Remember in
your charity:
Remember
the welfare of our expectant mother: Veronica
Vanderbrook, Claudia Gergely, and Michela
McManus,
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
and Juan Gonzalez,
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,
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 & their 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,
Lamonte White, requests our prayers for his spiritual and temporal
welfare,
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
The
health and spiritual welfare of Nate
Schaeffer is the petition of Gene Peters,
Peg
Berry requests our prayers for her brother, William Habekost,
Louise McCarthy, who has suffered a stroke,
For
the health and welfare of Katherine Wedel,
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,
For the health and spiritual welfare of Peggy
Cummings, the neice of Camila
Meiser, who is gravely ill,
Kaitlyn McDonald, for the recovery of her health and spiritual welfare,
Roco Sbardella,
for his health and spiritual welfare,
Mufide Rende requests our prayers for the spiritual and physical
welfare of the Rende Family,
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,
Joe
Sentmanet request prayers for Scott Nettles (who is in need of conversion), who is gravely
ill,
Michael
Brigg requests our prayers for the health of John Romeo,
The
health and welfare of Gene Peters,
Conversion
of Anton Schwartzmueller,
is the paryer request of his children,
Stacy
Fernandez requests are prayers for the heath of Terry Patterson, Steven Becerra, and Roberto Valez,
Christine Kozin,
for her health and spiritual
welfare,
Teresa Gonyea, for her conversion and health, is the petition of her
grandmother, Patricia McLaughlin,
Nolan Moran, a three year old diagnosed with brain tumor, and his
family,
For
the health of Sonya Kolinsky,
Jackie
Dougherty asks our prayers for her brother who is gravely ill, John Lee,
Rose
Bradley asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of her
granddaughter, Meg Bradley,
Timothy & Crisara, a couple from Maryland have requested our prayers for
their spiritual welfare,
Celine Pilegaard,
the seven year old daughter of
Cynthia Pilegaard, for her recovery from burn
injuries,
Rafaela de Saravia, for her health and welfare,
Mary Mufide, requests our
prayers for her family,
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,
Thomas A. Nelson, long time faithful traditional Catholic the founder
and former owner of TAN Books & Publishing, suffered a recent stroke,
The
Joseph Cox Family, their
spiritual welfare,
The
Thomas Dube
Family, for their conversion and spiritual welfare,
Luis Rafael Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, 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,
The
health and spiritual welfare of Tom
Grow, Amanda Gardner, and Alex Estrada,
Conversion
of Annette Murowski, and her son Jimmy,
Brent
Keith from Indiana has petitioned our prayers for the Keith Family,
The
welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,
The
spiritual welfare Robert Holmes
Family,
For
the spiritual and temporal welfare of Irwin
Kwiat,
Fr.
Waters asks our prayers for Elvira Donaghy,
Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco,
for her health and spiritual welfare,
Mufide Rende, a
traditional Catholic from India has asked our prayers for her welfare and he
family members, living and deceased,
Mary Glatz, her health and the welfare of her family,
Barbara Harmon, who is ill, and still cares for her ailing parents,
Jason Green, a father of ten children, recovery of 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,
Welfare
of Bishop Richard Williamson,
for strength and courage in the greater battles to come,
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 who has been ill, and for Fr. Thomas Blute,
For
the health and conversion of Kathryn Lederhos, the aunt of David Drew,
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 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:
Bishop Bernard
Tissier
de Mallerais, died
October 8, was responsible for preventing the SSPX from openly reconciling with
Rome in 2012,
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,
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,
Monica Bandlow asks prayers for Mr. John Pfeiffer who died August 20, Theresa Hanley, died July 23, Fr. Juan-Carlos Iscara,
SSPX, who died
December 20, Fr. James Louis Albert
Campbell, a faithful priest who died December 18 at 91 years of age,
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 brother, Richard Bandlow,
died August 22, Fr. Christopher
Darby, SSPX, who died March 17, Robert Byrne, Michelle Donofrio McDowell, her cousin, died March 5, and Patricia Fabyanic,
the Prefect of Our Lady’s Sodality, March 8, 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,
Fr. Anthony Cekada, a traditional Catholic priest, died September 11,
William Cox, the father of Joseph Cox, who died September 3,
James Larson, Catholic apologists, author of War Against Being publication, died July 6, 2020,
Hutton Gibson, died May 12,
Sr. Regina Cordis, Immaculate Heart of Mary religious for sixty-five
years, died May 12,
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,
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,and Rev. Hector Bolduc,
who died September 10,
Jennie Salaneck, died September 19 at 95 years of age, a devout and
faithful Catholic all her life,
Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,
Cynthia (Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the
mother of nine children, four who are still at home, died August 19,
Stanley Spahalski,
who died October 20, and his
wife, Regina Spahalski,
who died June 24, and for the soul of Francis
Lester, her son,
Julia Atkinson, who died April 30,
Antonio P. Garcia, who died January 6, 2012 and the welfare of his
teenage children, Andriana and Quentin,
Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who died February 27,
Fr. Timothy A. Hopkins, of the National Shrine of St. Philomena, in Miami,
November 2,
Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the welfare of his wife,
Delores,
Eduardo Cepeda, who died January 26,
Larry Young, the 47 year old father of twelve who died December
10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their family,
Sister Mary Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the Slaves of the Immaculate
Heart of Mary, died December 16,
Joeseph Elias, who died on September 28,
William, the brother of Fr. Waters, who died September 7,
Donald Tonelli, died August 1,
Rev. Fr. Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great defender of Catholic Truth, died
January 25, 2006,
Emma Colasanti, who died May 29,
Mary Dullesse, who died April 12, a Catholic convert who died
wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre Ebert, who died April 7,
Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,
Philip D. Barr, died March 5, and the welfare of his family,
Judith Irene Kenealy, the mother of Joyce Paglia,
who died February 23, and her son, George Richard Moore, who died May 14,
For
Joe Sobran
who died September 30,
Fr. Hector Bolduc, a great and faithful priest, died, September 10,
2012,
John
Vennari asks our prayers for Dr. Raphael Waters who died August 26,
Stanley Bodalsky, the father of Mary Ann Boyle who died June 25,
Mary Isabel Kilfoyle
Humphreys, a former York resident
and friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6,
Rev. John Campion, who offered the traditional Mass for us every first
Friday until forbidden to do so by Bishop Dattilo,
died May 1,
Joseph Montagne, who died
May 5,
For
Margaret Vagedes,
the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died January 6,
Fr. Michael Shear, a Byzantine rite Catholic priest, died August 17,
2006,
Fr. James Francis 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
“For the Jews,
‘Anti-Semitism’ is anything that is in opposition to the naturalistic Messianic
domination of their nation over all the others.” Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp.,
B.A., D.Ph., D.D.
On the Charge of Anti-Semitism in Our Time
“…Two reasons can be assigned to the fact
that Our Lord’s faithful members will often be betrayed by those who should be
on the side of Christ the King. Firstly, many Catholic writers speak of Papal
condemnations of Anti-Semitism without explaining the meaning of the term, and
never even allude to the documents which insist on the Rights of Our Divine
Lord, Head of the Mystical Body, Priest and King. Thus, very many are
completely ignorant of the duty incumbent on all Catholics of standing
positively for Our Lord’s Reign in society in opposition to Jewish Naturalism.
The result is that numbers of Catholics are so ignorant of Catholic doctrine
that they hurl the accusation of Anti-Semitism against those who are battling
for the Rights of Christ the King, thus effectively aiding the enemies of Our
Divine Lord. Secondly, many Catholic writers copy unquestioningly what they
read in the naturalistic or anti-Supernatural Press and do not distinguish
between Anti-Semitism in the correct Catholic sense, as explained above, and
‘Anti-Semitism’ as the Jews understand it. …”
Fr.
Fahey’s Preface in Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked: As the Secret Power
Behind Communism by Monsignor George F. Dillon, D.D.
Jews have
hated & persecuted the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus Christ to
this very day!
[The Jews are] a people who,
having imbrued their hands in a most heinous outrage [Jesus’ crucifixion], have
thus polluted their souls and are deservedly blind. . . . Therefore we have
nothing in common with that most hostile of people the Jews. We have received
from the Savior another way . . . our
holy religion. . . . On what subject
will that detestable association be competent to from a correct judgment, who
after that murder of their Lord . . .
are led… by. . . their innate fury?
Council of Nicaea, 325 AD
Jewish
Power is inversely proportional to the spiritual health of the Catholic Church
“Jews should not be placed in
public offices, since it is most absurd that a blasphemer of Christ should
exercise power over Christians.”
Fourth Lateran Council
PEW
POLL published September 2024:
PEW
POLL published September 2024:
COMMENT:
The
great majority of those claiming to be Catholic have corrupted Catholic
morality. Morality follows doctrine. The Novus Ordo
first became heretical, and the corruption of morality followed the corruption
of the faith. Now that the Pope Francis the Vulgar with Fiducia Supplicans has
permitted a new "non-liturgical" blessing for sodomite couples there
will follow a dramatic increase in those in the Novus Ordo
Church who believe their church should "recognize the marriages (sic) of
gay and lesbian couples". The accuracy of PEW polls was recently confirmed
by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) that conducted its
own poll that confirmed the findings of an earlier PEW poll that found that
only 63% of Novus Ordo Catholics who attend services
at least once a week believed in the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation, or
rather, they have sentiments that imply they may believe in the notion of the
True Presence. What is becoming more evident every day is that for a faithful
Novus Ordo Catholic, there is no possibility of
salvation.
After
40 Years of Dialogue, Rabbi identifies papal “conundrum.”
The real conundrum that faces
Benedict XVI on his visit to Israel… is should he be loyal to the Gospels which
claim that only acceptance of Christ can bring the messianic age, or should he
endorse Vatican II which acknowledges that Jews… can find the kingdom of God
via a different route? Should he look
inwards, backwards or forwards?
Rabbi Jonathan Romain, The Pope’s Jewish Dilemma, The Guardian
Explicit
Supernatural Faith in God’s Revealed Truth is Necessary as a Necessity of Means
for Salvation.
If
you do not believe this, you do not possess Supernatural Faith!
Responses of
the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI, 1703:
Q. Whether a minister
is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the
mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this
might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point
of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care
to be instructed, so that he may put into practice what has been commanded him.
Resp. A promise is not
sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one
who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as
are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.
Q. Whether it is
possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to
be baptized, if there were given to him only an understanding of God and some
of His attributes, especially His justice in rewarding and in punishing, according
to this passage of the Apostle "He that cometh to God must believe
that he is and that he is a rewarder' [Heb . 11:23],
from which it is inferred that a barbarian adult, in a certain case of urgent
necessity, can be baptized although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus
Christ.
Resp. A missionary should not baptize
one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to
instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of
means, according to the capacity of the one to be baptized.”
COMMENT: The infamous 1949 Holy Office Letter, sent privately to
Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston for the purpose of censoring Fr. Lenard
Feeney for his belief in the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic
Church, affirmed the novel doctrine of 'salvation by implicit desire'. The
"implicit desire" was to be a "member of the Church" and
the evidence of this "implicit desire" was a belief in a 'god who
rewards and punishes'. The Letter teaches that the only requirement for
salvation is found in St. Paul's Letter to the Hebrews 11:13. No longer were
the belief in any revealed truth, the reception of any sacrament, or being a
subject of the Roman Pontiff necessary as necessities of means for salvation. This
Letter teaches that any "good-willed" Jew as a Jew, Hindu as a Hindu,
Mohammedan as a Mohammedan, Protestant as a Protestant, etc., etc. are members
of the Church and can obtain salvation because they believe in a 'god who
rewards and punishes'. The Holy Office response of 1703 makes it clear that the
belief in a God who rewards and punishes is only the natural philosophical
prerequisite for receiving the gospel good-news of salvation and of itself is
insufficient grounds for receiving the sacrament of Baptism.
There is yet a time of
stillness and indifference. Liberalism is a twilight state in which all errors
are softened, in which no persecution for religion will be countenanced. It is the
stillness before the storm. There is a time coming when nothing will be
persecuted but truth, and if you possess the truth, you will share the trial.
Cardinal Henry Edward
Manning, Archbishop of Westminster
“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
OLDER
BULLETIN POSTINGS THAT REMAIN TIMELY CONTINIUE BELOW:
Pope tells American
Catholics to choose ‘lesser of two evils’
Both the pro-abortion Harris
and the anti-migrant Trump are “against life,” the pontiff has said
RT
| 13 Sep, 2024
US
Presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are both “against life,”
and Catholic voters should choose the “lesser evil,” Pope Francis told
reporters on Friday.
Speaking to reporters while
returning to Rome from Singapore, the pontiff said that “not voting is ugly,”
and that the faithful “must vote.”
“You must choose the lesser
evil,” he elaborated. “Who is the lesser evil? That lady, or that gentleman? I
don’t know. Whether it is the one who is chasing away migrants, or the one that
kills children, both are against life.”
If
elected, Trump has promised to close off the US’ southern border and lead “the
largest deportation operation in American history.” Harris has vowed to sign a
law guaranteeing the same access to abortion as under Roe v. Wade, a landmark
Supreme Court decision that was overturned in 2022.
Roe
v. Wade protected a woman’s right to seek an abortion, but certain restrictions
on this right – for instance, bans on abortion past the second trimester of
pregnancy – were set out in subsequent legislation. Harris’ running mate, Tim Walz, signed a bill in 2023 allowing abortions to be
performed up to the moment of birth.
“To
send migrants away, to leave them wherever you want, to leave them … it’s
something terrible, there is evil there. To send away a child from the womb of
the mother is an assassination, because there is life. We must speak about
these things clearly,” Pope Francis told reporters on Friday.
COMMENT: Once again Pope Francis displays a frightening incompetence on
moral questions. No Catholic "must vote" without serious
qualifications. No Catholic is obligated to "choose the lesser evil".
To choose neither by refusing to vote is a perfectly acceptable Catholic moral
act. A Catholic may choose the lesser of two evils when he is obligated to
choose but no obligation exists. To vote is to accept a process established by
a ruling elite that has selected the two evil choices. If everyone refused to
vote that act would itself disenfranchise the ruling elite.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò - On
the New World State Religion
In an interview on Fox News titled The Church of Environmentalism, journalist
Tucker Carlson has brought to light a contradiction that may have escaped the
notice of many, but which is extremely revealing. Carlson recalls that the U.S.
Constitution prohibits any state religion, but for some time the governing
Democratic party has imposed on the American people the globalist cult. A
religion in all respects, all-encompassing, with its green agenda, woke dogmas,
cancel culture, priests of the World Health Organization and prophets of the World Economic Forum.
In the name of the globalist
religion, its adherents demand that all citizens behave in accordance with the
morality of the New World
Order, accepting
uncritically and with an attitude of devout submission, the doctrines defined
ex cathedra by the Davos Sanhedrin. Citizens are not
required merely to share the motivations that justify the health, economic or
social policies imposed by governments, but to give their blind and irrational
assent. It is not allowed to contest the psycho-pandemic, argue the
groundlessness of climate alarms, oppose NATO’s provocation of the Russian
Federation with the Ukrainian crisis or refuse to stand by as children are
corrupted with LGBTQ obscenities.
The high priests of this religion
have even reached the point of theorizing human sacrifice by means of abortion
and euthanasia: a sacrifice required by the common good, so as not to
over-populate the planet or over-burden public health. Adherence to globalism is
not optional: it is the State religion, and the State "tolerates"
non-practitioners only to the extent that their presence does not prevent
society from exercising this cult. The public act of vaccination represented a
sort of "baptism" in the globalist faith, the initiation into
worship.
The "church of
environmentalism" defines itself as inclusive, but it does not tolerate
dissent. Those who do not accept the anti-Gospel of Davos
are ipso facto heretics and must therefore be punished, excommunicated, separated
from the social body, and considered public enemies.
This State religion has spread to
all the nations of the Western world, whose leaders were converted to the
globalist "Word" by the apostle of the Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, its
self-proclaimed "pope" who is invested with an infallible and
incontestable authority. On the website of the World Economic Forum, we find
the list of "prelates" of globalism. A very powerful, highly
organized network, widespread not only at the top of institutions, but also in
universities and courts, in companies and hospitals, in peripheral bodies and
local municipalities, in cultural and sports associations, so that it is
impossible to escape indoctrination even in a provincial primary school or a
small rural community.
Tucker Carlson’s observation
highlights the deception to which we are subjected daily by our rulers: the
theoretical imposition of the secularism of the State has served to eliminate
the presence of the true God from the institutions, while the practical imposition
of the globalist religion serves to introduce Satan into the institutions, with
the aim of establishing that
dystopian New World Order in which the Antichrist will claim to be worshipped as a god, in his
mad delirium to replace Our Lord.
Conservative
Catholics: Liberal in principle and conservative in practice can only be jarred
from their complacency by someone like Pope Francis. At least some recognize
that unqualified obedience is non-Catholic.
The power that Christ conferred upon Peter
and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of
teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the
faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law.
On the contrary: the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and
to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind
himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt
to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism. […..] To
put this question into sharp relief: the feet of whom should be washed in the
Mass of Maundy Thursday? Those of men or of women? The feet of Christians or
non-Christians? Why? With all due respect I submit that any answer based solely
on “. . . because the pope did it” is insufficient if not downright
ultramontane. Such reasoning will not do. Such positivism is simply foreign to
the Catholic faith. Papal preference is not the arbiter of the church’s
liturgy: sound liturgical and theological principles are. The Bishop of Rome
exercises his authority rightly when, in liturgical matters, he bases his
judgments on these principles. If he ignores them in his judgments or personal
practice he risks causing confusion, scandal, and disunity. The exercise of
authority in respect of the sacred liturgy and the personal liturgical behavior
of all popes, prelates, other clergy, and laity are rightly evaluated according
to these criteria.
Dom
Alcuin Reed, 2014
"All religions are paths
to reach God. They are—to make a comparison—like different languages, different
dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone. If you start to fight
saying 'my religion is more important than yours, mine is true and yours
isn't', where will this lead us? There is only one God, and each of us has a
language to arrive at God. Some are Sheik, Muslim, Hindu, Christians; they are
different ways to God."
Pope Francis addressing
non-Catholic children in Singapore, September 12, 2024
COMMENT: Pope
Francis is not just a simple heretic, he is an apostate. Anyone who holds Pope
Francis as their proximate rule of faith will follow him to hell!
“Remember,
O man, that dust thou art, and to dust thou shalt
return.”
"An excessive
desire for liberty at the expense of everything else is what undermines
democracy and leads to the demand for tyranny." Plato
In a 2022 lecture at Notre Dame, Alasdair MacIntyre
argued that the claims and conceptions of universal and inalienable human
dignity as reflected in documents such as the 1948 United Nations’ Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and in various post-war European constitutions are
puzzling, since this dignity requires a duty of respect to everyone just for
being human, no matter their behavior or character, so Stalin the mass murderer
has as much dignity and deserves as much respect as Mother Teresa. Aquinas’ view of dignitas as interpreted by Charles De Koninick is a challenge to this view, for it assigns human
dignity, not to the mere fact of being human, but to the end to which we are
called, which is supernatural, union with God, which might not be attained due
to one’s choices on earth against those common goods which enable our
attainment of the supernatural end, and so human dignitas could be lost. According to this view, the 20th-century concept
of human dignity is much too individualistic, and because it is not based in
justice and the common good, can only provide negative prescriptions against
the undignified treatment of humans. It is unable to provide positive
prescriptions that enable persons to obtain the common goods and the virtues
they need to attain their supernatural end. For MacIntyre, we need to speak
of human dignity in terms of justice, what we owe to each other for the sake of
enabling persons to attain their personal and common goods and final end, which
is the knowledge and love of God in this life and the next.
Thaddeus Kozinski, PhD, Introduction to his
article, From Liberal Democracy to Global Totalitarianism
ABCs of the Spiritual Life
MAN HAS a twofold nature, the one
superior, the other inferior. The first is generally termed reason, the second
is called appetite, sensuality, or passion. Reason is the distinguishing
property of man, and he is not considered responsible for the primary impulses
of his appetite unless his superior faculty confirms the choice.
The entire spiritual warfare,
consequently, consists in this: the rational faculty is placed between the
Divine will above it and the sensitive appetite below it, and is attacked from
both sides------God
moving it by His grace, and the flesh by its appetites strive for victory.
It is apparent, then, that
inconceivable difficulties arise when persons who during their youth have
contracted vicious habits resolve to change their life, mortify their passions,
and break with the world in order to devote themselves to the service of God.
The will is violently attacked by
Divine grace and by its own sensual appetites, and wherever it turns, it
absorbs these withering attacks with the greatest difficulty.
This onslaught is not experienced
by those who are firmly settled in their way of life, whether in virtue by
conforming to the will of God, or in vice by indulging their sensual desires.
No one should delude himself that
he can acquire virtue and serve God in the proper way, unless he is willing to
undergo a violent struggle. He must conquer the difficulty he will experience
when he deprives himself of the pleasures, great or small, to which he has been
viciously attached.
The result is that very few attain
any great degree of perfection. After conquering their greatest vice, after
undergoing tremendous exertions, they lose courage and fail to pursue their
objective. And this when only small trials are to be overcome, such as subduing
the feeble remnants of their own will, and annihilating some weaker passions
which revive and then completely regain their hearts.
Many persons of this type, for
example, do not take what belongs to others, but they are passionately attached
to what is their own. They do not use any illegal methods of aggrandizement,
but instead of spurning advancement, they are fond of it and seek it by any
means they think lawful. They observe the appointed fasts, but, on other days,
they indulge in the most exotic delicacies. They are very careful to observe
chastity, and yet they refuse to give up their favorite amusements, even though
they constitute great obstacles to a spiritual life and real union with God.
Since these things are so highly dangerous, particularly for those who do not
recognize their bad results, they must be dealt with very cautiously.
Without such caution, we may be
assured that most of our good acts will have as attendants, slothfulness,
vanity, human respect, hidden imperfections, conceit, and a desire for the
notice and approval of others. Dom
Lorenzo Scupoli, The Spiritual Combat
Vatican
Council I listing the beneficial Fruits of the Council of Trent which are in
every detail exactly the opposite which we have seen from Vatican Council II -
By their
fruits they are known!
Now this redemptive
providence appears very clearly in unnumbered benefits, but most especially is
it manifested in the advantages which have been secured for the Christian world
by ecumenical councils, among which the council
of Trent requires special mention, celebrated though it was in evil
days.
