..... this missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used ..... Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. ..... Accordingly, no one whatsoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, direction, will, decree and prohibition. Should any person venture to do so, let him understand he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
Pope St. Pius V, Papal Bull, QUO PRIMUM,
Tridentine Codification of the traditional Roman Rite of the Mass.
Fourth Sunday after Pentecost
St. Irenaeus, Bishop, Martyr
Within the Octave of St. John the Baptist
June 28, 2020
The leading thought in today’s liturgy is again that of trust in God in the midst of struggles and trials. This thought springs from the reading of the story of David in the Breviary as well as from an incident in the life of St. Peter, these being the two elements very different in themselves, from which are drawn the various parts of the Mass.
When almighty God had rejected Saul because of his pride, He told Samuel to anoint as king, the youngest son of Jesse, still a young boy. Samuel anointed him in the midst of his family, while from that day the spirit of God departed from Saul and descended upon David.
Soon after, the Philistines wishing to renew the war, assembled their army on the slope of a mountain while Saul drew up his in a similar position, in such a way that they were separated only be a valley with a mountain stream. From out of the Philistines’ camp came the giant, Goliath, having “a helmet of brass upon his head and he was clothed with a coat of mail. And he had greaves of brass on his legs and a buckler of brass covered his shoulders. And the stall of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and the head of his spear weighed six hundred sicles of iron. And standing he cried out to the bands of Israel and said to them: ‘Am I not a Philistine and you the servants of Saul? Choose one a man of you and let him come down and fight hand to hand. If he be able to fight with me and kill me we will be servants to you; but if I prevail against him, and kill him, you shall be servants, and shall serve us.’ And Saul and all the Israelites hearing these words of the Philistines were dismayed and greatly afraid.”
For forty days the Philistine came forward morning and evening, renewing his challenge which not one had the courage to accept. At this juncture young David visited Saul’s camp, where his brothers were, and hearing Goliath and witnessing the terror of Israel cried out full of faith: “Who is this uncircumcised Philistine, who hath dared to curse the army of the living God? Let not any man’s heart be dismayed in him. I, thy servant, will go and will fight against the Philistine.” And Saul said to David: “Go, and the Lord be with thee.”
Then David, taking his staff and sling, crossed the bed of the stream and choosing five smooth stones went boldly forward to meet the Philistine Goliath, who seeing a mere lad coming towards him exclaimed with great contempt: “Am I a dog that thou comest to me with a staff?” And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. And David said to the Philistine: “I came to thee in the name of the Lord of Hosts, the God of the armies of Israel which thou hast defied. And all this assembly shall know, that the Lord saveth not with sword and spear; for it is His battle and He will deliver you into our hands.”
“The Children of Israel,” says St. Augustine, “had been for forty days face to face with the enemy. By these forty days, because of the four seasons and four quarters of the world, is represented this present life during which the Lord’s people are never without the necessity of fighting a Goliath and his army, that is the devil and his angels. Nonetheless, they would never gain the victory, if Christ, the true David, had not come down to earth with His staff, that is the mystery of His Cross. For David, a type of Christ, stepped from the ranks, took his staff in his hand and went forth against the giant so that in his person we see prefigured what came to pass later on in the case of our Lord Himself. For Christ, the true David, who came to fight the spiritual Goliath, that is the devil, Himself carried His cross. Observe the precise spot where Goliath was struck by David. It was on his forehead where he had not the sign of the cross. In the same way that the staff represented the cross, so the stone which struck Goliath was a figure of Christ, our Lord (2nd Nocturn).
The army of Israel is the Church who endured the humiliations inflicted upon her by her enemies. She groans while waiting for her deliverance (Epistle). She asks the Lord who is “a refuge of the poor in tribulation” (Alleluia). And who is “a refuge” and “deliverer” (Communion) to come to her assistance, lest the enemy say: “I have prevailed against her” (Offertory). With confidence she cries: “Help us O Lord our Savior, and for the honor of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us” (Gradual). “The Lord is my light and my salvation: whom shall I Fear? The Lord is the protector of my life, of whom shall I be afraid? If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. My enemies that trouble me have themselves been weakened and have fallen” (Introit).
It is that under the guidance of Providence, that the Church renders “glad service” to God “in peace” (Collect). This is also clear from the Gospel, chosen because of the nearness of the feast kept on the 29th of June; in fact a Gospel book (Evangeliarium) of Wurtzburg actually calls this Doininica ante natalem Apostolorum (Sunday before the heavenly birthday of the Apostles).
It was from Peter’s boat that our Lord chose to preach; it was Simon Peter that He told to launch out into the deep, and it was he who, at the Master’s word of command, laid down the nets which became so full that they broke. Finally, it was Peter who overcome with astonishment and fear, adored His Master and was chosen by Him as a fisher of men.
“St. Matthew,” St. Ambrose tells us, “describes this boat as tossed by the waves, while St. Luke describes it as full of fish; here we have a picture of the Church’s vicissitudes in her early days and of her wonderful prosperity later on. The vessel which carries divine Wisdom and which is wafted by the wind of Faith runs no danger. What indeed can it fear, when for its pilot it has Him who is the very strength of the Church? Peril is encountered when Faith is rare; but here there is safety since love is perfect (3rd Nocturn).
Commenting on a Gospel which is very similar to this, in which St. John records a miraculous drought of fishes which took place after our Lord’s resurrection, St. Gregory writes: “What does the sea represent, if not the present age in which the changes and chances of this mortal life are like waves which unceasingly dash and break against each other? Of what is the firm ground of the shore a figure if not the permanence of eternal rest? Because the disciples were still surrounded by the waves of this mortal life, they toiled on the sea; and as our Redeemer had put off the corruptibility of the flesh after His resurrection, He stood on the shore.”
Again in St. Matthew, our Lord compares the Kingdom of heaven to “a net cast into the sea and gathering together all kinds of fishes. Which, when it was filled they drew out; and sitting by the shore, they chose out the good fishes but the bad they cast forth.”
In the same way Baptism was represented in the Catacombs by a fisher drawing a fish out of the water. Here then, is the function of the Church whose head is Peter, “to fish for men”, to free souls from the dangers they encounter in the world represented by the sea. “Certainly a new method of fishing,” says St. John Chrysostom. “For fishers drew their fish from the water to kill them, but we cast our nets into the water and those whom we take are made alive.” And St. Gregory says, in today’s homily: “The apostles’ net do not destroy those whom they catch, but preserve them, bringing them from the bottom of the abyss to the light; raising to the heights those who are tossed about in the lower depths.”
In St. Peter’s bark, tossed by the angry waves and the storms of the world, let us put all our trust in Christ. Through His Church He will save us from the attacks of “the strong man armed,” who is the devil, and as by David He saved the hosts of Israel, when they defied the giant Goliath.
Ps. 26. The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the protector of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? My enemies that trouble me have themselves been weakened and have fallen.
Ps. If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. Glory be, etc. The Lord etc.
Grant, O Lord, we pray, both that the course of this world may be peaceably ordered by Thy governance, and that Thy Church may joyfully serve Thee in tranquil devotion. Through our Lord, etc.
O God, who enabled blessed Irenaeus, Thy Martyr and Bishop, to overcome heresies by the truth of his teaching and happily to establish peace in the Church, give to Thy people, we pray, steadfastness in holy religion, and grant us Thy peace in our days. Through our Lord, etc.
O God, Who hast made this day honorable to us on account of the birth of blessed John, grant Thy people the grace of spiritual joys, and direct the minds of all the faithful in the way of everlasting salvation. Through the same Jesus Christ, etc.
EPISTLE: Rom. 8, 18-23.
Brethren, I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us. For the expectation of the creature waiteth for the revelation of the Sons of God. For the creature was made the subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him that made it subject in hope; because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God. For we know that every creature groaneth, and travaileth in pain, even till now; and not only it, but ourselves also, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even as we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body; in Christ Jesus Our Lord.
There is no better consolation under crosses and afflictions than the thought that all the troubles of this world are not to be compared with the glory to come, and "that which is at present momentary and light of our tribulation worketh for us above measure exceedingly an eternal weight of glory" (2 Cor. 4, 17). And, therefore, St. Bede says: "If we had to bear for awhile the pains of hell, it would not appear so hard, if thereby we might merit to see Christ in His glory, and to be added to His saints."
Ps 78. Forgive us our sins, O Lord, lest the Gentiles should at any time say, where is their God? Help us, O God our Savior; and for the honor of Thy name, O Lord, deliver us. Alleluia, alleluia.
Ps.9, 10. O God, who sitteth upon the throne, and judgeth justice, be Thou the refuge of the poor in tribulation. Alleluia.
GOSPEL: Luke 5, 1-11.
At that time, when the multitude pressed upon Jesus to hear the word of God, He stood by the lake of Genesareth. And He saw two ships standing by the lake; but the fishermen were gone out of them, and were washing their nets; and going up into one of the ships that was Simon's, He desired him to draw back a little from the land: and sitting He taught the multitudes out of the ship. Now when He had ceased to speak, He said to Simon: Launch out into the deep, and let down your nets for a draught. And Simon, answering, said to Him: Master, we have labored all the night, and have taken nothing, but at Thy word I will let down the net. And when they had done this, they enclosed a very great multitude of fishes; and their net broke: and they beckoned to their partners that were in the other ship, that they should come and help them; and they came, and filled both the ships, so that they were almost sinking. Which when Simon Peter saw, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord. For he was wholly astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of fishes which they had taken: and so were also James and John the sons of Zebedee, who were Simon's partners. And Jesus saith to Simon: Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And having brought their ships to land, leaving all things, they followed Him.
What may we learn from the
multitudes who pressed on Jesus to hear the word of God?
That we, also, should hear the word of God with great zeal, since it conveys to men the life of the soul and eternal happiness.
Why did Our Saviour teach the
multitude out of the ship of St. Peter?
That, as the ship is the figure of the Church, so we can receive the true doctrine from that Church only of which Peter was the head (John 21, 15-17). Amid all storms Jesus has preserved, and will preserve, this ship of His Church, till the end of time (Matt. 16, 18). Peter yet stands at the helm, in the unbroken line of his successors; Jesus yet teaches from the ship the same doctrines as before, by the mouth of bishops and priests, the assistants of St. Peter's successors, and whoever hears them hears Him. Hear them, therefore, with willingness and docility.
What was signified by the
great draught of fishes which the apostles took, by the command of Jesus, after
they had labored the whole night in vain?
To the disciples it was a type of their vocation, a pledge of their successful labors, and at the same time a lesson how to labor so as to gain fruits. The exceeding and wonderful abundance of the draught of fishes was to assure them that their zealous labors to save souls should, in like manner, be crowned with rich success. That, after laboring all the night in vain, they should at once take so many fish, when they let down their nets at the word of Jesus, was to be to them a lesson never to be forgotten, that they could work with blessing and success only by relying, not on their own skill and painstaking, but only on the might and blessing of the Lord.
What other lessons are to be
drawn from this gospel?
We learn that nothing has any value before God which is done from mere natural inclination and human respect, that our labors are without merit if not undertaken in the name of God, but that He does not permit the least work to be in vain when undertaken without hesitation, relying on His assistance and for His sake. That the disciples obeyed so quickly, teaches us to obey God at once, to spare no sacrifice, to leave all quickly, and not to put off till tomorrow what is to be done today. Finally, we may learn not to be proud of the success of our labor, but, like Peter, to give glory to God, Who does such great things, by cheerfully leaving all earthly things to follow Him.
Ps.12. Enlighten my eyes, that I may never sleep in death; lest at any time my enemy say, I have prevailed against him.
Receive, we pray, O Lord, our offerings, and even though our wills rebel, mercifully compel them to follow the behests of Thy will. Through our Lord, etc.
O God, who sufferest not the nations who believe in Thee to be shaken by any terror, vouchsafe to receive the prayers and offerings of the people dedicated to Thee, that in Thy mercy Thou wouldst grant peace to Christendom, and make it secure against all its enemies. Through our Lord, etc.
We heap Thine altars with gifts, O Lord, celebrating with fitting honor the nativity of him who heralded the coming of the Saviour, and pointed Him out when He had come, Our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son. Who liveth and reigneth with Thee, etc
Ps. 17. The Lord is my strength, and my refuge, and my deliverer; my God is my helper.
May the mysteries we have received, O Lord, purify us, and guard us as befits such a gift. Through our Lord, etc.
O God, the author and lover of peace, to know whom is to live, to serve whom is to reign, shield Thy suppliants from all assaults, that, we who put our trust in Thy protection may have the intercession of blessed Irenaues, Thy Martyr and Bishop, and fear no foe. Through our Lord, etc.
May Thy Church, O God, be joyful at the birth of blessed John the Baptist, through whom she knew the Author of her regeneration, our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son. Who with livest and reignest, etc.
When Simon Peter saw, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying: Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord… And Jesus saith to Simon: Fear not, from henceforth thou shalt catch men. And... leaving all things, they followed Him.
PROPER OF THE SAINTS FOR THE WEEK OF JUNE 28th:
4th Sunday after Pentecost
St. Irenaeus, BpM
Within the Octave
9:00 AM; Members Ss. Peter & Paul; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
Ss. Peter & Paul, App
Within the Octave
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
Commemoration of St. Paul, Ap
St. Peter, Ap
Within the Octave
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
The Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ
Octave day of St. John the Baptist
Within the Octave of Ss. P & P
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
Visitation of the Virgin Mary
Ss. Processus & Marinian, Mm
Within the Octave of Ss. P & P
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass
St. Leo II, PC
Within the Octave of Ss. P & P
Mass 8:30 AM; Rosary of Reparation before Mass; Benediction & Holy Hour of Reparation after Mass
Within the Octave of Ss. P & P
Mass 9:00 AM, Confessions 8:30 AM; Holy Hour & Benediction with Rosary of Reparation after Mass
5th Sunday after Pentecost
St. Anthony Mary Zaccaria, C
Within the Octave of Ss. P & P
9:00 AM; Members Ss. Peter & Paul; Rosary of Reparation 8:30 AM; Confessions 8:00 AM
Our Lady of Fatima, through her Immaculate Heart,
has promised the conversion of the Russian people to the Catholic Church
The Slavonic race spreads ever strong, ever indomitable to the influence of invasion, maintaining, in the midst of the empires that by force of arms have at last prevailed over it, a dualism which the conquering nation must be resigned to endure through the course of centuries as a living menace with her, a very thorn in her side, such an unparalleled phenomenon is but the product of the powerful demarcation effected a thousand years ago between this race and the rest of the world, by the introduction of its national language into the liturgy by Saints Cyril and Methodius with the approval of Rome. Having thus become sacred, the primitive Slavonic tongue has undergone none of those variations incident to the idiom of every other nation; whilst giving birth to the various dialects of the different peoples issuing from the common stock, it has itself remained the same, following the most insignificant Slavonic tribes through every phase of their history, and continuing, in the case of the greater number of them, to group them apart from all other nationalities at the foot of their own altars. Beautiful indeed such unity as this, a very glory for holy Church, had but the desire and the hope of the two saints who based it on the immutable rock (of Peter) been able to keep it ever fixed thereon!
Dom Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, regarding the Slavonic peoples
The “Spirit of Vatican II” dissolving - Correcting the error that pastoral care and doctrine are only accidentally related.
The practice of the Church always comes from what She receives and contemplates in Revelation. Pastoral care cannot be disconnected from doctrine.
Cardinal Robert Sarah, L’Osservatore Romano, June 12, 2015
OF THE POPE
What is the Pope to the Catholic?
The representative of Jesus Christ, and the visible head, appointed by Him, for the government of His Church.
Did Christ actually appoint such a supreme head?
Yes, and that in the person of Saint Peter. He gave him the significant name Peter - the rock, distinguished him always above the other apostles, and laid upon him the charge to feed His lambs, that is, the faithful, and His sheep, that is, the bishops themselves; and this power Peter uniformly exercised.
Why did Christ appoint a visible head for the Church?
Because the Church is an outward, visible society, united together not only by inward faith in Christ, but also by outward, visible signs. Such a visible head is as necessary for the Church as for a body, a family, a society, a state, to prevent disunion, confusion, and the consequent destruction of the whole; this supreme head is the center of the whole, the final judge, the authoritative teacher.
Who is now this supreme head?
