“…this missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used… Accordingly, no one whatsoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, direction, will, decree and prohibition.  Should  any person venture to do so, let him understand he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”

Pope St. Pius V, Papal Bull, QUO PRIMUM, Tridentine codification of the  “received and approved” immemorial Roman rite of Mass

PDF PRINT

 

 

Feast of Our Lord, Jesus Christ the King

Twentieth Sunday after Pentecost

October 25, 2026

In his Encyclical, Quas Primas, of December 11, 1925, Pope Pius XI, denounced the great modern heresies of secularism and naturalism.  They refuse to recognize the rights of God and His Christ over persons and peoples and organize the lives of individuals, families and society itself, as though God did not exist.  Secularism and naturalism ruin society, because in place of the love of God and one’s neighbor, they substitute pride and egoism.  They beget jealousy between individuals, hatred between classes and rivalry between nations.   

    The world denies Christ because it ignores His royal prerogatives, it must be instructed on this subject.  Now “a yearly feast can attain this end, more effectively than the weightiest documents issued by ecclesiastical authority.”  The Holy Father has instituted this new feast to be a public, social and official declaration of the royal rights of Jesus Christ, as God the Creator, as the Word Incarnate, and as Redeemer.  This feast makes these rights to be known and recognized, in a way most suitable to man and to society by the sublimest acts of religion – particularly by Holy Mass.  In fact, the end of the Holy Sacrifice is the acknowledgment of God’s complete dominion over us, and our complete dependence on Him.  And this act is accomplished, not only on Calvary but also through the royal priesthood of Jesus which never ceases in His kingdom, which is heaven.  The great reality of Christianity is not a corpse hanging from a cross, but the risen Christ reigning in all the glory of His triumph in the midst of His elect who are His conquest (Epistle).  And that is why the Mass begins with the finest vision of the Apocalypse where the Lamb of God is acclaimed by angels and saints (Introit).

    The Holy Father in Quas Primas said, “Therefore by Our Apostolic Authority We institute the Feast of the Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ to be observed yearly throughout the whole world on the last Sunday of the month of October—the Sunday, that is, which immediately precedes the Feast of All Saints. We further ordain that the dedication of mankind to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, which Our predecessor of saintly memory, Pope Pius X, commanded to be renewed yearly, be made annually on that day…. It seems to Us that We cannot in a more fitting manner close this Holy Year, nor better signify Our gratitude and that of the whole of the Catholic world to Christ the immortal King of ages, for the blessings showered upon Us, upon the Church, and upon the Catholic world during this holy period.”

This feast is celebrated on the last Sunday of October, as the consummation of all the mysteries by which Jesus has established His royal powers and nearly on the eve of All-Saints, where He already realizes them in part in being “the King and kings and the crown of All Saints (Invitatory at Matins); until He shall be the crown of all those on earth whom He saves, especially by the Mass.  It is indeed principally by the Eucharist which is both a sacrifice and a sacrament, that Christ, now in glory, assures the results of the victorious sacrifice of Calvary, by taking possession of souls through the application of the merits of His Passion (Secret) and thereby unites them as members to their head.  The end of the Eucharist, says the Catechism of the Council of Trent, is “to form one sole mystic body of all the faithful” and so to draw them in the cult which Christ, king-adorer, as priest and victim, rendered in a bloody manner on the cross and now renders, in an unbloody manner, on the stone altar of our churches and on the golden altar in heaven, to Christ, king-adored, as Son of God, and to His Father to whom He offers these souls (Preface).

             As we have seen, the breviary lessons throughout October are taken from the Book of Machabees.

Judas Machabeus had heard very great things of the power of Rome, of far-off countries brought to subjection and many kings compelled to pay yearly tribute; and on the other hand, of the willingness of the Roman people to accede to requests made to them, and of their readiness to swear friendship with any nation that approached them for the purpose.  Judas, therefore, decided to take the step of sending messengers to Rome itself, to seek the friendship and alliance of its people.  This request was received favorably by the senate, who later twice renewed the treaty of peace, first with Jonathan and then with Simon, who had succeeded their brother Judas Machabeus as a ruler.  Soon however, the little kingdom was torn by civil war, brothers in hostile camps disputing the power between them.  One of these thought fit to summon the Romans to his assistance; the invitation was accepted, and in 63 B. C. Pompey took Jerusalem.

    It must be remembered that Rome never gave back what it had taken by force of arms.  Palestine became and remained a Roman colony, the Senate appointing Herod, king of the Jews.  This ruler, by way of pleasing the Jews richly rebuilt and enlarged the Temple at Jerusalem, and it was into this third Temple that our divine Lord made His triumphal entry later on.

    From the moment of this conquest the Chosen People had to pay tribute to Rome, a fact which is alluded to in today’s Gospel.  This incident marks one of the last days of our Lord’s life, and it was an occasion when the Master, in an answer full of heavenly wisdom, put to confusion His enemies, who from then on, were more than ever bent upon His destruction.

    The necessity of paying tribute to Caesar was all the more odious to the Jews, since it went quite contrary to their instinct for universal supremacy, the promise of which Israel believed it had received.  It followed that anyone who maintained the duty of payment had public opinion against him, while those who held the opposite view incurred the anger of the Roman authority in possession, and of those among the Jews who approved it and who formed the party of the Herodians.  When therefore, the Pharisees thought to drive our Lord on to one or the other of the horns of this dilemma, it was in order to embroil Him either with the people or with the Roman power; on one count or the other they thought they could secure His arrest.

    The better to attain their end, they sent Him a deputation of Jews consisting of members of both parties, of “their disciples with the Herodians,” as St. Matthew puts it.  To get an answer to their question, these men began by telling our Lord that they knew that He “taught the way of God in truth” without “regarding the person of men.”  And then they laid their snare before Him.  “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not?”  But Jesus, knowing the malice that was in them, answers: “Why do ye tempt me, ye hypocrites?”  And then, evading their attack with the greatest skill, He bade them show Him “the coin of the tribute” to force them, as He always did on these occasions, to answer their own question.

    For when the Jews had offered Him “a penny” of this money, He asks them: “Whose image and inscription is this?”  “They say to Him: Caesar’s.”  As a matter of fact, before the tribute could be paid it was a necessary preliminary to change the money of the country for coins bearing the image of the emperor; and since a coin is only of value in the country of the monarch whose image it bears, by this very exchange the Jews acknowledged that they were under Caesar’s rule, and that they intended to pay tribute to him.  “Render therefore to Caesar,” says our Lord, “the things that are Caesar’s,” and then suddenly becoming the Judge of His hearers, He adds: “And to God the things that are God’s,” which means that since the soul of a man belongs to God who made it in His image, all the faculties ought to return to Him, in the sense of paying the tribute of their worship and service.

    “We,” says St. Augustine, “are the coins of God stamped with His image, and God demands the return of His coins as Caesar did the return of his,” And St. Jerome adds: “Let us give to Caesar the money which bears his inscription, since we cannot do otherwise, but let us give ourselves freely and of our own accord to God, for what our soul bears it the glorious imprint of the face of God and not the more or less majestic head of an emperor.”  Bossuet says: “This image will one day pass again through the hands and before the eyes of Jesus Christ, and some day He will look at us and say: ‘Whose image and inscription is this?’  And the very depth of our being will answer: ‘God’s.’  “It is for Him that we were made and we must bear His stamp upon us.  It had to be restored in baptism of which it is the effect and character.  But what has become of the divine features which we ought to bear?  Christian soul, may God’s image be in your reason!  But this you have drowned in drunkenness; you have sunk it in the love of pleasure; you have surrendered it to ambition; you have made it the slave of gold, which is a form of idolatry; you have sacrificed it to your appetites of which you have made a god; you have made of it an idol of vain glory, and instead of praising and blessing God day and night, it is itself constantly praised and admired.”

    And the divine Redeemer will say: “Amen, Amen, I know you not: you are not my work, no longer do I see in you what I put there.  You have chosen to form yourself in your own way: you are the work of pleasure and ambition: you are the work of the devil, whose works you have done, and whom, by taking him as you model, you have made your father.  Go with him who knows you, and whose promptings you have followed; go to fire eternal which has been prepared for him.  O just Judge!  And where shall I be found?  Shall I acknowledge myself, when my Creator has disowned me?”

    It is in this sense that we must interpret this Sunday’s Gospel, one of the last of the ecclesiastical year and in which the Church reminds us of the end of the world.  Thus the Epistle twice speaks of the coming of Christ as nigh at hand.  St. Paul prays that “He who hath begun a good work in you, will perfect it unto the day of Christ Jesus,” since the grace of final perseverance comes from Him alone.  Again the apostle asks that our “charity may more and more abound in knowledge and in all understanding”; that we “may approve the better things”; that we “may be sincere and without offense unto the day of Christ” (Epistle).  For in this dread moment: If the Lord “shall observe iniquities…. Who shall endure it?” (Introit).

    But the Lord is the “helper and protector” of them that hope in Him (Alleluia), for there is propitiation with the God of Israel (Introit, Secret).  And we shall ourselves experience this mercy if we are merciful to our neighbour.  “How good and how pleasant a thing it is for brethren to dwell together in unity,” says the Gradual.  Especially must we be found in prayer in the hour of danger, for if we cry to the Lord, He will hear us (Communion).

    The prayer, in the highest degree social and fraternal, to which almighty God is especially attentive is the prayer of His bride the Church.  He hears and answers her, like Assuerus the king, when as the Offertory reminds us, Esther his wife approached him that he might save God’s people from death.”

 

INTROIT:

Apoc. 5 and 1:  The Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power, and divinity and wisdom, and strength, and honor.  To Him be glory and empire forever and ever.

Ps. 72:  Give to the King Thy judgment, O God, and to the King’s Son Thy justice.  Glory be, etc.  The Lamb etc.

 

COLLECT:

Almighty and everlasting God, who hast willed to restore all things in Thy beloved Son, the universal King, mercifully grant that all the families of the nations, separated by the wound of sin, may become subjects of His most sweet rule.  Who with thee liveth and reigneth, etc.

 

O God, our refuge and strength, who art the author of all goodness, hear, we pray, the devout prayers of Thy Church, and grant that what we faithfully ask we may effectually obtain.  Through our Lord, etc. 

 

EPISTLE:  Coloss. 1, 12-20.

Brethren: Giving thanks to God the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the Saints in light: who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His Blood, the remission of sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature: for in Him were all things created in heaven and in earth, visible and invisible: whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by Him and in Him; and He is before all, and by Him all things consist, and He is the head of the body of the Church, who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in all things, He may hold the primacy because in Him it hath well pleased the Father that all fullness should dwell; and through Him to reconcile all things unto Himself, making peace through the Blood of His Cross, both as to the things on earth, and the things that are in heaven, in Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

GRADUAL:

Ps. 71:  He shall rule from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.  And all the kings of the earth shall adore Him, all nations shall serve Him.  Alleluia, alleluia.  

Dan. 7:  His power is an everlasting power that shall not be taken away: and His kingdom that shall not be destroyed. Alleluia

 

GOSPEL:  John 18, 33-37.       

At that time: Pilate said to Jesus: Art Thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered: Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or have others told it thee of Me? Pilate answered: Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered Thee up to me: what hast Thou done? Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews: by now my Kingdom is not from hence. Pilate therefore said to Him: Art Thou a King then? Jesus answered: Thou sayest I am a King. For this I was born, and for this came I into the world, that I should give testimony to the truth. Every one that is of the truth, heareth My voice.

 

OFFERTORY:

Ps. 2:  Ask of Me, and I will give Thee the Gentiles for Thy inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.

 

SECRET:

O Lord, we offer Thee the victim of human reconciliation, asking that He whom we immolate in these present sacrifices may grant the gifts of peace and unity to all peoples, Jesus Christ Thy Son, our Lord, who with thee liveth and reigneth, etc.

 

Grant, O merciful God, that this saving oblation may unceasingly deliver us from the liabilities of our wrong-doing and preserve us from all adversities.  Through our Lord, etc

 

PREFACE OF CHRIST THE KING:

It is truly meet and just, right and profitable unto salvation, that we should at all times and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O holy Lord, Father almighty, everlasting God.  Who with the oil of gladness hast anointed Thine only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, as eternal Priest and universal King, that, offering himself on the altar of the cross as an immaculate peace victim, He might accomplish the mysteries of human redemption; and, all creatures being subjected to His rule, He might deliver to Thy infinite majesty an eternal and universal kingdom – a kingdom of truth and life, a kingdom of grace and holiness, a kingdom of justice, love and peace.  And therefore with the angels and archangels, the thrones and dominions, and the whole host of the heavenly army, we sing a hymn to Thy glory, saying again and again: Holy, Holy, Holy, etc.

 

COMMUNION:

Ps. 28: The Lord shall sit King forever.  The Lord will give strength to His people, the Lord will bless His people with peace.

 

POSTCOMMUNION:

Having partaken of the food of immortality, we pray, O Lord, that we who now glory to battle under the standard of Christ the King, may be able to reign forever with Him in the heavenly abode.  Who with Thee liveth and reigneth, etc.

 

We have received, O Lord, the gifts of this sacred mystery, humbly imploring Thee that what Thou hast bidden us do in memory of Thee may avail for the assistance of our weakness.  Who liveth and reigneth, etc

 

LAST GOSPEL:  Matt. 22, 15-21

At that time, the Pharisees went and consulted among themselves how to ensnare Jesus in his speech. And they send to him their disciples, with the Herodians, saying: Master, we know that thou art a true speaker, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man, for thou dost not regard the person of men: tell us, therefore, what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not? But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites? Show me the coin of the tribute. And they offered him a penny. And Jesus saith to them: Whose image and inscription is this? They say to him: Caesar's. Then he saith to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.

Why did the Pharisees try to ensnare Jesus in His speech?

In order to find some reason to accuse Him before the emperor, or to make Him hated by the Jews; for had He denied tribute to Caesar, they would have accused Him before the emperor as guilty of high treason; had He, on the contrary made it obligatory to pay tribute, then they would have denounced Him as a destroyer of the liberty of the people, who considered themselves a free nation owing allegiance only to God. Like the Pharisees are all those who, under the appearance of friendship, only cause vexation and misfortune to their neighbor.

Who are really hypocrites?

Those who in order to cheat their neighbor, appear outwardly pious and holy, whilst inward they are full of malice; those who have honey on the tongue, but gall in the heart, and sting like scorpions, when we least expect it. Because there are so many vices connected with hypocrisy (Matt. 23), therefore Christ has denounced no sin more emphatically than this one. Hypocrites are brethren of Cain, Joab, and Judas, of whom the first killed his brother, the second his cousin and the third betrayed his divine Master with a kiss. Such false men are cursed by God (Mal. 1, 14). I hate a mouth with a double tongue (Prov. 8, 13). "The devil silently possesses the hearts of hypocrites and quietly sleeps in them, whilst he gives them no peace," says St. Gregory; and St. Jerome writes: "Pretended holiness is double malice." Better is an open enemy, before whom we can be on our guard, than a hypocritical friend of whom we have no suspicion, because we look upon him as a friend. Beware, therefore, my dear Christian, of the vice of hypocrisy, which is so hateful to God; endeavor always to be sincere with God, thyself and thy neighbor, and to walk in-true humility before God, then mayest thou carry His image within thee.

PRAYER Help me, O Lord, for the number of the saints is decreasing and truth is becoming rare among men. They speak vain things each with his neighbor: their lips are deceitful, and they speak with double hearts. Let the Lord destroy all those who say: We will magnify our tongue; our lips are our own; who is Lord over us? O Lord, deliver my soul from wicked lips and deceitful tongues give me grace to preserve Thy image in my soul, by piety and virtue. Direct my heart to justice and keep it from avarice, that I may give to each his own.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in Heaven, on earth and under the earth : And that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father.

Philippians 2, 10-11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Act of Consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus:

Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thee. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but to be more surely united with Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy Most Sacred Heart. Many indeed have never known Thee; many, too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy Sacred Heart.
Be King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to their Father's house, lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.
Be King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and the unity of faith, so that soon there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.

Be King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism; refuse not to draw them all into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy toward the children of that race, once Thy chosen people. Of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them in a laver of redemption and of life.
Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give tranquility of order to all nations; make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: Praise to the Divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to it be glory and honor forever. Amen.

Sacred Heart of Jesus, Thy kingdom come!

 

 

 

 

 

PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OFOCTOBER 25^th:

   Date   Day     Feast                                           Rank  Color F/A  Mass Time/Notes

25	Sun	Kingship of Jesus Christ 22nd Sunday after Pentecost	d1cl	W		Mass 9:00 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
26	Mon	St. Evaristus, PM	sp	R		Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
27	Tue	Vigil of Ss. Simon & Jude		V		Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
28	Wed	Ss. Simon & Jude, App	d2cl	R		Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
29	Thu	Ferial Day				No Mass;  8:30 AM Rosary of Reparation
30	Fri	Ferial Day			F	No Mass;  8:30 AM Rosary of Reparation
31	Sat	Vigil of All Saints		V	F/A	No Mass;  8:30 AM Rosary of Reparation
1	Sun	All Saints 23rd Sunday after Pentecost	d1cl	G		Mass 9:00 AM; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FEAST OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST THE KING     Last Sunday of October

Presence of God – O Jesus, Prince of Ages, King of Nations, be the sole Ruler of my mind and heart.

MEDITATION:

    1. The liturgy today is truly a triumphant celebrating the Kingship of Christ. From the First Vespers of the Feast, the figure of Jesus is majestically portrayed, seated on a royal throne and dominating the entire world; "His Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and all kings shall serve and obey Him . . . .He shall sit and rule and shall speak peace unto the nations."

    The Mass opens with the apocalyptic vision of this extraordinary King whose majesty is intimately linked to His immolation for the salvation of souls . . .. "The Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive power and divinity and wisdom and strength and honor. To Him belong glory and power forever and ever" (Introit).

    In the Epistle (Col 1:12‑20) St. Paul enumerates the titles which make Christ King of all kings: He is "the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature; for in Him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible." These titles belong to Jesus Christ inasmuch as He is God ­perfect image of the Father, exemplary cause of all earthly and heavenly creatures and, at the same time, Creator, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, of all that exists, for nothing has existence without Him, but "all things were created by Him and in Him... by Him all things consist."

    Then come His titles to Kingship as Man: "He is the Head of the Mystical Body, the Church .... Through Him [God] . . . reconciled all things unto Himself, making peace through the Blood of His Cross." He, who is already our King by reason of His divinity, is also King through His Incarnation, which has constituted Him the Head of all humanity, and through His Passion, by which at the price of His Blood He has regained our souls, which already belonged to Him as His creatures.

    Jesus is our King in the full sense of the word: He has created us, redeemed us, vivified us by His grace, He nourishes us with His Flesh and Blood, He governs us with love, and by love He draws us to Himself. In the face of such consid­erations, the cry of St. Paul rises spontaneously from Out heart: "Giving thanks to God the Father. . .who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath trans­lated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption . . . the remission of sins."

    2. In today's Gospel (Jn. 18:33‑37) we have the most authoritative proclamation of the Kingship of Christ, since it comes from His own lips in that most solemn moment during the trial which preceded His Passion. Pilate explicitly questioned Him on the subject: "Art Thou the King of the Jews?" Jesus did not reply directly to this first question; actually, He is not King of any one determined nation; His Kingdom has nothing to do with the kingdoms of earth. But to Pilate's second and more precise question, "Art Thou a King then?" Jesus replied unhesitatingly: "Thou sayest it; I am a King." He proclaims His Kingship in the most formal manner before the highest civil authority in Palestine; He proclaims it, not in the midst of an enthusiastic crowd, nor in the triumph of His miracles, but bound with chains, before him who is about to condemn Him to death, before a crowd thirsting for His Blood, a few moments before being dragged to Calvary where, from the heights of the Cross, above His thorn‑crowned head, hill appear for the first time the title of His royalty: "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews" (Jn. 19:19). He had fled when the enthusiastic crowd wished to make Him their King; now He proclaims Himself King in the midst of the unspeakable humiliations of His Passion, thus affirming in the clearest manner that His Kingdom is not of this world, that His Kingdom is so sublime that no dishonor, no insults can eclipse it. But by this act Jesus also tells us that He prefers to manifest His Kingship far more as a conquest of His Blood than as a title belonging to Him in virtue of His divine nature. 

    We should go to meet this divine King with all the yearning of our soul. He presents Himself to us under an appearance so human, so loving, so welcoming, stretching out His arms on the Cross to invite all to come to Him, showing us the wound in His side as the symbol of His Love. Far from trying to escape His dominion, we should beseech Him to be the sole Ruler of our mind and heart, and the complete master of our will. We should submit ourselves and all that belongs to us to "His most gentle rule” (Collect).

COLLOQUY:

    "You, my God, are an eternal King, and Yours is no borrowed kingdom . . . . When the Credo says: 'of Your Kingdom there shall be no end' this phrase nearly always makes me feel particularly happy. Yes, I praise You, Lord, and bless You, for Your Kingdom will endure forever" (T.J. Way, 22).

    "O divine King, most amiable Jesus, my Redeemer, my Savior, my Spouse, my Master and model, I renew today the total consecration of my being to You, begging You to take absolute dominion over me. Be my Sovereign, my Ruler, my Guide. Direct and govern me entirely, so that everything may turn to Your greater glory. Be King of my memory, of my intellect, of my will, of my emotions; I wish all to be completely subject to You and I invite You to reign in me.

    "Your Kingdom is a kingdom of Truth, of Love, of Justice and of Peace.

    "Grant that Your reign of Truth may be established in my mind, destroying all error, deceit and illusion. Enlighten me by Your divine Wisdom.

    "Grant that Your reign of Love may be completely established in my will, to move it, draw it, and direct it always, so that I may no longer be moved by self‑love, or by creatures but by Your Holy Spirit alone. Make this weak, mean, rebellious will of mine strong, generous, constant; make it grow stronger by the persevering exercise of virtue, and by the gifts of Your Spirit.

    "Grant that Your reign of Justice may be established in all my actions, so that all I do, having this characteristic, may be a work of holiness, accomplished with purity of intention and with the greatest fidelity in order to give You pleasure and accomplish Your holy will.

    “Grant that Your reign of Peace may be established, not only in my soul but also in my sensibility, so that, in harmony with the superior part of my soul, it may give You glory and neither retard me nor be an obstacle to union with You” (Sr. Carmela of the Holy Spirit, O.C.D.).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Knowest thou what it is to love Me in truth?  It is to realize that everything which is not pleasing to Me is a lie."  

Our Lord, Jesus Christ to St. Teresa of Avila

 

 

 

 

 

INSTRUCTION ON THE FOLLY OF HUMAN RESPECT
Thou art a true speaker ' neither carest thou or any man, for thou dost not regard the person of men (Matt. 22, 16).

In this Christians ought especially to follow the Saviour, and not permit themselves to be deterred from piety, and the practice of virtue by fear or human respect. What matters it, what people think and say of us, if we only please God? He alone can truly benefit or injure us; therefore he alone is to be feared, as Christ says: Fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell (Matt. 10, 28).

How foolishly, therefore, do those act who through fear of displeasing certain people, are afraid to serve God and practice piety; who even go so far as to commit sin; who in order to be pleasing to others, oppress innocent, poor and forsaken people; who adopt the latest and most scandalous fashions and customs; those who eat meat on days of abstinence, or give it to others; those who sing sinful songs, or what is still worse, do not hesitate to ridicule sacred things to give others occasion to laugh, or in order to be considered strong-minded. Implore God daily and sincerely, that He may take from you this vain fear of men and give you instead the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom.

INSTRUCTION ON THE VALUE AND DIGNITY OF THE SOUL
Whose image is this? (Matt. 22, 20)

Thus we should often ask ourselves with respect to our soul, particularly when we are tempted to stain and ruin it by sin, Whose image is this? We should then say to ourselves, "Is it not the likeness of God, a likeness painted with the blood of Jesus, an image for which the Savior gave His life? Should I defile and deform this by sin and voluptuousness? God forbid!" For in truth, what among all created things, except the angels, is more beautiful and more precious than a human soul, which is in the state of grace? "Could we," says St. Catherine of Sienna, "behold with our corporal eyes a soul in the state of grace, we would see with astonishment that it surpasses in splendor all flowers, all stars, the whole world, and there is probably no one who would not wish to die for such beauty." It is a dwelling of the Blessed Trinity! Christ did not give His life for all the goods and treasures of this earth, but for the human soul. And yet many estimate their soul at such little value that they sell it for a momentary pleasure, for a present not worth a penny! For shame! The body we estimate so highly that we take all pains to decorate it and keep it alive, and the soul the image and likeness of God, we take no pains to keep in the state of grace, and adorn with virtues! What folly!

 

 

 

 

TWENTY‑SECOND SUNDAY AFTER PENTECOST                        OUR DUTIES

PRESENCE OF GOD ‑ Teach me, O Lord, to fulfill all my duties in homage to Your sovereign Majesty.

MEDITATION:

    I.  The teachings contained in the Mass of this Sunday can be synthesized in the well-known statement of Jesus, which we read in the Gospel (Mt 22, I5‑21) of this day.  "Render. . . to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God, the things that are God's "; in other

words, fulfill with exactness your duties toward God and toward your neighbor, by giving to each one his due.

The Epistle (Phil I, 6‑11) presents St. Paul to us as a model of charity toward those whom God has confided to his care. "I have you in my heart," writes the Apostle to the Philippians, "for that in my bands and in the defense and confirmation of the Gospel, you all are partakers of my joy."  St. Paul is keenly aware of his spiritual paternity toward the souls he has begotten in Christ; even from a distance, he feels responsible for their success, is preoccupied with their perseverance in good, sustains them with his fatherly affection and wise counsels : "Being confident of this very thing, that He, who hath begun a good work in you, will perfect it unto the day, of Christ Jesus." He does not want them to be frightened because he is far away from them: he is nothing but a poor instrument, God alone is the true guide of souls, and He will complete the work begun. As for him, they may be certain that he does not cease to love them: "For God is my witness how I long after you all in the heart of Jesus Christ."

    St. John Chrysostom asserts that the heart of Paul is the heart of Christ because of the great love for souls which makes him so like the Redeemer; thus should it be possible to say of the heart of every apostle. When God has put us in contact with a soul and has asked us to occupy ourselves with it, we can no longer be disinterested; this soul is henceforth bound to ours, we should feel responsible for it, and bound to help it even to the end.