Thence came:
1. a closer definition and more fruitful
exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and
2. the condemnation and repression of errors;
thence too,
3. the restoration and vigorous strengthening
of ecclesiastical discipline,
4. the advancement of the clergy in zeal for
·
learning and
·
piety,
5. the founding of colleges for the training
of the young for the service of religion; and finally
6. the renewal of the moral life of the
Christian people by
· a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and
· a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also
came
7. a closer union of the members with the
visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole
Mystical Body of Christ.
Thence came:
1. the multiplication of religious orders and
other organisations of Christian piety; thence too
2. that determined and constant ardour for the spreading of Christ’s kingdom abroad in the
world, even at the cost of shedding one’s blood.
While we recall with grateful hearts, as is
only fitting, these and other outstanding gains, which the divine mercy has bestowed
on the church especially by means of the last ecumenical synod, we cannot
subdue the bitter grief that we feel at most serious evils, which have largely
arisen either because
o the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many,
or because
o its wise decrees were neglected.
First Vatican Council, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Faith, listing some of the manifold beneficial fruits from
the Council of Trent!
Is
this what Pope Francis means by “fleshless theology that becomes ideology”?
I likewise receive and accept the rites of the Catholic Church which
have been received and approved in the solemn administration of all the
aforesaid (seven) sacraments. [.....]
I resolutely assert that images of Christ and the ever virgin mother of
God, and likewise those of the other saints, are to be kept and retained, and
that due honour and reverence is to be shown them.
[.....]
Likewise all other things which have been transmitted, defined and
declared by the sacred canons and the ecumenical councils, especially the
sacred Trent, I accept unhesitatingly and profess; in the same way whatever is
to the contrary, and whatever heresies have been condemned, rejected and anathematised by the Church, I too condemn, reject and anathematise. This true Catholic faith, outside of which
none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall
steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness
and purity until my dying breath, and I shall do my best to ensure that all
others do the same. This is what I, the same Pius, promise, vow and swear. So
help me God and these holy gospels of God.
Profession of
Faith, Blessed Pope Pius IX before the bishops of the Church at the opening of
the First Vatican Council
"Let everything that conflicts with ecclesiastical tradition and
teaching, and that has been innovated and done contrary to the examples
outlined by the saints and the venerable Fathers, or that shall hereafter at
any time be done in such a fashion, be anathema."
Second Council of Nicaea
Our Lady of LaSalette
“Rome
will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.” “The demons of the
air, together with the Antichrist, will work great wonders on the earth and in
the air, and men will become ever more perverted. God will take care of His
faithful servants and men of good will; the Gospel will be preached everywhere,
all peoples and all nations will have knowledge of the Truth.”
Blessed
Virgin Mary addressing the children at LaSalette,
September 19, 1846
“When
the Secret has been scorned, misunderstood ... held back for money, one must be
surprised at nothing. The Church will endure forever, our Lord said so; but among
the teaching members of the Church, what traitors, what apostates, what
mercenaries, what sectarians, who bear the imprint or the sign of the beast
with ten horns St. John speaks of in his vision on Patmos! But this beast
similar to the Lamb, who rises out of the earth, isn't it the figure of
faithless ecclesiastics? I firmly believe so. Happy those who die in God's
grace, for those who live will see sad and terrifying things. We still haven't
reached the beginning of the end.”
Melanie
Calvat, visionary of LaSaletter,
Letter to Fr. Roubaud, January 2, 1892), quoted by Solange Hertz
"Souls
who are God's friends can guess the Secret's meaning without help, and the
others won't want to because it applies to them too closely. Melanie Calvat, to her spiritual director in 1903, quoted by Solange Hertz
Outrage as Vatican drops
‘Before Christ’ for ‘Before Common Era’
Simon
Caldwell | August 30, 2024
Catholics have accused the Vatican of
betraying Jesus by substituting the term “Before Christ” with “Before Common
Era” in official documentation.
The
traditional term BC was replaced by BCE in the English translation of a July
letter by Pope Francis on the role of literature in Christian formation.
Ann
Widdecombe, a convert to the Catholic faith and a former
Conservative Party minister, was among the Catholics all over the world who
were angered by the move.
“If
the Vatican is doing that then it is a complete betrayal,” said Miss Widdecombe.
“If
the Vatican is removing the name of Christ from official documentation it’s a
complete betrayal.”
The
use of the secular term BCE comes in paragraph 12 of the letter, which refers
to the address of St Paul before the Areopagus that
was described in the Acts of the Apostles.
The
paragraph reads: “This verse contains two quotations: one indirect, from the
poet Epimenides (sixth century BCE), and the other
direct, from the Phaenomena of
the poet Aratus of Soli (third century BCE), who
wrote of the constellations and the signs of good and bad weather.”
The
document represents a major departure from the Church’s perspective of history,
which it frames from the arrival of the Messiah.
The
Church has always numbered years either “BC”, meaning “Before Christ”, or “AD”
– Anno Domini, or
in the year of Our Lord, to represent the era of the Church.
The
term BCE was used from the 1800s by Jewish scholars who did not acknowledge
Jesus as the Messiah.
It
has crept into popular usage with the increased secularism of Western societies
and the rejection of any concept of God, and is often controversial.
BCE
appears only in the English translation of the Pope’s letter. BC remains the
preferred abbreviation for the translations into Italian, French, German,
Spanish, Portuguese, Polish and Arabic.
COMMENT: Is Pope Francis now a Jew? It was the Jews who refused to use
Anno Domini and are now imposing it in political, social and academic circles.
Regardless if Francis or the Jews recognize Anno Domini, Jesus Christ is God
who created time and His incarnation is the singular most important event in
all history. It is Pope Francis who is denying this unyielding fact.
Tikkun olam (Hebrew תיקון
עולם, literally, 'repair of the world') is
a concept in Judaism, often interpreted as aspiration to behave and act constructively
and beneficially. Documented use of the term dates back to the Mishnaic period (ca. 10-220 AD), (that is, the time when
the oral traditions of the Jews were committed to the written form in the Mishna, also called the Oral Torah). Since medieval times, kabbalistic literature has broadened use of the term. In
the modern era, among the post-Haskalah (Jewish
enlightenment, 1770-1880) movements, tikkun olam is the idea that Jews bear responsibility not only for
their own moral, spiritual, and material welfare, but also for the welfare of
society at large. For many contemporary pluralistic rabbis, the term refers to
"Jewish social justice" or "the establishment of Godly qualities
throughout the world". Wikipedia
COMMENT: Jews
repeatedly since the time of Jesus Christ are the passionate creators and
principle instigators of ideological movements conceived as necessary for the
moral and material improvement of political and social order. When one after
the other proves to be a political and social failure, it is simply dropped and
they move on to another. They recognize a ‘fall from grace’ because they
recognize the ‘world needs to be repaired.’ Since they have rejected Jesus
Christ, the incarnate Logos, the eternal Wisdom of the Father, they have rejected
His divine plan for the ‘repair of the world’ and in its place offer what Fr.
Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp. described as “Organized
Naturalism” in opposition to the Supernatural Order of Jesus Christ.
Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that whoever is not working for God
is working for the Devil. There is no middle ground. As Jesus said, “He that is
not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not
with me, scattereth” (Matthew 12:30).
Where
Tikkun Olam can lead
OPINION:
Stalin’s Jews
We mustn't forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were
Jewish
Israel News | ynetnews | Sever Plocker
Here's
a particularly forlorn historical date: More than 100 years ago, between the
19th and 20th of December 1917, in the midst of the Bolshevik revolution and
civil war, Lenin signed a decree calling for the establishment of The
All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and
Sabotage, also known as Cheka.
Within a short period of time, Cheka became
the largest and cruelest state security organization. Its organizational
structure was changed every few years, as were its names: From Cheka to GPU, later to NKVD, and later to KGB.
We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka
was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at
least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger,
large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at
Gulags.
Whole population strata were eliminated: Independent farmers, ethnic
minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals,
artists, labor movement activists, "opposition members" who were
defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party
itself.
In his new, highly praised book "The War of the World,"
Historian Niall Ferguson writes that no revolution in the history of mankind
devoured its children with the same unrestrained appetite as did the Soviet
revolution. In his book on the Stalinist purges, Tel Aviv University's Dr. Igal Halfin writes that Stalinist
violence was unique in that it was directed internally.
Lenin, Stalin, and their successors could not have carried out their
deeds without wide-scale cooperation of disciplined "terror
officials," cruel interrogators, snitches, executioners, guards, judges,
perverts, and many bleeding hearts who were members of the progressive Western
Left and were deceived by the Soviet regime of horror and even provided it with
a kosher certificate.
All these things are well-known to some extent or another, even though
the former Soviet Union's archives have not yet been fully opened to the
public. But who knows about this? Within Russia itself, very few people have
been brought to justice for their crimes in the NKVD's and KGB's service. The
Russian public discourse today completely ignores the question of "How
could it have happened to us?" As opposed to Eastern European nations, the
Russians did not settle the score with their Stalinist past.
And us, the Jews? An Israeli student finishes high school without ever
hearing the name "Genrikh Yagoda,"
the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU's deputy commander
and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda
diligently implemented Stalin's collectivization orders and is responsible for
the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and
managed the Gulag system. After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief
hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the "bloodthirsty
dwarf."
Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his Book
"Stalin: Court of the Red Star", Jewish historian Sebag
Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror,
when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded
by beautiful, young Jewish women.
Stalin's close associates and loyalists included member of the Central
Committee and Politburo Lazar Kaganovich. Montefiore characterizes him as the "first
Stalinist" and adds that those starving to death in Ukraine, an
unparalleled tragedy in the history of human kind aside from the Nazi horrors
and Mao's terror in China, did not move Kaganovich.
Many Jews sold their soul to the devil of the
Communist revolution and have blood on their hands for eternity. We'll mention
just one more: Leonid Reichman, head of the NKVD's
special department and the organization's chief interrogator, who was a
particularly cruel sadist.
In
1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most
senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They
too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating
lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin
described the waves of soviet terror as a "carnival of mass murder,"
"fantasy of purges", and "essianism of
evil." Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic
ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern
history.
The
Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and
abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but
rather, as Stalinists, communists, and "Soviet people." Therefore, we
find it easy to ignore their origin and "play dumb": What do we have
to do with them? But let's not forget them. My own view is different. I find it
unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people
when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does
amazingly despicable things.
Even
if we deny it, we cannot escape the Jewishness of
"our hangmen," who served the Red Terror with loyalty and dedication
from its establishment. After all, others will always remind us of their
origin.
“Don’t Jews still believe in a Messias
to come?” asks the credulous Christian. “And don’t they believe in the same
Biblical Heaven and Hell that we do?”
The answer to both these questions
is — no. And it is an emphatic “No!” as the subsequent Jewish testimony will
verify.
Concerning the Messias:
The Jews of today reject the notion of a personal redeemer who will be born of
them and lead them to the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. The Jews
believe that the whole Jewish race is to be elevated to a position of
prosperity and overlordship and that, when this happy
day arrives (the Messianic Age), they will have achieved all that is coming to
them by way of savior and salvation. In his recent book, The Messianic Idea in Israel, Jewish theologian Dr. Joseph Klausner explains: “Thus the whole people Israel in the
form of the elect of the nations gradually became the Messiah of the world, the redeemer of
mankind.”
Concerning Heaven and Hell: A succinct summary of Jewish
teaching on “life after death” was given in the May, 1958 issue of B’nai
B’rith’s National Jewish Monthly. Under the caption, “What Can A Modern Jew Believe?” there
appeared: “Judaism insists that ‘heaven’ must be established on this earth. The
reward of the pious is life and happiness in this world, while the punishment
of the wicked is misery on earth and premature death … By hitching its star to
the Messianic future on this earth, Israel became the eternal people.” The
article goes on: “The best Jewish minds have always held that a physical
hereafter is a detraction from mature belief.” And the conclusion: “There is
neither hell nor paradise, God merely sends out the sun in its full strength;
the wicked are consumed by its heat, while the pious find delight and healing
in its rays.”
Fr. Leonard Feeney, MICM, The
Point, October 1958
“In the name of the Gospel, and in the light of the Encyclicals of the
last four Popes, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X, I do not hesitate
to affirm that this indifference to religion which puts on the same level the
religion of divine origin and the religions invented by men in order to include
them in the same skepticism is the blasphemy which calls down chastisement on society
far more than the sins of individuals and families.”
Cardinal Désiré Félicien
François Joseph Mercier, Archbishop of Mechelen in Belgium and Catholic scholar, 1918, The Lesson of Events, quoted by Fr.
Denis Fahey in The Kingship of Chirst and Organized Naturalism
Infallibility
is primarily and essentially an attribute of the God's Church because it is an
attribute of God
“Infallibility is not a quality inherent in any person, but an
assistance attached to an office”
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning (1808-1892)
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
Novel theory:
Dogma contains “perennial truths” and contingent accretions.
My fundamental impulse, precisely from the
Council, has always been to free the very heart of the faith from under any
ossified strata, and to give this heart strength and dynamism. This impulse is
the constant in my life.
Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth
The steps taken by the Council towards the
modern era which had rather vaguely been presented as ‘openness to the world’
[aggiornamento], belong in short to the perennial problem of the relationship
between faith and reason that is re-emerging in ever new forms.... The Council
had to find a new definition of the relationship between the Church and the
modern age.... Here I shall cite only John XXIII’s well-known words, which
unequivocally express this hermeneutic when he says that the Council wishes “to
transmit the doctrine pure and integral, without any attenuation or
distortion”. And he continues: “Our duty
is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with
antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to
that work which our age demands of us…” It is necessary that “adherence to all
the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness…” be presented in
“faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however,
should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the
literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the
deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is
another…”, retaining the same meaning and message.... It is clear that this commitment
to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking upon it and a
new relationship with it.
Pope
Benedict XVI, speech to Roman Curia on Dec 22, 2005, outlining his papal agenda
Catholic teaching: Dogma is
the irreformable formal object of Divine and Catholic Faith
For the doctrine of faith which God has
revealed has not been proposed like a philosophical invention, to be perfected
by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of
Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence, also, that
meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy
Mother the Church has once declared; nor is that meaning ever to be departed
from, under the pretence or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them.
Vatican
Council I
Ugly
fact ignored by Reform of Reform – Bugnini was appointed by Paul VI, his work
was approved and imposed by Paul VI, and his work accurately reflected the
novel principles of liturgical innovation adopted in 1948 and approved at
Vatican II
Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II document on the liturgy, is
the justification for Bugnini’s Novus Ordo
• The order to promote urgently a liturgical
reform is in SC §§ 1, 14, 25, 31, 40, 43, 50, 63b, 128.
• The encouragement of the participation of the faithful in the liturgy is
stated in §§ 11, 14, 18, 19, 21, 27, 41, 53, 114, 121, 124.
• In § 12 communitarian prayer is recommended.
• In § 30 acclamations and dances are advised.
• Inculturation is counseled in §§ 37-40, 112, 119.
• Communion under two species is counseled in §55.
• In §§ 62, 67-82 a complete change in the ceremonies of the sacraments and
sacramentals is imposed.
• The reform of Divine Office is decreed in §§ 87-88, 91-93, 97.
• The reform of the liturgical year is ordered in § 107.
• The introduction of liturgical modern art is approved in § 123.
• The suppression of the statues in the churches is recommended in § 125.
• The change of sacerdotal vestments is allowed in §128.
Atila S. Guimarães, Tradition in Action
“This dialogue
should serve to strengthen our common hope in God in the midst of an
increasingly secularized society. Without this hope, society loses its
humanity.”
Benedict XVI, addressing
Jewish Community, Berlin, Germany, September 22, 2011
“Strengthen
Our common hope in God”??? – Society lost “its humanity” after Vatican II
96% of Jewish
Leaders Support Abortion, 93% believe that homosexuality is not wrong!
The study also found that on a variety of issues involving sexual
morality that have roiled other religious groups, Jews are much more liberal
than other Americans. Jews take a less critical view of homosexuality,
abortion, birth control and pornography than do Gentiles,” the study
found. In each case, Jewish leaders are
even more tolerant than the Jewish public.
For example, 48 percent of
non-Jews say homosexuality is wrong, compared to 23 percent of Jews and 7
percent of Jewish leaders. And while 56 percent of non-Jews support abortion rights, 88 percent of Jews and 96
percent of Jewish leaders do.
Only 38 percent of Jews support allowing the Ten Commandments to be
displayed in public schools, compared to 65 percent of non-Jews; 39 percent of
Jews would allow the teaching of creationism, compared with 63 percent of
non-Jews; and 22 percent of Jews would support vouchers that could be used at
religious schools, compared with 43 percent of non-Jews.
Pew Charitable Trusts,
examining the contemporary role of religious groups in the United States
What
“Religious Submission” to the ‘Ordinary Authentic Magisterium’ Actually Means
Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters
does not of itself demand consent just because in writing such Letters the
Popes do not exercise the supreme power [i.e., extra-ordinary magisterium] of
their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary
Teaching Authority [ordinary and universal magisterium], of which it is
true to say: “He that heareth you, heareth Me.” [Luke 10:16].
Pius XII, Humani Generis,
par. 20.
COMMENT:
This quotation taken from Pope Pius XII is now referenced to support the Novus
Ordo Church’s claim that every Catholic must give unconditional submission of
his “mind and will to the authentic magisterium” of Pope Francis. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical is referring
to the “ordinary and universal magisterium” and this can be clearly seen for
two reasons: The examples provided by Pope Pius XII that follow this statement
in his encyclical refer specifically to modern theological novelties that
reject, for example, the infallible teaching of the Church on the inerrancy of
sacred scripture, the identity of the Church and the Mystical Body of Christ,
and the nature of Original Sin. These
are all examples of the “ordinary and universal” magisterium that Vatican I
dogmatically defined as “infallible.”
The other reason is God cannot bind the authority of His Truth to what
can and have in the past contained errors.
Fr. Joseph Fenton, in an article published in the AER in 1949 entitled,
On the Doctrinal Authority of Papal Encyclicals, documents specific historical
errors published in those documents. Whenever the pope teaches by virtue of his
grace of state from the ‘authentic ordinary magisterium’, his teaching must be
accepted by a religious submission which is always and necessarily a prudent
and conditional submission to the personal teaching authority of the pope. Such conditional acceptance of the word of
God is not possible when the pope teaches infallibly by engaging the
“extra-ordinary magisterium” or the “ordinary and universal magisterium” of the
Church from which alone it can be said without qualification whatsoever, “He
that heareth you, heareth Me.” [Luke 10:16].
The modern encyclical by Pope Francis on global warming/earth worship,
for example, is wholly conscribed within a very narrow and tenuous ideological
framework that has little or nothing to do with Catholic doctrine or morality.
This document has nothing to do with the “ordinary and universal”
magisterium. It is entirely a product of
the personal authentic ordinary magisterium of Pope Francis teaching by his
grace of state. Anyone to whom the
document is addressed is free to toss the document in the trash along with the
junk mail if he, upon mature consideration, finds it to be a novelty and, in
its overall tone, an ideological screed divorced from natural truth.
On the Necessity of Baptism
"By
one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there
may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation,
‘For unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter
the kingdom of God’ (John 3:5)."
Council
of Trent, Session 5, Canon 4 on Original Sin ....
"Particular
texts (in sacred Scripture) where the Church has defined that such is the
meaning are few. The following texts have been dogmatically defined:
·
Romans
5:12 on Original Sin
·
John 3:5
on Baptism
·
Words of
institution on the Holy Eucharist
·
John
20:23 on the remission and retention of sin
·
James
5:14 on the establishment of the sacrament Extreme Unction
·
Matthew
16:16 & John 21:15 on the universal jurisdiction of the St. Peter and the
papacy
.......
From John 3:5 there is established the absolute necessity of baptism and that
real and natural water is necessary for baptism (Council of Trent, Session V,
Canon 4 Denz. 791, 858)
Fr.
Sixtus Cartechini, De Valore notarum theologicarum et de criteriis ad eas
dignoscendas, 1951, Chap. 7
Two response from a recent
lengthy interview 
with Msgr. Carlo Maria
Viganò are republished below:
Msgr. Carlo Maria Viganò
Interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall
August 9, 2024
What should lay Catholics do if the Traditional
Latin Mass is banned by the Vatican?
The
Tridentine Mass is a priceless treasure for the Holy Church. It has been
“canonized” by its centuries-old use in which we see the voice of Sacred
Tradition expressed. If the Hierarchy, abusing its power against the purpose
that the Lord has given it, prevents the celebration of the ancient Mass, it
commits an abuse, and this prohibition is null.
Priests
and bishops should show more courage, continuing to celebrate the ancient rite
and refusing to celebrate the Novus Ordo. They would probably face sanctions
from the Vatican, but they ought to ask themselves what sanctions will await
them when they have to answer before the Lord’s tribunal for not having
fulfilled their duty, preferring servile obedience to the powerful rather than
obedience to God.
The
laity should organize themselves into small communities by purchasing the
churches that are now up for sale or by setting up home chapels, and by seeking
out priests willing to celebrate the Mass and Sacraments for them according to
the Apostolic rite and by helping them materially to carry out their ministry.
What are your thoughts on the
Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP), the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign
Priest (ICKSP), and the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX)? Do you encourage people
to attend their Masses?
The
former Ecclesia Dei institutes were born from the Vatican’s intention to weaken
the Society of Saint Pius X after the Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, which,
having given itself an apostolic succession, was able continue its apostolate
even after the death of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The “authorization” to
celebrate the Tridentine Liturgy – which until then had been completely
excluded – had and still has as its condition the acceptance of the
“post-conciliar magisterium” and the licitness of the Novus Ordo. This premise
is completely unacceptable, because it reduces the celebration of the
Traditional Latin Mass to a ceremonial question, while instead it is evident
that the Tridentine rite summarizes in itself all the doctrine and spirituality
of the Catholic Faith, in antithesis to the Protestantized rite of Paul VI that
ecumenically silences that Faith. Whoever celebrates the Mass of Saint Pius V
cannot accept Vatican II. In fact, from the beginning, many priests who had
left the Society of Archbishop Lefebvre and had joined the Ecclesia Dei
institutes continued to have strong reservations and, so to speak, played on
the equivocation of a tacit acceptance that the Vatican itself did not ask to
be made explicit.
