March 5, and the welfare of his family,
Judith Irene
Kenealy,
the mother of Joyce Paglia, who died February 23, and her son, George Richard
Moore, who died May 14,
For Joe
Sobran who died September 30,
Fr. Hector
Bolduc, a
great and faithful priest, died, September 10, 2012,
James &
Jean Rowan
and their sons, Patrick & Daniel,
John Vennari asks our prayers for Dr. Raphael Waters who died
August 26,
Stanley
Bodalsky,
the father of Mary Ann Boyle who died June 25,
Mary Isabel
Kilfoyle Humphreys, a former York resident and friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6,
Rev. John
Campion,
who offered the traditional Mass for us every first Friday until forbidden to
do so by Bishop Dattilo, died May 1,
Joseph
Montagne, who
died May 5,
For Margaret
Vagedes, the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died January 6,
Fr. Michael
Shear, a
Byzantine rite Catholic priest, died August 17, 2006,
Fr. James
Francis Wathen, died November 7, 2006, author of The
Great Sacrilege and Who Shall
Ascend?, a great defender of dogma and liturgical purity,
Fr. Enrique
Rueda,
who died December 14, 2009, to whom our Mission is indebted,
Fr. Peterson asks to remember, Leonard Edward Peterson, his cousin, Wanda, Angelica Franquelli, and the six
priests ordained with him.
Philip Thees petitions our prayers for Beverly Romanick, Deacon Michael Erdeck,
Henry J. Phillips, Grace Prestano, Connie DiMaggio, Elizabeth Thorhas,
Elizabeth Thees, Theresa Feraker, Hellen Pestrock, and James & Rose Gomata,
and Kathleen Heinbach,
Fr. Didier
Bonneterre,
the author of The Liturgical Movement, and Fr. John Peek, both were traditional
priests,
Brother
Francis, MICM, the superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in
Richmond, NH, who died September 5,
Rodolfo
Zelaya Montealegre, the father of Claudia Drew, who died May 24,
Rev. Francis
Clifford,
a devout and humble traditional priest, who died on March 7,
Benjamin
Sorace,
the uncle of Sonja Kolinsky.
St. Dominic Painting
The picture in the vestibule is
a canvas print of a painting of St. Dominic (d. 1221) by Fra Bartolomeo Della
Porta (d. 1517). Fra Bartolomeo was
considered the greatest Dominican painter after the great Blessed Fra Angelico
(d. 1455). He was brought into the
Dominican Order by Jerome Savonarola, O.P. (d. 1498) and was one of his most
ardent admirers. Tradition relates that
Fra Bartolomeo was one of the armed friars and citizens that tried to defend
the convent of San Marco when Savonarola was captured by his enemies. He most certainly was a witness when the
Borgia Pope, Alexander VI, got his revenge by having Savonarola burned as a
“heretic.” Fra Bartolomeo gave up
painting for many years after the death of Savonarola because, with his death,
also ended the elevated principles of artistic purpose which he brought to
Florence. Only under obedience did he
once more begin to paint. One of his
best known paintings is that of Savonarola.
That painting hung in the cell of St. Catherine de Ricci (d. 1589), one
of the greatest Dominican saints who bore the stigmata for 47 years. Her body remains incorrupt to this day. The painting of St. Dominic emphasis the
spiritual importance of silence in the Dominican life as of essential
importance to fulfill the key to the Dominican vocation “to live, defend and
propagate the faith.” The axiom, “the
word of the Preacher must flow from a soul of silence.” St. Dominic, pray for us.
High Treason:
“Betrayal of your sovereign by acts of aid and comfort to the monarch’s
‘enemies’.”
On the one hand, therefore, it is necessary
that the mission of teaching whatever Christ had taught should remain perpetual
and immutable, and on the other that the duty of accepting and professing all
their doctrine should likewise be perpetual and immutable. “Our Lord Jesus Christ, when in
His Gospel He testifies that those who not are with Him are His enemies, does
not designate any special form of heresy, but declares that all heretics who
are not with Him and do not gather with Him, scatter His flock and are His
adversaries: He that is not with Me is against Me, and he that gathereth not
with Me scattereth” (S. Cyprianus, Ep. lxix., ad Magnum, n. I).
The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has
done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding
the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the
ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different
from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans,
the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned
only a certian portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared
heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned
all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. “There
can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole
cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the
real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic
tradition” (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum,
On the Unity of the Church
Our Lady of Good Success to
the Catholics of Today
My Beloved Daughter, I am Mary of Good Success, your Mother and your Protectress, I carry my most Holy Son in my left arm and the scepter of the world in my right arm…. The sanctuary lamp which you just saw go out has several meanings.
Firstly, towards the end of the nineteenth century and during a large part if the twentieth century there will arise various errors and the whole universe will become Republican. The precious light of faith will be going out following on the almost complete destruction of morals; in that time there will be many tribulations, moral tribulations also, both public and private. The little group of people who keep the true worship of faith and the virtues will have to suffer cruelly and indescribably. The constant martyrdom will bring many to an early death, they will be counted amongst the martyrs, they have sacrificed themselves for Church and country. In order to deliver oneself from the slavery of these errors one will need great strength of will, perseverance, courage and a great trust in God. These are gifts of the merciful love of my Divine Son, He has provided them for the renewal. In order to test the faith and the trust of the just and good men there will be moments when everything seems to be lost and paralyzed but that is the moment in which the happy beginning of the complete renewal starts.
Secondly, my communities will be abandoned, sunk in an abyss, a deep ocean of bitterness and they will seem to be satiated with sufferings and afflictions. How many good vocations are lost because of lack of good and prudent spiritual direction; the Novice Mistresses should take great care of the prayers of the novices and they should show understanding of souls.
The Third reason for the extinguishing of the sanctuary lamp is the spirit of impurity of those times, the air will be filled with this unclean spirit. A flood of filth will overflow the streets, the squares, and all public places so that there will be no virginal souls left in the world.
Fourthly, in all layers of society errors will strive with great cunning to penetrate into the families in order to corrupt the youth too; Satan will congratulate himself that he can feed himself in the fouled way on the hearts of the children. The innocence of children will hardly exist anymore. Priestly vocations will be lost. That will be a true misfortune and priests will turn away from their holy duties and enter upon a false, wrong course, and therefore the Church will go dark. No prelate and father will be watching any longer with love, strength and prudence over this flock, and many of the prelates will lose the spirit of God and bring their own souls into danger. Pray constantly, call upon heaven without tiring, and weep without ceasing inwardly in your heart and pray to the Heavenly Father through the Eucharistic Heart of my Divine Son Who has nobly shed blood.
Out of the bitterness and pains of His sufferings and death, pray that He will have compassion upon His servants, that He will bring an end to this terrible scourge by sending to the Church a prelate to renew the spirit of His priests. My Divine Son and I will surround this beloved son with a special love, we shall pour out a heap of many graces of humility of heart and docility towards God’s inspirations, and the strength to defend the rights of the Church so that he will know how to defend the rights of the Church with a heart which enables him to behave like another Christ towards the mighty people of this world and the little people of this world without despising the unfortunate ones. He will, with a divine gentleness, lead into the convents and monasteries souls consecrated to God for the service of God without making the yoke of the Lord heavy upon them. He holds in his hands the scales of sanctity in order that everything happen according to the weight and measure so that God be glorified.
This prelate and father will form a counter-weight against the lukewarmness of priests and religious who are meant to be dedicated to God. As a result of the guilt of these faithless men, Satan will gain upon earth control of this world like a dark cloud which darkens the sky and darkens all of the people who are consecrated to the Most Holy Heart of my Divine Son. All will have to suffer chastisements because all kinds of crimes have been allowed. They will suffer pestilence, hunger, civil strife, degeneration of morals and the loss of countless souls. In order to blow away the black clouds which block the shining holiness and the freedom of the Church there will be a fearful war in which much blood will flow of priests and religious. This night will be so terrible that people will think that wickedness is conquering. Then strikes my heart and in a most sudden way I shall annihilate the pride of Satan, I shall assist and liberate the Church and country from his cruel tyranny.
The Fifth reason why the sanctuary lamp went out is that influential men will watch with indifference, uncaringly, the oppression of the Church, the persecution of virtue and the triumph of wickedness. Because these influential people will not use their position of influence in order to combat evil or to renew the faith, the people will gradually become indifferent to the demands of God, they will take on an evil spirit and let themselves be swept away in all kinds of passion and vice. My beloved daughter, were you to live that terrible time you would die of pain or grief over the circumstances which I have described to you. The love of my Holy Son and mine which we have for this world which is our property demand from now on sacrifices and good works in order that the duration of this terrible catastrophe will be shortened.
The Blessed and ever Virgin Mary, under the title of Our Lady of Good
Success, to Sister Maria Anna of Jesus, in the Convent of the Immaculate
Conception in Quito on the 2nd February, 1634. Sister was praying in front of the Blessed
Sacrament when suddenly the sanctuary lamp went out.
Pope Leo
honors new female pro-abortion ‘archbishop’ of Canterbury
To pretend
that this is somehow a blessed vocation and praise Mullally in it and invoke
God's blessing and the inspiration of the Blessed Virgin Mary on it is
unspeakably evil.
LifeSiteNews | Vatican City | Mar 26,
2026 - Pope Leo XIV has issued a congratulatory letter to Sarah Mullally – the first woman
ever appointed “archbishop of Canterbury” and a vocal supporter of abortion and
the LGBT agenda. In the letter, Leo praises Mullally’s “weighty”
responsibilities, and explicitly invokes the Blessed Virgin Mary as a source of
“inspiration” for her new role.
The March 20, 2026 message, published on the Vatican website, was
released after Mullally’s installation yesterday. It makes no reference
whatsoever to the Catholic Church’s perennial teaching that Anglican orders are
“absolutely null and utterly void” (Apostolicae Curae, 1896), that the
ordination of women is impossible and contrary to the will of Christ, or to
Mullally’s own public record promoting grave moral evils of abortion and
homosexual acts.
Instead, Leo XIV
opens with the salutation:
“To The Most
Reverend and Right Honourable Dame Sarah Mullally Archbishop of Canterbury”
He continues:
“I know that the
office for which you have been chosen is a weighty one, with responsibilities
not only in the Diocese of Canterbury, but throughout the Church of England as
well as the Anglican Communion as a whole… In asking the Lord to strengthen you
with the gift of wisdom, I pray that you may be guided by the Holy Spirit in
serving your communities, and draw inspiration from the example of Mary, the
Mother of God.”
This invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary – the Theotokos, the model
of perfect obedience to God’s Will – is particularly scandalous. To hold up the
Mother of God as inspiration for a woman pretending to exercise a priestly and
episcopal office that the Church has always declared Christ reserved to men –
not to mention for a leader who actively promotes abortion and same-sex
“marriage” – is a mind-bending scandal.
Leo XIV quotes Pope Francis saying “it would be a scandal if, due to
our divisions, we did not fulfil our common vocation to make Christ known.”
He adds:
Dear sister, I
willingly make these words my own, for it is through the witness of a
reconciled, fraternal and united Christian community that the proclamation of
the Gospel will resound most clearly.
With these
fraternal sentiments, I invoke upon you the blessings of Almighty God as you
take up your high responsibilities. May the Holy Spirit come down upon you and
make you fruitful in the Lord’s service.
COMMENT: Those who praise heretics and schismatics are heretics and
schismatics. Those who seek "unity" with heretics and schismatics are
heretics and schismatics. Leo the Iceman and worshiper of Pachamama who has
publicly repudiated the titles of the Blessed Virgin Mary as Co- Redemptrix and
Mediator of All Grace now publically blasphemes the Mother of God. We pray for
his conversion and we pray that God will cleanse His Church of these homosexual
perverts. The latter is certain; the former is unlikely.
Around four o’clock in the afternoon on January 3rd
1944, in the convent chapel of Tuy, in front of the Tabernacle, Our Lady urged
Sister Lucia to write the text of the Third Secret and Sister Lucia recounts:
“I felt my spirit inundated by a mystery of light that is God and in
Him I saw and heard the point of a lance like a flame that is detached touch
the axis of the earth and it trembles: mountains, cities, towns and villages
with their inhabitants are buried. The sea, the rivers and clouds exceed their
boundaries, inundating and dragging with them in a vortex, houses and people in
a number that cannot be counted; it is the purification of the world from the
sin in which it is immersed. Hatred, ambition, provoke the destructive war.
After I felt my heart racing and in my spirit a soft voice that said: ‘In time, one faith, one
baptism, one Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity, Heaven!’
This word ‘Heaven’ filled my heart with peace and happiness in such a way that,
almost without being aware of it, I kept repeating to myself for a long time:
Heaven, Heaven!!”
A Path Under the Eyes of
Mary (Um Caminho sob o olhar
de Maria), published in
2013 by the Carmel of Coimbra
"Know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of
God?"
James 4:4
UNEARTHED:
1995 photo shows Pope Leo XIV participating in Pachamama ritual
Exclusive to
LifeSiteNews, this explosive revelation will feature prominently in Fr. Charles
Murr's forthcoming book on the new pontiff.
LifeSiteNews |
Wed Mar 18, 2026 — In an explosive revelation that will feature prominently in
his forthcoming book on the new Pontiff, Faith & Reason co-host Father
Charles Murr has confirmed that Pope Leo XIV – then Father Robert Francis
Prevost, OSA, actively participated in a pagan Pachamama “Mother Earth”
agricultural ritual while attending an official Augustinian theological
symposium.
The story was first brought to light by Fr. Murr, who has spent months
meticulously compiling documentation for his upcoming book on Leo XIV. Three
Augustinian priests have now independently confirmed to Fr. Murr that Robert
Prevost is clearly visible among the kneeling participants in the central
photograph. Although none of the three were present at the 1995 ritual itself,
they immediately and unmistakably recognized their confrere from the published
image.
The image
appears in the official proceedings of the IV Simposio-Taller
“Lectura de San Agustín desde América Latina” (São Paulo,
January 23-28, 1995), published as the book Ecoteología: Una
Perspectiva desde San Agustín (México, 1996). The
official caption beneath the photo of kneeling participants reads:
Celebración del Rito de la pachamama (madre tierra), que
es un rito agrícola ofrecido por las culturas del Sur-Andino en el Perú y
Bolivia.
Celebration of the Rite of Pachamama (Mother
Earth), which is an agricultural rite offered by the cultures of the
South-Andean region in Peru and Bolivia.
The same
volume includes a large group photograph explicitly captioned “Foto
de todos los participantes del Simposio Sao Paulo Brasil,” placing the future Pope squarely among the attendees of an event
that openly celebrated the Pachamama ritual as part of its “ecotheology”
program.
Fr. Murr told Faith
& Reason: “The man who is now Leo
XIV was documented kneeling in a pagan earth goddess ritual in an official
gathering of his own religious order. The implications for the direction of the
Church under this pontificate are profound.”
Fr. Murr has
obtained high-resolution scans of the proceedings (including the clear kneeling
Pachamama photograph) from the Salesian Central Library in Buenos Aires,
Argentina (stamped call number 276.04 ACU :504 / 30.161, Biblioteca
Central Salesiana, No. 30161).
Yet another
photo from the event, showing all the participants of the symposium, also
confirms Prevost’s attendance.
LifeSite
confirmed the photos of Leo at the ritual were in fact him by comparing images
from the same period found in the Augustinian Spanish-language magazine OALA, where he is named “Roberto Prevost.”
On the Faith
& Reason episode today, Fr. Murr
noted how this violates the First Commandment and how the martyrs of the Church
gave their lives rather than participate even slightly in ceremonies to false
gods.
COMMENT: Everyone
has know that Leo/Prevost was cut from the same cloth as Francis/Bergoglio:
they are both worshipers of the pagan earth goddess, Pachamama. And every
faithful Catholic knows that "All the gods of the gentiles are
devils" (Psalm 95:5). And every faithful Catholic who is familiar with
knows that the punishment of God that is now upon us will soon cleanse His
Church of all the devils and their worshipers.
Pope Leo, like his
predecessor Francis, is a member of the "gay mafia," a Defender of
the Homosexual Heresy
The Homoheresy
in the Church Today -- Benedict XVI Established a Clear Ban for Their
Ordination
Homoheresy is
the Rejection of the Church's Teaching on Homosexuality
Introduction / Translation: Giuseppe Nardi
(Rome) The Polish Catholic journal Fronda several years abo
published a long essay, which was also taken up by the German Catholic
journal Theologisches. The subject of the review was the
"Homohäresie" and the existence of a "gay mafia" in the
Catholic Church. The author described the existence of a network of
homosexual priests at all levels of the Church hierarchy, including the Roman
Curia, who cover for each other.
The author of the explosive essay is the Polish priest Fr. Dariusz Oko,
assistant professor of philosophy at the Pontifical Theological Academy
of Cracow and the Pontifical University of John Paul
II of Krakow and pastor at St. Hedwig's parish in this city. In his
essay, Oko recalled that more than 80 percent of the so-called pedophilia cases
of clerics in the US are in reality cases of ephebophilia and are aimed at male
adolescents. The numbers coincide with those of the CDF, which speaks of
90 percent, facts that had been systematically suppressed in
public. "Factual investigations show that the extent of the problem
in the Catholic Church is still the lowest. Why then is she the one mainly
spoken of? According to research, in a thousand cases of pedophila
or ephebophilia there is only one is related to the Catholic Church in the
United States, about 3-5 per ten thousand," says Oko in Theologisches (42)
9-10/2012.
However Fr. Oko also showed the difficulties of priests and
seminarians, who oppose the homosexual network in the church: "If the
rector or other supervisor try to expel one, then it may be that they
themselves are expelled and not the homo-cleric. Or should a vicar try to
defend young people from the parish from a priest who commits sexual assault,
he is harassed, disciplined and treated and not the priest, because the
decisions makers to whom they refer, are themselves part of the gay
lobby."
"If some indiscretions are verified, which is leaked from
the Vatican palaces, it would be an international network with hundreds of
clerics of all rank levels," said the Vatican expert Marco
Tosatti. Tosatti conducts an interview with, Dariusz Oko on this
subject. The pontificate of Benedict XVI was kept under continuous
bombardment with the pedophile scandal. With the new pontificate it was
"completely forgotten", says Tosatti.
Marco Tosatti: Two
years ago you had mapped the situation in the Church in your thorough
study. Has something changed since then?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: Certainly
my study has touched on a widespread problem that exists almost
everywhere. Only in this way can it be explained that they made the rounds
around the world within a few weeks. In many countries, translations were
made: from English to German, Italian and Czech, Slovak and Estonian ... It
seems to me that the problem is addressed in my study is perceived more
consciously.
Marco Tosatti: You
talk in your work of Homoheresy. What are their characteristics?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: The
Homoheresy is a rejection of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church on
homosexuality. The representatives of Homoheresy do not accept that the
homosexual inclination is a personality disorder. They doubt that
homosexual acts are unnatural. The defenders of Homoheresy are for the
ordination of homosexuals. The Homoheresy is an ecclesiastical version of
homosexualism.
Marco Tosatti: In
2005 the Congregation for Catholic Education published an important
document by Pope Benedict XVI that prohibits the ordination of
homosexuals. Why this document?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: Since
the 70s of the 20th century, a new type has entered in many seminars and
monasteries around the world, who view human sexuality contrary to the
traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality. The
consequence was that it started on all continents in so many diocesan
seminaries and monasteries, to represent the idea that there are two equivalent
sexual orientations: a heterosexual and a homosexual. Thus, it was that
clerics were only chaste, to be understood as abstaining from unclean actions,
and demanded the ability to live celibacy, without further asking about
their sexual orientation or their inclinations. In this way, it became
necessary to define homosexuality as an inclination and personality structure
explicitly as an objective obstacle to the ordination.
Marco Tosatti: Was
this requirement from 2005, which prohibits the priesthood for homosexuals,
used to your knowledge?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: I
am not responsible for training at seminaries. Therefore, I do not know
how this ban is handled in different countries. This question should be
directed to those responsible for the formation of future priests.
Marco Tosatti:
Since you have published your survey, the Pope has changed. Do you see any
difference in attitude between the two popes in connection with the problem?
Fr. Dariusz Oko: It
is difficult to speak of any difference. Fundamentally, the Magisterium of
the Catholic Church does not change and the forbids the ordination of
homosexuals. The Magisterium in force led to a contrast to previous
distinction between active and passive homosexuality a distinction between a
temporary homosexual inclination, which occurs in late puberty, and the
deep-rooted inclination. Both forms of homosexuality and not only active
homosexuality represent an obstacle for the priesthood. Homosexuality is
incompatible with the priestly vocation. Therefore, not only the
ordination of men with homosexual inclination, even if only temporarily, is
strictly forbidden, but their admission to the seminary as well.
“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
Anti-Semitism’s
“Working Definition”
The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) (until January 2013, known as
the Task Force for International
Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance, and Research or ITF) is
an intergovernmental organization founded in 1998 which unites governments and
experts to strengthen, advance and promote Holocaust education, research and
remembrance worldwide and to uphold the commitments of the Declaration of the
Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust. The IHRA has 34 member
countries, one liaison country and seven observer
countries. (Wikipedia)
The IHRA’s working definition
for Antisemitism that has been adopted by member countries:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception
of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical
manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish
individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and
religious facilities.” Such as:
· Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, such as by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
·
Applying
double standards by requiring of Israel behavior not expected or demanded of
any other democratic nation.
· Comparing contemporary Israeli policy to
that of the Nazis.
This
“working definition,” although worded a little differently in light of their
differing perspectives, is very close to the definition coined by Joe Sobran
who said: “An anti-Semite used to mean a man who hated
Jews. Now it means a man who is hated by Jews.” The IHRA’s definition it not
grounded on any objective standard but solely on the subjective “perception of
Jews.” You can expect this “working definition,” which has been adopted by U.S.
government agencies to work its way into the United States legal code
notwithstanding any legal niceties such as freedom of speech, equal protection
under the law, etc. The Jewish religion is a race base belief that Jews possess
a special salvific relationship with God because of their DNA irrespective of
what they believe or what they do. Jesus Christ was killed by the Jews in part
because he told them that this was not so. And like Jesus our Lord, the
Catholic Church will necessarily fall under this definition of Anti-Semitism as
well. Soon enough, the Novus Ordo Church of the New Advent will be calling
faithful Catholics anti-Semites.
U.S.
Politics: Jewish revolutionary, Saul Alinsky, died 6-12-1972 and will soon be
celebrating his 54th year in hell. His book, Rules for Radicals,
enumerates twelve rules for effective political organization:
RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you
have.”
RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and
become a positive.”
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive
alternative.”
RULE 12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
The
purpose of the “rules” is to impose the eight levels of control that must be
accomplished in the formation of a Godless socialist state.
1. Healthcare — Control healthcare and you
control the people.
2. Poverty —Increase the Poverty level as high
as possible:’ poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you
are providing everything for them to live.
3. Debt — Increase the debt to an
unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will
produce more poverty.
4. Gun Control— Remove the ability to defend themselves
from the government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5. Welfare — Take control of every aspect of
their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).
6. Education — Take control of what people
read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.
7. Religion — Remove the belief in the God
from the government and schools.
8. Class Warfare – Divide the people into the
wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent, and it will be easier to
take (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.
The new kill
chain: America is using AI to bomb targets in Iran
ET Online |
Mar 07, 2026
When
the US launched its military campaign against Iran, called Operation Epic Fury,
the conflict quickly became something more than a conventional war. The operation is emerging as one
of the most consequential real-world tests of artificial intelligence (AI) in
modern warfare.
In the Iran campaign, AI
technology has played a critical role by supporting the initial screening of
incoming data, allowing human analysts to focus on higher-level analysis and
verification, according to Captain Timothy Hawkins, a Central Command
spokesperson. “Centcom uses a variety of AI tools, and that is exactly what
they are, tools, to assist human experts in a rigorous process aligned with US
policy, military doctrine and the law,” Hawkins said in an interview with
Bloomberg News. He
declined to name the tools or the companies that provide them to the military.
[.....]
“Bottom line, these tools help
leaders -- humans -- make smarter decisions faster. The tools do not replace
them or make targeting decisions,” said Hawkins, adding that target selection
relies on a very specific, rigorous, legal process that involves commanders and
leaders.
COMMENT: The primary company providing the AI
"tool" is Palantir. Palantir's CEO is Alex Karp, a Jewish Zionist,
who said in a recent interview, "What makes America special right now is
our lethal capabilities, our ability to fight war... and the AI revolution is
uniquely American." Karp said his company's tools are uniquely links the
"U.S. and Middle East partners that were hit by Iranian airstrikes."
That "Middle East partners" is Israel. This AI tool of Palantir was
responsible for identifying Gaza targets for the Israeli IDF which included
killing tens of thousands of women, children and the elderly. Karp vigorously
opposed the college protesters against the Gaza genocide calling their
views a "pagan religion" and "an infection inside of our
society." At the AI Expo for National Competitiveness, he remarked that
"the peace activists are war activists" and said that
"protestors should be sent to North Korea" (WIKI).
It is the AI tool of Palantir
that selected the mostly girls school in Minab, Iran as an acceptable target
that was struck by two Tomahawk missiles killing 164 adolescent girls, 14
teachers on the first strike and the killing rescue personal and volunteered
helpers on the second strike forty minutes after the first. The school is
adjacent to a military complex and most likely the children where the daughters
of military personal. A few hours after the Minab strike a missile struck a
girls gymnasium in Lamerd, Iran where "dozens of teenage girls were
attending their regular training sessions of volleyball, basketball, and gymnastics
in the main sports hall in Lamerd, a city near the Persian coast" killing
18. Other targets include Shahid Bahonar Middle School,
Parand, Arian Pouya Elementary School, Parand, Kindergarten,
Narmak neighbourhood, and a Children's park
(called "Police Park"), Tehran. There are 13 hospitals and
other health facilities verified by the World Health Organization (WHO) that
were targeted by the US-Israeli attacks. Also struck by missiles were common
public facilities including Tehran Grand Bazaar, Ba'ath Stadium,
Tehran, and the Azadi sports complex, Tehran.
What is now evident is that the
U.S. is using Israeli programmed AI by Zionists to implement terror on the
Iranian people. These targets have no
military value. These attacks are total violations of Catholic moral teaching,
international law and U.S. law. Trump's war on Iran was launched without any
moral justification whatsoever and is being conducted without any moral
constraints.
JUST
WAR RULES
"It is not
to be doubted that the world is in a certain sense a single community, and
possesses the right to prescribe equitable and appropriate laws for its
members, like those which constitute the law of nations.... It is unlawful to
kill the innocent in war.... Slavery is not a legitimate consequence of war,
that hostages cannot rightfully be put to death because of a breach of faith by
an enemy.... The violators of
international law sin mortally as well in peace as in war and that it is not
lawful for any nation to refuse to observe the law of nations."
Fra Francisco
de Vitoria, O. P. notes from his lectures
Fra Francisco
de Vitoria, O. P., a Spanish Dominican friar, Father of International Law, held
the chair of theology at the University of Salamanca where he died 1546. Fra
Francisco is credited with establishing the Three Rules of a Just War developed
from the works of St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine and applying them during
the Age of Exploration, which often became under the unscrupulous, the Age of Exploitation.
He accepted without question that legitimate armed defense of property, life
and honor, but taught that offensive war must fulfill the conditions of being
declared by the right authority, being carried out in the right manner, and
having a just cause.
The unprovoked
war against Iran started by Israel and the United States fails with respect to
every criteria.
It is, therefore,
a strict duty for every priest wanting to remain Catholic to separate himself
from the Conciliar Church for as long it does not rediscover the Tradition of
the Church and of the Catholic Faith.
Bishop Tissier
de Mallerais, January 1, 2015
Bishop
Williamson explains why the “XSPX,” is called the “New Society,” - “Novus
Societas”
"The Catholic Church is much broader than just the Traditional
movement. [….] We will never make Tradition attractive or convincing if we
remain stuck in the 1950’s or 1970’s. [….] Tradition cannot be confined within
the 19th and 20th century Church condemnations of liberalism. […..] Our time is
different, we cannot stand still, much that is modern is not immoral. […..] So
we must re-position ourselves, which is a practical problem and not a question
of Faith. […..] The “Resistance” movement has fabricated its own “faith” by
which to condemn the Newsociety.