The Bishop of Rome, or the Pope. It is undeniable that Peter occupied the bishop’s see at Rome, and that he died there. Equally indisputable is it that the successor of Saint Peter entered upon possession of his rights, and, together with the episcopal see of Rome, inherited also the office possessed by him. From the first centuries this has ever been acknowledged by the faithful, who have accordingly called the Bishop of Rome Pope - that is, the father of the faithful. And how clearly does history show that Peter and his successors are the rock upon which the Lord has immovably founded His Church! What storms have not broken upon the Church! Persecutions from without and within, heresies and schisms without number, and infidelity in its most hideous form, have raged against the Church, and what has been the consequence? Nations have often fallen away from the Church, single bishops have proved betrayers of their flocks, the sees of the apostles themselves have been subject to the vicissitudes of time. And amid all these storms Rome alone has, for over eighteen hundred years, stood firm. She has come out of every contest victorious, has remained the center of faith and discipline, and has preserved the unbroken succession of bishops from Peter. Who does not see herein the assistance of Him Who forever fulfils that promise of His, “Upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates I of hell shall not prevail against it”? The Pope is, therefore, the visible supreme head of the Church, appointed by Christ for all time; the invisible, all-governing head is Christ Himself.
O Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, Who hast built Thy Church on Saint Peter, as on a rock, Who hast confided to him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and constituted him and his successors Thy representatives upon earth, grant us Thy grace, that in all the laws we may obey them as Thyself, that, resting upon the rock of truth, we may be immovable in all storms, and steadfastly persevere in the way of good works.
PRESENCE OF GOD ‑ O Lord, make me understand that I am nothing, that I can do nothing by myself, and that only in You can I accomplish anything.
I. Two ideas dominate the liturgy of today’s Mass great confidence in God and an acute awareness of human misery and insufficiency. These two ideas are closely connected, for it is the consciousness of our nothingness which leads us to put all our confidence in God, and the greater this confidence becomes in us, the more convinced we are of our nothingness.
The Mass begins with a cry of unshakable hope
“The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?” (Introit). The Lord is with me in the Blessed Sacrament of the altar, the Lord comes to me in Holy Communion. What can separate me from Him? What can make me fear?
Yet I know my weakness; I have ever before my eyes the remembrance of my failures and infidelities. How great, then, is my need to humbly repeat the beautiful prayer of the Gradual: “Save us, O Lord, and pardon our sins .... Help us, O God, our Savior, for the glory of Your Name.” Yes, in spite of the continual help of divine grace, in spite of so many confessions and communions, I have to acknowledge new failures every day; daily, I must begin anew. The struggle is arduous and painful, but in today’s Epistle (Rom 8, 18‑23), St. Paul reminds us that “the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come that shall be revealed in us.” This thought is one of consolation, hope and confidence; it does not, however, prevent us from longing for freedom and complete redemption. This is what the Apostle experienced when he said: “We also, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption of the sons of God, the redemption of our body in Christ Jesus.” The more we suffer because of our wretchedness, the more we should run to Jesus, with full confidence in the power of His Redemption.
2. Today’s Gospel (Lk 5, 1-11) is a practical demonstration of the words of Jesus: “Without Me, you can do nothing” (Jn 15, 5). Simon and his companions had been fishing all night and had caught nothing; that is all they had been able to do by themselves. If we have had some little experience in the spiritual life, we will recognize that this is often our situation too. How many efforts we have made to rid our self of this or that attachment, to forget injuries, to adapt our self to our neighbor’s way of doing things, to subject our will to another’s! And yet, after all these attempts, we find our hands empty, like Peter’s nets. Let us not be discouraged; if we can humbly acknowledge our failure instead of feeling annoyance because of it, the failure itself will turn into victory. So it happened to Peter after he had admitted publicly that he had “taken nothing.” St. Therese of the Child Jesus comments: “Had the Apostle caught some small fish, perhaps our divine Master would not have worked a miracle; but he had caught nothing, and so through the power and goodness of God his nets were soon filled with great fishes. Such is Our Lord’s way. He gives as God, with divide generosity, but He insists on humility of heart” (L ).
In spite of our good will to advance in virtue, Our Lord will not permit us to have any success until He sees that we are thoroughly convinced of our own weakness and inability; to give us this conviction, He lets us, as He let Peter, “work all night without catching anything.” But afterwards, as He sees our growing awareness of our poverty and our willingness to admit it openly, He will come to our aid. We must, then, have great faith in Him, never allowing ourselves to give up through lack of success. Every day, relying “on His word,” we must begin anew. If we have learned not to trust in our own strength, we must also learn to have complete confidence in the divine aid. If we have caught nothing until now, perhaps it is our lack of unshakable confidence that is the cause, and this deficiency, besides being displeasing to Jesus, paralyzes our spiritual life. Then let us repeat with Peter in a similar cry of confidence “in verbo tuo laxabo rete,” Lord, at Thy word, I will let down the net. And let us repeat it every day, every moment, without ever growing weary.
“O Lord, You are my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? You are the protector of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? ... If armies in camp should stand together against me, my heart shall not fear. If a battle should rise up against me, in this will I be confident. One thing do I ask of You, O Lord, that I may dwell in Your house all the days of my life .... Then, in the day of evils, You will protect me in the secret place of Your tabernacle, You will exalt me upon a rock....
“Hear, O Lord, my voice with which I have cried to You : have mercy on me and hear me.... Turn not away Your face from me; decline not in Your wrath from Your servant; be my helper, forsake me not; do not despise me, O God my Savior. Although my father and my mother should abandon me, I am sure that You will never abandon me.... O my soul, expect the Lord, do manfully, and let your heart take courage, and wait for Him” (Ps 26).
“O Lord, You have done great things in me, and the greatest of all is that you have shown me my littleness, and how of myself I am incapable of anything good.
“Lord, You see how often I fail, but I am never astonished at it... I enter into myself and say: `Alas, I am once more at the first step as before!’ But I say this in great peace without sadness, because I know that You know perfectly how fragile is our nature and You are always ready to help us. What, then, shall I fear? As soon as You see me fully convinced of my nothingness, You stretch out Your hand to me; but if I should try to do something great, even under the pretext of zeal, You desert me. So all I have to do is to humble myself, to bear with meekness my imperfections. Herein lies, for me, true holiness” (T.C.J. St, 9. NV ‑ C).
SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF ST. PETER
PETER, formerly called Simon, from Bethsaida in Galilee, was a son of Jonas and a brother of Andrew, by whom he was brought to Christ. After the great draught of fishes, when our Lord said to him and Andrew: Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men, Peter followed the Saviour constantly, from whom he received the most tender proofs of love. Peter was present when Christ appeared in His glory on Mount Thabor, when He raised the daughter of Jairus to life, and when He sweat blood in the agony on Mount Olivet. Peter was also present at the miraculous draught of fishes, which was a figure of the multitudes which he was to bring, by means of the holy Gospel, to the kingdom of God, for Christ called him a fisher of men, and afterwards, because Peter recognized and professed Him to be the Son of the living God, Christ named him Peter, made him the head of the apostles and of the entire Church, made him His vicar and visible representative upon earth, promising to build His Church upon him as upon a rock, gave him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and commanded him to feed His lambs and His sheep. Peter loved our Lord above all things; because of his love he wished to remain with Christ upon Mount Thabor to prevent Him from suffering, and in his love desired to die with Christ. He certainly showed the greatest courage when Christ was taken, following Him even into the house of Caiphas. But alas, the instability of man! There Peter three times denied the Lord. But the look of forgiving love which Jesus .east upon him, forced from him tears of the deepest contrition. He atoned for his denial by suffering much for Christ. Under the Emperor Nero he was crucified for his faith at Rome, and by his own request with his head downwards, because he did not consider himself worthy to die like Christ. Oh! that all sinners would seek by such penance to turn their evil into good!
PRAYER TO ST. PETER. O God, who from a poor fisherman hast made St. Peter prince of the apostles and head of Thy Church, we beseech Thee through his intercession to make us true lambs of Thy flock. Grant, that we may hear his voice, follow his doctrine, and walk in his steps, until we reach that happy pasture where the Good Shepherd, Thine only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, whom St. Peter represented on earth, reigns with Thee and the Holy Ghost forever. Amen.
SKETCH OF THE LIFE OF ST. PAUL
PAUL, before his conversion called Saul, of the tribe of Benjamin, was born at Tarsus in Cilicia, and was a pupil of Gamaliel. As he had the most zealous attachment for the Jewish law, he was exasperated against the Christians. However, when hastening to Damascus to persecute them, he was converted by the Lord on the way and called to be an apostle. [See the Feast of the Conversion of St. Paul.] His unwearied labors in the vineyard of the Lord after his conversion, the sufferings which he endured upon his apostolic journeys, and the dangers and persecutions through which he passed in different countries, cannot be described. The zeal and constancy with which he confessed and preached the faith, though in chains and fetters, though scourged and beaten, in hunger and thirst, and through innumerable dangers, are almost incredible. He was so humble that he regarded himself as the least of the apostles, and thanked God fervently that He considered him worthy to suffer for His sake. After he had fought a good fight and finished his course, having everywhere zealously preached the faith, and still more zealously practiced it, he won the crown of justice. On the same day and at the same place in Rome, in which Peter was crucified, he was beheaded, by command of the Emperor Nero. Thus God tries and rewards true virtue. Paul in his life, as after death, worked numberless miracles; even his handkerchief, like St. Peter's shadow, healed sickness and expelled devils. He had so deeply impressed the name of Jesus in his heart, that it was almost continually on his lips, for "out of the fullness of the heart, the mouth speaketh." Would that we loved Jesus as St. Paul loved Him, then we would, like St. Paul, be ready to do and suffer much for Him.
PRAYER TO ST. PAUL. O St. Paul, chosen vessel of the Lord, who didst carry the name of Jesus to kings and heathens, who didst suffer so much for Christ, and wast never allured from the love of Him: like a brave soldier of Christ, thou hast fought a good battle, a zealous teacher, thou hast preached far and wide the true faith, and the just and merciful God has, therefore, rewarded thee with the crown of justice: pray to God for me, that I who because of my sins am an instrument of wrath, may become an instrument of honor, adorned with the Christian virtues, with which thou art already decorated. Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen
But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8
Rise of the Guayrà Missions, A.D. 1610-1628
It is a remarkable fact that all Franciscan and Jesuit missionaries paid much respect to the tradition among the natives that St. Thomas the Apostle had preached the Gospel in South America. Not alone in Paraguay, but in Brazil, we find numerous traces of Pay Zuma or Pay Tuma, the equivalent in Guarani for “our Father Thomas,” and among the mixed and fantastical creed of the tribes in Guayrà there was a vague belief in a triple God, in a Saviour born of a virgin, and now residing in the sun, and the tradition of a general deluge. May it not he possible that St. Thomas passed from China into America, or that the Guaranis had some intercourse with Chinese Christians? It is very curious that the word “tea” is Chã in China, and Caã in Guarani, and that Chih-li, one of the divisions of the Chinese empire, has almost the same name as the country south of Peru.
Marion McMurrough Mulhall, New World Before and After Columbas and the Story of the Jesuit Missions of Paraguay
“Envy conceals itself under every possible pretext, and takes pleasure in secret and treacherous schemes. Hinted slanders, calumnies, betrayal, every kind of fraud and deceit, are its work and portion.”
Bishop Jacques-Benigne Bossuet
“Every act of the will is an act of self-limitation. To desire action is to desire limitation. In that sense every act is an act of self-sacrifice. When you choose anything, you reject everything else.”
G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy
It’s called ‘She Guardian,’ by Russian artist Dashi Namdakov who spent the last two years sculpting the towering figure out of four massive tons of bronze. The statue measures 36-feet high. Mr. Namdakov says the attention-grabbing piece is intended to express a sense of “maternal protectiveness.” The feminist work is “symbolic of female strength and a desire to care for the young.” But, with a mother like this, it is not surprising that there are no pups being cared for in the sculpture for the vast majority of feminists are sterile. The demonic statue by an odd coincidence has been erected in a place of precedence at the Marble Arch located opposite the North-East corner of Hyde Park in London (Buckingham Palace opposite the South-East corner of the park). The Marble Arch is where the infamous Tyburn gallows was located for the public execution of common criminals along with faithful Catholics. It is to Tyburn that Catholic recusants, such as St. Edmund Campion, Blessed Ralph Sherwin, Blessed Alexander Briant, St. Oliver Plunkett, etc., etc., etc., were literally dragged from Newgate Prison to be ‘hung, drawn and quartered.’ This rabid feminist bitch is directly overlooking the hallowed ground of Catholic martyrs. It only needs a sign warning the public not to pet or feed the animal.
Liturgical Philistines have been around for a long time!
“There is no higher act in the Christian religion,” says Father Le Brun, “than the Sacrifice of the Mass; the greater portion of the other sacraments, and nearly all the offices and ceremonies of the church, are only the means or the preparation to celebrate or participate in it worthily.” Such being the case, it is but natural that the place where this most holy sacrifice is to he offered up, should be set apart and railed off from less sacred portions of the church, and we find this to have been the case in all ages, in all styles, and in all countries professing the Catholic faith down to a comparatively very recent period, when in many places all feelings of sanctity, tradition, and reverence, seemed to have been superseded by ignorant innovation and love of change.
It will be shown in this work that the idea of room-worship, and the all-seeing principles, is a perfect novelty. Those indeed who would make the mass a sight, are only to be compared to the innovators of the l6th century, who made it essential to be heard; those who compiled the Book of Common Prayer converted the mass into all-hearing service ; this was the great object of the vernacular change, that people might hear the priest; they were to be edified by what he said, more than what he did; the sacrificial act was merged into the audible recitation of prayers and exhortations; for this reason the altars, in the reign of Edward the Sixth, were to be moved down from their eastern position to the entrance of the chancel, to enable the people to hear ; this led to the demolition of stone altars and the substitution of tables. For this reason the whole congregation crowd into the choirs of the cathedrals, leaving the rest of the church deserted. For this reason, in large parochial churches, the chancel has been often entirely cut off, and a portion of the nave glazed in and reduced to such a size that the people could hear the clergyman; these were all natural consequences of the change of principle consequent on the translation of the mass, and the altered nature of its celebration. That churches are now built after the old tradition for the service of the separated portion of the English Church, is purely owing to an internal revival of Catholic feelings and traditions in that body: the cause is a return to Catholic truth and reverence; the effect is the erection of churches in accordance with those feelings, it has been a charge and reproach made by Catholics against their separated countrymen, that the old fabrics were unsuited to their service, and unquestionably, on the principle that it was essential for every one to hear, they were so. But I will ask these new-fashioned men if it is indispensable for every one to see, how much better are they adapted for modern Catholic rites? They become as unfit for one as the other, for it is unquestionable, that comparatively very few persons in these cruciform churches could obtain a view of the altar, and this independent of any screen-work, the disposition of the pillars intersecting and shutting out all those who are stationed in the aisles and transepts.