In
2007, Benedict XVI recognized the legitimacy of the traditional Liturgy,
declaring that the Traditional Latin Mass was the “extraordinary form” of the
Roman Rite, alongside the “ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo. The Motu Proprio
Summorum Pontificum reveals Ratzinger’s Hegelian approach, which in the
coexistence of two forms of the same rite sought to compose the synthesis
between the thesis of the traditional Mass and the antithesis of the Montinian
rite. But even in that case, the ideological basis of the Motu Proprio was in
fact moderated by practice, and so the end result of Summorum Pontificum was
relatively positive, at least in the spread of the celebration of the
Traditional Latin Mass that today’s younger generations had never experienced.
Young priests and many of the faithful have embraced the Apostolic Rite,
discovering its beauty and intrinsic coherence with the Catholic Faith. In the
face of the success of the Mass of all time, the Motu Proprio Traditionis
Custodes drastically limited the liberalization of Summorum Pontificum,
declaring that the right of every priest to celebrate the traditional Mass had
been abolished and reserving it only to the former Ecclesia Dei institutes.
Thus an “Indian reservation” of more or less conservative clerics who depend on
Bergoglio has been created, who are required to profess the conciliar faith
through the concelebration of the new rite at least once a year: something that
practically all the priests of these institutes are forced to do, willingly or
not. On the other hand, it does not seem to me that the bishops and cardinals
who support them have expressed any reservations about the Council or about the
doctrinal, moral, and liturgical deviations of the post-conciliar period and of
Bergoglio himself. It is difficult to expect from subordinates a combativeness
that eminent Prelates have never demonstrated.
These
institutes are therefore under blackmail. If with Summorum Pontificum it was
plausible to think of an attempt at liturgical peace that would leave
conservatives free to choose the rite they prefer (in a vision that was, so to
speak, liberal), with Traditionis Custodes the clergy who celebrate and the
faithful who attend the Traditional Latin Mass are burdened by the ecclesial
stigma of backwardness, of the rejection of Vatican II, of pre-conciliar
rigidity. In this case, synodality and parrhesia yield to the authoritarianism
of Bergoglio, who, however, does speak an uncomfortable truth: the Ancient Rite
calls into question the ecclesiology and theology of Vatican II and as such
does not represent the conciliar church. The illusion of liturgical peace has
therefore been shattered miserably in the face of the evidence of the
irreconcilability of two rites that “excommunicate” each other, just like the
two churches – the Catholic Church and the synodal church – of which they are a
cultic expression.
In
the case of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the ritual and
ceremonial question seems to prevail over the doctrinal one, and it is no
coincidence that amidst the general dissolution that exists, the Canons of
Gricigliano seem to be exempt from opposition and ostracism: they do not
represent a problem, because they do not question the new course in the
slightest and indeed have extensive citations of conciliar documents in their
Constitutions. The other institutes are also surviving, but it remains to be
seen how they intend to respond to the coming future restrictions.
The
Society of Saint Pius X, after fifty years of activity, is showing signs of
tiredness, and sometimes it seems that its silence about the horrors of Santa
Marta is motivated by a tacit agreement of non-belligerence, perhaps in the
hope of being able to become the collector of conservatism and of part of Catholic
traditionalism, once Bergoglio has eliminated “the competition” of the former
Ecclesia Dei institutes. My fear is that this hope will in the end lead to
ratifying the de facto schism that is already present in the Church, forcing
Catholics to leave the official church, as if they, and not the Roman
Hierarchy, were in a state of schism. Once the critical voices are eliminated,
Bergoglio would find himself with “his own” heretical church, from which the
priests and faithful who do not accept the permanent revolution have been
banished.
As
for the faithful, I believe it is necessary to understand the situation of
great disorientation and anarchy that is present in the Church. Many Catholics
who have discovered the Traditional Latin Mass are no longer able to attend the
Montinian rite, and it is understandable that they are “content” – so to speak
– with the Tridentine Masses celebrated by the former Ecclesia Dei institutes,
without however accepting the compromises that are required of their priests.
But it is a situation that sooner or later will have to be clarified,
especially if the acceptance of conciliar and synodal errors becomes the
conditio sine qua non of the enjoyment of the Traditional Latin Mass. In that
case the faithful must act coherently and seek out priests who are not
compromised with the synodal church. The horrors of this “pontificate” are in
any case eroding the consensus of the Clergy with regard to Bergoglio: a
traditional faction could decide not to follow him on the failed path he has
undertaken.
What would you say to lay people who
have no access to the Traditional Latin Mass?
I
understand the torment that many feel at not being able to attend the
Tridentine Mass. It is like being deprived of the very Presence of the Lord and
of the Graces that the Holy Sacrifice spreads on souls and on the Church. But
we must remember that throughout history, many Catholics, both in distant lands
not yet reached by missionaries and also in times of persecution, have found
themselves unable to attend Mass except on rare occasions. A Catholic can
survive without the Mass, but not without the Faith. If Faith is therefore
indispensable for salvation, it is important that every Catholic nourish his or
her religious education by taking up the Tridentine Catechism again and
nourishing the intellect and the heart in such a way as to resist the contagion
of the Novus Ordo and its degenerations. We must pray that the Lord sends
workers for His harvest, and we must support the few priests who are still
faithful.
The
proper understanding of this dogma from the Council of Trent:
Canon 4 on the sacraments in general: If anyone says that the
sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous,
and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God
through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary
for each one, let him be anathema.
The Dogma
defines two revealed doctrinal truths:
1.
If anyone says: that the sacraments of the
New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be
anathema.
2.
If anyone says: that without the
sacraments or (if anyone says) without the desire of the sacraments
men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, let him be
anathema.
Both
the Sacrament of Baptism and the will to receive the Sacrament
are necessary for salvation!
“But God desired that his
confession should avail for his salvation, since he preserved him in this life until the time of his holy regeneration.”
St. Fulgentius
“If anyone is not baptized, not
only in ignorance, but even knowingly, he can in no way be saved. For his path to salvation was through the confession,
and salvation itself was in baptism.
At his age, not only was confession
without baptism of no avail: Baptism
itself would be of no avail for salvation if he neither believed nor
confessed.”
St. Fulgentius
Notice, both the CONFESSION AND
THE BAPTISM are necessary for salvation, harkening back to Trent's teaching
that both the laver AND the “votum” are required for justification, and
harkening back to Our Lord's teaching that we must be born again of water AND
the Holy Spirit.
In fact, you see the language of St. Fulgentius reflected in the Council of
Trent. Trent describes the votum (so-called “desire”) as the PATH
TO SALVATION, the disposition to Baptism, and then says that “JUSTIFICATION
ITSELF” (St. Fulgentius says “SALVATION ITSELF”) follows the dispositions in
the Sacrament of Baptism.
Yet another solid argument for why Trent is teaching that BOTH the votum
AND the Sacrament are required for justification.
“Hold most firmly and never
doubt in the least that not only all pagans but also all Jews and all heretics
and schismatics who end this present life outside the Catholic Church are about
to go into the eternal fire that was prepared for the Devil and his angels.”
St. Fulgentius
“The most Holy Roman Church
firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the
Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics,
can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the ‘eternal fire
which was prepared for the devil and his angels.’”
St. Eugene IV, Cantate Domino
Ladislaus,
CathInfo
"THE
SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF
BAPTISM. THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE."
“Let him heed what the blessed apostle Peter preaches,
that sanctification by the Spirit is effected by the sprinkling of
Christ’s blood (1 Pet. 1:2); and let him not skip over the same apostle’s
words, knowing that you have been redeemed from the empty way of life you
inherited from your fathers, not with corruptible gold and silver but by the
precious blood of Jesus Christ, as of a lamb without stain or spot (1 Pet.
1:18). Nor should he withstand the testimony of blessed John the
apostle: and the blood of Jesus, the Son of God, purifies us from
every sin (1 Jn. 1:7); and again, This is the victory which conquers
the world, our faith. Who is there who conquers the world save one who
believes that Jesus is the Son of God? It is He, Jesus Christ, who has
come through water and blood, not in water only, but in water and blood.
And because the Spirit is truth, it is the Spirit who testifies. For
there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood. And the
three are one. (1 Jn. 5:4-8) IN OTHER WORDS, THE SPIRIT OF
SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.
THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE. NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE FROM ITS
LINK WITH THE OTHERS.”
Pope St. Leo the Great, dogmatic letter to
Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451
“Also the epistle of
blessed Leo the Pope to Flavian… if anyone argues concerning the text of this
one even in regard to one iota, and does not receive it in all respects
reverently, let him be anathema.”
Pope St. Gelasius, Decretal, 495
Pope Francis praises nun for
opening ‘trans home’ for men claiming to be women, calls them ‘girls’
Pope Francis told the 'nun of
the trans' that 'God who did not go to the seminary or study theology will
repay you abundantly. I pray for you and your girls.'
LifeSiteNews
| NEUQUÉN, Argentina | August 18, 2020 – After a controversial nun opened
in Argentina a residence for ‘trans women’ — men who choose to identify as
women — Pope Francis praised her work, referring to the men as “girls.”
Sister Mónica Astorga Cremona, 53,
known locally in Argentina as the “Nun of the Trans,” cut the ribbon on the new
complex of twelve small apartments dedicated solely to housing men claiming to
be women and their partners.
Upon hearing the news the Pope
responded in a communication, according to the nun, “Dear Monica, God who did
not go to the seminary or study theology will repay you abundantly. I pray for
you and your girls.”
The Supreme Pontiff, according to the
nun, referred to the males, reported to be between 40 and 70 years old, as
“girls.”
“Do not forget to pray for me. May
Jesus blesses (sic) you and may the Holy Virgin take care of you,” he added,
according to a report to Newsflare.
Last
year, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, joined by other
prelates, issued a public declaration of truths of the faith where they called
it a rebellion and “grave sin” for a man to “attempt to become a woman.”
“The male and female sexes, man and
woman, are biological realities created by the wise will of God (see Gen. 1:
27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 369). It is, therefore, a rebellion
against natural and Divine law and a grave sin that a man may attempt to become
a woman by mutilating himself, or even by simply declaring himself to be such,
or that a woman may in like manner attempt to become a man, or to hold that the
civil authority has the duty or the right to act as if such things were or may
be possible and legitimate (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2297),” the
document states.
Pro-LGBT Jesuit priest Fr. James
Martin was delighted with the Pope’s congratulatory words to Sister Monica
Cremona, saying in a Tweet: “Wow. Pope Francis sends his support for a
Catholic sister in Argentina who ministers to transsexual women.” [.....]
EXCLUSIVE: Abp. Viganò Clarifies His Position Following DDF Ruling —
Part I
Matt Gaspers | July 19, 2024
In this exclusive interview, which will continue in a
further installment, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò clarifies various aspects of
his position following the Vatican’s announcement that he was “found guilty of
the reserved delict of schism” on July 4 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of
the Faith (DDF). In this first installment, he explains more precisely what he
means when he distinguishes the Catholic Church from the “conciliar church,”
describing it as “an overlap of two entities — Church and anti-church — in the
same Hierarchy,” something which he says “constitutes the ‘masterstroke of
Satan’ that Archbishop Lefebvre denounced from the beginning.”
“The same Masonic lobby that for over two centuries has systematically
demolished civil governments, has managed to penetrate the Catholic Church,” he
says, “to impose a series of radical changes that subvert the magisterial
teaching of two thousand years.” And this “coup d’état,” which he believes
includes “the usurpation of the Apostolic See,” began “with the Second Vatican
Council.”
Since the Council, Archbishop Viganò emphasizes that internal enemies have
“organized themselves so that they are at the head of the Church, so
that they can promulgate heresy from the See of Peter by imposing it as a truth
to be believed by virtue of the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and so that
they can silence every voice of dissent with canonical sanctions and excommunications,”
perhaps alluding to his own situation vis-à-vis the Vatican.
He reiterates his belief that Francis is not the Pope while also commenting on
what he calls a “paradox,” namely, “that the head of the ‘conciliar church,’”
referring to Francis, “who is heretical and apostate, can also be considered
Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and as usurping from Our Lord the
voice of His Bride so as to dishonor her and Jesus Christ Himself.”
“The problem is therefore not whether we are in the Church,” he concludes,
“but rather whether those who usurp her authority to demolish the
Church are part of the Church. They are the ones who must be kicked out —
not us!”
Remember? The SSPX
has been in “doctrinal” discussions with Rome since 1997. A faithful Catholic
who keeps DOGMA as his proximate Rule of Faith will exhaust any “doctrinal
discussions” with a Modernist in a few hours at most if he is patient. The SSPX
like the Modernists in Rome both hold that DOGMA is just a human axiom that
approximates the truth but must necessarily be continually purged of its human
accretions and purified as deeper theological insights are discovered!
The overheard plans are nearly identical
to comments from an important Italian liturgist in an interview published by France’s
LaCroix earlier this month. Andrea Grillo a lay professor at the
Pontifical Athenaeum of St Anselmo in Rome, billed by La Croix as “close to the
Pope,” is intimately familiar with Summorum
Pontificum. Grillo in fact published a book against Summorum Pontificum before the papal document was even
released.
Grillo told La Croix that Francis is
considering abolishing Summorum Pontificum. According to Grillo, once the
Vatican erects the Society of Saint Pius X as a Personal Prelature, the Roman Rite
will be preserved only within this structure. “But [Francis] will not do this
as long as Benedict XVI is alive.”
The plan, as related to LifeSite,
involved making an agreement with the Society of St. Pius X and, with that
agreement in place, sequestering those Catholics wanting the TLM to the SSPX.
For most, that would strip them of access to the TLM since there would not be
nearly enough SSPX priests to service Catholics wanting the TLM worldwide.
LifeSiteNews,
2017
COMMENT: We have
been warning the faithful since 2012 that the SSPX hierarchy has already been
regularized within the Novus Ordo Church. They are committed to bringing the
priests and laity associated with them along for the ride. Ultimately, the SSPX
will be filled with Conservative Catholics who have not and cannot defend the
Catholic faith and tradition because they uniformly reject DOGMA as the
proximate Rule of Faith. They will
overwhelm the few faithful Catholics attending Mass at SSPX chapels. The SSPX
will then introduce the reform measures to the 1962 Bugnini transitional Missal
to bring about, in time, one expression of the “Roman rite.”
en.news
Francis Allowed SSPX To Ordain Whomever They Wish
The Society Pius X is “completely regular,” James Bogle, a former Una
Voce President, told Gloria.tv at the Roman Forum in Gardone, Italy (video
below).
en.news | July 29, 2023 Bogle is
a barrister in London. He counseled in the cases of Archie Battersbee
(2010-2022) and Alfie Evans (2016-2018), who were sentenced to death by British
courts, the latter despite interventions by the Polish, Italian and Vatican
governments.
Francis "recognised" all Pius X sacraments, including marriage and
confession, Bogle notes. In March 2015, Bishop Fellay was appointed a Vatican
judge for all annulments and clerical misdemeanours in Pius X.
Fellay told Bogle in May 2015 that Francis had written him a personal letter
allowing him to ordain "whomever he wants", without having to consult
the local bishops. Bogle calls this not just a recognition but a "special privilege".
A member of the Order of Malta, Bogle believes Francis has "saved"
the order. At the 2014 Chapter General, a group of Germans were elected to the
governing body and then tried to secularise the order by marginalising the
professed members.
Francis stepped in and acted as a dictator, overriding all laws, codes and the
Order's constitution. This led to the expulsion of the Germans. Francis’
authoritarian and “frankly not legal” style worked in the Order's favour “by
accident”, says Bogle.
As for Francis' desire to close monasteries, Bogle recalls a dissolved monastery in Amalfi, Italy. Its
historic building was worth €80M. With Francis' knowledge, the nuns were told
that they were being suppressed and had to leave the convent.
For Bogle, Francis is reversing some
fundamentals of the faith and thus “destroying the Church”. But given his
treatment of Pius X he calls him "self-contradictory" and a “complex
figure”.
Sacrament
of Baptism: Significance of the Baptismal Character and why it is absolutely
necessary for salvation. Explains why St. Ambrose said regarding catechumens
who die before receiving the sacrament of Baptism, they are “forgiven but not
crowned”.
To be baptized is to become one with the
Church, and one with Christ. Thus
the ritual can say: “enter into the temple of God, that you may have part with
Christ, unto life everlasting.” The two ideas are correlative: to be
baptized into the Church and to be baptized into Christ; they are the visible
and invisible aspects of the same real effect. [….]
The effecting this incorporation into
Christ, Baptism marks the soul as permanently His; it stamps upon the soul a
spiritual “character”, or, as antiquity more commonly called it, a “seal”. For this reason, and putting the cause for
the effect, the rite of Baptism was itself called “the seal”, or “the seal of
faith”, or “the seal of water”, or “the seal of the Trinity” (which last
appellation endures still in the liturgical prayers for the dying, wherein God
is asked to remember His promises to the soul that in its lifetime was “stamped
with the seal of the Most Holy Trinity”).
The word “seal” derives from a group of
texts in St. Paul, which suggest this stamping of the soul at Baptism: “And in
Him (Christ), you too, when you had heard the word of truth, the good news of
your salvation, and believed in it, were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the
promise” (Eph. 1:13); “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in Whom you
were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph. 4:30). However, nowadays we are
accustomed to speak rather of the baptismal “character”, a term that suggests
the text wherein Christ is called “the brightness of His (the Father’s) glory
and the image (in Greek, character) of His substance” (Hebr. 1:3).
Basically, two words give the same meaning:
a seal imprints an image, and a “character”, in the original sense of the word,
means image. Baptism, therefore, stamps the soul with the image of Christ, Who
is Himself the image of the Father. And in the Scripture, this stamping is
attributed to the Holy Spirit, Who is the Spirit of Christ. The fact that we
are stamped with such a character is clearly defined by the Council of Trent:
“If anyone says that by the three Sacraments, to wit, Baptism,
Confirmation and Orders, there is not imprinted in the soul a Character, that
is a certain spiritual and indelible sign on account of which they cannot be
repeated; let him be anathem.” (Denz. 852).
The Council of Trent teaches that this
seal, once stamped on the soul, is indelible. Just as Baptism irrevocable makes
one a member of the Church, so also it irrevocably makes one a member of
Christ. Not the gravest sin, nor even final impenitence and self-condemnation
to eternal separation from Christ in Hell, can avail to erase this baptismal
seal. And the indelibility of the seal is the immediate reason why Baptism can
never be repeated, once it has been validly received. [….]
The sense in which Baptism stamps us with
the image of Christ is suggested in the rite itself, by the anointing which
follows the ablution. It is done with Sacred Chrism, a mixed unguent of oil and
balm, specially consecrated by the bishop on Holy Thursday. Kings and priests
in antiquity (and even today) were anointed with chrism in token of their royal
and priestly dignity. And the baptism anointing signifies, therefore, that the
new Christian has entered into the “royal priesthood” of the Christian people,
and shares in the royal Priesthood of Christ Himself. He bears the image of
Christ, inasmuch as Christ was the Priest of all humanity, Who offered Himself
in sacrifice on the Cross.
The baptismal seal or character, therefore,
endows the Christian with a priestly function, and a priestly power. It is not
that special power and function given by the Sacrament of Holy Orders to certain
selected members of the Church, who are made her official ministers, and
authorized to offer her sacrifice and dispense her Sacraments. But it is the
priestly function and power which is common to all the members of the Body of
Christ. As He was born as Priest, His whole life orientated toward the Passion
and Death which wad His priestly Sacrifice, so too, they are priests from their
birth into the Christian life at Baptism; and their lives are essentially
orientated toward sacrifice, in a double sense.
First of all, they receive a function and a
power with respect to the ritual Sacrifice of the Church, which is the Mass.
[….] They are empowered to assist actively in the offering of the Mass, as
members of the Church, in whose name her specially qualified members, priests
and bishops, offer the Mass, which is the sacrifice of the whole Church through
her official ministers. In union with the Priest, the Christian offers up
Christ as a Victim Who belongs to him and to Whom he belongs. An unbaptized person
cannot do this….
Secondly, the baptismal character
consecrates the Christian to sacrifice in a wider sense: it gives him the
function, the duty, the power to lead a life of sacrifice, since He is in the
image of Christ whose life was one long sacrifice – a life of complete
obedience to the will of His Father: “I seek not My own will, but the will of
Him Who sent Me” (Jn. 3:50).The will of the Father is the supreme law of the
Christian’s life; it is all embracing and all pervasive; and constant and total
obedience to it necessarily gives a sacrificial quality to the whole of life,
since it demands the renunciation of many ideas, and a steady refusal to be led
by one’s own emotions or to seek one’s own pleasure and profit – in a word, it
demands the sacrifice of selfishness in all its forms. St. Peter, therefore,
was thinking of Baptism when he wrote:
“Lay aside therefore all malice and all deceit, and pretense, and envy,
and all slander…. Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon (i.e., on
Christ) into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual
sacrifices to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:1,5).
Rev. John J. Fernan, S.J., Theology, Christ
Our High Priest, Baptismal Seal
Mandatory
Reading for Catholic INDULTISTS!
“The liturgical books promulgated by Saint (sic) Paul VI and Saint
(sic) John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are
the unique only expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”
Pope Francis, Traditionis
Custodes
“Responding to your requests, I take the firm decision to abrogate all
the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the
present Motu proprio, and declare that the liturgical books promulgated by
the saintly (sic) Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the
decrees of Vatican Council
II, constitute the unique only expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
I take comfort in this decision from the fact that, after the Council of Trent,
St. Pius V also abrogated all the rites that could not claim a proven
antiquity, establishing for the whole Latin Church a single Missale
Romanum.”
Pope Francis, explanatory letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes
COMMENT: It has not occurred to Conservative Catholics that Pope Francis
is being brutally honest with them. They have accepted the false
presuppositions of Summorum Pontificum:
that is, the immemorial Roman rite is a simple matter of Church discipline
subject to the arbitrary will of the legislator; that the 1962 Bugnini
Transitional Missal (BTM) is the immemorial Roman rite; that the 1962 BTM has
never been outlawed; that the 1962 BTM is the “right” of all Catholics because
it has not been outlawed; that the BTM is the Extra-ordinary form and the Novus
Ordo is the Ordinary form of the Roman rite expressing a single lex orandi/lex credendi; etc., etc.