[…..] SSPX HQ never betrayed Tradition
in 2012 because its actions were attacked from both sides. […..] The official Newsociety texts of 2012
were not dogmatic. […..] Rome was much less aggressive in 2012 to the XSPX than
it was in 2006. [……] The Newsociety
follows the Spirit and draws
on Tradition."
Fr. Niklaus Pfluger, SSPX First Assistant to Bishop Bernard Fellay,
critical comments addressing the “resistance” that has risen against the SSPX’s
accommodations with modernist Rome. Quotations taken from commentary by Bishop
Williamson
VATICAN
II COUNCIL: WHAT IS ITS AUTHORITY?
Vatican II Council was a "pastoral council." It was a council
of churchmen teaching by their grace of state. At no time before, during or after
the council did anyone ever teach anything by virtue of the Divine Magisterium
of the Church, that is, teach by the Holy Ghost. Every Catholic is obligated to
reject anything from this council that so much as equivocates or undermines any
Catholic dogma. The Vatican II Council is to judged by its pastoral success or
failures. The implementation of the pastoral corruptions of this council have
directly lead to the greatest apostasy in the history of the Catholic Church.
Those that claim that the "teaching of Vatican II" is good are those
whose intention is to destroy the Church.
"No
matter what may happen, since no one may justifiably command another to sin,
and since no one is permitted to obey such a command, no one may ever blame
another—even an errant pope—for his sins. Conversely, the failure of any
person—even the pope—to keep God's law or to preserve his own faith, does not
excuse any other person for his failure to do the same. Ignorance of the law or
ignorance of the Faith is never an excuse for sinning; one is bound to know
when he is being commanded to sin." -
Fr. James F.
Wathen, The Great Sacrilege
On Penance
St. Paul says: I beseech you to offer your bodies to God as a sacrifice
of mortification and penance, but in such wise that this sacrifice may be holy
and acceptable in His sight. That it may become so, he adds, this painful
sacrifice of mortification must be reasonable, that is, made with discretion
and without excess....
However, to the effect that penance may be discreet and reasonable,
conformably with the instruction left us by the Apostle of the Gentiles, it
must fulfill two conditions, according to the rules which the Holy Fathers have
prescribed for its practice. First, it should mortify the body, but not injure
the health. Secondly, it must not hinder our fulfillment of the duties attached
to our state of life. St. Basil expresses himself clearly in his Constitutions
as to the former of these conditions; he will have penance taken in a measure
proportioned to the strength of the body. Notice that by continence the holy
Doctor here means bodily austerities. We should imitate the camel, which kneels
to receive its burden, but which, when sufficiently laden, rises to its feet,
and refuses to take more. As St. Bernard says, the body must be afflicted by
penance in such degree as to prevent its unruly turning against the spirit; but
it is not to be disabled or annihilated, so as to hinder it contributing to the
exercise of the inner virtues, which are by far the most useful. St. Gregory
the Great is of the like mind, when he says that in the use of penance we
should keep within these bounds: we should not slay the flesh, but only its
unruly passions.
Rev. John Baptist Scaramelli, S.J., Guide
to the Spiritual Life
Because the
life of prayer and union with God is what I love most of all;
because I find it the most perfect; because it is a life of heaven, in a
certain way, since a Carmelite is concerned only with being united to God and
contemplating Him always and singing His praises. That thirst for prayer continually grows in
me; my recollection is always continuous now, because whatever I do, I do with
my Jesus and offer it to Him with love. When, for any reason whatever I am
unable to make my prayer, I suffer at not being able to be with my God.
The solitude of Carmel helps recollection. That isolation from
creatures helps Carmelites exchange with God alone and, as a result, to attain
greater union with Him, because this is the heart of perfection. I believe that
solitude won't tire me, as I'm always searching for it. I often become troubled
when dealing with creatures, because I’m with God when I’m alone.
The poverty of a Carmelite is very great. She can possess nothing,
which means that her whole capacity for possessing things is filled by God
alone. By being poor, she is made even more like to her Divine Spouse who had
nowhere to lay His head. A Carmelite must possess God alone.
The penance to which she submits herself and the austerity of her life are
a greater means of having her body made submissive to the soul in order to
become more like her Divine Spouse who became a victim for our sins. She does
penance for her own sins and for those of the world. And in this way she shows
her love for God who has filled her with so many favors.
Her sacrifice is perpetual, without mitigation, from the time her
religious life begins until she dies as a victim according to the example of
Jesus Christ. And she does all this in silence with no one aware of it. Yet how
many are there who think of this life as useless. Nevertheless, she’s like the
Lamb of God. She removes the sins from the world. She sacrifices herself to
bring back to the sheepfold those sheep who have gone astray. But just as
Christ did not know the world, neither does she know it. This abnegation
enchants me completely. There is no room for self-love. She doesn’t even see
the fruit of her prayer. In heaven alone will she know this.
The goal she proposes to herself is very great: to pray and sanctify
herself so that the divine sap may be communicated through the union that
exists between the faithful and all the members of the Church. She immolates
herself on the cross, and her blood falls on sinners, pleading for mercy and
repentance, for on the cross she is intimately united to Jesus Christ. Her
blood, then, is mixed with His Divine Blood.
All these consideration that I make, Father, are the ones that induce
me to prefer Carmel, since I believe that in that life, I will attain holiness.
I have chosen the Carmelite life because I see that, in choosing it, I will
find the cross; and I would travel, I believe, through the whole world with
God's grace in search of it and to possess it, because on the cross is Jesus
Christ.
Juana Fernández Solar (St. Teresa of the Andes), letter written at
fifteen years of age to a priest explaining why she wanted to become a
Discalced Carmelite nun.
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
Modernist
Heresy
“The medieval concept of
substance has long since become inaccessible to us. In so far as we use the concept of
substance at all today we understand thereby the ultimate particles of matter,
and the chemically complex mixture that is bread certainly does not fall into
that category.” Benedict/Ratzinger, Faith and the Future
Catholic
Truth
If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are
contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole
substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by
his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves
himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be
anathema
Vatican Council I, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Catholic Faith
Modernist
Heresy
“At this time the idea of salvation
history had moved to the focus of inquiry posed by Catholic theology and this
had cast new light on the notion of revelation, which neo-scholasticism had
kept too confined to the intellectual realm. Revelation now appeared no longer simply as a
communication of truths to the intellect but as a historical action of God in
which truth becomes gradually unveiled.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, Milestones
(Memoirs 1927-1977), published 1998
Catholic
Truth
For the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been
proposed, like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity;
but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be
faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence also, that meaning of the sacred
dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy Mother the Church has once
declared; nor is that meaning ever to be departed from, under the pretext of a
deeper comprehension of them.
Vatican I
“Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was
handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the
same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the
heretical misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to
another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn
every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been
given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical
figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by
human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely.”
Oath Against Modernism
DOGMA
is the proximate "rule of faith"!
When
the Pope personally falls from the faith, the "Catholic religion (is
still) preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See" in her Magisterial
documents.
The first means of safety is to guard the rule of strict faith and to
deviate in no way from those things that have been laid down by the Fathers.
And indeed the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: "Thou art Peter; and upon
this rock I will build my church" [Matthey 16:18], cannot be disregarded;
these things which were spoken are demonstrated by the results, for the
Catholic religion has been preserved ever immaculate in the Apostolic See.
Opening sentence of the "Formula Hormisdae", the decree of
Pope Hormisdas to the Eastern Churches that had followed the Acacian Schism, 516
A.D., for their correct profession of faith. The document was cited at Vatican
I.
Synod Office
releases first two Final Reports of the Study Groups
The General
Secretariat of the Synod publishes the first two Final Reports of the Study
Groups established by Pope Francis following the First Session of the XVI
Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops: that of Study Group No. 3 on
'The mission in the digital environment' and that of Study Group No. 4 on 'The
revision of the Ratio Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis in a missionary
synodal perspective.'
Vatican News | March 3, 2026
The General Secretariat of the Synod has
today released the first two Final Reports of the Study Groups established by
Pope Francis following the First Session of the XVI Ordinary General Assembly
of the Synod of Bishops.
The reports published were that of Study Group No. 3 on 'The Mission in
the Digital Environment' and Study Group No. 4 on 'The Revision of the Ratio
Fundamentalis Institutionis Sacerdotalis in a Missionary Synodal Perspective.'
Pope Leo XIV has
directed the publication of these Final Reports to share with the entire People
of God the fruits of the reflection and discernment undertaken during the
Synod, in a spirit of transparency and accountability. The Final Reports
are published in English and Italian, with an indication of the original
language and the working translation.
A summary, available in various languages, accompanies each Report to
facilitate access. With the presentation of their Final Reports, Study Groups
No. 3 and No. 4 conclude their mandate and are therefore to be considered
dissolved.
The General Secretariat will continue to release the Final Reports
progressively, with the next publication scheduled for 10 March 2026.
Cardinal Mario Grech, Secretary General of the Synod, said that the
Reports, “beyond the value of their content," "testify to the shared
journey undertaken with the Dicasteries.
"It is not
the first time that the Dicasteries have collaborated on a common project, but
here," he added, "there is something more: an authentic exercise of
shared listening, reflection, and discernment. It is synodality put into
practice, not merely bureaucratic cooperation.”
The Mission in the Digital Environment
The Report of Study Group No. 3 addresses a central question that
emerged during the XVI Assembly, namely how to live the Church’s mission within
a culture increasingly shaped by the digital sphere.
The Group, drawing on a broad consultation involving pastoral workers,
experts, and ecclesial realities from all continents, gathered experiences,
analyzed challenges, and formulated concrete recommendations.
Key themes include
the need to integrate digital mission into the Church’s ordinary structures, an
in-depth analysis of territorial jurisdiction in light of online communities,
and the formation of pastors and pastoral workers in digital culture.
The Report concludes with a series of operative proposals articulated
at three levels: the Holy See, Episcopal Conferences, and dioceses. It also
includes an extensive section on the methodology adopted and the entities
consulted.
Formation to the Priesthood
Rather than proceeding with a revision of the Ratio Fundamentalis
Institutionis Sacerdotalis (2016), which is still considered valid in its
fundamental principles, Study Group No. 4 opted to elaborate a Proposal for a
Guiding Document for its implementation in a missionary synodal key, in line
with the Final Document of the XVI Assembly.
The document is
structured in two parts. The Preamble offers an ecclesiological-pastoral
framework and identifies a series of necessary conversions in priestly
formation: relational, missionary, toward communion, toward service, and toward
a synodal style. At its heart lies a central insight: the identity of the
priest is formed “in and from” the People of God, not in separation from it.
The Guidelines in the second part translate these conversions into
concrete operative pathways.
Some of the most significant
proposals include alternating residence between the seminary and parish
communities or other ecclesial contexts; shared formative experiences and
moments with lay faithful, consecrated persons, and ordained ministers,
starting from the propaedeutic stage; the inclusion of qualified and competent
women as co-responsible at all levels of formation, including within formation
teams; and the acquisition of skills for co-responsibility and communal
discernment.
The Group also proposed a pathway for the dissemination and
implementation of the operative directions offered.
Nature and publication of the Final Reports
Along with the Final Report of Study Group No. 3, the General
Secretariat also published a Note outlining the origin and mandate of the Study
Groups, the nature of the Reports, and the envisaged operational follow-up.
In the note, it highlights that the Final Reports are the fruit of a
structured process: the listening to diverse competencies and professional
expertise, the analysis of numerous contributions, academic research, dialogue
with various ecclesial bodies, from Episcopal Conferences to Catholic
universities, and, above all, discernment and prayer.
They are to be understood as working documents.
Pope Leo XIV, has directed that the Final Reports be published
progressively, as they are presented to the General Secretariat of the Synod,
in a spirit of transparency.
In order that the content that has emerged may be translated into
concrete orientations, decisions and processes, the Holy Father has requested
the competent Dicasteries and the General Secretariat of the Synod to draw up,
on the basis of the Final Reports, operative proposals, also giving an
account of the choices made and of any elements not received.
This joint effort, the General Secretariat's note continues, ensures
coherence with the synodal dynamism and rootedness in the Church’s missionary
perspective.
The operative proposals thus formulated will be submitted to the Holy
Father, who will evaluate and may approve them.
With the submission of the Final Report to the General Secretariat of
the Synod, the Study Groups that have delivered it conclude the mandate
entrusted to them and are therefore to be considered dissolved.
COMMENT: This article is reproduced as a penitential offering for Lent.
It is a collection of bureaucratic drivel but its purpose is in fact malignant.
Vatican II, the pastoral council, that from a faithful Catholic's perspective
is a pastoral failure because since its implementation the Church has suffered
the greatest apostasy in the history of the Church. For Leo, the Vatican II
Council is in fact a wonderful success because his purpose is the destruction
of the Church. That is why for the Novus Ordites, Vatican II Council
"cannot be questioned." The important point of this publication on
Synodality is the fundamental change in the conception of the priesthood. The heart of the Catholic priesthood is
nicely summed up by St. Paul:
For every high priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in the
things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for
sins: Who can have compassion on them that are ignorant and that err: because
he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And therefore he ought, as for the
people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. Neither doth any man take the
honour to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So Christ also
did not glorify himself, that he might be made a high priest: but he that said
unto him: Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
As he saith also in another place: Thou art a priest for ever,
according to the order of Melchisedech. Who in the days of his flesh, with a
strong cry and tears, offering up prayers and supplications to him that was
able to save him from death, was heard for his reverence. And whereas indeed he
was the Son of God, he learned obedience by the things which he suffered: And
being consummated, he became, to all that obey him, the cause of eternal
salvation. Called by God a high priest according to the order of
Melchisedech (Heb 5;1-10).
There is nothing from St. Paul that calls for a "necessary conversions in priestly formation:
relational, missionary, toward communion, toward service, and toward a synodal
style." Don't forget that the Novus Ordo "missionary"
believes that proselytism is "solemn nonsense" and therefore, a Novus
Ordo "missionary" has no mission from God. There is nothing from St.
Paul that calls for "inclusion
of qualified and competent women as co-responsible at all levels of (priestly)
formation, including within formation teams; and the acquisition of skills for
co-responsibility and communal discernment" What is entirely absent from
the Novus Ordo synodal priest is his essence
and that is the power in "offering up gifts and sacrifices for sins."
The Novus Ordo priest is not "called by God, as Aaron was." He is not
called upon to share in the sacrificial priesthood of Jesus Christ that is in
its essence is a sacrificial and
sacrificing priesthood. This synodal intent in ordination cannot make a man a
priest any more than it can make a lady priestettes.
Explains
why Newman is now a "Doctor" of the Novus Ordites
He (Henry Cardinal
Newman) was led into his error by the false philosophy of the age, which
asserts that the mind apprehends truth only under subjective forms, and by
his Protestantism, which misapprehends the real character of those new
definitions and further explications of the faith opposed by the Church to
novel heresies and errors as they arise (i.e.:DOGMA). Confounding the
simple belief of the truth with the intellectual process of comprehending it,
he fell into the mistake of supposing that heresy has always an honest origin,
that it always springs from the necessary and laudable effort of the mind, an
effort which every true believer must make, to ascertain and comprehend the
truth, and that it always presupposes the faith on the point it contradicts was
previously unknown even to the pastors of the Church; — a sad mistake, for the
Church has never hesitated as to the faith to be opposed to the novel heresy,
which proves that she knew it prior to the heresy, and the heresy never
originates in ignorance of the faith or in an honest endeavor to ascertain it,
but in the desire to establish a favorite theory, or to follow one's own
private judgment.
Orestes Brownson,
on the fundamental err of Cardinal John Henry Newman, who Modernist Heretics
regard as their principle inspiration, from Newman's theory, written as a
Protestant, Essay on the Development of Christine Doctrine
The
SINS of the Novus Ordo Church:
Characterized
first and foremost by its SINS against the Theological Virtues and its SINS
against the Virtue of Religion - the most Malicious of all SINS because they
have God as their direct objects!
From a theological point of view, evils may be divided into two classes
: Voluntary evils (Sins) and Involuntary evils (Pain and Suffering). The evils
of the first class are really "the" evil, that is, objects to be
avoided and hated. They are also the greatest evils, because they injure at the
same time their own author and the Author of nature. God cannot cause, but only
permit and oppose them. The evils of the second class are only evils of the
subject which naturally abhors them, yet they are not so detestable as to be
avoided in all cases. God may cause them and use them as means to His ends;
notably, as a penalty for sin. In the original order established by Him, there
was no room for evils of this class. They came into the world with sin. As a
matter of fact, then, all evils existing in this world spring from sin, the
greatest and original evil. Hence the above division is equivalent to another
which distinguishes "Evils of Guilt" and "Evils of Penalty"
(mala culpae, mala poenae). Many
evils may, however, be at the same time a guilt and a penalty. Sin in its
theological and proper sense, consists in the conscious and voluntary
transgression, lesion, or denial of the moral order imposed upon the creature
by Divine Law. The philosophical notion of sin does not contain the element of
Divine command. What to the theologian is a voluntary transgression of the law
of God is looked upon by the philosopher as a transgression of the rational and
natural order. Yet even in sound philosophy the notion of sin ought not to be
dissociated from disobedience to the Lawgiver, for sin is always an action
against the dictates of conscience, and these are but the commanding voice of
God (Rom. ii. 14-16).
Hence the essence of sin consists in the more or less express opposition
of the human will against the Divine Will, an opposition which implies a
certain neglect or contempt of the Divine Will itself. This contempt involves
an "aversion from God as the ultimate End," that is, a refusal of the
submission and love which are His due. Sin averts or turns away the creature
from God as the Highest Good in Himself, and from God as the Highest Good of
the creature itself, in Whom alone it can find perfect beatitude. It seeks
outside God a satisfaction or pleasure incompatible with the possession and
fruition of God. On God's side, the contempt of His will by the creature
constitutes an offence and an insult, according to the saying, "The
lawbreaker offends the lawmaker." And this offence always includes an
"injury;" that is, it injures or damages the external glory of God.
For this reason, Holy Scripture describes sin as injustice, and iniquity.
Again, sin being always committed under the very eyes or in the face of God, it
must needs excite His displeasure, abhorrence, indignation, and anger. These
affections in God are not accompanied by the same feelings as in man, yet they
exist in Him eminently; and it is not the defect of malice in sin, but God's
own immutability, which prevents Him from being affected with infinite pain by
the sinner. In sins
against the theological virtues, and against the virtue of religion, the
aversion and offence assume a direct character, because God is the immediate
object of these virtues. Sin is clearly the greatest of evils — and an
absolute evil, because it deprives the Greatest and Absolute Good of the honour
due to Him.
Scheeben's Manual of Catholic Theology by Rev. Joseph Wilhelm, D.D.,
Ph.D. and Rev Thomas B. Scannell, D.D.
Separation
of Church and State is impossible. Every
state has an established religion with a creedal profession containing articles
of faith that it demands its citizens profess.
These articles of faith cannot be proven to be true or even demonstrated
as consistent with natural law. The
U.S.A. is no exception to this rule. We have a state religion but it is called
by another name. The secular dogma,
‘Separation of Church and State’, is nothing more than a tool to prevent
competition against the state religion in the public forum. The state demands a “faith” in “general
values” that are always “relative and changing.”
All organization is action and all action is rude. […..] There is a
hierarchy of values which have been expressed in nearly every revolutionary
slogan in history…. These values are up
on top. The democratic way of life is nothing more than a process, a device, a modus operandi, designed as the best
way, we believe, of achieving those values, of growing into them so to speak.
Now, those values that I have mentioned cannot be discussed, they cannot be
argued, they cannot be debated, they are articles of faith. [..…] In a free and
open society, equality is a value you cannot discuss or debate or put on a
ballot. If you do not accept our values then you can have no voice in a
democratic process. Then get out of our system and go someplace else. [……]
These values and goals, out of necessity, are always stated in general
terms. Every literate revolutionary
knows that you cannot be any more than general (in your) terms because all values
are relative and are changing.
Saul Alinsky, Jewish revolutionary, explaining the ‘religion’ of the
modern democratic state, 1/17/69, UCLA
Society
has already reached a sense of being “defeated” and “futureless.” The Novus Ordo Church is an essential cause and
contributor to this sense rather than a light of hope of union with Jesus
Christ!
[You must help] the people in the community… feel so frustrated,
so defeated, so lost, so futureless in the prevailing system that they are
willing to let go of the past and chance the future. [An] organizer must
shake up the prevailing patterns of their lives –agitate, create disenchantment
and discontent with the current values, to produce, if not a passion for
change, at least a passive, affirmative, non-challenging climate. [You
must] fan the embers of hopelessness into a flame of fight.
Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
Traditionalist
Catholic group doubles down on illicit consecrations, setting course for
potential schism
Vatican News |
Vatican City | Justin McLellan | February 19, 2026
The traditionalist Catholic society long a
thorn in the side of the Vatican will move forward with plans to create its own
bishops without approval from the pope. The plan escalates its standoff with Rome
and sets the group on a path toward an outright break from the Catholic Church.
The Feb. 19 announcement marks the latest turn in a back-and-forth
between the Society of St. Pius X and the Vatican that sought to avoid a
full-blown rupture between the two. Now, the situation poses a major test for
Pope Leo XIV, who has made church unity a priority of his pontificate.
Fr. Davide Pagliarani, superior general of the Society of St. Pius X,
said in a letter that the society would not postpone its announced bishop
consecrations. The letter was sent to Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, prefect
of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, which oversees the Vatican's
relationship with the group.
The two met one-on-one on Feb. 12 to discuss a resolution to the
society's threat of consecrating new bishops in defiance of Rome.
In their meeting, the cardinal offered to engage in a theological
"path of dialogue" with the society to establish "the minimum
requirements necessary for full communion with the Catholic Church" on the
condition the society suspend their planned episcopal consecrations.
Notably, Fernández met with the pope on Feb. 19, the day the letter was
made public.
The Society of St. Pius X has long operated in a canonical gray zone.
While its priests have been granted faculties in certain cases, including
permission for the valid administration of confession and marriage, the society
continues to function without full canonical recognition and in open defiance
of church authorities.
Pagliarini wrote that the society is not seeking canonical regularity
in the church,which he said "in the current state of affairs, is
impracticable due to doctrinal divergences."
The Society of St. Pius X, which counts 733 priests worldwide according
to its latest figures, rejects key teachings of the Second Vatican Council.
That includes the church's teaching on interreligious dialogue and the
postconciliar liturgical reform promulgated in 1970 and now celebrated by
nearly all Latin-rite Catholics.
Among the topics Fernández proposed for discussion with the Society of
St. Pius X were "the different degrees of assent required by the various
texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and their interpretation."
In response, Pagliarani wrote that the society and the Vatican
"cannot agree doctrinally" in light of the insistence that "the
texts of the Council cannot be corrected, nor can the legitimacy of the
liturgical reform be challenged."
The society's decision sets up a direct confrontation with the Vatican
ahead of its planned July 1 bishop consecrations, a move widely interpreted as
an attempt to pressure Rome into addressing the Society of St. Pius X's
shrinking number of bishops. [......]
COMMENT:
It is unfortunate that the SSPX is incapable of effectively defending the
Catholic Faith against the Neo-Modernists that control the Vatican. It is
absurd to say, "we 'cannot agree doctrinally' in light of the insistence
that 'the texts of the Council cannot be corrected, nor can the legitimacy of
the liturgical reform be challenged.'" It is not a question of exchanging
legitimate theological opinions on open questions. It is question defending the
faith against the claims of heretics. Vatican II and the Novus Ordo communion
service are heretical. SSPX should confront aberrant theological opinions and
the corruption of divine worship of the Neo-Modernists with Catholic dogma.
They should begin by asking how is it possible that a pastoral council of
churchmen teaching merely by their grace of state that called everything in the
Church into question itself cannot be questioned, especially when its
implementation has caused the greatest destruction of faith and worship in the
history of the Church? Their reason for this is no mystery. It is perfectly
legitimate to conclude that the destruction of the Church is the intention of
the Neo-Modernists. That is why they will not question Vatican II is because,
in their estimation, it is magnificent success! It is doing exactly what it was
intended to do.
Pope Leo has begun a series of Vatican II "catechesis." The
most recent on February 18 was on the document, Lumen gentium, the constitution
on the Church, and subtitled, "The
mystery of the Church, sacrament of the union with God, and the unity of all
humanity," wherein he cited this Lumen gentium teaching:
"The Church
is in Christ like a sacrament or as a sign and instrument both of a very
closely knit union with God and of the unity of the whole human race."
Vatican II, Lumen Gentium
Is this true? No it is not. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. This is an identity and it is heresy to obfuscate this truth by claiming, as Lumen Gentium did, that the "Mystical Body of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church" implying there are other members of the Church of Chrst that are not Catholics. The members of the Catholic Church, and therefore, the Mystical Body of Christ, profess the one, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic faith; they have, while professing this faith, by the sacrament of Baptism been made members of this Body; and they as members of this Body are subject to her ecclesiastical superiors. Those that have not been baptized are not members of the Church; those that are baptized and reject the truths revealed by God are apostates and/or heretics and are not members of the Church; those that reject the universal jurisdiction of the pope are schismatics and are not members of the Church. The Church is NOT a "sign.... of a very close knit union.... of the whole human race" because the "whole human race" is not a member of the Church. There is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Those members of the "whole human race" who reject the Catholic faith stand only in potentia to this membership and the possibility of salvation. The duty of the pope is to preach the gospel message for the purpose bringing those in potentia to membership in the Church to being members in actu. This is why for the post Vatican II Novus Ordo popes proselytism is "solemn nonsense" because if the "whole human race" is somehow already united to the Church they do not need to be converted. Pope Leo in affirming this corrupt pastoral opinion from Vatican II is joining himself with its heresy, and as St. Thomas made perfectly clear, "all heretics are schismatics." Furthermore, it is an absurdity, a violation of the first principles of the understanding, to affirm that disobedience to the pope who is a heretic, and therefore a schismatic, is a schismatic act! It would be to claim that a schismatic pope makes the entire Church schismatic.
For
the Indult Catholic Community: This is who they are dealing with!
Is church
unity worth a Latin Mass?
Religion News Service |Thomas Reese | February 6, 2026
"Paris is well worth a Mass" was reportedly the attitude of
King Henry IV when he was trying to secure the French throne. As a result, he
converted from Protestantism to Catholicism in 1593.
Today, the Eucharist, which is supposed to be the sacrament of unity,
is too often a battlefield between Catholics who support the Traditional Latin
Mass and those who want to see it disappear. Both sides need to ask themselves
whether the fight is worth something more important than Paris: the unity of
the church.
You must be my age to remember before the Second Vatican Council, when
the liturgy was entirely in Latin in Catholic churches, except in those using
Eastern Rite liturgies, where it was often in Greek. In Rome, it had been
changed from Greek into Latin in the third and fourth centuries so the common
people could understand it — a pragmatic decision, not a theological one.
When I was young, we took it for granted that the Mass was in Latin. It
was something that made us different from Protestants. We could go to the same
Mass anywhere in the world. The Scripture readings were in Latin, although on
Sunday the priest would reread the Gospel in English before giving his sermon.
Otherwise, unless you had a translation, you had no idea what the readings
were.
The Eucharistic prayer was the priest' s prayer, which he said with his
back to us. The altar boy would ring the bells to notify us when the priest
raised the host and chalice for us to adore. The bell also rang to call us to
Communion.
Other than that, the priest did his thing and the congregation
passively watched or prayed in silence.
In high school from 1958 to 1962, I had a St. Joseph's Missal with
Latin on one side of the page and English on the other so that I could follow
what the priest was praying when I went to daily Mass, but that was not the
norm. My parents had prayerbooks they read during Mass that had no connection
to what the priest was doing. Others in the church silently said their rosaries
during Mass.
And prior to the 20th century, Communion was infrequent. My parents
were among the first children allowed to go to Communion. Those who want to bring back the
Tridentine liturgy, if they want to be truly traditional, should go to
Communion less frequently and not allow their children to go to Communion.
Otherwise they are accepting early 20th-century innovations.
Although I entered the Jesuits prior to the Second Vatican Council and
went through a very traditional novitiate, I did not find the liturgical
changes difficult to accept. Our
conservative novice master taught us a course on the history of the Mass using
Josef A. Jungmannn's "Mass of the Roman Rite," which was published in
English in 1951. It taught us that the Mass was always changing throughout
history.