    After having spoken to us of the solicitude we should have for those confided to our care, the Epistle reminds us also of charity toward our neighbor in general : "That your charity may more and more abound in knowledge and in all understanding : that you may approve the better things." He speaks of a charity increasingly delicate in its understanding of the souls of others, adapting itself with an ever more refined tact to the mind, the demands, the tastes of others; a charity which must urge us, as St. Paul says, to "approve"‑ and therefore, to do ‑"the better things," in order that we "may be sincere and without offence unto the day of Christ.”

    2.  The Gospel outlines, clearly and distinctly, the position of the Christian toward civil authority. The insidious question : "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?" gives Jesus the occasion to solve the problem of the relation between religious and civil duties. He asks for a coin and says : "Whose image and inscription is this? They say to Him : Caesar's. Then He saith to them : Render, therefore, to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

    There is no opposition between the rights of political power and the rights of God, since "there would be no power unless it were given from above" (cf. Jn. 19, 11) : political authority, legitimately constituted, comes from God and must be respected as a reflection of the divine authority. This is precisely the reason why every Christian is bound to fulfill all the duties of a good citizen, and, consequently, must obey political authority, unless its orders are opposed to the law of God; for, in this case, it would no longer represent divine authority and then, as St. Peter says, "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5,29).

    We must not believe that because we are vowed to the apostolate or dedicated to religious works, we are, by this fact, dispensed from civic duties; on the contrary, even in this domain Catholics should be in the front rank. Emperors, kings, statesmen, soldiers, whom the Church honors as saints, tell us that sanctity is possible everywhere and for everyone, that it can be realized by those who dedicate themselves to the service of the State, because even here it is a question of serving God in His creatures.

    By telling us to render to Caesar what is Caesar's, Jesus teaches us to give to the State all that falls under its juris­diction, that is, everything that concerns temporal order and the public good. But Jesus does not stop there, He says more

"Give to God what is God's." If the coin which bears the image of Caesar should be restored to Caesar, with much greater reason should our soul, which bears the image of God, be restored to God. To say that we must give our soul to God, is to say that we owe Him everything, because, as a matter of fact, we have received everything from Him. In this sense, to fulfill our duties toward our neighbor, toward our equals or our inferiors, toward our ecclesias­tical or civil superiors, is to fulfill our duty toward God; it is to restore to Him everything He has given us, by submitting our freedom to His law, by putting our will in the service of His will.

COLLOQUY:

    "O my God, since I am Yours for so many reasons, and have so many obligations to serve You, permit no longer that sin, or Satan, or the world, usurp, even in the slightest degree, that which is entirely Yours. But, if it please You, take complete and absolute possession of my being and of my life. Here I am, O my God, I give myself entirely to You, protesting to You that I do not wish to exist but for You, and that I do not want to think, or say, or do, or suffer anything but for Your love, today, tomorrow, and always" (St. John Eudes).

    `'O my Lord Jesus, You gave Yourself to me and You ask only for my heart. But, O my Lord, what is this poor heart of mine when You are all? If my heart were worth a more than those of all the children of men combined, and all the love of the angels, and if its capacity were so great, that it could contain more than all the empyreal heaven, I would consecrate it wholly to You. It would be a very poor gift, and even almost nothing, to so great a Lord. `  But, how much more shall I not give You, and wholly repose in You, this little spark of a heart which I find in myself! Because this is for me a very great thing, that You should deign to keep my heart.  Would it not be folly if I should consecrate it henceforth to some creature, when my God wills it for Himself?  I do not want it to remain any longer in me, but to repose entirely in You, who have created it to praise You.  It is better that I place my heart in eternal Joy, in divine majesty and in immense goodness, rather than in my frailty; that I place it in Your deity, rather than in my iniquity” (St. Bonaventure).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"The (natural) moral virtues can make a man honest and virtuous, and can regulate his actions according to reason, but they can in no way bring him into friendship with God or even give him the possibility of meriting eternal life."

Fr. Gabriel of St. Mary Magdalen, Divine Intimacy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"The Church is One, Holy, Catholic Apostolic, and Roman : unique, the Chair founded on Peter.  Outside her fold is to be found nether the true faith nor eternal salvation, for it is impossible to have God for a Father if one does not have the Church for a Mother." 

Blessed Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peace Plan of Our Lady of Fatima

1. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA REQUEST?

At Fatima Our Lady said that God wished to establish in the world devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Our Lady said that many souls would be saved from Hell and the annihilation of nations averted if, in time, devotion to Her Immaculate Heart were established principally by these two means:

A.    the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by the Pope together with the world's bishops in a solemn public ceremony, and

B.    the practice or receiving Holy Communion (and other specific devotions of about 1/2 hour in duration) in reparation for the sins committed against the Blessed Virgin Mary, on the first Saturdays of five consecutive months--a practice known to Catholics as "the First Saturday" devotion.

2. HAVE THESE REQUESTS OF OUR LADY OF FATIMA BEEN HONORED?

No, not entirely. A number of the Faithful practice the "First Saturday" devotion, but Russia has yet to be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in a solemn public ceremony conducted by the Pope together with the world's Catholic bishops.

In 1982 the last Fatima seer, Lucia, when a cloistered nun living in Coimbra, Portugal, was asked if an attempted consecration by Pope John Paul II had sufficed. She replied that it did not suffice, because Russia was not mentioned and the world's bishops had not participated. Another attempted consecration in 1984 likewise did not mention Russia or involve the participation of many of the world's bishops, and Sister Lucia stated immediately afterwards that this consecration, too, had failed to meet Our Lady's requirements.

3.  WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA WARN?

It warns that if the requests of Our Lady of Fatima for the Consecration of Russia and the First Saturday devotion are not honored, the Church will be persecuted, there will be other major wars, the Holy Father will have much to suffer and various nations will be annihilated. Many nations will be enslaved by Russian militant atheists. Most important, many souls will be lost.

4. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA PROMISE?

The Message of Fatima promises that if the requests of Our Lady of Fatima are carried out "My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will Consecrate Russia to Me, which will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to mankind."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comment on the Widening Schism:

After the Passion, Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostles were directed to return to the Cenacle to await the coming of the Holy Ghost that would inaugurate the Catholic Church as the one and only means of salvation by uniting each individual by grace to the very person of Jesus Christ through virtue of faith and the sacrament of baptism.  Still standing was the Jewish Temple with its priesthood, government, and rites of worship.  The Jewish Catholics who made up the membership of the early Church continued to observe the old-covenant prescriptions for some time.  That time came to an end when, as prophesized by Jesus Christ, the providence of God destroyed forever what God Himself had established, the temple, and with it, the Levitical priesthood.

Analogously, since the close of Vatican II, there have existed under one authority two incongruent and distinct claimants to true Catholic doctrine and true worship.  These are the Novus Ordo Church directed by dedicated Modernists and those Catholics who remain faithful to Tradition in both doctrine and worship. 

There is a third group who call themselves “Catholic” who try to keep one foot in both camps.  They are identified as Conservative Catholics.  This group has maintained conformity with Novus Ordo Church practice while trying to reconcile this practice with faithful adherence to Catholic doctrine.  The fact that this cannot be successfully done in the great majority of cases is demonstrated by the failure of Conservative Catholics to keep their own children faithful to their baptismal vows. 

Now the corruption of Modernist theology under Pope Francis has infected Catholic morality in a formal matter with the attack on the sacrament of Matrimony and the accommodation of the homosexual heresy.  This will end Conservative Catholicism once and for all.  Either Conservatives will become formal Modernist or they will become formal Traditionalists.  This is the casting of the die.  There is no more sitting on the fence any longer trying to believe Catholic doctrine while corrupting Catholic immemorial ecclesiastical traditions.  There will be no more searching for the “right” priest or the “right” indult church to attend.  It will be a refreshing breath of air; a clarity of vision for everyone. 

Unfortunately at the same time, it will be a source of great sorrow.  The majority of Conservative Catholics will become formal Modernists.  They have been so habituated to compromise in practice that it is almost certain that they will find some way to become even more supine than they already are.  The sorrowful part of this coming division is that it will be the former Conservative-now Modernists who will be the most aggressive opponents and persecutors of Catholic Tradition.  Every faithful Catholic to Tradition will suffer under this coming persecution and, what is more sorrowful, experience the loss of family and friends to the Modernist camp.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And do thou, likewise, my good Angel, the faithful guardian of my soul and the witness of my past sins and infidelities---do thou, by thy prayers, assist me to rise again and beg that, in this holy Sacrament, I may obtain those helps which may enable me to lead a new life for the time to come.

Amen

 

 

 

 

Prayer Before Confession

MAY the blessed Angels and Saints of God, who rejoice in the conversion of a sinner; and above all, may thou, O Blessed Virgin, the refuge of the penitent and the Mother of Mercies, intercede for me, that the Confession which I am now going to make may not have the effect of rendering me more criminal than I am, but may procure for me the happiness of a reconciliation with my long-offended God and the grace never more to offend Him mortally.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remember in your charity:          

Remember the welfare of our expectant mother:

The Mission requests our prayers and sacrifices for Bishop Michael Stobnicki, Fr. Lawrence Smith, Fr. Paul Sretenovic, and Fr. Timothy Hoopes,

Beverly Bird, a devout memeber of our Mission, for her spiritual welfare,

Camilla Meiser requests our prayers for her granddaughter, Katie Wess, and her nephew, Haden Carlson,

Fr. Paul Sretenovic, a faithful priest who works in California,

Drews petition prayers for the spiritual and temporal welfare of the Christian & Irene Melnick family,

Gene Peters asks our prayers for the spiritual welfare of Beverly Wood and Bonnie Cormesser,

Mr. & Mrs. Hall request prayers for the health of their daughter, Erika Smith,

Drews request your prayers for Phyllis Virgil, for her health and spirital welfare,

For Anthony Niekrewicz, spiritual and temporal welfare is the petition of all the members of Ss. Peter & Paul,

Mary Lou Loftus' aunt, Susan Hendricks, who is gravely ill after emergencyC surgery,

Fred Holder, for his spiritual and physical welfare,

Thomas Soul, a nursing home patient who has suffered a stroke,

Donna Kallal, a dear friend of the Schiltz family who is dying,

Philip Thees requests our prayers for the heath of Mary Glatz and Agnus Messineo,

For the welfare of Aaron, a York resident in need of conversion,

For the spiritual welfare of Margaret Connelly is the petition of Camilla Meiser,

Linda Boyd, for her health,

Pete Schiffbauer, a cousin of Monic Bandlow who is gravely ill,

Joan R. Barr, the widow of F. Donald Barr who died March 7, they were married 70 years

Cole Schneider, prayers for his welfare are requested by Camilla Meiser,

JoAnn Niekrewicz, for her recovery from a recent fall and shoulder injury,

The Drews ask prayers for the spiritual and physical welfare of Robert Carballo,

Conversion of Jack Gentry, the nephew of Camilla Meiser,

For Sr. Maria Junipera, who took her final vows as a nun with the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, New Hampshire April 8,

Stephen Bryan, the brother of a devout Catholic religious, for his spiritual welfare,

Marie Kolinsky, for her health and spiritual welfare is the petition of her family,

Gene Peters requests our prayers for the conversion of Shirley Young and Carl Loy who are dying, the conversion of Dawn Keithley and Nate Schaeffer,

Rev. Leo Carley, an eighty-nine year old priest faithful to Catholic tradition, who is seriously ill,

For the recovery of Hayden Yanchek, the grandson of Francis Yanchek, injured in a farming accident,

Maureen Nies, for the recovery of her health is the petition of Camilla Meiser,

Daniel Vargs, for his health is the petition of his parents,

Art Noel, for the restoration of his health,

For the welfare of Peg Berry and her husband, Bill,

Marianne Connelly asks prayers for Chris Foley, who is gravely ill, and the welfare of his wife, Mary Beth,

The spiritual welfare of the Sal & Maria Messineo family is the petition of the Drew’s,

Liz Agosta, who is seriously ill, for her spiritual and temporal welfare,

Warren Hoffman, a long time member of our Mission who is in failing health,

Patrick Boyle, for the recovery of his health and his spiritual welfare,

For the spiritual welfare of the Drew children,

Monica Bandlow request our prayers for the welfare of Ray who is recovering from a MVA, and his daughter, Sonya, and Tera Jean Kopczynski, who is in failing health, and for a good death for Mr. Howald, Kathy Simons, Regina Quinn, James Mulgrew, Ruth Beaucheane, John Kopczynski, Roger & Mandy Owen

Peg Berry requests our prayers for her brother, William Habekost,

For the recently widowed, Maike Hickson, and her children,

For the spiritual welfare of the Carmelite nuns in Fairfield, PA,

Geralyn Zagorski, recovery of her health and spiritual welfare and the conversion of Randal Pace is the petition of Philip Thees,

For the grandson of Joe & Liz Agusta,

Fr. Waters requests our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Elvira Donaghy,

For the health and conversion of Stephen Henderson,

Fr. Paul DaDamio requests our prayers for the welfare of Rob Ward, and his sister, Debra Wagaman,

Kaitlyn McDonald, for the recovery of her health and spiritual welfare,

Roco Sbardella, for his health and spiritual welfare,

The Vargas’ request our prayers for the spiritual welfare of their son, Nicholas,

Family, for the welfare of Lazarus Handley, his mother, Julia, and his brother, Raphael, with Down’s Syndrome,

Fr. Waters requests prayers for the spiritual and physical welfare of Frank McKee,

Nancy Bennett, for the recovery of her health,

For the spiritual welfare of Mark Roberts, a Catholic faithful to tradition,

Michael Brigg requests our prayers for the health of John Romeo,

The health and welfare of Gene Peters and his sons,

Conversion of Anton Schwartzmueller, is the prayer request of his children,

Christine Kozin, for her health and spiritual welfare,

Teresa Gonyea, for her conversion and health, is the petition of her grandmother, Patricia McLaughlin,

For the health of Sonya Kolinsky,

Jackie Dougherty asks our prayers for her brother, John Lee, who is gravely ill,

For the health and spiritual welfare, Meg Bradley, the granddaughter of Rose Bradley,

Timothy & Crisara, a couple from Maryland have requested our prayers for their spiritual welfare,

Celine Pilegaard, the seven year old daughter of Cynthia Pilegaard, for her recovery from burn injuries,

Rafaela de Saravia, for her health and welfare,

Abbe Damien Dutertre, traditional Catholic priest arrested by Montreal police while offering Mass,

Francis (Frank) X.  McLaughlin, for the recovery of his health,

Nicholas Pell, for his health and spiritual welfare is the petition of Camilla Meizer,

Mary Kaye Petr, her health and welfare is petitioned by Camilla Meizer,

The welfare of Excellency Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò,

The welfare of Rev. Fr. Martin Skierka, who produces the traditional Ordo in the U.S.,

For the health and welfare of Katie Wess, John Gentry, Vincent Bands, Todd Chairs, Susan Healy and James O’Gentry is the petition of Camilia,

Marieann Reuter, recovery of her health, Kathy Kepner, for her health, Shane Cox, for his health, requests of Philip Thees,

The Joseph Cox Family, their spiritual welfare, 

For the health of Kim Cochran, the daughter-in-law of Joseph and Brenda Cochran, the wife of their son Joshua,

Louie Verrecchio, Catholic apologist, who has a health problem,

John Minidis, Jr. family, for help in their spiritual trial,

Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,

Regina (Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and health,   

Melissa Elena Levitt, her conversion, and welfare of her children,

For the grace of a holy death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,

Conversion of Annette Murowski, and her son Jimmy,

Brent Keith from Indiana has petitioned our prayers for the Keith Family,

The welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,

The spiritual welfare Robert Holmes Family,

For the spiritual and temporal welfare of Irwin Kwiat,

Fr. Waters asks our prayers for Elvira Donaghy,

Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,

Rende and Mary Mufide, a traditional Catholics from India ask our prayers for her welfare and he family members, living and deceased,

Mary Glatz, her health and the welfare of her family,

Barbara Harmon, who is ill,

Jason Green, a father of ten children, his health,

For the health and welfare of Sorace family,

Fr. Waters asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Brian Abramowitz,

Thomas Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation for their contribution to the beauty of our chapel,

John Rhoad, for his health and spiritual welfare,

Kathy Boyle, requests our prayers for her welfare,

Joyce Laughman and Robert Twist, for their conversions,

Michael J. Brigg & his family, who have helped with the needs of the Mission,

Nancy Deegan, her welfare and conversion to the Catholic Church,

Francis Paul Diaz, who was baptized at Ss. Peter & Paul, asks our prayers for his spiritual welfare,

The conversion of Rene McFarland, Lori Kerr, Cary Shipman and family, David Bash, Crystal and family, Larry Reinhart, Costanzo Family, Kathy Scullen, Marilyn Bryant, Vicki Trahern and Time Roe are the petitions of Gene Peters,

For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf, Eckhard Ebert, and Fahnauer family,

Fr. Waters requests our prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX, and for Fr. Thomas Blute, 

For the welfare of Fr. William T. Welsh,

The Drew’s ask our prayers for the welfare of Joe & Tracey Sentmanat family, Keith & Robert Drew, Christy Koziol & her children, Fred Nesbit and Michael Nesbit families, and Gene Peters Family, the John Manidis Family, the Sal Messinio Family, Michael Proctor Family,

Ryan Boyle grandmother, Jane Boyle, who is failing health,

Mel Gibson and his family, please remember in our prayers,

Rev. Timothy A. Hopkins requested our prayers for the welfare of  his friend, Fr Jean-Luc Lafitte,

Ebert’s request our prayers for the Andreas & Jenna Ortner Family,

Joyce Paglia has asked prayers for George Richard Moore Sr. & his children, and her brother, George Panell,

Philip Thees asks our prayers for his family, for McLaughlin Family, the welfare of Dan & Polly Weand, the conversion of Sophia Herman, Tony Rosky, the welfare Nancy Erdeck, the wife of the late Deacon Erdeck, John Calasanctis, Tony Rosky, James Parvenski, Kathleen Gorry, health of mind and body of Cathy Farrar.

 

Pray for the Repose of the Souls:

Shanon Smuckers, a thirty-three year old mother of three, died July 15,

John Callisanti, a faithful Catholic, died June 23, prayers petitioned by Philip Thees,

Christian Joseph Melnick, died June 19, a 56 year old faithful Catholic and devoted husband and father of nine,

Fr. Radoslav, a relatively young faithful priest who was working with Bishop Stobnicki in Poland,

Leonard  Messineo, a long time traditional Catholic, dies May 18,

Fr. Paul DaDamio, ordained conditionally by Bishop Richard Williamson, and warmly devoted to the Blessed Virgin Mary, died March 27, 2026,

For Jo Ann Niekrewicz, our dear friend, died March 1, for the blessed repose of her soul is the petition of all the members of Ss. Peter & Paul,

Shirley Rotondo, died February 2-26, and Louisa McBride, died February 27, is the petition of Monica Bandlow,

Katherine Veronica Wedel, the mother of Mary Baer, died February 6,

James Condit, Jr., traditional Catholic activist, died December 27,

Beverly Harmon, died December 16, requested by the Sentmanat family,

Rev. Nicholas DeProspero, a faithful Ruthenian Eastern rite Catholic priest, died December 10,

Monica Bandlow petitions our prayers for her friend, Patricia Messineo, died November 28,

Guy Berthault, died November 23, a great Catholic scientist whose work in sedimentology destroyed Lyellian geology and the theory of evolution,

Thomas Soul, died November 8 after receiving the last rites of the Church,

Etta Van Der Werken, a dear friend of Barbara Taffe, died 10-21-2025,

Gary Potter, Catholic writer and apologist and great long time defender of Catholic doctrine and tradition, died 9-9-2025,

Elizabeth Gorska, who died September 9, a relative of Lidia Gjec,

Camilia Meiser request our prayers for the souls of Peggy Cummings and Elizabeth Genter,

Thomas A. Nelson, founder of TAN Books and Publishers, died August 16,

Juan D. Gonzalez, our former sacristan, choir director, and dear friend, died July 23,

Sal Messineo, a faithful traditional Catholic, died Augsut 14,

Patricia Askew, a friend of Camilla Meiser, died July 3,

Joseph Kerney, a young man whose family provided the statues of the Sacred Heart, Mary and Joseph in our sanctuary, died May 30,

Louis Richard Ajlouny, the father of Randa Sharpe, died May 15,

Rene Guidicessi, died April 25, an old friend of the Drews,

F. Donald Barr, died March 7 at 94 years of age, co-founder of Robert Francis Religious Goods, in Philadelphia,

Dr. David Allen White, a well known defender of the Catholic faith, died February 11,

Bishop Richard Williamson, a renowned defender of the Catholic faith and most charitable gentleman, died January 29,

Rodolfo Alberto Lacayo, a cousin of Claudia Drew, died January 4,

Genieve Wallace, died Christmas day,

Ruth Marion Beaucheane, died December 8, is the petition of Monica Bandlow,

Ana Maria Salcedo,  the sister of Mario Fiol, died November 26,

Fr. Johin Cardaro, a traditional Catholic priest who was found dead in his home November 2,

Robert Carballo asks that we remember his parents, Roberto & Aida Carballo, and his friend, David Duclos, who died April 15,

Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais who may have been responsible for preventing the SSPX's public reconciliation with Rome in 2012, died October 8,

Lorna Edwards, our dear friend and loyal supporter of this Mission, died August 10,

Lois Petti, died July 28 two hours after receiving the Last Sacraments from Fr. Waters,

Wolfgang Smith, a renowned Catholic scholar, mathematician, scientist, philosopher, who helped the Kolbe Center for the Study of Creation, died July 19,

Willaim Glatz, a good and faithful Catholic, died July 17,

Alicio Gonzalez, a Catholic who asked for the sacrament of Extreme Unction, unfortunately did not receive, died July 9,

John Zavodny,  a faithful Catholic who died wearing the scapular of Mt Carmel on the first Saturday of May,  requested by Phyllis Virgil,

Catherine Martel, a lapsed Catholic, received the last sacraments in a good disposition from Fr. Waters on March 25 and died on April 4,

Father Basilio Méramo, a faithful priest, died March 5, removed from the SSPX for opposing their accommodation with Rome,

Julia McDonald, the mother of Kyle McDonald, died March 1,

Agnus Melnick, died February 28, a long time faithful Catholic and mother of eight children, including a traditional priest,

Kathryn (Drew) Lederhos, of Wellesley, MA, died February 3, 2024,

Chris Foley, the brother of Mary Lou Loftus, died February 1,

Louis Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, died January 30,

Fr. James Louis Albert Campbell, a faithful priest who died December 18 at 91 years of age, and her mother and father, Teresa and Thomas Maher,

Charles Harmon, the father of Tracey Sentmanet, died October 1, after receiving the rites of the Church,

Fr. Waters requests prayers for Elvira Donaghy, his friend and former secretary a for Bishop Gerado Zendejas, died September 9,

Robert Hickson, a faithful Catholic apologist who died Septembber 2,

Monica Bandlow requests prayers for her parents, Thomas & Teresa Maher, her husband, William Bandlow, her brother-in-law, Richard Bandlow, her sister, Mary Maher, Fr. Christopher Darby, SSPX,  who died March 17, Robert Byrne, Michelle Donofrio McDowell, her cousin, Patricia Fabyanic, the Prefect of Our Lady’s Sodality, March 8, for John Pfeiffer who died August 20, Theresa Hanley, died July 23, Fr. Juan-Carlos Iscara, SSPX, who died December 20, John Kinney, died December 21, Willaim Price, Jr., and Robert Arch Ward, died January 10, and Myra, killed in a MVA June 6,

John Sharpe, Sr., died July 20,

Maria Paulette Salazar, died June 6,

Dale Kinsey requests prayers for his wife, Katherine Kinsey, died May 17,

Richard Giles, who died April 29, the father of Traci Sentmanat who converted to the Catholic faith last All Saints' Day,

Joseph Sparks, a devout and faithful Catholic to tradition died February 25, 

Joyce Paglia, died January 21, and Anthony Paglia, died January 28, who were responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,

Joe Sentmanet request prayers for Richard Giles and Claude Harmon who converted to the Catholic faith shortly before their deaths, 

Rodolfo Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, died January 9,

Elizabeth Agosta petitions our prayers for Joseph Napolitano, her brother, who died January 2,

Michael Dulisse, died on December 26,

Michael Proctor, a close friend of the Drews, died November 9,

Richard Anthony Giles, the father-in-law of Joe Sentmanat converted to the Catholic faith on All Saints Day, died November 5,

Robert Kolinsky, the husband of Sonja, died September 18,

Gabriel Schiltz, the daughter of Thomas & Gay Schiltz, died August 21,

Mary Dimmel, the mother –in-law of Victoria Drew Dimmel, died July 18,

Michael Nesbit, the brother-in-law and dear friend of the Drew's, died July 14,

Thomas Thees, the brother of Philip, died June 19,

Carmen Ragonese, died June 22,

Juanita Mohler, a friend of Camella Meiser, died June 14,

Kathleen Elias, died February 14,

Hernan Ortiz, the brother of Fr. Juan Carlos Ortiz, died February 3,

Mary Ann Boyle, the mother of a second order Dominican nun, a first order Dominican priest, and a SSPX priest, died January 24, 

John DeMarco, who attended this Mission in the past, died January23,

Charles O’Brien, the father of Marlene Cox, died December 30,

Mufide Rende requests our prayers for the repose of the souls of her parents, Mehmet & Nedime,

Kathleen Donelly, died December 29 at 91 years of age, ran the CorMariae website,

Matthew O'Hare, most faithful Catholic, died at age 40 on November 30,

Rev. Patrick J. Perez, a Catholic priest faithful to tradition, pastor Our Lady Help of Christians, Garden Grove, CA, November 19,

Elizabeth Benedek, died December 14, requested by her niece, Agnes Vollkommer,

Dolores Smith and Richard Costello, faithful Catholics, died November,

Frank D’Agustino, a friend of Philp Thees, died November 8,

Fr. Dominique Bourmaud, of the SSPX, Prior of St. Vincent in Kansas City, died September 4,

Pablo Daniel Silva, the brother of Elizabeth Vargas, died August 18,

Rose Bradley, a member of Ss. Peter & Paul, died July 14,

Patricia Ellias, died June 1, recently returned to the Church died with the sacraments and wearing the brown scapular,

Joan Devlin, the sister-in-law of Rose Bradley, died May 18,

William Muligan, died April 29, two days after receiving the last sacraments,

Robert Petti, died March 19, the day after receiving the last sacraments,

Mark McDonald, the father of Kyle, who died December 26,

Perla Otero, died December 2020, Leyla Otero, January 2021, cousins of Claudia Drew,