Pope Francis is being honest but not entirely forthcoming. He “takes
comfort in this decision” because St. Pius V suppressed all rites that had less
than 200 years of “proven antiquity.” Pope Francis is doing the same thing. The
BTM of 1962 has less traditional standing than the Novus Ordo! When are the
Conservative Catholics going to wake up! How many times do they have to be
told? The 1962 BTM is not the immemorial Roman rite and it is now legally
suppressed. Therefore, turn to the “received and approved” immemorial Roman
rite used before Bugnini ever touched it. This rite is established by
immemorial custom and Catholic DOGMA. Whomsoever says that this “received and
approved” rite may be changed or set aside for a new rite by any pastor of the
churches whomsoever, is condemned, anathematized. Pope Francis is a “pastor” of
the Church and this divine truth applies just as much to him and his
predecessors as to every other Catholic.
It is also true
that the Novus Ordo Missae is the “only unique” expression of the “lex
orandi” of the Novus Ordo Church because it determines the Novus Ordo’s “only unique”
lex credendi. This is public confession that the Novus Ordo and the Catholic
Church do not have the same faith!
We recommend that all the faithful Catholics step aside and pray to God
to quickly and thoroughly cleanse His Church.
This article
and commentary is worth re-reading for understanding the mind, or rather, the
mindlessness of Pope Francis!
Pope: Traditionalism
is ‘dead memory’ and ‘paganism of thought’
CRUX | Elise
Ann Allen | Aug 5, 2022 | Senior Correspondent
ROME – While Pope Francis was on his “penitential pilgrimage” in Canada
last week, most of the focus was on his effort to heal historic wounds with
Indigenous peoples related to Canada’s residential school system. The hope is that the Catholic
Church can turn over a new leaf – rather than represent an assault on
Indigenous cultures and traditions, it will help to defend and preserve them.
Now, only days after returning to Rome, attention has turned to the
remarks the pope made in Canada out of the spotlight, about the church’s own
tradition, especially the liturgy and the ongoing battle over the Traditional
Latin Mass.
“It is important
to have respect for tradition, the authentic one,” Francis said,
speaking to members of the Jesuit order in Canada during a private conversation
July 29. He described tradition as “the living memory of believers,” whereas “traditionalism” means “the
dead life of our believers.”
Tradition,
the pope said, “is the
life of those who have gone before us and who go on. Traditionalism is their
dead memory. From root to fruit, in short, that is the way.”
When looking to the origin of something, it must be seen as a point of
reference, “not a
particular historical experience taken as a perpetual model, as if we had to
stop there,” he said.
Under this mentality, he said, “’Yesterday it was done like this’ becomes ‘it always has
been done like this,’” and even necessary change becomes problematic. He called
such a mindset “a paganism of thought.”
“Changes needed to
be made, and they were made. Law cannot be kept in a refrigerator. Law
accompanies life, and life goes on. Like morals, it is being perfected,”
he said.
Both the church and society have made important changes over time on
issues such as slavery and the possession of atomic weapons, he said, adding
that the moral life is also “progressing along the same line.”
This slow development resulting in change is something taught by Saint
Vincent of Lérins, he said, and quoted a phrase from the saint: “The dogma of
the Christian religion must follow these laws. It progresses, consolidating
over the years, developing with time, deepening with age.”
According to this
concept, he said, human thought and development “grows and consolidates with
the passage of time. Human understanding changes with time, and human
consciousness deepens.”
Francis said it is
“wrong” to view the church’s doctrine as “monolithic, to be defended without
nuance.”
Asked about the importance of liturgy in priestly and religious
formation, specifically for the Jesuits, Pope Francis said, “When there is
conflict, the liturgy is always mistreated.”
The pope said the aim of his actions on the liturgy, including his
decision to restrict the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, has been
“to follow the line taken by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, who had allowed the
ancient rite and asked for subsequent verification.”
“The most recent
verification made it clear that there was a need to regulate the practice, and
above all to avoid it becoming a matter, let us say, of ‘fashion’ and remaining
instead a pastoral question,” he said.
Last year, Pope Francis tightened permissions for celebration of the
pre-Vatican II Latin Mass, the use of which had been liberalized under his
predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI.
According to the decree Traditionis
Custodes, priests who wish to celebrate the 1962 liturgy must now get
permission from their bishop to continue doing so. Any priest ordained after
the issuance of the new norms who wishes to celebrate the Traditional Latin
Mass must submit a formal request to their bishop, and the bishop in turn must
consult with the Vatican before granting permission.
Francis also charged bishops with determining specific times and
locations where the Traditional Latin Mass can be celebrated and prohibited the
designation of new parishes exclusively dedicated to the Old Rite liturgy.
While exceptions have been made for communities and priestly societies
with a special attachment to the traditional liturgy, the decision was met with
intense blowback from so-called “traditionalist” communities in the church, who
argued that the measure was “cruel” and divisive.
In his remarks to the Jesuits in Canada, Francis said he looks forward
to further studies that will refine the church’s reflection on the topic,
saying the liturgy “is the people of God’s public praise!”
The topic of traditionalism also came up on Pope Francis’s return
flight to Rome.
When responding to
a question on whether the church would ever reconsider its position on the use
of contraceptives by Catholic couples, he said, “A church that does not develop
its thinking in an ecclesial sense is a church that goes backwards.”
“This is the
problem today of many who say they are traditional,” he said, saying these
people are not traditional, but “backward-looking.” Rather than going forward,
he said, they move backward “with no roots: it has always been done like this;
last century it was done this way.”
Francis called
this backward movement “a shame,” and repeated his remarks to the Jesuits,
saying, tradition itself “is the living faith of the dead,” this
“backward-looking” gaze of those who profess themselves as traditionalists, “is
the dead faith of the living.”
Tradition is the
root and is the “inspiration for the church to move forward,” he said, saying
this movement “is always vertical.”
“It is important
to understand well the role of tradition, which is always open, like the roots
of the tree, and the tree grows,” he said, calling tradition in this sense “the
guarantee of the future.”
“It is not a
museum piece,” he said. “If you conceive tradition as closed, this is not the Christian
tradition. It is always the juice of the roots that carries you forward.”
Pope Francis praised the work done by the country’s bishops to prepare
for his visit and their unity in their process of healing and reconciliation
with Indigenous communities.
“When an episcopate is united, then it can deal with the challenges
that arise,” he said, saying miracles can happen “when the church is united.”
COMMENT:
The
Vatican News Service says that Pope Francis has invoked the teaching of St.
Vincent of Lerins since his election to the papacy. St. Vincent has been a
favorite of traditional Catholics from the time of Vatican II, consequently, it
is not surprising to see Francis the Progressive Ideologue attempt to recruit
the great saint and Church father in support of his ideology. What is more to
the point, he wants St. Vincent to be seen as an opponent of tradition. Is this
a possible legitimate misunderstanding? Someone clearly does not understand the
teaching of St. Vincent. A case of legitimate development is provided by Pope
Francis who cites the moral ‘development’ of capital punishment from being
morally permissible and sometimes a morally necessary act to what is now become
an intrinsically evil act against the dignity of the human person. This is clearly
impossible in legitimate development for an act to go from what it was to what
it was not. This ‘development’ is a perfect contradiction and God does not
change.
How is it possible that the mind of Pope
Francis could see a moral development in the face of perfect contradiction,
which offends the first principle of the understanding, that is, that a thing
cannot be and not be at the same time? The answer is in the spiritual formation
of Pope Francis. Francis was Jesuit trained in a spirit of Anti-Thomism. Not
just grossly neglecting a classical realist formation as most modern clerics
underwent but an active opposition to traditional Catholic realistic philosophy
and theology. Pope Francis hates St. Thomas and rejects everything he taught.
As
Carroll Quigley explained, the Nominalist ascendency (which denies the reality
of essence) during the 14th century
discarded Thomistic metaphysics, logic and epistemology ultimately leading to
the Reformation and Enlightenment errors. Metaphysics of St. Thomas grasped the
objective reality of things as they are hierarchically constituted by God;
logic established the rules of validity (not the rules of truth) of subjective
mental thought; and epistemology providing the bridge between the objective
world and the subjective rational mind. The rule was that for truth, the mind
must conform with objective reality. Nominalism discarded Thomistic
hierarchical metaphysics for a
neo-platonic dualism; it discarded Aristotelian logic for mathematical
relationships; and it discarded Thomistic epistemology offering nothing in its
place because they made the erroneous assumption that the objective world
entirely conforms with mathematical logic and can be expressed perfectly in
mathematical formulas. Their rule was that the truth of the world must conform
with the logical rationalistic mind. With the realization over time that the
objective world was not logical or reasonable or conformable to mathematical
determination led to three common errors: skepticism, empiricism, and semantics.
Skeptics
despaired that the mind could know any truth. The Empiricists simply became
pure utilitarianists; whatever worked was true enough. The Semanticists answer
was to overturn the rules of logic and rationality in the mind itself. They
held and hold that since the objective world was not rational or logical,
neither should the mind be rational or logical. The first thing the
semanticists did was to discard the first
principles of the understanding, that is, the principle of contradiction: a thing is what it is, and it is not what it
is not, was held to be a useless mental construct. They hold that words
must be fluid to take on new and original meanings so as to be better conformed
to the objective world which is always changing, that is, they reject being and embrace becoming. This follows from their Nominalism that denies any that
there is any fixed essence in the
real world.
Francis
is a Semanticists. Words for Francis have no fixed meaning. He like all
nominalists denies any fixed essence
or, when viewed from the perspective of what a thing can do or what can be done
to it, he denies any fixed nature. He
sees no problem when faced with the complete inversion of morality. He has no
mental problem of contradiction when he supports restoring the pagan traditions
of North American Indians while denying the same right to Catholics faithful to
their traditions. The solution for Semanticism is not simply returning to
Thomistic epistemology and metaphysics but a radical rejection of Nominalism.
Francis requires a complete and integral conversion to the Catholic faith. He
has been personally paganized by his Jesuit formation.
According
to Carroll Quigley (who no friend of Catholic faith) George Orwell’s Nineteen
Eighty-Four is the story of a semanticists’ dystopia with Newspeak and Double
Think: the Ministry of Peace wages war, the Ministry of Plenty produces
scarcity of goods and services, slavery is called freedom and freedom slavery.
Francis the Semanticist has produced a dystopian Church of the New Advent.
Francis says “Backwardism is a sin” and so ‘Forwardism is a virtue’ necessary
to arrive at the progressivists ideologues idea of heaven. But the
“backwardism” of pagan Indians is a virtue. Pope Francis the Hypocrite (“Who am
I to judge? ”) after actively participating in a pagan Indian ceremony judges
the “thoughts” of faithful Catholics accusing them of “paganism of thought.” Even the word hypocrite can be rehabilitated
for Francis!
At
the behest of the Jews, Pope Francis wants to rehabilitate the reputation of
the Pharisees. In 2019 he directed the Pontifical Biblical Institute,
co-sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, to conduct an inter-religious
conference entitled, “Jesus and the Pharisees: an Interdisciplinary
Reappraisal.” The goal of both Francis and the Jews is to rehabilitate the
reputation of the Pharisees who conspired the death of Jesus Christ for the end
of “helping to combat anti-semitism” and legitimize the Talmudic religion and
its debased morality. Soon we will learn that the hypocrites are Catholics
faithful to tradition while the Pharisees were unfortunately misunderstood by
the writes of the gospel narratives.
Francis
does not believe in God’s hell and God does not believe in Francis’ semantic
progressivism. There is no progressive ideology in hell and no matter how much
Francis will want to call the hell fire “cold, cool or refreshing” it will
still burn eternally where the “worm dieth not.”
Pius
XII - the man responsible for planting the seed of liturgical 
destruction!
Fr. Annibale Bugnini had been making clandestine visits to the Centre
de Pastorale Liturgique (CPL), a progressivist conference centre for liturgical
reform which organized national weeks for priests.
Inaugurated in Paris in 1943 on the private initiative of two Dominican priests
under the presidency of Fr. Lambert Beauduin, it was a magnet for all who
considered themselves in the vanguard of the Liturgical Movement. It would play
host to some of the most famous names who influenced the direction of Vatican
II: Frs. Beauduin, Guardini, Congar, Chenu, Daniélou, Gy, von Balthasar, de
Lubac, Boyer, Gelineau etc.
It could, therefore, be considered as the confluence of all the forces
of Progressivism, which saved and re-established Modernism condemned by Pope Pius
X in Pascendi.
According to its
co-founder and director, Fr. Pie Duployé, OP, Bugnini had requested a
“discreet” invitation to attend a CPL study week held near Chartres in
September 1946.
Much more was
involved here than the issue of secrecy. The person whose heart beat as one
with the interests of the reformers would return to Rome to be placed by an
unsuspecting (?) Pope (Pius XII) in charge of his Commission for the General
Reform of the Liturgy.
But someone in the Roman Curia did know about the CPL – Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini, the acting
Secretary of State and future Paul VI – who sent a telegram to the CPL dated
January 3, 1947. It purported to come from the Pope with an apostolic blessing.
If, in Bugnini’s estimation, the Roman authorities were to be kept in the dark
about the CPL so as not to compromise its activities, a mystery remains. Was
the telegram issued under false pretences, or did Pius XII really know and
approve of the CPL? [.....]
This agenda (for liturgical reform) was set out as early as 1949 in the
Ephemerides Liturgicae, a leading
Roman review on liturgical studies of which Fr. Annabale Bugnini was Editor
from 1944 to 1965.
First, Bugnini denigrated
the traditional liturgy as a dilapidated building (“un vecchio edificio”),
which should be condemned because it was in danger of falling to pieces
(“sgretolarsi”) and, therefore, beyond repair. Then, he criticized it for its
alleged “deficiencies, incongruities and difficulties,” which rendered it
spiritually “sterile” and would prevent it appealing to modern sensibilities.
It is difficult to understand how, in the same year that he published this
anti-Catholic diatribe, he was made a Professor of Liturgy in Rome’s Propaganda
Fide (Propagation of the Faith) University. His solution was to return to the
simplicity of early Christian liturgies and jettison all subsequent
developments, especially traditional devotions.
These ideas expressed in 1949 would form the foundational principles of Vatican
II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium. For all practical purposes, the Roman Rite was
dead in the water many years before it was officially buried by Paul VI.
Dr.
Carol Byrne, How Bugnini Grew Up under
Pius XII
Baptism imprints in
your soul a spiritual character, which no sin can efface. This character is a
proof that from this time you do not belong to yourself, but that you are the
property of Jesus Christ, who has purchased you by the infinite price of his
blood and of his death. You are not of yourself, but you are of Christ;
wherefore, St. Paul concludes, “that the Christian should no longer live for
himself, but for Him who died and rose again for him;” that is to say, that the
Christian should live a life of grace, and that he should consecrate to his
Redeemer his spirit, his heart, and all his actions. […..]
First, is true penance; for, as the holy Council of Trent teaches,
penance is no less necessary for those who have sinned after Baptism, than
Baptism is necessary for those who have not received it. The Holy Scripture
informs us, that there are two gates by which we are to enter into
heaven—baptismal innocence, and penance. When a Christian has shut against
himself the gate of innocence, in violating the holy promises of Baptism, it is
necessary that he should strive to enter by that of penance; otherwise there is
no salvation for him. On this account, Jesus Christ, speaking of persons who
have lost innocence, says to them: “Unless you do penance, you shall all
perish.”
But in order that penance may prevent us from perishing—it must be true
Penance. Confessors may be deceived by the false appearance of conversion, and
it is too often the case; but God is never deceived. If, therefore, those who
receive absolution are not truly penitent and worthy of pardon, their sins are
not forgiven before God. In order to do true penance, it is not sufficient to
confess all our sins and to fulfill what is enjoined on us by the priest. There
are two other things which are necessary: First; to renounce sin with all your
heart, and for all your life… and second; to fly the occasions of sin, and to
use the means to avoid it.
St. John Eudes, Man’s Contract
with God in Baptism
Amoris Laetitia was published in 2016. No answer or corrective action to
this "appeal" was ever made. That is because no clarification was
ever needed. Why? That is because the "numerous propositions in Amoris
Laetita (that) can be construed as heretical upon the natural reading of the
text" is exactly what the author intended! So in 2016 these
"academics and pastors" were "not accusing the pope of
heresy", but what about now?
“Amoris
Laetitia.... scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous...”
Catholic academics and
pastors appeal to the College of Cardinals over Amoris Laetitia
A group of Catholic academics and
pastors has submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College
of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic
Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of
erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the
post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris
laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various
languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218
living at present.
Describing the exhortation as containing “a number of
statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith
and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with their appeal, a documented
list of applicable theological censures specifying “the nature and degree of
the errors that could be attributed to Amoris
laetitia.”
Among the 45 signatories
are Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various
pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes,
religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of
Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope’s official advisers, to approach the Holy Father with
a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document in a definitive
and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of them to be believed or
considered as possibly true.”
“We are not accusing the pope of
heresy,” said a spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous
propositions in Amoris laetitia can
be construed as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional
statements would fall under other established theological censures, such as
scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.” [......]
SOON TO BE THE
EXCLUSIVE HOME FOR THE EVER FLUID BUGNINI TRANSITION MISSAL OF 1962
Maybe
the common ground is “does not care for doctrine”?
“A pope (Francis) who does not care
for doctrine, who looks at the people, and who has known us in Argentina. And
he appreciated our work in Argentina. And that's why he sees us with a good
disposition while in the same time he is against conservatism. This is like a
contradiction. But I have been able to verify several times that he really does
things personally for us.”
Bishop Bernard Fellay, SSPX,
2017
A
Personal Prelature for SSPX: comment from 2017
Bishop Fellay then commented on
a project of Personal Prelature which had been offered to the SSPX in the
summer of 2015. As he already said on January 26, 2016, such a canonical
structure fits the needs and the actual apostolate and presence of the Society
all over the world. He revealed that the written proposal given to the SSPX foresees
that prelate should be a bishop. How would the prelate be designated? The Pope
would choose amongst the three names presented by the SSPX through its own
elections. It is also foreseen, said Bishop Fellay, that other auxiliary
bishops would be given to the Society.
Everything that exists now will
be recognized all over the world. And the faithful also! They will be in this
Prelature with the right to receive the sacraments and teachings from the
Society’s priests. It will be also possible to receive religious congregations,
as it is in a diocese: Capuchins, Benedictines, Carmelites, and others. This
prelature is a Catholic structure which is not under the [authority of the
local] bishops. It is autonomous.”
The Angelus, SSPX publication for United States
District, 2017
“Cultivate a great
desire to be firmly rooted in the sublime virtue of confidence. Do not fear, but be courageous in
serving and loving our Most Adorable and Amiable Jesus, with great perfection
and holiness. Undertake courageously great tasks for His glory, in proportion
to the power and grace He will give you for this end. Even though you can do
nothing of yourself, you can do all things in Him and His help will never fail
you, if you have confidence
in His goodness. Place your entire physical and spiritual welfare in His
hands. Abandon to the paternal solicitude of His Divine Providence every care
for your health, reputation, property and business, for those near to you, for
your past sins, for your soul’s progress in virtue and love of Him, for your
life, death, and especially for your salvation and eternity, in a word, all
your cares. Rest in the
assurance that, in His pure goodness, He will watch with particular
tenderness over all your responsibilities and cares and dispose all things for
the greatest good.”
St. John Eudes, The Life and Kingdom of Jesus in Christian
Souls
Hermeneutics of
Continuity/Discontinuity
Pope Francis
in Evangelii Gaudium Smears Faithful
Catholics as “Neo-pelagians”:
Catholics
faithful in keeping God’s moral law and believing His revealed truth are “self-absorbed promethean
neopelagianism [who] observe
certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style
[characterized by a] narcissistic
and authoritarian elitism [which is a] manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is
impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these
adulterated forms of Christianity.”
94. This worldliness can be fuelled in two
deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely
subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas
and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which
ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The
other is the self-absorbed
promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their
own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently
faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed
soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism,
whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and
instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting
and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or
others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think
that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of
Christianity.
Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
While in the same document he has this to say
about the possibility of salvation for “Non-Christinas”:
254. Non-Christians, by God’s gracious
initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live
“justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery
of Jesus Christ”.
Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, this teaching of Pope Franics references the
teaching of the International Theological Commission.
“By
God’s gracious initiative” is pure invention. God has never revealed this
fable. This is Pelagianism by definition. This is what a Pelagian heretic
affirms that salvation is possible through being “faithful to their own
consciences.” Catholic dogmas, formal objects of divine and Catholic faith,
affirm that supernatural faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and
subjection to the Roman Pontiff are necessary as necessities of means to obtain
eternal salvation. Pope Francis is a Pelagian heretic. So where is his source
material for this error? He cites as his
authority the International Theological Commission which teaches:
10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of
a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase
extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after
the clear statements of Pius XII (sic) and Vatican II the possibility of
salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., Vatican
II, LG 16; GS 22).
Christocentrism accepts that salvation may
occur in religions, but it denies them any autonomy in salvation on account of
the uniqueness and universality of the salvation that comes from Jesus Christ.
This position is undoubtedly the one most commonly held by Catholic
theologians, even though there are differences among them.
International Theological Commission,
Christianity and the World Religions, 1997
This
is the fundamental doctrine of Neo-Modernism that holds that Dogmas need not be
taken in a literal sense because they are always undergoing evolutionary
development in an effort to achieve a closer approximation of truth. Catholics
believe, as St. Pope Pius X said, dogmas are “truths fallen from heaven.” Pope
Pius XII never denied the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic
Church. Those who claim he did are
simply liars. Vatican II on the other hand did, and Vatican II cites as its
authority for the denial of the dogma that there is no salvation outside the
Catholic Church, the heretical 1949 Holy Office Letter that teaches that the
one and only thing necessary for salvation is the ‘desire to do the will of a
god who rewards and punishes’. This can be known by natural philosophy and is
simply a necessary presupposition to receiving the Gospel message. The 1949
Holy Office Letter and Vatican II are teaching Pelagianism. The very error that Pope Francis attributes
to faithful Catholics who believe the revealed truths of our faith and keep our
immemorial traditions. Is it any wonder that Pope Francis who denies the
necessity of faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and submission to
the Roman Pontiff as necessary for salvation as necessities of means would then
thoroughly corrupt the definition of “genuine evangelization”?
Catholics
who “observe certain rules (like keeping the Ten Commandments or believing
Catholic dogma) or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic
style (the “received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn
administration of the sacraments” Trent)” are guilty of “self-absorbed
promethean neopelagianism... narcissistic and authoritarian elitism [that is a]
manifestation of an anthropocentric immanentism... [whereby, it is] impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing
thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.”
Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
What
is “Genuine
evangelization”? Pope Francis said: “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.
We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our
knowledge of the world around us. ..... I believe I have already said that our goal is not to proselytize
but to listen to needs, desires and disappointments, despair, hope”
(Interview with Italian journalist and atheist Eugenio Scalfari). He also said
in answer to a question from a Lutheran girl, “It is not licit that you convince them of your faith;
proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path.” On
another occasion he said, “Proselytism
among Christians, therefore, in itself, is a grave sin.”
How
is this possible? Proselytism means to seek converts. A “proselyte” is a
convert. It was the Great Commission given by Jesus Christ to His Church: “Go
ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that
believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be
condemned.” (Mark 16:15-16) The goal of “preaching” is to bring other to
“believe” the revealed truth and become members of the Church through “baptism”
so that they may become a “proselyte,” like one of the first deacons of the
Church, Nicolas in Acts 6:5, and be “saved.”
“Genuine
evangelization” is the act of proselytism and the fruit of evangelization is
proselytes. “By their fruit you shall know them.” In South America alone there
have been more than 40 million Catholics lost to the faith since Vatican II.
This is the fruit of the “new evangelization” of Pope Francis which does not
seek converts at all because he sees no reason to convert.
So
who in end is “self-absorbed promethean neo-pelagian”? Prometheus was eternally
punished for his hubris of defying the gods while Pope Francis does the same
thing by “intransigently” overturning God’s revealed truth. His heresy is the fruit of his own “narcissistic
and authoritarian elitism” to believe that he is better than God. He proposes an “adulterated form of
Christianity” which explains why he promotes Catholic divorce. Heretics always permit divorce because
marriage is the metaphor used by God to describe His relationship to His Church
and to each of His faithful. The heretic
cannot stand the integrity of the metaphor and always permits divorce. This is the unmistakable sign that Pope
Francis is a heretic.
"Not a
stone upon a stone" - Comment on
the Gospel from the 9th Sunday after Pentecost
The
'Western Wall' (Wailing Wall) in Jerusalem is held by Jews as a remnant of
Herod's Temple destroyed by the Romans in 72 A.D. Yet, Jesus prophesized not
only that the Temple would be destroyed but also that there would not remain a
"stone upon a stone." So how is it that there remains a large wall on
the western side at the south end of the 'Temple Mount'? Some Catholics claim
the prophecy of Jesus was referring only to the edifice itself and not the
entire foundation for the Temple. Jesus words must be taken in literally unless
there it is clearly manifest that the metaphorical sense is intended
exclusively. Therefore, the 'Wailing Wall' where the Jews worship is not a
remnant of the ancient Temple, and the 
'Temple Mount', on which is currently situated
the Al-Aqsa mosque and the "Dome of the Rock", is not the location of
the Temple destroyed in 72 A.D. The 36 acre 'Temple Mount' is actually the
location of the Roman fortress Antonia built by Herod.
What
is the evidence for this? The current popular claim is the fortress Antonia was
located on a five-acre section on the north-west side of the 'Temple Mount'
while the Temple occupied the remaining 30 acres. Five acres is far too small
to accommodate a Roman legion (6,000 soldiers plus auxiliary staff) which we
know from the writings of Flavius Josephus that the fortress Antonia did in
fact hold. Many Roman fortresses have been examined by archeologists and they
typically are between 45 and 55 acres but some are as small as 36 acres. As far
as the area needed for the Temple of Herod itself, consider this, the ancient
pagan temple complex at Baalek in Lebanon built by the Romans is less than six
acres in total area and encloses the largest temple to Jupiter in the Roman
Empire as well as a smaller temple dedicated to Bacchus and another to Venus.
The Temple built by Herod was a single temple and much smaller in overall
dimensions.
Furthermore,
when Solomon was designated by King David to succeed him (3 Kings 1), King
David directed the prophet Nathan and the high priest Sadoc to take Solomon on
the king's mule to be anointed king at the "Gihon spring" with oil
taken from the tabernacle. The Gihon spring is located in the City of David
directly south and adjacent to the present-day 'Temple Mount'. There Solomon
was anointed with oil taken from the Tabernacle, proclaimed king and celebrated
by the populace with great jubilation and the sounding of trumpets that could
be heard outside the city. The Temple built by Solomon was in the same location
as the Tabernacle established by King David on the threshing floor of the land
he purchased Areuna the Jebusite as God had commanded by the mouth of Gad (2
Kings 24 and 2 Paralipomenon 3:1).
The
water from the Gihon spring was essential for the sacrificial offerings of the
Temple. There is no living water source on the 'Temple Mount' which was
required in the washing of the priests and the sacrifices offered. The water
source for the Antonia fortress was provided by large cisterns located just
north of the Antonia fortress and under the 'Temple Mount' that are still
present today.
There
is a Catholic tradition the there was a church called the Church of the
Judgment that was built over and enclosed the Rock that is now enclosed under
the Dome of the Rock built by the Moslems in 692 A.D. The Dome of the Rock is
located directly north of the Al-Aqsa mosque on the 'Temple Mount'. The Church
of the Judgment was destroyed either by the Persians who conquered Jerusalem in
614 A.D. with the help of 26,000 Jewish allies during the Byzantine-Sasanian
War 602-628 A.D. (during which many churches were destroyed including the
Church of the Ascension on Mount Olivet), or the church was destroyed by the
Moslems who conquered Jerusalem in 637 A.D. No living Jew at the time would
have knowledge of the exact location of Herod's Temple because the Jews were
forbidden to enter Jerusalem by the Romans since the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135
A.D. on the pain of death. Two hundred years later, the Catholic emperor
Constantine permitted the Jews to enter Jerusalem once a year on the feast of Tisha B'Av (the ninth of Av) which is
regarded as the saddest day in the Jewish calendar because it is the
anniversary of the destruction of both the Temple of Solomon and the Temple of
Herod! Be that as it may, many of the pillars used in the construction
of the interior of the Dome of the Rock have Christian markings indicating that
they were salvaged from a destroyed Catholic church.
The
Rock itself is regarded (WIKI) as The Foundation Stone (Hebrew אֶבֶן
הַשְּׁתִיָּה, romanized: ʾEḇen
haŠeṯīyyā, lit. 'Foundation Stone'), or the Noble
Rock (Arabic:الصخرة
المشرفة, romanized: al-Saḵrah
al-Mušarrafah, lit. 'The Noble Stone') is the rock enclosed by the
Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. It is also known as the Pierced Stone,
because it has a small hole on the southeastern corner that enters a cavern
beneath the rock, known as the Well of Souls. Traditional Jewish sources
mention the stone as the place from which the creation of the world began.
Jewish sources also identify its location with that of the Holy of Holies. Yet,
it is not possible for a threshing floor to be around a large rock or stone.
Before
the Muslim conquest, the Rock was enclosed in the Church of the Judgment
because it is believed to have been the place where the condemned stood to hear
the judgment against them by the Roman authorities. The Rock is held to be
where Jesus stood when His official condemnation was decreed by Pontius Pilate
and thus, if it is the stone where the "creation of the world began,"
it is the stone from which the creation of the world began anew. John 19:13
says: "Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought Jesus forth, and
sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in
Hebrew Gabbatha." Lithostrotos in Greek refers to a stone and Gabbatha in
Hebrew an elevated place. According to St. Mary Agreda after Jesus was
condemned by Pilate the decree of condemnation, which she quotes in its
entirety, was then formally read to the Jewish mob assembled outside the north
entrance to Fortress Antonia where Jesus was taken to bear His cross.
Of
the Temple of Herod destroyed in 72 A.D. there does not remain a "stone
upon a stone".
The Papacy is an
office established by Jesus Christ. No pope can change the essential nature of
the office, he can only accept it and address the duties the office imposes. If
Pope Benedict XVI did not resign the office of the papacy in its entirety, he
did not resign the papacy at all. If Pope Francis was not elected to the papacy
in its entirety, he was not elected at all.
Following his resignation as pope in 2013, Benedict XVI became the
first pope to step down from office since the resignation of Gregory XII in 
1415.
But unlike his predecessors who resigned, he continued to live in the Vatican
and to be adorned with the clothing and regalia of a pope.
Archbishop Georg Gänswein, the private secretary of Pope Benedict XVI,
said after his resignation that Benedict would continue to fulfill the
spiritual duties of the papacy. Journalist Edward Pentin reported in July 8,
2017 (National Catholic Register) that
Gänswein said that Francis and Benedict are not two popes "in competition"
with one another, but represent one "expanded" Petrine Office with an
"active" member and a "contemplative" one. He said that
Benedict had not abandoned the papacy like Pope Celestine V in the 13th century
but rather sought to continue his papacy in a more appropriate way given his
frailty and that "Therefore,
from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before. It is and
remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that
Benedict XVI has profoundly and lastingly transformed by his exceptional pontificate."
This division of the papacy is impossible.
In light of his decision to resign, Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di
Montezemolo, the designer of the Benedict's papal coat of arms, suggested the
need to create a new coat of arms for the former pope. According to the cardinal, the coat of arms of the
retired pope should retain all the symbolic elements found on the shield, but
all the external elements, such as the two crossed keys and the mitre, should
be removed or modified as they represent an office he no longer holds.
Cordero presented a hypothetical design shown above of how he believed
the new coat of arms of the pope emeritus should look, replacing the bishop's
mitre with a white galero with 15 tassels, removing the two crossed keys, and
placing the pope's episcopal motto "Cooperatores Veritatis" below the
shield. The new coat of
arms was offered to but never adopted by Benedict. He continued to use
his papal coat of arms for the rest of his life and it is the papal coat of
arms which was also displayed by his catafalque during his funeral
at St. Peter's.
IN SANGUINE TUO
Homily on the
external Solemnity of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ
Redemisti nos, Domine, in sanguine tuo, ex omni tribu, et lingua, et
populo, et natione: et fecisti nos Deo nostro regnum.
Rev 5:9-10
Dear brothers and sisters,
First of all, allow me to share with you my
serenity of mind in facing this trial. I experienced the same inner peace when,
a few years ago, I rediscovered the Traditional Mass, which since then I have
never stopped celebrating exclusively and which has brought me back to the
beating heart of our holy Religion, to understand that being united to Christ
the Priest in the offering to the eternal Father must necessarily be translated
into the mystical immolation of oneself on the model of Christ the Victim, in
restoring the divine order in which Charity consumes us with love for God and
neighbor, and shows us how incomprehensible – as well as unacceptable – it is
to modify anything of this perfect order that the Holy Church anticipates on
earth precisely by placing the Cross at the center of everything. Stat Crux dumvolvitur orbis.
For sixty years, however, along with the
world, volvitur et
ecclesia. The ecclesial body has also lost its point of
stability: yesterday, in the mad attempt to adapt to the world by softening its
doctrine; today, in the deliberate desire to erase the Cross, a sign of
contradiction, in order to please the Prince of this
world. And in a world hostile to the Cross of Christ, it is not
possible to preach Christ, and Christ crucified, because this is “divisive”
for a “human brotherhood” from which the fatherhood of God is
excluded. It is not surprising, therefore, that those who proclaim the Gospel
without adaptations are considered enemies. Christians
of all ages, and among them the Pastors in the first place, have always been
opposed and fought and killed precisely because of the incompatibility between
the Civitas Dei and the civitas Diaboli. The Lord taught us: “If they have persecuted me, they
will persecute you also; if they have kept my word, they will also keep yours” (Jn 15:20).
A few days ago, a church enslaved to the
world put me on trial for schism and condemned me with excommunication for
having openly professed the Faith that the Lord by my Episcopal Consecration
ordered me to preach; the same Faith for which the Martyrs were killed, the
Confessors persecuted, priests and Bishops imprisoned or exiled. But how can we
even think that it is the
true Church that strikes its children and its Ministers,
and at the same time welcomes its enemies and makes their errors its own? This
Church, which calls itself “conciliar and synodal,” is a counterfeit, a
counter-church, for which everything begins and ends in this life, and which
does not want to accept anything eternal precisely because the immutability of
the Truth of God is intrinsically alien to the permanent revolution that it has
welcomed and promotes.
If we were not persecuted by those who are
hostile to the Cross, we would have to question our fidelity to Christ, who
from that Throne of pain and blood struck a mortal blow against the Enemy of
the human race. If our Ministry could be “tolerated” in some way, it would mean
that it is ineffective and compromised, if only because of the implicit
acceptance of an impossible coexistence between opposites, of a hermeneutic of continuity in which there is room for truth and error, light and darkness, God
and Belial. That is why I consider this sentence of the Roman Sanhedrin as
causing clarity: a Catholic cannot but be in a state of schism with those who
refuse the Profession of Faith in Charity. There can be no communion with the
one who first broke the supernatural bond with Christ and with His Mystical
Body. Nor can there be obedience and submission to an adulterated version of
the Papacy in which authority has deliberately withdrawn from Christ, the first
principle of that authority, to be transformed into tyranny.
Thus, just as in the morally necessary
choice to return to the Apostolic Mass I rediscovered the true meaning of my
priesthood, so too in the decision to denounce the apostasy of the modernist
and globalist hierarchy I rediscovered the meaning of my Episcopate, of being a
Successor of the Apostles, a witness of Christ and a Pastor in His Church.
Timidity, human respect, opportunistic
evaluations, thirst for power, or corruption have led many of my Brothers to
make the simplest choice: to leave the Lord by Himself in His Passion and
mingle with the crowd of His executioners, or even just to stand by for fear of
going against the high priests and scribes of the people. Some of them, like
Peter, repeat the “I do
not know Him” so as not to be brought before the
same Sanhedrin. Others stay closed in their cenacle, content not to be tried
and condemned. But is this what the Lord wants of us? Is this what He has
called us to in choosing us as His Ministers and as proclaimers of His Gospel?
Dear brothers, bless these times of tribulation with me, because it is
only in infirmitate that we have the certainty of fulfilling
God’s Will and sanctifying ourselves with His Grace. As Saint Paul says: My
grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness (2
Cor 12:9). Our being docile instruments in the Lord’s hands is the
indispensable premise for ensuring that His work is truly divine.
We are asked only to follow him: Veni, et sequere me (Mt
10:21); to follow Him leaving everything else, which is to make a radical
choice. We are asked to preach His Gospel, to baptize all nations in the name
of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, to keep faithfully all the
precepts that the Lord has commanded us to observe (Mt 28:19-20). We are asked
to pass on intact what we have received – tradidi quod et accepi
– without additions, without changes, without omissions. And to preach the Word
opportune, importune, enduring everything: in omni patientia et
doctrina (2 Tim 4:2). We are asked to take up our cross every day, to deny
ourselves, to be ready to climb Calvary and be crucified with Christ to rise
with Him, to share in His victory and triumph in the blessed eternity of
Heaven. We are asked to complete in our flesh what is lacking in Christ’s
afflictions, for the good of his Body which is the Church (Col 1:24). Pastors need to return to belonging to Christ, shaking off the
oppressive yoke of a servitude to the world that makes them accomplices in the
ruin of the Church.
From the Most Sacred Heart, pierced by a
spear, flows the infinite Grace of the Sacraments and especially of the
Catholic Priesthood. It ensures the perpetuation of Christ’s redemptive action
throughout History, so that the perfect Sacrifice of the divine Victim – who entered the Sanctuary once and for all
through his own blood (Heb 9:12) – may continue to be
offered under the sacramental species to the Eternal Father. In the same way,
when the Church appears defeated and is given up for dead, a spear in Her side
renews the flow of blood and water, laying the foundation for a future
restoration and guaranteeing the preservation of the Priesthood, the Mass, and
the Sacraments: of Tradition. It will be that blood and water that will
irrigate this land parched and split by drought, thirsty for the True and the
Good, so that the semen Christianorum may sprout
and bear fruit.
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the form of sheep, but
who inwardly are ravenous wolves (Mt 7:15). With these
words, significantly proposed by the Liturgy of this Seventh Sunday after
Pentecost and which we will read in the last Gospel, the Lord warns us against
those who usurp the gift of prophecy in order to contradict the Faith that he
revealed and taught the Apostles so that it might be faithfully handed down the
centuries. The Lord does not say: Beware of those who sow error, but of false prophets. Who are
these false prophets, these pseudochrists of whom Sacred
Scripture speaks? For false Christs and false prophets will arise and
perform great portents and miracles, so as to mislead even the elect if
possible. Behold, I have foretold it to you (Mt 24:24-25).
These are the hirelings, the false shepherds, those whom we can recognize ex
fructibus eorum, by their fruits, by what they do
(Mt 7:16-20). We know the fruits and we have them before our eyes: the planned
destruction of the Lord’s Vineyard by His own vinedressers.
What is imputed to me as a crime in order
to declare me schismatic and condemn me to excommunication has been put on the
record of a trial that condemns not me, but my accusers, the enemies of the
Cross of Christ. When the eclipse that darkens the Church ends and Our Lord returns
to be at the center of the lives of his ministers, those who are ostracized
today will find justice, and those who have abused their power to disperse the
Lord’s flock will have to answer to His tribunal and to that of History. We
will continue to do what all Catholic Bishops have done, often being persecuted
by them.
And we will continue in our work even if it
is hindered by those who usurp the power of the Holy Keys against the Church Herself.
The authority of the Pastors – and that of the Supreme Pontiff – is in the
hands of false pastors, who as such count precisely on our respect for the Hierarchy and on
our habitual obedience to make us accept the betrayal of
Christ and the ruin of souls. But authority comes only from Christ, who wants
all to be saved and to reach eternal blessedness through the one Ark of
Salvation. If the vicarious authority on earth preaches salvation from false
religions and the uselessness of Christ’s Sacrifice, it breaks the umbilical
cord that binds it to Him, thereby delegitimizing itself. We do not separate
ourselves from Holy Mother Church, but rather from the mercenaries who infest
her. We do not refuse obedience and submission to the Pontiff, but rather to
those who humiliate and tamper with the Papacy against the Will of Christ. Let
us not impugn the revealed Truth – quod Deus avertat! – but rather the errors that all the Popes have always condemned and
that today are imposed by those who want to make the Holy Church the servant of
her enemies (Lam 1:1), by those who delude themselves that they can keep the
ecclesial body alive by separating it from its Head who is Christ.
We do not have a Pontiff who can judge and
excommunicate us. If there were a Pope I would not even have been put on trial, nor
excommunicated or declared schismatic, because we would both profess the same
Faith and would receive Communion at the same altar. If today Bergoglio is
putting me on trial to condemn and excommunicate me, it is precisely because he
makes a public profession that he belongs to another religion and that he
presides over another church – his church, the synodal
church – from which I am “expelled” because I am a
Catholic and, indeed, a stranger to it.
Pray, dear brothers. Pray first of all for
the faithful and the ministers who live the contradiction of moral belonging to
the true Church of Christ and at the same time belonging to the false church of
the usurper Bergoglio, so that they may shake themselves from their torpor and
line up underneath the Cross, bearing witness to the Truth. Pray for those Bishops and priests who
humbly, and despite their infirmities, serve the Lord. Let us not nullify the
Most Precious Blood that he shed for us, and indeed let us make sure that we
can repeat with Saint Paul: Gratia Dei in me vacua non fuit (1 Cor
15:10). This Blood will descend today on our altar, and it will continue to
descend there as long as the Church has Bishops who can perpetuate the
Priesthood and priests who celebrate the Holy Sacrifice, according to the rite
handed down to us by Sacred Tradition. For this reason, let us act with a
serene heart and in the conviction that what I am doing is in conformity with
God’s will. And so may it be.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
July 7, 2024
Dominica VII post Pentecosten
COMMENT: The latest encyclical of Pope Francis is entitled, Bishop of
Rome. In this document prepared for the ongoing Synod on Synodality
Francis/Bergoglio offers an understanding of the papacy that is conformable to
that professed by the schismatic Orthodox bishops who hold that the pope is
only the first among equals and that he does not exercise universal
jurisdiction over the Church founded by Jesus Christ. This conception is antithetical
to the dogma declared at Vatican I. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is rejecting
the papal claims of Francis/Bergoglio primarily on the grounds that the office
that Francis/Bergoglio accepted is not
the office of the papacy but something altogether different. He could not and
cannot have accepted an office that he,
in fact, publically denies that exists.
Is this true? I do not know. There is no way to judge the matter
authoritatively. There is plenty of evidence that the bishops can judge a pope
who has become an open and manifest heretic as Francis/Bergoglio is but where
are the bishops holding ordinary jurisdiction that themselves who are free from
heresy? Our duty is to keep the faith and refuse any obedience to any exercise
of authority that directly or indirectly undermines that faith in its
profession and/or in its practice.
It is unfortunate that the Vatican was able to institute an illegal and
immoral administrative "extra-judical" process against Archbishop
Viganò without at least the Archbishop's open declaration that such a process
is a direct violation of canon law. He should demand his full canonical rights
to a public contentious hearing with all accusations of crimes and his own
defense in written format for all the faithful.
For
Every Faithful Catholic: The Principle of Unity is Faith, the Bond of Unity is
Charity!
The
Novus Ordo has broken the Principle of Unity with Tradition because they first
broke the Bond of Unity of Faith and thus, the unity with God.
But love must not be wrought in our imagination but must be proved by
works... Oh Jesus, what will a soul inflamed with Your love not do? Those who
really love You, love all good, seek all good, help forward all good, praise
all good, and invariably join forces with good men and help and defend
them. They love only truth and things
worthy of love. It is not possible that
one who really and truly loves You can love the vanities of earth; his only
desire is to please You. He is dying
with longing for You to love him, and so would give his life to learn how he
may please You better. O Lord, be please
to grant me this love before You take me from this life. It will be a great comfort at the hour of
death to realize that I shall be judged by You whom I have loved above all
things. Then I shall be able to go to
meet You with confidence, even though burdened with my debts, for I shall not
be going into a foreign land but into my own country, into the kingdom of Him
whom I have loved so much and who likewise has so much loved me.
St. Teresa of Jesus
“Taking
this plurality of forms seriously avoids hegemonic tendencies and mitigates the
risk of reducing the message of salvation to a single understanding of
ecclesial life and its liturgical, pastoral, or moral expression. The web of
relations within a synodal Church, made visible in the exchange of gifts
between the Churches and guaranteed by the unity of the College of bishops
headed by the bishop of Rome, is a dynamic guardian of a unity that can never
become uniformity.”