The transition was
also made easier by our traditional novitiate's emphasis on obedience. If the
church decided to change the liturgy, we were to accept it without question. To
do otherwise would be disobedient.
The Jesuits in
charge of formation were no help during the transition. They were clueless
about what was happening. The classics professors argued about how we
should pronounce "Amen" in English. The first time our superior said
the Eucharistic prayer in English, he got as far as the institutional narrative
and switched to "Hoc est enim corpus meum." The next day, he was able
to do it all in English.
Some of my
classmates had problems with the transition. Before ordination in 1973, one
confessed that it just wasn't the same because in the old church, after
ordination, he would be allowed to touch the consecrated bread for the first
time. Now anyone could receive Communion in the hand. It was as if part of his
priesthood had been taken away.
But for the most
part, the liturgical changes were accepted and implemented with excitement and
joy. They were the most visible reforms of Vatican II. And after a bit
of confusion, they were accepted overwhelmingly by Catholics in the pews.
But there were two
groups of holdouts.
First, there were
those who found the change difficult because they were used to the old ways and
the reforms were not well explained. Popes Paul VI and John Paul II wanted to
deal with these people with pastoral sensitivity and patience, but the popes
made clear that eventually, the old Mass was to fade away.
The other group of
holdouts was more problematic. They objected to the new liturgy in principle
and felt it was blasphemous. In truth, these ideologues objected to all the
reforms of the council, not just liturgy. They were divisive and contentious.
Some of these
dissenters were led into schism by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, despite
all the Vatican's efforts to appease him. To undermine Lefebvre and win
back schismatics to the church, the Vatican permitted more frequent celebration
of the Traditional Latin Mass. This strategy was partially successful, as
exemplified by Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, which celebrates the old Mass
but is in unity with the pope.
But there was an
unanticipated side effect: Some who grew up after Vatican II began to attend
these Latin Masses. Most were not ideologues, but pious, theologically
unsophisticated Catholics who were attracted by the ritual and mysterious
ceremony that allowed them to focus on adoration and private prayer without the
distraction of communal participation.
It is a mistake for liturgical reformers to lump this third group in
with the ideologues who reject Vatican II. These are good, devout people who
want to come closer to Jesus and find spiritual nourishment in the old liturgy.
Their existence is a
result of our failure to better explain the reforms and to make the new liturgy
more appealing to them. We should have encouraged them to go to Benediction and
explained how it is different form Mass.
Pope Benedict XVI
erred in taking away the local bishop's control over the Latin Mass and
allowing any priest to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass anywhere, any time.
Pope Francis erred in seeing only the ideologues and not the pious Catholics
who liked the old Mass.
Now, poor Pope Leo
XIV must figure out how to deal with this mess in a pastoral way that does not empower
the ideologues and affirms that the Traditional Latin Mass must eventually fade
away. This is why he gets the big bucks.
Leo should keep in
place the Francis mandate that seminarians are to be trained and ordained for
the reformed liturgy. If they prefer the old Mass, they should not be ordained.
On the other hand, Francis' ban on the Latin Mass in parishes could
have more flexibility. It might make sense to return the authority over this to
diocesan bishops, although some may prefer to blame the Vatican for not
allowing it. And yet, this is exactly the kind of issue that should be handled
in a synodal fashion at the local level. And diocesan bishops can more easily
determine whether those asking for the Latin Mass are pious Catholics or
ideologues, and respond accordingly.
In any case, I
would keep some limits on the availability of the Latin Mass. It should be
banned on major feasts like Christmas, Holy Week, Easter and holy days, so that
the entire community can gather for and take part in these feasts. And, the
Latin Mass should not be available every Sunday. Everyone should experience the
new liturgy on a regular basis, at least once a month, especially families with
children. If one totally rejects the reformed liturgy, then one is out of step with
the church.
Meanwhile, Leo
should relaunch liturgical reform. The 1998 English translation of the Roman
missal by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy should be
permitted. Individual prefaces should be written for each Sunday in the A, B
and C cycles of Scripture readings. New Eucharistic prayers that are more
scriptural should be written.
Henry IV compromised his faith to win Paris. Catholics of all stripes
should be able to compromise on the liturgy to maintain the unity of the church.
We must respect and love one another, despite our liturgical differences. And
everyone should know that we are Christians by our love, not know that we are
Catholics by our fights.
COMMENT: Thomas Reese, S.J., the author of this editorial,
is a progressive liberal Jesuit who is about 81 years of age. His entire
religions life directly tied to liberal causes. For example, he is involved
with the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at the Jesuit Santa Clara
University which holds as a first principle the Vatican II humanistic
philosophy of the dignity of the human person which ends up in defending
abortion rights. He is also the former editor-in-chief from 1998 to 2005 of the
Jesuit magazine America. The Jesuit
order he is a member of during his religions life has become largely a
homosexual collective.
His recounting of his liturgical formation is interesting. He was
formed by his Jesuit novice master at the beginning of Vatican II. His novice
master, using Josef Jungmann, S. J. as his authority, is credited for his
liturgical views. Jungmann was a professor of pastoral theology in Austria who
wrote the two-volume The Mass of the
Roman Rite, Its Origin and Development. He held that the primary purpose of
the liturgy from the beginning of the Church was pastoral. He was active in the
liturgical reform with Rev. Annibale Bugnini from the beginning of the
liturgical commission in 1948. He envisioned a Novus Ordo Mass with a primary
pastoral purpose. He was largely a self instructed liturgical
"expert" who functioned as a peritus
at Vatican II and the major contributor
to its Constitution on the Liturgy.
Jungmann's idea of a pastoral liturgy was to return to the liturgical practices
around the 4th to the 6th century. Over the last 40 years beginning in the
1980s, there has been a tremendous amount of liturgical academic research and
publications as well as the reprinting of liturgical works. The upshot of this
is that Jungmann was exposed as a fraud selective picking and choosing
anecdotal historical elements that served his ideology and not the Catholic
faith or true liturgical development.
One example, he wrote that the ancient Roman rite was offered versus populum and not ad orientem. When real liturgical
scholars demonstrated his error he argued that versus populum may not be what was done but should be done now for
pastoral reasons. Msgr. Klaus Gamber made it clear in his work on the Roman
rite that this practice can be traced to Luther and the Protestant reformation
and nowhere before. Jungmann was an ecumenical ideologue and not ashamed to
publish lies if they helped his cause.
An ideology is a man conceived intellectual system pertaining to some
specific form of thought and/or action based upon human presuppositions that
are held be faith alone, that is, they cannot be demonstrated or proved. A
Catholic is not an ideologue because his presuppositions rest upon divine
authority. Reese, like the former Jesuit pope, holds traditional Catholics as
ideologues while it is Reese himself, like Francis/Begoglio, who is tied to a
hopeless, loosing, antiquated, boring ideology. Francis/Bergoglio is the only
one who ever tried to identify the "traditional" ideology as a form
of the Pelagian heresy. That was so
stupid it merited no intellectual exposition by anyone. Liberals like Reese
effectively deny original sin. They are faced with the reality of a fallen
human nature and thus constantly spend themselves on determining its causes and
proposing their remedies. Since their diagnosis excludes the need for divine
redemption and salvation, it is always wrong and their remedies always fail.
Yet the liberal never repents his folly. The failures are always attributed to
others who did not implement the plan with sufficient rigor, for sufficient
time, and with sufficient purity. They
never take responsibility for the ruin they cause in countless lives.
Reese is a shining example of this. He has been a Catholic religious
with the Jesuits from the beginning of Vatican II Council and standing in the
worst collapse in Catholic faith and morals in the shortest period of time
recommends a "relaunch" (of the) liturgical reform." The PEW
pole that Reese sites determined that only about 30% of those who identify as
Catholics believe in the dogma of transubstantiation. The purpose of the
American bishops poll was to bump these numbers up. They did this by avoiding
any technical terminology that would be found in a grade school catechism and
asking multiple questions to arrive at the conclusion that the respondent, who
were restricted to those who actually attended a weekly communion service, had
some sense of Catholic teaching. Reese is responsible for this as much as any
of his fellow religious and yet he still thinks his opinions have value! This
idiot will soon follow Francis/Bergoglio to his eternal judgment. At that
judgment the fruits of Vatican II and the Novus Ordo service will condemn him
because it is by these fruits that he is known. He will plead to the just Judge
that he was only being "obedient"
religious and anyway, since Francis/Bergoglio pointed out, "time greater
than space", he just did not have enough time to see that things were
going wrong? He will be told, 'No, space is greater than time', for you,
"time" is over and your "space" is awaiting and prepared
for you and it is not with the blessed.
Letter from Father
Pagliarani to Cardinal Fernández
February 19, 2026
Source: FSSPX News
Response of the General Council
of the Society of Saint Pius X to the Prefect of the Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith.
Menzingen, 18 February 2026
Ash Wednesday
Most Reverend Eminence,
First of all, I thank you for receiving me on 12 February, and for
making public the content of our meeting, which promotes perfect transparency
in communication.
I can only welcome the opening of a doctrinal discussion, as signalled
today by the Holy See, for the simple reason that I myself proposed it exactly
seven years ago, in a letter dated 17 January 2019. At that time, the Dicastery
did not truly express interest in such a discussion, on the grounds—presented
orally—that a doctrinal agreement between the Holy See and the Society of Saint
Pius X was impossible.
For the Society’s part, a doctrinal discussion has always been—and
remains—desirable and useful. Indeed, even if we do not reach an agreement,
fraternal exchanges allow us to better know one another, to refine and deepen
our own arguments, and to better understand the spirit and intentions behind
our interlocutor’s positions—especially their genuine love for the Truth, for
souls, and for the Church. This holds true, at all times, for both parties.
This was precisely my intention in 2019, when I suggested a discussion
during a calm and peaceful time, without the pressure or threat of possible
excommunication, which would have undermined free dialogue—as is,
unfortunately, the situation today.
That said, while I certainly rejoice at a new opening of dialogue and
the positive response to my proposal of 2019, I cannot accept the perspective
and objectives in the name of which the Dicastery offers to resume dialogue in
the present situation, nor indeed the postponement of the date of 1 July.
I respectfully present to you the reasons for this, to which I will add
some supplementary considerations.
1. We both know in advance that we
cannot agree doctrinally, particularly regarding the fundamental orientations
adopted since the Second Vatican Council. This disagreement, for the Society’s
part, does not stem from a mere difference of opinion, but from a genuine case
of conscience, arising from what has proven to be a rupture with the Tradition
of the Church. This complex knot has unfortunately become even more
inextricable with the doctrinal and pastoral developments of recent
pontificates.
I therefore do not see how a
joint process of dialogue could end in determining together what would
constitute “the minimum requirements for full communion with the Catholic
Church”, since—as you yourself have recalled with frankness—the texts of the
Council cannot be corrected, nor can the legitimacy of the liturgical reform be
challenged.
2. This dialogue is supposed to clarify
the interpretation of the Second Vatican Council. But this interpretation is
already clearly given in the post-Conciliar period and in the successive
documents of the Holy See. The Second Vatican Council is not a set of texts open
to free interpretation: It has been received, developed, and applied for sixty
years by successive popes, according to precise doctrinal and pastoral
orientations.
This official reading is
expressed, for example, in major texts such as Redemptor hominis, Ut
unum sint, Evangelii gaudium, or Amoris lætitia.
It is also evident in the liturgical reform, understood in the light of the
principles reaffirmed in Traditionis custodes. All these
documents show that the doctrinal and pastoral framework within which the Holy
See intends to situate any discussion has already been firmly established.
3. One cannot ignore the context of the
dialogue proposed today. We have been waiting for seven years for a favourable
response to the proposal of doctrinal discussion made in 2019. More recently,
we have written twice to the Holy Father: first to request an audience, then to
clearly and respectfully explain our needs and the real-life situation of the
Society.
Yet, after a long silence, it is
only when episcopal consecrations are mentioned that an offer to resume
dialogue is made, which thus seems dilatory and conditional. Indeed, the hand
extended to open the dialogue is unfortunately accompanied by another hand
already poised to impose sanctions. There is talk of breaking communion, of
schism, and of “serious consequences”. Moreover, this threat is now public,
creating pressure that is hardly compatible with a genuine desire for fraternal
exchanges and constructive dialogue.
4. Furthermore, to us
it does not seem possible to enter into a dialogue to define what the minimum
requirements for ecclesial communion might be, simply because this task does
not belong to us. Throughout the centuries, the criteria for belonging to the
Church have been established and defined by the Magisterium. What must be
believed in order to be Catholic has always been taught with authority, in
constant fidelity to Tradition.
Thus, we do not see how these
criteria could be the subject of joint discernment through dialogue, nor how
they could be re-evaluated today so as not to correspond to what the Tradition
of the Church has always taught—and which we desire to observe faithfully in
our place.
5. Finally, if a dialogue is envisaged with
the aim of producing a doctrinal statement that the Society could accept
regarding the Second Vatican Council, we cannot ignore the historical
precedents of efforts made in this direction. I draw your attention to the most
recent: the Holy See and the Society had a long course of dialogue, beginning
in 2009, particularly intense for two years, then pursued more sporadically
until 6 June 2017. Throughout these years, we sought to achieve what the
Dicastery now proposes.
Yet, everything ultimately ended
in a drastic manner, with the unilateral decision of Cardinal Müller, the Prefect
of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who, in June 2017, solemnly
established, in his own way, “the minimum requirements for full communion with
the Catholic Church”, explicitly including the entire Council and the
post-Conciliar period. This shows that, if one persists in a doctrinal
dialogue that is too forced and lacks sufficient serenity, in the long term,
instead of achieving a satisfactory result, one only worsens the situation.
Thus, in the shared recognition that we cannot find agreement on
doctrine, it seems to me that the only point on which we can agree is that of
charity toward souls and toward the Church.
As a cardinal and bishop, you are above all a pastor: allow me to address
you in this capacity. The Society is an objective reality: it exists. That is
why, over the years, the Sovereign Pontiffs have taken note of this existence
and, through concrete and significant acts, have recognised the value of the
good it can accomplish, despite its canonical situation. That is also why we
are speaking today.
This same Society asks you only to be allowed to continue to do this
same good for the souls to whom it administers the holy Sacraments. It asks
nothing else of you—no privileges, nor even canonical regularisation, which, in
the current state of affairs, is impracticable due to doctrinal divergences.
The Society cannot abandon souls. The need for the sacraments is a concrete,
short-term need for the survival of Tradition, in service to the Holy Catholic
Church.
We can agree on one point: neither of us wishes to reopen wounds. I will
not repeat here all that we have already expressed in the letter addressed to
Pope Leo XIV, of which you have direct knowledge. I only emphasise that,
in the present situation, the only truly viable path is that of charity.
Over the last decade, Pope Francis and yourself have abundantly
advocated “listening” and understanding of non-standard, complex, exceptional,
and particular situations. You have also wished for a use of law that is always
pastoral, flexible, and reasonable, without pretending to resolve everything
through legal automatism and pre-established frameworks. At this moment, the
Society asks of you nothing more than this—and above all it does not ask it for
itself: it asks it for these souls, for whom, as already promised to the Holy
Father, it has no other intention than to make true children of the Roman
Church.
Finally, there is another point on which we also agree, and which should
encourage us: the time separating us from 1 July is one of prayer. It is a
moment when we implore from Heaven a special grace and, from the Holy See,
understanding. I pray for you in particular to the Holy Ghost and—do not take
this as a provocation—His Most Holy Spouse, the Mediatrix of all Graces.
I wish to thank you sincerely for the attention you have given me, and
for the interest you will kindly take in the present matter.
Please accept, Most Reverend Eminence, the expression of my most sincere
greetings and of my devotion in the Lord.
Davide
Pagliarani, Superior General
+ Alfonso de Galarreta, First Assistant General
Christian Bouchacourt, Second Assistant General
+ Bernard Fellay,
First Counsellor General, Former Superior General
Franz Schmidberger, Second
Counsellor General, Former Superior General
COMMENT: Among Protestants there are a few doctrinal
positions that unite them all: They without exception profess that God did not
establish His Church with the divine attributes of infallibility, indefectibility
and authority. Beyond this level of agreement Protestants differ radically from
one another in doctrine, worship, and morality. The Protestant modus vivendi then is to respect the
errors of each other since none claim the attribute of infallibility regarding
truth in belief and practice. Christ's Church is altogether different. The
Church speaks with authority the truth of God's revelation and of this truth
will not be compromised one iota. The Novus Ordo Church, like all Protestants,
seeks an accommodation with the world and its lies. The only thing they hate
with one voice is the Catholic Church because it does not. G.K. Chesterton
said, 'The Catholic Church is intolerant in principle because she believes; she
tolerant in practice because she loves. The world is tolerant in principle
because it does not believe; it is intolerant in practice because it does not
love.' The Novus Ordo Church, like the Protestants, is of the world that Jesus
Christ said, "I pray not for the world" (John 17:9). It is complete
folly for the SSPX to beg from the Novus Ordites a tolerance in belief based
upon a charity in practice because without faith, there is, and never can be,
charity. The dialogue with the SSPX began in 1997 and will go on as long as the
SSPX stands upon opinion and not on God's revealed truth.
Hermeneutics of
Continuity/Discontinuity
Explains why Novus Ordo Catholics have dumped the
season of Septuagesima and do not do penance for Lent – they have ‘dialogued’
themselves out of Original Sin!
Original Sin:
Benedict/Ratzinger teaches:
The account (of Genesis 3) tells us that sin begets sin, and that
therefore all the sins of history are interlinked. Theology refers to this
state of affairs by the certainly misleading and imprecise term ‘original sin’. What does this mean?
Nothing seems to us today to be stranger or, indeed, more absurd than to insist
upon original sin, since, according to our way of thinking, guilt can
only be something very personal, and since God does not run a concentration camp,
in which one’s relatives are imprisoned because he is a liberating God of love,
who calls each one by name. What does
original sin mean, then, when we interpret it correctly?
Finding an answer to this
requires nothing less than trying to understand the human person better. It must once again be stressed that no human being is closed in upon
himself or herself and that no one can live of or for himself or herself alone.
We receive our life not only at the moment of birth but every day from without
– from others who are not ourselves but who nonetheless somehow pertain to us.
Human beings have their selves not only in themselves but also outside of
themselves: they live in those whom they love and in those who love them and to
whom they are ‘present.’ Human beings are relational, and they possess their lives – themselves – only by way of relationship. I alone am not myself, but only in and with you am I myself. To be
truly a human being means to be related in love, to be of and for. But sin means the damaging or the
destruction of relationality. Sin is a rejection of relationality because it wants to make the human being a god. Sin is loss of relationship, disturbance of relationship, and therefore it is not
restricted to the individual. When I destroy a relationship, then this event – sin – touches the other person involved in the relationship. Consequently sin is always an offense that touches others, that
alters the world and damages it. To the extent that this is true, when the
network of human relationships is damaged from the very beginning, then every human being enters into
a world that is marked by relational damage. At the very moment that
a person begins human existence, which is a good, he or she is confronted by a
sin- damaged world. Each of us enters into a situation in which relationality has been hurt. Consequently each person is, from the very start,
damaged in relationships and does not engage in them as he or she ought. Sin pursues the human being,
and he or she capitulates to it.”
Benedict XVI/Ratzinger, Catholic
Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall
(1995)
Catholic
Church teaches divine Truth with precision and clarity:
“For that which the Apostle has said, ‘By one man, sin entered into this world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men in whom all have sinned.’ (Rom 5:12), is not to be understood otherwise than as the Catholic Church spread everywhere hath always understood it. For, by reason of this rule of faith, from a tradition of the Apostles, even infants who could not as yet commit any sin of themselves, are for this cause truly baptized for the remission of sins, that in them that may be cleansed away by regeneration which they have contracted by generation. For, ‘unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.’” (John 3:5).
Council of Trent, Decree on Original Sin
“I was
under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the
faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3).
COMMENT:
Benedict/Ratzinger’s (B/R) heretical theology presupposes modern
doctrine of scientism that material reality consists of atoms and the void in
constant evolutionary progress. He therefore denies the existence of substantial reality in the place of substance, he offers the accident of relationship as the fundamental essence
of all reality beginning with the reality of God. Being is rejected for becoming.
The pursuit of Truth is favored over its possession. This theology of B/R is
applied to man and sin including Original Sin. For the Catholic, sin is a
transgression of the will of God in a more or less serious degree. A serious
violation of God’s will is a mortal sin ending the life of grace in the substantial soul of an individual man.
The relationship of friendship with God is ended but God remains in a
relationship with all creatures including sinners because without a
relationship with God they would not exist. But while sin ends the life of grace
in the soul, the sin itself does not touch God.
And where does “relationality” lead? B/R’s “essential” Christianity? It
is a religion of fantasy that has no real doctrinal or moral impediments and
offers ‘dialogue’ as a nostrum for healing all problems of “relationality.”
But who in their right mind would want to join the ‘Church of
Relationality’, which explains why the Novus Ordo Church has massive defections
and few conversions. It also explains why for Francis/Bergoglio “proselytism is
solemn nonsense.” How can you
“proselytize” for a religion that does not know what it believes or for what
end it was established?
As for “relations,” if we want to “essentialize our faith,” Jesus
Christ makes perfectly clear just what is really “essential”: “If any man come to me, and hate
not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters,
yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26). The
“essential… relation” is with Jesus Christ, not man, and this “relation” is
only possible by believing what Jesus Christ has revealed and doing what Jesus
Christ commands.
Seewald: “The Church prays for Christians to be reunited. But who ought
to join up with whom?”
Benedict/Ratzinger:
“The formula that the
great ecumenists have invented is that we go forward together. It’s not a
matter of our wanting to achieve certain processes of integration, but we hope
that the Lord will awaken people’s faith everywhere in such a way that it
overflows from one to the other, and the one Church is there. As Catholics, we
are persuaded that the basic shape of this one Church is given us in the
Catholic Church, but that she is moving toward the future and will allow
herself to be educated and led by the Lord. In that sense we do not picture for
ourselves any particular modes of integration, but simply look to march on in
faith under the leadership of the Lord – who knows the way.”
“We can only humbly seek to essentialize our faith, that is, to
recognize what are the really essential elements in it – the things we have not
made but have received from the Lord – and in this attitude of turning to the
Lord and to the center, to open ourselves in this essentializing so that he may
lead us onward, he alone.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, God and the
World, interviewed by Peter Seewald, pp 452-453
Lastly,
if there is no Original Sin and the Church of Jesus Christ lies somewhere in
the unknown future, the sacrament of Baptism becomes meaningless! What the
Church has taught always and everywhere is now regarded as “unenlightened” and
“problematic” for him.
Mr.
Seewald: “In canon 849 of
Church canon law it says: ‘Baptism… [is] necessary to salvation in fact or at
least in intention.’ But what happens, when a man dies unbaptized? And what
happens to the millions of children who are killed in their mothers’ wombs?”
Benedict/Ratzinger:
“The question of what
it means to say that baptism is necessary for salvation has become ever more
hotly debated in modern times. The Second Vatican Council said on this point
that men who are seeking for God and who are inwardly striving toward that
which constitutes baptism will also receive salvation. That is to say that a
seeking after God already represents an inward participation in baptism, in the
Church, in Christ.
To that extent, the
question concerning the necessity of baptism for salvation seems to have been
answered, but the question about children who could not be baptized because
they were aborted then presses upon us that much more urgently.
Earlier ages had devised a teaching that seems to me
rather unenlightened. They said that baptism endows us, by means of sanctifying
grace, with the capacity to gaze upon God. Now, certainly, the state of
original sin, from which we are freed by baptism, consists in a lack of sanctifying
grace. Children who die in this way are indeed without any personal sin, so
they cannot be sent to hell, but, on the other hand, they lack sanctifying
grace and thus the potential for beholding God that this bestows. They will
simply enjoy a state of natural blessedness, in which they will be happy. This
state people called limbo.
In the course of our century, that has gradually come to
seem problematic to us. This was one way in which people
sought to justify the necessity of baptizing infants as early as possible, but
the solution is itself questionable. Finally, the Pope made a decisive turn in the encyclical Evangelium Vitae, a change already
anticipated by the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Note: Not so, even the
compromised CCC teaches the necessity of Baptism for salvation), when he
expressed the simple hope that God is powerful enough to draw to himself all
those who were unable to receive the sacrament.”
Benedict/Ratzinger, God and the World, interviewed by Peter Seewald, pp
401-402
Catholic
Church teaches divine Truth with precision and clarity:
Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the
kingdom of God….. Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water
and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Jesus Christ,
(John 3:3, 5)
If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for
baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of
our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost;
let him be anathema.
Council of Trent, Canon II on the sacrament of Baptism
If anyone saith, that Baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for
salvation, let him be anathema.
Council of Trent, Canon V on the sacrament of Baptism
Limits
of Papal Authority imposed by the Faith itself!
“The gravity of sin is
determined by the interval which it places between man and God; now sin against
faith, divides man from God as far as possible, since it deprives him of the
true knowledge of God; it therefore follows that sin against faith is the
greatest of all sins.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
“If the Faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate
even publicly.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
“Were the pope to command
anything against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the truth of the
Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or divine law, he ought not to be
obeyed, but in such commands is to be ignored.”
Juan Cardinal de Torquemada (1388–1468)
“You must resist, to his face, a pope who is openly tearing the Church
apart—for example, by refusing to confer ecclesiastical benefices except for
money, or in exchange for services… A
case of simony, even committed by a pope, must be denounced.”
Thomist Cardinal Cajetan (1469–1534)
“If the Pope lays down an order contrary to right customs one does not have to
obey him; if he tries to do something manifestly opposed to justice and to the
common good, it would be licit to resist him; if he attacks by force, he could
be repelled by force, with the moderation characteristic of a good
defense.”
Francisco Suárez, S.J. (1548–1617)
“In answer to the question, ‘What should be done in cases where the Pope
destroys the Church by his evil actions?’ [I reply]: ‘He would certainly sin;
he should neither be permitted to act in such fashion, nor should he be obeyed
in what was evil; but he should be resisted with a courteous reprehension.… He
does not have the power to destroy; therefore, if there is evidence that he is
doing it, it is licit to resist him. The result of all this is that if the Pope
destroys the Church by his orders and acts, he can be resisted and the
execution of his mandate prevented. The right of open resistance to prelates’
abuse of authority stems also from natural law.’”
Sylvester Prieras, O.P. (1456–1523), Dominican theologian, appointed
master of the Sacred Palace by Pope Leo X who wrote the rebuttal to Luther’s 95
Theses
“As it is lawful to resist the pope, if he assaulted a man’s person, so it is
lawful to resist him, if he assaulted souls, or troubled the state, and much
more if he strove to destroy the Church. It is lawful, I say, to resist him, by
not doing what he commands, and hindering the execution of his will; still, it
is not lawful to judge or punish or even depose him, because he is nothing
other than a superior.”
St. Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621), Doctor of the Church
And then, pure papalolatry!
“There is in the world … one man in whom the greatness of God is reflected in
the most outstanding way of all. He participates in the authority and in a
certain sense in the personality of Christ. This man is the Vicar of Jesus
Christ, the Pope. … His power extends to the ends of the world and is under the
protection of God, Who has promised to confirm in Heaven whatever he will
decree upon earth. His dignity and authority, then, are almost divine. Let us
bow humbly before such greatness. Let us promise to obey the Pope as we would
Christ. … We cannot dispute or murmur against anything which he teaches or
decrees. To disobey the Pope is to disobey God. To argue or murmur against the
Pope is to argue or murmur against Jesus Himself. When we are confronted with
His commands, we have only one choice—absolute obedience and complete
surrender.”
Cardinal Antonio Bacci (1885-1971), the Vatican’s chief Latinist under
four successive popes (Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI) and the
co-author of the Ottaviani Intervention with Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, the
head CDF.
SSPX bid farewell to Bishop Richard Williamson as only they
could do!
His defiance of the Society's authorities ultimately made a separation
inevitable. God forgive him for the errors and confusion he caused in the years
that followed with his Kyrie eleison
comments, and even more so for his episcopal
consecrations, which lacked and still lack any objective necessity and any sensus
ecclesiae.