I have always imagined that one great distinction between the Protestant and Catholic services was this, that the former was essentially a hearing service, at which only a comparatively few persons could assist, while at the latter many thousands, or, indeed, hundreds of thousands could unite in one great act of adoration and praise, concentrating their thoughts and intentions with the priest who is offering at God’s altar, although he is far shut off from their vision. [……]
Christians of the present time have but little idea of the solemnity of the ancient worship of the Catholic church; ordained ministers were alone permitted to fill the humblest offices about the sanctuary, every object connected with the sacred rites were considered deserving of the most loving care; even in the very early ages, the vessels of the altar were usually of precious metals, and studded with jewels. The books of the holy gospels were written in golden text on purple vellum, bound in plates of silver encasing ivory diptychs, and deposited in portable shrines, like relics. Though all this should fill us with admiration, there is nothing to excite surprise, when we reflect on the very sacred nature of the Christian mysteries—no sign typical and prophetic, as under the Mosaic law, but our blessed Lord truly present and abiding in the temple in the holy sacrament of the altar, - it is by no means wonderful that the Christian worship should assume a form of solemnity formerly unknown, and we are only astounded that with the perpetuation of the doctrine the practice of external solemnity should have so lamentably become decayed in the latter times; indeed, so sacred, so awful, so mysterious is the sacrifice of the mass, that if men were seriously to reflect on what it really consists, so far from advocating mere rooms for its celebration, they would hasten to restore the reverential arrangements of Catholic antiquity, and instead of striving for front seats and first places, they would hardly feel worthy to occupy the remotest corner of the temple. The form and arrangement of the ancient churches originated from the deepest feelings of reverence; the altar, or place of sacrifice, was accessible only to those who ministered, it was enclosed by pillars and veils; the sanctuary was veiled, the choir was enclosed, and the faithful adored at a respectful distance. All this, and the custom of every succeeding century, is in utter opposition to the modern all-seeing principle, and which, if it is carried out, ends in an absurd conclusion; for if it be essential for every worshipper to see, even a level room would not answer the purpose, and the floor must be raised like an amphitheatre to elevate the receding spectators, for unless the people be thus raised, they form a far greater barrier than any screen-work; and even at St. Peter’s itself, when the Pope celebrates, there is a living screen of Swiss troops and noble guards that effectually shuts out the sight of what is going on, except to those taking part in the functions, or a favoured few, who by means of gold or interest are seated in raised loggia. If religious ceremonies are to be regarded as spectacles they should be celebrated in regular theatres, which have been expressly invented for the purpose of accommodating great assemblages of persons to hear and see well. It has been most justly said, that there is no legitimate halting-place between Catholic doctrine and positive infidelity, and I am quite certain that there is none between a church built on Christian tradition and symbolism and Covent Garden Theatre with its pit, boxes, and gallery. It is only by putting the question in this forcible contrast that persons can really understand the danger of these new notions, or the lengths to which they may eventually lead; and I trust it may be the means of raising a feeling of the greatest repugnance to them in the hearts of every true Catholic.
Augustus Welby Pugin, A Treatise on Chancel Screens and Rood Lofts: Their Antiquity, Use, and Symbolic Signification, 1851
Why Chinese whistleblower may be right that Communists paid Vatican to ‘shut up’ about its war on Catholics
Chinese Billionaire Dissident Guo Wengui claims the Vatican was bribed into silence
LifeSiteNews | June 25, 2020 – Chinese dissident Guo Wengui claims that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) “allocates up to $2 billion a year” to buy the Vatican's silence concerning the ongoing persecution of the Catholic Church in China and other human rights abuses.
Mr. Guo made the allegation — without offering any supporting evidence — in a June 20th interview on Steve Bannon's The War Room. The explosive claim was made in the context of a larger discussion of how the CCP is spending huge sums of money to buy politicians, media, and influence in countries like Australia and Italy.
“2014, the CPC, inside, made the decision: Every year, they want 2 billion dollars to pay to the Vatican, to influence the Vatican policy about China/Vatican — and [regarding] the Christian and Catholic [mistreatment], they wanted Vatican to shut up, to follow the CPC about religion, you know the policy – that’s disaster,” Guo said.
These expenditures, according to previous statements by Guo, are part of a larger strategy to achieve global hegemony that goes by the initials “BGY.” The initials "BGY" stand for Blue (control over the Internet), Gold (buying influence with money), and Yellow (seducing key people with sex). [….]
Pope Francis belittles as ‘adolescent’ priests who defied COVID lockdowns to give faithful sacraments
'I admired the apostolic spirit of many priests who visited by telephone, knocked on doors, called by homes (saying): 'Do you need something? I will do your shopping.''
LifeSiteNews | Dorothy Cummings McLean | VATICAN CITY, June 25, 2020 — Pope Francis has indicated that he was not impressed with priests who violated coronavirus lockdown rules to minister to the laity.
In a speech he delivered Saturday to primarily bishops, doctors, nurses, and other healthcare workers from the Italian region of Lombardy, Pope Francis contrasted priests who violated the ban on public worship with priests who ministered to their flock in “creative” ways, like buying their shopping.
“The pastoral zeal and creative solicitude of priests helped people to follow the way of faith and not to remain alone before sorrow and fear,” he said.
“This priestly creativity ... overcame ... a few, ‘adolescent’ expressions against the measures of the authority having the duty of protecting the health of the people.”
Francis said most priests were “obedient and creative.”
“I admired the apostolic spirit of many priests who visited by telephone, knocked on doors, called by homes (saying): ‘Do you need something? I will do your shopping,’” he added.
“A thousand things. Closeness, creativity, without shame. ... They were a sign of the consoling presence of God.”
He said these priests were “fathers, not adolescents.” […..]
COMMENT: Pope Francis the Small and Timid belittles those Catholic priests who were faithful to their duties during the recent government imposed closing of Catholic churches. To the coward, all courageous acts are regarded as “rash” and “imprudent.” In this little tantrum, Pope Francis displays his own worthlessness for the world to see! The Catholic priest’s vocation, if he is faithful to the “apostolic spirit,” is not to “do your shopping” but rather to be “ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God” (I Cor 4:1), that is, to bring the sacraments to the faithful. St. Paul continues, “Here now it is required among the dispensers, that a man be found faithful.” Pope Francis the Small and Timid was not a “dispenser of the mysteries of God” because he is not “found faithful.”
Remember the argument for legalized abortion that the fetus at 14 weeks was only a “blob of tissue”?
Twin fetuses start
playing at 14 weeks
Examining 3D ultrasound images of five pairs of in-utero twins, a team at the University of Padova, Italy, found that fetuses started deliberately interacting at 14 weeks, reaching out and touching each other through the uterine wall. By 18 weeks, they spent more time stroking each other than themselves, and were equally careful when touching their co-twin’s sensitive eye areas. The results are “astonishing,” says Jean-Philippe Rivière at Doctissimo. At 14 weeks, “they were already socializing with their sibling in the womb.”
“Only take heed to yourself and guard your soul diligently” (Deut 4:9)
Remember in your charity the following pray requests:
Remember the welfare of our expectant mother: Vanessa LoStrocco,
Marieann Reuter, recovery of her health, Kathy Kepner, for her health, Shane Cox, for his health, requests of Philip Thees,
Thomas Thees, recently hospitalized,
Thomas A. Nelson, long time faithful traditional Catholic the founder and former owner of TAN Books & Publishing, suffered a recent stroke,
The Joseph Cox Family, their spiritual welfare,
The Thomas Dube Family, for their conversion and spiritual welfare,
Luis Rafael Zelaya, the brother of Claudia Drew, who is seriously ill,
For the health of Kim Cochran, the daughter-in-law of Joseph and Brenda Cochran, the wife of their son Joshua,
Louie Verrecchio, Catholic apologist, who has a health problem,
John Minidis, Jr. family, for help in their spiritual trial,
John and Joann DeMarco, for their health and spiritual welfare,
Regina (Manidis) Miller, her spiritual welfare and health,
Melissa Elena Levitt, her health and conversion, and welfare of her children,
For the grace of a holy death, Nancy Marie Claycomb,
The health and spiritual welfare of Tom Grow, Amanda Gardner, and Alex Estrada,
Conversion of Annette Murowski, and her son Jimmy,
Brent Keith from Indiana has petitioned our prayers for the Keith Family,
The welfare of the Schmedes Family, and the Mike and Mariana Donohue Family,
The spiritual welfare Robert Holmes Family,
For the spiritual and temporal welfare of Irwin Kwiat,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers for Elvira Donaghy, who is recovering from a stroke,
Kimberly Ann, the daughter of John and Joann DeMarco, for her health and spiritual welfare,
Mufide Rende, a traditional Catholic from India has asked our prayers for her welfare and he family members, living and deceased,
Mary and Bill Glatz, the welfare of their family,
Barbara Harmon, who is ill, and still cares for her ailing parents,
Jason Green, a father of ten children who has been seriously injured,
For the health and welfare of Kolinsky and Sorace families,
Fr. Waters asks our prayers for the health and spiritual welfare of Brian Abramowitz,
Janine Mullen, for her health and help for her family,
Thomas Schiltz family, in grateful appreciation for their contribution to the beauty of our chapel,
Carlo A. De Porto, who is in failing health,
Welfare of Bishop Richard Williamson, for strength and courage in the greater battles to come,
John Rhoad, for his health and spiritual welfare,
Angelina Montesano family & Helen Snyder, for their health and spiritual welfare,
Kathy Boyle, requests our prayers for her welfare,
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, Scott Osborn, Lori Kerr, Cary Shipman and family, David Bash, Crystal and family, Larry Reinhart, and Costanzo Family, are the petitions of Gene Peters,
The Drews ask your intercession for the welfare of Brendan McGuire, a young father of three, who has been diagnosed with cancer,
For the conversion of Ben & Tina Boettcher family, Karin Fraessdorf, Eckhard Ebert, and Fahnauer family,
Fr. Waters requests our prayers for Br. Rene, SSPX who has been ill, and for Fr. Thomas Blute,
For the health and welfare of Kathryn Lederhos, the aunt of David Drew,
Fr. Peterson asks our prayers for Charles Valenti, and his wife, Julia,
For the welfare of Fr. Paul DaDamio and Fr. William T. Welsh,
The Drew’s ask our prayers for the welfare of Joe & Tracy Sentmanat family, Keith & Robert Drew, Christy Koziol & her children, Fred Nesbit and Michael Nesbit families, and Gene Peters Family, the John Manidis Family, the Sal Messinio Family, Michael Proctor Family,
Ryan Boyle grandmother, Jane Boyle, who is failing health,
Mel Gibson and his family, please remember in our prayers,
Rev. Timothy A. Hopkins, prayers for his mother, the Mission of St. Philomena in Miami, and the welfare of Fr Jean-Luc Lafitte,
Ebert’s request our prayers for the Andreas & Jenna Ortner Family,
Joyce Paglia has asked prayers for George Richard Moore Sr. & his children, and her brother, George Panell,
For the welfare of Anthony & Joyce Paglia, who are responsible for the beautiful statuary in our chapel,
Philip Thees asks our prayers for his family, for McLaughlin Family, the conversion of Bruce Heller, & Janet Gardner, the welfare of Dan Polly Weand, the conversion of Sophia Herman, Tony Rosky, and Carl Ropeter, the welfare Nancy Erdeck, the wife of the late Deacon Erdeck, and the welfare of Frank D’Agustino who is ill, the health of Charles Kanaskie, and the health of his brother, Thomas Thees, John Calasanctis, Stephen Cagorski, Tony Rosky, John Bogda, Maryann Reutter, James Parvenski, Kathleen Gorry, and Cecilia LeBow.
Pray for the Repose of the Souls:
Hutton Gibson, died May 12,
Sr. Regina Cordis, Immaculate Heart of Mary religious for sixty-five years, died May 12,
Victoria Zelaya, the sister-in-law of Claudia Drew, died March 20,
Ricardo DeSilva, died November 16, our prayers requested by his brother, Henry DeSilva,
Joyce Laughman and Robert Twist, for their conversions,
Roland H. Allard, a friend of the Drew’s, died September 28,
Rose Cuono, died Oct 23,
Sandra Peters, the wife of Gene Peters, who died June 10 receiving the sacraments and wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Rev. Francis Slupski, a priest who kept the Catholic faith and its immemorial traditions, died May 14,
Martha Mochan, the sister of Philip Thees, died April 8,
George Kirsch, our good friend and supporter of this Mission, died February 15,
For Fr. Paul J. Theisz, died October 17, is the petition of Fr. Waters,
Fr. Mecurio Fregapane, died Jan 17, was not a traditional priest but always charitable,
Fr. Casimir Peterson, a priest who often offered the Mass in our chapel and provided us with sound advice, died December 4,
Fr. Constantine Bellasarius, a faithful and always charitable Eastern Rite Catholic Melkite priest, who left the Roman rite, died November 27,
Christian Villegas, a motor vehicle accident, his brother, Michael, requests our prayers,
John Vennari, the former editor of Catholic Family News, and for his family’s welfare,
Mary Butler, the aunt of Fr. Samuel Waters, died October 17,
Joseph DeMarco, the nephew of John DeMarco, died October 3,
John Fergale, died September 25 after receiving the traditional sacramental rites of the Church wearing the brown scapular,
John Gabor, the brother of Donna Marbach, died September 9,
Fr. Eugene Dougherty, a faithful priest, fittingly died on the Nativity of the BVM after receiving the traditional Catholic sacraments,
Phyllis Schlafly, died September 5,
Helen Mackewicz, died August 14,
Mark A. Wonderlin, who died August 2,
Fr. Carl Cebollero, a faithful priest to tradition who was a friend of Fr. Waters and Fr. DeMaio,
Jessica Cortes, a young mother of ten who died June 12,
Frances Toriello, a life-long Catholic faithful to tradition, died June3, the feast of the Sacred Heart, and her husband Dan, died in 1985,
John McLaughlin, a friend of the Drew’s, died May 22,
Angela Montesano, who died April 30, and her husband, Salvatore, who died in July 3, 2013,
Charles Schultz, died April 5, left behind nine children and many grandchildren, all traditional Catholics,
Esperanza Lopez de Callejas, the aunt of Claudia Drew, died March 15,
Fr. Edgardo Suelo, a faithful priest defending our traditions who was working with Fr. Francois Chazal in the Philippines, died February 19,
Conde McGinley, a long time laborer for the traditional faith, died February 12, at 96 years,
The Drew family requests your prayers for Ida Fernandez and Rita Kelley, parishioners at St. Jude,
Fr. Stephen Somerville, a traditional priest who repented from his work with the Novus Ordo English translation, died December 12,
Fr. Arturo DeMaio, a priest that helped this Mission with the sacraments and his invaluable advice, died December 2,
J. Paul Carswell, died October 15, 2015,
Solange Hertz, a great defender of our Catholic faith, died October 3, the First Saturday of the month,
Paula Haigh, died October 21, a great defender of our Catholic faith in philosophy and natural science,
Gabriella Whalin, the mother of Gabriella Schiltz, who died August 25,
Mary Catherine Sick, 14 year old from a large traditional Catholic family, died August 25,
Fr. Paul Trinchard, a traditional Catholic priest, died August 25,
Stephen J. Melnick, Jr., died on August 21, a long-time faithful traditional Catholic husband and father, from Philadelphia,
Patricia Estrada, died July 29, her son Alex petitions our prayers for her soul,
Fr. Nicholas Gruner, a devoted priest & faithful defender of Blessed Virgin Mary and her Fatima message, died April 29,
Sarah E. Shindle, the grandmother of Richard Shindle, died April 26,
Madeline Vennari, the mother of John Vennari, died December 19,
Salvador Baca Callejas, the uncle of Claudia Drew, died December 13,
Robert Gomez, who died in a motor vehicle accident November 29,
Catherine Dunn, died September 15,
Anthony Fraser, the son of Hamish Fraser, died August 28,
Jeannette Rhoad, the grandmother of Devin Rhoad, who died August 24,
John Thees, the uncle of Philip Thees, died August 9,
Sarah Harkins, 32 year-old mother of four children, died July 28,
Anita Lopez, the aunt of Claudia Drew,
Fr. Kenneth Walker, a young traditional priest of the FSSP who was murdered in Phoenix June 11,
Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for Gilberte Violette, the mother of Fr. Violette, who died May 6,
Pete Hays petitions our prayers for his brothers, Michael, died May 9, and James, died October 20, his sister, Rebecca, died March17, and his mother, Lorraine Hayes who died May 4,
Philip Marbach, the father of Paul Marbach who was the coordinator at St. Jude in Philadelphia, died April 21,
Richard Slaughtery, the elderly sacristan for the SSPX chapel in Kansas City, died April 13,
Bernedette Marie Evans nee Toriello, the daughter of Daniel Toriello , died March 31, a faithful Catholic who suffered many years with MS,
Natalie Cagorski, died march 23,
Anita Lopez de Lacayo, the aunt of Claudia Drew, who died March 21,
Mario Palmaro, Catholic lawyer, bioethicist and professor, apologist, died March 9, welfare of his widow and children,
Daniel Boyle, the uncle of Ryan Boyle, died March 4,
Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died on January 25,
Arthur Harmon, died January 18,
Fr. Waters petitions our prayers for the soul of Jeanne DeRuyscher, who died January 17,
Joseph Proctor, died January 10,
Susan Scott, a devote traditional Catholic who made the vestments for our Infant of Prague statue, died January 8,
Brother Leonard Mary, M.I.C.M., (Fred Farrell), an early supporter and friend of Fr. Leonard Feeney, died November 23,
John Fergale, requests our prayers for his sister Connie, who died December 19,