Mehmet Rende, died December 12, who was the father of Mary Mufide,

Joseph Gravish, died November 26, 100 year old WWII veteran and daily communicant,

Jerome McAdams, the father of, died November 30,

Rev. James O’Hara, died November 8, requested by Alex Estrada,

Elizabeth Batko, the sacristan at St. John the Baptist in Pottstown for over 40 years, died on First Saturday November 7 wearing the brown scapular,

William Cox, the father of Joseph Cox, who died September 3,

James Larson, Catholic apologists, author of War Against Being publication, died July 6, 2020, 

Hutton Gibson, died May 12,

Sr. Regina Cordis, Immaculate Heart of Mary religious for sixty-five years, died May 12,

Leslie Joan Matatics, devoted Catholic wife and mother of nine children, died March 24,

Victoria Zelaya, the sister-in-law of Claudia Drew, died March 20,

Ricardo DeSilva, died November 16, our prayers requested by his brother, Henry DeSilva,

Rev. Fr. Joseph F. Collins, died April 27, 2019 to whom we are indebted for establishing our traditional pre-Bugnini Holy Week  in all its beauty,

Roland H. Allard, a friend of the Drew’s, died September 28,

Stephen Cagorski and John Bogda, who both died wearing the brown scapular,

Cecilia LeBow, a most faithful Catholic,

Rose Cuono, died Oct 23,

Patrick Rowen, died March 25, and his brother, Daniel Rowen, died May 15,

Sandra Peters, the wife of Gene Peters, who died June 10 receiving the sacraments and wearing our Lady’s scapular,

Rev. Francis Slupski, a priest who kept the Catholic faith and its immemorial traditions, died May 14,

Martha Mochan, the sister of Philip Thees, died April 8,

George Kirsch, our good friend and supporter of this Mission, died February 15,

For Fr. Paul J. Theisz, died October 17, is the petition of Fr. Waters,

Fr. Mecurio Fregapane, died Jan 12, was not a traditional priest but always charitable,

Fr. Casimir Peterson, a priest who often offered the Mass in our chapel and provided us with sound advice, died December 4,

Fr. Constantine Bellasarius, a faithful and always charitable Eastern Rite Catholic Melkite priest, who left the Roman rite, died November 27,

Christian Villegas, a motor vehicle accident, his brother, Michael, requests our prayers,

John Vennari, the former editor of Catholic Family News, and for his family’s welfare, April 4,

Mary Butler, the aunt of Fr. Samuel Waters, died October 17,

Joseph DeMarco, the nephew of John DeMarco, died October 3,

John Fergale, died September 25 after receiving the traditional sacramental rites of the Church wearing the brown scapular,

John Gabor, the brother of Donna Marbach, died September 9,

Fr. Eugene Dougherty, a faithful priest, fittingly died on the Nativity of the BVM after receiving the traditional Catholic sacraments,

Phyllis Schlafly, died September 5,

Helen Mackewicz, died August 14,

Mark A. Wonderlin, who died August 2,

Fr. Carl Cebollero, a faithful priest to tradition who was a friend of Fr. Waters and Fr. DeMaio,

Jessica Cortes, a young mother of ten who died June 12,

Frances Toriello, a life-long Catholic faithful to tradition, died June3, the feast of the Sacred Heart, and her husband Dan, died in 1985, 

John McLaughlin, a friend of the Drew’s, died May 22,

Angela Montesano, who died April 30, and her husband, Salvatore, who died in July 3, 2013,

Charles Schultz, died April 5, left behind nine children and many grandchildren, all traditional Catholics,

Esperanza Lopez de Callejas, the aunt of Claudia Drew, died March 15,

Fr. Edgardo Suelo, a faithful priest defending our traditions who was working with Fr. Francois Chazal in the Philippines, died February 19,

Conde McGinley, a long time laborer for the traditional faith, died February 12, at 96 years,

The Drew family requests your prayers for Ida Fernandez and Rita Kelley, parishioners at St. Jude,

Fr. Stephen Somerville, a traditional priest who repented from his work with the Novus Ordo English translation, died December 12,

Fr. Arturo DeMaio, a priest that helped this Mission with the sacraments and his invaluable advice, died December 2,

J. Paul Carswell, died October 15, 2015,

Solange Hertz, a great defender of our Catholic faith, died October 3, the First Saturday of the month,

Paula P. Haigh, died October 22, a great defender of our Catholic faith in philosophy and natural science,

Gabriella Whalin, the mother of Gabriella Schiltz, who died August 25,

Mary Catherine Sick, 14 year old from a large traditional Catholic family, died August 25,

Fr. Paul Trinchard, a traditional Catholic priest, died August 25,

Stephen J. Melnick, Jr., died on August 21, a long-time faithful traditional Catholic husband and father, from Philadelphia,

Patricia Estrada, died July 29, her son Alex petitions our prayers for her soul,

Fr. Nicholas Gruner, a devoted priest & faithful defender of Blessed Virgin Mary and her Fatima message, died April 29,

Sarah E. Shindle, the grandmother of Richard Shindle, died April 26,

Madeline Vennari, the mother of John Vennari, died December 19,

Salvador Baca Callejas, the uncle of Claudia Drew, died December 13,

Robert Gomez, who died in a motor vehicle accident November 29,

Catherine Dunn, died September 15,

Anthony Fraser, the son of Hamish Fraser, died August 28,

Jeannette Rhoad, the grandmother of Devin Rhoad, who died August 24,

John Thees, the uncle of Philip Thees, died August 9,

Sarah Harkins, 32 year-old mother of four children, died July 28,

Msgr. Donald Adams, who offered the Indult Mass, died April 1996,

Anita Lopez, the aunt of Claudia Drew,

Fr. Kenneth Walker, a young traditional priest of the FSSP who was murdered in Phoenix June 11,

Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for Gilberte Violette, the mother of Fr. Violette, who died May 6,

Pete Hays petitions our prayers for his brothers, Michael, died May 9, and James, died October 20, his sister, Rebecca,  died March17, and his mother, Lorraine Hayes who died May 4,

Philip Marbach, the father of Paul Marbach who was the coordinator at St. Jude in Philadelphia, died April 21,

Richard Slaughtery, the elderly sacristan for the SSPX chapel in Kansas City, died April 13,

Bernedette Marie Evans nee Toriello, the daughter of Daniel Toriello, died March 31, a faithful Catholic who suffered many years with MS, 

Natalie Cagorski, died march 23,

Anita Lopez de Lacayo, the aunt of Claudia Drew, who died March 21,

Mario Palmaro, Catholic lawyer, bioethicist and professor, apologist, died March 9, welfare of his widow and children,

Daniel Boyle, the uncle of Ryan Boyle, died March 4,

Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died on January 25,

Arthur Harmon, died January 18,

Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for the soul of Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died January 17,

Joseph Proctor, died January 10,

Susan Scott, a devote traditional Catholic who made the vestments for our Infant of Prague statue, died January 8,

Brother Leonard Mary, M.I.C.M., (Fred Farrell), an early supporter and friend of Fr. Leonard Feeney, died November 23,

John Fergale, requests our prayers for his sister Connie, who died December 19,

Jim Capaldi, died December 15,

Brinton Creager, the son of Elizabeth Carpenter, died December 10, 

Christopher Lussos, age 27, the father of one child with an expecting wife, died November 15,

Jarett Ebeyer, 16 year old who died in his sleep, November 17, at the request of the Kolinsky’s,

Catherine Nienaber, the mother of nine children, the youngest three years of age, killed in MVA after Mass, 10-29,

Nancy Aldera, the sister of Frances Toriello, died October 11, 2013 at 105 years of age,

Mary Rita Schiltz, the mother of Thomas Schiltz, who died August 27,

William H. (Teddy) Kennedy, Catholic author of Lucifer’s Lodge, died August 14, age 49, cause of death unknown,

Alfred Mercier, the father of David Mercier, who died August 12,

The Robert Kolinsky asks our prayers for his friend, George Curilla, who died August 23,

John Cuono, who had attended Mass at our Mission in the past, died August 11,

Raymond Peterson, died July 28, and Paul Peterson, died February 19, the brothers of Fr. Casimir Peterson,

Margaret Brillhart, who died July 20,

Msgr. Joseph J. McDonnell, a priest from the diocese of Des Moines, who died June 8,

Patrick Henry Omlor, who wrote Questioning The Validity of the Masses using the New, All English Canon, and for a series of newsletters which were published as The Robber Church, died May 2, the feast of St Athanasius,  

Bishop Joseph McFadden, died unexpectedly May 2,

Timothy Foley, the brother-in-law of Michelle Marbach Folley, who died in April,

William Sanders, the uncle of Don Rhoad, who died April 2,

Gene Peters ask our prayers for the repose of the soul of Mark Polaschek, who died March 22,

Eduardo Gomez Lopez, the uncle of Claudia Drew, February 28,

Cecelia Thees, died February 24,

Elizabeth Marie Gerads, a nineteen year old, the oldest of twelve children, who died February 6, 

Michael Schwartz, the co-author with Fr. Enrique Rueda of “Gays, Aids, and You,” died February 3,

Stanley W. Moore, passed away in December 16, and Gerard (Jerry) R. Pitman, who died January 19, who attended this Mission in the past, 

Louis Fragale, who died December 25,

Fr. Luigi Villa, Th.D. author of Vatican II About Face! detailing the heresies of Vatican II, died November 18 at the age of 95,

Rev. Michael Jarecki, a faithful traditional Catholic priest who died October 22,

 Jennie Salaneck, died September 19 at 95 years of age, a devout and faithful Catholic all her life,

Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,

Cynthia (Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the mother of nine children, four who are still at home, died August 19,

Stanley Spahalski, who died October 20, and his wife, Regina Spahalski, who died June 24, and for the soul of Francis Lester, her son,

Julia Atkinson, who died April 30,

Antonio P. Garcia, who died January 6, 2012 and the welfare of his teenage children, Andriana and Quentin,

Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who died February 27,

Fr. Timothy A. Hopkins, of the National Shrine of St. Philomena, in Miami, November 2,

Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the welfare of his wife, Delores,

Eduardo Cepeda, who died January 26,

Larry Young, the 47 year old father of twelve who died December 10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their family,

Sister Mary Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, died December 16,

Joeseph Elias, who died on September 28,

William, the brother of Fr. Waters, who died September 7,

Donald Tonelli, died August 1,

Rev. Fr. Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great defender of Catholic Truth, died January 25, 2006,

Emma Colasanti, who died May 29,

Mary Dullesse, who died April 12, a Catholic convert who died wearing our Lady’s scapular,

Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre Ebert, who died April 7, Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,

Philip D. Barr, died March 5, and the welfare of his family, 

Judith Irene Kenealy, the mother of Joyce Paglia, who died February 23, and her son, George Richard Moore, who died May 14, 

For Joe Sobran who died September 30,

Fr. Hector Bolduc, a great and faithful priest, died, September 10, 2012,

James & Jean Rowan and their sons, Patrick & Daniel,

John Vennari asks our prayers for Dr. Raphael Waters who died August 26,

Stanley Bodalsky, the father of Mary Ann Boyle who died June 25,

Mary Isabel Kilfoyle Humphreys, a former York resident and friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6,

Rev. John Campion, who offered the traditional Mass for us every first Friday until forbidden to do so by Bishop Dattilo, died May 1,

Joseph Montagne, who died May 5,

For Margaret Vagedes, the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died January 6,

Fr. Michael Shear, a Byzantine rite Catholic priest, died August 17, 2006,

Fr. James Francis Wathen, died November 7, 2006, author of The Great Sacrilege and Who Shall Ascend?, a great defender of dogma and liturgical purity,

Fr. Enrique Rueda, who died December 14, 2009, to whom our Mission is indebted,

Fr. Peterson asks to remember, Leonard Edward Peterson, his cousin, Wanda, Angelica Franquelli,  and the six priests ordained with him.

Philip Thees petitions our prayers for Beverly Romanick, Deacon Michael Erdeck, Henry J. Phillips, Grace Prestano, Connie DiMaggio, Elizabeth Thorhas, Elizabeth Thees, Theresa Feraker, Hellen Pestrock, and James & Rose Gomata, and Kathleen Heinbach,

Fr. Didier Bonneterre, the author of The Liturgical Movement, and Fr. John Peek, both were traditional priests,

Brother Francis, MICM, the superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, NH, who died September 5,

Rodolfo Zelaya Montealegre, the father of Claudia Drew, who died May 24,

Rev. Francis Clifford, a devout and humble traditional priest, who died on March 7,

Benjamin Sorace, the uncle of Sonja Kolinsky.

 

 

 

 

 

THE NATURE OF GOD'S CHRUCH - “The kingdom of heaven”

In the thirteenth chapter of St. Matthew there are several parables recorded, commencing with the words, “The kingdom of heaven is likened,” etc. Now, this cannot be the kingdom of God’s glory, for there are no tares or bad fishes to cast out in that kingdom. It must of necessity be the Church of Jesus Christ on earth, the new-chosen children of God, who have superseded the people of the ancient law.

It is called “the kingdom,” in the singular number, not in the plural number, kingdoms, for Jesus Christ founded but one Church, which is His kingdom; “and of His kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:33). He does not call it a republic, but a kingdom, thus describing the monarchical form of government which He gave to His Church. A kingdom is a country governed by a king; and if the king does not preside over it in person, he governs it by means of a viceroy, who in everything represents the king, and governs the country according to the powers and laws received from the king. If nowadays we have so many Christian sects, each one calling itself the true Church of Christ, it is not because He founded them, but because “many revolted and did not remain in the doctrine of Christ” (II John 9).

To say that all churches are good and pleasing in the sight of God, since they all believe in the same God and in His Son, Jesus Christ, whom He has sent, is the same as to say that provinces and individuals originally of the same kingdom, but revolting against their lawfully-constituted authorities and forming laws for themselves not sanctioned by the king, are just as agreeable to the king as those who were always faithful and submissive to him and to his ministers, and that it is enough to say to Jesus Christ, “Lord, Lord!” in order to be saved, no matter how many of His doctrines one rejects, nor how many of His laws and ordinances are despised. He Himseif answers “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doth the will of My Father, who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to Me in that day: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name?” (and to prophesy does not only mean to foretell future things, but also to explain and discourse on religious matters), “and cast out devils in Thy name, and done many miracles in Thy name? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you : depart from Me, you that work iniquity” (Matt 7:21). If the Apostle St. Paul says, “There must be also heresies,” it is not because Jesus Christ approves of them, but He permits them only “that they also who are approved may be made manifest” (l Cor. 11:19). They are, as it were, the shades which serve to make what is light still clearer and more visible to the world. But shade is darkness, and nothing dark or defiled will ever be admitted into the kingdom of glory. “Take heed, therefore, that the light which is in you be not darkness” (Luke 11:35).

If, then, Christ has established but one Church, which is His kingdom — “the kingdom of heaven” — and this Church has a monarchical form of government, behold here already a main feature of the holy Catholic Church.

JOSEPH PRACHENSKY, S.J., TIlE CHURCH OF THE PARABLES - TRUE SPOUSE OF THE SUFFERING SAVIOR, 1880

 

 

 

 

Viganò denounces Amoris Laetitia summit as ‘rupture’ from Church teaching

'The officials of the conciliar and synodal church call 'paradigm' what in the language of the Church has always been called error,' said Viganò.

LifeSiteNews | October 15, 2026 — “A theological paradigm that changes”: they admit it themselves. Whoever declares that the Church “is moving toward the full realization of Vatican II and the Synod on Synodality” is merely confessing what we denounce: a rupture, not a homogeneous development.

Theology has no paradigms to change, because it has the deposit of faith to safeguard and transmit. Vatican I defined it in terms that no one can abrogate: from the sense of the dogmas one must never stray “under the appearance and name of a higher understanding,” under the pretext of a better comprehension.

“A Church in which everyone has a voice”? The Church is not a parliament, and Our Lord did not call for consultations: “He who hears you hears me.” The listening that saves is that of the Word of God (“faith comes from hearing” Rm. 10:17), not a listening to the world, which has obtained our surrender. One listens to Our Lord, and then one obeys.

And Amoris Laetitia, whose “reception” is celebrated with such fervor, has introduced into the discipline of the sacraments what Scripture (Mt. 19; 1 Cor. 11:27) and the Council of Trent excluded. Trent anathematized whoever says that the Church errs when it teaches that the matrimonial bond is not dissolved by adultery, and that other marriages may be contracted while the spouse is still living (Sess. XXIV, can. 7); and it established that whoever is conscious of mortal sin must not approach the Eucharist without prior sacramental confession (Sess. XIII, can. 11).

The officials of the conciliar and synodal church call “paradigm” what in the language of the Church has always been called error. And when the error concerns a defined doctrine (i.e.: DOGMA), the Catholic Church has an even graver name: heresy.

 

 

Pope Leo: Take to heart the riches of ‘Amoris laetitia’

In his homily read by Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle at the concluding Mass of the Vatican encounter to mark the 10th anniversary of 'Amoris laetitia,' Pope Leo XIV calls on the Church to put the Apostolic Exhortation's pastoral guidance into practice in the heart of families.

Vatican News Service | Christopher Wells | October 14, 2026

“Today, as we celebrate the Eucharist, we offer to the Lord the fruits of the work we have carried out” on Amoris laetitia, “and we seek to take its riches to heart and put its pastoral guidance into practice”, Pope Leo said on Wednesday, 14 October, in his homily for the concluding Mass of the ecclesial Encounter marking the 10th anniversary of Pope Francis’ Apostolic Exhortation on love in the family.

The Holy Father’s homily was read by Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle, the new Dean of the College of Cardinals and Pro-Prefect of the Dicastery for Evanglization.

COMMENT: Amoris laetitia overturned all Catholic morality. It established the individual subjective conscience as the primary determination  of the morality of any human act. Catholic morality holds that the primary determination of the morality of any act is always the objective act itself. The subjective motivation for any human act contributes to the merit or guilt of a human act, but the act itself is always the primary determinate. A good motive cannot redeem an evil act however an evil motive can destroy an objective good act. A good motive may mitigate the imputability of an evil act but it cannot remove the guilt. The late Pope Francis/Bergoglio, by permitting divorced and remarried Catholics to receive the Holy Eucharist based upon their own subjective conscience set the precedence for overturning all Catholic morality. For this crime, Francis/Bergoglio is unhappily paying an eternal recompense. Now Pope Leo/Prevost is travelling down the same road to perdition.  Their own subjective consciences cannot by any measure make this objective evil act of corruption Catholic morality good.

 

Francis/Bergoglio and his shadow, Leo/Prevost have said nothing about the grave sin of abortion while claiming to defend "human dignity." Their argument is now the public position for politicians seeking the Catholic vote.

Texas Democratic Senate candidate is James Talarico, (surnamed after his apostate Catholic step-father, is neither Catholic nor Italian). He supports abortion and has actively worked against Texas law that restricts abortion access. Talarico pointed to the consequences of Texas' restrictive abortion law, arguing that it has endangered women experiencing pregnancy complications. He said the ban prohibits abortion even when a mother's life is threatened. Talarico said, "If we are authentically pro-life, I think we should be disturbed by the outcomes of this extreme abortion ban." When Talarico was questioned, "If you cannot provide policies or support policies that protect the most innocent among us, who is the unborn child, how can we trust that you're going to provide policies to protect the rest of Texans?" Talarico responded by invoking Pope Francis and Pope Leo XIV, whom he described as consistently pro-life because their concern for human dignity extends beyond abortion to poverty, climate change, (capital punishment) and war.

 

 

SPES CONTRA SPEM

Observations on the Note “A Journey of Hope” by the Dicasteries for the Doctrine of the Faith, Christian Unity, and Interreligious Dialogue 

Carlo Maria Viganò, 23 September 2026

Et non est in alio aliquo salus

Nec enim aliiud nomen est sub caelo datum hominibus,

in quo oporteat nos salvos fieri.

Act 4:12

 

Habere non potest Deum patrem
qui Ecclesiam non habet matrem.

S. Cyprianus, De unitate Ecclesiæ, 6

 

Foreword: An Accusing Date

The Note A Journey of Hope, drafted for the sixtieth anniversary of Nostra Ætate, bears the signatures of Cardinals Fernández, Koch, and Koovakad. Leo XIV approved it and ordered its publication. It is dated September 16, the memorial of Saints Cornelius and Cyprian.

I do not know whether the authors noticed the irony: St. Cyprian is the Father who bequeathed to the Church the formula salus extra Ecclesiam non est. He taught that he who does not have the Church for his Mother cannot have God for his Father. Under his patronage, a document has been published that, for sixty entire paragraphs, takes great care never to repeat that truth; indeed, in many ways, it contradicts and denies it. And this is the Dicastery that was once the Holy Office. The body established to guard the Catholic Faith now signs off on its liquidation.

I would add that the Note comes out four days after the Feast of the Most Holy Name of Mary. Blessed Innocent XI extended this feast to the Universal Church in 1683, in thanksgiving for the liberation of Vienna from the Ottomans. Precisely during these same days of September, the Holy See explains to us that the true danger to Christendom is called Islamophobia.

Let us therefore examine the document, not for what it claims to be, but for what it actually “teaches.”

I. A Confessed Rupture

The Note presents itself as the testimony of an «enriched continuity». Yet a simple reading suffices to realize that the text itself refutes this claim, and more than once.

Already at the outset (n. 1), it asserts that Nostra Ætate marked a profound change in the way the Church understands her relationship with other religions. In its conclusion (n. 57), it takes pleasure in the fact that this Conciliar Declaration radically transformed interreligious relations. The Church, the document claims, supposedly pivoted from a reserved and distant stance to a journey of dialogue. At n. 51, it goes so far as to state that dialogue transforms individuals, communities, and at times even ecclesial structures.

Now, the Church cannot «understand differently» her relationship with error, for that relationship is fixed by Divine Revelation. The First Vatican Council taught this in words that admit of no updating. The sense of sacred dogmas once declared by the Church must forever be retained: nec umquam ab eo sensu, altioris intelligentiæ specie et nomine, recedendum; one must never depart from that meaning [of the dogmas] under the pretext or appearance of a deeper understanding (Dei Filius, ch. 4). And in the Anti-Modernist Oath of St. Pius X, every cleric up until 1967 swore: prorsus rejicio hæreticum commentum evolutionis dogmatum, ab uno in alium sensum transeuntium diversum ab eo, quem prius habebat Ecclesia – “I entirely reject the heretical misrepresentation of the evolution of dogmas, passing from one meaning to another different from that which the Church held before.”

A document celebrating the «radical transformation» of a teaching does not describe a homogeneous development. It describes a mutation. And the individuals within those Dicasteries who are adulterating the Faith, with Leo’s consent and patronage, betray and abuse the authority they hold.

II. Indifferentism in a clergyman’s collar

The doctrinal core of the Note is a thesis the Church has always condemned: that false religions are, to one extent or another, pathways to God.

It repeats (n. 1) that the Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in other religions. It adopts (n. 33) Leo’s catechesis of October 29, 2025, according to which every sincere religious search should discern a reflection of the sole Divine Mystery. It affirms (n. 59) that the Holy Spirit works within the various religions of peoples and kindles in them the flame of wisdom. Finally (n. 51), it defines interreligious dialogue as «a theological locus, where the Holy Spirit wishes to make Himself heard».

The fact that fragments of natural truth are scattered among the errors of the pagans, no Catholic has ever denied. The devil himself, in order to deceive, mingles the true with the false. But it is one thing to recognize a fragment of truth within an erroneous system; it is quite another to attribute to that system, as such, a salvific value, a presence of the Holy Spirit, or a function as a «theological locus». This second step is precisely what the perennial Magisterium has always condemned.

Blessed Pius IX condemned the following propositions in the Syllabus: Homines in cujusvis religionis cultu viam æternæ salutis reperire æternamque salutem assequi possunt. Men can find the way of eternal salvation and attain eternal salvation in the worship of any religion (prop. 16).

Saltem bene sperandum est de æterna illorum omnium salute, qui in vera Christi Ecclesia nequaquam versantur. We must at least entertain good hope concerning the eternal salvation of all those who are in no way within the true Church of Christ (prop. 17).

Pius XI, in Mortalium Animos (1928), described future interreligious congresses with prophetic accuracy. He condemned their core principle: the false opinion of those who consider all religions plus minusve bonas ac laudabiles, more or less good and praiseworthy. And he warned that whoever adheres to such an opinion departs entirely from the Religion revealed by God.

St. Pius X, in Pascendi, exposed the theological root of this error: Modernist immanentism. If religion springs from the experience of the divine within human feeling, then every religion, even that of the pagans, must be called true. The Note merely applies this principle when it speaks of a «sincere religious search» and a «dialogue of religious experience» (n. 39).

The Holy Spirit is Spiritus veritatis (Jn 16:13), and cannot dwell where the Divinity of the Son who sent Him is denied. The Psalmist knew nothing of the nuances of dialogue: Quoniam omnes dii gentium dæmonia – for all the gods of the pagans are demons (Ps 95:5). Nor did the Apostle know them: quæ immolant gentes, dæmoniis immolant, et non Deo – what the pagans sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God (1 Cor 10:20).

III. The Old Covenant and the Synagogue

The most grave section of the document concerns Judaism. I wish to be clear from the outset, for the bad faith of the neo-Modernists stands ready to misrepresent my words. Hatred toward the Jews is a sin, and the Church has always condemned it; charity toward them is a duty. Yet the greatest charity one can show them is that which the Church has always practiced: praying for their conversion to Our Lord Jesus Christ, their Messiah. It is precisely this charity that the Note suppresses.

1.     The naturalistic genesis of Christianity

At n. 10, the Note sets forth a reconstruction that no Father of the Church would ever have recognized. Primitive Christianity supposedly developed out of the «movement initiated by Jesus». The early Christians allegedly adopted principles of contemporary Judaism, adapting them to the new post-Paschal situation. Rabbinic Judaism and Christianity would thus appear as two parallel branches of the same root.

his is the history of religions according to 19th-century rationalism, not the Catholic Faith. The Church of Christ is not an «adaptation» of Judaism. She is the true Israel, Israël Dei (Gal 6:16), in whom the promises are fulfilled. Rabbinic Judaism, which arose after the destruction of the Temple, is not a twin brother to the Church: it is the continuation of that portion of Israel that failed to recognize the time of its visitation (Lk 19:44).

That a document from the former Holy Office should invoke the authority of the Calvinist theologian Karl Barth (n. 5) to illustrate the Incarnation as «the Word [who] became Jewish flesh» says everything about its underlying inspiration...