Fr. Franz Schmidberger, former superior general of the SSPX, published
in his weekly newsletter, on the death of Bishop Richard Williamson on January
29, 2025
COMMENT: The good bishop Williamson has only been dead for a little over
one year. At the time of his death the SSPX judged him to be in need of God's
forgiveness for the sin of consecrating bishops
"which lacked and still lack any objective necessity and any sensus ecclesiae." They now
threaten Rome with doing their own episcopal consecrations because their own
"sensus ecclesiae" has now
discovered that there is in fact an existing "objective
necessity"! Nothing has changed
with regard to the Church but something has changed with regard to the SSPX.
They are concerned only with their "objective necessity"!
Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith issues statement
following today’s meeting at the Vatican between SSPX Superior General Fr.
Davide Pagliarani & DDF Prefect Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández on
2-12-2026
STATEMENT OF THE DICASTERY FOR THE DOCTRINE
OF THE FAITH Regarding the Meeting between the Prefect of the Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith and the Superior General of the FSSPX On 12 February
2026, a cordial and sincere meeting took place at the Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith between the Prefect, His Eminence Cardinal Victor Manuel
FERNANDEZ, and the Superior General of the FSSPX, Reverend Don Davide
PAGLIARANI, with the approval of the Holy Father Leo XIV. After clarifying
certain points presented by the FSSPX in various letters, particularly those
sent between 2017 and 2019 — including, among other topics, the question of the
divine will concerning the plurality of religions — the Prefect proposed a
pathway of specifically theological dialogue, following a precise methodology,
on issues that have not yet received sufficient clarification. These include:
the distinction between an act of faith and the “religious submission of mind
and will,” as well as the differing degrees of adherence required by various
texts of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and their interpretation. At the
same time, he proposed addressing a series of topics listed by the FSSPX in its
letter of 17 January 2019. The aim of this dialogue is to highlight, in the
topics under discussion, the minimum requirements for full communion with the
Catholic Church, and consequently to outline a canonical statute for the
Fraternity, along with other aspects requiring further study. The Holy See
reaffirmed that the ordination of bishops without the mandate of the Supreme
Pontiff, who possesses ordinary, supreme, universal, immediate, and direct
power (cf. CIC, can. 331; Dogmatic Constitution Pastor aeternus, chs. I and III),
would constitute a decisive rupture of ecclesial communion (schism), with
serious consequences for the Fraternity as a whole (John Paul II, Apostolic
Letter Ecclesia Dei, 2 July 1988, nn. 3 and ff.; Pontifical Council for
Legislative Texts, Explanatory Note, 24 August 1996, n. 1). Therefore, the
possibility of undertaking this dialogue presupposes that the Fraternity
suspend the announced episcopal ordinations. The Superior General of the FSSPX
will present the proposal to his Council and will provide his response to the
Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. In the event of a positive response,
the steps, stages, and procedures to be followed will be established by mutual
agreement. The Church is asked to accompany this process, especially in the
coming times, with prayer to the Holy Spirit, who is the principal agent of
true ecclesial communion willed by Christ.
Viganò
Urges SSPX To Cut Off 'Dialogue' With Fernandez, Proceed With Consecrations
'True ecclesial communion is not
measured by canonical recognition granted by a Hierarchy that has lost the
Faith, but by integral fidelity to divine Revelation.'
I cannot but note with sorrow and
indignation the Statement released today by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of
the Faith, signed by Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, at the end of his
meeting with Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Priestly Society
of Saint Pius X. After decades of humiliation, inconclusive dialogues, partial
concessions revoked by “Traditionis Custodes,” deafening silences regarding
doctrinal and liturgical deviations widespread throughout the Church, and even
more serious doctrinal and moral errors promoted by the Supreme Throne, Rome
now claims to make the suspension of the episcopal consecrations announced by
the SSPX for next July 1st a preliminary condition for dialogue. These
consecrations are not acts of rebellion, but a supreme act of fidelity to the
One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church, which has been deprived for
almost sixty years of Bishops who preach integral Doctrine and administer the
Sacraments without any compromise with error. The Dicastery’s Statement subtly
repeats the same modernist scheme seen in 1988: it offers a “theological
dialogue” on issues the Holy See has always refused to seriously address—religious
freedom, destructive episcopal “collegiality,” pan-heretical ecumenism, the
Nostra Ætate declaration that equates false religions with the one true Faith,
and the Abu Dhabi Document—while threatening “schism” for the only gesture that
is able to guarantee the certainty of Apostolic Succession. But who wields
“schism” as a weapon today? Who excommunicated the Bishops consecrated in 1988
for defending Tradition and its beating heart, the Catholic Mass? Who
excommunicated me and silenced me, while promoting declared heretics and
covering up abuses of every kind? Who forced the faithful to submit to an
authority that has renounced immutable Catholic doctrine in the name of a “new
humanism” and a “synodality” that is nothing other than the cancer of democracy
applied to the Catholic Church in order to destroy from within its divine
hierarchical Constitution and Petrine Primacy? The true schism is not that of those who consecrate
Bishops to guard and transmit the Catholic Faith in its entirety, but rather
the schism of the conciliar and synodal Hierarchy, which has denied Apostolic
Tradition, replacing sound Doctrine with heretical ambiguities, true Catholic
Worship with a Protestantized liturgy, and legitimate Authority with a
totalitarian power exercised against the faithful who refuse to apostatize.
The Society of Saint Pius X does not need the permission of those who have
renounced the Faith to do what Providence asks of it: namely, to perpetuate the
episcopal line faithful to Tradition. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre acted not out
of schism, but out of necessity – same state of necessity that persists today,
aggravated by the systematic persecution of the Traditional Mass and the
imposition of false doctrines that contradict the perennial Magisterium.
GENERAL
COMMENT: The SSPX is buried in the Neo-modernist
heresy that believes that the dogmas of our faith contain both divine and human
elements and must necessarily continually evolve by a distillation process
where the divine elements are progressively purified by removing the
historically dated human encrustations. This Neo-modernist heresy is the
unstated pre-supposition for the Vatican II pastoral council. For the
Neo-modernist, the proximate rule of faith is no longer Dogma, but however the
current pope interprets the dogma to mean. That being the case, the SSPX,
having abandoned dogma as their proximate rule of faith must turn to the
present pope to tell him the current version of the Catholic faith.
Neo-modernism is just a variation of the heresy of Modernism which St. Pius X
called "the synthesis of all heresies." It is the "synthesis of
all heresies" because it denies all dogmas as dogmas. It attacks the very
nature of what dogmas are. Dogma contains no human elements. They are divine
revelation that is formally defined by the infallible Magisterium of the
Church. They are the infallible word of
God in both the truth expressed and the words used to express that truth. The
pope is only the necessary but wholly insufficient material and instrumental cause
of dogma. It is God who is the formal and final cause of dogma. Therefore, the
pope is just as much a subject to dogma as any of the faithful. Truth is the
only weapon possessed against an abusive authority and the SSPX has entered
into a "dialogue" with an opponent that claims for itself personally
the divine attribute of infallibility and the right to dictate their personal
conceptions of truth even against the divine infallible revelation of God.
Archbishop Viganò is politely telling the SSPX that it is the FAITH
itself that is being attacked and they need to wake up. The SSPX has been in
constant interminable doctrinal discussions with Rome since 1997. The reason
Rome dialogues with the SSPX is because the SSPX is defenseless having
abandoned the infallible truth of Catholic dogma as their weapon. This dialogue
between Rome and the SSPX never raises above the level of exchanging opinions.
Because our Mission of Ss. Peter & Paul stands on the truth of Catholic
dogma, the local ordinaries will never enter into open discussions. Always
remember: A heretic is a baptized Catholic who rejects one or more Catholic
dogmas AND all heretics are schismatics! If the SSPX can learn this simple but
essential truth, then they will stop seeking a place at the table of apostates
and start defending the faith.
Modernism
vs. Neo-modernism: A difference in method, an agreement in ends
The heresy of Modernism denies
dogma directly. Neo-modernism is a more subtle heresy. The end remains the denial of dogma but the
method of denial is indirect. Dogma, the
revelation of God that forms the formal objects of divine and Catholic faith,
is formulated in categorical propositions that are always and everywhere true
or false. There are two methods the
Neo-modernist employs to destroy dogma. The first method is to change the
category of dogma from truth-falsehood to the category of
authority-obedience. They treat dogma as
if it were laws, commands, precepts, injunctions, etc., etc., etc., and then
limit the universal truth with all the moral restrictions that apply to laws,
etc. For example, the dogma that the
sacrament of baptism is necessary for salvation is treated as a law and
therefore as a law, it does not bind in cases of impossibility, necessity,
unreasonable burden, psychological impediment, etc., etc.
The second method is to corrupt
the dogmatic proposition be changing the meaning of the terms OR altering the
universality of the copula. An excellent example of this corruption of
terminology can be seen in Benedict/Ratzinger’s treatment of the word, substance.
“…the medieval concept of
substance has long since become inaccessible to us. In so far as we use the
concept of substance at all today we understand thereby the ultimate particles
of matter, and the chemically complex mixture that is bread certainly does not
fall into that category.”
Joseph Ratzinger, Faith and
the Future, p. 14
It is impossible to affirm the
Catholic dogma that “Lord Jesus Christ... is consubstantial with the Father” or
the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation if the concept of “substance” is
rejected in the sense as used by scholastic theologians found in the perennial
realist philosophical tradition. And so
we have Benedict/Ratzinger writing:
“Eucharistic devotion such as
is noted in the silent visit by the devout in church must not be thought of as
a conversation with God. This would assume that God was present there locally
and in a confined way. To justify such an assertion shows a lack of
understanding of the Christological mysteries of the very concept of God. This
is repugnant to the serious thinking of the man who knows about the
omnipresence of God. To go to church on the ground that one can visit God who
is present there is a senseless act which modern man rightfully rejects.”
Joseph Ratzinger, Die Sacramentale
Begrundung Christliche Existenz
The
Catholic Church infallibly teaches:
“By the consecration of the
bread and wine there takes place a change of the whole substance of the bread into the substance of the body of Christ our Lord
and of the whole substance of the
wine into the substance of his blood. This change the holy Catholic Church has
fittingly and properly called transubstantiation.”
Council of Trent, Session XIII,
chapter IV
“If anyone denies that in the
sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood
together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a
sign, or figure or force, let him be anathema.”
Council of Trent, Session XII,
Canon I
Benedict/Ratzinger’s
affirmation of these dogmas is done within the corrupted context of mutilating
the meaning of the terms. The entire hermeneutic of discontinuity/rupture vs.
the hermeneutic of reform proposed by Benedict/Ratzinger is predicated upon
accepting or rejecting his false philosophy which ultimately elevates the
accident of relationship to overthrow
the concept of substance. Reciting
the Credo is no longer evidence of the Catholic faith without clearly defining
every term.
Cardinal
Henry Edward Manning – The true Revelation of God is both a Definite and
Certain participation in God’s own knowledge.
IT is this fundamental truth of revelation that our Neo-Modernist
hierarchy reject!
What, then, is the knowledge which God has restored to man through
revelation but a definite knowledge, a participation of His own? The
truth which has been revealed, what is it in the mind of God who reveals it, but
one, harmonious and distinct? What was that knowledge as revealed by the Holy
Spirit on the day of Pentecost, but one, harmonious and distinct? What was the
conception of that knowledge in inspired men, but one, harmonious and distinct
also? And what was that knowledge when communicated by those who were inspired
to those who believed, but one, harmonious and distinct as before? And what is this unity and
harmony and distinctness of knowledge, which God revealed of Himself through
Jesus Christ, but the faith we confess in our creed? Our baptismal faith, its
substance and its letter, the explicit and the implicit meaning, article by
article, is as definite, severe, and precise, as any problem in science. It is
of the nature of truth to be so; and where definiteness ends, knowledge ceases.
Observe, then, the distinction between finite knowledge and definite knowledge.
Is not science definite? And yet it is also finite. The theory of gravitation,
definite as it is, it is finite too. [……] Go through the whole range of
physical sciences, what is it but an example of the same condition of
knowledge, definiteness in conception with finiteness of reach? [….] If we have not a definite
knowledge of what we believe, we may be sure we have no true knowledge of it.
But, further, it is evident that knowledge must also be certain.
When we speak of certainty, we mean one of two things. Sometimes we say, that a
thing is certain; at other times, that we are certain. When we say a truth is
certain, we mean, that the proofs of that truth are either self-evident, or so
clear as to exclude all doubt. This is certainty on the part of the object
proposed to our intelligence. But when we say we are certain, we mean that we
are inwardly convinced, by the application of our reason to the matter before
us, of the sufficiency of the evidence to prove the truth of it. In us,
certainty is rather a moral feeling, a complex state of mind. As light manifests itself by its
own nature, but sight is the illumination of the eye; so certainty means truth
with its evidences illuminating the intelligence, or, in other words, the
intelligence possessed by truth with its evidences.
This we call certainty. I ask, then, is there not this twofold
certainty in the revelation which God has given? Was not the revelation
which God gave of Himself through Jesus Christ made certain on His part by
direct evidence of the divine act which revealed it? Is it not also certain on
our part by the apprehension and faith of the Church? Was not God manifest in
the flesh that He might reveal Himself? Did not God dwell on earth that He
might teach His truth? Has not God spoken to man that man might know Him? Did
not God work miracles that man might believe that He was present? What evidence
on the part of God was wanting that men might know that Jesus Christ was indeed
the Son of God? And if
there was certainty on the part of God who revealed, was there not certainty
also on the part of those that heard? Look back into the sacred history.
Had not Prophets and Seers certainty of that which they beheld and heard? […..]
What, then, is the first
condition of faith but certainty? He that has not certain faith has no faith.
We are told that to crave for certainty implies a morbid disposition. Did not
Abraham, and Moses, and Daniel, the Apostles and Evangelists desire certainty
in faith, and crave to know beyond doubt that God spake to them, and know with
definite clearness what God said? Was this a morbid craving? Surely this is not
to be reproved. But rather
the contrary disposition worthy of rebuke. How can we venture to content
ourselves with uncertainty in matters where the truth and honour of God and the
salvation of our own souls are at stake? This truly is not without sin.
[…..] And yet, what is the very idea of Revelation but a Divine assurance of
Truth? Where faith begins uncertainty ends. Because faith terminates upon the
veracity of God; and what God has spoken and authenticated to us by Divine
authority cannot be uncertain.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Grounds of Faith
"The
group holding power in the SSPX have decided to stage a drama, unfortunately
not a good Shakespearean play, but a poor play by Fernandez. They will follow
two narratives: one for liberals, the other for hardliners. Unfortunately,
nothing has changed for many years – secret meetings with the Roman hierarchy
and the search for a practical agreement without doctrinal agreement. This
makes no sense. As Bishop Richard Williamson said, it is a betrayal of
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre's struggle, a betrayal of Our Lord Jesus Christ and
His Church." -
Bishop
Michal Stobnicki. Comment on the SSPX threat to consecrate new bishops
Pope Leo XIV
is continuing ‘irreversible trajectory’ of Pope Francis: SSPX statement
In addition to
spelling out the Francis/Leo crisis, the statement addresses the silence of
conservative bishops in the Church, the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus
Ordo, and more.
LifeSiteNews | John-Henry Westen | Feb 5, 2026 — Today the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX)
released a major statement explaining the reasons behind their announcement of
upcoming episcopal consecrations. This comes from Superior General Davide
Pagliarani, and it directly addresses the current pontificate of Pope Leo XIV,
describing it as continuing the “irreversible trajectory” set by Pope Francis.
The document outlines why the SSPX believes these consecrations are necessary,
while still expressing some hope for dialogue with Rome.
In addition to spelling out the Francis/Leo crisis, the statement
addresses the silence of conservative bishops in the Church, the possibility of
sanctions, their hopes, the ultimate reason for their action and their
perspective on the Traditional Latin Mass. Let me read the key portions
directly from the statement, but I encourage you to read the full statement.
They spell out the
Francis and Leo crisis
Furthermore, the major orientations already taking shape in this new
pontificate – particularly through the most recent consistory – only confirm
this. An explicit
determination to preserve the line of Pope Francis as an irreversible
trajectory for the entire Church is discernible.
It is sad to
acknowledge, but it is a fact that, in an ordinary parish, the faithful no
longer find the means necessary to ensure their eternal salvation. Missing, in
particular, are both the integral preaching of Catholic truth and morality, and
the worthy administration of the sacraments as the Church has always done. This
deprivation is what constitutes the state of necessity. In this critical
context, our bishops are growing older, and, as the apostolate continues to
expand, they are no longer sufficient to meet the demands of the faithful
worldwide.
In what way do you
believe that last month’s consistory confirms the direction taken by Pope
Francis?
DP: Cardinal Fernández, speaking in the name of Pope Leo, invited the
Church to return to Pope Francis’s fundamental intuition expressed in his key
encyclical, Evangelii gaudium. Put
simply, he believes that the Gospel should be proclaimed by reducing it to a
primitive and essential expression, a series of concise and striking formulas –
the “kerygma” – with a view to eliciting an “experience,” an immediate
encounter with Christ. Everything else should be set aside, however precious it
may be.
In concrete terms, all that is Tradition is considered as accessory and
secondary. It is this method of the new evangelization that has produced the
doctrinal emptiness characteristic of Pope Francis’s pontificate, and is keenly
felt by many in the Church.
In a similar vein, one must provide new and relevant answers to the
emerging questions of our time, but, according to Cardinal Fernández, this is
to be done through synodal reform, rather than by rediscovering the classical
and ever-valid answers provided by the Tradition of the Church. It is by these
means, in the “breath of the Spirit” of this synodal reform, that Pope Francis
has been able to impose catastrophic decisions upon the whole Church, such as
authorizing Holy Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried, or the
blessing of same-sex couples.
In summary, through the “kerygma,” the proclamation of the Gospel is
isolated from the whole corpus of traditional doctrine and morality. And
through synodality, traditional answers are replaced by arbitrary decisions,
with a high risk of being absurd and doctrinally unjustifiable. Cardinal Zen
himself considers this method manipulative and considers attributing it to the
Holy Ghost blasphemous. Unfortunately, I fear that he is right.[…]
[…] the Church is in danger of busying herself with both everything and
nothing. Ecological concerns, for example, or the preoccupation with the rights
of minorities, of women, or of migrants, risk causing the essential mission of
the Church to be lost from view. If the Society of Saint Pius X strives to
preserve Tradition, with all that this entails, it is solely because these
treasures are vital for the salvation of souls, and because it aims at nothing
else but the good of souls, and that of the priesthood—ordered to their
sanctification.[…]
[…] 2019, when Pope Francis, on the occasion of his visit to the
Arabian Peninsula, signed, together with an imam, the well-known Abu Dhabi
declaration. Together with the Muslim leader, he affirmed that the plurality of
religions had been willed as such by divine Wisdom.
It is evident that a communion founded upon the acceptance of such a
statement, or which would include it, would simply not be Catholic, since it
would constitute a sin against the First Commandment and the denial of the
first article of the Creed.
I consider such a statement to be more than a simple error. It is
simply inconceivable. It cannot be the foundation of Catholic communion, but
rather the cause of its dissolution. I believe that a Catholic should prefer
martyrdom rather than accept such an affirmation.
They address the
silence of conservative bishops in the church to the crisis of Pope Francis and
Leo
[…] the fear of breaking a fragile stability by behavior deemed
“disturbing” reduces many pastors to a constrained silence, when they should be raising
their voices against scandalous teaching which corrupts faith or morals.
The necessary denunciation of errors that undermine the Church – required by the
very good of souls who are threatened by this poisoned nourishment – is thereby
left undone. One may enlighten another in private, if able to discern the
harmfulness of a given error, but it may be only a timid whisper, in which
truth struggles to express itself with the required freedom – especially in the
shadow of tacitly accepted, contradictory principles. Once again, souls are no
longer enlightened and are deprived of the bread of doctrine for which they
remain hungry. Over time, this progressively alters mentalities and gradually
leads to a general and unconscious acceptance of the various reforms affecting
the life of the Church. Towards these souls, too, the Society feels a
responsibility to enlighten and not to abandon.
Realistically sees
possibility of sanctions
[…] Cardinal Fernández’s response does not address the possibility of
an audience with the Pope. It also evokes the possibility of new sanctions.
What will the Society
do if the Holy See decides to condemn it?
DP: First of all, let us recall that in such circumstances any
canonical penalties would have no real effect.
Nevertheless, should they be pronounced, the Society would certainly
accept this new suffering without bitterness, as it has accepted past
sufferings, and would sincerely offer it for the good of the Church. It is for the Church that the
Society works. And there is no doubt that, should such a situation
arise, it could only be temporary, for the Church is divine and Our Lord will
not abandon her. […]
We are sure that one day the Roman authorities will acknowledge, with
gratitude, that these episcopal consecrations providentially contributed to
preserving the faith, for the greater glory of God and the salvation of souls.
They make the
comparison to the China Communist Party naming bishops without the Pope’s
approval
Let us take the current case of relations with the Chinese government.
Despite a genuine schism of the Chinese Patriotic Church, despite the
uninterrupted persecution of the underground Church faithful to Rome, despite
agreements regularly renewed and then broken by the Chinese authorities, in
2023, Pope Francis approved, a posteriori, the appointment of the Bishop of
Shanghai by those authorities.
More recently, Pope Leo XIV himself ultimately accepted, a posteriori, the appointment of the
Bishop of Xinxiang, designated in the same manner during the vacancy of the
Apostolic See, while the bishop, faithful to Rome—who had been imprisoned
several times—was still in office.
In both cases, these were clearly pro-government prelates, imposed
unilaterally by Beijing to control the Catholic Church in China. It should be
clearly noted that these were not merely auxiliary bishops, but residential
bishops, that is, ordinary pastors of their respective dioceses (or prefectures),
possessing jurisdiction over the local clergy and faithful. In Rome, it is
perfectly well known for what purpose these pastors were chosen and
unilaterally imposed.
The Society’s case is entirely different. For us, it is obviously not a
matter of favoring a communist or anti-Christian power, but solely of
safeguarding the rights of Christ the King and of the Tradition of the Church,
at a time of general crisis and confusion in which these are gravely
compromised. The intentions and the ends are clearly not the same.
They lay out the
request ignored by the Pope since last summer
Last summer, I wrote to the Holy Father to request an audience. Having
received no reply, I wrote to him again a few months later, in a filial
and straightforward manner, without concealing any of our needs. I
mentioned our doctrinal divergences, but also our sincere desire to serve the
Catholic Church without respite, for we are servants of the Church despite
our irregular canonical status.
To this second letter, a reply from Rome reached us a few days ago,
from Cardinal Fernández. Unfortunately, it took no account whatsoever of the
proposal we put forward, and offers nothing that responds to our requests.
Still retains hope
Pope Leo will acquiesce
A Pope is first and foremost a father. As such, he is capable of
discerning a right intention, a sincere will to serve the Church, and above
all, a genuine case of conscience in an exceptional situation. […]
In fact, the superior
general suggests that the consecration of new bishops will be a grace for the
whole church when they happen
I would like to emphasize that this is a time for prayer and
preparation of hearts, souls, and minds. We must prepare ourselves to receive
the grace that these consecrations will occasion for the whole Church. This
should be done with recollection, peace, and trust in Providence, which has
never abandoned the Society and will not abandon it now.
The ultimate reason:
for the salvation of souls
[…] it is for the Pope himself, as such, that we preserve this treasure
until the day when its value will once again be understood and when a Pope will
wish to make use of it for the good of the whole Church. […]
[…] The very law of the Church provides for it. In the spirit of
ecclesiastical law, which is the juridical expression of this charity, the good
of souls comes before everything else. It truly represents the law of laws, to
which all others are subordinate and against which no ecclesiastical law can
prevail.
The axiom “suprema lex, salus animarum” —”the supreme law is the
salvation of souls”—is a classic maxim of canonical tradition which is
explicitly taken up by the final canon of the 1983 Code. In the present state
of necessity, it is upon this highest principle that the entire legitimacy of
our apostolate and of our mission towards the souls who turn to us depends. For
us, we fulfil a role of supplying for a deficiency, in the name of that same
charity.
About the Traditional
Latin Mass
As far as I am aware, Pope Leo XIV has maintained a certain
discretion on this subject, which arouses great expectation in the conservative
world. Very recently, however, a text by Cardinal Roche on the liturgy—intended
initially for the cardinals participating in last month’s consistory—was made
public. There is no reason
to doubt that it corresponds, in its broad lines, to the orientation desired by
the Pope. It is an unambiguous text, and above all, logical and coherent.
Unfortunately, it is based on a false premise.
Concretely, this
text, in perfect continuity with Traditionis custodes, condemns the
liturgical project of Pope Benedict XVI, according to whom, the ancient rite
and the new rite are two more or less equivalent forms, expressing the same
faith and the same ecclesiology, and therefore capable of mutually enriching
one another. Concerned for the unity of the Church, Benedict XVI sought to
promote the coexistence of the two rites and, in 2007, published Summorum
Pontificum. For many, this occasioned a providential rediscovery of the
Mass of all time; but over time, it also gave rise to a movement calling the
new rite into question—a movement deemed problematic and which Traditionis
custodes, in 2021, sought to stem.
Faithful to Pope Francis, Cardinal Roche is now attempting to promote
an elusive unity of the Church according to an idea contradictory to that of
Benedict XVI. While maintaining the assertion of a continuity from one rite to
the other through reform, Cardinal Roche firmly opposes their coexistence. He
sees in it a source of division, a threat to unity, which must be overcome by
returning to an authentic liturgical communion. “The primary good of the unity
of the Church is not achieved by freezing division, but by finding ourselves in
the sharing of what cannot but be shared.” In the Church, “there ought to be
only one rite”, in full syntony with the true meaning of Tradition.
This is a just and coherent principle, since the Church, having one
faith and one ecclesiology, can have only one liturgy capable of expressing
them adequately. But it is a principle applied to a wrong conception of
Tradition. Consistent with the new post-conciliar ecclesiology, Cardinal Roche
conceives Tradition as something evolving, and the new rite as its sole living
expression for our time. The value of the Tridentine rite can therefore only be
regarded as obsolete, and its use, at most, a “concession”, and “in no way a
promotion.”
That there is a present “division” and incompatibility between the two
rites now appears more apparent than ever. But let there be no mistake, the only
liturgy that adequately expresses, in an immutable and non-evolving manner, the
traditional conception of the Church, of Christian life, and of the Catholic
priesthood—that is, Tradition—is the liturgy of all time. On this point, the
opposition of the Holy See appears more irrevocable than ever.
Direct calling into
question of the Novus Ordo
[…] instead of sincerely questioning the intrinsic deficiencies of the
new Mass, and therefore the overall failure of the reform, instead of facing
the reality that churches are emptying and vocations are declining, instead of
asking why the Tridentine rite continues to attract so many souls, Cardinal
Roche sees no other solution than an urgent preliminary formation of the
faithful and seminarians.
[…] For almost two thousand years, souls—often illiterate—were edified
and sanctified by the liturgy, without the need for any prior formation.
Failing to recognise the intrinsic incapacity of the Novus Ordo to
form and edify souls and continuing to demand ever better prior formation seems
to me to be the sign of an irremediable blindness. One arrives at shocking
paradoxes: the reform was intended to foster a greater participation of the
faithful; yet the faithful abandoned the Church en masse, because this insipid
liturgy failed to nourish them—and this would supposedly have nothing to do
with the reform? […]
[…] how can it then be understood that this Mass of all time stands in
irreducible opposition to the new Mass, remains the sole true liturgy of the
whole Church, and that no one may be prevented from celebrating it? How can it
be known that the Mass of Paul VI cannot be recognized, because it constitutes
a considerable departure from the Catholic theology of the Holy Sacrifice of
the Mass, and that no one may be compelled to celebrate it? And how are souls
to be effectively turned away from this poisoned liturgy, to drink from the
pure sources of Catholic liturgy?
COMMENT:
Complaining about conservative bishops being mute dogs is rank hypocrisy
coming from the SSPX who have been dancing the two-step with Neo-modernist Rome
since 1997, nearly thirty years of "doctrinal discussions"! Dogma is
the proximate rule of faith for all the faithful. It is immutable in both the
truth it expresses and the manner in which it is expressed. It forms the formal
object of divine and Catholic faith. The very definition of heresy is the
denial of dogma. The heresy of Neo-modernism denies this truth. They believe
that dogma evolves and changes its meaning over time as the Church develops a
deeper and richer understanding of God's revealed truth. Consequently, a
Catholic must always turn to the pope to know what any particular dogma means
today. Thus, the pope becomes the proximate rule of faith for Neo-modernists.