Jim Capaldi, died December 15,
Brinton Creager, the son of Elizabeth Carpenter, died December 10,
Christopher Lussos, age 27, the father of one child with an expecting wife, died November 15,
Jarett Ebeyer, 16 year old who died in his sleep, November 17, at the request of the Kolinsky’s,
Catherine Nienaber, the mother of nine children, the youngest three years of age, killed in MVA after Mass, 10-29,
Nancy Aldera, the sister of Frances Toriello, died October 11, 2013 at 105 years of age,
Mary Rita Schiltz, the mother of Thomas Schiltz, who died August 27,
William H. (Teddy) Kennedy, Catholic author of Lucifer’s Lodge, died August 14, age 49, cause of death unknown,
Alfred Mercier, the father of David Mercier, who died August 12,
The Robert Kolinsky asks our prayers for his friend, George Curilla, who died August 23,
John Cuono, who had attended Mass at our Mission in the past, died August 11,
Raymond Peterson, died July 28, and Paul Peterson, died February 19, the brothers of Fr. Casimir Peterson,
Margaret Brillhart, who died July 20,
Msgr. Joseph J. McDonnell, a priest from the diocese of Des Moines, who died June 8,
Patrick Henry Omlor, who wrote Questioning The Validity of the Masses using the New, All English Canon, and for a series of newsletters which were published as The Robber Church, died May 2, the feast of St Athanasius,
Bishop Joseph McFadden, died unexpectedly May 2,
Timothy Foley, the brother-in-law of Michelle Marbach Folley, who died in April,
William Sanders, the uncle of Don Rhoad, who died April 2,
Gene Peters ask our prayers for the repose of the soul of Mark Polaschek, who died March 22,
Eduardo Gomez Lopez, the uncle of Claudia Drew, February 28,
Cecelia Thees, died February 24,
Elizabeth Marie Gerads, a nineteen year old, the oldest of twelve children, who died February 6,
Michael Schwartz, the co-author with Fr. Enrique Rueda of “Gays, Aids, and You,” died February 3,
Stanley W. Moore, passed away in December 16, and Gerard (Jerry) R. Pitman, who died January 19, who attended this Mission in the past,
Louis Fragale, who died December 25,
Fr. Luigi Villa, Th.D. author of Vatican II About Face! detailing the heresies of Vatican II, died November 18 at the age of 95,
Rev. Michael Jarecki, a faithful traditional Catholic priest who died October 22,and Rev. Hector Bolduc, who died September 10,
Jennie Salaneck, died September 19 at 95 years of age, a devout and faithful Catholic all her life,
Dorothy Sabo, who died September 26,
Cynthia (Cindy) Montesano Reinhert, the mother of nine children, four who are still at home, died August 19,
Stanley Spahalski, who died October 20, and his wife, Regina Spahalski, who died June 24, and for the soul of Francis Lester, her son,
Julia Atkinson, who died April 30,
Antonio P. Garcia, who died January 6, 2012 and the welfare of his teenage children, Andriana and Quentin,
Helen Crane, the aunt of David Drew who died February 27,
Fr. Timothy A. Hopkins, of the National Shrine of St. Philomena, in Miami, November 2,
Frank Smith, who died February 7, and the welfare of his wife, Delores,
Eduardo Cepeda, who died January 26,
Larry Young, the 47 year old father of twelve who died December 10 and the welfare of his wife Katherine and their family,
Sister Mary Bernadette, M.I.C.M., a founding member of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, died December 16,
Joeseph Elias, who died on September 28,
William, the brother of Fr. Waters, who died September 7,
Donald Tonelli, died August 1,
Rev. Fr. Gregory Hesse, of Austria, a great defender of Catholic Truth, died January 25, 2006,
Emma Colasanti, who died May 29,
Mary Dullesse, who died April 12, a Catholic convert who died wearing our Lady’s scapular,
Ruth Jantsch, the grandmother of Andre Ebert, who died April 7, Derrick and Denise Palengat, his godparents,
Philip D. Barr, died March 5, and the welfare of his family,
Judith Irene Kenealy, the mother of Joyce Paglia, who died February 23, and her son, George Richard Moore, who died May 14,
For Joe Sobran who died September 30,
Fr. Hector Bolduc, a great and faithful priest, died, September 10, 2012,
John Vennari asks our prayers for Dr. Raphael Waters who died August 26,
Stanley Bodalsky, the father of Mary Ann Boyle who died June 25,
Mary Isabel Kilfoyle Humphreys, a former York resident and friend of the Drew’s, who died June 6,
Rev. John Campion, who offered the traditional Mass for us every first Friday until forbidden to do so by Bishop Dattilo, died May 1,
Joseph Montagne, who died May 5,
For Margaret Vagedes, the aunt of Charles Zepeda, who died January 6,
Fr. Michael Shear, a Byzantine rite Catholic priest, died August 17, 2006,
Fr. James Francis Wather, died November 7, 2006, author of The Great Sacrilege and Who Shall Ascend?, a great defender of dogma and liturgical purity,
Fr. Enrique Rueda, who died December 14, 2009, to whom our Mission is indebted,
Fr. Peterson asks to remember, Leonard Edward Peterson, his cousin, Wanda, Angelica Franquelli, and the six priests ordained with him.
Philip Thees petitions our prayers for Beverly Romanick, Deacon Michael Erdeck, Henry J. Phillips, Grace Prestano, Connie DiMaggio, Elizabeth Thorhas, Elizabeth Thees, Theresa Feraker, Hellen Pestrock, and James & Rose Gomata, and Kathleen Heinbach,
Fr. Didier Bonneterre, the author of The Liturgical Movement, and Fr. John Peek, both were traditional priests,
Brother Francis, MICM, the superior of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Richmond, NH, who died September 5,
Rodolfo Zelaya Montealegre, the father of Claudia Drew, who died May 24,
Rev. Francis Clifford, a devout and humble traditional priest, who died on March 7,
Benjamin Sorace, the uncle of Sonja Kolinsky.
Modernism vs. Neo-Modernism: What is the Difference?
The overarching principle of post-conciliar theology is not modernism,
properly speaking. Let us get our terms straight.
Modernism is the idea that there are no eternal truths, that truth is the correspondence of the mind with one's lifestyle (adaequatio intellectus et vitae), and that, therefore, old dogmas must be abandoned and new beliefs must arise that meet 'the needs of modern man'. This is a radical denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth: the correspondence of the mind with reality (adaequatio intellectus et rei), which is the basis of the immutability of Catholic dogma.
No, the post-conciliar theological principle is neo-modernism, and the theology that is based on it is known as the nouvelle theologie. It is the idea that old dogmas or beliefs must be retained, yet not the traditional 'formulas': dogmas must be expressed and interpreted in a new way in every age so as to meet the 'needs of modern man'. This is still a denial of the traditional and common sense notion of truth as adaequatio intellectus et rei (insofar as it is still an attempt to make the terminology that expresses the faith correspond with our modern lifestyle) and consequently of the immutability of Catholic dogma, yet it is not as radical as modernism. It is more subtle and much more deceptive than modernism because it claims that the faith must be retained; it is only the 'formulas' of faith that must be abandoned--they use the term 'formula' to distinguish the supposedly mutable words of our creeds, dogmas, etc. from their admittedly immutable meanings. Therefore, neo-modernism can effectively slip under the radar of most pre-conciliar condemnations (except Humani Generis, which condemns it directly) insofar as its practitioners claim that their new and unintelligible theological terminology really expresses the same faith of all times. In other words, neo-modernism is supposed to be 'dynamic orthodoxy': supposedly orthodox in meaning, yet always changing in expression to adapt to modern life (cf. Franciscan University of Steubenville's mission statement).
Take extra ecclesiam nulla salus as a clear example of a dogma that has received a brutal neo-modernist re-interpretation: they claim that the old 'formula' that ”there is no salvation outside the Church” must be abandoned; rather it is more meaningful to modern man to say that salvation is not in, but through, the Church; people who are not in the Church may still be saved through the Church; thus, to them the dogma that “there is no salvation outside the Church” means that there is salvation outside the Church. Hence see Ven. Pope Pius XII condemning those “reduce to a meaningless formula the necessity of belonging to the true Church in order to gain eternal salvation.” (Humani generis 27).
Yet this mentality of reinterpreting everything anew in order to 'meet the needs of the times' is generally tends to be found in different degrees among different post-conciliar sources:
It tends to be (1) rampant in men like De Lubac, Von Balthasar, Congar, etc.: it is the ultimate goal of their writings, teachings, and activities as churchmen. To achieve this end, they employ the technique of 'resourcement', the neo-modernist strategy of fishing for the few dubious, questionable, or idiosyncratic teachings of some Fathers of the Church and other authoritative writers, and gather them into a massive, heterodox theological argument against the traditional understanding of the faith (which they like to relativize by giving it names such as “Counter-Reformation” Theology, “Tridentine” Theology, or “Scholastic” Theology, instead of just admitting that it is Catholic Theology plain and simple). This technique accomplishes three things that go hand-in-hand: (a) offers a refutation of traditional Catholicism, (b) defends an interpretation that meets the needs of modern times, and (c) gives it a semblance of being traditional, because it appears to be based in the Fathers et al. This type of argument is used, for example, by Von Balthasar in his nearly heretical book, Dare We Hope that All Men be Saved? to 'prove', not that Hell does not exist (that is a dogma), but that it is empty. But this technique and its neo-modernistic underpinnings is not only practiced in almost all of these men's writings; it is also defended in theory by many of them, particularly in Von Balthasar's daring little book, Razing the Bastions, where he demonstrates that “Tridentine” theology must be rejected in our times because it is 'boring'.
It also tends to be (2) present in a more moderate way in the non-binding statements by post-conciliar popes, since they themselves were deeply involved in the developing of the nouvelle theologie. Just to give one of a million possible examples, see Pope Benedict's evolutionistic re-interpretation of the Resurrection of Our Lord. Nothing here obviously contradicts the dogma of the Resurrection (it may be interpreted as a simple analogy, even if a bad one, and nothing more), but it is a novelty that can be easily understood as claiming that the Resurrection is part of the natural development of nature (thus giving credence to some of the nouvelle theologie's pet doctrines, such as De Lubac's heterodox notion of the supernatural and De Chardin's pantheistic evolutionism). This happens almost on a daily basis in what comes out of the Vatican, not to mention what comes from local bishops.
And finally, neo-modernism tends to be present (3) mostly implicitly or behind-the-scenes in the Council,
the Catechism, etc., even though it seldom comes out more explicitly.
Things are done at this level under the pretext
of 'aggiornamento', a euphemism for neo-modernism. That is
usually all the justification provided since at this authoritative level, there
is no need to justify things theologically. Hence, Vatican II and the
Catechism are not outright neo-modernistic. Rather, they (like most of
post-conciliar doctrine) tend in that direction and/or are inspired
by that mentality. In other words, most of the time
these documents do not explicitly teach neo-modernist errors (the kind of
errors you hear explicitly from neo-modernist theologians and priests).
Rather, they are full of dangerous ambiguities: statements that in a
technical sense could be interpreted as being in harmony with the traditional
faith, but that, in their natural, non-forced, interpretation are heterodox.
One clear example of this is Dignitatis humanae, par. 2; entire
monographs have been written in order to prove that, despite appearances, this
document does not contradict previous teaching. Maybe in fact it
ultimately does not, but it is obvious that the prima facie meaning
does; otherwise there would be no need to write so many volumes to prove it.
It must be noted that these are general tendencies, and that in some documents (cf. Gaudium et Spes) and every now and then in papal and episcopal statements neo-modernist principles come out more explicitly.
For a more detailed philosophical and theological critique of neo-modernism, and how it is nothing but a re-hashing of modernism, see Garrigou-Lagrange's Where is the New Theology Leading Us? and his The Structure of the Encyclical Humani Generis.
Francisco J. Romero Carrasquillo, Ph.D., Professor of Theology and Philosophy
“And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved” (Matt. 10:22).
How the Supreme Court’s trans ruling will reshape federal law and further marginalize Christians
The ruling effectively passed much of the Democratic Party’s so-called Equality Act into law.
LifeSiteNews | June 17, 2020 – In a devastating 6-3 ruling on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt religious liberty a brutal blow and handed the LGBT movement a victory that stunned even them by deciding that both “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Antonin Scalia’s replacement Neil Gorsuch authored the majority opinion, and John Roberts joined him. President Donald Trump called it a “very powerful decision,” and most of the top GOP senators greeted the ruling with a collective shrug. Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley offered criticism, but for the rest, it appears that Rod Dreher has been correct in his constant warnings that much of the Republican Party is disinterested in doing the tough work necessary to protect religious liberty.
To discuss the implications of the ruling, I contacted Dr. Darel E. Paul, professor of political science at Williams College and author of the essential book From Tolerance to Equality: How the Elites Brought America to Same-Sex Marriage, published by Baylor University Press. He writes regularly for First Things, and I’ve had him on my podcast several times to share his insights on the transformation of American values. He was kind enough to share his perspective once again.
How would you explain this Supreme Court decision in layman’s terms?
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court in Bostock v. Clayton County decided that the word “sex” in Title VII of the famous 1964 Civil Rights Act—the section that deals with employment—must be understood to include both sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). President Trump’s first appointment to the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote the majority opinion. This outcome was, suffice to say, quite a shock to conservatives. While social conservatives now worry over its implications for religious liberty and the state’s enforcement of progressive gender ideology, many liberal conservatives such as Mitt Romney and David French quickly reconciled themselves to the ruling.
What is the real-world impact of this Supreme Court decision for Christians and social conservatives?
The immediate effect is to effectively pass much of the Democratic Party’s Equality Act into law. This bill was passed by the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives in 2019 but never taken up by the Republican-controlled Senate. The Gorsuch majority in Bostock has thus effectively made an end run around the Congress and the President. During oral arguments in October 2019, Justice Alito proclaimed sarcastically to the attorneys for the plaintiffs, “We might as well just take the Equality Act and issue that as our opinion!” A prophetic statement indeed. [….]
COMMENT: This decision represents a most serious corruption of law. The first principle of legal interpretation relies on the wording of the law itself. If this is not clear, then the proper understanding of law is determined from how the law was objectively applied historically. Lacking this help, the interpretation is sought by trying to understand the mind of the lawgiver; what exactly was intended by those who gave the law. The last method, the least in authority, is referred by modern legal scholars as textualism and originalism. This case examines the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Courts decision represents a raw abuse of judicial power by usurpation of legislative powers. This is accomplished by redefining the meaning of the term “sex” within the text of the law from identifying the natural order of male-female to inclusively embrace homosexuals and any other sexual pervert that the mind can imagine. The justification for this novelty is based upon a real corruption of textualism and originalism. In 1964 every one of the new categories included in the term “sex” was formally defined, without exception, as specific types of psychiatric mental illnesses. The Court has affirmed that the legislators who wrote and enacted 1964 Civil Rights Act intended to grant equality of civil rights to the mentally and psychologically impaired! Now a pedophile can claim a civil right to baby sit your children! This cannot remain an isolated abuse of power but establishes a precedent that can only lead to the overturning of all law. This game can be played with any law where words can be assigned any meaning that fits the political ends intended, and therefore marks the end of all law. The internal law of society whose end is the just and proper ordering of society for a given end can only lead to permanent social disorder and injustice. It is unsettling that this decision was supported by the Donald Trump nominee, Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch who was touted as possessing a great legal mind turns out to be just another clever little liar.
Sen. Josh Hawley reacts to SCOTUS trans ruling: ‘The end of the conservative legal movement’
The junior senator from Missouri called out the Republican Party for its treatment of religious conservatives and conservative legal groups for attacking his questioning of Trump judicial nominees.
LifeSiteNews | WASHINGTON, D.C., | June 17, 2020 – Senator Josh Hawley, R-MO, decried “the end of the conservative legal movement” in a fiery speech before the U.S. Senate yesterday. He also called out the Republican Party for its treatment of religious conservatives.
Hawley made his remarks following Monday’s Supreme Court ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. The ruling concluded that “sex discrimination” in Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act should be interpreted to mean “sexual orientation” and “gender identity,” in addition to its original biological meaning.
“After Bostock,” the 40-year-old senator said, the effort of the conservative legal movement, “as it has existed up to now, is over.”