2.     The «irrevocable» covenant and the present religiosity of the Jews

At n. 13, the Note asserts that the covenant with the Jewish people is irrevocable and possesses theological significance. It adds that the religiosity of today's Jews, not merely that bound to the Old Testament, is relevant for Christians. It goes so far as to present it as an effect of the revealed Word, a current and dynamic value capable of enriching us. The Note takes pains to deny the existence of «two ways of salvation». Yet this is a mere facade, for immediately afterward it attributes salvific and theological value to the very thing it claimed not to view as a parallel path. Against this doctrine stands the entire perennial Magisterium of the Church.

The Apostle Paul teaches: Dicendo autem novum, veteravit prius. Quod autem antiquatur et senescit, prope interitum est; in speaking of a new covenant, God has declared the first one old; and what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away (Heb 8:13).

The Council of Florence, in the Bull Cantate Domino (1442), defined that the legal prescriptions of the Old Testament ceased with the coming of Christ. After the promulgation of the Gospel, they cannot be observed without forfeiting eternal salvation. The same Council proclaims that no one existing outside the Catholic Church – not only pagans, but also Jews, heretics, and schismatics – can become partakers of eternal life. Firmiter credit, profitetur et prædicat, nullos extra catholicam Ecclesiam existentes, non solum paganos, sed nec Judæos aut hæreticos atque schismaticos, æternæ vitæ fieri posse participes.

St. Thomas (S. Th. I-II, q. 103, a. 4) teaches, alongside the Fathers, that the ceremonies of the Old Law became dead after the Passion, and mortiferous (deadly) after the propagation of the Gospel.

Pius XII, in Mystici Corporis (1943), teaches that with the death of the Redeemer, the Old Law was abolished, and the New Testament took its place.

For nineteen centuries, the Catholic Church prayed on Good Friday for God to lift the veil from the hearts of the Jewish people, according to the words of St. Paul: velamen positum est super cor eorum. Cum autem conversus fuerit ad Dominum, auferetur velamen – to this day, whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their hearts; but when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed (2 Cor 3: 15-16). But the Note does not view that veil as an impediment to be removed; rather it sees it as a richness from which to learn.

3.     An amputated citation

There is a detail that reveals the method. At n. 14, the Note invokes the Holy Office decree of March 25, 1928 (AAS 20 [1928], 103-104) as a precedent for its fight against antisemitism. That decree indeed condemns hatred against the people once chosen by God. Yet the Note remains silent regarding the 1928 decree’s primary objective. The decree suppressed the association Amici Israël, whose members requested, among other things, modifications to the Good Friday liturgy. The Holy Office judged their ideas contrary to the mind of the Church, the doctrine of the Fathers, and the sacred Liturgy.

Thus, the officials of the Roman Dicasteries quote in support of their position a document that condemned the very things they are now promoting. This is no oversight: it is the hallmark of a deceitful operation sustained by amputated citations and calculated omissions.

4.     Rabbinic Judaism is not the religion of the Old Testament

Here lies the misconception upon which the entire edifice of the Note, and of Nostra Ætate, is built: speaking of Judaism as though it were the religion of Abraham, Moses, and the Prophets, surviving intact down to our day through another channel. It is not so, and the Magisterium has always known it. The religion established by God on Sinai was entirely ordered toward the Temple, the Levitical priesthood, and ritual sacrifice: when the veil of the Temple was rent and the Sacrifice of the Cross fulfilled and abolished these figures, that economy came to an end; and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, which no observant Jew has ever been able to remedy, was the visible sign of this end. What arose thereafter – Rabbinic and Talmudic Judaism, codified in the Mishna and Talmud between the 2nd and 6th centuries and in its subsequent schools—is not the continuation of the Mosaic religion: it is a post-Christian construct, developed largely in opposition to the Church and to the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah come in the flesh. It is not the ancient branch: it is a new branch, born after Calvary and against Calvary, born of the Sanhedrin that condemned Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Therefore, the expressions «elder brothers» (n. 20) and «fathers in the faith» (n. 12) are not merely unfortunate phrases: they are theological errors. Far from elder brothers! Our fathers in the faith are the Patriarchs and Prophets who awaited Christ and whom Christ, descending into hell, set free. Most Holy Mary, the Apostles, and the early martyrs were Jews, and the Ecclesia ex circumcisione is our mother. But later Rabbinism is in no way our father: it was born after us and in controversy against us. St. Paul, who loved his brothers according to the flesh so much that he wished himself accursed and separated from Christ for their sake (Rom 9:3), teaches that the natural branches were broken off because of unbelief, and that God has the power to graft them in again if they do not persist in unbelief (Rom 11:20, 23). The Apostle's entire hope rests upon that if – and the Note, while quoting the Epistle to the Romans copiously, never mentions that if.

Let me add a word that I wish to be understood precisely as stated. The criterion given by St. John the Apostle does not concern a people, a bloodline, or a nation; it concerns a doctrine: Quis est mendax, nisi is qui negat quoniam Jesus est Christus? Hic est antichristus, qui negat Patrem et Filium. Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son (1 Jn 2:22). Whoever denies Christ falls under that judgment: Greek or Roman, European or American, layman or cleric, and today preeminently cleric... But a religion historically constituted around the denial of the Messianic identity of Our Lord Jesus Christ is not a sister faith with a few omissions: it is, in principle, the antithesis of Christianity. To say this is not contempt for anyone: it is the very reason why the Catholic Church prayed for the conversion of Israel on every Good Friday in her history. Whoever stripped us of that prayer did not render us more charitable; they rendered us indifferent to the eternal salvation of men we claim to love.

5.     A Judaizing Catholicism

That which the Note intends to bring to completion bears an ancient name, found in the Epistle to the Galatians: quomodo gentes cogis judaizare? Why do you compel the Gentiles to judaize? (Gal 2:14). St. Paul fought all his life against those who sought to maintain a parallel economy alongside the Cross, using words that no Dicastery would dare reprint today: si circumcidamini, Christus vobis nihil proderit; if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you (Gal 5:2). The Judaizer does not deny Christ: he places something alongside Him. He does not say the Cross is useless: he says it is not spes unica. This is precisely the structure of n. 13, where the doctrine of two ways of salvation is denied in words but reaffirmed in substance, attributing an ongoing theological significance to the Old Covenant and a value to contemporary «Jewish religiosity» that allegedly enriches us.

This Christianized Judaism is no Conciliar invention: for nearly two centuries, the Anglo-Saxon Protestant world has cultivated the same two-covenant theology – the dispensationalism of Darby and Scofield – with political consequences now visible across Western nations, where proponents of “Christian Zionism” subject nations to the Ashkenazi mafia. The synodal church has done nothing more than import its substance, dressing it in “Catholic” vocabulary: today's Judaizing Catholicism is the synodal counterpart to Protestant Zionism. Two paths different in origin, identical in effect, for both render the Cross partially superfluous and reduce the Catholic Church to merely one path among many.

6.     Noahidism, or the universal religion of the Gentiles

If one denies that Jews must convert to Christ, the question remains: what is offered to the Gentiles? Rabbinic tradition offers an ancient and consistent answer: the seven Noahide laws (Sanhedrin 56a), a minimal moral code reserved for non-Jews that excludes any supernatural claim for them. A universal religion without the Trinity, without the Incarnation, without the Cross, without the Priesthood, without the Church, without Grace, and without the Sacraments. This is no mere scholarly curiosity: in 1991, the United States Congress, through Public Law 102-14, solemnly recognized the «Seven Noahide Laws» as the foundation of civilization.

Compare that project with what the Note proposes. At n. 58, religions are called upon to transform the world so that it becomes a fraternal expression of the will of God, while at n. 53 it hastens to exclude any intention of founding a world religion. The result, however, is identical: a generic monotheism, a common morality, a fraternity without the Son of God. I need not attribute motives to anyone, and I refrain from doing so: it suffices to observe that the synodal church is preaching to the Gentiles roughly what the Synagogue has always reserved for the Gentiles, and in neither framework does any place remain for Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is this, and not evangelical fraternity, that hides behind the phrase «elder brothers».

IV. Islam and the memory of Lepanto

At n. 43, the Note reiterates the claim from Nostra Ætate that Muslims worship the one God. It further rejoices in a growing critical awareness regarding Islamophobia.

But what God is worshipped by a person who explicitly denies the Most Holy Trinity, the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, His Death on the Cross, and His Resurrection? St. John the Apostle answers unambiguously: Omnis qui negat Filium, nec Patrem habet; whoever denies the Son does not have the Father (1 Jn 2: 23). And again: Omnis qui recedit, et non permanet in doctrina Christi, Deum non habet; anyone who goes ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ does not have God (2 Jn 9). A monotheism that rejects the Son is not an imperfect form of the true faith: it is its denial, and a deliberate one, for the Quran knows Christ and yet rejects Him as God.

Then there is the practical dimension, which the Note touches upon with revealing caution. At n. 45, it draws from Evangelii Gaudium to ask Christians to welcome Muslim immigrants with affection, while imploring Islamic countries to grant Christians freedom of worship. Note the asymmetry of the verbs: on one side a duty, on the other a plea. Reciprocity has been invoked for sixty years and has never arrived, yet no one dares draw the obvious conclusion.

Meanwhile, mass immigration continues, promoted by political and financial powers well aware of its effects, and blessed by a hierarchy that has found in it its ultimate social purpose (and a convenient source of profit compensating for disastrous losses in donations and offerings from its own faithful). The consequences are visible to anyone not paid to ignore them: entire European suburbs effectively removed from Christian law and custom; churches sold, closed, or converted while mosques multiply; a planned ethnic and religious replacement that can no longer be denied, which people prefer to label as enrichment. At n. 47, the Note acknowledges the persecution of Christians by extremist groups, but without naming the place, the cause, or the remedy: the sole response identified is yet more dialogue – a dialogue that turns its gaze elsewhere, almost annoyed by the blood of Catholic Martyrs in Nigeria, daily massacred by those whose smiling hands Rome shakes.

Charity toward the individual foreigner is a duty, and no one here disputes it. But charity has an order – the ordo caritatis that St. Thomas expounds in the Summa (II-II, q. 26, a. 6-8) – and charity toward the foreigner does not obligate a Christian people to hand over to their children a de-Christianized land. The Pontiffs who organized the Holy League loved the Turks enough to desire their conversion, and loved their own peoples enough not to surrender them to their rule. Today, both approaches have ceased, and this double, cowardly abandonment is hypocritically labeled as “welcome.”

The Note repeatedly invokes St. Francis of Assisi as the patron of «universal brotherhood» (n. 30). In the past few days, the Church celebrated the Stigmata imprinted upon his sacred body. Now, when the Poverello traveled to Damietta to meet Sultan al-Malik al-Kamil in 1219, he did not go to «build a fraternal society capable of accepting differences». He went to preach Our Lord to him and to convert him. In his First Rule, he prescribed that friars going among the Saracens should proclaim the Word of God, so that they might believe and be baptized. This is Franciscan brotherhood: the charity that desires the eternal salvation of the brother, not that he be confirmed in error.

St. Pius V did not fight Islamophobia: he assembled the Holy League, entrusted the fleet to the Rosary, triumphed at Lepanto, and instituted the feast of Our Lady of Victory. Blessed Innocent XI, after the Battle of Vienna, consecrated September 12 to the Name of Mary. According to the criteria of this Note, both should be numbered among the «monolithic models» that n. 54 declares to be a source of violence and suffering.

V. Religious freedom and the religion of Man

The Note explicitly ties Nostra Ætate to Dignitatis Humanæ (n. 2). It presents religious freedom as the prerequisite for any respectful relationship among religions and places it at the foundation of a «universal citizenship».

Here too, the prior Magisterium is unanimous.

Gregory XVI, in Mirari vos (1832), calls freedom of conscience an absurd and erroneous proposition, or rather a delirium, stemming from the poisoned source of indifferentism: Ex hoc putidissimo indifferentismi fonte absurda illa fluit ac erronea sententia, seu potius deliramentum, asserendam esse ac vindicandam cuilibet libertatem conscientiæ.

Blessed Pius IX, in Quanta Cura (1864), made that condemnation his own. The Syllabus condemns the proposition that everyone is free to embrace that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true (prop. 15). It likewise condemns the proposition that it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State (prop. 77).

Leo XIII, in Immortale Dei (1885) and Libertas præstantissimum (1888), teaches that the State cannot treat all forms of worship in the same manner without sinking into practical atheism. Liberty of worship, understood as a right to profess any religion, contradicts the virtue of religion, which is owed to the one true God alone.

Pius XI, in Quas Primas (1925), proclaims the Social Kingship of Christ over individuals, families, and States. He denounces secularism as the plague of our time.

Even the dream of a «universal brotherhood» without Christ has already been judged. St. Pius X did so in his Apostolic Letter Notre charge apostolique (1910), condemning the Sillon. He denounced a vast movement of apostasy organized in all countries pour l’établissement d’une Église universelle qui n’aura ni dogmes, ni hiérarchie, ni règle pour l’esprit, ni frein pour les passions, for the establishment of a universal Church which will have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, nor rule for the mind, nor restraint for the passions. The Note, at n. 53, hastens to clarify that it does not intend to establish a great world religion, yet meanwhile demands that religions transform the world into a fraternal expression of God's will (n. 58). A will of God that, evidently, can express itself indifferently in a synagogue, a mosque, a pagoda, or St. Peter's Basilica.

In that same Letter, St. Pius X recalled that the true friends of the people ne sont ni révolutionnaires, ni novateurs, mais traditionalists – the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but traditionalists. This explains why traditionalists today are treated as enemies.

VI. The Abolition of the Mission

The point at which the Note drops its mask is n. 54. There we read that «defending one’s position and proselytism», as modes of encounter with the other, no longer make sense in the «global village». At n. 22, those who might be «tempted» to insist upon the obligation to proclaim Christ are admonished. At n. 46, assurances are given that there is no proselytism within the dynamics of love.

Before answering, one must unmask the lexical deceit upon which this entire operation rests.

Proselytism, in current usage, carries a negative connotation: it evokes aggressive persuasion, psychological pressure, recruitment, a conscience bought with bread or bent through threat. Now, evangelization is not proselytism, and never has been. The Church has always taught that the act of faith must be free and that infidels cannot in any way be coerced into belief (S. Th. II-II, q. 10, a. 8). St. Gregory the Great forbade baptizing Jews against their will, and that prohibition entered into the decree Sicut Judæis, renewed by a long line of Pontiffs. No Catholic worthy of the name has ever defended forced conversions.

The deception consists in conflating the terms evangelization and proselytism. Bergoglio deceptively played upon this identification, attributing the abhorrent traits of proselytism to the mandate of evangelization: arrogance, violence, lack of respect for the other. Once the substitution was complete, the game was won: whoever preaches conversion becomes an aggressor; whoever remains silent becomes a man of dialogue; and the missionary, who for twenty centuries stood as the purest image of Christian charity, is cast as intolerant and divisive.

It is an elementary sophism, and for that very reason effective. But it must be stated clearly: none of us promotes proselytism – that is rather the hallmark of sects, particularly those of Protestant origin. We claim the mandate of Our Lord, which is a vastly different thing, and which no Pope and no Dicastery has the power to abrogate.

In the conciliar and synodal church, Our Lord’s command is considered a form of intolerance to be banished. Yet that command cannot be erased: Euntes ergo docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti (Mt 28:19). Nor does it admit of exceptions: Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit; qui vero non crediderit, condemnabitur (Mk 16:16).

Benedict XV, in Maximum illud (1919), reminded missionaries that their sole end is the extension of the Kingdom of Christ and the salvation of souls. The same was taught by Pius XI in Rerum Ecclesiæ (1926) and Pius XII in Evangelii præcones (1951). A Church that renounces converting infidels is no longer missionary and betrays her reason for being. She becomes a cultural mediation agency serving «peaceful coexistence».

Even the practices praised by the Note were explicitly forbidden by Church law. No. 49 praises «shared celebrations»; canon 1258 § 1 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law (in force until 1983) established that it is not licit for the faithful to actively assist in or take part in the sacred rites of non-Catholics in any way: Haud licitum est fidelibus quovis modo active assistere seu partem habere in sacris acatholicorum. No. 19 celebrates the 1986 pantheon of Assisi, with the leaders of false religions gathered to pray each to his own god. Mortalium Animos had strictly forbidden Catholics from participating in such assemblies.

No. 41 presents «interreligious couples» as a fruit of dialogue. Canon 1070 established that disparity of cult renders a marriage null. Canon 1060 declared that the Church likewise forbids mixed marriages with non-Catholic baptized persons.

No. 38 of the Note records with satisfaction that the Dicastery sends greeting messages for the feasts of other religions. St. John commanded not even to greet those who do not bring the doctrine of Christ: Nec Ave ei dixeritis (2 Jn 10). Today, the Holy See sends best wishes for the worship of idols. But what concord has Christ with Belial? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? Quæ autem conventio Christi ad Belial? Qui autem consensus templo Dei cum idolis? (2 Cor 6:15-16).

VII. The Newspeak of False Irenism

It remains to speak of language, which is not an accessory but the very vehicle of error.

The Note offers us the «culture of complexity, flexibility, and friendship» (n. 55) and the model of the «polyhedron» (n. 56). It speaks to us of a «common home», a «global village», and «martyrs of dialogue» (n. 33). None of these terms belongs to the vocabulary of Faith. They all belong to the lexicon of globalist ideology. The Martyrs of the Church died for refusing to dialogue with idolatry, and for refusing to offer a single grain of incense to Jupiter. The Note has invented a new category for them: martyrs of compromise.

Pius XII, in Humani Generis (1950), described this phenomenon with precision. He deplored the false irenicism of those who, to foster union, are willing to hollow out dogmas of their meaning and replace Scholastic terminology with vague and adaptable formulas. Truth is not openly denied: it is rendered unspeakable, because the words to speak it have been abolished.

A Church that can no longer utter the words infidel, heresy, conversion, or hell has no need to formally renounce the Faith. She has already done so in her language.

VIII. Conclusion: the Broad Way

The Note is entitled A Journey of Hope, and its final paragraph invites everyone to walk it together. Yet Our Lord warned us that two ways exist. One is narrow and leads to life. The other is wide and spacious, et multi sunt qui intrant per eam(Mt 7: 13). The path proposed by Leo and the Roman Dicasteries displays every characteristic of the second. It is wide, for anyone may enter it without conversion. It is spacious, for everything is admitted except the claim to Truth. It is crowded with dignitaries of all religions, lacking only Him who said: Ego sum via, et veritas, et vita. Nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me (Jn 14:6). Abraham, of whom the Note claims common fatherhood, contra spem in spem credidit (Rm 4:18): he believed in hope against all human hope, because he believed in the promise of God, who is Our Lord Jesus Christ. The hope offered to us by the Note is the exact opposite: an entirely human hope that has ceased to believe in the Promise.

This is not theological hope, which has eternal life for its object and the merits of Our Lord for its foundation. It is the worldly hope of peace without the Prince of Peace, fraternity without the Father, and coexistence without the Cross. It is the Religion of Man that Freemasonry theorized for three centuries and which the conciliar church, sixty years ago, began preaching from its pulpits.

To those who ask me whether it is licit to reject a document approved by the Pope, I answer with St. Paul: Licet nos aut angelus de cælo evangelizet vobis præterquam quod evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit (Gal 1:8). I have cited Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII, St. Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XI, Pius XII, the Council of Florence, and the First Vatican Council. Who among them and this Note stands in contradiction with the Faith of all time? Certainly not those Pontiffs.

To the faithful I say: do not be troubled. What was true for nineteen centuries did not become false on October 28, 1965, with the promulgation of Nostra Ætate, nor on September 16, 2026, with the publication of this Note. Continue to pray for the conversion of infidels, heretics, and Jews, as the Church has always done. Continue to profess that outside the Church there is no salvation. Continue to love souls enough to desire their Baptism.

And let us turn to Her of whom the Church sings: Gaude, Maria Virgo, cunctas hæreses sola interemisti in universo mundo. She who saved Christendom from the sword at Lepanto and Vienna will save it from this more subtle deception as well. She will do so when a Pope returns to doing what St. Pius V and St. Pius X did: confirming his brethren in the Faith, condemning error, and restoring to the Church her mission. Or Our Lord Himself will do so on the Day of His Second Coming, when He shall gather up unto Himself universal Kingship and the Supreme Pontificate.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

21 September MMXXVI
S. Matthæi Apostoli et Evangelistæ ✠

 

 

 

The Incarnation Unites Jesus Christ to His Church, Not to all Humanity;

Baptism Unites the Individual to Christ in His Church!

For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. Gal. 3: 27

The kingdom of heaven is the assembly of the just; for, the Lord says by a prophet: “Heaven is My throne”; and Solomon says: “The soul of the just man is the throne of wisdom”; and St. Paul calls Christ the Wisdom of God.  If, therefore, heaven be the throne of God, we must evidently conclude that, as Wisdom is God, and the soul of the just man is the throne of Wisdom, this soul is a heaven… The kingdom of heaven, then, is the assembly of the just… If this kingdom is said to be like to a King, who made a marriage for his Son, your charity at once understands who is this King, who is the Father of a Son, King like Himself.  It is He, of whom the psalmist says: “Give to the King Thy judgment, O God, and to the King’s Son Thy justice!”  God the Father made the marriage of God His Son, when He wished that He, who had been God before all ages, should become Man towards the end of ages…. It is, perhaps clearer and safer to say, that the King made a marriage for His Son, in that, by the mystery of the Incarnation, He united the Church to Him. 

St. Gregory the Great, Commentary on the Gospel, 19^th Sunday after Pentecost

 

The Wedding garment, says St. Augustine is the honour and glory of the spouse, which each one should seek, and not his own; and he shows this, to be charity.  St. John Chrysostom explains that this charity is an immaculate life, or a life shining with virtues, and free from the filth of sin; for charity cannot exist without a good life, nor the purity of a good life, without charity. When, therefore, we are called by the grace of God, we are clothed with a white baptismal garment, to preserve which from every stain, from every grievous sin, depends upon the diligence, the watching and praying, of every individual. 

Fr. George Leo Haydock, Commentaries of the Church Fathers on the Wedding Garment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Keep thyself therefore, and thy soul carefully. Forget not the words that thy eyes have seen, and let them not go out of thy heart all the days of thy life. Thou shalt teach them to thy sons and to thy grandsons.

Deut 4:9

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the Catholic Church!"

Blessed Pope Pius IX

 

 

 

 

PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTING WORTH REMEMBERING:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sins That Cry to Heaven for Vengeance:

1.     Willful murder

2.     The sin of Sodom

3.     Oppression of the poor

4.     Defrauding the laborer of his wages

Nine Ways of Being Accessory to Another's Sin

1.     By counsel

2.     By command

3.     By consent

4.     By provocation

5.     By praise or flattery

6.     By concealment

7.     By partaking

8.     By silence

9.     By defense of the ill done

 

 

 

 

“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.

 

 

Good Night, Sweet Princeton! By Fr. Leonard Feeney, 1952

Maritainism is a system of thought which allows Catholics to be both Catholic and acceptable in the drawing rooms of Protestant and Jewish philosophers. Maritainism is not a seeking and a finding of the Word made flesh. It is a perpetual seeking for un-fleshed truth in an abstract scheme called Christianity. Maritainism is the scrapping of the Incarnation in favor of a God Whose overtures to us never get more personal or loving than the five rational proofs for His existence. This plot to encourage only pre-Bethlehem interest in God takes its name from its perpetrator, that highly respected religious opportunist, Jacques Maritain.

The slightest acquaintance with Maritain’s history is sufficient to indicate how awry he must be in his Catholicism. He is a former Huguenot who married a Jewish girl named Raïssa. During their student days in Paris, both Jacques and Raïssa felt a double pull in the general direction of belief. Intellectually they were attracted to the religious self-sufficiency of a Jewish intuitionist named Henri Bergson. Sociologically they were attracted to the spurious Catholicism of Leon Bloy, a French exhibitionist who made a liturgy of his own crudeness and uncleaness and tried to attach it to the liturgy of the Church. At some point in their association with an unbaptized Bergson and an unwashed Bloy, the Maritains figured out that there was a promising future ahead of them in Catholicism.

Jacques Maritain is noted for his solemn-high, holier-than-thou appearance. For this reason, more than one priest reports that by the time a Maritain lecture is over, any priest who is present has been made to feel that the Roman collar is around the wrong neck and that perhaps he, the priest, ought to put on a necktie and kneel for Maritain’s blessing.

One explanation of Maritain’s distant expression is that he fancies himself to be the Drew Pearson of the Christian social order. Judging by Maritain’s passion for the abstract, the fulfillment of all his prophecies will come in an era when mothers can sing such songs as “Rock-a-bye Baby, on the Dendrological Zenith,” and children recite such bedtime prayers as “The Hail Mariology.”

Jacques Maritain prefers Thomism to Saint Thomas Aquinas and, similarly, he much prefers the notion of the papacy to the person of the Pope. He could not, however, turn down the prestige of an appointment as French ambassador to the Vatican. Maritain went to Rome, but he protected himself against over exposure to Italian faith by visits to Dr. George Santayana. In Maritain, Santayana recognized a brother, the kind of European intellectual cast-off that is annually being grabbed-up by American Universities.

That Jacques Maritain should now be found preaching at Princeton University is not so strange. It did not require too much insight on Princeton’s part to see that a Catholic who hates Franco, speaks at Jewish seminaries, and favors “theocentricity” in place of Jesus, would be a bizarre, but harmless, addition to anybody’s faculty club.

Perhaps Princeton realized also that a Catholic’s admirers are a good measure of his militancy. Among Maritain’s more prominent sympathizers are John Wild, Charles Malik and Mortimer Adler (N.B. Adler was converted and received into the Catholic Church in 1999 only 18 months before he died at 98 years of age), who are, respectively, an Anglican, a Greek schismatic, and a Jew. Naturally Maritain could not insult intellectuals like these by telling them that although they are outside the Church they can get into Heaven because of their “invincible ignorance.” It was necessary that Maritain concoct a new way of getting around the dogma, “No Salvation Outside the Catholic Church.”

After a lot of abstract deliberation, Maritain decided that a man could be “invisibly, and by a motion of his heart, a member of the Church, and partake of her life, which is eternal life.” According to Maritain’s new covenant, the important salvation-actions in our world are no longer a head bowed to the waters of Baptism, a hand raised in Absolution, a tongue outstretched to receive Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. “A motion of his heart,” says Maritain, is all that is required before a man may partake of eternal life.