The SSPX, just like Rome, are Neo-modernists. The SSPX cannot call the
Neo-modernist heretics because the SSPX does not hold dogma as their proximate
rule of faith. They can only offer opinions and thus, for thirty years they
have been exchanging opinions with Neo-modernist Rome. The SSPX during the
entire pontificate of Francis/Bergoglio did and said nothing to oppose his
gross heresy and immorality. Why is it suddenly an issue now? Because at that
time it was not in the interest of the SSPX to stir the pot. Their pretense of
being at the service of the Church has never been true. From the beginning they
have worked to consolidate control of Catholic tradition imposing upon it their
own distorted conceptions of doctrine and liturgy while denying any help to
those who do not conform in every detail. Bishop Richard Williamson, since
being expelled from the SSPX, helped our little Mission. He did not agree with
us entirely but his charity was not thereby stifled. Supplied jurisdiction is
entirely generated by the needs of each individual Catholic faithful and Bishop
Williamson exercised that supplied jurisdiction in helping us at Ss. Peter
& Paul Roman Catholic Mission. Bishop Williamson's charity extended to the
needs of the faithful over the world and he provided six bishops, at least some
of which are continuing as he did. That is really the reason the SSPX got rid
of him. For the SSPX, there is no state of necessity. They have denied it
certainly over the last 15 years and they cannot reclaim it now. If they want
to get their house in order they should ask Bishop Michael Stobnicki,
consecrated by Bishop Williamson for the eastern Slavs, and who the SSPX
expelled from their seminary, to help them.
"A Dark
Cloud of Fog Instead of a Head"
I saw a strange church being built against every rule.... No angels
were supervising the building operations.
In that church, nothing came from high above... There was only division
and chaos. It is probably a church of
human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the new heterodox
church of Rome, which seems of the same kind...
I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and
violent about it, and they seemed to be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single
saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw a
laughing figure which said: 'Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it
to the ground'.... Among the strangest things that I saw, were long processions
of bishops. Their thoughts and utterances were made known to me through images
issuing from their mouths. Their faults towards religion were shown by external
deformities. A few had only a body, with a dark cloud of fog instead of a head.
Others had only a head, their bodies and hearts were like thick vapors. Some
were lame; others were paralytics; others were asleep or staggering.
Blessed Anna-Katarina Emmerick, Yves Dupont, Catholic Prophecy
Purgation Now
with Merit, or Purgatory Later Without
When I look to God, I see no gate to Paradise, and yet he who wishes to
enter there does so, because God is all mercy.
God stands before us with open arms to receive us into His glory. But well I see the divine essence to be of
such purity, far greater than can be imagined, that the soul in which there is
even the least note of imperfection would rather cast itself into a thousand
Hells than find itself thus stained in the presence of the Divine Majesty. Therefore the soul, understanding that Purgatory
had been ordained to take away those stains, casts itself therein, and seems to
itself to have found great mercy in that it can rid itself there of the
impediment that is the stain of sin. No
tongue can tell nor explain, no mind understand, the grievousness of
Purgatory. But although I see that there
is in Purgatory as much pain as in Hell, I yet see the soul that has the least
stain of imperfection accepting Purgatory as though it were a mercy, as I have
said, and holding its pains of no account as compared with the least stain that
hinders a soul in its love. I seem to
see that the pain that souls in Purgatory endure because of that in them which
displeases God (that is, what they have willfully done against His great
goodness) is greater than any other pain they feel in Purgatory. And this is because they see the truth and
the grievousness of the hindrance that prevents them from drawing near to God,
since they are in grace.
St. Catherine of Genoa, Purgation
and Purgatory
All
Are Called to be Co-Redeemers with Christ
God has entrusted to each one
of us a share in the great redemptive work of Jesus. As consecrated souls, we are especially
called to cooperate in Christ’s work.
First of all, we must cooperate with grace, so that the fruits of the
redemption can be fully applied to our souls.
This is the work of our own personal sanctification. It is not limited to this one aspect,
however. We are called to sanctify
ourselves in order to be able to bring others to sanctity. Each one of us has a mission to fulfill for
the good of others and for their sanctification. We must collaborate with Christ in extending
the fruits of the Redemption to as many souls as possible. This work is entrusted to us by the heavenly
Father, and we must apply ourselves to it with the interior disposition of
Christ: a total, generous, exclusive dedication, a dedication capable of making
even the greatest sacrifices. All
actions are of value only insofar as they help toward the accomplishment of
this work. Anything that does not
contribute to our own sanctification or to the sanctification of other is
useless, a waste of time, and should be courageously eliminated.
Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary
Magdalen, O.C.D., Divine Intimacy
And
yet, the fathers of Vatican II professed to worship the same god as the
Mohammedans!
He [Muhammad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to
which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained
precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to
carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal
men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such
as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom.
Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with
doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in
a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration;
for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired
teacher of truth. On the contrary, Mohammed said that he was sent in the power
of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is
more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from
the beginning. Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers,
utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Mohammed forced
others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine
pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the
contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments
by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines
his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his
followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of
falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe
foolishly.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles
The
Principle Muslim objections to the Catholic Faith – Utterly carnal!
“We
preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews indeed a stumbling block, and unto the
Gentiles foolishness” 1 Cor 1:23.
These, then, are the points, which, as you affirm, are attacked and
ridiculed by the unbelievers. For the Muslims (Saraceni), as you say, ridicule
our claim that Christ is the Son of God, since God does not have a wife; and
they think us mad, assuming we profess there are three gods. They also mock our
belief that Christ, the Son of God, was crucified for the salvation of the
human race, because if God is omnipotent, He could have saved the human race
without the suffering of His Son; He could also have so constructed man that he
could not have sinned. They rebuke Christians because daily at the altar they
eat their God and because the body of Christ, were it even as big as a
mountain, should long since have been consumed.
St. Thomas, De Rationibus Fidei (The Reasons for Our Faith)
Behold, then the whole
of Christian perfection: love and sacrifice. Who cannot with
God's grace, fulfil this twofold condition? Is it, indeed, so difficult to love
Him Who is infinitely lovable and infinitely loving? The love that He asks of
us is nothing extraordinary; it is the devotedness of love - the gift of
oneself - consisting chiefly in conformity to the divine will. To want to love
is to love. To keep the commandments for God's sake is to love. To pray is to
love. To fulfil our duties of state in view of pleasing God, this is likewise
to love. Nay more, to recreate ourselves, to take our meals with the like
intention is to love. To serve our neighbor for God's sake is to love. Nothing
then is easier, God's grace helping, than the constant exercise of divine love
and through this, steady advance toward perfection.
Rev. Adolphe
Tanquewrey, S.S., D.D., The Spiritual Life
Vatican II and
the Leap of Faith for the Hermeneutics of Continuity
ON CATHOLIC UNITY
Vatican II pastoral
opinion:
And
we now ask: What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?... This
unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without
the possibility of ever being lost (Unitatis Redintegratio) the Church
in fact has not totally disappeared from the world. On the other hand, this
unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is,
to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely
not! Pope Benedict XVI, to Protestants
at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005
Catholic Doctrine:
… the union of Christians can only be
promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of
those who are separated from it… Pope
Pius XI, Mortalium Animos
ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
Vatican II pastoral
opinion:
The
Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation
in the very dignity of the human person... This right to religious freedom is
to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed. Thus it
is to become a civil right. Declaration on Religious Liberty, Dignitatis
Humanae
Catholic Doctrine:
And from this wholly false idea of social organization they do not fear to
foster that erroneous opinion, especially fatal to the Catholic Church
and the salvation of souls, called by our predecessor, Gregory XVI, insanity,
namely that the liberty of conscience and worship is the proper right of every
man, and should be proclaimed by law in every correctly established society...
Each and every doctrine individually mentioned in this letter, by Our Apostolic
authority We reject, proscribe and condemn; and We wish and command that
they be considered as absolutely rejected by all the sons of the Church.
Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura
ON
SALVATION
Vatican II pastoral
opinion:
The separated churches and communities
as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have
been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of
salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as
means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of
grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church. Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis
Redintegratio
Catholic Doctrine:
The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of
those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and
heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will
go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the Devil and his angels, unless
before death they are joined with her... Pope Eugene IV, Council
of Florence
ON ACCOMODATION OF
CATHOLIC TRUTH TO THE WORLD
Vatican II pastoral
opinion:
May the faithful,
therefore, live in very close union with the men of their time. Let them strive
to understand perfectly their way of thinking and feeling as expressed in their
culture. Let them blend modern science and its theories and the understanding
of the most recent discoveries with Christian morality and doctrine.... Thus
their religious practice and morality can keep pace with their scientific
knowledge and with an ever - advancing technology... Decree on the Church in the
Modern World, Gaudium
et Spes
Catholic Doctrine:
The Roman pontiff can and must reconcile himself
with human progress, with liberalism and with modern and human culture. – condemned.
Blessed Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors
ON RELATIONS WITH FALSE
RELIGIONS
Vatican II pastoral
opinion:
Upon the Moslems, too, the Church looks with esteem...They adore
the one God...though they do not acknowledge Jesus as God they revere Him as a
prophet.... In addition they await the day of judgment when God will give each
man his due.... and give worship to God especially through prayer, almsgiving
and fasting. Decree
on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate
Catholic Doctrine:
...that
false opinion which considers all religions more or less good and
praiseworthy... Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived,
but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by
little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism...from which it clearly follows
that one who supports those who hold on these theories and attempt to realize
them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion. Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos
Why
is John Henry Cardinal Newman regarded by Modernists as their Spiritual Father?
– Because he was! So why do
“Conservative Catholics” admire Newman? Because
he explained how dogma can be discarded.
“Dr. Newman is the most
dangerous man in England. And you will see that he will make use of the laity
against your Grace. You must not be afraid of him. It will require much
prudence, but you must be firm, as the Holy father sill places his confidence
in you; but if you yield and do not fight the battle of the Holy See against
the detestable spirit growing up in England, he will begin to regret Cardinal
Wiseman, who knew how to keep the laity in order.”
Msgr. George Talbot, Papal
Chamberlain, Letter to Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, after Pope Pius IX
suppressed a plan for Dr. John Henry Newman going to Oxford to establish an
inter-faith oratory.
An English Catholicism, of
which Newman is the highest type, is the old Anglican, patristic, literary,
Oxford tone transplanted into the Church... In one word, it is a worldly
Catholicism, and it will have the worldly on its side, and will deceive many.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning,
on Dr. John Henry Cardinal Newman
Another influential writer during the last century was Lord Acton (Sir
John Dalberg), who was famous for his critical historicism and also renowned
for his friendship with (Rev. Johann von) Dollinger (a Munich priest and
professor at the University, excommunicated for rejecting the dogma of papal
infallibility). Acton was almost excommunicated, as Dollinger was, but managed
to maintain the appearance of orthodoxy and remain in the Church. As liberal as
Lord Acton was, and although he sided with Newman in fighting the dogma of
Infallibility, he came to the same conclusion as (Cardianl Henry Edward)
Manning regarding Newman’s heterodox position. In a letter written by Acton a
few weeks before Manning’s death, after mentioning the ‘personal aversion to
Manning’ displayed by Newman he said, “Many will wonder how anybody who saw
much of him (Newman) could remain a Catholic — assuming that Newman really was
one.” Acton, although an ally of Newman in editing the liberal journal The
Rambler, was not baffled by Newman’s prosaic tact. Acton went much further than
Manning in his strictures on his old ally. He described Newman as “a sophist,
the manipulator and not the servant of truth.” When men of diametrically
opposed beliefs, as Acton and Manning, agree in their judgment of another man
whom they so well knew, the assumption that they are not both in error is not
unreasonable.
John Edward Courtenay Bodley, On Cardinal John Henry Newman
DOGMA IS THE PROXIMATE RULE OF FAITH; DOGMA is revealed doctrine
formally defined by the Church. The pope is the necessary but insufficient
means by which DOGMA is declared.
Hence, the distinction is made betewen
the Remote and the Proximate Rule of Faith.
The remote Rule of Faith is the Objective Deposit, [Scripture and
Tradition], It contains revealed truths which - for some reason or other - were
forgotten, obscure, or not sufficiently understood. Hence, they were broght into discussion, or
denied without injury to the Faith until they became clear or werer defined by
the Church. The Proximate Rule of Faith
is the teaching of the Church sufficiently proposed and manifestly promulgated
to the Faithful, [DOGMA]. If this
Proximate Rule of Faith proclaims anything as belonging to the Remote Rule
of Faith, it can no longer be challenged
without shipwreck of the Faith. For
unity of faith is whole and entire only while there is no dissent with the
Proximate Rule of Faith. On this point
Gregory of Valentia declares: "The Church has from darkness brought to
light wth her infallible authority some doctrines which, through human
negligence or malice or perversity of mind, remained concealed. And mayhap there are some still hidden in the
Church."
Msgr. George Agius, D.D., J.C.D.,
Tradition and the Church
Worth
Repeating: The SCHISM is HERE and Leo is just a dull echo of Francis/Bergoglio!
COMMENT: This
book in the article below provides an interpretation of Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia. It is addressed to
bishops with a “merciful heart” and offers an interpretation that is consistent
with the interpretation approved in the private letter sent by Pope Francis to
the bishops of Argentina as well as with the interpretation of Cardinal
Schornborn who Pope Francis publically identified as its ‘official
interpretor.’ These bishops say that the proper understanding and application
is that any Catholic living in public adultery based upon their own private
judgment in the internal forum can declare themselves worthy to receive Holy
Communion and absolution in the sacrament of Penance and therefore cannot be
denied these sacraments. It is given
semi-official approval by its publication in L’Osservatore Romano.
Pope
Leo XIV in a message to to the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life holding
a seminar entitled, “Evangelizing
with Families Today and Tomorrow,” endorsed Amoris Laetitia by directly quoting his predecessor from Amoris
Laetitia §76, writing the “Gospel of the family also nourishes seeds that
are still waiting to grow,” praising its “basis for caring for those plants
that are wilting and must not be neglected.”
Now the Novus Ordo, which may
be nothing more than a memorial meal as it was initially and officially defined
by Pope Paul VI, perhaps giving the Novus Ordo communion wafer to a person in objective
mortal sin is not a real problem. But what is certainly a grave sin is that
these persons can expect to be absolved by a confessor in the sacrament of
Penance without confessing or repentance of mortal sin. This does not represent
a change in the Church’s teaching. It
represents the active effort of a Francis (and now Leo) and his minions to
destroy Catholic doctrine and morality. As St. Thomas said, “All heretics are
schismatics,” the schism has long been present with every post-conciliar pope who
have repeatedly denied Catholic dogma. It is more evident each passing day and
every Catholic will have to pick sides. God cannot let an open attack upon the
sacrament of marriage go unpunished. Their hypocrisy is oozing from every pore.
Imagine if a Catholic with “humility, discretion and love for the Church and
her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a more
perfect response to it” arrives at traditional Catholicism, what kind of
response can be expect from the local bishop and Rome? If you want to know read our OPEN LETTERS!
After all, a “merciful heart” has its limits!
“If, as a result of the process
of discernment, undertaken with “humility, discretion and love for the Church
and her teaching, in a sincere search for God’s will and a desire to make a
more perfect response to it” (Amoris
Laetitia 300), a separated or divorced person who is living in a new
relationship manages, with an informed and enlightened conscience, to
acknowledge and believe that he or she are at peace with God, he or she cannot
be precluded from participating in the sacraments of Reconciliation and the
Eucharist (see AL, notes 336 and 351).”
Bishops Charles J Scicluna and
Mario Grech, Guide for the Interpretation
of Chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia: An Invitatiion to the Bishops of Merciful
Hearts. This received semi-official
approbation by being featured in the publication, L’Osservatore Romano, 1-2017
"You know Gaza is interesting. It's a phenomenal location on the
sea, the best weather—you know, everything's good. It's like some beautiful things
could be done with it. It's very interesting. Some fantastic things could be
done with Gaza."
President Donald Trump, On the rebuilding of Gaza for Israel
COMMENT:
According to the latest figures released by the Gaza Ministry of Health
on December 23, 2025, Israel had killed at least 70,937 Palestinians and
wounded 171,192; of those identified fatalities, 53% were women, children or
elderly. But the estimate is difficult to make. This estimate from the Ministry
of Health is collected from hospital records and in May of 2025 the United
Nations reported that 94% of the hospitals in Gaze had been destroyed. It is
not possible 
to know how many Palestinians are buried under the rubble, nor how many
will die from starvation and disease. There were 2.23 million Palestinians in
Gaza before the conflict and relief workers estimate the current population
requiring aid at 1.87 million. The difference is 360,000.
The picture on the right is six bags containing the remains of children
killed in the bombing of a school. The picture on the left is northern area of
Gaze with no structure left standing. This killing and destruction was
accomplished by American made planes dropping 2,000 pound American made bombs.
The specific bomb used by Israelis on the school building was a Boeing GBU-39
designed to penetrate warships and hardened targets. It splinters into small
fast moving shrapnel segments that can penetrate three feet of reinforced
concrete. In an interview Jonathan Pollard,
the Jewish spy while working as a clerk for Naval Intelligence delivered to
Israel what Scott Ritter called the "Crown Jewels" of U.S.
Intelligence Singles and was sentenced to life in prison in 1987, said that
Israel has promised President Trump tax free concessions on anything he builds
in Gaza. The picture below is the visionary Trump plan, directed by his Jewish
son-in-law Jared Kushner, for turning Gaza everything in life Trump thinks is
important. The Blessed Virgin Mary said at Fatima, "Only the Lady of the
Rosary can help you" through devotion to her Immaculate Heart, the Rosary,
and the First Saturdays of Reparation. Whatever good President Trump may
occasionally do, in the end he cannot fix anything.
Pope Leo appoints pro-LGBT archbishop as secretary for Dicastery for
Clergy
Archbishop Carlo Roberto Maria Redaelli's pro-LGBT views were recounted
in a description of his response to the same-sex 'marriage' of a Catholic scout
leader.
LifeSiteNews | Jan 22, 2026 — Pope
Leo XIV has appointed a controversial and homosexualist archbishop to a
prominent role in the Vatican.
Archbishop
Carlo Roberto Maria Redaelli of Gorizia was named today as the new Secretary
for the Dicastery for Clergy.
Raedelli and his pro-LGBT views were
mentioned in a 2020 book by Luciano Moia, a senior journalist for the Italian
Bishops’ Conference’s daily newspaper Avvenire. In his book, Moia argues that
the Church should look at “chastity” within a same-sex relationship the same
way in which it looks at chastity within marriage.
As an example of how the Church should
begin to do this, the author cited Raedelli’s response to the same-sex
‘marriage’ in 2017 of a homosexual Catholic scout leader.
In Moia’s words, Raedelli “threw everyone off. He refused the role of
the judge, he didn’t absolve, but neither did he condemn. He invited the
community to reflect together to understand if, even from such a divisive
occurrence, one can receive aspects of grace. An intervention in search of
moderation and of that invitation to welcome, discern and integrate that
impregnates the magisterium of Pope Francis.”
Contrary to the attitudes of Moia and
Archbishop Redaelli, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is very clear on
homosexuality:
Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which
presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always
declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary
to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not
proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no
circumstances can they be approved.
Only after stating that homosexual acts
cannot be approved does the catechism move on to a discussion of chastity. In
other words, chastity for people with homosexual inclinations plainly means
absolute continence.
Redaelli has served as auxiliary bishop of
Milan from 2004 to 2012, and as Archbishop of Gorizia, in northeastern Italy,
since 2012. A canon lawyer by training, he has been at the center of several
controversies over the years. For example, the archbishop has previously
attracted attention for his positions on the Traditional Latin Mass.
During the Italian Bishops’ Conference General Assembly in Rome in
November 2018, Redaelli had questioned the legal basis of Pope Benedict XVI’s
2007 motu proprio Summorum Pontificum.
The Pope stated that the 1962 Roman Missal had never been abrogated and
could be freely used. However, according to the Italian blog Messainlatino.it,
Redaelli stated that the Missal promulgated by Pope John XXIII had in fact been
abrogated by Pope Paul VI, rendering Summorum Pontificum juridically
ineffective. On this basis, the motu proprio was described as a “juridical
non-sense,” and the Traditional Latin Mass as not legitimately liberalized.
However, Redaelli’s claim is juridically
wrong because it rests on a false premise. No explicit act ever abrogated the
1962 Roman Missal. Under canon law (see canon 21), “in a case of doubt, the
revocation of a pre-existing law is not presumed.” Furthermore, Pope Benedict
XVI did not grant a derogation or indult but formally recognized a right that
had never been suppressed.
As Secretary of the Dicastery for Clergy,
Archbishop Redaelli will hold a key administrative role within one of the most
influential departments of the Roman Curia. Under articles 113–120 of
Praedicate Evangelium, the dicastery oversees matters relating to diocesan
clergy, including their pastoral ministry, discipline, ongoing formation, and
material support. [.....]
COMMENT: Pope Leo's appointment meets two
important criteria: He is accepting of homosexuals, and therefore, will not be
a problem for homosexuals in the clergy that he will oversee; and, he is intent
in doing away with the Indult. It is Bishop Redaelli that understands the legal
standing Summorum Pontificum while the Indult conservative Catholics cannot
figure it out. Summorum Pontificum was abrogated by Pope Francis' Traditionis
Custodes so the argument is really moot. Be that as it may, there was never a
Roman Missal published in 1962. There were several changes in the Missal in
1962 just as there were changes before 1962 and there would be in the years
that followed 1962. Each change in the Missal abrogated the previous usage. The
Missal that was in usage at the end of 1962, the last change being addition of
St. Joseph's name to the canon in December, was changed in 1965, 1967, and
1969. Redaelli's claim that the 1962 Missal usage was juridically suppressed by
Paul VI is correct. It was Benedict/Ratzinger who was dealing from the bottom
of the deck when he said that the 1962 usage had not been abrogated or legally
suppressed. Shortly after the publication of Summorum Pontificum
Benedict/Ratzinger tried to clean up the historical record by abrogating the
two documents of Paul VI that did so. What should be recognized is that
Benedict/Ratzinger implied that the 1962 usage could be suppressed but lied in
claiming that that did not happen. What is certain is that Benedict/Ratzinger
said that those who used the 1962 Missale were exercising the privilege of a
"legal right" granted by the legislator and not a moral and doctrinal
right from God. He changed the 1962 usage from the Indult of JPII into a grant
of legal privilege. It was Francis/Bergoglio who returned it to an Indult in
Traditionis Custodes where it exists today. Those who have accepted the use of
the 1962 Bugnini transitional Missal by grant of Indult and/or legal privilege
have no legal grounds to complain when the grant is taken away. Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission
refused the offer to become an Indult community for this very reason. We offer
the pre-Bugnini "received and approved" immemorial Roman rite not by
grant of legal privilege or Indult but by our rights as baptized Catholics
derived from of our duty to worship God as God Himself has determined that He
wants to be worshiped.
St. Raymond of
Pennafort: Dominican Friar, Priest, Master of the Order
A renowned doctor of canon law and notable writer, Raymond of Pennafort
(1175 – 1275) joined the Dominican Order in 1222, after a distinguished
academic career in Barcelona and Bologna. His two principal works are his Summa
Casuum on penitential discipline and his compilation of the
decretals of canon law, commissioned by Pope Gregory IX. This collection of
conciliar and papal decrees became a standard work for canon lawyers for nearly
seven hundred years. St. Raymond later became the third master of the Order.
According to Dominican tradition, he once rebuked the king of Aragon for his
immoral behavior. When St. Raymond attempted to leave the island of Majorca and
return to Spain, he could not because the kind had forbidden all sailors to
give him passage. St. Raymond placed his cappa, the black mantle of the
Dominican habit, on the water, stepped on it, and sailed to the mainland.
CANON LAW and the Judgment of a
heretical pope
Comment:
The Decretals of Gratian is a collection of canonical
texts compiled in the 12th century. Pope Gregory IX in 1230 directed St.
Raymond of Pennafort, the distinguished Dominican, to organize an addendum
to the code to include legal codes adopted since the time of Gratian but the
work became a much more extensive revision. Working from
the Decretals of Gratian, St. Raymond wrote a five volume edition of
the Decretals that became
the Corpus iuris canonici which served as the legal code
for the Latin Church’s canon law from that time until the promulgation of the
Code of Canon Law in 1917.
Decretum Gratiani, which was included in the
old Corpus Iuris Canonici, affirmed that a Pope who deviates
from right doctrine (i.e.: a notorious public heretic) can be
judged. The canon states that the "pope judges all and is judged by
no-one, unless he is found to have departed from the faith":
‘Hujus culpas redarguere præsumit mortalium nullus, quia cunctos ipse judicaturus a nemine est judicandus,
nisi
deprehendatur a fide devius (dist. XL, C. 6)’.
When the revised Code of Canon Law (Codex Iuris Canonici 1917)
came into force, the Church eliminated from the new legislation the phrase "unless he is found to have
departed from the faith." This deletion was continued in the 1983
code. Although the phrase, "unless he is found to have departed from
the faith," was not included in the 1917 and the 1983 codes, the
canonical commentary still regards the phrase as legally binding:
‘Canon 1404 – The
First See is judged by no one.‘
COMMENTARY: "Canon 1404 is not a
statement about the personal impeccability or inerrancy of the Holy Father.
Should, indeed, the pope fall into heresy, it is understood that he would lose
his office. To fall from Peter’s faith is to fall from his chair."
New Commentary on
the Code of Canon Law, John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, and Thomas J. Green
eds. (New York: Paulist, 2000), p. 1,618.
The code is the compilation of laws governing the Church as social
institution. Most of the laws in the code are of ecclesiastical positive human
laws grounded upon human authority, however, many of the legal codes are divine
positive laws grounded upon divine authority or upon natural law. If a human
law is deleted from the code, the law ceases to bind. If a law of divine
authority is deleted from the code, the law continue in force for the human
authority of the Church cannot overturn the law of God. This self-evident
principle is stated in the code itself. Consequently, the commentary cited above is a recognition
that the pope cannot be judged "unless he is found to have departed from
the faith" is of divine origin. It is necessarily a divine law
because the papacy is a divine institution established directly by Jesus Christ
and therefore governed in its essence only by divine laws. In other words,
if it were not a divine law, the Church could not propose a human law to judge
what was established by God.
Therefore, it is of divine law that permits a heretical pope to be
judged. Importantly, although the law permits a heretical pope to be judged, it
says nothing about who and how a pope is to be judged regarding heresy and it
does not address penalties. It says nothing about removal from office. If the
law intended the removal from office the law itself would have to state the
penalty and provide a mechanism for its determination and enforcement.
So now it falls to opinions regarding the judgment of a heretical pope.
Most theologians believe that it is "understood" that the removal
from office necessarily follows from a judgment of heresy often citing the
scriptural and traditional admonition to avoid heretics:
"A man that
is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid: Knowing that he,
that is such a one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own
judgment" (Titus 3:10-11).
They argue that since the faithful cannot avoid a pope as head of the
Church therefore the heretical pope must lose his office. A serious problem
with this argument follows, that is, if the faithful cannot "avoid" a
pope, then there must necessarily be a pope who in fact cannot be
avoided. Therefore, those who would make the papacy vacant must also be
able to fill the office with a true pope.
But can a heretical pope be avoided? It really becomes a problem for
those who hold the pope as their proximate rule of faith and not, as they
should, dogma. For if dogma is not the proximate rule of faith then the pope
must be and he then can never be a heretic for whatever the pope holds the
dogma or doctrine to mean is what it then means and only those who disagree
with the pope are heretics. For a Catholic, dogma is the proximate rule of
faith and although a heretical pope can do immeasurable damage to the Church he
cannot touch individual souls of the faithful.
If we adhere to what the law says and nothing more we can say this: The
definition of heresy is the denial of dogma. The heretic denies dogma and the
faithful keep dogma. Those who can judge a heretical pope are the faithful. The
law does not distinguish or discriminate among the faithful as to the judgment.