Hawley referred to the legal philosophies of textualism and originalism, which were supposed to essentially interpret legal texts based on their ordinary meaning, as understood by regular citizens at the time the law was made.
He said that “if you can invoke textualism and originalism in order to reach such a decision—an outcome that fundamentally changes the scope and meaning and application of statutory law—then textualism and originalism and all of those phrases don’t mean much at all.”
“And if those are the things that we’ve been fighting for—it’s what I thought we had been fighting for, those of us who call ourselves legal conservatives—if we’ve been fighting for originalism and textualism, and this is the result of that, then I have to say it turns out we haven’t been fighting for very much,” Hawley pointed out.
Now, however, it has become evident that “the bargain that has been offered to religious conservatives for years now is a bad one. It’s time to reject it.”
“The bargain has never been explicitly articulated,” Hawley admitted, “but religious conservatives know what it is. The bargain is that you go along with the party establishment, you support their policies and priorities—or at least keep your mouth shut about it—and, in return, the establishment will put some judges on the bench who supposedly will protect your constitutional rights to freedom of worship, to freedom of exercise.”
Hawley went on to recount some of the policies pushed by the Republican Party that religious conservatives accepted, hoping for a strong defense of the First Amendment in return:
We were told that we’re supposed to shut up while the party establishment focuses more on cutting taxes and handing out favors for corporations, multinational corporations who don’t share our values, who will not stand up for American principles, who were only too happy to ship American jobs overseas. But we’re supposed to say nothing about that. We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut because maybe we’ll get a judge out of the deal. That was the implicit bargain.
We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut while the party establishment opens borders, while the party establishment pursues ruinous trade policies.
We’re supposed to keep our mouths shut while those at the upper end of the income bracket get all of the attention. While working families and college students and those who don’t want to go to college but can’t get a good job, while they get what? What attention?
Workers? Children? What about parents looking for help with the cost of raising children? Looking for help with the culture in which they have to raise children? Looking for help with the communities, rebuilding the communities in which they must carry out their family life?
What about college students trying to find an education that isn’t ruinously expensive and then figure out some way to pay back that enormous debt? What about those who don’t have a college degree and don’t want one, but would like to get a good job? What about them?
Hawley also seemed to reference his public disputes with the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative legal group that backed President Trump’s nominees to the Supreme Court and lower courts:
...the truth is, to those who have objected to my own questioning of judicial nominees in this body, to those who said I was wrong to question judges who came for the Judiciary Committee, to those who chided me for asking tough questions even of nominees by a Republican president, for those who said that I was slowing the process down, that I was out of line, for the supposedly conservative groups who threatened to buy television time in my own state to punish me for asking questions about conservative judges, I just have this to say: this is why I asked questions. This is why I won’t stop. And I wish some more people would ask some harder questions. Because, this outcome is not acceptable. And the bargain which religious conservatives have been offered is not tenable.
“Every judgment of conscience, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, is obligatory, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always sins.”
St. Thomas Aquinas
Excerpts from Archbishop Carlo Viganò’s article published on Marco Tosatti Blog condemning Vatican II while offering his own humble and heartfelt apology for coming to this truth so late in life. Redde Rationem is Latin translated as, “to give an account,” which is taken from Luke 16:2 when the rich man demands an accounting of the stewardship from the unjust steward. “In standard Italian, it is used as a synonym for a showdown” (Wikipedia). Question: What will he do now?
VIGANÒ WRITES ON THE VATICAN II: WE ARE AT THE REDDE RATIONEM
Viganò: “Vatican II Marked the Beginning of a False, Parallel Church”
[…..]I confess it with serenity and without controversy: I was one of the many people who, despite many perplexities and fears which today have proven to be absolutely legitimate, trusted the authority of the Hierarchy with unconditional obedience. In reality, I think that many people, including myself, did not initially consider the possibility that there could be a conflict between obedience to an order of the Hierarchy and fidelity to the Church herself. What made tangible this unnatural, indeed I would even say perverse, separation between the Hierarchy and the Church, between obedience and fidelity, was certainly this most recent Pontificate. […..]
It is no accident: what these men affirm with impunity, scandalizing moderates, is what Catholics also believe, namely: that despite all the efforts of the hermeneutic of continuity which shipwrecked miserably at the first confrontation with the reality of the present crisis, it is undeniable that from Vatican II onwards a parallel church was built, superimposed over and diametrically opposed to the true Church of Christ. This parallel church progressively obscured the divine institution founded by Our Lord in order to replace it with a spurious entity, corresponding to the desired universal religion that was first theorized by Masonry. Expressions like new humanism, universal fraternity, dignity of man, are the watchwords of philanthropic humanitarianism which denies the true God, of horizontal solidarity of vague spiritualist inspiration and of ecumenical irenism that the Church unequivocally condemns. “Nam et loquela tua manifestum te facit [Even your speech gives you away]” (Mt 26, 73): this very frequent, even obsessive recourse to the same vocabulary of the enemy betrays adherence to the ideology he inspires; while on the other hand the systematic renunciation of the clear, unequivocal and crystalline language of the Church confirms the desire to detach itself not only from the Catholic form but even from its substance. […..]
This operation of intellectual honesty requires a great humility, first of all in recognizing that for decades we have been led into error, in good faith, by people who, established in authority, have not known how to watch over and guard the flock of Christ: some for the sake of living quietly, some because of having too many commitments, some out of convenience, and finally some in bad faith or even malicious intent. […..]
Just as I honestly and serenely obeyed questionable orders sixty years ago, believing that they represented the loving voice of the Church, so today with equal serenity and honesty I recognize that I have been deceived. Being coherent today by persevering in error would represent a wretched choice and would make me an accomplice in this fraud. Claiming a clarity of judgment from the beginning would not be honest: we all knew that the Council would be more or less a revolution, but we could not have imagined that it would prove to be so devastating, even for the work of those who should have prevented it. [……]
The Abu Dhabi Declaration is the ideological manifesto of an idea of peace and cooperation between religions that could have some possibility of being tolerated if it came from pagans who are deprived of the light of Faith and the fire of Charity. But whoever has the grace of being a Child of God in virtue of Holy Baptism should be horrified at the idea of being able to construct a blasphemous modern version of the Tower of Babel, seeking to bring together the one true Church of Christ, heir to the promises made to the Chosen People, with those who deny the Messiah and with those who consider the very idea of a Triune God to be blasphemous. The love of God knows no measure and does not tolerate compromises, otherwise it simply is not Charity, without which it is not possible to remain in Him: qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo [whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him] (1 Jn 4:16). It matters little whether it is a declaration or a Magisterial document: we know well that the subversive mens of the innovators plays games with these sort of quibbles in order to spread error. And we know well that the purpose of these ecumenical and interreligious initiatives is not to convert those who are far from the one Church to Christ, but to divert and corrupt those who still hold the Catholic Faith, leading them to believe that it is desirable to have a great universal religion that brings together the three great Abrahamic religions “in a single house”: this is the triumph of the Masonic plan in preparation for the kingdom of the Antichrist! […..]
Last Sunday, the Church celebrated the Most Holy Trinity, and in the Breviary it offers us the recitation of the Symbolum Athanasianum, now outlawed by the conciliar liturgy and already reduced to only two occasions in the liturgical reform of 1962. The first words of that now-disappeared Symbolum remain inscribed in letters of gold: “Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem; quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit – Whosoever wishes to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic faith; For unless a person shall have kept this faith whole and inviolate, without doubt he shall eternally perish.”
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, June 10, 2020, translated by Giuseppe Pellegrino
Let nothing disturb thee, Nothing affright thee;
All things are passing; God never changeth;
Patient endurance attaineth to all things;
Who God possesseth in nothing is wanting;
Alone God sufficeth.
Bookmark of St. Teresa of Jesus
How beauteous is the courage which we find,
with childlike confidence in God combined!
Who fears his God shall know no other fear -
He heeds not pitying smile, nor unkind sneer.
“The virtue of fortitude protects a person from loving his life so much that he loses it.”
Josef Pieper, A Brief Reader on the Virtues of the Human Heart
“Prayer draws its merits from charity; but its imperative efficacy comes from faith and confidence.”
“Only take heed to yourself and guard your soul diligently.” (Deut 4:9)
“It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the Catholic Church!”
Blessed Pope Pius IX
Pope Francis and his inverted metaphor!
[Catholic] “fundamentalists, have a nostalgia for returning to the ashes.... Tradition is the guarantee of the future and not the container of the ashes,.... Tradition is like roots [of a tree], which give us nutrition to grow,... You will not become like the roots. You will flower, grow, give fruit. And the seeds become roots for other people..... The tradition of the church is always in movement.... The tradition does not safeguard the ashes”
Pope Francis the Destroyer, another high altitude, hypoxic babble on a flight to Rome.
COMMENT: Marion Maréchal-Le Pen, the grand-daughter of the French National Front founder, Jean-Marie Le Pen, applied a quotation of Gustav Mahler in a new context, “Tradition is not the worship of ashes but the preservation of fire.” Using Francis' metaphor, tradition is not the “root” of the tree, it is the tree itself, and trees are not “always in movement.” They are in fact ‘rooted’ and stable.
Tradition is firstly as a noun refers to content of divine revelation. This content is incarnate in our immemorial Catholic traditions which are the perfect images of the Catholic faith. These images are the means by which the faith is known and communicated to others. The Neo-iconoclasts destroy these images as the means to destroy the faith itself. For Francis, Tradition is obstacle that must be overcome if he is to overthrow the Catholic faith. He therefore considers how tradition has always been understood by the Church as “ashes.”
The verb form of tradition refers to the actual handing-on of the content of divine revelation to the next generation of Catholics. As St. Paul said, “For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread” (I Cor. 11:23). What St. Paul “delivered” is exactly the same as what he first “received,” and this is called Tradition.
“Have in mind therefore in what manner thou hast received and heard: and observe, and do penance. If then thou shalt not watch, I will come to thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know at what hour I will come to thee” (Apoc. 3:3). This is the warning to the Church in Sardis. What was their sin? They had not kept the traditions they received and therefore St. John writes, “And to the angel of the church of Sardis, write: These things saith he, that hath the seven spirits of God, and the seven stars: I know thy works, that thou hast the name of being alive: and thou art dead. Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain, which are ready to die. For I find not thy works full before my God” (Apoc. 3:1-2). The Catholics of Sardis were not faithful to what they had “received.” When the faith is corrupted by corrupting its images, the corruption of morals necessarily follows, therefore, their “works” were “dead,” that is, they had fallen from the grace of God.
By the light of Francis, tradition received is not what is passed on. What is passed on is different and no longer shares an identity between father and son with every generation. Francis is a Neo-modernist Neo-iconoclast. Those that follow him will lose their souls because “without faith, it is impossible to please God” (Heb. 11:6). And without the images of the faith it is impossible to have the faith.
Therefore, faithful Catholics today, unlike those of Sardis, must “watch” lest their traditions be trampled into ashes by Francis the Destroyer.
Unjust judgment: It is a grave sin to attribute an evil motive to an objectively good and meritorious act!
DC archbishop criticizes long-planned Trump visit to Catholic shrine as ‘reprehensible’
'I find it baffling and reprehensible that any Catholic facility would allow itself to be so egregiously misused and manipulated in a fashion that violates our religious principles,' said Archbishop Wilton Gregory.
LifeSiteNews | WASHINGTON, D.C. | JUNE 2, 2020– Washington, D.C.’s Archbishop Wilton Gregory issued a stinging rebuke to the John Paul II National Shrine for “allowing” President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump to visit today.
The president and Mrs. Trump visited the shrine to both commemorate Pope John Paul II's 100th birthday two weeks ago and the 41st anniversary of the modern day saint’s historic Mass at Victory Square in Warsaw. Melania Trump is the first Catholic First Lady since Jacqueline Kennedy.
After his visit to the shrine, established and operated by the Knights of Columbus, President Trump planned to return to the White House to sign an executive order on religious freedom.
“I find it baffling and reprehensible that any Catholic facility would allow itself to be so egregiously misused and manipulated in a fashion that violates our religious principles, which call us to defend the rights of all people even those with whom we might disagree,” said Gregory in a statement released the very hour of Trump’s visit.
“Saint Pope John Paul II was an ardent defender of the rights and dignity of human beings,” continued Gregory. “His legacy bears vivid witness to that truth. He certainly would not condone the use of tear gas and other deterrents to silence, scatter or intimidate them for a photo opportunity in front of a place of worship and peace.”
It turns out that Archbishop Gregory was wrong about the deployment of tear gas against Monday night's protesters. It simply didn't happen, despite major media's initial claims to the contrary. It remains unclear if Archbishop Gregory plans to issue a correction to his statement.
A spokesperson for the shrine indicated on Tuesday that the White House had scheduled the president’s visit long before the recent violent uprisings in cities across the nation, countering Gregory’s implication that this was nothing more than a political photo op.
“This was fitting given St. John Paul II was a tireless advocate of religious liberty throughout his pontificate,” the Shrine said in a statement. “International religious freedom receives widespread bipartisan support, including unanimous passage of legislation in defense of persecuted Christians and religious minorities around the world.”
He added that “the shrine welcomes all people to come and pray and learn about the legacy of St. John Paul II.”
In declaring that the shrine and the president are in “violation of Catholic principles,” Archbishop Gregory chose to overlook Donald Trump’s record as the most pro-life president in the history of the nation, and his strong efforts to protect religious liberty.
Trump’s pro-life gains include allowing states to defund Planned Parenthood of Title X and Medicaid funds; defunding the United Nations Population Fund and very recently the pro-abortion World Health Organization; reinstating and expanding the Mexico City Policy preventing taxpayer money from funding abortions overseas; creating a new office for conscience protection at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; and strengthening enforcement of federal laws protecting the conscience rights of health care workers who do not want to participate in abortion.
Trump also declared churches “essential” on May 22, telling state governors to allow them to reopen as coronavirus lockdowns begin to loosen. All public Masses in Washington, D.C. remain cancelled.
The president has long been the object of criticism by many Catholic prelates because of his strong stance on immigration and secure borders.
Last summer, in his first public statement following his installation as Archbishop of Washington, Gregory accused the president of “diminishing our national life.” [.....]
Gregory has a long record of supporting liberal causes. During his tenure as Archbishop of Atlanta, Gregory did nothing to stop a pro-LGBT parish from promoting, participating in, and hosting a booth at, the Atlanta “Pride Parade.” Gregory also personally invited pro-gay priest Father James Martin to give a speech at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, titled “Showing Welcome and Respect to LGBT Catholics,” in 2018.
He has made statements suggesting support for allowing Catholics living in a state of adultery to receive Holy Communion. [....]
New York - 23,083 (Status
New Jersey — 10,843 (Status — CLOSED)
Pennsylvania — 4624 (Status — CLOSED)
Michigan — 5129 (Status — CLOSED)
Total Dead — 43,679
Total Population — 51.11 million
Florida - 2144 (Status — OPEN)
Texas — 1369 (Status — OPEN)
Georgia — 1754 (Status — OPEN)
Ohio — 1720 — (Status — OPEN)
Total Dead — 6987
Total Population — 72.79 million
*More people have died of coronavirus in NY & NJ nursing homes than all the people combined in FL, TX, GA, OH.
“With them that hated peace I was peaceable: when I spake unto them, they fought against me without cause.” Ps. cxix
“Forty years long was I nigh unto that generation, and said: They do always err in their heart; and they have not known My ways to whom I swore in My wrath that they should not enter into My rest.” Ps. xciv
“In the later editions of the Talmud the allusions to Christianity are few and cautious compared with the earlier or unexpurgated copies. The last of these was published at Amsterdam in 1645. In them our Lord and Saviour is ‘that One, ‘such a One,’ ‘a fool,’ ‘the leper,’ ‘the deceiver or Israel,’ &c.; efforts are made to prove that He is the son of Joseph Pandira before his marriage with Mary. His miracles are attributed to sorcery, the secret of which He brought in a slit in his flesh out of Egypt. His teacher is said to have been Joshua, the son of Perachlah. This Joshua is said to have afterwards excommunicated Him to the sound of 800 rams’ horns, although he must have lived seventy years before His time. Forty days before the death of Jesus a witness was summoned by public proclamation to attest his innocence, but none appeared. He is said to have been first stoned and then hanged on the eve of the Passover. His disciples are called heretics, and opprobrious names. They are accused of immoral practices; and the New Testament is called a sinful book. The references to these subjects manifest the most bitter aversion and hate.”