Instrumentum
Laboris for Second Session of Synod on Synodality,
October 2024
COMMENT: The Church of Synodality, under the
Francis/Bergoglio the "bishop of Rome", is open to a variety of
messages regarding salvation, a variety of human forms of worship, and a
variety of opinions as to what constitutes the moral law because the Church of
Synodality IS NOT the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church founded by
Jesus Christ. It is open to everything except the Catholic faith and
"received and approved" immemorial worship of God which it abhors.
Truth is One; error is always a plurality. By their fruits they are known.
Comments
from those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima:
Ø
“I cannot say anything of what I learned at
Fatima concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one
concerns the Pope. The other, logically – although I must say nothing –
would have to be the continuation of the words: In
Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.” [3]
[emphasis added] – Joseph Schweigel, S.J.,
d. 1964 (interrogated Sister Lucia about the Third Secret on behalf of Pope
Pius XII on Sept. 2, 1952)[4]
Ø
“In the period preceding the great
triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, terrible things are to happen.
These form the content of the third part of the Secret. What are they? If ‘in Portugal the dogma of the Faith will
always be preserved,’ … it can be clearly deduced from this that in other parts
of the Church these dogmas are going to become obscure or even lost altogether.
Thus it is quite possible that in this intermediate period
which is in question (after 1960 and before the triumph of the Immaculate Heart
of Mary), the text makes concrete references to the crisis of the Faith
of the Church and to the negligence of the pastors themselves.” [5]
[emphasis added] – Fr. Joaquin Alonso, C.M.F., d.
1981 (Cleratian priest and official Fatima archivist for over sixteen years;
had unparalleled access to Sister Lucia)
Ø
“The Secret of Fatima speaks
neither of atomic bombs, nor nuclear warheads, nor Pershing missiles, nor
SS-20’s. Its content concerns only our faith. To identify the
Secret with catastrophic announcements or with a nuclear holocaust is to deform
the meaning of the message. The loss of faith of a continent is worse
than the annihilation of a nation; and it is true that faith is
continually diminishing in Europe.” [6]
[emphasis added] – Bishop Alberto Cosme do Amaral, d. 2005 (former bishop of
Fatima-Leiria; remarks made in Vienna, Austria on Sept. 10, 1984)
Ø
“It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with
Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the
Church.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Silvio Oddi, d. 2001 (Vatican diplomat
and personal friend of Pope John XXIII, from whom he knew certain details
concerning the Third Secret) [7]
Ø
“In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other
things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
[emphasis added] – Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi,
O.P., d. 1996 (personal theologian to Popes John
XXIII-John Paul II) [8]
Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité, The Whole Truth about Fatima, [2],
Volume 3.
Posted by OnePeterFive
Vatican-backed interfaith
opened 2-16-23 - Esteemed by all excepting God and His friends!
LifeSiteNews | June 17, 2021
“The ‘Abrahamic Family House,’ a
juxtaposition of three places of worship on Saadiyat Island in Abu Dhabi – one
Muslim, one Jewish and one Christian – will open in 2022, according to a
release from Higher Committee of Human Fraternity echoed by the Abu Dhabi
Government Media Office and by Vatican News, the Vatican’s own media service
run by the Dicastery for Communication.
The ‘Abrahamic Family House’ is an
architectural complex in which the three so-called ‘Abrahamic’ religions, or
(abusively), the ‘religions of the Book’ born of God’s promise to Abraham, are
presented side by side in places of worship of equal proportions, set in a
triangle around a ‘common ground,’ a garden where believers can meet and enter
into ‘dialogue’ with each other.
The
projected interfaith complex presents itself as an embodiment of the Abu Dhabi
Document on Human Fraternity signed by Pope Francis and Imam Al-Tayeb of the
Sunni Al-Azhar University of Cairo, and the ‘Higher Committee for Human
Fraternity’ to which the joint declaration gave birth, and has been ‘endorsed’
and is being ‘closely followed’ both by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam.
Together
with photos of the construction site, which show the foundations of the three
religious buildings while one of them appears to be nearing completion, the
release revealed the names officially chosen for the three religious
buildings.”
"Pope Francis won't
ever speak ex cathedra."
Cardinal
Fernandez, during press conference introducing Dignitas Infinita
COMMENT:
God
has revealed that He will never permit His Church to bind doctrinal or moral
error on His faithful. This promise has been invariably kept throughout the
history of the Church including the time of Vatican II and its aftermath.
Vatican II was a pastoral council of churchmen teaching by their grace of state
by virtue of their personal magisterium. The pope and the council never engaged
the Magisterium of the Church to teach without the possibility of error.
Consequently, the errors of Vatican II reflect only on the heresy and weakness
of individual churchmen.
The fact that Pope Francis "won't
ever speak ex cathedra" could
mean anything. It could mean that he is not the pope but only the "bishop
of Rome" and therefore cannot engage the Magisterium even if he wanted to.
It could mean that he does
not recognize the Magisterium of the Church and will not engage what he does
not believe in. This would imply that he does not believe in the office of the
papacy with its universal jurisdiction, and therefore, the office which he
assumed is not the papacy but something of his own imaginary construction.
Pope Francis may be just another Pontius Pilate and does not know or care what
truth is. Maybe he is just another habitual liar. Maybe he is the pope and
knows that if he puts his ass into the chair of Peter and tries to bind the
Catholic conscience to his doctrinal error and moral corruption it will be the
last thing he ever tries to do. Time will tell.
REVENGE
OF THE HOMOLOBBY
Vatican says Archbishop
Viganò ‘guilty’ of schism and excommunicated
Pope Francis' Vatican
announced it had found former Nuncio to the U.S. Archbishop Viganò 'guilty of
the reserved delict of schism' on July 4, and that consequently he is
automatically excommunicated.
LifeSiteNews
| Vatican City | Michael Haynes | Jul 5, 2024 — The Vatican’s Dicastery for the
Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) announced July 5 that it had declared former U.S
Nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to be guilty of “schism” and automatically
excommunicated.
In
a statement issued without warning to the Holy See press corps, the DDF stated
that its Congress met on July 4 to decide against Viganò. The statement read:
On 4 July 2024, the Congress of
the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith met to conclude the extrajudicial
penal process referred to in canon 1720 CIC against the Most Reverend Carlo
Maria Viganò, titular Archbishop of Ulpiana, accused of the reserved delict of
schism (canons 751 and 1364 CIC; art. 2 SST).
His
public statements manifesting his refusal to recognize and submit to the
Supreme Pontiff, his rejection of communion with the members of the Church
subject to him, and of the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second
Vatican Council are well known.
At the conclusion of the penal process, the
Most Reverend Carlo Maria Viganò was found guilty of the reserved delict of
schism.
The
Dicastery declared the latae sententiae excommunication in accordance with
canon 1364 § 1 CIC. The lifting of the censure in these cases is reserved to
the Apostolic See. This decision was communicated to the Most Reverend Viganò
on 5 July 2024.
Under
the terms of the latest edition of Canon Law, one who is excommunicated is
prohibited from offering the sacraments.
On
June 20, Viganò revealed that the DDF had, by way of a letter dated June 11,
begun an “extrajudicial penal trial” against him, accusing the prelate of “the
crime of schism.”
Issued
by Monsignor John Kennedy, who leads the DDF’S Disciplinary Section, the Vatican’s
letter alerted him to “the crime of schism of which he has been accused (public
statements which result in a denial of the elements necessary to maintain
communion with the Catholic Church; denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; a
rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council).”
Rebuffing
the accusation, Viganò stated at the time that “I claim, as Successor of the
Apostles, to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church,
with the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted
doctrinal, moral, and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully
preserved.”
He
further added that “I repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors,
and heresies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical
management of power, exercised against the purpose that legitimizes authority
in the Church: an authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and
as such must obey Him alone.”
In
an expansive statement issued June 28, the former U.S. nuncio issued a
blistering response to the DDF’s charge of schism, attesting that “[a]
schismatic sect accuses me of schism: this should be enough to demonstrate the
subversion taking place.”
Bottom
of Form
Continuing,
the archbishop stated:
… in order to separate myself
from ecclesial communion with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, I would have to have first
been in communion with him, which is not possible since Bergoglio himself
cannot be considered a member of the Church, due to his multiple heresies and
his manifest alienness and incompatibility with the role he invalidly and
illicitly holds.
Turning
the Vatican’s charges against them, Viganò then accused Pope Francis of schism,
writing:
I accuse Jorge Mario Bergoglio
of heresy and schism, and I ask that he be judged as a heretic and schismatic
and removed from the throne which he has unworthily occupied for over 11 years.
This in no way contradicts the adage Prima Sedes a nemine judicatur,
because it is evident that, since a heretic is unable to assume the Papacy, he
is not above the Prelates who judge him.
Archbishop
Viganò has been contacted for comment in response to the Vatican’s ruling, and
this report will be updated accordingly.
COMMENT: Luther, the heretical and eventual schismatic Augustinian
priest, was granted a canonical trial before any judicial determination of
heresy was concluded. Why was Luther granted his canonical rights while
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was not? Why was Luther given a formal canonical
trial while Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was given the immoral and illegal
application of an administrative “extrajudicial” process? It is because the
former case was to determine TRUTH while the latter case was to conceal and
destroy it. Archbishop
Viganò was given the semblance of canonical due process for public consumption
while denying its substance. The declaration that Archbishop Viganò as
“excommunicated” is a change of his juridic standing in the Church. No
administrative process, which is what an extrajudicial process is, can be used
against any Catholic accused of a crime without his consent when it involves a
change of his juridic standing in the Church. This shame, this farce, only
condemns those who have perpetuated it.
Homosexual priests charged with pederasty against Catholic adolescents
are afforded full canonical due process The Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith headed by then Cardinal Ratzinger from 1981 until 2004 assumed
jurisdiction over these cases because, as Ratzinger said the faith itself was
an aggrieved party in the scandal. After he became pope, Benedict removed the
most egregious offenders. In
the last two years of his pontificate before his resignation (2011 and 2012)
three hundred and eighty-four offending priests were laicized. Everyone of
these homosexual predators were given canonical due process. None were administratively
laicized by an extrajudicial process without their consent. As reported
in the New York Times, “By 2006, the Church had spent $2.6 billion settling
sexual-abuse cases, as Berry wrote in the 2010 edition of Vows of Silence.”
Now the down-graded Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) still
has the primary duty of defending the faith. The primary and essential cause
and sign of the unity of the One Church is the FAITH. The DDF publically
ignores the charges of heresy against Pope Francis and Vatican II Council
leveled by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò as if the faith itself is no longer an
“aggrieved party” deserving of a canonical hearing and canonical defense!
Without the faith it is impossible to please God. The DDF does not possess the
faith it is obligated to defend. The entire presupposition of the DDF is that
the pope is the proximate rule of faith and any divergence from his will is the
definition of schism and heresy. This is not only not Catholic it is idolatry.
Dogma is the proximate rule of faith to which the pope himself is subject as
well as the DDF.
How does this differ from the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel
Lefebvre by Pope John Paul II? JPII excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre was
a mere public expression of his canonical opinion that the act of consecrating
bishops without a papal mandate is an ipso
facto excommunicable offense. Therefore, in his opinion, Archbishop
Lefebvre was excommunicated. This did not even reach the level of an
administrative extrajudicial process. The ignorant simply took the opinion of
the pope as the law of the Church!
The consecration of bishops is not necessarily an excommunicable
offense. Bishops were often consecrated without a papal mandate in the former
Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact countries and communist China on many occasions in
our own times. The point is that the law is hierarchical. The salvation of
souls is the highest law to which all others laws are subjected. There was a
context for the consecration of bishops in communist controlled countries and
there was a context for the consecration of bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre. The
context was never addressed which canonical due process would insure.
Archbishop Lefebvre was denied his canonical rights by JPII for the
same reason that Francis and his DDF are denying Archbishop Viganò his
canonical rights. The
Novus Ordo Church cannot defend its doctrinal, moral, and liturgical
corruptions because they are indefensible so it must necessarily destroy the
accuser. JPII's excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre only made an
impression on those who believe that the opinions expressed by the pope are
above the law and the pope has the power and authority to act unjustly against
God and His Church. Church history records a number of these abuses of
authority as well as a number of subsequent corrections. St. Philip Neri and
St. Catherine de Ricci rejoiced at the determination by a papal ad hoc committee that Savonarola was
innocent of the crimes for which the corrupt Borgia pope had accused, tried and
executed him. When God sets things aright, as He most assuredly will do,
everyone will know why Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is in heaven and Francis
and his DDF minions, unless there is serious repentance, are not.
The abrogation
of Summorum Pontificum got the Neo-Traditionalists all stirred up. They have
professed their ‘faith’ in the inerrancy of Vatican II and their understanding
that the Novus Ordo and the traditional Roman rite are one and the same liturgy
in two divergent forms. In return for
this corruption of truth they were granted an Indult, which became a grant of
legal privilege, which has now again has become an indult, to worship according
to the immemorial traditions of the Church, which they hold as simple accidents
of the faith subject to the arbitrary will of the legislator. These crumbs that
have fallen from the table of Benedict/Ratzinger have been swept away by
Francis because, it is a fact of law, that what is accepted as a privilege can
no longer be claimed as a right.
For
several decades now, we have lived in the “Tyranny of the Present.” Tradition
is forgotten and, precisely because it is forgotten, our responsibilities for
the future are also dismissed. The liturgical experimentation that led to the
Novus Ordo was the epitome of Vatican II: it has given the Catholic hierarchy
the liturgical-theological basis for their current promotion of the “here and
now” as the supreme aim of the Church.
With
Summorum Pontificum, the most
consequential pontifical legislative act since 1969, Benedict XVI upended this
new materialistic logic: by opening the gates of the past, he once again placed
the Church on the path of eternity and immortality (sic).
Summorum Pontificum is now under threat, with the survey being conducted
whose consequences are uncertain. There was a Church before the present
reality, there will be a Church forever: and the Sacred Liturgy she celebrates
here, with true Traditional and Apostolic imprint, has always been and should
always be, not a reflection of the banality of the moment, but a prefiguration
of her immortality as Bride of Christ and her Paschal Feast with the Lord for
all Eternity, outside the limitations of our present existence.
Rorate
Caeli
All law proceeds from the reason and will of the lawgiver; the Divine
and natural laws from the reasonable will of God; the human law from the will
of man, regulated by reason. Now just as human reason and will, in practical
matters, may be made manifest by speech, so may they be made known by deeds:
since seemingly a man chooses as good that which he carries into execution. But
it is evident that by human speech, law can be both changed and expounded, in
so far as it manifests the interior movement and thought of human reason.
Wherefore by actions also, especially if they be repeated, so as to make a
custom, law can be changed and expounded; and also something can be established
which obtains force of law, in so far as by repeated external actions, the
inward movement of the will, and concepts of reason are most effectually
declared; for when a thing is done again and again, it seems to proceed from a
deliberate judgment of reason. Accordingly, custom has the force of a law,
abolishes law, and is the interpreter of law.
St. Thomas Aquinas
Just
insider confirmation to what is common knowledge: Pope Francis, the CEO of the
HomoLobby
Francis is the first ever pope to use the word “gay.” He has LGBTQ
friends, and he has appointed many LGBTQ friendly and supportive cardinals,
archbishops and bishops.... Catholics who reject LGBTQ are “homophobic.”
Fr. James Martin, S.J., Homosexual Jesuit priest sermon at a LGBTQ
Novus Ordo celebration
The
United States Empire is no different!
The imperial city (Rome) endeavours to communicate her language
(religion, philosophy, law, government and general cultural values) to all the
lands she has subdued to procure a fuller society and a greater abundance of
interpreters on both sides. It is true, but how many lives has this cost! And
suppose that done, the worst is not past, for… the wider extension of her
empire produced still greater wars… Wherefore he that does but consider with
compassion all these extremes of sorrow and bloodshed must needs say that this
is a mystery. But he that endures them without a sorrowful emotion or thought
thereof, is far more wretched to imagine he has the bliss of a god when he has
lost the natural feelings of a man.
St. Cyprian, Epistle to Donatus
Getting
What We Deserve
THE MOST EVIDENT MARK of God’s anger and the most terrible
castigation He can inflict upon the world are manifested when He permits
His people to fall into the hands of clerics’ who are priests more in name than
in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the
charity and affection of devoted shepherds.
Instead of nourishing
those committed to their care, they rend and devour them brutally.
Instead of leading their people to God, they drag Christian souls into
hell in their train. Instead of being the salt of the earth and the
light of the world, they are its innocuous poison and its murky darkness.
St. Gregory the Great
says that priests and pastors will stand condemned before God as
the murderers of any souls lost through neglect or silence. Tot occidimus, quot ad mortem ire tepidi et
tacentes videmus. Elsewhere St. Gregory asserts that nothing more
angers God than to see those whom He set aside for the correction of
others, give bad example by a wicked and depraved life.
Instead of
preventing offenses against His Majesty, such priests become themselves
the first to persecute Him, they lose their zeal for the salvation of
souls and think only of following their own inclinations. Their affections
go no farther than earthly things, they eagerly bask in the empty praises
of men, using their sacred ministry to serve their ambitions, they
abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world, and
in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and
worldly pursuits.
When God permits such
things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with
His people, and is visiting His most dreadful anger upon them. That
is why He cries unceasingly to Christians, “Return, O ye revolting children . . . and
I will give you pastors according to my own heart” (Jer. 3, 14-15). Thus,
irregularities in the lives of priests constitute a scourge visited upon
the people in consequence of sin.
St. John Eudes, The Priest: His Dignity and Obligations
SSPX Two-Cent
Opinion:
The Vatican Activates
Extrajudicial Proceedings Against Archbishop Viganò
FSSPX
News | June 24, 2024
Archbishop
Carlo Maria Viganò published on the internet the letter from the Dicastery for
the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF). It notified him of his summons to appear at
the DDF Palace on June 20, after the opening of an “extrajudicial” criminal
trial against him.
A Little Explanation
What
is an extrajudicial criminal trial? According to the DDF Vademecum published on
June 5, 2022, the extrajudicial criminal trial, sometimes called an
“administrative trial,” is a form of criminal trial which reduces the
formalities provided for in the judicial trial in order to accelerate the
course of justice. It does not eliminate the procedural guarantees required for
a fair judgment.
For
offenses reserved to the DDF, it is up to the DDF alone, on a case-by-case
basis, ex officio or at the request of the Ordinary, to decide whether to
proceed this way. Just like a judicial trial, an extrajudicial criminal trial
can take place at the DDF – which is the case for Viganò – or be entrusted to a
lower authority.
The Accusations Made by the DDF
The
decree of summons mentions the charge Viganò will face during the trial. The crime
of schism is put forward, because of certain public affirmations negating the
elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church: denial of
the legitimacy of Pope Francis; rupture of communion with him; and rejection of
the Second Vatican Council.
Following
this summons, Viganò published a communiqué, available online, to respond to
these accusations. He defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal
wanderings of the current pontificate; rejecting neo-modernist errors; and
asserting his case compares to that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, also
summoned in his time to the Palace of the former Holy Office .
There
is, however, one point which significantly differentiates him from the founder
of the Society of Saint Pius X: Archbishop Viganò makes a clear declaration of
sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is
not pope.
How
does he explain this? Because of a “defect of consent” from Cardinal Jorge
Bergoglio when accepting the papacy. That is, according to Viganò, Cardinal
Bergoglio considered the papacy as something other than what it really is. He
accepted the pontifical office without fully consenting, and this error
resulted in the nullity of his acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be
that of a place-holder.
Archbishop
Lefebvre and the Society he founded have not ventured down that perilous
road.
COMMENT: The SSPX has already been regularized by
Rome. This is easily proved. Although they have been regularized informally sub rosa this is not generally known by
all their members and it is purposely concealed from those who attend their
chapels. This criticism of Archbishop Viganò is offered to distance
themselves from his accusation that Pope Francis is a heretic and schismatic.
The leadership of the SSPX has taken the 1989 Profession of Faith and Oath of
Fidelity to Pope Francis in which they vow unconditional obedience to his
"authentic magisterium" and promise to abstain from any public
criticism of the Pope that has not been approved by Rome.
There are several problems with this
publication. Their
"little explanation" regarding extrajudicial proceedings is
incorrect. An "extrajudicial criminal trial" is an
administrative process that cannot be used against any Catholic defendant
without his consent who is accused of a crime if their conviction would change
their juridic standing in the Church. The crime of heresy and schism changes
the juridic standing of the accused in the Church. Instituting an extrajudicial
process in a criminal accusation is just an attempt to deny the accused his
canonic rights of due process. Archbishop Viganò is canonically entitled
to demand a contentious canonical
judicial process. He can also demand that the arguments be in a written
format rather than oral, and he is free to publish Rome's accusations and
arguments as well as his replies. Rome not only must objectively prove the
criminal charges of schism and heresy, they must establish subjective
imputability of the crime.
Pope
Francis is not just guilty of "doctrinal wanderings", but of
objective heresy which is defined as the denial of Catholic dogma.
The "pastoral council", Vatican II, committed many "doctrinal
wanderings" that directly corrupted Catholic dogma and there are multiple
examples of this. The reason
the "SSPX has not ventured down that perilous road" of declaring Pope
Francis and Vatican II as heretical is because the SSPX does not hold dogma as
the proximate rule of faith. The definition of heresy IS the denial of dogma
and if you do not believe in dogma, you cannot call anyone a heretic. The SSPX has been in constant
"dialogue" with Rome for more than 25 years. Dialogue is the exchange
of opinions. Dogma is the affirmation of divine Truth. If the SSPX had appealed
to dogma against the modernists in Rome the dialogue would have ended in a few
hours.
Archbishop Viganò has not
declared that he is a sedevacantist. Sedevacantists believe that the crime of
heresy and schism automatically removes a pope from the office of the papacy.
Most of them believe that there has not been a pope since Pius XII. It is
calumny to publish this accusation. Archbishop Viganò has offered the opinion
that there are irregularities regarding the election of Pope Francis in that
his conception of the papacy is in fact heretical and that therefore the office
he accepted and ascended to does not exist. This has been offered as an
opinion. The SSPX and other conservatives are afraid of being to close to the
truth and thus their criticism of
Archbishop Viganò will only get worse. The coward always accuses the
brave of being 'imprudent'!
Pope
Francis the Amazed - It all depends on what "spirit" you are
listening to!