Dogma is articulated for all the faithful. Its understanding does not require
any theological competence. It requires proper definition and correct grammar.
Any of the faithful, that is those who hold dogma as their proximate rule of
faith, can judge a manifestly heretical pope such as Pope Francis was. Any of
the faithful can know when a dogma is directly contradicted for the first
principles of the understanding, such as the principle of non-contradiction,
are innate in human nature. Thus all the faithful can judge, in fact must
judge, a heretical pope and so that they may not follow him in his heresy for
God has said that 'it
is not possible to deceive His elect' (Matt. 24:24). The law does
not specify the judge because the judgment rests with all the faithful, it is
universal. The law does not specify a penalty because none of the faithful have
the competency to impose a penalty and remove a heretical pope from office. It
is God who is the formal and final cause of the pope and the office of the
papacy. It is God who 'marries' the designated candidate to the papal office
and only God can remove him from it just as God removed the High Priest and
destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem and the Levitical priesthood which
can never be reconstituted.
Those who hold dogma as their proximate rule of faith recognize Pope
Francis as a heretic because he denies dogmatic truth. He preaches a different
gospel so we "receive him not into the house nor say to him, God speed
you" (2 John 10). Since he preaches a different gospel, "Let him be
anathema" because we are first "servants of Christ" (Gal 1: 8).
For in dogma, the Church has spoken and the heretic Pope Francis "will not
hear the church, (therefore) let him be to thee as the heathen and publican
(Matt 18:17).
The job of the faithful is to keep the faith.
Dogmas
“are to give light, not to receive light from human reason”!
I answer: The obligation to
believe what God says is a natural duty, it is a natural law, dictated by the
common sense of reason which the Creator has deposited in every human soul. The
Church only enforces this law, which existed before she herself existed,
because from all eternity it was a truth that the creature is bound to believe
the word of the Creator. If the Church allows no denial, no doubt, no
alteration or misconstruction of any of her dogmas, it is because the veracity
of the Son of God, who has revealed these truths, is attacked when any of His
doctrines are denied or doubted. These dogmas are so many fixed stars in the
firmament of holy Church. They cannot be reached by the perversity and
frivolity of man. He may close his eyes against them and deny their existence;
he may misrepresent them and look at them through glasses stained the color of
every prejudice; but he cannot do away with them altogether, nor change in any
way their natural brightness and brilliancy. Like the stars that deck the vault
of heaven, they are to give light, not to receive light from human reason. They
are the word of God, and what God says is truth, that cannot be made untruth.
The mind that receives truth is enlightened thereby; the mind that denies or
misrepresents it is darkened and corrupted.
Besides, every dogma of faith is
to the Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also
an incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and
derive other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that
the beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear
of exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which
if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, world not be able to
contain the books that should be written.”
The Catholic Church, by
enforcing firm belief in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were
given by Jesus Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it
from going astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the
mind from exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine
truth, and a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a
man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things
and old.” …. They are new because newly enacted, declared, defined; they are
old because they contain no new revelation or any assumption of power never granted
by Christ, but simply old truths under new forms, the old power exercised under
new circumstances.
Rev. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The
Church of the Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Savior
When Pope Leo XIV met with cardinals and bishops residing in Rome at
Christmas, his Master of Ceremonies, Monsignor Marco Agostini, outed them by
identifying them on an open microphone as “culattoni tutti insieme” (all the
faggots together).
Anyone who questions Agostini’s statement is encouraged to read In
the Closet of the Vatican
by Frédéric Martel who estimated that around 80% of the
clergy working in the Vatican are homosexuals. The 555-page work is the
result of over 1,500 interviews with people in the Vatican and in 30 countries:
among them, 41 cardinals, 52 bishops and monsignors, 45 apostolic nuncios and
foreign ambassadors.
Some of Martel’s conclusions include:
·
The
Vatican has one of the biggest gay communities in the world….it is one huge
closet.
·
The
Church has become sociologically homosexual. It is responsible for countless
instances of sexual abuse that are undermining it from within.
·
The
priesthood is (now) the ideal escape route for young homosexuals. Homosexuality
is one of the keys to their vocation.
·
There are
more and more homosexuals as one rises through the Catholic hierarchy. In the
College of Cardinals and at the Vatican, the preferential process is said to be
perfected; homosexuality becomes the rule, heterosexuality the exception.
Gene Thomas Gomulka, is a sexual abuse victims’ advocate,
investigative reporter, author, and screenwriter. A former Navy Captain Chaplain
Corps, seminary instructor, and diocesan Respect Life Director. Gomulka was
ordained a priest for the Altoona-Johnstown diocese and later made a Prelate of
Honor (Monsignor) by JPII.
COMMENT: Apparently Msgr. Agostini did not realize that the microphone
was on when he said, "All the faggots together." For his indiscretion
he has been dismissed from his position. While not knowing anything about
Martel's book that is recommended by Rev. Gomulka, it is just another addition
to the a long list, and growing longer, of documentation of the Homosexual
Lobby's infiltration and control of the Novus Ordo Church. Traditional
Catholics have been exposing this crime for a long time. One of the priests
that help in the establishment of Saints Peter & Paul Roman Catholic
Mission was the late Rev. Enrique Rueda authored The Homosexual Network
published in 1982. Rev. Rueda inspired the work of Randy Engel who continued
his work with her book, Rite of Sodomy published in 2006. The late Rev. John
O'Connor, O.P., a traditional Dominican, exposed in detail the homosexual
takeover of the Dominican Order in the United States and the failure of Rome to
do anything about it. The Polish priest, Rev. Dariusz Oko, a theology professor at the Pontifical
University of John Paul II in Krakow, was fined in Germany in 2022 along with
his published, for "hate speech" in an article that referred to
homosexual priests as "a colony of parasites", "a cancerous
growth" and "a homosexual plague" in the Church. He also called
the "gay-affirming movement" a "homo-heresy." The book
Goodbye, Good Men by Michael S. Rose is another work that documents the
homosexual infiltration of the Church. Should we be surprised? Remember Bella Dodd, under sworn testimony before
Congress in the 1950s, claimed that she had helped place 1,500 committed
communists into Catholic seminaries. None of these homosexuals will ever give
up their sinecures in the Novus Ordo church network. Jesus Christ began and
ended His public life with the 'cleansing of the Temple' driving the profane
from the house of God. Call to mind what God did to Rome in 1527 when the
mercenary Protestant army of Charles V sacked Rome. The destruction and death
lasted about nine months. This cleansing of Rome made possible the rebuilding
and reformation accomplished by the Council of Trent. The punishment that is at
the door today will be a pitiless destruction of the entire Novus Ordo
structure and make possible the great restoration that will follow.
"All ceremonies are professions of
faith, in which the interior worship of God consists. Now man can make
profession of his inward faith, by deeds as well as by words: and in either
profession, if
he makes a false declaration, he sins mortally."
St. Thomas Aquinas, (ST, I-II, Q. 103,
Art. 4)
Queers Always
Hang Together
“Sodomy Is a Gift from God….
Those who oppose sodomy should be debarred from church seminaries.”
Rev. Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., an Oxford
scholar and international celebrity appointed by Pope Francis to the Pontifical
Council of Justice and Peace in 2015. On 6 October 2024, Pope Francis announced
that Radcliffe would be created a cardinal on December 8 but was the date was
later changed to 7 December. Pope Francis, granting him a dispensation from the
current requirement that all cardinals must be bishops, made him a cardinal
deacon and assigned him to the Chiesa dei
Santi Nomi di Gesu e Maria. He participated as a cardinal elector in the 2025
conclave that elected Pope Leo as the sole elector that was not a bishop.
Pro-LGBT Cdl. Radcliffe urges ‘openness to novelty’ in address to
extraordinary consistory
Reports from inside the Vatican suggest growing unease among the cardinals
after Pope Leo’s two-day gathering opened with tightly controlled group
sessions led by liberal voices.
LifeSiteNews | Gaetano Masciullo | Thu
Jan 8, 2026
VATICAN CITY— Pro-LGBT Cardinal Timothy
Radcliffe delivered the opening meditation at the consistory in Rome by urging 
cardinals to remain “in the boat of Peter” amid global crises and
Church divisions while suggesting “memory and openness to novelty must coexist
in the life of the Church.”
On the afternoon of January 7, Pope Leo XIV
opened a two-day extraordinary consistory at the Vatican, convening cardinals
from around the world to reflect on four major themes – the mission of the
Church in today’s world, synodality, the relationship between the Holy See and
the particular Churches, and the liturgy – though only the former two were
selected for detailed discussion, a decision that, according to off-the-record
accounts reported by the Italian blog Messainlatino, prompted discouragement
and concern among several participants.
“I
am here to listen,” Pope Leo XIV told the cardinals in his opening address,
stressing that the meeting was intended not to produce documents but “to
continue a conversation that will help me in serving the mission of the entire
Church.”
According to the blog Messainlatino,
multiple unnamed cardinals described the first session as poorly prepared and
structurally restrictive, noting in particular that there were no free
interventions scheduled for the opening day. Discussions were conducted in
small, pre-assigned working groups based on language and curial affiliation, a
format some participants reportedly said did not resemble the traditional
consistory model of the past.
The same source reported that, for reasons
of time, the theme of the liturgy was effectively excluded from substantive
group discussion, despite being listed among the four initial topics. Several
cardinals allegedly lamented what they perceived as a lack of interest in the
Church understood as “mystery,” and said that the overall approach appeared to
be in continuity with the synodal processes of recent years.
The opening meditation was delivered by
Cardinal Timothy Radcliffe, O.P., a leftist prelate who has praised “gay
sexuality” in blasphemous remarks, celebrated “LGBT Masses,” supported
admitting homosexuals to the priesthood, and encouraged Catholics to watch
homosexual movies and read homosexual novels.
In his reflection on the Gospel of Mark
(6:45–52), Radcliffe urged the cardinals to “remain in the boat of Peter” amid
contemporary storms facing both the world and the Church, including war,
inequality, sexual abuse scandals, and ideological divisions.
Radcliffe warned against remaining “on the
shore” out of fear or disagreement, arguing that unity and mutual charity among
the cardinals were essential to supporting the Pope. He stated that “memory and
openness to novelty must coexist in the life of the Church,” citing Evangelii
Gaudium and Saint Augustine to argue that Tradition and renewal are
inseparable.
Messainlatino also reports that upcoming
sessions of the consistory are expected to open with reflections by pro-LGBT
Cardinal José Tolentino de
Mendonça and Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, both widely regarded as
prominent liberal voices within the College of Cardinals.
COMMENT: Cardinal Radcliffe
is a notorious homosexual. Pope Leo in selecting him as the spiritual director
of the consistory is making an open declaration that the spirit of the
consistory is NOT the Holy Spirit. The Mission of the Church was established by
its founder, Jesus Christ. It was established with a specific commission to
"make disciples of all nations." Synodality is a denial of the dogma
of the universal jurisdiction of the pope. The Church's relationship with
non-Catholic churches is established by God: "There is no salvation
outside the Catholic Church." It is the relationship is between those who
can be saved and those who are not. Finally, the liturgy is the work of God Who
dogmatically established at the Council of Trent: "Those that say that the
received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn administration of
the sacraments may be changed into other new rites... by any pastor of the
churches whomsoever: anathema sit.
Pope Leo begins a new catechism series dedicated to Vatican II
Pope Leo on Wednesday praised the ‘liturgical reform’ launched by Vatican
II that laid the groundwork for the revolutionary Novus Ordo Missae, the new
Mass.
LifeSiteNews | Emily Mangiaracina | Jan
8, 2026
VATICAN CITY— Pope Leo XIV announced
Wednesday that he is beginning a catechesis series to “closely” study the Second
Vatican Council, which many priests and scholars have affirmed to be in need of
correction.
“We are beginning a new catechesis series dedicated to the Second
Vatican Council and to a fresh reading of its Documents,” Leo wrote in an X
post on January 7. “The Council’s Magisterium remains even today the North Star
guiding the Church’s journey.”
“Closely studying the Council documents
will help us to be attentive interpreters of the signs of the times, and to
proclaim the Gospel to all,” Leo said Wednesday during his general audience.
In Leo’s strong support for Vatican II, he aligns himself with Pope
Francis, who described the Council as “a visit of God to His Church,” and as
“irreversible.”
The pope has not given further details thus far on the forthcoming
“catechesis” of Vatican II. However, during his general audience on Wednesday,
he highlighted aspects of the Council that he highly esteems.
For example, Leo praised the “liturgical reform” launched by Vatican
II, which laid the groundwork for the revolutionary Novus Ordo Missae,
the new Mass. The Council “set in motion an important liturgical reform by
placing at the center the mystery of salvation and the active and conscious
participation of the entire People of God,” Leo said in his general audience.
Liturgist and author Dr. Peter Kwasniewski
has pointed out that the idea articulated in the Second Vatican Council’s Sacrosanctum Concilium that “In the
restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active
participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else” is
backward.
“It cannot escape our notice that this text
turns things on their head,” Kwasniewski remarked in 2019. “Where Pius X had
said that what should be ‘provided for before everything else’ is the ‘sanctity
and dignity of the temple,’ Vatican II says that ‘the aim to be considered
before all else’ is ‘full and active participation by all the people.’ In doing
so, it inverts the hierarchy of goods. Now the worship of God and its right
condition becomes secondary to the people’s involvement.”
Pope Leo also on Wednesday lauded Vatican II for being responsible for
a Church committed to “seeking the truth through the way of ecumenism,
interreligious dialogue and dialogue with people of good will,” as if the Church
needs to seek truth outside of Herself. The idea that the fullness of the truth
is not found within the Catholic Church is heretical.
Leo’s description of the Second Vatican
Council during his general audience and in his social media post as the
“guiding star” of the Church’s path suggests he sees this council as surpassing
in importance every other council of the Church, which is especially
significant given that Vatican II appeared to contradict previous magisterial
councils in certain respects.
Prelates such as Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Archbishop Carlo Maria
Viganò have pointed to errors in the Second Vatican Council regarding religious
freedom and other religions, and in doing so have been supported by many
priests and scholars.
For example, Bishop Schneider has said Lumen Gentium is “wrong” and errs by suggesting that Christians and
Muslims participate together in the same act of adoration when it states that
“Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the
one and merciful God.”
It errs because Muslims worship on a
natural level, at the same level of anyone who adores God with the “natural
light of reason,” whereas Christians adore God on a supernatural level as His
adopted children “in the truth of Christ and in the Holy Spirit.”
“This is a substantial difference,”
Schneider observed. He explained that the use of the phrase “with us”
represents a relativization of the act of adoration of God and also of
Christians’ “sonship.”
In addition, Muslims reject the Trinity,
which they consider to be an idolatrous idea. Christ made clear that “whoever
rejects me rejects the one who sent me” (Luke 10:16) and “no one comes to the
Father except through me” (John 14:6).
Schneider criticized texts suggesting that
Buddhists and Hindus can attain illumination on their own, without “the grace
of Christ,” as a heresy. Nostra Aetate
claims that “in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery,” and that
Buddhism “teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be
able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own
efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination.”
The German prelate has also criticized Dignitatis Humanae for putting forth “a
theory never before taught by the constant Magisterium of the Church, i.e.,
that man has the right founded in his own nature, ‘not to be prevented from
acting in religious matters according to his own conscience, whether privately
or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.’”
Archbishop Viganò agreed with Bishop
Schneider in his criticism of the Second Vatican Council, noting that Vatican
II’s formulation of religious freedom “contradict[s] the testimony of Sacred
Scripture and the voice of Tradition, as well as the Catholic Magisterium which
is the faithful guardian of both.”
It is also noteworthy that Vatican II’s
Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis
Redintegratio, condones “prayers in common” with our “separated brethren”
in “certain special circumstances, such as the prescribed prayers “for unity,”
and during ecumenical gatherings.”
However, the Councils of the Church have
repeatedly made clear that Catholics cannot pray with heretics or schismatics,
let alone those of other religious practices:
· “One must neither pray nor sing psalms with heretics, and whoever shall
communicate with those who are cut off from the communion of the Church,
whether clergy or layman: let him be excommunicated.” — Council of Carthage
· “No one shall pray in common with heretics and schismatics.” — Council
of Laodicea
· If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the synagogue of the Jews
or to the meeting houses of the heretics to join in prayer with them, let them
be deposed and deprived of communion. If any bishop or priest or deacon shall
join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from communion. — II Council
of Constantinople
COMMENT: Pope
Leo is just another heretic embracing the heresies of Vatican II, a pastoral
council that has by every statistical analysis has proven to be an utter pastoral
failure. A pastoral approach to pastoral problem is comparable to a business
plan to the operation of the business. Now is a business plan leads to
financial ruin of a business the board of directors will immediately fire the
CEO, his staff and advisors, and seek another with a different business plan.
What can be said about the Novus Ordo popes is that the "pastoral
plan" they have adopted from Vatican II is not a failure but rather a
resounding success because the purpose of the plan is to destroy the Church of
Jesus Christ. What they are doing is what they have always intended to do. The
Church was established in Truth by Truth Itself and does not "seek"
truth from those who deny it.
In 2005 the Dover, PA electorate removed the School Board
members that permitted Intelligent Design to be considered in as a possible
explanation for the natural order found in the material universe. Scientists,
while affirming that the natural order in the universe must necessarily be the
result of mechanical chance, “listened with a vast radio telescopic network for
signals (from outer space) that resembled coded intelligence and were not
merely random” for evidence of intelligent life in the universe. If these scientists affirm that the DNA code
of biological life, which is clearly goal directed, is “merely random” and not
a sign of “intelligence” how can they be open to recognize any sign of
intelligible communication!? Is this WSJ article evidence that there is no
intelligence design in the Dover, PA electorate or in modern science?
Science
Increasingly Makes the Case for God
The odds of life existing on
another planet grow ever longer. Intelligent design, anyone?
Eric Metaxas: Dec. 25, 2014
In 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.
Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 27 zeros—planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 24 zeros—planets capable of supporting life.
With such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large, expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the 1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search continues with private funds. As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely bubkis—0 followed by nothing.
What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.
Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”
As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.
Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.
Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?
There’s more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.
Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?
Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology…. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”
Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”
The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself.
Mr. Metaxas is the author, most recently, of “Miracles: What They Are, Why They Happen, and How They Can Change Your Life” (Dutton Adult, 2014).
JP II the
'Grate' - if somehow he made it to Purgatory -
ask him to turn out the lights and lock the place up when he is the last
to leave.
John
Paul II was a pope under whose reign we had the most horrific scandal in the
Church's 2000-year history. Thousands of
children were molested by priests and bishops he ordained. By the end of his pontificate, lawsuits were
bankrupting Catholic Churches all over the world; and between one third and one
half of the clergy (sources available upon request) were admittedly homosexual,
with a significant percentage being pederasts whom the pope didn't even admit
existed when he was told of their crimes, much less did anything to stop them,
even when stark evidence was brought before him, as in the case of Legionnaires
leader Marciel Maciel. At the same time
he hid other clerics from prosecution, as in the case of Cardinal Bernard Law
of Boston.
This
was the pope who allowed the Vatican Bank's corruption that started under Paul
VI to continue with little or no reform; and who protected its chief
perpetrator, Bishop Paul Marcinkus, from prosecution. He did nothing to investigate the suspected
murder of John Paul I, the very pope who made it known in the first days of his
reign that he was going to clean up the financial misdealings of his
curia. This was the pope who took 250
million dollars of the Vatican's money and gave it to Solidarity in Poland,
thereby making the Church a political institution instead of a spiritual
one. By the same token he condemned
Liberation theology because if its tendency to get involved in politics.
This
was the pope who went to the hut of an African witch doctor in 1985 and
afterward wrote, "the prayer meeting in the sanctuary at Lake Togo was
particularly striking. There I prayed
for the first time with animists."
In December 1984 he sent a
Vatican representative to the laying of the
foundation of the largest mosque in Europe.
In September 1989 he wrote to Muslim leaders and said: "In the name
of the same God we adore," without any qualifications whatsoever. In May 1999 he kissed the Koran in a public
ceremony; and in 2000 asked John the Baptist "to protect Islam." In February 1986 he received the red dust of
the Hindu religion on his forehead in honor of the goddess Shiva. In March 1986 in New Delhi he stated that
"collaboration between all religions is necessary for the good of
mankind... as Hindus, Buddhists, Jainists, and Christians, we unite to proclaim
the truth about man."
This
was the pope who invited all the world's non-Christian and pagan religions to
pray for world peace at Assisi in 1986 and Assisi in 2002 (with five additional
Assisi-like gatherings in the 1990s in various countries) and never once in
those 16 years did he preach the Gospel to them about conversion to Christ for
salvation. Instead he sent them all back
to their countries encouraging them to continue to pray to their false gods,
the very opposite that St. Paul did in Acts 17.
He paid no attention to any of his high-placed clerical advisors who
told him these acts were abominations.
This
was the pope who, against two millennia of Catholic tradition, told husbands to
be mutually submissive to women; dispensed with head coverings for women; and
allowed women and girls to be communion ministers, altar girls, and directors
of chanceries, thereby increasing the feminization of the Church amidst an
already feminized clergy who were by this time at least a third homosexual,
while another significant portion were receiving paternity suits.
This
was the pope who profusely apologized for the ecclesiastical policies of
previous popes; who had his Vatican envoy sign the 1998 Lutheran/Catholic Joint
declaration which, in direct contradiction to the Council of Trent, said
"man is justified by faith alone."
This was the pope who told the Lutherans they had a "profound
religiousness and spiritual heritage" and that Martin Luther was driven by
a "burning passion of the question of eternal salvation," and who
told the Lutheran bishops that Rome's excommunication of Luther had expired,
and that "There is a need for a new evaluation of the questions raised by
Luther and his teaching." This was
the pope who implied or taught universal salvation and that hell may not be
applicable to any human being. This was
the pope who at the very beginning of his pontificate in the 1979 encyclical Redemptor Hominis used the word
"church" 150 times but never once mentioned the word
"Catholic." This was the pope
who continually sided with liberals like Karl Rahner, Urs von Balthasar and
Raymond Brown but who would hardly give an ear to those, such as Archbishop
Lefebvre, who wanted to preserve the tradition and who decried the
anti-Catholic innovations being foisted on the Catholic populace. (Fortunately, Pope Benedict XVI saw John Paul
II's mistake and reversed the decision against Lefebvre). This was the pope who was criticized by his
own admirers for failing to discipline wayward clerics, both in their doctrinal
aberrations and moral laxity (Charles Curran, Edward Schillebeeckx, Hans Kung,
et al). Ironically, the only cleric that
was excommunicated was Lefebvre, yet he was one of the most doctrinally sound
and morally upright clerics the Church had ever known.
This
was the pope who in 1981, contrary to tradition, implied or taught that the
Jewish Old Covenant is not revoked and that Jews have a special relationship
with God, as does Paragraph 121 of his papally-signed 1994 Catechism. He continued to propagate confusing and
doctrinally fallacious teaching about the Jews and Judaism through his
cardinals who taught that the Jews did not need to convert to Christianity to
be saved since they have their own covenant with God (Kasper, Keeler,
Willebrands, George, Ratzinger, et al).
This was the first pope in history to visit Israel and who then placed
himself under Judaism by praying at the Jerusalem's Wailing Wall. This was the pope who, for the first time in
the history of the papacy, visited and prayed in Jewish synagogues - the religion
that denies more than any other that Jesus Christ is God.
Last
but not least, this was the pope who changed the Church's criterion for
sainthood, which now allows him and all his fellow 20th century popes to be
easily canonized in the face of the fact that there have been only three popes
canonized since 1294 (Pius X, d. 1914; Pius V, d. 1572; Celestine V, d.
1294). As such, the very popes who lived
and reigned during the Church's worst corruptions and scandals are now being
exonerated and place in heaven.
Robert Sungenis, Ph.D., Letter to Editor, Culture Wars Magazine
In pastoral letter, Charlotte's Bishop Martin ends altar rails for holy
Communion
National Catholic Reporter | Patricia L.
Guilfoyle | Charlotte, N.C. — December 23, 2025
Bishop
Michael Martin has established guidelines for the reception of holy Communion in the Diocese
of Charlotte to strengthen unity in worship, uphold the church's
liturgical norms and encourage active participation by the faithful.
Martin announced the new norms in a pastoral letter that affirms
the common posture of standing to receive holy Communion, encourages
priests to offer Communion under both bread and wine more often, and calls
for the broader use of trained laypeople to serve as Eucharistic ministers.
"The liturgy of the Church is the work
of God and the work on behalf of God in the life of the Church," Martin
wrote in the Dec. 17 letter. "These norms for our diocese move us together toward the
Church's vision for the fuller and more active participation of the
faithful."
In his pastoral letter, the bishop
emphasized that the celebration of the Eucharist is a communal act of worship,
not only an individual act of piety.
"Throughout the ages and within the context of our rich liturgical
traditions from the East to the West, our unity as believers in
Holy Communion is expressed through our postures and gestures that reflect
our mystical communion and unity as fellow believers," he said.
The new guidance does not replace the
diocese's general liturgical norms established in 2005, but builds upon
them and aligns closely with the Catholic Church's universal norms
(what is called the "General Instruction of the Roman Missal") and
directives set by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The pastoral letter follows months of
consultation with the diocese's Office for Divine Worship and the Presbyteral
Council of priests, which represents all priests of the diocese in
administrative and policy discussions.
In his pastoral letter, Martin affirmed the "normative
posture" for receiving holy Communion in the United States is
standing, after bowing the head as a sign of reverence.
The directive instructs any parishes that currently use altar rails for
distributing Communion to discontinue the practice and remove any portable
kneelers or prie-dieus by Jan. 16, noting that such practices are "a
visible contradiction" to the prescribed posture of standing.
"Instead," his pastoral letter states, the church
"emphasizes that receiving Holy Communion is to be done as the
members of the faithful go in procession, witnessing that the Church journeys
forward and receives Holy Communion as a pilgrim people on their
way."
In many churches, altar rails are architectural elements that
differentiate the sanctuary from the nave and once were used for Communion
distribution.
Over the past decade or so, a small number
of churches in the diocese reintroduced the use of rails or kneelers to
distribute Holy Communion, but most diocesan churches already follow the
practice of receiving Communion while standing, consistent with
U.S. norms.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop
reiterated that individuals may not be denied holy Communion if they
choose to kneel, yet he encouraged the faithful to "prayerfully consider
the blessing of communal witness that is realized when we share a common
posture."
Clergy and catechists, he added, "are
to instruct communicants according to the normative posture in the United
States" and "are not to teach that some other manner is better,
preferred, more efficacious, etc."
In guidance to pastors that accompanied the
bishop's pastoral letter, the diocese's Office for Divine Worship noted
that if a communicant wishes to kneel but is physically unable, the pastor
should address the situation privately.
"He is to catechize and remind the person that standing to receive
is no less reverent or worthy a way to receive Our Lord," advised Fr. Noah
Carter, diocesan liturgy director. "In both ways, the communicant
who is properly disposed to receive holy Communion gains the same graces and
gifts contained in the Eucharist, regardless of standing or kneeling."
In his letter, Martin also encouraged pastors, where and when
possible, to distribute holy Communion under the forms of both bread and
wine more often.
While affirming church teaching that Christ
is fully present — body, blood, soul and divinity — under either bread or wine,
he encouraged priests to consider the "fuller sign" of distributing
holy Communion under both kinds to foster "a deeper participation in
the Eucharistic mystery," consistent with prevailing church practice.
The bishop specifically noted that "a
significant number of parishes" did not resume distribution of the
Precious Blood in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. "To foster unity, it
is helpful that we all practice a similar way of distributing
Holy Communion," he said.
"Parishioners who travel from parish
to parish because of their own needs may otherwise rightly question why the
Precious Blood is always available in one church and never available in
another."
The pastoral letter specifically
recommends distributing the Precious Blood for at least one Mass every Sunday
and for major solemnities, including: Christmas, the Easter Vigil, Divine Mercy
Sunday, Pentecost, Trinity Sunday, Corpus Christi, Christ the King Sunday, and
Holy Thursday. It also encourages distributing holy Communion under both
kinds for first holy Communion Masses, wedding Masses, parish patronal
feast days and church anniversaries.