Dr. Joseph Barclay, LL.D, Rector of Stapleford, Herts, London, The Talmud, 1878, from Introduction, p. 30
St. John Eudes: “That there is a special contract made between God and man in Baptism.”
THE name of contract is given to any agreement entered into by two or more persons, in which the parties contracting incur mutual obligations. This clearly shows that a contract. has been entered into by the most Blessed Trinity and you in Baptism; since you have incurred many obligations towards the Blessed Trinity, and the Blessed Trinity has also obliged itself in regard to you. What is the nature of this contract? It is a reciprocal contract of gifts, the highest and most entire that can “enter into the heart of man to conceive;” for in making it you are obliged to give yourself entirely and forever to God; you have renounced all things to be united to Him, and for Him, and God on his part has given Himself entirely to you. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, come to you and take up their abode in your soul, in order to confer honors and benefits on you. They enrich you ‘with spiritual treasures to render you worthy of their three divine Persons.
It is a contract of adoption, since God the Father has taken you for his child, and has conferred on you the right of his inheritance with his only Son, and you have taken God for your Father, and have promised to entertain for him all the love and respect which a child owes to a so good a parent. “Consider,” writes St. John the Evangelist, “what love the Father has testified to you in wishing that you should be called, and that you should, really, be his children.”
Behold the admirable effect of the contract which you have made with God in Baptism, from being the child of wrath and an heir of hell, you have become the child of God and an heir to heaven! What you should not do to acknowledge the infinite goodness of God in your regard?
It is a contract of alliance with the Son of God, since in receiving Baptism you have united yourself to him as to your head, your master, and your sovereign, and since the Son has taken you for His servant and one of the members of his body, which is his Church. How great is the goodness of God, says St. Paul to the newly converted Christians of Corinth; “By whom you arc called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”
What were you before Baptism but the unhappy slave of Satan, and subject like him to eternal punishment? But by Baptism you have been delivered from this unhappy subjection, through the divine alliance which you have contracted with Jesus Christ, which procures you the enjoyment of eternal happiness, if you observe all its conditions.
Finally, it is a contract of alliance with the Person of the Holy Ghost; for faith teaches us, that the Holy Ghost takes the Christian soul as his spouse, and that the Christian reciprocally takes the Holy Ghost for his spouse. In consequence of this sacred alliance, the Holy Ghost calls you “his sister and his spouse,” and as, of yourself, you are poor indeed, he adorns your soul with all the gifts necessary to render it worthy of him, and he comes to take up his abode in it, and to consecrate it as his temple and his sanctuary. […..]
When you had been presented to the church to receive Baptism, you were treated as a person in the possession of the devil, for the priest pronounced over you the exorcism of the church, commanding the wicked spirit to depart from you, and to give place to the Holy Ghost.
This ceremony teaches you that by original sin you were really in possession of the devil, and that he abided in you, but that, through Baptism, he has been cast out of you; that your soul has been purified from the horrible stain which disfigured it, and that the Holy Ghost, having sanctified and ornamented it with his grace, comes to take up his abode in it. […..]
That Baptism imprints in your soul a spiritual character, which no sin can efface. This character is a proof that from this time you do not belong to yourself, but that you are the property of Jesus Christ, who has purchased you by the infinite price of his blood and of his death. You are not of yourself, but you are of Christ’s therefore, St. Paul concludes, “that the Christian should no longer live for himself, but for Him who died and rose again for him;” that is to say, that the Christian should live a life of grace, and that he should consecrate to his Redeemer his spirit, his heart, and all his actions. […..]
The Priest introduced you into the Church, by saying, “Enter into the house of God, that you may have eternal life.” This ceremony teaches you that Baptism enables you to enter into the Society of Jesus Christ, and of all the faithful who compose the house or family of God. By this entry, you begin to partake of all the good works of the faithful and you acquire a right to the sacraments, to the prayers, and to all the other good works which are done in the Church. Moreover, in entering into the Church, you have become her child, and have been made a child of God, the heir of God, and co-heir of Jesus Christ; you entered into society and communion with the angels and all the blessed who are in Heaven. By this ceremony you are likewise taught that, in order to be united to Jesus Christ, and to have eternal life, it is necessary to be a member of the Church, and to persevere therein to the end, believing all she teaches, obeying all she commands.
St. John Eudes, excerpt from Man’s Contract with God in Baptism
COMMENT: St. John Eudes makes clear what ever faithful Catholic should already know, that is, it is by virtue of the sacrament of Baptism received with Faith that makes a person a Child of God. The Neo-modernist popes since Vatican II heretically teach that everyone is a child of God by virtue of the Incarnation of the Logos, the Word becoming flesh, where the second Person of the Trinity, by personally uniting Himself with our human nature, thereby elevated all humanity to being children of God by virtue of this shared humanity. For them, Baptism is only an outward sign acknowledging what has already taken place. It reduces Baptism from a necessity of means to a simple necessity of precept which obligates only those who feel some inner compulsion to obey. It is this fundamental corruption of revealed truth that makes modern ecumenism with such events as the blasphemous “Prayer Meeting at Assisi” possible. For them the “spiritual character” imprinted on the soul at Baptism is meaningless. The “spiritual character” is both the sign of and cause of the adoption as Sons of God. The character is like a receptacle that makes the reception of the sacramental grace of adoption possible. Those who have the character of the sacrament without the sanctifying grace of adoption will suffer the greatest torments of all in hell.
It is an unfortunate fact that the many traditional Catholics and conservative Catholics believe this tripe and profess that any “good-willed” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. can be a child of God, a member of the Church, a temple of the Holy Ghost and an heir to heaven by virtue of being a “good” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. We call this “salvation by implicit desire.” This error is derived essentially from the more fundamental error of denying Dogma as Dogma, by overturning Dogma in its very nature. For these Neo-modernists, Dogma is not the revealed truth of God but only a human axiom open to unending refinement and new interpretations.
But the truth is that Dogma is divine revelation formally and infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church. It is irreformable in both the truth it declares and the words that it uses to define. It constitutes the formal object of divine and Catholic faith and is the proximate rule of faith for every faithful child of God. Not until every traditional Catholic recognizes and defends this truth will any effective resistance to Neo-modernist error be effectively mounted.
“The Jews are enemies of God and foes of our holy religion.” St. Pio of Pietrelicina
[American Jewish Committee’s interfaith affairs director Rabbi David] Rosen said. “Those who said Benedict was the last pope who would be a pope that lived through the Shoah, or that said there would not be another pope who had a personal connection to the Jewish people, they were wrong,” Rosen said.... Israel Singer, the former head of the World Jewish Congress, said he spent time working with Bergoglio when the two were distributing aid to the poor in Buenos Aires in the early 2000s, part of a joint Jewish-Catholic program called Tzedaka.... Bergoglio also wrote the foreward of a book by Rabbi Sergio Bergman, a Buenos Aires legislator, and referred to him as “one of my teachers.”.... Bergoglio attended Rosh Hashanah services at the Benei Tikva Slijot synagogue in September 2007.... Last November, Bergoglio hosted a Kristallnacht memorial event at the Buenos Aires Metropolitan Cathedral with Rabbi Alejandro Avruj from the NCI-Emanuel World Masorti congregation. He also has worked with the Latin American Jewish Congress and held meetings with Jewish youth who participate in its New Generations program.... In his visit to the Buenos Aires synagogue, according to the Catholic Zenit news agency, Bergoglio told the congregation that he was there to examine his heart “like a pilgrim, together with you, my elder brothers.”....
Jewish Telegraphic Agency, March 13, 2015
Benedict/Ratzinger: Claims to have resigned the Papacy while retaining a “spiritual dimension” of the Office!
It is here that Pope Benedict then draws a comparison with the papacy. For, such a retired bishop, he adds, “does not anymore actively have an episcopal seat, but, still finds himself in a special relationship of a former bishop to his seat.” This retired bishop, however, thereby “does not become a second bishop of his diocese,” explains Benedict. Such a bishop had “fully given up his office, yet the spiritual connection with his former seat was now being acknowledged, also as a legal quality.” This “new relationship with a seat” is “given as a reality, but lies outside of the concrete legal substance of the episcopal office.” At the same time, adds the retired Pope, the “spiritual connection” is being regarded as a “reality.”
“Thus,” he continues, “there are not two bishops, but one with a spiritual mandate, whose essence it is to serve his former diocese from within, from the Lord, by being present and available in prayer.”
“It is not conceivable why such a legal concept should not also be applied to the bishop of Rome,” Pope Benedict explicitly states, thus making it clear that according to his own ideas, he fully resigned his papal office while maintaining a “spiritual dimension” of his office.
Peter Seewald, Excerpt from book length interview with the ever talkative Benedict/Ratzinger to be published fall of 2020
“In my opinion, one of the most problematic aspects would be the idea, implicit in Pope Ratzinger’s act, that the papacy is not a single and indivisible office, but, on the contrary, a divisible office that can be ‘unpacked’, in the sense that a Pope may choose to give up some functions, keeping for himself others, which would not then be passed on to his successor. A clearly erroneous idea.” […]
“The comparison of the papal office with the episcopal office in what regards the abdication of the papal office is not correct. The episcopal office is conferred by episcopal ordination or consecration, imprinting an indelible character on the soul of the bishop. Thus, while he may be relieved of a particular pastoral responsibility, he remains always a bishop. The papal office is conferred by the acceptance of the election to the See of Peter, that is, by an act of the will of the person elected, accepting the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth. From the moment that the person elected consents he has the full jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff.”
If the person elected is not a Bishop,” Monsignor Bux continued, “he must be immediately consecrated a Bishop because the papacy entails the exercise of the episcopal office, but he is Pope from the moment he consents to the election. If the same person, at a certain point, declares that he can no longer fulfill the call to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, he loses the papal office and returns to the condition in which he was before giving the consent to be the Vicar of Christ on earth.”
Don Nicola Bux, Vatican theologian and former consultor to Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
The Comment from Msgr. Bux is very good but insufficiently critical of the imposter Benedict/Ratzinger’s running around in his white cassock constantly looking for someone to uncritically publish his latest musings. The very idea, the absurd notion, that he could retain a “spiritual dimension” of the papacy while resigning the office evidences further insight into this coward’s philosophical foundations which he has plainly expressed in his voluminous writings. Benedict/Ratzinger is an apologist of the modernist reductionist philosophy of scientism. He believes that the fundamental reality consists of atoms and the void in constant evolution. And since nothing is in a fixed state, he closes his mind to the reality of substance. In place of being, he affirms the process of becoming and makes the accident of relationship the foundation of his reality. He denies that the papacy has a substantial existence. This is heresy plain and simple. Why? Because it is a direct denial of Dogma regarding the immutability of the papal office which will exist as Jesus Christ established it until the end of time. It is indirect heresy because the philosophical principle of substance, and the principle of hylomorphism, that is, that material substantial being is composed of form and matter, have been incorporated in Dogmatic definitions and are therefore necessarily true descriptions of reality as God Himself has created and revealed it. Any separation of form and matter necessarily causes a substantial change. The substance ceases to be what it was and becomes something else. By denying the truth of substantial reality, it is impossible to believe the literal meaning of such Dogmas as those regarding the consubstantial relationship of the Father and the Son, as well as those dogmas regarding transubstantiation and the True Presence. This blabber about the “spiritual dimension” of the papacy existing apart from the actual office is just another example of the same problem. He denies the substantial reality, drives a wedge between the substantial form and the matter, destroys the substantial reality and then pretends that he can reconstitute the evolving reality in his own image. Benedict/Ratzinger, like all Modernists, is a Nominalist by default. Nominalists believe that we can only know sense perceptions and not intellectual perceptions. He becomes a Nominalist by default because he denies there is any substantial essence to intellectually perceive. He denies that any substantial reality can exist or if it does exist, that it can be known. He believes that we can only know the accidents of anything by sense perception and that these are in perpetual state of evolution in the reconstitution of atoms within the void.
Whether or not this is due to Benedict/Ratzinger’s vanity or his malice makes no difference. The result is a direct denial and attack upon the Dogma of the papacy and a scandal to all Catholics.
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
“God does not save factious sinners. Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ every more boldly. No sin will separate us form the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.” Martin Luther
When I awoke last night the Devil came and wanted to debate with me arguing that I was a sinner. To this I replied, “Tell me something new, Devil! I already know that perfectly well; I have committed many a solid and real sin. Indeed there must be good honest sins not fabricated and invented ones for God to forgive.” Martin Luther
In translating St. Paul, “We account a man to be justified by faith” (Romans 3:28), Luther added the word, “alone.” In answer to those who objected to his mutilating Sacred Scripture, he answered: “If your Papist annoys you with the word (alone), tell him straightway: Dr. Martin Luther will have it so. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by; the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Dr. Martin Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.”
Pope Francis the Lutheran:
“I think that Marin Luther's intentions were not mistaken. He was a reformer.... And today, Luther and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point which is very important, he did not err.”
Pope Francis, public interview, June 26, 2016
Catholic Faith: Council of Trent: Selected Canons on Justification
CANON IX.-If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.
CANON XII.-If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.
CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.
CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.
CANON XXIX.-If any one saith, that he, who has fallen after baptism, is not able by the grace of God to rise again; or, that he is able indeed to recover the justice which he has lost, but by faith alone without the sacrament of Penance, contrary to what the holy Roman and universal Church-instructed by Christ and his Apostles-has hitherto professed, observed, and taugh; let him be anathema.
CANON XXXIII.-If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.
Open Letter by “Papal favorite” calling for End of Summorum Pontificum
OPEN LETTER on the “State of Liturgical Exception” | Andrea Grillo, April 29, 2020
To all theologians, scholars, and students of theology:
The great liturgical tradition, which has always accompanied and supported the Church in her history of grace and sin, hears the groaning of individuals and nations in this pandemic crisis, which brings suffering and affliction to those who are sick, and fear, isolation and loneliness to everyone else. The ordinary rhythm of the Lenten and Paschal journey is altered and subverted, in solidarity with our common suffering. We would never have thought, however, that a small but not marginal suffering would also come at the same time through the exercise of ecclesial authority and through the decrees Quo magis e Cum sanctissima, which the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith published on 25 March 2020.
It is no surprise that This Congregation should devote its attention to the liturgy. But special and singular is the fact that it modifies the ordines, introduces prefaces and formularies for feasts, and modifies calendars and criteria of precedence. And it does this on a 1962 missal. How is this possible? The Congregation, as is known, in this case moves in the space of an exceptional authority, which dates back 13 years, in accordance with motu proprio Summorum pontificum. But since time is greater than space, what is possible on the regulatory level is not always appropriate. Therefore, it is crucial to engage in critical reflection on the logic of this development.
Time, in fact, has unveiled to us the paradox of a competence on the liturgy being taken away from the Bishops and the Congregation of Worship: this was arranged, in Summorum pontificum, with an intention of solemn pacification and generous reconciliation, but soon it changed into a serious division, a widespread conflict, and became the symbol of a “liturgical rejection” of the Second Vatican Council. The greatest distortion of the initial intentions of the motu proprio can be seen today in those diocesan seminaries where it is expected that the future ministers will be trained at the same time in two different rites: the conciliar rite and the one that denies it. All this reached its most surreal point the day before yesterday, when the two Decrees were released. They mark the culmination of a distortion which is no longer tolerable, and which can be summed up as follows:
· the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith acts as a substitute in exercising competences conferred by the Second Vatican Council on Bishops and the Congregation for Divine Worship;
· it undertakes to elaborate ”liturgical variants” of the ordines without having the historical, textual, philological and pastoral competences;
· it seems to ignore, precisely on the dogmatic level, a grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credendi, since it is inevitable that a dual, conflictual ritual form will lead to a significant division in the faith;
· it seems to underestimate the disruptive effect this “exception” will have on the ecclesial level, by immunizing a part of the community from the “school of prayer” that the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform have providentially given to the common ecclesial journey.