The Sacred Heart might have saved Himself a lot of inconvenience had He only known this, one Friday afternoon on Calvary.

COMMENT: Jacques Maritain was Paul VI’s favorite philosopher. Maritain's reputation as a great philosopher is based on his supposed integration of the Scholastic principles of St. Thomas with the modern world. He had a world-wide reputation and following that extending beyond his native France to hold visiting professorships at Princeton and the University of Chicago, as well as a visiting lecturer at Notre Dame, Yale, Harvard, and the University of Toronto. Pope Paul VI publicly confessed his profound respect and influence by Maritain’s thought on his Credo of the People of God (1968). At the close of the Second Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, the pope’s “Address to Men of Thought and Science” was dedicated to his “dear friend and mentor, Jacques Maritain.” Pope Paul offered Maritain a cardinal’s hat, but the philosopher declined it. Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom—Dignitatis Humanae—which teaches that the dignity of man is so exalted that he possesses the inalienable right to neither conform his mind to God’s revealed truth nor obey God’s commandments, drew as its inspiration Maritain’s book Man and the State (1951) which is an articulation of the language of “rights” that Dignitatis Humanae employs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The proper literal understanding of this dogma from the Council of Trent:

Canon 4 on the sacraments in general: If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary for each one, let him be anathema.

The Dogma defines two revealed doctrinal truths:

1.     If anyone says: that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be anathema.

2.     If anyone says: that without the sacraments or (if anyone says) without the desire of the sacraments men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, let him be anathema.

Both the Sacrament of Baptism and the will to receive the Sacrament are necessary for salvation!

“But God desired that his confession should avail for his salvation, since he preserved him in this life until the time of his holy regeneration.” St. Fulgentius

 

 “If anyone is not baptized, not only in ignorance, but even knowingly, he can in no way be saved. For his path to salvation was through the confession, and salvation itself was in baptism. At his age, not only was confession without baptism of no avail: Baptism itself would be of no avail for salvation if he neither believed nor confessed.” St. Fulgentius

 

Notice, both the CONFESSION AND THE BAPTISM are necessary for salvation, harkening back to Trent’s teaching that both the laver AND the “votum” are required for justification, and harkening back to Our Lord’s teaching that we must be born again of water AND the Holy Spirit.

 
In fact, you see the language of St. Fulgentius reflected in the Council of Trent.  Trent describes the votum (so-called “desire”) as the PATH TO SALVATION, the disposition to Baptism, and then says that “JUSTIFICATION ITSELF” (St. Fulgentius says “SALVATION ITSELF”) follows the dispositions in the Sacrament of Baptism.

 
Yet another solid argument for why Trent is teaching that BOTH the votum AND the Sacrament are required for justification.

“Hold most firmly and never doubt in the least that not only all pagans but also all Jews and all heretics and schismatics who end this present life outside the Catholic Church are about to go into the eternal fire that was prepared for the Devil and his angels.” St. Fulgentius

 

 “The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the ‘eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels.’”  Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino

Ladislaus, CathInfo

 

 

Leo XIV embraces ‘profound change’ in Church’s stance on false religions

Leo XIV’s ‘A Journey of Hope’ rejects the Church’s historic approach to religious error as ‘defensive’ and ‘insular’ while advancing a ‘new paradigm’ of interreligious dialogue.

LifeSiteNews | Matthew McCusker | Oct 1, 2026 — The Vatican has recently published a “commemorative document” to mark 60 years since the “promulgation” of Nostra Aetate, the Second Vatican Council’s “Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions.”

The text contains errors regarding:

·       The nature of religion,

·       The sources of revelation,

·       The theological virtue of faith,

·       The incarnation of Our Lord,

·       The relation of the old and new covenants,

·       The duties of the state toward the true religion,

·       The necessity of the Church for salvation,

·       The Church’s mission toward those outside her fold,

·       The manner in which the baptized are to be reconciled to the Church,

·       The prohibition on participating in false worship,

·       The legitimate use of violence by a society in self-defense.

Underlying the specific errors can be discerned the erroneous systems of naturalism, liberalism, and modernism.

Taken as a whole, the text is incompatible with the public profession of the Catholic faith and the visible unity of Christ’s Church.

The authors of the text

The document, “A Journey of Hope: Sixty Years of Interreligious Dialogue and Fraternity in the Light of the Conciliar Declaration Nostra Aetate,” has been published in the names of three Vatican cardinals and their secretaries.

The cardinals are:

Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, who has been a key figure in implementing the programs of both Francis and Leo.

Cardinal Kurt Koch, prefect of the Dicastery for Promoting Christian Unity, under whose leadership that dicastery produced a document that I have previously described as a blueprint for transforming the papacy as part of “the commitment to build a synodal Church.”

Cardinal George Koovakad, prefect of the Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue, who has also shown himself a loyal adherent of the revolutionary program, as can be seen, for example, in his message to Muslims at Ramadan.

On June 22, 2026, the document was approved by Leo XIV who “ordered its publication,” which took place on September 16, 2026.

A clear break with the past

“A Journey of Hope” does not hide its lack of continuity with the teaching of the Catholic Church.^[1]

In fact, the document is refreshingly honest about the novelties introduced by Vatican II, and the contradiction between the new approach and the old. The document says of Nostra Aetate:

Far more than a mere text, it marked a profound change in the Church’s understanding and expression of her relationship with followers of other religions.^[2]

It made “it possible to overcome attitudes of exclusion, contempt, or indifference that had long prevailed.”^[3]

The document speaks of “the Church’s new attitude toward other faiths and religious traditions – which emerged from the Second Vatican Council” and notes that since Vatican II, “non-Christian religions should no longer be seen as adversaries but as companions on the journey.”^[4]

Nostra Aetate “radically transformed the face of interreligious relations,” as a result of which:

The Church has moved from an attitude that was often reserved or distant to a courageous path of sincere dialogue, respectful encounter, and fraternal cooperation.^[5]

Taking the revolution further

In “A Journey of Hope,” Leo XIV and his collaborators are open about their intention to take this revolution further, in order to achieve the goal of building “a fraternal society capable of accepting differences.” The differences to be accepted are specifically the religious differences of “believers of different traditions.”^[6]

The authors think that a “genuine shift in mindset is necessary.” This means “abandoning the logic of defensiveness, hostility, or conquest in order to adopt an attitude that is open, benevolent, and courageous.”^[7]

In paragraph 55, we read that “it is time to promote a new ethic of dialogue”:

It is no longer a matter of fearing or keeping one’s distance from the “other believer” – another civilization, another way of thinking – but of daring the encounter. The one who was once perceived as a threat, an enemy to be feared, respected only from a distance, or even destroyed, can become a dialogue partner, an ally, a friend, even a “pilgrim of truth” with whom one shares a part of the journey.^[8]

The authors continue:

Civilizations and religions can certainly come into tension, but they can also resonate with one another in a creative dynamic, knowing how to transform diversity into solidarity. Otherness should no longer be experienced as an obstacle, but as a challenge to be embraced. In a world confined within the suffocating limits of immanence, believers belonging to different religions do not wish to give up presenting to the world the truth of transcendence and God’s love for all people.^[9]

And they hold that:

Monolithic and isolated models, which encourage a closed view of reality, are proving increasingly inadequate and, ultimately, become sources of violence and suffering for the most vulnerable. The defensive entrenchment in one’s own position and the view that proselytism is the only way to engage with the other no longer make sense in a world that increasingly resembles an interconnected and constantly evolving global village.^[10]

Quoting Francis, the text affirms:

Long gone are the days when an insular mode of thought could determine an approach to time and space and appear to offer a valid way of resolving conflicts. Now is the time to be bold and envision the logic of encounter and mutual dialogue as the path, common cooperation as the code of conduct, and reciprocal knowledge as a method and standard. In this way, we can provide a new paradigm for resolving conflicts and help foster greater understanding and the protection of creation. In this regard, religions, like universities, have much to offer, without having to renounce their specific character and special gifts. Everything we do in this regard will be a significant step towards guaranteeing younger generations their right to the future, while serving the cause of justice and peace.^[11]

The goal toward which Leo XIV’s document tends is not the conversion of mankind to Christ, but rather the coexistence of false religions with the religion revealed by man’s Creator and Savior, which He commands be believed by all (cf. Mk 16:15-16). Nostra Aetate remains “highly relevant,” so the document states, in a world searching “for a peaceful coexistence within a universal citizenship founded on fraternity and mutual recognition.”^[12]

The new text asserts that an “integral dimension” of the Church’s missionary activity is “the dialogue of life, consisting in respectful and fraternal coexistence among believers of different religions”.^[13] It also presents “interreligious dialogue” as “an essential and complementary dimension” of “the explicit proclamation of the Gospel.”^[14]

By this sleight of hand, the document is able to simultaneously insist on the proclamation of the Gospel, while robbing that phrase of its authentic meaning.

The Church opposes error because she loves mankind

The quotations above, though lengthy, represent only a selection of the many similar affirmations contained throughout the document. They clearly manifest two of the central positions of the text:

1.     That the Church’s authentic teaching about other religions was “defensive,” “insular,” and based on “fear” and other negative characteristics.

2.     That the proposed alternative to this attitude is a “new paradigm” of “dialogue” and “coexistence.”

Both the text’s characterization of the Church’s true teaching and the proposed solution are false.

The Catholic Church has directed herself outwards toward the whole of mankind more than any institution in human history. Her missionaries have gone forth since the day of Pentecost to bring all mankind into one universal Church. The Church seeks out every single person that her Divine Founder has lovingly created. She wants to bring every man, woman, and child, of every race and nation, under her loving care.

When the Church encounters each society and culture, she does not seek to impose any man-made ideology, or reject any natural goods. She seeks only to teach those truths which are intended for all mankind, and which God Himself has revealed; to provide the worship and sacraments that unite us to God and to direct souls in that which pertains their eternal salvation.

Under her divinely assisted tutelage, all peoples can attain their greatest glory and see their particular gifts and characteristics brought to a higher state of development and perfection.

Pope Pius XII taught that “the nations” have “diverse conditions of life and of culture.” They “enrich and embellish [the human race] by the sharing of their own peculiar gifts” and by a “reciprocal interchange of goods.”^[15] However, this enrichment, is only possible and efficacious “when a mutual love and a lively sense of charity unite all the sons of the same Father and all those redeemed by the same Divine Blood.”^[16] Mankind can find unity in supernatural charity only within the unity of the Catholic Church.

The Church always seeks the genuine good of all mankind, in those things which are natural and temporal, as well as in those that are supernatural and eternal. She only seeks to eliminate that which is always harmful to mankind, namely error and sin.

She is completely and irreconcilably opposed to these because they harm us in this life and endanger our eternal happiness in the next. It is precisely because she loves us that the Church opposes all the errors and sins that threaten us.

Father Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P., expressed this truth well when he wrote:

In the Church we again meet with this same harmony between things most difficult to reconcile. In her, charity most compassionate and doctrine most firm and uncompromising are united in one love, which is zeal for God’s glory and the salvation of souls. She knows she can do no good without combating evil, that she cannot preach the Gospel without fighting heresy. Mercy and firmness of doctrine can exist only when united; separated they die, and we have left but two corpses, namely, humanitarian Liberalism with its false serenity, and fanaticism with its false zeal.

It has been said: “The Church is intolerant in principle be­ cause she believes; she is tolerant in practice because she loves. The enemies of the Church are tolerant in principle, because they do not believe, and intolerant in practice, because they do not love.”^[17]

Leo XIV and his cardinals have abandoned the harmony of Catholic doctrine for the “corpse” of “humanitarian Liberalism with its false serenity.” This path leads nowhere but misery in this life, and eternal agony in the next.

That is why it is so important that the doctrinal errors in this document be countered. In the next part of this series, we will go deeper in our analysis of this deadly text.

References not posted

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

EXCLUSIVE:

Abp. Viganò says Leo XIV has intensified Francis’s agenda, not slowed it

In this exclusive interview, Abp. Viganò argues that changing the way Catholics worship ultimately changes what they believe, making the liturgical reform central to the post-conciliar crisis.

LifeSiteNews— In Part 1 of this interview, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò claimed that the reforms associated with the Second Vatican Council weakened the Church’s role as the katéchon, the force that restrains the spread of the Antichrist’s spirit in history. He discussed the nature of papal authority, the distinction between the papacy as a divine institution and individual popes while critiquing of post-conciliar developments, the rise of synodality, and women in Vatican leadership.

This second part of the interview centers on Viganò’s critique of the post-conciliar Church, focusing on liturgical reform and Traditionis Custodes as instruments of a broader theological transformation. He also discusses the pontificate of Leo XIV, particularly the allegations of networks of protection among ecclesiastical elites, and the influence of ideological and global forces on the contemporary hierarchy.

LifeSiteNews: Throughout this entire crisis, you have always identified the liturgical reform not as a consequence but as a cause. Why is the question of the Mass, in your judgment, prior to and more decisive than the doctrinal one? And what meaning does the relentlessness of Traditionis Custodes, maintained intact by Leo XIV, have in this context?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Because the Church has always known what the modernists deliberately forgot: ut legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi (“that the law of prayer may establish the law of belief”). It is the law of prayer that establishes the law of faith, and not vice versa. The Christian people do not learn dogma from manuals: they breathe it in at the altar. A man who for years knelt before the Blessed Sacrament, who has seen the priest turned toward God and not toward the assembly, who witnessed the Consecration in the sacred silence of the Roman Canon, believes in the Real Presence and in the Sacrifice, even if he would not know how to formulate the corresponding dogmas; and no theologian will succeed in taking that faith away from him. Change the way a person prays, and you change what he believes, without him noticing and without anyone ever having to state a single heretical proposition.

That is why I say that the liturgical reform was not a consequence of the crisis: it was its instrument. It was the fastest and safest way to obtain what a definition would never have achieved. Let it be noted: it is the perfect application of that Bergoglian principle according to which “time is superior to space.” Nothing is defined, a process is initiated, and then all it takes is a couple of generations for the rest to fall into place. Anyone who wants confirmation of this method should read the Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, who as early as 1969 warned that the new rite “departs impressively, as a whole and in detail, from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent.” They were not two seditionists: one was the former secretary of the Holy Office [NOTE: Indeed, the office of Prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation was reserved to the Pope himself. Ottaviani served as the Congregation’s Secretary] and the other a curial cardinal. They were ignored, and today the statistics on belief in the Real Presence confirm how right they were. Cranmer understood four centuries earlier that changing the Mass is enough to change the religion of a people, and he did not need to deny any dogma in order to eradicate the Holy Sacrifice from England.

As for Traditionis Custodes, it is the most eloquent confession our adversaries could have made. If the two rites truly expressed the same faith [the vetus ordo and novus ordo], persecuting one of them would be an inexplicable whim: they persecute it because they know perfectly well that they do not express the same faith, and that as long as a single altar safeguards the ancient lex orandi, the new one cannot claim victory.

It should also be noted that under Prevost, Traditionis Custodes has neither been withdrawn nor mitigated: instead, it has been applied even more rigidly, with a meticulousness that Bergoglio did not have time to exercise. That Leo himself – who speaks so much of welcome and listening – should be so relentless in opposing the Mass of all time proves to those who still hoped in him that in the synodal church there is room for everything except the rite in which the Church prayed for centuries.

LifeSiteNews: Prevost was elected thanks to those who hoped for a restoration of the juridical order, but in fact he seems to be continuing his predecessor’s agenda, simply slowing its pace and delegating the most contentious decisions to the Curia. Does this more phlegmatic and “dialoguing” style not risk being even more insidious for the defense of dogma than Francis’s direct authoritarianism?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I must correct the premise of the question, because it is precisely the misunderstanding on which Prevost relies. It is not at all accurate to say that Leo is proceeding “little by little.” He is proceeding by means of forced marches, without the slightest concern for reactions – also because negative reactions are few, and those few are promptly suppressed. What changed, if compared with Bergoglio, is not the speed: it is the face. Bergoglio shouted, and whoever shouts wakes people up; Prevost smiles, and whoever smiles puts people to sleep. But it is an icy smile, the smirk of one who knows he will meet no resistance.

Bottom of Form

Look at the facts, not at the manner. The agenda has not been slowed down: it has been intensified on every front – synodality, environmentalism, pro-immigration policies, syncretic ecumenism, normalization of LGBT ideology. And above all, look at the appointments, which are the acid test of a pontificate: there is not a single one that makes an exception; not one man of sound doctrine promoted, not one enemy of the faith removed. On every front, Prevost has gone beyond his predecessor.

On August 13, in Cusco, at a conference preparing for Prevost’s journey to Peru, Monsignor Jordi Bertomeu – pontifical commissioner of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith – placed coca leaves in an offering to the infernal idol Pachamama together with Bishop Lizardo Estrada Herrera, auxiliary bishop of Cusco and secretary general of CELAM, and Bishop Miguel Ángel Cadenas, bishop of Iquitos. Under Bergoglio, the Pachamama entered the Vatican Gardens and St. Peter’s Basilica as a scandalous gesture; under Prevost, the Pachamama entered the dicastery whose task ought to be to condemn it – and that idol entered it at the hands of the man who, within that dicastery, administers justice. This is not a slowing down: it is an institutionalization.

Leo’s style is measured only in appearance. The Latin here and there, the mozzetta worn even in inappropriate circumstances – even when getting off the plane – the courteous tone: these are anesthetics administered to a body now incapable of reacting. And the anesthetic does not lessen the violence: the anesthetic is what makes the violence possible.

The conservatives have allowed themselves to be enchanted by the form. But in truth there is not even that. Those who were satisfied by the mozzetta got the mozzetta and nothing else, and are now paying for that piece of cloth with silence about everything else.

Finally, there is the aspect that reveals the authentically tyrannical nature of this government, and that is delegation. Prevost delegates to the Curia, to the dicasteries, to episcopal conferences, to the “synodal processes,” so that no decision bears his signature and each one can be presented as the fruit of collective discernment. This is not mildness: it is the most perfect form of absolute power, one that exercises command without assuming responsibility for it. The ancient tyrant signed his edicts and bore the hatred they generated; the synodal tyrant has others deliberate and remains above them, an arbiter and never the accused. It is the dissolution of the pope’s personal responsibility – exactly what synodality sets out to achieve – and whoever never makes decisions can never be contradicted. The pope who does not decide is the pope who decided to let others act, and who found a way not to be held accountable by anyone.

LifeSiteNews: You intervened publicly in the case of Eleuterio Vásquez González, known as Lute, the Peruvian priest accused of serious abuse of girls in the Diocese of Chiclayo. When Leo XIV was bishop of that diocese, the canonical investigation was described by an ecclesiastical delegate as “a farce”; yet today the Pope has as his personal secretary Edgard Rimaycuna, a priest who was raised precisely within Lute’s pastoral and vocational circle.

Another prominent prelate, the Venezuelan Edgar Peña Parra – formerly Substitute for General Affairs of the Secretariat of State and now Apostolic Nuncio to Italy and San Marino – was reported by you in 2002 over extremely serious allegations, ranging from the abuse of underage seminarians to alleged links to violent deaths, allegations that were then systematically ignored by Bergoglio.

In light of these and other cases, do you believe that under Bergoglio a genuine “network” of reciprocal protection among men of power has become consolidated in the Church, in which omissions and responsibilities are covered up in order to preserve internal balances? And, if so, how extensive is this phenomenon at the highest levels of the Holy See?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: The Lute case reproduces with astonishing precision the modus operandi of other extremely serious cases, from McCarrick to Rupnik: victims who report and are not heard; an investigation conducted in such a way as to find nothing; the dicastery that closes the case by invoking the statute of limitations; the accused who not only remains unpunished, but is actually protected.

Alongside this, the necessary reverse side: whoever exposes the crimes and defends the victims is destroyed. Bishop Ricardo Coronado, the canon lawyer who had taken up the defense of the three young women, had his ecclesiastical forensic authorization revoked by the Peruvian Episcopal Conference in August 2024, and four months later was dismissed from the clerical state by a decree that – please note – did not bear Bergoglio’s handwritten signature.

Whoever accuses loses the priesthood; whoever is accused keeps everything. There is nothing to interpret here: the bishop of Chiclayo who conducted that investigation, described as “a farce” by those who knew the details closely, now sits on the Chair of Peter, and he has chosen beside him, as his personal secretary, a priest formed within Fr. Lute’s circle. These are not biographical details or unfortunate coincidences: they are proof that in this system, proximity to certain circles is not an obstacle to a career, but in fact the very condition for having one.

Also, observe a coincidence that is no coincidence. The same Msgr. Jordi Bertomeu who offered coca leaves to Pachamama in Cusco is the man who, in the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, inaugurated – and justified in principle – that interpretation of canon law whereby ordinary procedures, with the safeguards they guarantee to the accused, are replaced by parallel structures and extraordinary commissarial powers. It is the juridical doctrine that makes the fate of Bp. Coronado possible: wherever procedure gives way to the will of the commissioner, whoever causes trouble is lost from the outset, and is not even left with the right to defend himself. Before being dismissed from the clerical state, Coronado was accused of infamous acts without a shred of evidence.

This is not an isolated case. When a Peruvian priest, Father Omar Sánchez, publicly criticized Bertomeu’s handling of matters, 22 days later an allegation of abuse against him appeared in the press – an allegation that the supposed complainant subsequently publicly denied, declaring that he had never filed any complaint.

Whoever raises his voice against the system discovers that he has a file already opened against him. And the man who places coca leaves before Pachamama is the same man who strips the priesthood from the man who defended the three young victims of Fr. Lute in Chiclayo. This gives us the measure of what the Holy Office has now become.

As for Peña Parra, allow me a clarification that I consider important. I dealt with his case much earlier, when I was Delegate for Pontifical Representations at the Secretariat of State. The allegations – his seduction of two underage seminarians in Maracaibo in September 1990, and his connection with the circumstances surrounding two violent deaths in August 1992 – had been transmitted to the Secretariat of State in 2002 by the Apostolic Nuncio to Venezuela, Archbishop André Dupuy. But this did not prevent Peña Parra’s career from advancing. And I will add a detail that says much about the role of the media: I spoke about that case in a lengthy interview with the Washington Post, and it was precisely the part concerning the Venezuelan abuser that never saw the light of day. Bergoglio wanted him as Substitute; and Prevost has now sent him as nuncio to Italy.

Yes, a network exists. I do not say this as a conjecture. I know it to be true from direct experience of decades in the Roman Curia and in nunciatures. It is founded on a simple principle: whoever can be blackmailed can be controlled by whoever holds the blackmail material. Moral corruption is not an accident of the system: it is the glue that holds the entire system together. That is why the guilty party or accomplice is promoted, while the person who reports him is isolated and struck down.

How extensive is this network of corruption? You need only to see how many among McCarrick’s “progeny” still occupy positions of authority in the United States and in the Vatican; how many of the cardinals created by Bergoglio were chosen precisely for their corruption and susceptibility to blackmail; and how many, in the Secretariat of State and in the dicasteries, owe their position not to doctrine or holiness, but to membership in a faction. The answer lies in the facts, and the facts speak for themselves.

LifeSiteNews: Who benefits from this mechanism? Was Bergoglio its architect, or did he become entangled in it against his will?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Neither one nor the other, in the terms in which the question is posed. Bergoglio was not a victim of a system, but neither was he its inventor: he was its beneficiary and then its guarantor. He was elected thanks to the Mafia of Saint Gallen, that is, thanks to a network that spent years planning its own seizure of power, and that found in him the right man because he was unscrupulous, devoid of doctrinal scruples, and extraordinarily skilled in the use of power – qualities refined through a long Jesuit formation whose method he retained throughout his life: ostensible obedience united with subterranean maneuvering, outwardly proclaimed poverty while simultaneously wielding absolute command.

Once elected, he did what every illegitimate power does: he surrounded himself with men who could not betray him because he knew their corruption and crimes, and he removed those who, being in no way blackmailable, could not be controlled. It is no coincidence that his closest collaborators – from Zanchetta to Peña Parra – are figures burdened by extremely serious allegations, which he systematically covered up and promoted.

Above all, the case of Marko Rupnik, S.J., is no coincidence: expelled from the Society of Jesus, already excommunicated for absolving an accomplice, and nevertheless protected for years, along with the entire faction that owes its position to that protection – beginning with the then-Cardinal Vicar Angelo De Donatis, whose transfer from the Vicariate of Rome to the Apostolic Penitentiary took place precisely in the wake of that case. That was not at all a promotion, as people wanted to make it appear, but a way of shielding him, removing him from the questions he would no longer have been able to evade in Rome.

Who benefits? Internally, it benefits a clerical caste that made the Church its private property and that needs impunity in order to survive. Externally, it benefits those financial, political, and supranational powers – that is, globalists – who have an interest in keeping the Catholic Church under blackmail, because a blackmailed Church does not speak, condemn, or evangelize: it collaborates. The link between deep church and deep state is not a theory: it is the reason why the Holy See docilely supported every globalist agenda – from climate to migration, from the pandemic to universal fraternity, from vaccine advocacy to pan-sexualism – and why it has signed and stubbornly renewed the secret agreement with Communist China, handing over faithful bishops and the underground Church to their persecutors, while remaining silent about everything that the Gospel ought to require it to proclaim loudly.

Moral corruption and doctrinal corruption are two sides of the same coin. Whoever betrays the faith also betrays morality, and whoever is blackmailable on morality is willing to betray the faith – even to the point of idolatry, as the coca leaves placed at Cusco by an official of the former Holy Office demonstrate to anyone who has eyes to see.

LifeSiteNews: While the 2025 Papal Conclave was underway, a high-ranking Masonic authority told me confidentially during an investigation I was conducting: “You will see that they will elect Francis’s useful idiot.” When I asked for an explanation, this Freemason contact – who was, in fact, very close to the circles of the Roman Curia – told me that Francis appointed cardinals “with skeletons in their closets” from the peripheries of the world, with the request that they elect “his man” and preserve his “synodal legacy.” When Prevost was elected, this same Freemason told me sarcastically: “Habemus Papam! They elected him.” At first I was very cautious, and even hopeful about Prevost. Now that one year and several months have passed, I wonder how far this Masonic authority’s interpretation was from reality… What do you think?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I cannot confirm words that I did not hear, nor am I interested in giving credence to the boasts of circles that have always enjoyed attributing to themselves credit for governing the Church. But I can say that this reading coincides exactly with what the facts make evident to anyone willing to look at them.

Bergoglio created the overwhelming majority of the College of Cardinals, choosing men whom no one knew, with very poor formation, coming from irrelevant sees, whose only qualification was personal loyalty to Bergoglio and, almost always, a vulnerability that made them controllable. A conclave composed in this way could only elect a man like Prevost, that is, a man who would guarantee the continuity of Bergoglio’s “synodal legacy.”