It reaffirms that the consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or
in the hand, at the discretion of the communicant.
It explicitly prohibits the practice of
intinction — dipping the host into the Precious Blood before placing it on the
communicant's tongue — at public liturgies.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop also encouraged parishes to enlist more
laypeople to help clergy with distributing holy Communion.
Priests and deacons are the "ordinary
ministers of holy Communion," while laypeople may serve as
"extraordinary ministers of holy Communion" when needed, such as
when there are too many communicants for the clergy to
distribute Communion efficiently.
In many parishes, extraordinary ministers
also take Communion to the sick and homebound.
The diocese's existing
liturgical norms already call for extraordinary ministers in such
situations and provide for people to serve in three-year terms. The new
guidelines formalize practices that are already commonplace in the diocese and
across the U.S.
They set eligibility and formation
requirements, and direct parishes to have enough eucharistic ministers
"for roughly 75 communicants" at each Mass. Parishes are also
directed to invite people to serve as extraordinary ministers and offer
training at least once a year.
To be appointed as such, a layperson must:
be a practicing Catholic who has received the sacraments of initiation; be
at least 16 years old; "demonstrate a deep reverence for and devotion to
the holy Eucharist"; be "distinguished in their Christian life, faith
and morals"; and take part in the diocese's safe environment training.
COMMENT: The immemorial rule
of receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic Church is kneeling and on the
tongue from the hands of a Catholic priest or deacon. In the Latin Rite
communion is distributed only under the appearance of bread. The current
practice of the Novus Ordo Church is by Indult granted by the Vatican at the
petition from the Novus Ordo National Conference of Catholic Bishops in the
United States. An Indult is a permission to NOT obey the law. Bishop Martin's
Letter begins with a lie. It ends with imposing the norms of the Lutheran
church on the Novus Ordites and his determination to prevent anyone from
building a Catholic sanctuary. The Lutherans do not believe in the True
Presence in their services and neither does Bishop Martin. The Novus Ordo Mass
was initially defined as a memorial meal, and if that is all it is, then the
Lutheran norms are perfectly reasonable and there is no problem with Bishop
Martin's arguments. But Bishop Martin is liar and therefore we cannot expect
him to acknowledge this truth. A PEW poll in 2019 found that only 26% for all
Catholics under 40 years of age (and only 63% of all Novus Ordites who go to
Mass at least once each week) believe in the Catholic dogma of the True
Presence. These Catholics under 40 years of age were raised on the current
Indult and have lost the Catholic faith. What an established practice does in its signification is
what it was intended to do. The intention of Bishop Martin is to destroy
the belief in any remaining Catholics of the True Presence. The argument that
standing better symbolizes that we are a "pilgrim people" has been
used for more than fifty years. It was a stupid argument in the beginning and
remains a more stupid argument today because the result of the practice are
evident. The Novus Ordo church has yet to publically acknowledge that their
church is on a pilgrimage to hell!
"ALL
HERETICS ARE SCHISMATICS." St. Thomas Aquinas quoting St. Augustine
“It is not to be
excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church.”
Pope Francis,
concluding remarks attributed to him in the Der Spiegel article on the Crisis
in the Catholic Church.
COMMENT: As if that was not Pope Francis' intention
and what in fact he had long been doing throughout his pontificate? The
question remains as to what name in history will Francis be known? But let's
leave that for later. The truth is that Conservative Catholics have never
gotten anything in its right hierarchical order. They stupidly thought the
“split” in the Church began when traditional Catholics were disobedient to
legitimate exercise of authority by resisting the overthrow of our
Ecclesiastical Traditions by which alone the Faith can be known and communicated
to others. Conservative Catholics are only now turning to face the front of
this conflict but they are unarmed for the fight. Pope Francis, who professed
the same doctrine as his conciliar predecessors, only drovethe wedge far deeper
into the Bark of Peter to “split” the Church. The Conservative Catholics are at
last alarmed because the Ship is taking on massive amounts of water.
Unfortunately, the poor Conservative Catholics who are raising their voices
against the corruption of Francis and his successor Leo will surely fail. Let's
call them the Dubiaists. The Dubiaists have doubts but no real convictions.
They will fail because they turned their backs against the literal meaning of
DOGMA long ago and cannot recognize heresy. They now have nothing from which to
mount their defense for DOGMA is the one and only weapon against an abusive
authority. Authority is subject only to Truth. and DOGMA is the most perfect
expression of Truth available to all men.
Greetings from Pope Leo to
Father Franz Schmidberger, SSPX
Pope
Leo extends his heartfelt congratulations to venerable Father Franz
Schmidberger, SSPX on the occasion of his fiftieth anniversary of his priestly
ordination and extends his apostolic blessing.
Friedrichshafen,
Germany, December 14, 2025
COMMENT: We have publically
affirmed that the SSPX was formally regularized with modernist Rome no later
than 2015 and most likely in 2012 although this is not commonly shared with its
member priests or those faithful who attend their chaples for Mass. Fr.
Schmidberger was the general superior of the SSPX after the retirement of
Archbishop Lefebvre, and after his death when Bishop Fellay became the general
superior, Fr. Schmidberger was his direct assistant. It was under the guidance
of Fr. Schmidberger that the secret negotiations with modernist Rome began in
the 1990s that would eventually lead to their regularization. This
"heartfelt" greetings and congratulations from Pope Leo is in
acknowledgment of Fr. Schmidberger's untiring commitment to betray Catholic
tradition.
"There will be two worm-ridden popes".
Blessed Virgin
Mary, Our Lady of La Salette to Melanie
The idea that there would be two worm-ridden popes is an unofficial,
unpublished prophecy of Melanie, one of two children at the apparition of La
Salette in France. It pops up in one of her letters to Fr. Roubaud back on
September 30, 1884, and it was brought to light by author Michel Corteville in
his book, Découverte du secret de La Salette. Some say
that the phrase actually translates to: “two shaky, servile, doubtful popes.”
The original French reads:
Mais avant ce temps
(des tribulations) il y aura deux fois une paix de peu de durée, deux Papes
vermoulus, plats, douteux.*
TRANSLATION: “But
before this time (of tribulations) there will be twice a peace of short
duration, two worm-eaten, flat, and doubtful Popes.”
“Living Tradition,” synonym for Immanentism of
the Modernist
The term, “living tradition,” a novelty of modernist construction given
official standing at Vatican II, conflates the subjective understanding with
the objective truth, is part of the theological justification to replace our
received traditions with novelties grounded in fantasy.
“The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and
contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take
sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as
the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and
progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in
insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about
in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers
who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of
spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching
of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the
episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.
John Paul II, explaining the
problems with Archbishop Lefebvre’s consecration of four bishops from his
failure to understand the novel Vatican II definition of tradition
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
– Even JPII did not deny this dogma!
Pope Francis Teaches:
We hold the Jewish people in special regard
because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the
call of God are irrevocable” (Rom.11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an
important part of the Sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant
and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf.
Rom. 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign
religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and
to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes. 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God
who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word. Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
The Church officially recognizes that the
People of Israel continue to be the Chosen People. Nowhere does it say: “You
lost the game, now it is our turn.” It is a recognition of the People of
Israel.
Pope Francis, On Heaven and Earth
The Catholic Church Teaches:
Hebrews 7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews 10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2 Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away”;
Hebrews 8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians 2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross”;
The Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council of Florence: [This council] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosiac law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino
Council of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St. John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on Galatians, Ch 3);
St. Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin Martyr: “Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
John Paul II: “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.” (Redemptoris Mater)
Taken from Robert Sungenis, The
Old Covenent: Revoked or Not Revoked?
Pope Leo: Don’t let tension between tradition, novelty become ‘harmful
polarizations’
EWTN | Victoria Cardiel | October 27, 2025
Pope Leo XIV said at a Mass on Sunday that no
one in the Church “should impose his or her own ideas” and asked that tensions
between tradition and novelty not become “ideological contrapositions and
harmful polarizations.”
“The supreme rule in the Church is love. No
one is called to dominate; all are called to serve,” Leo said in St. Peter’s
Basilica on Oct. 26.
“No one should impose his or her own
ideas; we must all listen to one another,” he continued. “No one is excluded;
we are all called to participate. No one possesses the whole truth; we must all
humbly seek it and seek it together.” [.....]
COMMENT: The problem
is this: the love of novelty is an ideology, Tradition along with sacred
Scripture is divine revelation. The Church always and everywhere has condemned
novelty until Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Church of Novelty embraced it. The
conflict between novelty and tradition is the conflict between God's revelation
and demonic lies; the conflict between the Church and the World. Those who are
faithful to tradition do not "impose their own ideas" but defend
God's revealed truth against the novelty of the world. The Novus Ordo Novelty
Church is "seeking truth"; the Church of Jesus Christ possesses it.
Pope Leo like his predecessor likes to characterize tradition as rigid and dead
and the novelty of modernism as mature and hopeful. This was once an intensely
debated matter but, at this time, after all the wreckage of the last 50 years
all tradition has to do is to point at the fruit of Vatican II novelty. Both
Leo and his predecessor Francis worked in South America. The total population
of South and Central America is about 600 million. Since Vatican II about 300
million have apostatized from the Catholic Church. These last two popes have
personally presided over the greatest apostasy over the shortest period of time
in the history of the Catholic Church. Anything Leo has to say, as long as he
is not sitting in the Chair of Peter, must be examined in light of this record.
Fruit of
Vatican II - Apostasy
In Honduras, the
country of the once most powerful man in the Roman Curia under
Francis/Bergoglio, Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga, a personally corrupt and
immoral man who had been a bishop in the capital since 1978, first as auxiliary then as Archbishop for 30 years,
the hierarchy led by him managed the
amazing feat of transforming that country in the first Catholic-minority nation
in Central America, a vertiginous fall from 94% to 46% in the same period -
and the same happened in Uruguay, across the Rio de la Plata from (Bergoglio's
home) Buenos Aires.
Rorate Caeli
Data Collapse of Catholic Faith in Latin America from 2014 presided
over by Pope Leo/Provost and his predecessor Francis/Begoglio
The “received and approved rites of the Catholic Church,
accustomed to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments”:
…..Because, as we will see, Catholics must
celebrate only the “received and
approved rites” of the Church as a matter of Divine Law.
God revealed this truth in Scripture
through St. Paul. Before St. Paul teaches the Corinthians liturgical and
theological details concerning the Holy Mass (consecration formula, Real
Presence), he prefaces his teaching by affirming: “For I have received of the Lord that
which I also delivered unto you…”
(I Cor 11:23). St. Paul says again: “For I delivered unto you first of all,
which I also received” (1Cor 15:3). In these and other verses, St. Paul
emphasizes that we must believe and practice only what we have “received” from
Christ and the apostles which has been “delivered” unto us, and which includes
the liturgical rites of the Church. This is a divinely revealed truth and a
matter of Faith.
The Church has taught this divine truth
throughout her history. For example, in the Papal Oath of Coronation, which
originates at least as far back as Pope St. Agatho in 678 A.D. (and which was
set aside by Paul VI), every Pope swore to change nothing of the “received
tradition.” Pope Pius IV’s Tridentine Profession of Faith,
which is binding on the souls of all Catholics, likewise expresses this
principle by requiring adherence to the
“received and approved rites of the Catholic Church used in the solemn
administration of the sacraments.” The “received
and approved rites of the Church” originate from the Spirit of Christ and
the traditions of the apostles which have been handed down to us through the
ages.
Because the “received and approved rites” are part of the Church’s infallible
expression of the unchanging Deposit of Faith, as inspired and nurtured by the
Holy Ghost, they cannot be set aside or changed into new rites. This is why the
Ecumenical Council of Trent (1545-1563) infallibly declared:
“If anyone says
that the received and approved
rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the
administration of the sacraments, may be despised or omitted by the ministers
without sin and at their pleasure, or
may be changed by any pastor of the churches to other new ones, let him be
anathema.”
Because the Council declares anathema (that
is, condemned, or severed from the Body of Christ) anyone who would set aside
or change into new rites the already “received
and approved rites” of the Church, proves that adherence to the “received and approved rites” is a
matter of Divine Law. The absolute necessity to preserve the substance of the
Church’s ancient liturgical rites is a requirement of the Faith because the
rites preserve and express that Faith. To hold that the Church’s rites can
change implies a belief that the Church’s doctrines can change, because the
rites preserve and express the doctrines. Hence, those who do not preserve the
Church’s rites (by omitting or changing them) are objectively anathema because they sin
against the Faith itself.
In light of the foregoing
condemnation, the Holy Council of Trent directed that the Roman Missal be
restored so that the faithful would know once and for all what is the “received and approved rite” of Mass.
To that end, Pope St. Pius V issued his papal bull Quo Primum Tempore to legally codify “the decrees of the Holy Council of Trent”
and render a definitive application of the Divine Law dogmatized by the
Council. This judgment mandated a single usage of the Roman rite for the Latin
Church, with some minor exceptions for usages greater than 200 years old, “in order that what has been handed down by
the most holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the rest of the churches
may be accepted and observed by all everywhere.” Hence, the sainted Pope
declared the oft-called “Tridentine
Mass” to be the “received and
approved rite” of the Church, and which precluded the creation of any “new
rite” of Mass in the future. Further, because Quo Primum is an infallible application of
Divine Law (that is, we must use only the “received
and approved rites”), St. Pius V rightly declared the decree to be
irreformable and valid forever.
This brings us to the inevitable and
troubling question: Is the
Novus Ordo a “new rite” of Mass that comes under the anathema of the Council of
Trent, as definitively interpreted by St. Pius V in Quo Primum? The name of the
rite itself (Novus Ordo
which means “new order” or “new ordinary” of the Mass) certainly suggests the
same. More importantly, so do the words of Pope Paul VI. In his November 19,
1969 General Audience address, Paul VI refers to the Novus Ordo as a “new rite” of
Mass several times, for example: “We wish to draw your attention to an event
about to occur in the Latin Catholic Church: the introduction of the liturgy of
the new rite of the Mass.”
He also says, “In the new rite you will find the relationship between the
Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist...”
We also consider the statements of the
members of Paul VI’s liturgical commission that created the New Mass, such as
the secretary and head of the commission, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, who said: “It
is not simply a question of restoring a valuable masterpiece, in some cases it
will be necessary to provide new
structures for entire rites…it will truly be a new creation.” Bugnini’s
assistant, Fr. Carlos Braga, also stated that the New Mass has “an entirely new foundation of
Eucharistic theology” and whose “ecumenical requirements” are “in harmony with
the Church’s new positions.”
Fr. Joseph Gelineau, one of the most influential members of the commission,
also said: “To tell you the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This
needs to be said without ambiguity: the
Roman rite as we knew it no
longer exists.” Therefore, both Paul VI and his appointed
authors of the Novus Ordo admitted that the New Mass is not the rite “received”
from tradition, but rather a rite created by innovation – an entirely
unprecedented act in the history of the Church.
But we should not rely on these
statements alone. While they may reveal the intent of the innovators, it is
still necessary to look at the substance of the Novus Ordo rite itself. As we have seen, the
Council of Trent and St. Pius V intended to preserve the substantial identity
of the Roman rite forever. If the New Mass does not preserve this identity,
then it cannot be considered the “received
and approved rite” of the Catholic Church no matter what anyone says. Even
the Second Vatican Council, which did not (and could not) mandate the creation
of a new rite of Mass, recognized this truth by directing that the rites “be revised carefully in the light of sound
tradition” with “due care being
taken to preserve their
substance.”
The Council of Trent’s condemnation
of omitting or changing the “received
and approved rites” into “new rites”
is best understood by referring to one of the oldest maxims of the Church’s
sacred theology: “legem credendi statuit lex orandi.”
This is a Latin phrase which means “the rule of prayer determines the rule of
faith” (often referred to as “lex
orandi, lex credendi”). In other words, the way we pray determines
what we believe. If a liturgical tradition which expresses a doctrine of the
Faith is altered or removed altogether, the underlying doctrine will
necessarily be compromised. This is why the “received and approved rites” must be faithfully preserved and
never transformed into “other new ones”
as declared by Trent.
…… However, the Novus Ordo Missae deviates from the Roman Missal
of St. Pius V to such an extent that it no longer retains the substantial
identity of the Roman rite. Even before the introduction of such abuses as
audible canons, vernacular and versus
populum (toward the people) celebrations, lay ministers, Communion
under both species, Communion in the hand to standing communicants and the
like, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci advised Paul VI that “the Novus Ordo
represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the
Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the
Council of Trent.” Consequently, Cardinal Ottaviani (who, as head of the
Holy Office, was responsible for safeguarding the doctrine of the Faith), in
his famous intervention, concluded that the Novus Ordo was indeed a different
rite of Mass.
For example, Ottaviani says: “To abandon a liturgical tradition which
for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace
it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it
implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division – a liturgy which
teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the
Catholic Faith – is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an
incalculable error.” He also says,
“It is obvious that the New
Order of Mass has no intention of presenting the Faith taught by the
Council of Trent. But it is to this Faith that the Catholic
conscience is bound forever.” Accordingly, Ottaviani appealed to Paul VI “not to deprive us of the possibility of
continuing to have recourse to the integral
and fruitful Missal of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your
Holiness, and so deeply venerated by the whole Catholic world.” Therefore,
both the critics and the
creators of the New Mass, including Paul VI himself, agree that the
Novus Ordo differs
in substance from
the Tridentine Missal and, hence, constitutes a “new rite” of Mass.
John Salza, J.D., The Novus Ordo Mass and Divine Law, excerpt from Catholic Family
News
He failed on two
occasions, 1942 & 1952, to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of
Mary as our Lady requested! He
contributed his share in liturgical destruction by establishing the liturgical
commission under Bugnini in 1948 and having Bea, his personal confessor,
undertake a new Latin translation of the Psalms.
“I am concerned
about the messages of the Virgin to the little Lucia of Fatima. This
persistence of the Good Lady in face of the danger that threatens the Church is
a divine warning against the suicide that the alteration of the Faith, in its
liturgy, its theology, and its soul, would represent. I hear around me
innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame
of the Church, reject her ornaments, and make her remorseful for her
historical past.”
Pope Pius XII,
1933
And now, addressing the “false prophets that exploit fear
and hopelessness to sell magical formulas of hate and cruelty,” Pope Francis again
insults the Catholic Faith as known and practiced by all our forefathers!
COMMENT: Pope Francis often
referenced St. Vincent of Lérins as if his understanding of Tradition is in
accord with that of the great Church Father.
It most certainly was not which is evident to anyone familiar with his
writings. This corruption can only be attributed to malice. Francis the Lutheran and St. Vincent the
Catholic did not profess the same Faith and only one of them is the Faith
without which it is impossible to please God.
Francis characterized faithfulness to the revelation of God as
“rigidity” which was itself attributed to deeper psychological and moral
failings of traditional Catholics. “Love is not rigid,” claimed Francis while
he counseled the overthrow of God’s commandments, but St. John the Apostle of
Love and devotee of the Sacred Heart reports a very different Gospel of Jesus
Christ:
· If you love me, keep my commandments. John 14:15
· If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have
kept my Father’ s commandments, and do abide in his love. John 15:10
· He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth
me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him,
and will manifest myself to him. John 14:21
· Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my
word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our
abode with him. John 14:23
· In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and
keep his commandments. 1 John 5:2
· And by this we know that we have known him, if we keep his
commandments. 1 John 2:3
Love is never lax or slothful in its pious
attention to duty. The laxism and sloth
of Pope Francis was because without Faith, he had no true love of God.
Leo the Homosexual following in the way of Francis the
Homosexual.
Pictured below is Leo and Francis both greeting
homosexual "married" couples for public photo-ops. The other pictures
are Francis and Leo both slumming around with the pervert James Martin.
The Vatican is in the hands of the Homosexual Lobby. We
must pray to God to purge His Church of this gross perversion.
Preaching to the DEAF!
You gather here today, present-day
apostles, as the Church and, therefore, the world stand perched on the edge of
a cliff. And yet you who are entrusted with the keeping of souls choose to
speak not a word of the spiritual danger which abounds. Today we stand on the cusp of all
that has been prophesied about the Church and the abominations which would come
forth in these times, a time when all of hell attacks the Church of Jesus
Christ, and a time when the fallen angels of hell no longer seek entry into her
sacred halls but instead stand inside, peeking out of her windows and unlocking
doors to welcome in more diabolical destruction.
Do you not know that Our Lord will
send forth His avenging angels to heap coals of fire upon the heads of those
who were called to be His apostles and who have not guarded what He has given
unto them?
And yet almost all of you, my
brothers, stood by silently watching as the Synod on Synodality took
place, an abomination constructed not to guard the Deposit of Faith, but to
dismantle it, and yet few were the cries heard from you – men who should be
willing to die for Christ and His Church.
The Synod’s final document has
been released, yet with the sleight of hand which is so characteristic
of the Francis-controlled Vatican. By drawing attention to the issues which
worried many, they have slipped in what was always their real goal without
anyone even noticing. What they were after in the first place was the
dismantling of Christ’s Church by replacing the structure of the Church as
Our Lord instituted it with a diabolically-inspired new structure of
“synodality” which in actuality is a new church that is in no way Catholic.
Bishop Joseph Strickland, former bishop of
Tyler, TX who was removed from his office by Pope Francis the Diabolical for
preaching Catholic truth, addressing the U.S. bishops gathered at their annual
meeting
Latae sententiae crimes in the external forum require a determination of guilt!
“A
sentence declaratory of the offence is always necessary in the forum externum,
since in this tribunal no one is presumed to be excommunicated unless convicted
of a crime that entail such a penalty.”
Pope
Benedict XIV, De syndod, X, I, 5
COMMENT: Recently
a group of young men and women missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints (Mormons) were doing their required missionary work in
central city York. A friendly theological discussion took place on the steps of
our Mission chapel. The friendly exchanged ended and the climate cooled when
the question about the exact number of Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's wives
was brought up. Mormons believe that Jesus Christ founded one Church. They
believe that that Church became corrupted and God abandoned it. God then,
centuries later, reconstituted His Church when the angel Moroni lead the
illiterate Joseph Smith to a hidden book and provided him with mystical
spectacles permitting him to read it. When you ask a Mormon how is it that
Jesus Christ promised to be with His Church until the end of time and taught
that marriage is between one man and one woman until death, why is it that they
believe Joseph Smith or Brigham Young and not believe Jesus Christ? They answer
by walking away. Jesus Christ uses the metaphor of marriage to describe His
relationship with His Church and with each of the faithful individually. Every
man-made heretical and schismatic sect eventually repudiates marriage because
they cannot abide the metaphor. Luther permitted bigamy. The Orthodox permit
divorce and remarriage three times. Joseph Smith had "up to forty
wives" and Brigham Young had "fifty-six wives, twenty-one had
never been married before; seventeen were widows; six were divorced; six had
living husbands; and the marital status of six others is unknown. Nine of his
wives had previously been plural wives of Joseph Smith, and Young was sealed to
them as a proxy for Smith" (WIKI). The first clue to the Mormons that they were being lead into a spiritual desert was
polygamy but some like the desert. Mormons claim that Brigham Young saw the
light and abandoned the practice for the Latter Day Saints but this occurred
only after the U.S. government told they to give it up or get out. Although
Mormons are no longer polygamists, they permit divorce and "temple"
remarriage which is just serial polygamy. These "missionaries" now
know that Jesus Christ did not abandon His Church and will not do so no matter
how corrupt churchmen become. The Catholic Church alone offers the possibility
of salvation.
It’s Official: Mormon Founder Had Up
to 40 Wives...
Mormon leaders have acknowledged for the first time that the church’s
founder and prophet, Joseph Smith, portrayed in church materials as a loyal
partner to his loving spouse Emma, took as many as 40 wives, some already
married and one only 14 years old.... The biggest bombshell for some in the essays is that Smith married women
who were already married, some to men who were Smith’s friends and followers.
Religious Liberty from Vatican II has its root in the
Americanist Heresy
On
every side the dread phantom of war holds sway: there is scarce room for
another thought in the minds of men. The combatants are the greatest and
wealthiest nations of the earth; what wonder, then, if, well provided with the
most awful weapons modern military science has devised, they strive to destroy
one another with refinements of horror. There is no limit to the measure of
ruin and of slaughter; day by day the earth is drenched with newly-shed blood,
and is covered with the bodies of the wounded and of the slain. Who would
imagine as we see them thus filled with hatred of one another, that they are
all of one common stock, all of the same nature, all members of the same human
society? ....We implore those in whose hands are placed the fortunes of nations
to hearken to Our voice. Surely there are other ways and means whereby violated
rights can be rectified. Let them be tried honestly and with good will, and let
arms meanwhile be laid aside.
Benedict
XV, Ad beatissimi apostolorum,
November 1, 1914
“We
consider the establishment of our country’s independence, the shaping of its
liberties and laws, as a work of special Providence, its framers ‘building
better than they knew,’ the Almighty’s hand guiding them. We believe that our
country’s heroes were the instruments of the God of nations in establishing
this home of freedom; to both the Almighty and to His instruments in the work
we look with grateful reverence. And to maintain the inheritance of freedom
which they have left us, should it ever–which God forbid—be imperiled, our
Catholic citizens will be found to stand forward as one man, ready to pledge
anew ‘their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.’”
Archbishop
(soon to be Cardinal) James Gibbons, addressing the American bishops at the
Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884 attended by 14 archbishops and 61
bishops.
Moved
to the very depths of our hearts by the stirring appeal of the President of the
United States, and by the action of our national Congress, we accept
whole-heartedly and unreservedly the decree of that legislative authority
proclaiming this country to be in a state of war. Inspired neither by hate nor
fear, but by the holy sentiments of truest patriotic fervor and zeal, we stand
ready, we and all the flock committed to our keeping, to cooperate in every way
possible with our President and our national government, to the end that the
great and holy cause of liberty may triumph and that our beloved country may
emerge from this hour of test stronger and nobler than ever. Our people, as ever,
will rise as one man to serve the nation.
Pledge
of U.S. Catholic Archbishops, April 18, 1917; sent to President Woodrow Wilson
by Cardinal James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, the leading Catholic
prelate in the United States.
“The
primary duty of a citizen is loyalty to country. It is exhibited by an absolute
and unreserved obedience to his country’s call.”
Cardinal
James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore (1877-1921), April 1917 in support of
the U.S. declaration of war against Germany and Austria-Hungary. The Balfour
Declaration agreement committed the British to deliver Palestine into Jewish
hands in return for the Jews bringing the United States into WWI in support of
the British. Cardinal James Gibbons was the chief propagator of the heresy of Americanism
which became settled Novus Ordo doctrine after Vatican II (religious liberty)
primarily by the work of Fr. John Courtney Murray who greatly admired Cardinal
Gibbons. Gibbons did his best to align American Catholics with Jewish interests
to bring the United States into the Great War. In doing so Gibbons worked
directly to undermine the peace plans of Pope Benedict XV. Pope Benedict
devised a generous peace plan and contacted Cardinal Gibbons to do what he
could to influence the United States government to back his offer of a
negotiated peace. Gibbons did nothing of the sort. While giving lip service to
the Pope's peace plan six months too late, he in fact never contacted President
Wilson or any official of the government to even mention Pope Benedict's peace
plan. Gibbons was too busy building the National Catholic War Council (NCWC)
and supporting the call of universal military service. The purpose of the NCWC
as Gibbons said in a letter to all American bishops was to form “the mental and
moral preparation of our people for the war.”
To Congar's
credit, he at least told the truth about what he helped destroy!
“It cannot be denied that the Declaration on
Religious Liberty does say materially something else than the Syllabus of 1864;
it even says just about the opposite of
Propositions 15 and 77 to 79 of this document..... I collaborated on the
final paragraphs which left me less satisfied.
It involved demonstrating that the theme of religious liberty was
already contained in Scripture. Now, it isn't there.”
Cardinal
Yves Marie Joseph Congar, O.P., forbidden to teach by the Church and
whose books were suppressed in the early 1950s, made a peritus at Vatican II by
Novus Ordo St. John XXIII, and is considered by many to have been the most
influential of all the periti. He was raised to the cardinalate by Novus Ordo
St. John Paul II. He rejected the dogmatic teaching of Trent which his teacher
and mentor, Fr. Marie-Dominique
Chenu, O.P., derisively called “Baroque
theology”.