A “state of exception” is also happening today on the civil level, in its harsh necessity, and this fact allows us greater ecclesial foresight. To return to an ecclesial normality, we must overcome the state of liturgical exception established 13 years ago in another world, with other conditions and with other hopes, by Summorum pontificum. It no longer makes sense to deprive diocesan bishops of their liturgical powers; neither does it make sense to have an Ecclesia Dei Commission (which has in fact already been suppressed), or a Section of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith which take away authority from diocesan Bishops and the Congregation of Divine Worship; it no longer makes sense to enact decrees to “reform” a rite that is closed in the historical past, inert and crystallized, lifeless and without vigor. There can be no resuscitation for it. The double regime is over; the noble intention of SP has waned; the Lefebvrians have raised the barhigher and higher and then run away, insulting the Second Vatican Council and the present pope along with all three of his predecessors. Continuing to nourish a “state of liturgical exception” – one that was born to unite, but does nothing but divide – only leads to the shattering, privatization, and distortion of the worship of the Church. On the basis of these considerations, we resolve together to request that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith immediately withdraw the two decrees of 25/03/2020 and restore all powers concerning the liturgy to the diocesan Bishops and the Congregation for Divine Worship. Obviously, we ask this without prejudice to the powers that this Congregation retains in doctrinal matters.
So let us leave the “state of liturgical exception”. If not now, when?
With best wishes to all colleagues and students, besieged but not conquered in life, during these bitter yet still generous times.
“Time is greater than space” – The ideological lynchpin of Pope Francis the Great Equivocator
This liturgical OPEN LETTER structures its argument around the phrase: Time is Greater Than Space.” This enigmatic slogan of Pope Francis, “Time is greater than space” (TGTS), appeared in his first two encyclicals, Lumen Fidei and Laudato Si’. It surfaced again in the apostolic exhortations, Evangelii Gaudium and Amoris Laetitia.
From Lumen Fidei:
“Let us refuse to be robbed of hope, or to allow our hope to be dimmed by facile answers and solutions which block our progress, ‘fragmenting’ time and changing it into space. Time is always much greater than space. Space hardens processes, whereas time propels towards the future and encourages us to go forward in hope.”
Evangelii Gaudium is more revealing as to the cryptic meaning of this phrase:
222. A constant tension exists between fullness and limitation. Fullness evokes the desire for complete possession, while limitation is a wall set before us. Broadly speaking, “time” has to do with fullness as an expression of the horizon which constantly opens before us, while each individual moment has to do with limitation as an expression of enclosure. People live poised between each individual moment and the greater, brighter horizon of the utopian future as the final cause which draws us to itself. Here we see a first principle for progress in building a people: time is greater than space.
223. This principle enables us to work slowly but surely, without being obsessed with immediate results. It helps us patiently to endure difficult and adverse situations, or inevitable changes in our plans. It invites us to accept the tension between fullness and limitation, and to give a priority to time. One of the faults which we occasionally observe in sociopolitical activity is that spaces and power are preferred to time and processes. Giving priority to space means madly attempting to keep everything together in the present, trying to possess all the spaces of power and of self-assertion; it is to crystallize processes and presume to hold them back. Giving priority to time means being concerned about initiating processes rather than possessing spaces. Time governs spaces, illumines them and makes them links in a constantly expanding chain, with no possibility of return. What we need, then, is to give priority to actions which generate new processes in society and engage other persons and groups who can develop them to the point where they bear fruit in significant historical events. Without anxiety, but with clear convictions and tenacity.
St. Pius X said in Pascendi that Evolution is the fundamental principle of the heresy of Modernism. This error is practically applied when Modernists embrace Becoming and reject Being. This neologism of Francis, TGTS, is just a repacking of this old philosophical error of Modernism. Francis is trying to sound clever by putting a little make-up and bow-tie on the pig. But the pig remains a pig because that is his Being. Fr. Réginald Marie Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. explained this error in his great essay, Where is the New Theology Leading Us?, that was published in the Angelicum in 1946.
It should be remembered that on December 1, 1924, the Holy Office condemned 12 propositions taken from the philosophy of action, among which was number 5, or the new definition of truth: “Truth is not found in any particular act of the intellect wherein conformity with the object would be had, as the Scholastics say, but rather truth is always in a state of becoming, and consists in a progressive alignment of the understanding with life, indeed a certain perpetual process, by which the intellect strives to develop and explain that which experience presents or action requires: by which principle, moreover, as in all progression, nothing is ever determined or fixed.” The last of these condemned propositions is: “Even after Faith has been received, man ought not to rest in the dogmas of religion, and hold fast to them fixedly and immovably, but always solicitous to remain moving ahead toward a deeper truth and even evolving into new notions, and even correcting that which he believes.”
Many, who did not heed these warnings, have now reverted to these errors.
It revisits modernism. Because it accepted the proposition which was intrinsic to modernism: that of substituting, as if it were illusory, the traditional definition of truth: aequatio rei et intellectus (the adequation of intellect and reality), for the subjective definition: adequatio realis mentis et vitae (the adequation of intellect and life). That was more explicitly stated in the already cited proposition, which emerged from the philosophy of action, and was condemned by the Holy Office, December 1, 1924: “Truth is not found in any particular act of the intellect wherein conformity with the object would be had, as the Scholastics say, but rather truth is always in a state of becoming, and consists in a progressive alignment of the understanding with life, indeed a certain perpetual process, by which the intellect strives to develop and explain that which experience presents or action requires: by which principle, moreover, as in all progression, nothing is ever determined or fixed” (v. Monitore ecclesiastico, 1925. t. I; p. 194.)
The truth is no longer the conformity (of judgment) to the intuitive reality and its immutable laws but the conformity of judgment to the exigencies of action, and of human life which continues to evolve. The philosophy of being or ontology is substituted by the philosophy of action which defines truth as no longer a function of being but of action.
Thus is modernism reprised: “Truth is no more immutable than man himself, inasmuch as it is evolved with him, in him and through him. As well, Pius X said of the modernists, “they pervert the eternal concept of truth.”
The traditional definition truth is no longer for them the conformity of judgment to intuitive being and the immutable laws of non-contradiction, of causality, etc. For them, the truth is no longer that which is but that which is becoming — and is constantly and always changing.
For the Modernist heretic, Pope Francis, “Time is greater than space,” “Time” means the process of becoming through evolution and “Space” is the limitation of static being. They prefer the prusuit of truth over its actual possession. A library could be filled with analyzing the implications of this error but suffice for the present there are two obvious to everyone: Firstly, the very definition of heresy is the rejection of DOGMA. For the faithful Catholic, DOGMA is NECESSARILY the proximate rule of faith. This is directly rejected by the Modernists. They replace Dogma with the person of the pope as the proximate rule of faith and he is free to corrupt the revealed truth in whatever manner he pleases. The second obvious error is that they deny the philosophical meaning of substance. They follow modern reductionist Scientism that resurrected the Greek philosopher Democritus’ (460-370 B.C.) theory that the fundamental nature of all that existed is “atoms and the void.” Since all reality is just the recombination of atoms and the void between them, then there cannot be such thing as a fixed substance in which accidents adhere. Consequently, we have Benedict/Ratzinger denying substance altogether and, in its place, making the accident of relationship the fundamental ground of all reality. It is therefore not surprising when he denies the Dogma of Transubstantiation. And what becomes of the Dogma that the Father and the Son are Consubstantial? Francis follows in the same manner and never kneels before the Blessed Sacrament. No argument can touch these blighted minds, if you call a “mind” something that never thinks. It matters not what wreckage and ruin that has followed since Vatican II because the being of the wreckage cannot overcome their ideological fantasy of becoming as Pope Francis looks to his “brighter horizon of the utopian future.”
The truth is just the opposite, ‘Space is Greater than Time.’ God revealed His name to Moses, “I AM.” Jesus applied this name to Himself. God is perfect BEING; He is perfect ACT: “Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration” (James 1:17). Ultimately time will end in a changeless eternity where the faithful will be with God in a space prepared by Him for each one of us. “In my Father's house there are many mansions. If not, I would have told you: because I go to prepare a place for you. And if I shall go, and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will take you to myself; that where I am, you also may be” (John 14:2-3).
Andrea Grillo gives as a reason for the suppression of the Latin Mass granted to the Indult crowd:
· it seems to ignore, precisely on the dogmatic level, a grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credendi, since it is inevitable that a dual, conflictual ritual form will lead to a significant division in the faith;
He too believes with Francis that TGTS. Latin Mass Catholics are stuck in space while the Catholic Church is moving in time to a new “dogmatic level.” The two rites he says represent a “grave conflict between the lex orandi and the lex credenda.” Are to congratulate Grillo for this insight? Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith with his Interventionin in 1969 said the same thing! This is a truth that faithful Catholics have known for more than 50 years! Yet Indultists publicly deny this truth professing that both the Novus Ordo and the traditional Latin rite express an identity of “lex orandi /lex credendi.” This is the price they have paid for their Indult.
Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission’s purpose is to make a public profession of the Catholic faith before our local ordinary and Rome. Foundational to this purpose is that DOGMA is divine revelation infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church and irreformable in its terminology which becomes the “formal object of divine and Catholic faith” and constitutes the proximate rule of faith. Furthermore, our immemorial ecclesiastical traditions are necessary attributes of the faith by which alone the faith can be known and communicated to others. Since God has imposed a duty upon His faithful to profess their faith and worship Him in the public forum, every Catholic possesses the inalienable right to our immemorial traditions by which alone these duties can be fulfilled. Those who have accepted the Latin Mass by virtue of Indult and/or grant of legal privilege want a non-confrontational modus vivendi with Modernist heretics. This has never worked in the past and it will not work now. Being neither ‘cold nor hot’, they please no one and will soon learn that having traded their birth right for bowl of pottage there is nothing left to eat.
Satan’s Primary Target: The Family
“The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”
Sr. Lucia, letter to Cardinal Carlo Caffara
It is no accident that this Heresy which denies the Catholic doctrine concerning Supernatural Charity is to be found in a document which purports to encapsulate the teaching of the Synod on the Family.
Continuing the metaphor employed at the beginning of this article, we may rightly say that, if the Catholic truth concerning Charity is the “Hub” of the wheel of all true Catholic life, then the family is the lynch-pin which holds this wheel in place as the foundational institution incarnating this Charity in the life of both the Church and the world. The family is the place where Charity is received through baptism. It is the place where it is nourished through love. It is where it receives its foundations and bulwarks through the educational process, and the place of support and protection where it endures through the sufferings of this life. It is the Family, and the question as to whether it is constituted as either a place of Charity or its denial, which determines whether we live in a Christian civilization, or a civilization turned away from God to the worship of Evil.
It is also therefore no accident that the chapter of Amoris Laetitia (Chapter VIII) which attempts to enshrine this heresy within its teaching on the family is called “Accompanying, discerning and integrating weakness.” The “weaknesses” specifically addressed in this chapter are Catholics couples living in objective mortal sin through cohabitation, those in a civil marriage without the sacrament, and those who have gone through the process of civil divorce and remarriage. Each of these are designated as “weaknesses” in this document, but are in reality situations of objective mortal sins which are primary attacks upon the family and the institution of marriage upon which it is founded. To therefore speak of integrating such sins into the Church is to speak of integrating evil into the very lifeblood of the Church, thereby violating the entire Christian idea of what constitutes Charity within the family.
The key to this satanic strategy is the word “integration”. It is a word which is absolutely central, not only to the agenda of a totally anti-Christian occult worldview which now worships the evolutionary progress and “salvation” of the entire world through an “integral ecology”, but also the theology now dominant within the Church through the theology of Teilhard de Chardin and Pope Benedict, and which is now being implemented through the words and pastoral policies of Pope Francis and his supporters in the hierarchy. It views Christian Revelation not as immutable and finished upon the death of the last Apostle, but rather as an ongoing historical progression (containing no fixed absolutes,) toward the Omega point of Teilhardian evolution in which the truth will be fully revealed and incarnated.
James Larson, Excerpt from, A Love That Maketh a Lie: Amoris Laetitia and the Teilhardian Agenda
Our implacable enemy, Satan, and the mystery of iniquity:
“What though the field be lost?
All is not lost: the unconquerable will,
And study of revenge, immortal hate,
And the courage never to submit or yield!”
John Milton, Paradise Lost
ROME (AP) — Pope Francis is urging the faithful to use the coronavirus pandemic’s “time of trial” to prepare for a future where inequalities are abolished and the poorest are no longer left behind.
“This is not some ideology,” Francis said. “It is Christianity.”
Francis traveled a few blocks outside the Vatican walls on Sunday to celebrate Mass at a nearby church to mark a special feast day dedicated to mercy. Only a few priests were in the pews given Italy’s strict virus lockdown.
In his homily, Francis said the grave, global toll of the pandemic has reminded the world that there are no borders between those who suffer, no differences in nationalities among those who are struck or spared.
“We are all frail, all equal, all precious,” he said.
“May we be profoundly shaken by what is happening all around us,” he said from the altar of the Santo Spirito church. “The time has come to eliminate inequalities, to heal the injustice that is undermining the health of the entire human family!”
While people infected with the coronavirus often experience mild or moderate symptoms, possible complications like pneumonia can put their lives at risk.
Francis has been using his daily livestreamed Masses in the Vatican hotel where he lives to single out a particular group of people for prayers during the pandemic: the elderly, doctors and nurses, prisoners and those with disabilities.
On Sunday, he delivered a broader message about inequality and the need for a post-virus world to rethink its priorities. It’s a theme that echoes the pre-pandemic preaching of the world’s first Latin American pope, who has constantly demanded greater solidarity among rich and poor.
In recent days, Francis has proposed the creation of a universal basic wage to help those who have lost their jobs as a result of the virus economic shutdown to survive. On Sunday, he said there is a grave risk that while COVID-19 might eventually be tamed, the virus of “selfishness indifference” could take its place.
To combat that risk, he said: “Let us welcome this time of trial as an opportunity to prepare for our collective future. Because without an all-embracing vision, there will be no future for anyone.”
COMMENT: The inequality of God is evident everywhere in His creation. “And he said to them that stood by: Take the pound away from him, and give it to him that hath ten pounds. And they said to him: Lord, he hath ten pounds. But I say to you, that to every one that hath shall be given, and he shall abound: and from him that hath not, even that which he hath, shall be taken from him. But as for those my enemies, who would not have me reign over them, bring them hither, and kill them before me. And having said these things, he went before, going up to Jerusalem” (Luke 19:24-28).
But when the first also came, they thought that they should receive more: and they also received every man a penny. And receiving it they murmured against the master of the house, Saying: These last have worked but one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us, that have borne the burden of the day and the heats. But he answering said to one of them: Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst thou not agree with me for a penny? Take what is thine, and go thy way: I will also give to this last even as to thee. Or, is it not lawful for me to do what I will? is thy eye evil, because I am good? So shall the last be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen” (Matt. 20:10-16).
Pope Francis is crude communist ideologue who views the gospel through the lens of liberation theology. It was only a year ago in May 2019 that Pope Francis called for a one-world government saying, “When a supranational common good is clearly identified, there is need for a special legally constituted authority capable of facilitating its implementation. Think of the great contemporary challenges of climate change, new slavery and peace.” He censored sharply the nation state saying that it leads to “excluding and hating others, when it becomes conflictual nationalism that builds walls, indeed even racism or anti-Semitism.” In this talk he supported the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals which includes abortion and, in its earlier drafts, called for a world population of 500 million. He also censored “ideological colonization” which was a code word for converting others to Jesus Christ.
Pope Francis is an apostate. Unless there is repentance, he will suffer the same fate as those who refuse the rule of Jesus Christ. Even what he thinks he has will be taken away.
“They Are Trying to Establish a ‘Neo-Church’”
– New Interview with Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano
In a new interview, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano criticizes the fact that a connubium of modernists and Freemasonry wants to create a “neo-church”.
Benedict XVI also confirmed the topicality of the message of the Virgin Mary, although according to the interpretation spread by the Vatican, it is to be regarded as complete. (N.B., Benedict/Ratzinger with the CDF and Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone as Secretary of State were the primary promoters of this Vatican position that the Fatima message is to be regarded as an historical event.) Those who have read the Third Secret said in all clarity that it concerns the apostasy of the Church, which began at the very beginning of the 1960s and has now reached such an obvious stage that it is recognized even by inexperienced observers. This almost compulsive insistence on issues that the Church has always condemned, such as relativism and religious indifferentism, false ecumenism, Malthusian ecology, homoheresy and mass immigration, has found in the Abu Dhabi Declaration the fulfilment of a plan conceived by secret sects for more than two centuries. [….]