Freemasonry takes pleasure in this election, and this is not surprising at all: it also rejoiced at the election of John XXIII. For three centuries now it has pursued a single design, namely to demolish the Catholic Church: first by emptying her of her supernatural dimension and reducing her to a philanthropic organization, then by subverting her from within, and finally by transforming her into the anti-church, that is, into the Universal Religion of Humanity, which is its true goal.

Synodality, as a permanent revolution and the quintessence of all the demands of modernism, is the closest thing to that project ever accomplished from within. There is no need to imagine conspiracies: it is enough to read the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, which describes a century and a half in advance a pope formed in the ideas of the revolution, elected by cardinals formed in the same ideas.

If a Masonic authority rejoiced at Prevost’s election, it is because what was being sought was achieved. The regret belongs to those cardinals and faithful who, for a few months, wanted to delude themselves. The expression “useful idiot” is offensive, and I would not make it my own; but I fear that whoever used it knows well the nature of the usefulness expected from the man they elected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMMENT: The Novus Ordo Church has canonize Bishop Fulton J. Sheen a Catholic prelate very popular with conservative Catholics. The miracle in support of his canonization is a "stillborn" infant who may very well not in fact been dead. Like the recent Novus Ordo canonization of Cardinal John Henry Newman, Sheen is thought by conservatives to represent an example for faithful Catholics but the Novus Ordo Church recognizes that he endorsed many modernist heretical first principles and thus can be used as a weapon against the Catholic faith. Bishop Sheen, while participating in the Sabbath service, did not remind his Jewish hosts of their need to convert to the Catholic faith to save their souls. Cheers to Fulton Sheen!

Bishop Sheen Pulpit Guest at New York Synagogue Sabbath Services

Jewish Telegraphic Agency | January 19, 1968

The Mount Neboh Synagogue here conferred a brotherhood award on Fulton J. Sheen, Bishop of Rochester, at its regular Friday Sabbath service. The ceremony marked the first time in the New York Archdiocese that a Catholic prelate has addressed worshippers from a Jewish pulpit on the Hebrew Sabbath.

The award, an illuminated parchment scroll with doves of peace in 14th century character lettering, opened with an inscription from Psalm 133: “Behold how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.” Bishop Sheen accepted the award from Dr. Edward Jacobs, president of the Metropolitan Conference of the National Federation of Temple Brotherhoods, and hailed recent advances in ecumenicity within Christianity. He emphasized a growing rapprochement between Jews and Christians. Rabbi Philip Hiat, spiritual leader of the congregation, stressed that “with all our so-called differences, there is a host of aims and goals toward which both faiths can work together in perfect harmony.”

 

 

 

EXCERPT: The Vatican has been covering-up the crimes of homosexual pederasts since 1922 but the practice became actively enforced policy since 1962!!!

The total payouts by the Catholic Church for sex abuse claims in the United States have exceeded $5 billion over the past two decades with almost all of this for homosexual crimes.

FROM FORGIVENESS, TO SILENCE... TO BETRAYAL, By Michael Kenny

THE FEAR OF SCANDAL: A DEEPENING MOTIF

As the Church gained public visibility and institutional structure, the fear of scandal – that is, anything that could bring shame or doubt upon the Church – grew proportionally. This concern is not without biblical foundation. Apparently Christ Himself warned that:

“Scandals must come, but woe to the one through whom they come.”

In a world where the Church was often maligned, the temptation to protect its reputation – even at the cost of truth – grew strong.

This approach reached its most formal expression in the 20th century.

CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS: CODIFYING SECRECY

In 1962, the Vatican issued a secret instruction titled CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS. Which laid out procedures for dealing with priests accused of using the confessional to solicit sexual acts (an update of canon 904 in 1741). While its original focus was on confessional abuse – a particularly grievous offense – it extended its protocols to cover ALL sexual misconduct by clergy, including child abuse.

This document mandated strict secrecy:

“Cases of this nature are subject to the strictest pontifical secret – under pain of excommunication.”

This meant the victims, witnesses, and Church authorities were all bound by silence, ostensibly to protect the sacrament and the dignity of the Church. But in practice, this secrecy protected the perpetrators and silenced the victims.

The same theological instinct that once prompted Origen to counsel forgiveness now found its legal expression in institutional concealment.

The Church fathers were not wrong to value forgiveness. But forgiveness without justice is not sanctity – it is surrender. And the Church must never surrender the innocent to the sins of the powerful.

THE COST OF MISAPPLIED MERCY

What unites the early Christian response to personal violation with the institutional culture of silence centuries later is a tragic misapplication mercy – a prioritizing of the Church's image, or of the offender's soul, over the immediate demands of justice and the protection of the innocent.

In the name of forgiveness, the Church failed to act.

In the name of avoiding scandal, it created a greater one.

In the name of unity, it tolerates wolves among the sheep.

The very teachings of Christ – meant to uphold truth, protect the weak, and heal the broken – were twisted into realizations for secrecy and inaction.

TOWARD A NEW ETHOS OF ACCOUNTABILITY

The path forward must involve more than policy reform. It requires a re-examination of the Church's spiritual instincts – a return to the full Gospel, where mercy and justice walk hand in hand.

Forgiveness does not mean the abandonment of truth.

Compassion does not mean the protection of the predator.

The Church must rediscover the moral courage to expose evil, even when it dwells in its own house.

EPILOGUE: A WAR ON INNOCENCE

There is a deeper layer to this crisis. Darker than secrecy. Worse than betrayal. It is diabolical.

Satan hates God. This hatred is total, consuming and unrelenting. But Satan can't hurt God directly – God is beyond his reach. So he strikes where it hurts most: at what God loves – CHILDREN.

Jesus told us to let the children come to Him. Jesus warned about the millstone. So, what then is a perfect way for Satan's followers to do his bidding and please him, and hate God at the same time...

VIOLATE A CHILD, and do it wearing the robes of Christ

In this perverse inversion of the priesthood, the altar becomes a hunting ground, and the confessional, a trap. [....]

COMMENT: From the 1917 Code of Canon Law, clerical homosexual predators and other sex offenders  who were found guilty were laicized and turned over to the state for suffer criminal penalties. Such a response was necessary to restore justice, protect the faithful, and begin the hard work of rebuilding. Everything changed in 1922 with a new canon law which required all bishops of the world to violate mandatory reporting laws of the state by concealing child abuse and homosexuality by clerics from criminal state law enforcement. This document, Crimens Sollicitationis, was included in the 1983 Code of Canon Law and remained in force until 2001.

Abp. Carlo Maria Vigano, the former apostolic nuncio to the United States, was required first by Crimens Sollicitationis and then by Sacramentum Sanctitatis Tutela of 2001 and then by Graviora Delicta of 2010 to conceal any knowledge of sexual crimes by clergy from public disclosure. The “Spotlight” investigation of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in 2002 revealed that many clerics found guilty of child sexual abuse were repeatedly returned to Catholic ministry where they repeated their crimes on new adolescent victims. Following this investigation, the United States was the only country that received an exemption from the Vatican policy to conceal sexual abuse from state criminal law enforcement.

The problem was magnified in the 1983 Code of Canon Law protecting homosexual predators. Canon 1341 of the current 1983 Code of Canon Law, requires bishops whenever possible to ask priests to please stop committing crimes, instead of punishing them for their criminal actions. What is perhaps worse, Canon 1324 in the 1983 Code is used to decrease punishment for pedophiles on the grounds that pedophiles have less freedom than non-pedophiles to control their perverse passions. Thus, a diagnosis of pedophilia lessens culpability and imputability of the crime of pedophilia!!! As a result, bishops have concluded pedophiles should receive a lesser punishment for pedophilia than other sex offenders. Their hypocrisy is evident when compared to the treatment given to Fr. Samuel Waters. Homosexual predators are given the full canonical rights of due process while Fr. Waters was denied canonical due process for the "crime" of offering the "received and approved" immemorial Roman rite of Mass and "administratively laicized" which itself is a violation of canon law!

The SSPX follows the 1983 Code and has used it cover up sexual offenders within the SSPX. This includes the former district superior in the United States for the SSPX, Fr. Arnaud Rostand who was sentenced to a French prison after conviction of homosexual pederasty in France, Spain and Switzerland against seven boys on scouting trips between 2002 and 2018. The purpose of this is not detraction of the SSPX but to point out an ugly fact that every faithful Catholic should be aware of when receiving their sacraments, attending their schools or participating in their supervised camps and other summer activities. They as an organization have followed the Vatican policy to cover up any crimes of sexual abuse of children. Perhaps, now that they have been "excommunicated" from the Novus Ordo they will stop following the Novus Ordo code of canon law.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Surrogacy magnate to bring child trafficking to Poland

The Ukrainian company BioTexCom will hold a surrogacy fair from September 12–13 in Warsaw.

LifeSiteNew | Sep 7, 2026 -

ORDO IURIS Publication—  Here is a harrowing testimony from a woman born through surrogacy:

“I was programmed to be abandoned. My mother was supposed to disappear from my life. This separation was not accidental. It was the purchase of a product (…)

Throughout my childhood I felt a sense of abandonment, rejection, and emptiness. I had the feeling that something very important was missing. (…) I spent years trying to escape this pain through alcohol, drugs, and self-destructive behavior, and at one point I even tried to take my own life.”

These words from Olivia Maurel shook those gathered at the June Ordo Iuris Converence. They resonated powerfully within the walls of the Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, lending emotional weight to the voices of international experts demanding the global outlawing of surrogacy.

The need to ban “womb renting” – which leads to child trafficking, to the enslavement of women, and also to the growth of abortion and the IVF industry – was argued at the time by experts from Poland, France, Chile, and the United Kingdom, as well as the UN Special Rapporteur Reem Alsalem.

After the conference, the Ordo Iuris publishing house reached an agreement with Olivia Maurel to publish her book in Poland – a powerful testimony and a professional analysis of the terrible mechanisms of the global surrogacy industry.

Ordo Iuris took up this important issue literally moments before the surrogacy industry’s assault on Poland.

The surrogacy business wants to enter Poland

In just a few days, a surrogacy fair is set to take place in Poland—in the very center of Warsaw.

The Ukrainian company BioTexCom has announced that on September 12–13 it will hold a conference in Poland’s capital, at which attendees will be able to learn about its offer of so-called surrogate parenthood.

Surrogacy is 21st-century slavery. Poor women are treated like living incubators, and children are sold like goods. “Defective” goods are killed, and “used-up” surrogate mothers are thrown out onto the street. The fuel for this inhuman industry is supplied by well-off couples (often same-sex) who buy themselves children at surrogacy fairs.

Until recently, these modern-day slavery fairs took place only in Germany, Belgium, or France. Protests led to the fairs being driven out of Paris, which gave hope for a broad condemnation of this repugnant practice. All along, it seemed that Poland was a country free from surrogacy barbarism.

The September fair organized by the Ukrainian surrogacy magnate is meant to change that. And it is counting on the leniency of the Polish authorities.

That is why we have a duty to speak loudly about what surrogacy truly is.

As lawyers, we must also state clearly that surrogacy should meet with a firm response from criminal law. That is why, for years, we have been helping to build the international group of experts behind the “Casablanca Declaration;” they are demanding the global, treaty-based outlawing of surrogacy. Proof of the effectiveness of these efforts is the resolute ban on surrogacy in Italy, where both domestic surrogacy and “surrogacy tourism” are subject to punishment.

Surrogacy is a barbaric practice

The links between surrogacy and abortion cannot be emphasized enough. Recent weeks provide an example. On August 12 of this year, little Gabriel was born in Texas – a boy with a heart defect, miraculously saved from abortion. His mother is the surrogate McKenna West, who refused to carry out the contract and kill the child that his biological parents, Omar Ahmed and Nausheen Gilkar, no longer wanted. The surrogate had to flee to Texas, where the law protected the child’s life.

And so, for “failing to perform the contract” and refusing an abortion, she was sued for $250,000 in damages. For now, a court has barred the surrogate mother from contact with the child…

Gabriel was very lucky, but thousands of other children are not given such a chance. If they fail to meet the excessive expectations of those who commissioned them, they fall victim to abortion.

In the surrogacy procedure, the killing of children and trafficking in them very often go hand in hand with the modern-day enslavement of women. Surrogate mothers are subjected to humiliating selection and control. Very often they must live on so-called surrogacy farms – isolated from their families. And immediately after giving birth, they are forced to hand over the child at once.

According to the price list on BioTexCom’s website, the “standard” package costs €39,900, “standard plus” €49,900, and “VIP” €64,900. For that price, BioTexCom gives its clients access to a database with photographs, video interviews, and 3D footage – so they can view the women from various angles. The company’s clients themselves select both the egg donor and the woman who is to carry the pregnancy and give birth to the child.

Ordo Iuris against surrogacy

In Poland, surrogacy is illegal. That is why Ordo Iuris lawyers have prepared a notification to prosecutors of a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

In it, we point out that surrogacy-based child trafficking meets the conditions of Art. 189a § 2 of the Criminal Code, which provides for a penalty of up to 5 years’ imprisonment for preparing to commit the offense of human trafficking.

We also cite Art. 211a § 1, § 2(a), and § 3 of the Criminal Code, which provide that the illegal organizing of a child’s adoption for financial gain is an offense punishable by up to 5 years’ imprisonment. The same penalty applies to everyone involved in the transaction – including those who “buy” the child by declaring their intention to assume parental authority over it.

In addition – because the operating model of the “surrogacy business” is not a one-off but constitutes an entire, well-coordinated industry – we direct the prosecutors’ attention to Art. 258 § 1 and § 3 of the Criminal Code, concerning the direction of and participation in an organized criminal group. Those taking part in the activities of such a group face up to 8 years’ imprisonment, while those performing leadership roles face up to 15 years’ imprisonment.

We have launched an online information campaign revealing what surrogacy really is, along with a petition, "No to Surrogacy in Poland", in which we call on Poland’s Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General, Waldemar Żurek, to intervene urgently in this matter.

The response to the surrogacy fair in the center of the Polish capital is part of a strategy pursued for years, aimed at introducing an effective ban on surrogacy – both at the national and international level.

We must stand up in defense of the victims of surrogacy.

No one will do it for us.

COMMENT:

The company, BioTexCom, is NOT a "Ukrainian" company. BioTexCom is a Swiss‑registered fertility clinic based in Kyiv, Ukraine, and its registered owner is Albert Tochilovsky. Tochilovsky is an Ashkenazi Jew. Tochilovsky says that the three dynamic trends in reproductive medicine are genome editing to produce designer babies; mitochondrial replacement to enable women in their 50s and 60s to become pregnant; and ectogenesis, or artificial wombs. He said, "I think that we will acquire ectogenesis within 5-7 years, and our clinic keeps working in this direction. I doubt, though, that Ukraine will let us do something like that because Ukraine is afraid of everything. Most likely, ectogenesis will be allowed in the mentioned above America and Great Britain.... This is a highly developed society, where women build their careers before they reach the age of 40-45, after that they want to have children. Nowadays, immigrants help to solve this issue. I believe, in future this problem will be solved through the use of ectogenesis and mitochondrial replacement."

So the "Ukraine is afraid of everything" while Poland is expected to not "afraid" of offending God? This technology is so offensive to God that only the Godless will dive in. The Jews were the main profiteers and promoters of the slave trade historically. They are largely responsible for bringing abortion to the United States.  They were in the forefront of promoting pornography, homosexual "marriage," "no-fault divorce," the 'Epstein Class' and anything else that destroys the traditional family and Catholic morality. 

The Jewish intellectual, Yuval Noah Harari, is a featured speaker at the Davos Forum for the elites who plan of the New World Order. In 2016 Harari spoke about the Fourth Industrial Revolution where "humanity will be divided between a superelite of improved humans and a mass of 'useless people'" that will have "power is in the hands of those who control the algorithms" (WIKI).  Harari says he was influenced greatly by the Jewish writer, Jared Diamond, author of the popular best-seller, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, A Short History of Everybody for the Last 13,000 Years. Unlike the Catholic historian, Christopher Dawson, Diamond holds that religion and the spiritual life have nothing to do with civilization and culture. It is purely a mechanical determinist process. Harari believes that through the use of technologies like that of BioTexCom they will someday determine all human life forms. This is the technology that Tochilovsky hopes to bring into Poland. In the United State it is already a multi-billion dollar industry.

Surely God cannot permit this destruction of humanity to proceed.  Pray God that this foul pestilence is prohibited from Poland.

 

 

EXCLUSIVE:

Abp. Viganò says Leo XIV has intensified Francis’s agenda, not slowed it

In this exclusive interview, Abp. Viganò argues that changing the way Catholics worship ultimately changes what they believe, making the liturgical reform central to the post-conciliar crisis.

LifeSiteNews— In Part 1 of this interview, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò claimed that the reforms associated with the Second Vatican Council weakened the Church’s role as the katéchon, the force that restrains the spread of the Antichrist’s spirit in history. He discussed the nature of papal authority, the distinction between the papacy as a divine institution and individual popes while critiquing of post-conciliar developments, the rise of synodality, and women in Vatican leadership.

This second part of the interview centers on Viganò’s critique of the post-conciliar Church, focusing on liturgical reform and Traditionis Custodes as instruments of a broader theological transformation. He also discusses the pontificate of Leo XIV, particularly the allegations of networks of protection among ecclesiastical elites, and the influence of ideological and global forces on the contemporary hierarchy.

LifeSiteNews: Throughout this entire crisis, you have always identified the liturgical reform not as a consequence but as a cause. Why is the question of the Mass, in your judgment, prior to and more decisive than the doctrinal one? And what meaning does the relentlessness of Traditionis Custodes, maintained intact by Leo XIV, have in this context?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Because the Church has always known what the modernists deliberately forgot: ut legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi (“that the law of prayer may establish the law of belief”). It is the law of prayer that establishes the law of faith, and not vice versa. The Christian people do not learn dogma from manuals: they breathe it in at the altar. A man who for years knelt before the Blessed Sacrament, who has seen the priest turned toward God and not toward the assembly, who witnessed the Consecration in the sacred silence of the Roman Canon, believes in the Real Presence and in the Sacrifice, even if he would not know how to formulate the corresponding dogmas; and no theologian will succeed in taking that faith away from him. Change the way a person prays, and you change what he believes, without him noticing and without anyone ever having to state a single heretical proposition.

That is why I say that the liturgical reform was not a consequence of the crisis: it was its instrument. It was the fastest and safest way to obtain what a definition would never have achieved. Let it be noted: it is the perfect application of that Bergoglian principle according to which “time is superior to space.” Nothing is defined, a process is initiated, and then all it takes is a couple of generations for the rest to fall into place. Anyone who wants confirmation of this method should read the Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, who as early as 1969 warned that the new rite “departs impressively, as a whole and in detail, from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent.” They were not two seditionists: one was the former secretary of the Holy Office [NOTE: Indeed, the office of Prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation was reserved to the Pope himself. Ottaviani served as the Congregation’s Secretary] and the other a curial cardinal. They were ignored, and today the statistics on belief in the Real Presence confirm how right they were. Cranmer understood four centuries earlier that changing the Mass is enough to change the religion of a people, and he did not need to deny any dogma in order to eradicate the Holy Sacrifice from England.

As for Traditionis Custodes, it is the most eloquent confession our adversaries could have made. If the two rites truly expressed the same faith [the vetus ordo and novus ordo], persecuting one of them would be an inexplicable whim: they persecute it because they know perfectly well that they do not express the same faith, and that as long as a single altar safeguards the ancient lex orandi, the new one cannot claim victory.

It should also be noted that under Prevost, Traditionis Custodes has neither been withdrawn nor mitigated: instead, it has been applied even more rigidly, with a meticulousness that Bergoglio did not have time to exercise. That Leo himself – who speaks so much of welcome and listening – should be so relentless in opposing the Mass of all time proves to those who still hoped in him that in the synodal church there is room for everything except the rite in which the Church prayed for centuries.

LifeSiteNews: Prevost was elected thanks to those who hoped for a restoration of the juridical order, but in fact he seems to be continuing his predecessor’s agenda, simply slowing its pace and delegating the most contentious decisions to the Curia. Does this more phlegmatic and “dialoguing” style not risk being even more insidious for the defense of dogma than Francis’s direct authoritarianism?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I must correct the premise of the question, because it is precisely the misunderstanding on which Prevost relies. It is not at all accurate to say that Leo is proceeding “little by little.” He is proceeding by means of forced marches, without the slightest concern for reactions – also because negative reactions are few, and those few are promptly suppressed. What changed, if compared with Bergoglio, is not the speed: it is the face. Bergoglio shouted, and whoever shouts wakes people up; Prevost smiles, and whoever smiles puts people to sleep. But it is an icy smile, the smirk of one who knows he will meet no resistance.

Bottom of Form

Look at the facts, not at the manner. The agenda has not been slowed down: it has been intensified on every front – synodality, environmentalism, pro-immigration policies, syncretic ecumenism, normalization of LGBT ideology. And above all, look at the appointments, which are the acid test of a pontificate: there is not a single one that makes an exception; not one man of sound doctrine promoted, not one enemy of the faith removed. On every front, Prevost has gone beyond his predecessor.

On August 13, in Cusco, at a conference preparing for Prevost’s journey to Peru, Monsignor Jordi Bertomeu – pontifical commissioner of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith – placed coca leaves in an offering to the infernal idol Pachamama together with Bishop Lizardo Estrada Herrera, auxiliary bishop of Cusco and secretary general of CELAM, and Bishop Miguel Ángel Cadenas, bishop of Iquitos. Under Bergoglio, the Pachamama entered the Vatican Gardens and St. Peter’s Basilica as a scandalous gesture; under Prevost, the Pachamama entered the dicastery whose task ought to be to condemn it – and that idol entered it at the hands of the man who, within that dicastery, administers justice. This is not a slowing down: it is an institutionalization.

Leo’s style is measured only in appearance. The Latin here and there, the mozzetta worn even in inappropriate circumstances – even when getting off the plane – the courteous tone: these are anesthetics administered to a body now incapable of reacting. And the anesthetic does not lessen the violence: the anesthetic is what makes the violence possible.

The conservatives have allowed themselves to be enchanted by the form. But in truth there is not even that. Those who were satisfied by the mozzetta got the mozzetta and nothing else, and are now paying for that piece of cloth with silence about everything else.

Finally, there is the aspect that reveals the authentically tyrannical nature of this government, and that is delegation. Prevost delegates to the Curia, to the dicasteries, to episcopal conferences, to the “synodal processes,” so that no decision bears his signature and each one can be presented as the fruit of collective discernment. This is not mildness: it is the most perfect form of absolute power, one that exercises command without assuming responsibility for it. The ancient tyrant signed his edicts and bore the hatred they generated; the synodal tyrant has others deliberate and remains above them, an arbiter and never the accused. It is the dissolution of the pope’s personal responsibility – exactly what synodality sets out to achieve – and whoever never makes decisions can never be contradicted. The pope who does not decide is the pope who decided to let others act, and who found a way not to be held accountable by anyone.

LifeSiteNews: You intervened publicly in the case of Eleuterio Vásquez González, known as Lute, the Peruvian priest accused of serious abuse of girls in the Diocese of Chiclayo. When Leo XIV was bishop of that diocese, the canonical investigation was described by an ecclesiastical delegate as “a farce”; yet today the Pope has as his personal secretary Edgard Rimaycuna, a priest who was raised precisely within Lute’s pastoral and vocational circle.

Another prominent prelate, the Venezuelan Edgar Peña Parra – formerly Substitute for General Affairs of the Secretariat of State and now Apostolic Nuncio to Italy and San Marino – was reported by you in 2002 over extremely serious allegations, ranging from the abuse of underage seminarians to alleged links to violent deaths, allegations that were then systematically ignored by Bergoglio.

In light of these and other cases, do you believe that under Bergoglio a genuine “network” of reciprocal protection among men of power has become consolidated in the Church, in which omissions and responsibilities are covered up in order to preserve internal balances? And, if so, how extensive is this phenomenon at the highest levels of the Holy See?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: The Lute case reproduces with astonishing precision the modus operandi of other extremely serious cases, from McCarrick to Rupnik: victims who report and are not heard; an investigation conducted in such a way as to find nothing; the dicastery that closes the case by invoking the statute of limitations; the accused who not only remains unpunished, but is actually protected.

Alongside this, the necessary reverse side: whoever exposes the crimes and defends the victims is destroyed. Bishop Ricardo Coronado, the canon lawyer who had taken up the defense of the three young women, had his ecclesiastical forensic authorization revoked by the Peruvian Episcopal Conference in August 2024, and four months later was dismissed from the clerical state by a decree that – please note – did not bear Bergoglio’s handwritten signature.

Whoever accuses loses the priesthood; whoever is accused keeps everything. There is nothing to interpret here: the bishop of Chiclayo who conducted that investigation, described as “a farce” by those who knew the details closely, now sits on the Chair of Peter, and he has chosen beside him, as his personal secretary, a priest formed within Fr. Lute’s circle. These are not biographical details or unfortunate coincidences: they are proof that in this system, proximity to certain circles is not an obstacle to a career, but in fact the very condition for having one.

Also, observe a coincidence that is no coincidence. The same Msgr. Jordi Bertomeu who offered coca leaves to Pachamama in Cusco is the man who, in the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, inaugurated – and justified in principle – that interpretation of canon law whereby ordinary procedures, with the safeguards they guarantee to the accused, are replaced by parallel structures and extraordinary commissarial powers. It is the juridical doctrine that makes the fate of Bp. Coronado possible: wherever procedure gives way to the will of the commissioner, whoever causes trouble is lost from the outset, and is not even left with the right to defend himself. Before being dismissed from the clerical state, Coronado was accused of infamous acts without a shred of evidence.

This is not an isolated case. When a Peruvian priest, Father Omar Sánchez, publicly criticized Bertomeu’s handling of matters, 22 days later an allegation of abuse against him appeared in the press – an allegation that the supposed complainant subsequently publicly denied, declaring that he had never filed any complaint.

Whoever raises his voice against the system discovers that he has a file already opened against him. And the man who places coca leaves before Pachamama is the same man who strips the priesthood from the man who defended the three young victims of Fr. Lute in Chiclayo. This gives us the measure of what the Holy Office has now become.