“The problematic is primarily ecclesiological. I do not see how it is
possible to say that one recognizes the validity of the Council — though it
amazes me that a Catholic might presume not to do so — and at the same time not
accept the liturgical reform born out of Sacrosanctum Concilium, a document
that expresses the reality of the Liturgy intimately joined to the vision of
Church so admirably described in Lumen gentium.” ……
"Let us abandon our polemics to
listen together to what the Spirit is saying to the Church. Let us safeguard
our communion. Let us continue to be astonished at the beauty of the (Novus
Ordo) Liturgy. The Paschal Mystery has been given to us. Let us allow ourselves
to be embraced by the desire that the Lord continues to have to eat His
Passover with us. All this under the gaze of Mary, Mother of the Church."
Pope Francis the Low and Vicious, Desiderio
Desideravi, his apostolic letter on liturgical formation
COMMENT: Nice to see Pope Francis getting to the meat
of the matter: How can “one recognizes the validity of the Council…. and not accept the liturgical reform.” So
let’s “amaze” the deaf and dumb and repeat again, the Vatican II Council was
merely a pastoral council that has proven to be a pastoral failure by every
objective criterion that measures pastoral success or failure. The Pope can
babble all he wants about “Time is greater than space,” but after 60 years that
psychological lollipop can only pacify the brain dead. Nothing, absolutely
nothing, from Vatican II binds the conscience of the Catholic faithful
regarding any matter of doctrine, morals or worship when that teaching
contradicts or contravenes directly or indirectly the Catholic faith, morals or
immemorial traditions. The Council is the work of churchmen teaching by their
grace of state and has nothing to do with the Magisterium of the Church
teaching by virtue of the Church’s attributes of Infallibility and Authority.
If this were not the case, then God would have failed in His divine promise to
preserve His Church from formal error, for as everyone knows but does not like
to say, the Vatican II Council is clearly heretical in many of its direct
pronouncements and their implications. The most important error of the Council
was declared by the Novus Ordo Saint John XXIII in his opening address where he
stated that the purpose of the Council was to reformulate Catholic truth with
new words and new images. This is the heresy of Neo-modernism which postulates
the heretical opinion that there exists a disjunction between the truth of
dogma and the words to express that truth. The very purpose of Vatican II was
heretical and its fruit has abundantly revealed this ugly fact. Pope Francis in
his direct endorsement of sexual perversion by his active associations with
homosexuals and abortion by his public praising of the likes of Nancy Pelosi,
is evidence of this fact. He hates the immemorial Roman rite of Mass because he
hates God and everything that pertains to His acceptable worship. The
immemorial Roman rite of Mass is the Holy Sacrifice of the Cross. The Novus
Ordo is a memorial meal, the offering of Cain, ‘the fruit of the earth and the
work of human hands’.
Vatican charges Archbishop
Viganò with schism for ‘denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis’
The Vatican's doctrinal
office summoned Archbishop Viganò to appear before an 'extrajudicial penal
trial' on June 20 over accusations of 'schism' owing to a 'denial of the
legitimacy of Pope Francis, rupture of communion with Him, and rejection of the
Second Vatican Council.'
LifeSiteNews
| Jun 20, 2024— The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) has
instigated an “extrajudicial penal trial” against 
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, accusing the
prelate of “the crime of schism.”
In
an email signed by Monsignor John Kennedy of the dicastery’s Disciplinary
Section and sent to the Italian archbishop, who served as papal nuncio to the
United States from 2011 to 2016, the dicastery summoned Viganò to the Vatican
on June 20 that he “may take notice of the accusations and evidence concerning
the crime of schism.” Namely, the dicastery notified the archbishop that he
stands accused of making “public
statements which result in a denial of the elements necessary to maintain
communion with the Catholic Church; denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis,
rupture of communion with Him, and rejection of the Second Vatican Council.”
In
response, Viganò defended himself stating:
In
the face of the Dicastery’s accusations, I claim, as Successor of the Apostles,
to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, with the
Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted doctrinal, moral,
and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully preserved.
Regarding
the accusations against him “as an honor,” Viganò stressed his desire to
“repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of Jorge
Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical management of power,
exercised against the purpose that legitimizes authority in the Church: an
authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and as such must obey
Him alone.”
After
arguing that “[no] Catholic worthy of the name can be in communion with this
‘Bergoglian church,’ because it acts in clear discontinuity and rupture with
all the popes of history and with the Church of Christ,” Viganò asked Catholics
to “pray that the Lord will come to the aid of His Church and give courage to
those who are persecuted for their Faith.”
Attendite a falsis prophetis
Announcement regarding the
start of the extrajudicial criminal trial for schism (Art. 2 SST; can. 1364
CIC)
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has informed me, with a simple
email, of the initiation of an extrajudicial penal trial against me, with the
accusation of having committed the crime of schism and charging me of having
denied the legitimacy of “Pope Francis” of having broken communion “with Him”
and of having rejected the Second Vatican Council. I have been summoned to the
Palace of the Holy Office on June 20, in person or represented by a canon
lawyer. I assume that the sentence has already been prepared, given that it is
an extrajudicial process.
I regard the accusations against me as an honor. I believe that the
very wording of the charges confirms the theses that I have repeatedly defended
in my various addresses. It is no coincidence that the accusation against me
concerns the questioning of the legitimacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and
the rejection of Vatican II: the Council represents the ideological,
theological, moral, and liturgical cancer of which the Bergoglian “synodal
church” is the necessary metastasis.
It is necessary for the Episcopate, the Clergy and the People of God to
seriously ask themselves whether it is consistent with the 
profession of
the Catholic Faith to passively witness the systematic destruction of
the Church by its leaders, just as other subversives are destroying civil
society. Globalism calls for ethnic substitution: Bergoglio promotes
uncontrolled immigration and calls for the integration of cultures and
religions. Globalism supports LGBTQ+ ideology: Bergoglio authorizes the
blessing of same-sex couples and imposes on the faithful the acceptance of
homosexualism, while covering up the scandals of his protégés and promoting
them to the highest positions of responsibility. Globalism imposes the green
agenda: Bergoglio worships the idol of the Pachamama, writes delirious
encyclicals about the environment, supports the Agenda 2030, and attacks
those who question the theory of man-made global warming. He goes beyond his
role in matters that strictly pertain to science, but always and only in one
direction: a direction that is diametrically opposed to what the Church has
always taught. He has mandated the use of experimental gene serums, which
caused very serious damage, death and sterility, calling them “an act of love,”
in exchange for funding from pharmaceutical companies and philanthropic
foundations. His total alignment with the Davos religion is scandalous.
Wherever governments at the service of the World Economic Forum have introduced
or extended abortion, promoted vice, legitimized homosexual unions or gender
transition, encouraged euthanasia, and tolerated the persecution of Catholics,
not a word has been spent in defense of the Faith or Morals that are
threatened, or in support of the civil battles of so many Catholics who have
been abandoned by the Vatican and the Bishops. Not a word for the persecuted
Catholics in China, with the complicity of the Holy See, which considers
Beijing’s billions more important than the lives and freedom of thousands of
Chinese who are faithful to the Roman Church. In the “synodal church” presided
over by Bergoglio, no schism is recognized among the German Episcopate, or
among the government-appointed Bishops who have been consecrated in China
without the mandate of Rome. Because their action is consistent with the
destruction of the Church, and therefore must be concealed, minimized,
tolerated, and finally encouraged. In these eleven years of “pontificate” the
Catholic Church has been humiliated and discredited above all because of the
scandals and corruption of the leaders of the Hierarchy, which have been
totally ignored even as the most ruthless Vatican authoritarianism raged
against faithful priests and religious, small communities of traditional nuns,
and communities tied to the Latin Mass.
This one-sided zeal is reminiscent of Cromwell’s fanaticism, typical of
those who defy Providence in the presumption of knowing that they are finally
at the top of the hierarchical pyramid, free to do and undo as they please
without anyone objecting to anything. And this work of destruction, this
willingness to renounce the salvation of souls in the name of a human peace
that denies God is not an invention of Bergoglio, but the main (and
unmentionable) purpose of those who used a Council to contradict the Catholic
Magisterium and to begin to demolish the Church from within, in small steps,
but always in a single direction, always with the indulgent tolerance or
culpable inaction – if not the explicit approval – of the Roman authorities.
The Catholic Church has been slowly but surely taken over, and Bergoglio has been
given the task of making it a philanthropic agency, the “church of humanity, of
inclusion, of the environment” at the service of the New World Order. But this
is not the Catholic Church: it is her counterfeit.
The resignation of Benedict XVI and the appointment by the St. Gallen
Mafia of a successor in line with the diktats of the Agenda 2030 was
intended to allow – and has succeeded in allowing – the global coup to take
place with the complicity and authoritative support of the Church of Rome.
Bergoglio is to the Church what other world leaders are to their nations:
traitors, subversives, and final liquidators of traditional society who are
certain of impunity. Bergoglio’s defect of consent (vitium consensus)
in accepting his election is based precisely on the evident alienity of
his action of government and magisterium with respect to what any Catholic of
any age expects from the Vicar of Christ and the Successor of the Prince of the
Apostles. Everything that Bergoglio does constitutes an offense and a provocation
to the entire Catholic Church, to her Saints of all times, to the Martyrs who
were killed in odium Fidei, and to the Popes of all times until the
Second Vatican Council.
This is also and principally an offense against the Divine Head of the
Church, Our Lord Jesus Christ, Whose sacred authority Bergoglio claims to
exercise for the detriment of the Mystical Body, with an action that is too
systematic and coherent to appear to be the fruit of mere incapacity. In the
work of Bergoglio and his circle, the Lord’s warning is put into practice: Beware
of false prophets, who come to you in the guise of lambs, but who are ravenous
wolves at heart (Mt 7:15). I am honored not to have – and indeed I do not
want – any ecclesial communion with them: theirs is a lobby, which conceals its
complicity with the masters of the world in order to deceive many souls
and prevent any resistance against the establishment of the Kingdom of the
Antichrist.
In the face of the Dicastery’s accusations, I claim, as Successor of the
Apostles, to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church,
with the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted
doctrinal, moral, and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully
preserved.
I repudiate the neomodernist errors inherent in the Second Vatican
Council and in the so-called “post-conciliar magisterium,” in particular in
matters of collegiality, ecumenism, religious freedom, the secularity of the
State, and the liturgy.
I repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical management of
power, exercised against the purpose that legitimizes Authority in the Church:
an authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and as such must obey
Him alone. This separation of the Papacy from its legitimizing principle, which
is Christ the High Priest, transforms the ministerium into a
self-referential tyranny.
No Catholic worthy of the name can be in communion with this
“Bergoglian church,” because it acts in clear discontinuity and rupture with
all the Popes of history and with the Church of Christ.
Fifty years ago, in that same Palace of the Holy Office, Archbishop
Marcel Lefebvre was summoned and accused of schism for rejecting Vatican II.
His defense is mine; his words are mine; and his arguments are mine – arguments
before which the Roman authorities could not condemn him for heresy, having to
wait instead for him to consecrate bishops so as to have the pretext of
declaring him schismatic and then revoking his excommunication when he was
already dead. The scheme is repeated even after half a century has demonstrated
Archbishop Lefebvre’s prophetic choice.
In these times of apostasy, Catholics will find in Pastors faithful to
the mandate received from Our Lord an example and an encouragement to abide in
the Truth of Christ.
Depositum custodi, according to the Apostle’s exhortation: as
the time approaches when I will have to give an account to the Son of God of
all my actions, I intend to persevere in the bonum certamen and not to
fail in the witness of faith which is required of each one who, as Bishop, has
been endowed with the fullness of the priesthood and constituted Successor of
the Apostles.
I invite all Catholics to pray that the Lord will come to the aid of
His Church and give courage to those who are persecuted for their Faith.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
June 20, 2024
S.cti Silverii Papæ et Martyris
B.ti Dermitii O’Hurley, Episcopi et Martyris
COMMENT: An
"extrajudicial" process is intended to deny Archbishop Carlo
Maria Viganò his canonical rights of due process while still giving the
external appearance of a legitimate legal process. This same immoral and
illegal process was done with our pastor, Fr. Samuel Waters. Canon law forbids any administrative
process that permanently effects the juridic standing of any Catholic or for
the removal of any cleric from office. A priest cannot be administratively
laicized without his consent. There are several published letters on our
web page from Fr. Waters to the archdiocese of Philadelphia specifically
declaring Fr. Waters' intent to remain a Catholic priest and demanding
canonical due process, Archbishop Charles Chaput, the ordinary of Philadelphia
at that time, in open conspiracy with the Vatican Dicastery for the Clergy, issued an
administrative laicization. They then published the administrative order at the
same time with the laicization of another priest who was convicted of child
pornography and laicized only after a ten-year canonical process that was
respective of all his legal rights. This act of Chaput to smear the name of Fr.
Waters was both illegal and grossly immoral, but since when does legality or
morality of the matter been an obstacle to the outlaw and degenerate? Forgiveness
of sin requires all three elements of penance: contrition, confession and
satisfaction Archbishop Chaput committed a sin for which making satisfaction is
impossible.
Rome
is attempting to do the same thing to Archbishop Viganò. Schism is a canonical crime. The Church's contentious canonical judicial
process is required for the crime of schism because schism permanently changes
the juridic standing of the defendant in the Church. The judicial process
requires those making a criminal charge to clarify and prove the existence of a
delict and assess the imputability of the delict to the defendant. It can be
done orally or in writing. Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission has been
demanding a contentions canonical due process for the alleged crimes of heresy
and schism that were made by the diocese of Harrisburg. Our demands have been
ignored for more than twenty years. Why? They cannot prove their charges.
A
extrajudicial canonical process is a contradiction in terms because when it is
imposed against the defendant's will an extrajudicial process CANNOT be
canonical! Recommendation: Now that the
charge of schism has been publically made for calling into question the
canonical legitimacy of Pope Francis' papacy and the Vatican II Council,
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
should demand canonical due process and then demand written arguments be
presented by all parties. He should refuse any cooperation with
"extrajudical" processes that are intended to deny canonical rights
and expose it for the fraud that it is. The Vatican II Novus Ordo Church likes
to talk about the dignity of the human person unless he gets in their way and
then "dignity be damned"!
The
Novus Ordo is a new order lex orandi to make a new order lex credendi!
In every liturgical year the whole
revelation of faith returns, mystery by mystery, dogma by dogma, precept by
precept, upon our intelligences and upon our hearts. The lex
credendi is the lex orandi,
and the worship of the Church preaches to the world without, and to the faithful
within the sanctuary. To those that are without, it is a visible and audible
witness for the kingdom of God: to those that are within, it is a foresight and
a foretaste of the beauty and the sweetness of the worship of eternity. If
preachers will follow the Church as it moves year by year in the cycle of
eternal truths, and will explain pastorally in simple and manly words the
epistles and gospels by which the Church, or rather the Holy Ghost, teaches us
the meaning of the feast and fast as they come and go, they will year by year
declare to their flocks the whole counsel of God.
Cardinal Henry Edward Manning,
1897
Pope Francis approves new
document elevating ecumenism and synodality above papal primacy
The new ‘study document’
from the Vatican’s Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity emphasizes an
intimate link between papal primacy and synodality, advocating for
decentralization, granting more authority at regional levels while enhancing
ecumenism.
LifeSiteNews | Michael
Haynes | Jun 13, 2024
VATICAN CITY — The Vatican has unveiled a pivotal document on the
papacy, which contains numerous calls to fundamentally alter the understanding
of the practice of papal primacy and authority in order to aid ecumenism and
synodality.
Billed
as “the first document to summarize the entire ecumenical debate on the service
of primacy in the Church since the Second Vatican Council,” the
document is the fruit of almost four years of “truly ecumenical and
synodal work.” The text presents the results of a process initiated by the
Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity (DPCU) in 2020, which saw the
25th anniversary of Ut Unum Sint.
The
document, drawn up under the guidance of the DPCU, has received input from
“Orthodox and Protestant theologians,” as well as the Roman Curia and the Synod
of Bishops. As such, the text is a “study document”: not presenting a new line
which the Vatican is set to adhere to – at least not yet – but giving a strong
indication of probably future direction on the papacy which may soon emerge,
partially from the Synod on Synodality.
As
with many elements of the Catholic Church today, ecumenism is at the fore. The
dicastery summarized that following Vatican II the “ecumenical dimension” of
the papacy “has been an essential aspect of this ministry.”
Writing
his preface to the 150-page document, DPCU prefect Cardinal Kurt Koch noted
that:
It
is our hope that it will promote not only the reception of the dialogues on
this important topic [the papacy], but also stimulate further theological
investigation and practical suggestions, ‘together, of course,’ for an exercise
of the ministry of unity of the Bishop of Rome ‘recognized by all concerned’
(UUS 95).
Indeed,
The Bishop of Rome appears to present the blueprint for a new understanding of
the papacy and papal primacy in the 21st century, an era marked by a focus on
ecumenism and “synodality.” As noted in the document itself:
The
following pages offer a schematic presentation of (1) the responses to Ut
unum sint and documents of the theological dialogues devoted to the
question of primacy; (2) the main theological questions traditionally
challenging papal primacy, and some significant advances in contemporary
ecumenical reflection; (3) some perspectives for a ministry of unity in a
reunited Church; and (4) practical suggestions or requests addressed to the
Catholic Church. This synthesis is based both on the responses to Ut unum
sint and on the results of the official and unofficial dialogues
concerning the ministry of unity at the universal level. It uses the
terminology adopted by these documents, with its advantages and limitations.
Windswept
House? Primacy or committees?
The
document’s theological arguments and essays are followed by a summary along
with “practical suggestions or requests addressed to the Catholic Church”
regarding the future exercise of the office of the papacy. As with other
elements of current ecclesial life, the text bears a peculiar resemblance to
Malachi Martin’s Windswept House, in which the globalist and
Masonic-aligned cardinals are attempting to force the “Slavic Pope” to resign
by arguing that for him to do so would help the damaged unity of the Church,
and improve relations between the (heterodox) bishops and the pope.
Though
not aimed at forcing Pope Francis to resign – since he has approved of The
Bishop of Rome and ordered its promulgation, the DCPU’s text appears aimed at
changing the papacy generally, not at any pope in particular. The “principles
for the exercise of primacy in the 21st century” present a change in
understanding of the papacy which would be at the service of ecumenism and
synodality, the text outlines.
Papal
primacy, the DCPU’s text states, should be intimately linked with synodality –
reflecting the current wave of thought sweeping through the Church at the
instigation of Pope Francis. “A first general agreement is the mutual
interdependency of primacy and synodality at each level of the Church, and the
consequent requirement for a synodal exercise of primacy,” the DCPU’s text
reads.
Another
point agreed on by the numerous ecumenical bodies involved in writing the text
is that the papacy should be understood in a new sense by opening the door to
decentralization of power. In this light, a call is made for synodality to be
effected by granting more power to the “regional” levels of the Catholic
Church, and “a continuing ‘decentralization’ inspired by the model of the
ancient patriarchal Churches.”
Moving
on, the text then presents the “practical suggestions” from all the ecumenical
dialogues and bodies involved, before adding a further couple of suggestions
from the DCPU in particular.
Even
before the concrete and “practical suggestions” are presented – giving the
DCPU’s ecumenical assessment on how to increase ecumenical unity and synodality
by changes to the papacy – the subtext is remarkably clear: in the modern
“enlightened” age in which the Church now exists, and given the
self-understanding of “synodality” which is now endemic, papal primacy should
be quietly faded out.
First change: Primacy a historical fad?
First
on the DCPU’s list of “practical suggestions” is a call for a
“re-interpretation” of the teachings of Vatican I – the council which
issued the dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus which outlines the primacy and
infallibility of the pope, two ecumenical stumbling
blocks. Pastor Aeternus reads:
We teach and declare that,
according to the Gospel evidence, a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole
Church of God was immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle
Peter and conferred on him by Christ the lord… Therefore whoever succeeds to
the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ Himself, the primacy of
Peter over the whole Church.
These
teachings appear to be in the crosshairs of the DCPU via The Bishop of Rome.
They call for “a Catholic ‘re-reception,’ ‘re-interpretation,’ ‘official
interpretation,’ ‘updated commentary’ or even ‘rewording’ of the teachings of
Vatican I.” The document states that some of the contributors to its compilation
have argued that Vatican I’s “teachings were deeply conditioned by their
historical context, and suggest that the Catholic Church should look for new
expressions and vocabulary faithful to the original intention but integrated
into a communio ecclesiology and adapted to the current cultural and
ecumenical context.”
“Deeply
conditioned by the historical context,” should be interpreted as “no longer
acceptable for the brave, modern world in which we now live.”
Second change: Stick to the diocese of Rome to ‘renew’ the papacy
Continuing
the Windswept House theme, the DCPU presents its second suggestion for how to
alter the papacy. Just as the scheming cardinals in Windswept House presented a
forced papal resignation as a good thing for ecclesial unity, so also the DCPU
presents a stripping of papal power as a means to “renew the image of the
papacy.”
The
DCPU issues a request for “a clearer distinction between the different
responsibilities of the Bishop of Rome,” which would, it argues, aid his
“ministry of unity.” This call includes the desire for how “other Western
Churches might relate to the Bishop of Rome as primate while having a certain
autonomy themselves” – arguably translated as “will the Pope please consider
himself just the bishop of an important diocese, and allow other ‘primates’ to
enjoy some equitable power like he does?”
Indeed,
the DCPU goes so far as to make this very argument, removing the need for the
customary interpretation of Vatican-style linguistics. “A greater accent on the
exercise of the ministry of the Pope in his own particular Church, the diocese
of Rome, would highlight the episcopal ministry he shares with his brother
bishops, and renew the image of the papacy,” the DCPU recommends.
Third change: Ecumenism demands more synodality, including for the
papacy
If
it was not already clear that the two watchwords of the modern church are
“ecumenism” and “synodality,” the DCPU makes such crystal clear in its third
suggestion on how to reassess the papacy. The DCPU wrote that the theological
dialogues involved in compiling the document had identified how “a growing
synodality is required within the Catholic Church,” which would be evidenced by
increasing the authority of bishops’ conferences. The text reads:
Putting
an emphasis on the reciprocal relation between the Catholic Church’s synodal
shaping ad intra and the credibility of her ecumenical
commitment ad extra, they identified areas in which a growing synodality
is required within the Catholic Church. They suggest in particular further
reflection on the authority of national and regional Catholic bishops’
conferences, their relationship with the Synod of Bishops and with the Roman
Curia.
At
the universal level, they stress the need for a better involvement of the whole
People of God in the synodal processes. In a spirit of the ‘exchange of gifts,’
procedures and institutions already existing in other Christian communions
could serve as a source of inspiration.