Excerpts from the Diary of Msgr. Joseph Fenton:
·
“He
[Cardinal Ottaviani] remarked that we were on the eve of the Council, and that
no one knew who the Council’s theologians were to be.” (Sept. 28, 1962)
·
“It is a
crime that we did not take the Anti-Modernist Oath. Poor O[ttaviani] must have
failed to have our own profession passed by the central commission. It
contained his condemnation of [Fr. John Courtney] Murray [the Americanist
heretic who structured the Council teaching on Religious Liberty].” (Oct. 9,
1962)
·
“I had
always thought that this council was dangerous. It was started for no
sufficient reason. There was too much talk about what it was supposed to
accomplish. Now I am afraid that real trouble is on the way.” (Oct. 13,
1962)
·
“I
started to read the material on the Liturgy, and I was shocked at the bad
theology. They actually have been stupid enough [to say] that the Church
is ‘simul humanam et divininam, visibilem et invisibilem’ [at the same
time human and divine, visible and invisible]. And they speak of the Church
working ‘quousque unum ovile fiat et unus pastor’ [until there be one fold
and one shepherd], as if that condition were not already achieved.” (Oct. 19,
1962)
·
“I do not
think that any little work on our part is going to bring good to the Church. We
should, I believe, face the facts. Since the death of [Pope] St. Pius X the
Church has been directed by weak and liberal popes, who have flooded the
hierarchy with unworthy and stupid men. This present conciliar set-up makes
this all the more apparent. [Fr.] Ed Hanahoe, the only intelligent and
faithful member of [Cardinal] Bea’s secretariat has been left off the list of
the periti. Such idiots as [Mgr. John
S.] Quinn and the sneak [Fr. Frederick] McManus have been put on. [Fr. George]
Tavard is there as an American, God help us. From surface appearance it
would seem that the Lord Christ is abandoning His Church. The thoughts of many
are being revealed. As one priest used to say, to excuse his own
liberalism, which, in the bottom of his heart he knew was wrong, ‘for the
last few decades the tendency in Rome has been to favor the
liberals.’ That is the policy now. We can only do what we can to
overt an ever more complete disloyalty to Christ.” (Oct. 19, 1962)
·
“[Fr.] Ed
Hanahoe gave me two books on Modernism. In one of them I found evidence that
the teaching in the first chapter of the new schema on the Church [that became
the Vatican II dogmatic constitution Lumen
Gentium] and the language are those of [the excommunicated Modernist Fr.
George Tyrrell [who died outside the Catholic Church and was denied
ecclesiastical burial]. May God preserve His Church from that chapter. If it
passes, it will be a great evil. I must pray and act.” (Sept. 24, 1963)
Paul VI declared
Novus Ordo Saint. So just what is a “Novus Ordo Saint”?
A Novus Ordo
Saint is a man-made saint. Contrasted with Catholic saints who are God-made
saints. In virtue of their union with God they are sanctified, and therefore,
Catholic Saints exhibit heroic virtue in their lives. God confirms their
sanctity by working miracles through their intercession and thus, a cult of
veneration (dulia) develops and spreads throughout the Church. The Church
recognizes God's evidence that they are saints and declares this fact to the
universal Church. Contrary to this, Novus Ordo Saints are man-made saints and
their elevation to the title of sainthood is for the purpose of promoting the
human ideology exemplified in their lives. There is no real cult of veneration
(dulia) among the faithful to Novus Ordo Saints. Since God does not work true
miracles through the intercession of man-made saints, only man-made miracles
are required for the beatification of man-made Novus Ordo Saints. Finally, the
Novus Ordo beatification process does have a promotor fidei, the
so-called “devil’s advocate,” although his role has been change as the promotor ideologiae. The greatest
difference between Catholic Saints and Novus Ordo Saints is that the former are
in heaven and the latter, very well may not be.
COMMENT ON THE
MODERN MIND DEVOID OF GOD’S GRACE
“But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given [the common
man] a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp inked with advertising slogans, with
editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of tabloids
and the profundities of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each
man's rubber stamp is the twin of millions of others, so that when these
millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. [...]
The amazing readiness with which large masses accept this process is probably
accounted for by the fact that no attempt is made to convince them that black
is white. Instead, their preconceived hazy ideas that a certain gray is almost
black or almost white are brought into sharper focus. Their prejudices,
notions, and convictions are used as a starting point, with the result that
they are drawn by a thread into passionate adherence to a given mental
picture.”
Edward Bernays, from his book, The Minority Rules, 1927. Bernays was a Jewish double nephew of
Sigmund Freud and a pioneer in public relations and propaganda. He was called
"the father of public relations" in his obituary. Bernays was named
one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century by Life Magazine.
He was the subject of a full-length biography called The Father of Spin
(1999) and later an award-winning 2002 documentary for the BBC called The Century of the Self. (Wiki)
"Pray for the conversion
of Russia." Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima
Your must
understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They
hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured
and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The
October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian
Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More
of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any
people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be
understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact
that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global
media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators. We cannot state that all Jews
are Bolsheviks. But: without Jews there would have been no Bolshevism. For a
Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish
terrorists murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.
Aleksandr
Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Noble Prize winning novelist, historian and victim of
Jewish Bolshevism
American Catholic Apostasy: PEW POLE 2025
29% of U.S. Catholics say they attend
Mass weekly.
59% of Catholics say abortion should be legal.
76% U.S. Catholics say society should be
accepting of homosexuality.
61% U.S. Catholics support legal
homosexual "marriage."
80% of Catholics view Pope Francis
favorably.
84% of U.S. Catholics say they have a favorable view of Leo although 67% say they know little about Leo, and 25% know nothing at all.
Pope Leo XIV commemorates Nostra Aetate anniversary with interfaith
celebrations
Catholic NewsAgency | Vatican City |Kridina
Millare | Oct 29, 2025
Pope Leo XIV joined faith leaders on Tuesday
to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, the Church’s declaration
on building relationships with non-Christian religions.
Approximately 300 representatives of world
religions and cultures joined the Holy Father for an evening ecumenical prayer
service for peace organized by the Community of Sant’Egidio and held at the
Colosseum in Rome.
“Peace is a constant journey of
reconciliation,” the Holy Father said at the Oct. 28 event.
Thanking religious leaders for coming
together in Rome, he said their interfaith meeting expressed their shared
“conviction that prayer is a powerful force for reconciliation.”
“This is our witness: offering the immense treasures of ancient
spiritualities to contemporary humanity,” he said.
“We need a true and sound era of
reconciliation that puts an end to the abuse of power, displays of force, and
indifference to the rule of law,” he added. “Enough of war, with all the pain
it causes through death, destruction, and exile!”
In his remarks, the pope urged people not to be indifferent to the “cry
of the poor and the cry of the earth” in their pursuits for peace in countries
scarred by ongoing conflict and injustice.
“In the power of prayer, with hands raised
to heaven and open to others, we must ensure that this period of history,
marked by war and the arrogance of power, soon comes to an end, giving rise to
a new era,” he said.
“We
cannot allow this period to continue. It shapes the minds of people who grow
accustomed to war as a normal part of human history,” he continued.
Pope Leo and other religious leaders lit
candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed commitment to engage in
interfaith dialogue.
Several people waved small blue banners
with the word “peace” in different languages while Pope Leo and the other
religious leaders lit candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed
commitment to engage in interfaith dialogue.
After the prayer gathering at Rome’s iconic landmark, the Holy Father
returned to the Vatican to join colorful celebrations jointly organized by the
Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue and the Dicastery for Promoting Christian
Unity.
To mark the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, several multicultural music and
dance performances were held inside the Vatican’s Paul VI Audience Hall as well
as a presentation highlighting papal initiatives to promote the Church’s
dialogue with other religions since the pontificate of Pope Paul VI.
Pope Leo’s appearance and special address
toward the end of the two-hour gathering highlighted the Church’s reverence for
all people and its desire to collaborate with others for the common good.
“We belong to one human family, one in origin, and one also in our
final goal,” he said. “Religions everywhere try to respond to the restlessness
of the human heart.”
“Each in its own way offers teachings, ways of life, and sacred rites
that help guide their followers to peace and meaning,” he said.
Emphasizing the common mission shared among people of different
religions to “reawaken” the sense of the sacred in the world today, the Holy
Father encouraged people to “keep love alive.”
“We have come together in this place
bearing the great responsibility as religious leaders to bring hope to a
humanity that is often tempted by despair,” Leo said.
“Let us remember that prayer has the power
to transform our hearts, our words, our actions, and our world,” he said.
COMMENT: Now for the third
time in his short pontificate Leo/Provost quotes Leonard Boff's Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor. Boff
is a former Franciscan priest who was censored by the liberal Cardinal
Ratzinger when he headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under
the liberal JPII for his extreme Marxist liberation theology. Boff is famous
for his development of an integrated theology of Marxism, Gaia cult earth
worship and "social justice." He was admired by Francis/Bergoglio and
he is admired thrice as much by Leo/Provost. The picture with its Satanic imagery
was reportedly published by the Vatican. Leo/Provost, like Francis/Bergoglio,
wants to restore native American culture and religious traditions. It should be
remembered that Christopher Columbus encountered cannibalism on his second
voyage of exploration and ritual murder was widespread not only among the
Aztecs and Incas but in smaller tribes across both North and South America as
reported by Jesuit missionaries. In the interfaith celebrations at the Vatican
a young native American boy half dressed paraded an image of a snake into the
assembly before Leo/Provost. Is this the native American tradition that the
Vatican wants to recover?
Doctrinal Note on Marian titles: Mother of the faithful, not
Co-redemptrix
The document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, approved by
Pope Leo XIV, offers clarifications on titles applied to the Blessed Virgin
Mary, and calls for special attention to the use of the expression, “Mediatrix
of all graces.”
Vatican News
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith
on Tuesday, 4 November 2025, published Mater populi fidelis (“The Mother of the
Faithful People”), a Doctrinal Note “On Some Marian Titles Regarding Mary’s
Cooperation in the Work of Salvation.” Signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Víctor
Manuel Fernández, and the Secretary for the Dicastery’s Doctrinal Section,
Monsignor Armando Matteo, the Note was approved by the Pope on 7 October.
Mater populi fidelis (MPF) is the fruit of
a long and complex collegial effort. It is a doctrinal document on Marian
devotion, centred on the figure of Mary, who is associated with the work of
Christ as Mother of believers. The Note provides a significant biblical
foundation for devotion to Mary, as well as marshalling various contributions
from the Fathers, the Doctors of the Church, elements of Eastern tradition, and
the thought of recent Popes.
In this positive framework, the doctrinal
text analyses a number of Marian titles, encouraging the adoption of some of
those appellations and warning against the use of others. Titles such as
“Mother of Believers,” “Spiritual Mother,” “Mother of the Faithful” are noticed
with approval in the Note. Conversely,
the title of “Co-redemptrix” is deemed inappropriate and problematic. The title
of “Mediatrix” is considered unacceptable when it takes on a meaning that
excludes Jesus Christ; however, it can used appropriately so long as it
expresses an inclusive and participatory mediation that glorifies the power of
Christ. The titles “Mother of Grace” and “Mediatrix of All Graces” are
considered acceptable when used in a very precise sense, but the document also
warns of particularly broad explanations of the meaning of the terms.
Essentially, the Note reaffirms Catholic
doctrine, which has always emphasised that everything in Mary is directed
towards the centrality of Christ and His salvific work. For this reason, even
if some Marian titles admit of an orthodox interpretation through correct
exegesis, Mater populi fidelis says it is preferable to avoid them.
In his presentation of the Doctrinal Note,
Cardinal Fernández expresses appreciation for popular devotion but warns
against groups and publications that propose a certain dogmatic development and
raise doubts among the faithful, including through social media. The main
problem in interpreting these titles applied to Our Lady, he says concerns the
way of understanding Mary's association with Christ's work of redemption
(paragraph 3).
Co-redemptrix
Regarding the title “Co-redemptrix,” the
Note recalls that “some Popes have used the title “without elaborating much on
its meaning.” Generally, it continues, “they have presented the title in two
specific ways: in reference to Mary’s divine motherhood (insofar as she, as
Mother, made possible the Redemption that Christ accomplished) or in reference
to her union with Christ at the redemptive Cross. The Second Vatican Council
refrained from using the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.
Saint John Paul II referred to Mary as ‘Co-redemptrix’ on at least seven
occasions, particularly relating this title to the salvific value of our
sufferings when they are offered together with the sufferings of Christ, to
whom Mary is united especially at the Cross” (18).
The document cites an internal discussion
within the then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which in February
1996 had discussed the request to proclaim a new dogma on Mary as
“Co-redemptrix or Mediatrix of all graces.” Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was
opposed to such a definition, arguing, “the precise meaning of these titles is not
clear, and the doctrine contained in them is not mature. […] It is not clear
how the doctrine expressed in these titles is present in Scripture and the
apostolic tradition.”
Later, in 2002, the future Benedict XVI
expressed himself publicly in the same way: “The formula ‘Co-redemptrix’
departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the
Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings… Everything comes from
Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians,
in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything that she is through Him. The
word ‘Co-redemptrix’ would obscure this origin.”
The note clarifies that Cardinal Ratzinger
did not deny the good intentions behind the proposal, nor the valuable aspects
reflected in it, but nonetheless maintained that they were “being expressed in
the wrong way” (19).
Pope Francis also expressed his clear
opposition to the use of the title Co-Redemptrix on at least three occasions.
Tuesday’s Doctrinal Note concludes: “It is
always inappropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s
cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and
can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of
the Christian faith. […] When an expression requires many, repeated
explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not
serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful” (22).
Mediatrix
The Note emphasises that “the biblical
statement about Christ’s exclusive mediation is conclusive. Christ is the only
Mediator” (24).
At the same time, MPF recognises “the fact
that the word ‘mediation’ is commonly used in many areas of everyday life,
where it is understood simply as cooperation, assistance, or intercession. As a
result, it is inevitable that the term would be applied to Mary in a
subordinate sense. Used in this way, it does not intend to add any efficacy or
power to the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man” (25).
Further, “it is clear that Mary has a real
mediatory role in enabling the Incarnation of the Son of God in our humanity”
(26).
Mother of believers and Mediatrix of all graces
Mary’s maternal role “in no way obscures or
diminishes” the unique mediation of Christ, “but rather shows its power […]
Understood in this way, Mary’s motherhood does not seek to weaken the unique
adoration due to Christ alone but, rather, seeks to enkindle it.”
Therefore, the Note states, “one must avoid titles and expressions that
present Mary as a kind of ‘lightning rod’ before the Lord’s justice, as if she
were a necessary alternative before the insufficiency of God’s mercy” (37b).
Thus, the title “Mother of Believers”
“enables us to speak of Mary’s role in our relation to our life of grace”.
However, MPF goes on to urge caution concerning the use of expressions that may
convey “less acceptable notions” (45).
“Cardinal Ratzinger already affirmed” for example, “that the title
‘Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces’ was not clearly grounded in Revelation.” So,
the Note continues, “in line with this conviction, we can recognize the
difficulties this title poses, both in terms of theological reflection and
spirituality” (45). In fact, “no human person — not even the Apostles or the
Blessed Virgin — can act as a universal dispenser of grace. Only God can bestow
grace, and he does so through the humanity of Christ” (53).
“Some titles, such as ‘Mediatrix of All Graces,’ have limits that do
not favour a correct understanding of Mary’s unique place,” MPF explains,
adding, “In fact, she, the first redeemed, could not have been the mediatrix of
the grace that she herself received” (67).
Nonetheless, the Doctrinal Note
acknowledges that “the term ‘graces,’ when seen in reference to Mary’s maternal
help at various moments in our lives, can have an acceptable meaning. The
plural form expresses all the aids — even material — that the Lord may grant us
when He heeds His Mother’s intercession” (68).
COMMENT: Amazing to hear these apostates chirping
about the lack of "precise meaning" of theological terms while
obscurity in definition is, and has been since Vatican II, the calling card of
the Novus Ordo theologian and prelates. They like to muddle what is clear. Let's
start with the title, "Mother of Believers" and "Mother of the
Faithful." These are, in fact, worthy titles of the Mother of God and
frequently occur in St. Mary of Agreda's City of God, yet the Novus Ordo
clerics would never be found offering a precise definition and meaning for the
term "faithful" and then identify exactly who the
"faithful" are.
The term "faithful" has a precise
Catholic definition. It refers to those who have been baptized into the
Catholic Church and profess the one, holy, catholic and apostolic faith. By
virtue of this incorporation by baptism they have become "children of
God." They faithfully believe all the truths that God has revealed on the
authority of God the Revealer. Only those who have become thus members of the
Mystical Body of Christ share by participation in His divine nature and become
brothers and sister of Jesus Christ and therefore, sons of His Mother. This
definition excludes all heretics, schismatics, Jews, pagans, and any other form
of idolaters. Novus Ordo clerics heretically teach that everyone is a child of
God by virtue of the Incarnation. Everyone by nature is a creature of God
created in His image and likeness with the spiritual soul with the powers of
reason and free will, but every creature is born in original sin and cut off
from the friendship of God. He is only a "child of God" in potentia. Without the sacrament of
Baptism and the Catholic faith they can never become "children of
God." This obscurity of definition as to who is a child of God and thus a
child of the Blessed Virgin Mary ultimately obscures what is necessary as a
necessity of means to obtain salvation.
The title Mediatrix of all grace is long
established and of sound and precise theological understanding. Those that
pretend otherwise are ignorant, proud, and deceitful. They have no excuse. 'The
law of prayer determines the law of belief' is, as affirmed by St. Pius X in Pascendi, a canon of faith from the time
of Celestine I, that is, a dogma of the Catholic Church. The immemorial Roman
rite has a Mass in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of all grace
celebrated on May 31 established by Pope Benedict XV. Regarding this feast, Dom
Gaspar Lefebvre, O.S.B. of the Abby of St. Andrew teaches:
"The will of God is that we should
have everything through Mary," says St. Bernard. The Father has sent us
His Son, but His will was to make His coming depend upon the Fiat of the
Virgin, which He commanded to the angel Gabriel to solicit on the day of the
Annunciation.
The Father and the Son send us the Holy Ghost,
but it is through Mary that He comes down to men. On the day of Pentecost,
according to an ancient Tradition, the heavenly fire which descended on the
Cenacle first rested on Mary, and then on the apostles. This is a figure of
what happens every day in the Church where the Holy Ghost is sent invisibly
into our souls. "All the gifts of the Holy Ghost are distributed by Mary
to those whom she chooses, whenever she wishes and as much as she wishes,"
says St. Bernardine of Siena.
The graces which the Holy Ghost pours down
on us are due to the merits of Christ on Calvary; but in order that God may
bestow them on the world, it is necessary that Mary should intervene. Having
cooperated by her divine maternity and by her sufferings at the foot of the
Cross in the Incarnation and Redemption, she has deserved to co-operate when
they are continually applied to creatures by the most High. "By the
communion of sorrows and of will between Christ and Mary," says St. Pius
X, "she has deserved to become the dispenser of all the blessings which
Jesus acquired for us by His blood" (Encyclical 2-2-1904). Such is His
will, but it is essential that she should constantly intercede for each one of
us. This she does, relying on the blood of Christ by whom she was herself saved,
and who alone saves us. This actual intervention of Mary plays a preponderating
part in the salvation of the world. It is important that we should realize
this, and it is the object of the feast of Mary Mediatrix of all Graces. A
clear idea of the fact may be obtained by simple reading the texts of the Mass
and Vespers.
"Through the Virgin," says St.
Bernardine of Siena, "life-giving graces flow from Christ, who is the
head, into His mystical body." "Through her," adds St.
Antoninus, "come from heaven all the graces granted to the world."
"What all the saints united to thee may obtain for us by their
intercession," writes St. Anselm, "thy pleading alone may obtain
without the help of their prayers." The maternal solicitude of Mary for
the whole human race is therefore continual, and it is because of this that
unceasingly, through the Mass, the sacraments, the hierarchy and other channels
of grace, the merits of Calvary are applied to our souls. "We may
affirm," declared Pope Leo XIII, "that by the will of God, nothing is
given to us without Mary's mediation, in such a way that just as no one can approach the almighty
Father but through His Son, so no one, so to speak, can approach Christ but
through His Mother" (Encyclical, 9-22-1891).
Let us therefore not consider as of small
importance the efforts made to establish this point of doctrine of Mary's
mediation, since this doctrine enables us to understand the divine plan, and
clearly manifests the mediation of the Son of God of which it is a corollary.
St.
Mary of Agreda at the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven,
writes that Jesus Christ addressed the entire heavenly assembly of angels and
saints saying:
"My
Father and eternal God, this is the Woman, that gave Me my human form in her
virginal womb, that nourished Me at her breast and sustained labors for Me,
that shared in my hardships and co-operated with Me in the works of Redemption.
This is She, who was always most faithful and fulfilled our will according to
our entire pleasure; She, pure and immaculate as my Mother, through her own
works, has reached the summit of sanctity according to the measure of the gifts
We have communicated to Her; and when She had merited her reward and could have
enjoyed it forever, She deprived Herself of it for Our glory and returned to
attend to the establishment, the government, and instruction of the Church
militant; and We, in order that She might live in it for the succor of the
faithful, deferred her eternal rest, which She has merited over and over again.
In the highest bounty and equity of our Providence it is just, that my Mother
should be remunerated for her works of love beyond all other creatures; and
toward Her the common law of the other mortals should not apply. If I have
merited for all infinite merits and boundless graces, it is proper that my
Mother should partake of them above all the others who are so inferior; for She in her conduct
corresponds to our liberality and puts no hindrance or obstacle to our infinite
power of communicating our treasures and participating them as the Queen and
Mistress of all that is created."
Sanctifying
grace is the created participation in the divine nature. The Blessed Virgin is
the "Queen and Mistress of all that is created." In this Mass the
Church prays:
"
O Lord Jesus Christ, our Mediator with the Father, who hast appointed the most
blessed Virgin, Thy mother, to be our mother also and our mediatrix before
Thee: Grant that whosoever draweth nigh to Thee to beseech any benefit, may
receive all things through her and rejoice.
Rev.
Gregory Alastruey's theological work titled, The Blessed Virgin Mary, says that, "There are five principle titles and offices due
Mary, the Mother of God, by reason of her cooperation in redemption: Mediatrix,
Co-redemptrix, Mother of Christians, Patroness or Advocate, and Queen and
Mistress of the universe. I would recommend those who deny this proper
honor to the Mother of God obtain a copy of the book and have their stupidity
erased. I do not say, ignorance erased because willful ignorance is stupidity. Fr. Alastruey affirms that
"Mary is truly mediatrix of the human race and this doctrine pertains to
the deposit of faith." He then draws from Scripture, the Fathers,
and theologians in support of this truth. He proves from the Church Fathers
that the word "mediatrix" was explicitly used by St. Ephrem, St.
Epiphanius, St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil of Seleucia, St. Andrew of Crete, St
Germanus of Constantinople, St. John Damascene, St Theodore, St. Antoninus and
Denis the Carthusian. He draws richly from the divine liturgy from both Eastern
and Roman traditions. The errors of the Protestant heretics are addressed and
exposed which are curiously the same as expressed by the Novus Ordo popes.
Lastly,
it is worth asking Why do the Novus Ordo popes hate these proper titles of the
Mother of God? The answer is simple. The Blessed Virgin asked the three
children at Fatima on June 13, 1917, "Are you willing to offer yourselves to God to bear all the sufferings
He wills to send you, as an act of reparation for the sins by which He is
offended, and of supplication for the conversion of sinners?" To which
question all answered, "Yes, we are willing." The Mother of God said
on July 13 after the children had seen a vision of Hell, "Sacrifice
yourselves for sinners, and say many times, especially whenever you make some
sacrifice: O Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and
in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of Mary."
On August 19 (the apparition did not occur on the August 13 because the
children were in prison) the Mother of God continued saying, "Pray, pray
very much, and make sacrifices for sinners; for many souls go to hell, because
there are none to sacrifice themselves and to pray for them." The Blessed
Virgin is asking the children to be co-redemptors and co-mediators of grace
with her in union with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for the conversion and
salvation of sinners. If the title of Co-Redemtrix and Mediatrix of all Grace
can be taken away from the Mother of God then no one is responsible to do
penance for their own sins or the sins of others. This falls back to the
Protestant heresy on the dogma of justification and the very nature of our
incorporation into the divine nature in the Mystical Body of Christ.
Leo/Provost, like his predecessor Francis/Bergoglio, believes that proselytism
is "solemn nonsense." They attack the titles to excuse their own
faithless sloth. They are working to obscure the very means of salvation. As
Jesus Christ said: "But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites;
because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not
enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter" (Matt 23:13).
Pope
Leo is just another heretic who denies the Blessed Virgin Mary her just titles
of Mediatrix of all Grace and Co-Redemtrix. Only a few days ago, he celebrated
with heretics, schismatics, Jews, Moslems, and a variety of idolaters a shared
communion praying to their common god a united petition for peace in the world.
He continues to ignore the peace plan offered by the Blessed Virgin Mary,
Mediatrix of all Grace, at Fatima. Pope Leo will soon learn that those who
insult the Mother have made an enemy of the Son.
It was the opening of the three-day
“Raising Hope for Climate Justice” conference organised by the Laudato si’ Movement
in collaboration with ecclesial and institutional partners. 
If
the ice block is 20,000 years old then the Genesis creation account and the
global flood of Noe is reduced to mythology and not divine revelation. The fact
is, ancient mythology ended with the Christian revelation of Jesus Christ but
the modern scientific world is doing its best to resurrect the cult of
mythology. The world likes to talk about the scientific fables of Big Bang,
primordial soups with lightening bubbling forth proteins that congeal into
cellular life with the teleological purpose of producing the DNA of Darwinian
man. These fables are believed and shamelessly pandered by our neo-modernists
popes. The absurdity is that the neo-modernists popes have embraced the myths
of scientology when science itself has discredited their claims. Scientists
have been predicting global flooding of coastal areas for the last fifty years
with no evidence of rising sea levels. Global warming is not science. It is
liberal ideology applied to climatology that always calls for a one-world governance
to enforce its dictatorial and anti-Catholic mandates. The alleged global
warming is always without exception a man made assault on Mother Earth that
requires the ritual murder of 6.5 billion people for a world
"sustainable" population of 500 million for expiation. Never is it
considered in their calculus that the
Here's
a particularly forlorn historical date: More than 100 years ago, between the
19th and 20th of December 1917, in the midst of the Bolshevik revolution and
civil war, Lenin signed a decree calling for the establishment of The
All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and
Sabotage, also known as Cheka. 
“My
reaction was a silent cry of horror, indignation, and sorrow,” the auxiliary of
Astana, Kazakhstan, said regarding the Vatican’s approval of an LGBT-themed
“pilgrimage” on its Jubilee website, in an interview with Diane Montagna, a
journalist in Rome.
He pointed out that in doing so, Pope Leo
XIV broke with the precedent of all popes before Francis, who “neither received
officially nor posed for photographs with those who, by word or deed, openly
rejected the doctrinal and moral teaching of the Church.”
The 'Western Wall' (Wailing Wall) in
Jerusalem is held by Jews as a remnant of Herod's Temple destroyed by the
Romans in 72 A.D. Yet, Jesus prophesized not only that the Temple would be
destroyed but also that there would not remain a "stone upon a
stone." So how is it that there remains a large wall on the western side
at the south end of the 'Temple Mount'? Some Catholics claim the prophecy of
Jesus was referring only to the edifice itself and not the entire foundation
for the Temple. Jesus words must be taken in literally unless there it is
clearly manifest that the metaphorical sense is intended exclusively.
Therefore, the 'Wailing Wall' where the Jews worship is not a remnant of the ancient
Temple, and the 'Temple Mount', on which is currently situated the Al-Aqsa
mosque and the "Dome of the Rock", is not the location of the Temple
destroyed in 72 A.D. The 36 acre 'Temple Mount' is actually the location of the
Roman fortress Antonia built by Herod.
Carlo Alberto Capella was
Vatican diplomat who was convicted by a Vatican tribunal of possessing and
sharing child pornography. Capella admitted guilt to the charges. He is the only
one who has served a prison sentence in the Vatican jail for this crime or for
any sexually related crime against minors.