As for Peña Parra, allow me a clarification that I consider important. I dealt with his case much earlier, when I was Delegate for Pontifical Representations at the Secretariat of State. The allegations – his seduction of two underage seminarians in Maracaibo in September 1990, and his connection with the circumstances surrounding two violent deaths in August 1992 – had been transmitted to the Secretariat of State in 2002 by the Apostolic Nuncio to Venezuela, Archbishop André Dupuy. But this did not prevent Peña Parra’s career from advancing. And I will add a detail that says much about the role of the media: I spoke about that case in a lengthy interview with the Washington Post, and it was precisely the part concerning the Venezuelan abuser that never saw the light of day. Bergoglio wanted him as Substitute; and Prevost has now sent him as nuncio to Italy.

Yes, a network exists. I do not say this as a conjecture. I know it to be true from direct experience of decades in the Roman Curia and in nunciatures. It is founded on a simple principle: whoever can be blackmailed can be controlled by whoever holds the blackmail material. Moral corruption is not an accident of the system: it is the glue that holds the entire system together. That is why the guilty party or accomplice is promoted, while the person who reports him is isolated and struck down.

How extensive is this network of corruption? You need only to see how many among McCarrick’s “progeny” still occupy positions of authority in the United States and in the Vatican; how many of the cardinals created by Bergoglio were chosen precisely for their corruption and susceptibility to blackmail; and how many, in the Secretariat of State and in the dicasteries, owe their position not to doctrine or holiness, but to membership in a faction. The answer lies in the facts, and the facts speak for themselves.

LifeSiteNews: Who benefits from this mechanism? Was Bergoglio its architect, or did he become entangled in it against his will?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Neither one nor the other, in the terms in which the question is posed. Bergoglio was not a victim of a system, but neither was he its inventor: he was its beneficiary and then its guarantor. He was elected thanks to the Mafia of Saint Gallen, that is, thanks to a network that spent years planning its own seizure of power, and that found in him the right man because he was unscrupulous, devoid of doctrinal scruples, and extraordinarily skilled in the use of power – qualities refined through a long Jesuit formation whose method he retained throughout his life: ostensible obedience united with subterranean maneuvering, outwardly proclaimed poverty while simultaneously wielding absolute command.

Once elected, he did what every illegitimate power does: he surrounded himself with men who could not betray him because he knew their corruption and crimes, and he removed those who, being in no way blackmailable, could not be controlled. It is no coincidence that his closest collaborators – from Zanchetta to Peña Parra – are figures burdened by extremely serious allegations, which he systematically covered up and promoted.

Above all, the case of Marko Rupnik, S.J., is no coincidence: expelled from the Society of Jesus, already excommunicated for absolving an accomplice, and nevertheless protected for years, along with the entire faction that owes its position to that protection – beginning with the then-Cardinal Vicar Angelo De Donatis, whose transfer from the Vicariate of Rome to the Apostolic Penitentiary took place precisely in the wake of that case. That was not at all a promotion, as people wanted to make it appear, but a way of shielding him, removing him from the questions he would no longer have been able to evade in Rome.

Who benefits? Internally, it benefits a clerical caste that made the Church its private property and that needs impunity in order to survive. Externally, it benefits those financial, political, and supranational powers – that is, globalists – who have an interest in keeping the Catholic Church under blackmail, because a blackmailed Church does not speak, condemn, or evangelize: it collaborates. The link between deep church and deep state is not a theory: it is the reason why the Holy See docilely supported every globalist agenda – from climate to migration, from the pandemic to universal fraternity, from vaccine advocacy to pan-sexualism – and why it has signed and stubbornly renewed the secret agreement with Communist China, handing over faithful bishops and the underground Church to their persecutors, while remaining silent about everything that the Gospel ought to require it to proclaim loudly.

Moral corruption and doctrinal corruption are two sides of the same coin. Whoever betrays the faith also betrays morality, and whoever is blackmailable on morality is willing to betray the faith – even to the point of idolatry, as the coca leaves placed at Cusco by an official of the former Holy Office demonstrate to anyone who has eyes to see.

LifeSiteNews: While the 2025 Papal Conclave was underway, a high-ranking Masonic authority told me confidentially during an investigation I was conducting: “You will see that they will elect Francis’s useful idiot.” When I asked for an explanation, this Freemason contact – who was, in fact, very close to the circles of the Roman Curia – told me that Francis appointed cardinals “with skeletons in their closets” from the peripheries of the world, with the request that they elect “his man” and preserve his “synodal legacy.” When Prevost was elected, this same Freemason told me sarcastically: “Habemus Papam! They elected him.” At first I was very cautious, and even hopeful about Prevost. Now that one year and several months have passed, I wonder how far this Masonic authority’s interpretation was from reality… What do you think?

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: I cannot confirm words that I did not hear, nor am I interested in giving credence to the boasts of circles that have always enjoyed attributing to themselves credit for governing the Church. But I can say that this reading coincides exactly with what the facts make evident to anyone willing to look at them.

Bergoglio created the overwhelming majority of the College of Cardinals, choosing men whom no one knew, with very poor formation, coming from irrelevant sees, whose only qualification was personal loyalty to Bergoglio and, almost always, a vulnerability that made them controllable. A conclave composed in this way could only elect a man like Prevost, that is, a man who would guarantee the continuity of Bergoglio’s “synodal legacy.”

Freemasonry takes pleasure in this election, and this is not surprising at all: it also rejoiced at the election of John XXIII. For three centuries now it has pursued a single design, namely to demolish the Catholic Church: first by emptying her of her supernatural dimension and reducing her to a philanthropic organization, then by subverting her from within, and finally by transforming her into the anti-church, that is, into the Universal Religion of Humanity, which is its true goal.

Synodality, as a permanent revolution and the quintessence of all the demands of modernism, is the closest thing to that project ever accomplished from within. There is no need to imagine conspiracies: it is enough to read the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita, which describes a century and a half in advance a pope formed in the ideas of the revolution, elected by cardinals formed in the same ideas.

If a Masonic authority rejoiced at Prevost’s election, it is because what was being sought was achieved. The regret belongs to those cardinals and faithful who, for a few months, wanted to delude themselves. The expression “useful idiot” is offensive, and I would not make it my own; but I fear that whoever used it knows well the nature of the usefulness expected from the man they elected.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vatican Council I listing the beneficial Fruits of the Council of Trent which are in every detail exactly the opposite which we have seen from Vatican Council II

Now this redemptive providence appears very clearly in unnumbered benefits, but most especially is it manifested in the advantages which have been secured for the Christian world by ecumenical councils, among which the council of Trent requires special mention, celebrated though it was in evil days.

Thence came:

1.     a closer definition and more fruitful exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and

2.     the condemnation and repression of errors; thence too,

3.     the restoration and vigorous strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline,

4.     the advancement of the clergy in zeal for

·  learning and

·  piety,

5.     the founding of colleges for the training of the young for the service of religion; and finally

6.     the renewal of the moral life of the Christian people by

·  a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and

·  a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also came

7.     a closer union of the members with the visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole Mystical Body of Christ.

Thence came:

1.     the multiplication of religious orders and other organisations of Christian piety; thence too

2.     that determined and constant ardour for the spreading of Christ’s kingdom abroad in the world, even at the cost of shedding one’s blood.

While we recall with grateful hearts, as is only fitting, these and other outstanding gains, which the divine mercy has bestowed on the church especially by means of the last ecumenical synod, we cannot subdue the bitter grief that we feel at most serious evils, which have largely arisen either because

o the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many, or because

o its wise decrees were neglected.

First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Faith, listing some of the manifold beneficial fruits from the Council of Trent!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding the Crime of Schism and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

        There are no manifest acts of schism with one and only one important exception which will be identified below. This means there are no acts that are necessarily always and everywhere evidence of a schismatic motive in the internal forum excepting one. Contrasted, for example, with abortion and blasphemy which are acts that are manifest sins because they can never be done with a morally right intention; the act itself reveals the intent of the internal forum as being vicious. These are always and everywhere necessarily mortal sins. As St. Paul says, "Some men's sins are manifest, going before to judgment: and some men they follow after" (1Tim 5:24). St. Paul gives specific examples of "manifest sins": "Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind (sodomites), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God" (1 Cor 6:10). What exactly is the schismatic motive that a contentious canonical process must discover for conviction and attribution of imputability of the crime?

        The canonical definition for both heresy and schism are taken directly almost verbatim from St. Thomas Aquinas: "Schismatics are those who refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of the Church who acknowledge his supremacy." Schism is the repudiation of the universal jurisdiction of Sovereign Pontiff and communion with those who accept it. It is the burden of the canonical trial to prove the schismatic intention for all schismatics are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff but not all who are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff are schismatics. St. Thomas' in his examination identifies schism as a specific species of sin. St. Thomas says, "Hence the sin of schism is, properly speaking, a special sin, for the reason that the schismatic intends to sever himself from that unity which is the effect of charity: because charity unites not only one person to another with the bond of spiritual love, but also the whole Church in unity of spirit." The genus to which schism belongs is acts opposed to peace which is the fruit of "that unity which is the effect of charity." Regarding peace, St. Thomas continues: "Peace implies a twofold union... The first is the result of one's own appetites being directed to one object; while the other results from one's own appetite being united with the appetite of another: and each of these unions is effected by charity." All acts that disturb the fruit of peace are directed against the cause of peace which is charity."

        Acts of disobedience against properly constituted authority are only acts of schism when the intention is to overturn the peace of unity caused by charity. This intention constitutes the species difference of schism from other acts opposed to peace, as St. Thomas says, the schismatic "intends to separate himself from the unity that charity makes" (Q.39, a.1.) among the faithful. St. Thomas is offering an essential definition of schism which is the best of all definitions because it is the most intelligible because it identifies the essence. Schism, just as other acts opposed to peace enumerated by St. Thomas, which include discord, contention, war, strife and sedition, requires contextualization. Specifically for the case of Archbishop Viganò, St. Thomas says that morality of contention, which is the opposition to another in speech, is determined by the intention: "As to the intention, we must consider whether he contends against the truth, and then he is to be blamed, or against falsehood, and then he should be praised." Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's "contention" against Pope Francis is the contention of truth against falsehood and is therefore praiseworthy and not schismatic. This is why a canonical trial is called "contentious" for it is intended to reveal who is contending for truth.

        The poles of contention are truth-falsehood which is the same for dogmas of faith. As St. Jude admonishes: "I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). Schism is the rejection of the divinely revealed truth of papal universal jurisdiction, a dogma of faith since Vatican I. Schism is manifested by disobedience but all disobedience is not schism. Obedience to God is unqualified. All other acts of obedience are morally good only to the degree that they are properly regulated by the virtue of Religion which is the primary subsidiary virtue under Justice. Any act of obedience that violates the virtue of Religion is a sin. The virtue of Religion above all requires that we "give unto God the things that are God's." This first and necessary act of obedience is to believe all that God has revealed and to keep his commandments. Without this first necessary condition, it is impossible to keep the greatest commandment to love God above all things and it is impossible to have "the unity that charity makes."

        Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was administratively "excommunicated" for "schism" because the administrative process avoided the canonical requirement to prove that his intent was to "separate himself from the unity that charity makes" among the faithful. They denied the right of Archbishop Viganò to defend himself in a contentions forum against the charge which would obviously have included discussing the heretical acts of Pope Francis which are manifest. The ultimate purpose of the canonical process is to determine truth and bring those who have deviated from truth back from error. But for many the contention itself irrespective of truth or falsehood is the manifest evidence of schism. The reason for this will become clearer after discussing the relationship in the context of faith and charity, and heresy and schism.

        Schismatics "refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff" because they deny that the pope possesses universal jurisdiction conferred  by God for the legitimate exercise of the papal office which produces unity and peace. Universal jurisdiction of the pope is a divinely revealed truth that was dogmatized at Vatican I Council. St. Thomas says:

"Heresy and schism are distinguished in respect of those things to which each is opposed essentially and directly. For heresy is essentially opposed to faith, while schism is essentially opposed to the unity of ecclesiastical charity. Wherefore just as faith and charity are different virtues, although whoever lacks faith lacks charity, so too schism and heresy are different vices, although whoever is a heretic is also a schismatic, but not conversely."

        Since the universal jurisdiction of the pope has become a dogma at Vatican Council I, a schismatic is now also conversely always a heretic. Importantly, faith precedes charity. "Without faith, it is impossible to please God" (Heb 11-6) because "whoever lacks faith lacks charity." The keys of universal jurisdiction were promised to St. Peter after his profession of faith which is its proximate material cause. Many Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine and St. John Chrysostom, describe an analogical identity of the rock (petra) with divine faith, with St. Peter, with Jesus Christ the "cornerstone," and the Church itself. The faith proceeds and is the proximate cause of the universal jurisdiction conferred by Jesus Christ because faith is indispensible to the bond of unity which is charity.  Cardinal Henry Edward Manning wrote:

“The interpretation by the Fathers of the words ‘On this rock; etc. is fourfold, but all four interpretations are not more than four aspects of one and the same truth, and all are necessary to complete its full meaning. They all implicitly or explicitly contain the perpetual stability of Peter’s faith...:’

“In these two promises [i.e. Lk 22:32, Mt 16:18] a divine assistance is pledged to Peter and to his successors, and that divine assistance is promised to secure the stability and indefectibiity of the Faith in the supreme Doctor and Head of the Church, for the general good of the Church itself.”

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, “The Vatican Council and Its Definitions: A Pastoral Letter to the Clergy”, p. 83-84, 1870

All this is nicely summed up by St. Paul who admonishes "that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called; With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:1-5).  The primary and essential cause and sign of the unity in the Church is the faith. The pope is only secondarily and accidentally the sign and cause of unity in the Church. If the pope falls from the faith he is to be confronted as St. Paul did to St. Peter when he "walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel" and accommodated the Judaizers leading others into "dissimulation" (Gal. 2:11). If the pope is a heretic he "lacks faith (and) lacks charity". Without charity he breaks the bond of unity in the Church and necessarily becomes schismatic. Manifest Heresy is the one and only sin that identifies a schismatic because it manifests a schismatic intent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where Tikkun Olam has led in the past and is now leading in Gaza

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMMENT: GREAT INTERVIEW! Archbishop Viganò clearly understands and articulates the current problems in the Church, their causes, and the modus operandi of the apologists of evil. Now that the enemy is stripped naked, it is much easier matter to clean his mess up. 

Archbishop Viganò says restraint on Antichrist loosened at Vatican II

In Part 1 of an interview with LifeSiteNews, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò discusses Leo XIV, the Antichrist, women in Vatican leadership roles, and more.

LifeSiteNews  | Sep 10, 2026  — Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has become one of the most controversial and, for many Catholics attached to Tradition, courageous voices in the contemporary ecclesial crisis. After serving as Apostolic Nuncio to the United States from 2011 to 2016, Viganò definitively entered the center of ecclesial debate in August 2018 when he published his denunciation concerning the case of former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, accusing Pope Francis and several members of the Curia of having ignored information already available about the conduct of the then-prelate and calling for Francis’ resignation.

Subsequently, his opposition to the Francis pontificate became increasingly radical, eventually raising fundamental questions on Petrine authority, the Second Vatican Council, and the legitimacy of the post-conciliar ecclesial direction. In July 2024, the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith declared him guilty of schism and announced his excommunication latæ sententiæ, specifically charging him with refusing to recognize the Pontiff and the legitimacy of Vatican II.

It is precisely in light of this long and dramatic affair that his new book, The Capital Schism: When the Pope Is the First Enemy of the Papacy, should be read. READ: Archbishop Viganò publishes book on ‘when the pope is the first enemy of the papacy’ Published in August, the essay represents Viganò’s reflection on the crisis in the Church. He distinguishes between the papacy understood as a divine institution and the person who occupies its Chair, culminating in the thesis that the current crisis represents a profound rupture between the Petrine office and the one who exercises it.

The book also addresses such themes as a state of necessity, resistance to commands deemed illicit, and the eschatological dimension of the ecclesial crisis through the biblical figure of the katéchon, “the one who restrains” the Antichrist spirit that is already at work in the world. LifeSiteNews interviewed Archbishop Viganò to discuss these issues and, above all, the theme that runs throughout the entire book: what happens when the crisis no longer concerns merely certain men of the Church or certain decisions, but the one who sits upon the Throne of St. Peter?

LIFESITENEWS: Your Excellency, in your new book you argue that today the first enemy of the papacy is the Pope himself. How do you explain this paradox?

Archbishop Archbishop Viganò: The paradox is only apparent, and it is resolved as soon as one distinguishes what Catholic theology always distinguished: the Papacy as a divine institution, willed by Our Lord when He said to Peter, “Tu es Petrus,” and the individual person who at any given moment in history occupies the Chair of Peter. The Papacy is indefectible, because it is of Christ; the person of the Pope is a man, with his free will, who may correspond to the grace of state or reject it. On the other hand, the Church prays for the Supreme Pontiff, asking the Divine Majesty to preserve the Domnum Apostolicum in Holy Religion, precisely because she knows that his perseverance in the Faith is not automatically guaranteed by the office. If this were not so, that is, if the Pope were exempt from the possibility of failing in his mandate, praying for him would make no sense. When a Pontiff uses the authority that has been conferred upon him ad ædificationem to instead demolish what that authority is called to safeguard — doctrine, liturgy, discipline, the very monarchical and hierarchical constitution of the Church — he places himself in contradiction with his own munus. He is no longer the servant of the Papacy: he becomes its first adversary, because no external enemy could wound the Church as much as one who wounds her from within, clothed in the garment of Peter. I have called this phenomenon a capital schism in the proper sense of the word: a schism that begins from the caput, from the head. Classical schism is the separation of a portion of the body from the head; here we witness the opposite: it is the head that separates itself from the mystical body and from the Tradition that precedes it, that rebels against what its predecessors taught and what it would have the obligation to transmit intact. Saint Paul says it in words that admit no reply: sed licet nos aut angelus de cœlo evangelizet vobis præterquam quod evangelizavimus vobis, anathema sit (Gal 1:8-9). Not even an angel, not even an Apostle, not even the Successor of the Apostle Peter may proclaim another gospel. The Pope is the custodian of the Depositum, not its owner; and he who, from custodian, makes himself owner, betrays the very reason for which Our Lord Jesus Christ instituted the Papacy in vicarial form.

LIFESITENEWS: You compare the current situation to the removal of the katéchon spoken of by Saint Paul (cf. 2 Thess 2:6-8). What role does the figure of Leo XIV play in this dramatic removal of the “restraint” on iniquity?

Archbishop Archbishop Viganò: The Fathers and the great commentators understood the katéchon, “the one who restrains,” as both the Christian Roman Empire and, together with it, the authority of the Church, and eminently the authority of the Papacy, which for centuries had opposed a barrier to the mysterium iniquitatis. That restraint began to be loosened from the moment when the hierarchy, with the Second Vatican Council, renounced exercising its authority in the sense willed by Christ, in order to seek reconciliation with the world, with modern thought, with the Revolution. From then on, those who should have restrained began to accommodate. Leo XIV fits into this process not as an innovator, but as the one who consolidates it and makes it presentable. Bergoglio dismantled the Papacy violently; Prevost gives that dismantling an institutional, “orderly,” almost reassuring form. His task — and I believe he is perfectly aware of it — is to make synodality irreversible, that is, that “permanent revolution” which brings the Council to its extreme consequences, and to ensure that the Catholic Church definitively ceases to be an obstacle to the Masonic and globalist project. When the Pope is no longer a restrainer but an accelerator, the removal of the katéchon is not a future event: it is happening right now before our very eyes. And the Lord warned us: tunc revelabitur ille iniquus. I do not say this with apocalyptic relish, but with the sorrow of a Bishop seeing the Bride of Christ handed over to her enemies by those who should defend her.

LIFESITENEWS: In the face of canonical sanctions, you invoke a state of necessity, just as the Society of Saint Pius X has done for its new episcopal consecrations. How do you respond to the many conservatives who accuse you of formal disobedience to the Pope? Archbishop Viganò: I respond that obedience is a virtue, not an idol. Obedience is to be given to a legitimate command given by a legitimate authority for the purpose for which that authority exists. When a command is contrary to the Faith, divine law, or the good of souls, it not only does not bind, but obliges one not to obey: obœdire oportet Deo magis quam hominibus (Acts 5:29). This principle is not an invention of traditionalists: it is taught by Saint Peter, it is taught by Saint Thomas, it is taught by the perennial Magisterium, it is demonstrated in practice by the conduct of the Saints who resisted Pontiffs when they erred, from Saint Paul who resisted Peter in faciem, to Saint Athanasius, to Saint Catherine of Siena. A state of necessity is not an invention for evading the law: it is a principle of law itself, according to which the salus animarum, which is the supreme law, prevails over positive norms when these, applied literally, would produce irreparable harm to souls. The Society of Saint Pius X, in consecrating its Bishops this past July, did exactly what Archbishop Lefebvre did in 1988, and for the same reason: Rome is not giving Tradition the bishops it needs, and without bishops there are no priests, and without priests there are no Sacraments. And it is significant that, in threatening the Society, Prevost let the pretext of the Consecrations fall away in order to confess that the real fault is the rejection of the Council. In doing so he revealed — perhaps involuntarily — the fraud: canonical sanctions are a political instrument, wielded against those who remain Catholic and never against those who openly deny the Faith. To the conservatives who reproach me I say with affection: you obey a man who asks you to disobey Our Lord, and you call this contradiction “fidelity.” I have never intended to separate myself from Apostolic Communion; I have asked and continue to ask Leo XIV to tell me in what way I contradict the Depositum Fidei. I have received no answer. Which of the two, then, is in a state of schism?

LIFESITENEWS: In a now-distant 1999 address to the European bishops given by Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini – pioneer of the St. Gallen Mafia and, as he liked to define himself, not an antipope, but the “antepapa” (the one who would prepare the way for the “new” pope) – Martini declared that the Church, in order to “update” itself, had to urgently untie a series of knots. And he identified the first knot as the “shortage of ordained ministers,” to be untied by abolishing celibacy or at least making it optional. Recently, Bishop Johan Bonny in Antwerp announced that he will ordain married men by 2028. Not to mention that the Vatican has just appointed a new archbishop of Vienna, Josef Grünwidl, a former member of the dissident movement “Call to Disobedience,” which has advocated for the same abolition of clerical celibacy. Rome watches all of this in silence and, unlike in other situations, does not threaten sanctions even though canon law is systematically trampled upon. It almost seems that Rome is encouraging all this. What do you think?

Archbishop Viganò: It does not “seem” that Rome is encouraging this – Rome is encouraging this. Rome is not a distracted spectator of a process that is escaping it; it is the director. The method is the one tested by the conciliar Revolution: disobedience is allowed to begin from the periphery, it is allowed to consolidate itself as a “fait accompli,” and then the center intervenes not to repress it but to “accompany” it, invoking synodality, listening, pastoral needs. The Bonny Case is emblematic: a Bishop publicly announces that he will violate the law of the Church, and no Dicastery calls him to account. The Grünwidl case is even more eloquent, because it is not a matter of tolerating a dissident, but of promoting him to one of the most important sees in Europe. Someone who belonged to a movement literally called “Call to Disobedience” is rewarded by a Pontiff who excommunicates those who ask to be able to obey the Church of all time. But the question goes deeper than celibacy. The “shortage of ordained ministers” is the poisoned fruit of sixty years of emptying the Priesthood of its substance. When people ceased to believe that the priest is the alter Christus, that he ascends the altar to renew the Sacrifice of the Cross, celibacy ceased to make sense, because it makes sense only as total configuration to Christ the High Priest. Cardinal Martini knew this well: the list of his “knots” is not a list of problems to be solved, but a program of demolition, in which each point is a stepping stone to the next. First celibacy is abolished, then women are admitted, then morality is rewritten, then marriage is dissolved… It is a plan, and its executors are called by other names today but pursue the same design. The fact that Martini called himself “antepapa” says much about the awareness with which the St. Gallen Mafia prepared what we see today.

LIFESITENEWS: The second knot identified by Martini concerned the role of women and the question of women’s ordination. The bishops promoted by Leo XIV — I am thinking of Mackinlay, Grögli, Satué, Grünwidl, and many others — have openly expressed support for the female diaconate. The Vatican Commission on the subject reiterated “no” to the sacramental ordination of women, but it defined this judgment as “not definitive.” Consequently, numerous bishops today avoid addressing the question directly, preferring to enhance women’s presence in the governance of dioceses or to propose “inclusive” liturgical reforms. In your view, is this strategy aimed at progressively shifting the Overton Window on the issue of women’s ordination?

Archbishop Viganò: It is exactly the Overton Window technique, and not even particularly disguised. John Paul II, with his Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, did not define something new: he declared that this doctrine belongs to the Depositum Fidei and has been taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium — as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith confirmed in its Responsum of 1995. To say today that this judgment is “not definitive” therefore means not reopening a disciplinary question, but denying the very infallibility of the ordinary and universal Magisterium. The female diaconate is the lever, because the Sacrament of Orders is one in its three degrees: admitting a woman to the diaconate means admitting that she is capable of receiving Orders, and at that point exclusion from the priesthood would appear to be nothing more than discrimination to be removed. It is no coincidence that the admission of women to orders is promoted by anti-Catholic movements in the name of gender equality, which the synodal church embraces and makes its own. The neo-modernists know this perfectly well, and for this reason they do not immediately ask for priestly ordination: they ask for governing roles, a presence in the Curias, “instituted ministries,” “inclusive” liturgies. Each step prepares the next, and each step is presented as harmless. The Bishops appointed by Prevost were not chosen despite their positions on the female diaconate, but precisely because of them: whoever appoints a Bishop knows his ideas, and whoever appoints many with the same ideas is building an Episcopate that, at the appropriate moment, will ask “from below” for what the Pope wishes to grant “from above.” This is synodality: the staging of a play in which actors present a demand whose answer has already been decided. To all this is added an aspect that I consider even more serious, and about which there is a culpable silence: the promotion of women to head Roman Dicasteries. We have two religious sisters, Sister Simona Brambilla and Sister Tiziana Merletti, respectively Prefect and Secretary of the Dicastery for Institutes of Consecrated Life, who now command authority over Cardinals, Bishops, Abbots and priests; another religious sister, Sister Reffaella Petrini, President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State and President of the Governatorate; a laywoman, Maria Montserrat Alvarado, at the head of the Dicastery for Communication, which is coordinating and reorganizing the entire communications system of the Holy See; and also women appointed as members and consultants of various Dicasteries, including the Congregation for Bishops, that is, called upon to decide on promotions to the Episcopate. Now, the power of governance in the Church is not an administrative function that can be attributed to just anyone by decree: by its nature it is connected to sacra potestas, which flows from the Sacrament of Orders, because in the Church — which is a supernatural society and not a business corporation — one governs insofar as one is configured to Christ the King and High Priest. Separating jurisdiction from Orders, by conferring upon those who cannot receive Orders the power to govern those who have received them, means overturning the hierarchical constitution that Our Lord gave to His Church. This is why I say that Bergoglio, and now Prevost, do much more and much worse than conferring Holy Orders upon these women. An invalid ordination would be a sacrilege, but it would remain a null act; here, instead, the sacramental order is being dismantled piece by piece, sacra potestas is being rendered a superfluous accessory, and the clergy are being accustomed to obeying those who have no divine title whatsoever to command them. It is a deadly assault on the divine constitution of the Church, that is once again being carried out in practice, without the need to touch a single dogma.