Fourth change: More ecumenical meetings
Pope
Francis has continued to champion the cause of ecumenical meetings between
religious leaders throughout his papacy, increasingly linking it to the current
Synod on Synodality. These encounters appear set to continue under the spirit
of The Bishop of Rome, since the DCPU highlights them as its fourth recommended
change.
“A
last proposal is the promotion of ‘conciliar fellowship’ through regular
meetings among Church leaders at a worldwide level in order to make visible and
deepen the communion they already share,” the text reads. “In the same spirit,
many dialogues have proposed different initiatives to promote synodality
between Churches, especially at the level of bishops and primates, through
regular consultations and common action and witness.”
Commentators
have long expressed concerns about the effect of such ecumenical meetings (like
holding joint Catholic-Anglican vespers in the Basilica of St. Paul’s
outside the Walls in Rome) since they create the impression that the Catholic
Church and the Pope are on an equal footing with all the multitude of religions
customarily represented at such events.
Speaking to this correspondent in Rome last year, Bishop
Athanasius Schneider attested that modern ecumenism “undermines the truth that
there is only one Church of God and this is the Catholic Church, the Church of
Peter, united with the Holy See, the chair of Peter – the popes.”
While
the Vatican heavily promotes interreligious actions, Schneider stated that
“such gestures, or inter-religious meetings, are undermining these truths, and
therefore these actions have to change.”
He
added that Catholics must ensure that charity is always practiced with
non-Catholics, but they must also inform non-Catholics “that they are
unfortunately in an objective error, and that they are called by God to join the
Holy Mother Church which is the Catholic Church, which is the will of God.”
Goodbye
to the ‘universal Church’
Amongst
the specific aims of the DCPU’s own direct recommendations, which conclude the text,
is a peculiarly convoluted argument against understanding the Catholic Church
as “universal.” “It seems particularly necessary to clarify the meaning of the
expression ‘universal Church,’” the DCPU writes, employing another standard
phrase, “clarify the meaning,” which is more correctly interpreted as “reject.”
The
DCPU declared that “since the 19 century, the catholicity of the Church has
often been understood as its worldwide dimension, in a ‘universalistic’ way.”
This understanding, Cdl. Koch’s dicastery argues, “does not take sufficient
account of the distinction between the Ecclesia universalis (the
‘universal Church’ in the geographical sense) and the Ecclesia
universa (the ‘whole Church,’ the ‘entire Church’), the latter being the
more traditional expression in the Catholic magisterium.”
By
having “a merely geographical notion of the catholicity of the Church,” the
DCPU wrote that a risk exists of “giving rise to a secular conception of a
‘universal primacy’ in a ‘universal Church,’ and consequently to a secular
understanding of the extension and constraints of such a primacy.”
Instead,
the DCPU urged a shift in the understanding of the universal Church and the
power necessary to govern such a universal body. “Roman primacy should be
understood not so much as a universal power in a universal Church (Ecclesia
universalis), but as an authority in service to the communion between the
Churches (communio Ecclesiarum), that is to the whole Church (Ecclesia
universa).” That is to say, once the language is stripped away, the papacy
should not seek to exercise its divine authority – the authority outlined in
Pastor Aeternus – and instead work on using a restrained practice of power to
foster ecumenical unity.
Conclusion
Tying
all its many pages together, The Bishop of Rome concludes by urging the
acceptance of the suggestions and recommendations made, in order to make a
renewal – an unqualified renewal – of the “exercise of the ministry of the
Bishop of Rome” and to further aid ecumenical unity.
“Building
on the above principles and recommendations, which are fruits of common
ecumenical reflection, it may be possible for the Catholic Church to renew the
exercise of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome and to propose a model of
communion based on ‘a service of love recognised by all concerned’ (UUS 95),”
the text opines.
As
is already widely documented, modern ecumenism has as its aim simple unity, not
unity as outlined in the traditional teaching of the Church. For the papacy to
become directly subordinated to the modern form of ecumenism would appear to be
the next stage in a long process of ecumenical “walking together” – together,
but away from truth.
COMMENT: In the Creed, faithful Catholics profess their belief in "One,
holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church." The Church is "One" in its
faith, its worship, its sacraments and its governance. The essential
presupposition of ecumenism is that the Church is NOT One and therefore unity
is a goal the Church must pursue. The purpose of ecumenism is to obtain unity
that the Church does not possess. Therefore, ecumenism begins with heresy in
its denial that the Church is One possessing perfect unity as the Mystical Body
of Jesus Christ. Whatever follows from this heresy in ecumenical acts always
leads to greater error. For example, the ecumenical act of Novus Ordo worship
that was created with Protestant help to foster unity between Protestants and
Catholics was formally defined:
“The
Sunday Supper, or Mass, is the sacred meeting or congregation of the people of
God assembled, the priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.”
[“Cena
dominica, sive Missa, est sacra synaxis, seu congregatio populi Dei in unum
convenientis, sacerdotale praeside, ad memoriale Domini celebrationem ...”]
Istitutio
Generalis Missalis Romani, Article 7
This
is an accurate descriptive definition of the Novus Ordo and it is also a
fitting descriptive definition of a Protestant communion service. In their
denial that the Church founded by Jesus Christ possess unity, the Novus Ordo
committed a greater error in corrupting divine worship.
Now
Pope Francis is simply compounding heresy with greater heresy. The principle
cause and sign of unity in the Church is the faith. The pope is only
secondarily and accidently a sign and cause of unity of the Church therefore,
the pope is just as much subject to the faith as every other baptized Catholic.
Pastor aeternus is the Dogmatic
Constitution of the Church of Christ, issued by the First Vatican Council, July
18, 1870. The document defines four doctrines (i.e.: a defined doctrine is
called a dogma) of the Catholic faith: 1) the apostolic primacy conferred on
Peter, 2) the perpetuity of the Petrine Primacy in the Roman pontiffs, 3) the
meaning and power of papal primacy, and 4) Papal Infallibility - infallible
teaching authority (Magisterium) of the Pope.
Pastor aeternus says that the
Magisterium of the Church, that is, the teaching authority of the Church
grounded upon the Church's attributes of Authority and Infallibility that only
the pope stands in potentia to, is
derived from the universal jurisdiction conferred by Jesus Christ on St. Peter
as a reward for his profession of faith and passed on to all his successors in
the papal office until the consummation of the world. Heretical Protestants
deny that the Magisterium is part of the content of God's divine revelation.
The Schismatic Orthodox deny that the Magisterium is part of the God's act of
revelation when they deny the jurisdiction of the pope, and thus deny his
teaching authority that is derived from his jurisdiction, to make God's
revelation known.
The
immediate problem for Francis is that, while heresy does not necessarily remove
the pope from the office, the heresy of denying the jurisdiction of the papal
office is to deny the office itself and is a deeply schismatic act. This heresy
and schism may constitute an indirect form of personal abdication of the
office. Thus the title of
the document, "The Bishop of Rome." The question now, Is it possible
to possess an office that you deny exists?
Not only do we know God through Jesus Christ, but we only know
ourselves through Jesus Christ; we only know life and death through Jesus
Christ. Apart from Jesus Christ we cannot know the meaning of our life or our
death, of God or of ourselves. Thus without Scripture, whose only object is
Christ, we know nothing, and can see nothing but obscurity and confusion in the
nature of God and in nature itself.
Blaise Pascal, Pensées
In light of the
synodal process leading to the rejection of Catholic DOGMA of Vatican I, Pastor aeternus, reprint from last year:
Vatican releases Synod
document calling for discussion of women, LGBT Catholics, church authority and
more
AMERICA, the
Jesuit Review | Gerald O'Connell | June 20, 2023
The secretariat for the synod has published the working document, known
by its Latin title instrumentum laboris, for the first session of the General
Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on synodality that will be held in the Vatican,
Oct. 4 to Oct. 29. The second session will be held in October 2024.
“A synodal church is founded on the recognition of a common dignity
deriving from baptism, which makes all who receive it sons and daughters of
God, members of the family of God, and therefore brothers and sisters in
Christ, inhabited by the one Spirit and sent to fulfil a common mission,” said
the document.
However, it said, many Catholics around the world report that too many
baptized persons—particularly L.G.B.T. Catholics, the divorced and civilly
remarried, the poor, women and people with disabilities—are excluded from
active participation in the life of the church and, particularly, from its
decision-making structures.
The 50-page text was presented at a press conference in the Vatican on
June 20 by Cardinals Mario Grech and Jean Claude Hollerich S.J., secretary
general and relator general of the upcoming synod, respectively, and Father
Giacomo Costa, S.J., the consultor of the synod’s secretary general.
Cardinal Grech described the working document as “the fruit of a
synodal process” that started on Oct. 10, 2021, and “involved the whole church”
in an exercise of listening to the people of God.
Cardinal Grech described the working
document as “the fruit of a synodal process” that started on Oct. 10, 2021, and
“involved the whole church” in an exercise of listening to the people of God.
The first phase was articulated in three stages: at the local churches with
consultation of the people of God (clergy and laity); at the bishops’ conferences,
which engaged in a discernment process about the input from the local churches;
and at the continental levels, where input from around the world was
synthesized.
“Where the bishops started and accompanied the consultation, the
contribution has been very alive and profound,” the cardinal said, and the
bishops were enriched with “a fruitful ministry.”
The document brings together “the fruits” of the synodal journey since
October 2021. Unlike the working documents for past synods, which were intended
to be amended, improved and voted upon, this document is designed as “a
practical aid for the conduct” of the October assembly at which there will be
more than 350 participants (including laymen and around 45 women, both lay and
consecrated), not a text to be amended.
The document states that it “is not a document of the Church’s
Magisterium, nor is it the report of a sociological survey; it does not offer
the formulation of operational indications, goals and objectives, nor a full
elaboration of a theological vision.” It is “part of an unfinished process.” It
draws on but also goes beyond the insights of the first phase and articulates
“some of the priorities that emerged from listening to the People of God, but
avoids presenting them as assertions or stances. Instead, it expresses them as
questions addressed to the synodal assembly,” which “will have the task of
discerning the concrete steps which enable the continued growth of a synodal
church, steps that it will then submit to the Holy Father.”
Significantly, the working document does not offer a theoretical
understanding of synodality but rather presents “a dynamic vision of the ways
in which synodality has been experienced” in different church communities and
cultures worldwide during the almost two-year synodal journey. It articulates
“the insights and tensions that resonated most strongly with the experience of
the church on each continent” and identifies “the priorities to be addressed in
the first session of the synod.”
According to the working document, the synodal journey so far “has made
it possible to identify and share the particular situations experienced by the
church in different regions of the world.” These experiences include “too many
wars,” “the threat represented by climate change,” “an economic system that
produces exploitation, inequality and a throwaway culture” and “cultural
colonialism that crushes minorities.”
It points to “situations of persecution to the point of martyrdom” and
“emigration that progressively hollow out communities.” It mentions the
situation of “Christian communities that represent scattered minorities within
the countries in which they live” and “the aggressive secularization that seems
to consider religious experience irrelevant, but where there remains a thirst for
the Good News of the Gospel.”
In many regions, it says, “the churches are deeply affected by the
crisis caused by various forms of abuse, including sexual abuse and the abuse
of power, conscience and money.” It describes these as “open wounds, the consequences
of which have yet to be fully addressed” and says the church must be “penitent”
and intensify its commitment “to conversion and reform.”
It says the October synod takes place in a context that is “diverse but
with common global features,” and participants will be asked “to listen deeply
to the situations in which the church lives and carries out its mission.”
It says the synodal journey so far has revealed the existence of
“shared questions” and “part of the challenge of synodality is to discern the
level at which it is most appropriate to address each question.” That same
journey also showed there are shared tensions in the church, but, the document
says, “we should not be frightened of them, nor attempt at any cost to resolve
them, but rather engage in ongoing synodal discernment” so that these tensions
can “become sources of energy and not lapse into destructive polarizations.”
At the press conference, Cardinal Grech said “one of the discoveries”
on the synodal journey that started on Oct. 10, 2021, was the method of
“conversation in the Spirit,” which will now be used in the October synod.
Father Costa described this method as “shared prayer in view of a
common discernment, by which participants prepare themselves through personal
reflection and prayer” before the discussion. He said this method “opens
‘spaces’ in which to face together controversial subjects, around which in both
society and in the church there are often clashes and confrontation, in person
or through social media.”
The consultation phase has shown how this method offers “a practical
alternative to polarization in the church,” Father Costa said.
To enable this method to be used at the October 2023 synod, where there
will be hundreds of participants, Father Costa revealed that the assembly will
be held in the Paul VI Audience Hall of the Vatican and its members will be
divided into small groups of 12 people. They will work in these groups, then
gather in plenary sessions and share their input.
Part A of the working document, called “For a synodal church, An
Integral Experience,” highlights “the characteristic signs” of a synodal church
and emphasizes that “conversation in the Spirit” is the way forward for this
kind of church.
Cardinal Hollerich said the working document “leads us to a matter of
discernment, a discernment about the concretization of communion, mission and
participation,” which Part B of the document lists as the three priority issues
for the synodal church.
Cardinal Hollerich explained that “each of these three priorities is
linked to five worksheets. These [are] five approaches [that] take into
consideration the diversity of persons as well as the diversity of the
different social, cultural and religious contexts we have experienced during
the synodal process.”
Each of the worksheets contains many questions for discernment that
cannot all be listed here, but reveal the wide-ranging and even radical nature
of what it means to be a synodal church, a church that includes and is not
judgmental. The many questions raised around the world that are recognized in
the document relate to the role of women in the church (including the women’s
diaconate), the ways of exercising authority in the church at all levels including
the papacy, ecumenical and interreligious relations, the need for a new
language in church communication, the need for renewal of the formation in the
seminary, the question of the ordination of mature married men in some regions,
the approach to the divorced and remarried Catholics and to L.G.B.T. people,
the preferential option for the poor, the preferential option for young people,
the care of our common home and much more.
As the two cardinals and Father Costa made clear at the press conference,
the synod on synodality cannot be reduced to single issues; its mandate is much
broader than any one issue. Indeed, to reduce it to one or other issue would be
to radically distort what the synod is really about. As the working document
states clearly, the synod has three main priorities—communion, participation
and mission—and these require bringing about a profound conversion and cultural
change in the way of being church in the 21st century. It is not about making
another church but a different church, as Pope Francis, quoting Yves Congar
O.P., one of the great theologians of the Second Vatican Council, said in his
speech to the synod in October 2021.
Below are the five main questions for discernment linked to each of the
three priorities. The full list of questions can be found here.
Communion
1. How does the service of charity and
commitment to justice and care for our common home nourish communion in a
synodal Church?
2. How can a synodal Church make credible the
promise that “love and truth will meet” (Ps 85:11)?
3. How can a dynamic relationship of gift
exchange between the Churches grow?
4. How can a synodal Church fulfill its
mission through a renewed ecumenical commitment?
5. How can we recognise and gather the
richness of cultures and develop dialogue amongst religions in the light of the
Gospel?
Mission
1. How can we walk together towards a shared
awareness of the meaning and content of mission?
2. What should be done so a synodal Church is
also an ‘all ministerial’ missionary Church?
3. How can the Church of our time better
fulfill its mission through greater recognition and promotion of the baptismal
dignity of women?
4. How can we properly value ordained Ministry
in its relationship with baptismal Ministries in a missionary perspective?
5. How can we renew and promote the Bishop’s
ministry from a missionary synodal perspective?
Participation
1. How can we renew the service of authority
and the exercise of responsibility in a missionary synodal Church?
2. How can we develop discernment practices
and decision-making processes in an authentically synodal manner that respects
the protagonism of the Spirit?
3. What structures can be developed to
strengthen a missionary synodal Church?
4. How can we give structure to instances of
synodality and collegiality that involve groupings of local Churches?
5. How can the institution of the Synod be
strengthened so that it is an expression of episcopal collegiality within an
all-synodal Church?
COMMENT:
It's
all in how you frame the question that directs the group to the "correct
answer" the Synodal Church is looking. For example, "Communion"
question #2 refers to Psalm 85:11. In a Catholic bible it is 84:11 and the
actual verse is: "Mercy and truth have met each other:
justice and peace have kissed." The Synodal Church, using a Protestant
reference, changes the tense from past perfect to the future tense and
translates the word justice as love. For what end can we guess this
perversion is intended? And what do these questions about
"missionary" church possible mean when proselytism is rejected as the
proper end for which Jesus Christ instituted His Church? The use of the
Encounter Group is entirely foreign to the Catholic spirit because it attacks
the freedom of the human will. The American Psychological Association
says:
"Encounter
Group: a group of people who meet, usually with a trained leader, to increase
self-awareness and social sensitivity, and to change behavior through interpersonal confrontation,
self-disclosure, and strong emotional expression." It is a group of
individuals in which constructive insight, sensitivity to others, and personal
growth are promoted through direct interactions on an emotional and social level.
The leader functions as a catalyst and facilitator rather than as a therapist
and focuses on here-and-now feelings and interaction rather than on theory or
individual motivation."
The
entire Synod on Synodality is nothing but more employing the experimental
psychological techniques of encounter developed by Jewish psychologists on the
modern Church of the New Advent. It was these same methods that were used on
the Catholic religious orders in the 1960s that brought about their
destruction. Carl Rogers used these same psychological methods on the Jesuits
order at the time Pope Francis/Bergoglio began his novitiate. They are now
being employed by Francis the Destroyer to corrupt what is left of the Catholic
Church and form it in his own image. He claims to head a "listening
church" while he cannot keep his own mouth shut. That is because Francis
only wants to listen to himself. That last thing he wants to listen to is the
voice of anyone who contradicts his ideology, especially the voice of the dead,
that is, the voice of tradition that constitutes, with sacred Scripture, the
Remote Rule of Faith for all Catholics. It is Francis that is a committed
anti-Catholic Ideologue and every faithful Catholic must recognize this fact.
The proximate Rule of Faith is Dogma. If every faithful Catholic keeps this
Truth as the guide of their faith and actions nothing Francis can do can bring
them any personal harm.
Early recognition of the
psychological weaponization
of Encounter Groups
An
assessment of the danger of the Encounter Group published in the New York Times
in 1974!
Encounter
Movement, a Fad Last Decade Finds New Shape
New York Times | Jan 13, 1974 | Robert
Reinhold
BERKELEY, CA—The encounter
group movement, which became something of a national fad in the nineteen‐sixties,
has evolved into a new, more mature and gentler form:
Having largely discarded its
more extreme and coercive aspects, along with extravagant assertions of instant
personal redemption, the encounter concept has quietly found an accepted place
in such established institutions as schools, churches, industry and even the
military and sports.
Meanwhile, persistent doubts
about the effectiveness as well as possible hazards of encounter groups are
being sorted out in the first rigorous appraisals of the groups and their
consequences.
These studies, performed here
in Berkeley and at Stanford University, are finding that, while many people
benefit enormously from the openness and baring of emotions fostered by
encounter, there are dangers to be guarded against.
Tried by Millions
By now millions of Americans
have touched, walked and talked their way through some type of .encounter
session. Encounter is loose term for a variety of group techniques, such as T‐groups,
sensitivity training, sensory awareness, Synanon psychodrama, gestalt therapy
and others, that are used as means of personal growth for ostensibly healthy
persons
The encounter; or “human
potential techniques are so routine today that the pioneers at the Eselen
Institute and elsewhere have already departed for new psychological frontiers.
Amid the dazzling succulents and eucalyptus trees on the broken California
coast at Big Sur, the Esalen leaders are moving into the spiritual orbit of
‘transpersonal’ psychology—oriental meditation, mysticism,
“psychosynthesis"’ and other techniques of achieving new heights of self‐awareness.
Others have been experimenting
with such methods as “rolfing,” “feldenkrais,” “bioenergetics,” in which
massage and physicals are used to increase awareness.
A Variety of Method
Encounter methods vary widely,
but a group typically consists of eight to 18 persons led by a “facilitator.”
The members are urged to express their emotions toward one another openly, both
physically and verbally. Mutual trust, openness, honesty and naturalness, are
the watchwords, and the assumption is that this stripping away of psychological
defenses is healthy and will enhance both interpersonal relationships and self‐awareness.
“A lot of mistakes were made
during the youthful period,” says John Levy, executive officer of the
Association for Humanistic Psychology, the San Francisco‐based
organization to which many of the practitioners of encounter belong.
“The movement suffered from
excess enthusiasm—it made promises that could not hold up. There are still
plenty of encounter groups, but you don't hear about them anymore. They are not
the cutting edge."
Encounter may be passé in the
compulsive California and New York milieus that nurtured it, says William C.
Schutz of Esalen, author of “Joy” and other popular works on encounter, but in
Athens, GA and Rock Island, IL, and for the overwhelming majority of Americans,
encounter is just beginning.
Searing Experience
Whether or not its assumptions
are valid, encounter evidently filled a real need in a depersonalized
technological world. Millions flocked to “growth centers,” like oases in a psychological desert, Where
they could go through the searing but often uplifting experience of spilling
out their doubts and fears.
But as in most fads, the
phonies, fast‐huck artists, incompetents and predators soon moved in.
illequipped and sometimes sadistic leaders started groups, the idea was
exploited in the movies, and on stage. The Concord Hotel offered “encounter
singles weekends,” and a “group therapy” restaurant was opened in New York.
Still, the potential value of
encounter has attracted a growing number of conventionally trained
psychologists and psychiatrists. Carl Rogers, the psychologist who is often
called the father of the movement, has termed encounter “the most rapidly
spreading social invention of the century, and probably the most potent.”
‘A Psychic Whorehouse’
Behind all this lies Israeli arrogance; the
idea that we can do whatever we like, that we’ll never pay the price and be
punished for it. We’ll carry on undisturbed. 
We’ll keep holding thousands of Palestinian
prisoners, sometimes without trial, most of them political prisoners. And we
won’t agree to discuss their release even after they’ve been in prison for
decades.
Celebrating
the tapestry of rich faith traditions alive in the greater Harrisburg area,
faith leaders gathered at Beth El Temple on the evening of September 22 for the
annual Commonwealth Interfaith Service: Prayers for Justice and Peace. Bishop
Timothy Senior joined leaders from more than a dozen faith and interfaith
organizations in the hour-long annual prayer service, hosted by the Jewish community
under the leadership of Rabbi 
The prayer service was called to worship by
the soul stirring blowing of a