LIFESITENEWS: The third and fourth knots identified by Martini concerned, respectively, sexual morality and the discipline of marriage. In his official book-length interview with Elise Ann Allen, Leo XIV stated that people’s “attitudes” must be “changed” before doctrine itself is changed. In your opinion, what are the means that the neo-modernists in power intend to use to bring about this change?

Archbishop Viganò: That sentence deserves to be weighed, because it is a confession. “Changing attitudes before changing doctrine” is to admit that doctrine will be changed — just not at first. Doctrine will be changed last, when by then no one believes in it anymore, and its formal abrogation will appear as a mere notarial act. It is the modernist method described by Saint Pius X in Pascendi: one does not attack dogma head-on, one transforms the mentality that sustains it, one separates faith from life, and one allows life, thus separated, to drag faith along with it. In reality, it is not even necessary to change the dogma: one renders it irrelevant through pastoral practice. And this method today has its theoretical charter, which almost no one has wanted to read for what it is. In Evangelii Gaudium, Bergoglio set out four principles, and the first of them — “time is greater than space” — is the key that opens all the others: “giving priority to time means being concerned with initiating processes rather than possessing spaces.” In other words: do not define, but initiate; do not establish a result, but trigger a dynamic that no one will ever again be able to stop. Space is the bounded territory; the boundary, the dogmatic definition, the canon that says how far it is permissible to go; time is the process that erodes that boundary without ever declaring an intention to tear it down. And note the cunning: whoever guards a space must defend a position, and a position can be besieged, debated, refuted; whoever initiates a process has no positions to defend, and is therefore unassailable. Nothing can be opposed to him, because he has not yet asserted anything. Someone will object that this is not Hegel but Romano Guardini, whose writings Bergoglio studied extensively without ever completing his doctoral thesis. Guardini’s polarity — the Gegensatz — is conceived precisely against dialectical contradiction, since tensions are to be held together and not resolved in a higher synthesis. Whether one calls it Hegelian synthesis or an unfinished process, the result is that no truth remains a fixed point, but becomes a mere moment in a process of becoming. And what in Hegel was philosophy of history, and in Marx became revolutionary praxis (praxis preceding the principle, judging it and subverting it), in the synodal church is now simply called “pastoral ministry.” And here is the work taking place before our eyes: Amoris Lætitia does not abrogate the indissolubility of Marriage, it merely opens a “process”; Fiducia Supplicans does not declare an irregular union licit, it simply “blesses” those who are in one; the synodal path decides nothing, and precisely for this reason it decides everything. Doctrine is never formally touched, and precisely for this reason there is no new doctrine that can ever be formally challenged. There is no proposition to censure, no heresy to condemn, nothing upon which to pronounce an anathema. The faithful are left with the intact wording of a dogma that no longer prevails in the life of the Church. But this is precisely what the First Vatican Council condemned with an anathema, forbidding that the dogmas proposed by the Church should ever be attributed a meaning different from that which she understood and understands: eodem sensu eademque sententia. The means are those that we have seen at work for decades. The first is language: “sin” is replaced with “fragility,” “conversion” with “journey,” “truth” with “discernment,” “law of God” with “ideal.” The second is pastoral practice, deliberately made ambiguous: Amoris Lætitia with its footnotes, Fiducia Supplicans with its blessings that bless without blessing; and now Prevost’s strategy, which has not withdrawn any of this but allows it to operate “calmly.” The third is formation: seminaries, theological faculties, catechesis, in which for sixty years it has been taught that Catholic morality is a historical remnant to be overcome. The fourth is the choice of pastors: those who practice ambiguity and error are promoted, while those who speak clearly are marginalized. And beneath all this there is an alliance that I never hesitated to denounce: that between the synodal church and the globalist agenda. This is not one ideology among others, but the synthesis of all the ideologies of the right and the left, which for two centuries have pretended to fight one another while leading men toward the same destination; a synthesis of neo-Malthusian origin, which no longer sees in man the image of God but an excess to be managed, and which is therefore anti-human even before it is anti-Christian. We know its components, and each strikes a precise aspect of the order willed by the Creator: the dissolution of the natural family; pansexualism and gender ideology, which deny man created masculum et feminam; vaccinism, which makes the body the property of the State; environmentalism, which replaces the worship of the Creator with that of the creature; mass immigration ideology, which dissolves nations and with them Christian peoples; and at the summit transhumanism, which promises man divinization without God, already promised in Eden by the serpent: eritis sicut dii. The conciliar church does not suffer this process: it participates in it. She has renounced judging the world and accepted being judged by it; she stopped converting it, and allowed herself to be converted by it. This is why Martini’s third and fourth knots are not knots to be untied at all: indissoluble marriage and sexual morality are not the historical shell of a bygone age, but the very flesh of the Gospel, and they are the words of Our Lord — quod ergo Deus coniunxit, homo non separet. Whoever claims — as Pope — to change them does not reform the Church: he founds another religion, and founds it upon the ruins of the one he received into his custody.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pope Benedict to the Jews in Germany: Maybe he never heard of the Talmud?

     I would also like to express my gratitude for the deepening dialogue between the Catholic Church and Judaism. The Church feels a great closeness to the Jewish people. With the Declaration Nostra Aetate of the Second Vatican Council, an “irrevocable commitment to pursue the path of dialogue, fraternity and friendship” was made (cf. Address in the Synagogue in Rome, 17 January 2010). This is true of the Catholic Church as a whole, in which Blessed John Paul II committed himself to this new path with particular zeal. [....]

     Alongside these important initiatives, it seems to me that we Christians must also become increasingly aware of our own inner affinity with Judaism, to which you made reference. For Christians, there can be no rupture in salvation history. Salvation comes from the Jews (cf. Jn 4:22). When Jesus’ conflict with the Judaism of his time is superficially interpreted as a breach with the Old Covenant, it tends to be reduced to the idea of a liberation that mistakenly views the Torah merely as a slavish enactment of rituals and outward observances. Yet in actual fact, the Sermon on the Mount does not abolish the Mosaic Law, but reveals its hidden possibilities and allows more radical demands to emerge. It points us towards the deepest source of human action, the heart, where choices are made between what is pure and what is impure, where faith, hope and love blossom forth.

     The message of hope contained in the books of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament has been appropriated and continued in different ways by Jews and Christians. “After centuries of antagonism, we now see it as our task to bring these two ways of rereading the biblical texts – the Christian way and the Jewish way – into dialogue with one another, if we are to understand God’s will and his word aright” (Jesus of Nazareth. Part Two: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection, pp. 33f.). 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.

Pope Benedict to the Jews in Germany, September 22, 2011

“Strengthen Our common hope in God”??? – Society lost “its humanity” after Vatican II

96% of Jewish Leaders Support Abortion

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

 

 

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

The novel theory that 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 that Dogma once defined 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

 

If anyone shall assert it to be possible that sometimes, according to the progress of science, a sense is to be given to doctrine propounded by the Church different from that which the Church has understood and understands; let him be anathema.

Vatican Council I, Canon III, on Faith and Reason

 

 

 

 

 

 

“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called. Which some promising, have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.”

St. Paul, letter to his disciple, Bishop St. Timothy (1 Timothy 6:20-21)

... We wish to make our own the important words employed by the Council; those words which define its spirit, and, in a dynamical synthesis, form the spirit of all those who refer to it, be they within or without the Church. The word “NOVELTY”, simple, very dear to today’s men, is much utilized; it is theirs... That word... it was given to us as an order, as a program... It comes to us directly from the pages of the Holy Scripture: “For, behold (says the Lord), I create new heavens and a new earth”. St. Paul echoes these words of the prophet Isaiah (II Corinthians 5, 17); then, the Apocalypse: “I am making everything new” (II Corinthians 21, 5). And Jesus, our Master, was not He, himself, an innovator? “You have heard that people were told in the past ... but now I tell you...” (Matthew 5) – Repeated in the “Sermon on the Mount”.

It is precisely thus that the Council has come to us. Two terms characterize it: “RENOVATION” and “REVISION”. We are particularly keen that this “spirit of renovation” – according to the expression of the Council – be understood and experienced by everyone. It responds to the characteristic of our time, wholly engaged in an enormous and rapid transformation, and generating novelties in every sector of modern life. In fact, one cannot shy away from this spontaneous reflection: if the whole world is changing, will not religion change as well? Between the reality of life and Christianity, Catholicism especially, is not there reciprocal disagreement, indifference, misunderstanding, and hostility? The former is leaping forward; the latter would not move. How could they go along? How could Christianity claim to have, today, any influence upon life?

And it is for this reason that the Church has undertaken some reforms, especially after the Council. The Episcopate is about to promote the “renovation” that corresponds to our present needs; Religious Orders are reforming their Statutes; Catholic laity is qualified and found its role within the life of the Church; Liturgy is proceeding with a reform in which anyone knows the extension and importance; Christian education reviews the methods of its pedagogy; all the canonical legislations are about to be revised. And how many other consoling and promising novelties we shall see appearing in the Church! They attest to Her new vitality, which shows that the Holy Spirit animates Her continually, even in these years so crucial to religion. The development of ecumenism, guided by Faith and Charity, itself says what progress, almost unforeseeable, has been achieved during the course and life of the Church. The Church looks at the future with Her heart brimming with hope, brimming with fresh expectation in love... We can say... of the Council: It marks the onset of a new era, of which no one can deny the new aspects that We have indicated to you. 

Pope Paul VI, General Audience of July 2, 1969

And Then, Only Three Years Later:

Through some cracks the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: there is doubt, uncertainty, problematic, anxiety, confrontation. One does not trust the Church anymore; one trusts the first prophet that comes to talk to us from some newspapers or some social movement, and then rush after him and ask him if he held the formula of real life. And we fail to perceive, instead, that we are the masters of life already. Doubt has entered our conscience, and it has entered through windows that were supposed to be opened to the light instead....

Even in the Church this state of uncertainty rules. One thought that after the Council there would come a shiny day for the history of the Church. A cloudy day came instead, a day of tempest, gloom, quest, and uncertainty. We preach ecumenism and drift farther and farther from the others. We attempt to dig abysses instead of filling them.

How has all this come about? We confide to you our thought: there has been the intervention of a hostile power. His name is the Devil; this mysterious being who is alluded to even in the letter of St. Peter. So many times, on the other hand, in the Gospel, on the very lips of Christ, there recurs the mention of this enemy of man. We believe in something supernatural (post-correction: “preternatural”!), coming into the world precisely to disturb, to suffocate anything of the Ecumenical Council, and to prevent that the Church would explode into the hymn of joy for having regained full consciousness of Herself (!!).

Pope Paul VI, June 29, 1972

 

 

 

 

 

Pope Leo XIV appoints Freemason to Vatican committee

Umberto Longo, appointed to the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, appears repeatedly in Masonic records.

LifeSiteNews | VATICAN CITY | Fri Aug 14, 2026  — Pope Leo has appointed a historian who appears repeatedly in Masonic records to a Vatican historical committee.

On August 13, Pope Leo XIV appointed Umberto Longo, director of the Italian Historical Institute for the Middle Ages and professor of medieval history at Sapienza University of Rome, as a member of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences.

The appointment comes despite documentary evidence connecting him to Freemasonry, including records from the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite and later appearances by Longo at events organized within the sphere of the major Masonic lodge in Italy, the Grand Orient of Italy (GOI).

On February 9, 2019, for example, Longo participated in the conference “God and People. Roman Republic. 170 years of love,” organized in Rome by the GOI and the District College of Worshipful Masters of Lazio. The surviving video provides visual evidence of Longo speaking at the event, opened by Giuseppe Bramucci, a Master Mason. In particular, Longo gave a lecture titled “The Legacy of the Roman Republic.”

The Roman Republic of 1849 was deeply influenced by the ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity that spread through Europe after the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, and was founded in hatred against the Roman Pontiff. The Republic’s leaders – including Giuseppe Mazzini – were mostly Freemasons and shared with the Masonic tradition a vision of a moral and civic regeneration of humanity, grounded in reason and universal brotherhood rather than religious authority. […..]

During his lecture, Longo describes with remarkable precision the stages of the Masonic initiation ritual: the chamber of reflection, the divesting of metals, the inner journey. He presents them not merely as a subject of historical study, but as a “complete representation” which he interprets using the kind of language of someone well-versed in the Order’s symbolism.

At the end of his lecture, Longo concludes by placing himself, Hugo Pratt, Corto Maltese, and the audience within a single shared category: “Corto and Ugo know well that an initiate can only be a traveler… Pratt and Corto embody all of this, with a gentle smile, without dogmas, without claims to primacy; they are gentlemen of fortune. And, after all, so are we.”

Even more striking is that, at the conclusion of the conference, a man introduced as the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite took the floor to thank the speaker, referring to him verbatim as “Brother Professor Longo.”

 

Pagan Gaia earth worship officially part of Novus Ordo liturgical prayer service!

Pope asks Catholics to acknowledge 'unfaithful' attitudes for care of creation

National Catholic Reporter | Justin McLellan | Vatican Correspondent | September 1, 2026

Celebrating a new form of the Catholic Mass "for the care of creation," Pope Leo XIV urged Catholics to contemplate nature as well as the ways they have shirked their responsibility to care for it.

"From contemplating creation and encountering its creator, there arises an awareness of our particular place within God's wondrous plan, and of the responsibility that we bear both personally and collectively for preserving the original harmony," Leo said while celebrating Mass in the papal gardens at Castel Gandolfo, outside Rome, on Sept. 1.

During the intimate Mass marking the church's celebration of World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation and attended by Vatican staff, Leo remarked that the Gospel invites believers to contemplate God's creation, "a task that is certainly not difficult in the setting of these beautiful gardens."

It was only the second time the pope has celebrated a Mass "for the care of creation" using a new formulary for the Mass he introduced into the Roman Missal last July.

Pope Leo XIV celebrates Mass for the Care of Creation on the grounds of the Borgo Laudato Si’ ecology center in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, Sept. 1, 2026. (CNS/Vatican Media)

The Vatican's liturgy office promulgated the Latin text of the new formulary last year. But English and Spanish translations were approved only last month (August), making this the first year in which Catholic communities in the United States can celebrate the new Mass during the Season of Creation — a month long period devoted to prayer and action for the care of creation which runs from Sept. 1, the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, through Oct. 4, the feast of St. Francis of Assisi.

This year's observance ends during the 800th anniversary of the death of St. Francis: the founder of the Franciscan order, namesake of Pope Francis and a central inspiration for the late pope's encyclical on the care of creation, "Laudato Si', on Care for Our Common Home."

In a nod to the patron saint of ecology, Leo quoted extensively in his homily from St. Francis' "Canticle of the Sun."

Beginning Mass amid the lush green surroundings of the papal garden on Tuesday, Leo invited the congregation to "recognize with humility the ways in which we have been unfaithful in safekeeping creation and caring for the dignity of each person."

In his homily, the pope asked the faithful in the coming weeks to "set aside a few moments to pause from the frenzy of our daily lives, in order to savor the profound harmony of which we ourselves are a part."

"Let us place in 'silent mode' the many noises generated by human activity, so that we may hear the melodious voice of creation, through which God, the author of all things, speaks to us," he said.

Contemplation of nature, Leo added, "is a first step towards an authentic ecological conversion."

"It is not yet too late, and the Season of Creation calls us to a profound conversion," he said.

Celebrating Mass in the same spot as he did last year to inaugurate the new formulary, the pope prayed "for the conversion of many people, inside and outside of the church, who still do not recognize the urgency of caring for our common home."

Leo, who has continued the church's advocacy for environmental issues which was championed by his predecessor Francis, warned in his encyclical Magnifica Humanitas of the far-reaching environmental consequences of the AI revolution.

One of the prayer intentions offered during the Mass asked that the work and research of those working in artificial intelligence "may be increasingly oriented toward the common good, safeguarding human work and service of fraternity and peace."

The pope's celebration came as local churches worldwide seek to better understand and embrace the new formulary of the Mass.

Bishops' councils across Latin America, Europe, Africa and Asia with other Catholic organizations hosted a webinar in June to explain how to celebrate the new formulary of the Mass and why it should be celebrated on the day of prayer for creation.

"The new Mass is a significant step to enable our liturgical celebrations of this special day, aligning our faith and deeds," said Bishop Allwyn D'Silva, chair of the Office for Human Development at the Federation of Asian Bishops' Conferences said in a statement on the new formulary. "Ultimately, the Eucharistic celebration of Creation Day is an opportunity to celebrate God as Creator and renew our appreciation of the sacred gift of creation, while inspiring us to care for it more fervently."

 

Mass for care of creation ready for US churches after Vatican finalizes translations

National Catholic Reported | Brian Roewe | environment correspondent | August 27, 2026

The Mass for safeguarding the environment that Pope Leo XIV first celebrated last summer is now available for Catholic churches in the U.S., just in time for the upcoming ecumenical Season of Creation.

The Vatican's Dicastery for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments finalized Aug. 4 English and Spanish translations of the Mass "for the care of creation," a new set of prayers and texts the Vatican added to the Roman Missal in June 2025.

The completion of the translations proved providential for the Seattle Archdiocese, which plans to use the new texts (known as a formulary) at a Mass Sept. 2 celebrated by Archbishop Paul Etienne at St. James Cathedral to open its celebration of the Season of Creation. The monthlong period of prayer and actions for God's creation runs from Sept. 1, the World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation, to Oct. 4, the feast day of St. Francis of Assisi.

"The timing is ideal to be able to celebrate it when it's new and fresh and just start a new tradition, I guess, to do this each year," said Corinna Laughlin, the cathedral's pastoral assistant for liturgy and consultant for the archdiocese's liturgy office.

Pope Leo XIV leads the Mass for the Care of Creation, in Castel Gandolfo, Italy, July 9, 2025. (Pool Via AP/Yara Nardi)

The Mass for creation joins 17 other "civil needs" formularies in the Roman Missal, among others for particular needs and other circumstances. Several touch on environment-related themes, such as times of harvest and famine along with prayers for good weather.

Vatican officials said its development was in response to requests for a liturgical means to celebrate the messages of Pope Francis' 2015 encyclical, "Laudato Si', on Care for Our Common Home." In that papal teaching document, Francis bemoaned the numerous ecological threats facing the planet, including climate change and biodiversity loss, and called on Christians to act.

"At this time it is evident that the work of creation is seriously threatened because of the irresponsible use and abuse of the goods God has endowed to our care," Cardinal Arthur Roche, prefect of the divine worship dicastery, wrote in the decree issuing the new formulary.

The first iteration of the Mass for creation was celebrated in July 2025 by Leo at the Borgo Laudato Si' ecology project in Castel Gandolfo outside Rome. He is set to do so again on Sept. 1. But before it could be used in most churches in the U.S., it first needed to be translated from Latin.

Along with the exemplar original Latin text, the Vatican released working translations to assist national bishops' conferences in preparing them for use in their native languages. The English translation was led by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy, which includes the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. In June, the U.S. bishops' unanimously approved the translation, which were then sent back to Rome for final confirmation.

A similar process unfolded for the Spanish translation, which was undertaken through a collaboration by the U.S. bishops' conference and the Mexican Episcopal Conference.

Fr. Dustin Dought, executive director of the U.S. bishops' Secretariat of Divine Worship, said the procedure for approving adaptations of liturgical texts was outlined in Francis' 2017 motu proprio ("on his own initiative") Magnum Principium. That document gave bishop conferences responsibility for translating into local languages.

"His insight there was that the conference of bishops is closest to the culture and language that it serves," Dought said.

The new formulary will be included in future editions of the Catholic Lectionary for Mass. In the meantime, the U.S. bishops' conference has posted translations for both the English and Spanish versions of the Mass for the care of creation on its website, as well as bulletin inserts.

Along with creation-themed prayers, the formulary suggests readings for the Liturgy of the Word, including passages from Matthew's Gospel where Jesus calms the sea and where he instructs his disciples to learn from the birds in the air and flowers in the field to trust in God's providence.

Before the Mass for creation was issued, some Catholic churches prepared ecological liturgies at various times, even at the occasion of the first Earth Day in 1970. The practice has grown in the past decade, including with "Green Masses," following Francis' invitation for Catholics to join fellow Christians in marking the Season of Creation.

Tuty Gunawan sings during a prayer service marking the summer solstice and celebrating the beauty of creation at the motherhouse campus of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood, N.Y., June 20, 2024. (OSV News/Gregory A. Shemitz)

Having a Mass for the care of creation formally added to the Roman Missal is a major step, said Jesuit Fr. James Hug, who for years has developed liturgical resources for the Season of Creation.

"It's official, and that makes it legitimate to use," he said, calling the prayers "lovely" and affirming the Christian mission to care for the world God has created.

That stamp of approval from the Vatican is important, Hug added, for many priests who may have been hesitant to use other creation-centered liturgical resources in the past, whether ones he prepared or from groups like the Catholic Climate Covenant or Laudato Si' Movement.

"It says that this is the concern of the whole church," Laughlin said. "This isn't just a thing we pray about but a really important universal concern."

At Seattle's St. James Cathedral, the new formulary will be used at the Mass with the archbishop as well as a weekend Mass later in the month. Other parishes have also expressed an interest in planning their own liturgies for creation.

Dought said his office has received many inquiries about when the Mass for the care of creation would be available.

Preparations are already in the works in at least a half-dozen dioceses to celebrate the Mass for the care of creation. That includes the St. Paul-Minneapolis Archdiocese, where Archbishop Bernard Hebda will be the lead celebrant Sept. 6 at St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in Lake St Croix Beach, situated along the St. Croix River in Minnesota.

School Sister of Notre Dame Kathleen Storms, who too for decades has developed creation prayer services, is eagerly anticipating the first use of the new formulary in the Twin Cities region.

"Even with everything we've seen just this summer — with the fires and the floods and the huge hurricanes and all of the rest — sometimes there is no connection between what's going on there and

what the church teaches about care for creation," she said.

Sr. Kathleen Storms shows tomatoes grown in a raised garden bed made by her brother with recycled cedar planks at her apartment in West St. Paul, Minn., Aug. 17, 2022. (CNS/The Catholic Spirit/Dave Hrbacek)

Storms hopes the new Mass for creation will lead more priests to uplift Catholic social teaching on creation and to preach on environmental concerns. How and when a formulary is used is mostly left to the discretion of the pastor, who weighs it against other feast days and holy dates on the liturgical calendar.

Catholics who have been eagerly anticipating the new formulary see in it the potential to expand awareness of Laudato Si' and other church teachings on creation, as well as cultivate the ecological conversion both Leo and Francis have said is essential to spur the level of collective action needed to address crises like climate change and deforestation.

"The liturgy does something that a lecture can't do. The liturgy does something that a catechism can't do," Dought said.

Laughlin, the liturgical consultant in the Seattle Archdiocese, turned to the church adage "Lex orandi, lex credendi" — how we pray expresses what we believe.

"What we lift up at Mass really shapes our understanding of what church teaching is, even without going to other documents. ... It tells us this is part of what we believe. This is significant enough and substantial enough that this is part of the Mass, which is source and summit. "So I think planting the seeds there will make a difference, because obviously we need to be praying about this."

COMMENT:

Freemasonry is the creation of gnostic Jewish Cabalism. Its mystical symbology is taken from Jewish Cabalism. Freemasonry is a secret society that reveals itself to its initiates as they progress to greater degrees of depravity for everyone begins by choosing evil under the appearance of good. At the apex of freemanonry, like Jewish Cabalism,  it is unadulterated Satanism. Pope Leo has been pictured paying religious homage to the pagan goddess, Pachamama, an Andean earth goddess, like the Greek goddess Gaia.  Common in pre-Columbian Andean worship was ritual human sacrifice. Thier ritual murder seems to have largely involved children, like our present day abortion and the ancient worship paid to the pagan deities Baal and Moloch in the Old Testament. Every faithful Catholic knows that "All the gods of the gentiles are devils" and Pope Leo knows this as well. The Novus Ordo offers the "fruit of the earth and the work of human hands" like the ritual offering of Cain who killed his brother Abel.  He killed his brother out of envy because God would not accept his man-made worship and, rather than repenting, he looked for another who would accept his worship. Like freemasonry that reveals itself in degrees, we now see the direct unification of earth worship and the Novus Ordo service by a pope who worships the earth goddess and honors professed enemies of Jesus Christ.

Conservative Catholics are critical of Pope Leo just as they slowly became critical with Pope Francis but the tragedy is that they argue as a correction against this blasphemy for a return to days of Pope Benedict.  It was Pope Benedict who was present at, participated in, and personally endorsed the Aparecida Document (2007) that was produced by the Fifth General Conference of Latin American and Caribbean bishops. This document explicitly promoted the integration of the Catholic faith with native American pre-Columbian  paganism. The document claims that the proclamation of Jesus Christ did not alienate pre-Columbian religions of indigenous cultures but sought a synthesis between the gospel values and existing cultural expressions. Pope Benedict in meeting with pagans acknowledged the richness of native American rituals, symbols and spiritual practices and advocated for their integration into Catholic worship.  Pope Benedict praised the Jews, he praised Luther and the Lutheran religion, and he praised the native American pagans. Pope Francis and Pope Leo are doing nothing more than following his example and the example of John Paul II who kissed the Koran, received the blessing of a Hindu priestess, and established the syncretistic Prayer Meeting of Assisi. Conservative Catholics are just retarded liberals who prefer style over substance. Conservative Catholics prefer the style of Benedict's apostasy to the crude style of Francis and Leo. They do not defend the Catholic faith. We are witnessing as participants the punishment of God that will bring about the restoration of the Church but we cannot forget our Lady of Fatima said, "the good will be martyred."  We must keep the faith and recognize the face of the enemy. We do not seek the approval of the Novus Ordites but their conversion.