A church that presents itself as new in contrast to the Church of Christ is simply not the Church of Christ! The Mosaic religion, that is, the “Church of the Old Law”, which was wanted by God to lead His people to the coming of the Messiah, has found its fulfillment and completion in the New Covenant and was finally revoked on Calvary by the sacrifice of Christ. From his open side came the New and Eternal Covenant, which replaced the synagogue. It seems that the post-Conciliar, modernist and Freemason Church also aims to transform, overcome, and replace the Church of Christ with a “neo-church”, a disfigured and monstrous creature that does not come from God.
The purpose of this neo-church is not to get the chosen people to recognize the Messiah, just as it is not the purpose for the synagogue to convert and save all peoples from the second coming of Christ, which is the purpose of the Catholic Church. Its purpose is rather to constitute itself as the spiritual arm of the New World Order and to promote the One World Religion. In this sense, the Council Revolution first had to destroy the heritage of the Church, its thousand-year-old tradition from which it drew its vitality and authority as the mystical body of Christ. Then it was a matter of getting rid of the representative of the old hierarchy, and only recently she began to show herself to be what she wants to be, without pretense or camouflage.
What you call utopia is in fact a dystopia, because it represents the concreteization of the plan of Freemasonry and prepares the appearance of the Antichrist.
I am also convinced that the majority of my confreres, and especially almost all priests and believers, are not fully aware of this hellish plan, and that recent events have opened the eyes of many. Their faith will enable our Lord to gather the pusillus grex, the small flock, before the final confrontation around the true shepherd.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, excerpt from new interview published April 22, 2020
COMMENT: A characteristic attribute with all conservative Catholics is that they think the problems with the Church began when they discovered them. Therefore, everyone that figured it out before they did were precipitously rash, radical, acting without sufficient evidence or motive, drawing conclusions without sufficient cause or reason. They then recommend that they Church needs a restoration to the way everything was before they became unsettled. This first cause of this is pride. Therefore they do not trouble themselves for a deeper understanding of how and why the Church has come to a condition of generalized apostasy. The second cause that follows from the first is ingratitude and indifference toward those who have been defending the faith for the last fifty-plus years. With all due respect, Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, who is already a member of the ‘Neo-Church’, has exhibited this same quality as other conservative Catholics, but there are indications in these comments above that he is discovering Catholic tradition. We are always pleased to see conservative Catholics begin to figure out that things are not as they should be, but as a rule, when you are lost, you should ask directions from others who know the lay of the land, who know where you are, and who know how you can get to where you need to be going. That apparently is what Archbishop Vigano is now doing.
Cardinals, bishops ask pope to dogmatically declare Mary ‘spiritual Mother’ in face of pandemic
Mary should be declared 'Mother of all Peoples' to release grace on humanity, they write.
LifeSiteNews | April 15, 2020 — Cardinals and bishops representing each continent begged Pope Francis in an Easter letter to dogmatically proclaim Mary as “Spiritual Mother of all Peoples” as the world faces the “historic” coronavirus pandemic.
The letter states that the signatories made this same request of the Holy Father in August 2019, but felt the “pastoral and moral imperative” to appeal to him again as the “world faces exponentially greater disaster on personal, social, political, economic, and humanitarian aspects” because of the coronavirus pandemic.
“[B]ehind all these external events, a spiritual battle is taking place, more than ever, between good and evil, light and darkness, in the hearts of humanity,” they state.
“Here, the real battle must be fought. Humanity is in great need of conversion, and of supernatural help which can only come from the Lord Jesus, and from his Mother.”
The two cardinals and six bishops who signed the letter believe God is waiting for the Church “to dogmatically proclaim Mary as the ‘Spiritual Mother of all Peoples’, in a solemn declaration of her unique cooperation with Jesus in the Redemption, and her consequential roles in the distribution of grace and intercession for humanity, for which he will respond with a historic new outpouring of his Holy Spirit and the eventual grace of world peace.” […..]
COMMENT: The Blessed Virgin Mary gives God’s plan for “world peace” at Fatima and these clerics, turning their back on God, come up with what they think to be a better idea. What is just as bad, the Blessed Virgin Mary is not the “spiritual mother of all peoples.” And this title of “mother of all peoples” is not equivalent to or consequent from her titles as “Co-Redemptrix” and “Mother of all Grace.” The Blessed Virgin Mary is the Mother of all those who “have been baptized in Christ, (and have) have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:27). Because she is the Mother of Jesus Christ, she is the Mother of all those who by grace are united with her divine Son. She is the Mother of all those “who keep the commandments of God,” as St. John so perfectly said: “And the dragon was angry against the woman: and went to make war with the rest of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” (Apoc. 12:17). The Church liturgically attributes to her from the prophecy from Sirach: “Let thy dwelling be in Jacob, and thy inheritance in Israel, and take root in my elect... And so was I established in Sion, and in the holy city likewise I rested, and my power was in Jerusalem. And I took root in an honorable people, and in the portion of my God his inheritance, and my abode is in the full assembly of saints.” These clerics could not be sufficiently insulted because they are aggravating the problem for which they claim to be offering a relief. As the Blessed Virgin Mary said at Fatima, “The good will have much to suffer.”
[Modernism is the] synthesis of all heresies [whose] system means the destruction not of the Catholic religion alone, but of all religion.... [Modernists] partisans of error are to be sought not only among the Church’s open enemies; but what is to be most dreaded and deplored, in her very bosom, and are all the more mischievous the less they keep in the open.... They put themselves forward as reformers of the Church [though they are] thoroughly imbued with the poisonous doctrines taught by the enemies of the Church.... They assail all that is most sacred in the work of Christ.... [They are] the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church... They lay the axe not to the branches and shoots, but to the very root, that is, to the Faith and its deepest fibers.... The most absurd tenet of the Modernists, that every religion according to the different aspect under which it is viewed, must be considered as both natural and supernatural. It is thus that they make consciousness and revelation synonymous. From this they derive the law laid down as the universal standard, according to which religious consciousness is to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and that to it all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church. St. Pius X, Pascendi
Therefore: In the Novus Ordo Church of Sweet Dreams where harshness is always frowned upon harshly!
· Religious Liberty is the doctrinal validation of “Religious Consciousness.”
· Ecumenism is the collectivization and synthesis through dialogue of the individual’s “Religious Consciousness.”
· “Faith” is the affirmation of the subjective “Religiousness Consciousness” on the authority of the believer.
· “Dogma” is the historical and transitory expression of “Religiousness Consciousness” for a particular age.
· “Tradition” is the historical experience from which the present “Religious Consciousness” has evolved.
Our Lady of Good Success to the Catholics of Today
My Beloved Daughter, I am Mary of Good Success, your Mother and your Protectress, I carry my most Holy Son in my left arm and the scepter of the world in my right arm…. The sanctuary lamp which you just saw go out has several meanings.
Firstly, towards the end of the nineteenth century and during a large part if the twentieth century there will arise various errors and the whole universe will become Republican. The precious light of faith will be going out following on the almost complete destruction of morals; in that time there will be many tribulations, moral tribulations also, both public and private. The little group of people who keep the true worship of faith and the virtues will have to suffer cruelly and indescribably. The constant martyrdom will bring many to an early death, they will be counted amongst the martyrs, they have sacrificed themselves for Church and country. In order to deliver oneself from the slavery of these errors one will need great strength of will, perseverance, courage and a great trust in God. These are gifts of the merciful love of my Divine Son, He has provided them for the renewal. In order to test the faith and the trust of the just and good men there will be moments when everything seems to be lost and paralyzed but that is the moment in which the happy beginning of the complete renewal starts.
Secondly, my communities will be abandoned, sunk in an abyss, a deep ocean of bitterness and they will seem to be satiated with sufferings and afflictions. How many good vocations are lost because of lack of good and prudent spiritual direction; the Novice Mistresses should take great care of the prayers of the novices and they should show understanding of souls.
The Third reason for the extinguishing of the sanctuary lamp is the spirit of impurity of those times, the air will be filled with this unclean spirit. A flood of filth will overflow the streets, the squares, and all public places so that there will be no virginal souls left in the world.
Fourthly, in all layers of society errors will strive with great cunning to penetrate into the families in order to corrupt the youth too; Satan will congratulate himself that he can feed himself in the fouled way on the hearts of the children. The innocence of children will hardly exist anymore. Priestly vocations will be lost. That will be a true misfortune and priests will turn away from their holy duties and enter upon a false, wrong course, and therefore the Church will go dark. No prelate and father will be watching any longer with love, strength and prudence over this flock, and many of the prelates will lose the spirit of God and bring their own souls into danger. Pray constantly, call upon heaven without tiring, and weep without ceasing inwardly in your heart and pray to the Heavenly Father through the Eucharistic Heart of my Divine Son Who has nobly shed blood.
Out of the bitterness and pains of His sufferings and death, pray that He will have compassion upon His servants, that He will bring an end to this terrible scourge by sending to the Church a prelate to renew the spirit of His priests. My Divine Son and I will surround this beloved son with a special love, we shall pour out a heap of many graces of humility of heart and docility towards God’s inspirations, and the strength to defend the rights of the Church so that he will know how to defend the rights of the Church with a heart which enables him to behave like another Christ towards the mighty people of this world and the little people of this world without despising the unfortunate ones. He will, with a divine gentleness, lead into the convents and monasteries souls consecrated to God for the service of God without making the yoke of the Lord heavy upon them. He holds in his hands the scales of sanctity in order that everything happen according to the weight and measure so that God be glorified.
This prelate and father will form a counter-weight against the lukewarmness of priests and religious who are meant to be dedicated to God. As a result of the guilt of these faithless men, Satan will gain upon earth control of this world like a dark cloud which darkens the sky and darkens all of the people who are consecrated to the Most Holy Heart of my Divine Son. All will have to suffer chastisements because all kinds of crimes have been allowed. They will suffer pestilence, hunger, civil strife, degeneration of morals and the loss of countless souls. In order to blow away the black clouds which block the shining holiness and the freedom of the Church there will be a fearful war in which much blood will flow of priests and religious. This night will be so terrible that people will think that wickedness is conquering. Then strikes my heart and in a most sudden way I shall annihilate the pride of Satan, I shall assist and liberate the Church and country from his cruel tyranny.
The Fifth reason why the sanctuary lamp went out is that influential men will watch with indifference, uncaringly, the oppression of the Church, the persecution of virtue and the triumph of wickedness. Because these influential people will not use their position of influence in order to combat evil or to renew the faith, the people will gradually become indifferent to the demands of God, they will take on an evil spirit and let themselves be swept away in all kinds of passion and vice. My beloved daughter, were you to live that terrible time you would die of pain or grief over the circumstances which I have described to you. The love of my Holy Son and mine which we have for this world which is our property demand from now on sacrifices and good works in order that the duration of this terrible catastrophe will be shortened.
The Blessed and ever Virgin Mary, under the title of Our Lady of Good Success, to Sister Maria Anna of Jesus, in the Convent of the Immaculate Conception in Quito on the 2nd February, 1634. Sister was praying in front of the Blessed Sacrament when suddenly the sanctuary lamp went out.
Unintended blessings from Pandemic
De Mattei: Is the Corona Virus “the black swan” of 2020?
Roberto de Mattei | Corrispondenza Romana | March 25, 2020
“Our Lady asked for something more: the specific consecration of Russia, done by the Pope, in union with all the bishops of the world. It is this act, until now never done, that everyone is waiting for, before it is too late.”
[……]The world’s interconnected economy is proving itself to be a precarious system, but the impact of the Corona Virus is not only economical and sanitary, it is also religious and ideological. The Utopia of Globalization, which until September 2019, seemed to prevail, is [now] undergoing an irremediable debacle. On September 12, 2019, Pope Francis had invited the leaders of the major religions, and the international exponents of the economic, political and cultural world, to participate in a solemn event which was to take place in the Vatican on May 14, 2020: the Global Compact on Education. Around the same time “the prophetess” of deep ecology, Greta Thunberg, arrived in New York for the U.N. Climate Change Summit 2019, and Pope Francis on the eve of the Amazon Synod, sent a video- message to her and the participants at the summit, manifesting his full consonance with the globalist aims.
On January 20, 2020, the Pope addressed a message to Klaus Schwab, Executive President of the World Economic Forum (WEF), of Davos, underlining the importance of an “integral ecology”, which takes into account “the complexity of the interconnection of our common home”. But by then a mysterious virus had already begun to inflict a deadly blow on “the global village”.
A few months later, we find ourselves faced with an absolutely unprecedented situation. Greta is forgotten, the Amazon Synod a failure, the world’s political leaders reveal their incapacity in dealing with the emergency, the Global Compact is off and St. Peter’s Square, spiritual centre of the world, is empty. The ecclesiastical authorities conform to (sometimes anticipating) the restrictive decrees from the civil authorities who forbid Masses and religious ceremonies of any kind. The most symbolic and paradoxical event is perhaps the closing of the Sanctuary in Lourdes, par excellence place of physical and spiritual healing, that barred its doors, for fear that someone might get ill there, praying to God for his health. Is it all a maneuver? Do we find ourselves faced with a totalitarian power that is restricting the freedom of citizens and is persecuting Christians? […..]
Pope Francis – his “most gentle manner”!
They (our most holy predecessors) knew the capacity of innovators in the art of deception. In order not to shock the ears of Catholics, the innovators sought to hide the subtleties of their tortuous maneuvers by the use of seemingly innocuous words such as would allow them to insinuate error into souls in the most gentle manner. Once the truth had been compromised, they could, by means of slight changes or additions in phraseology, distort the confession of the faith that is necessary for our salvation, and lead the faithful by subtle errors to their eternal damnation. This manner of dissimulating and lying is vicious, regardless of the circumstances under which it is used. For very good reasons it can never be tolerated in a synod of which the principal glory consists above all in teaching the truth with clarity and excluding all danger of error. Moreover, if all this is sinful, it cannot be excused in the way that one sees it being done, under the erroneous pretext that the seemingly shocking affirmations in one place are further developed along orthodox lines in other places, and even in yet other places corrected; as if allowing for the possibility of either affirming or denying the statement, or of leaving it up the personal inclinations of the individual – such has always been the fraudulent and daring method used by innovators to establish error. It allows for both the possibility of promoting error and of excusing it. It is a most reprehensible technique for the insinuation of doctrinal errors and one condemned long ago by our predecessor St. Celestine, who found it used in the writings of Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, and which he exposed in order to condemn it with the greatest possible severity. Once these texts were examined carefully, the impostor was exposed and confounded, for he expressed himself in a plethora of words, mixing true things with others that were obscure; mixing at times one with the other in such a way that he was also able to confess those things which were denied while at the same time possessing a basis for denying those very sentences which he confessed.
Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, 1794 papal bull addressed to all the faithful condemning 85 propositions from the Council of Pistoia, 1786
“On earth, no mortal should presume to reproach (redarguere) any faults to the Pontiff, because he who has to judge (judicaturus) others, should not be judged (judicandus) by anyone, unless he is found deviating from the Faith.”
Gratian, the ‘Father of Canon Law,’ Decree of Gratian, (Pars I, D 40, c. 6)
Pope Francis: An Eschatological Overview
The massive emphasis on mercy–giving and receiving–is the key to understanding the eschatological dimension of his pontificate
Vatican Insider | Stephen Walford | February 8, 2020
[….]This teaching on divine mercy is one example where a beautiful convergence between authentic private revelation and the magisterium has enabled the faithful to grasp an essential element of what it means to live an authentic Christian life. But there is more to it than that. In the Diary of St Faustina Kowalska, there is a little talked of, but undeniable theme running through it: the Lord makes clear the season of divine mercy is for the end times. St Faustina herself was told she would prepare the world for the Lord’s second coming, while St John Paul II in 2002 referred to the promise of Jesus to St Faustina that “a spark from Poland will prepare the world for my final coming” as binding.
It is surely the case that Pope Francis has–with the prompting of the Holy Spirit–taken what was in part embryonic in the pontificate of St John Paul II, and placed mercy as the absolute key for the future of the Church and the world. Its salvific message is plastered across almost every page of the Holy Father’s writings in one way or another, as the antidote to the ever increasing evil that offers only death and destruction.
Fr Spadaro in his essay also touches upon several teachings and attitudes that I too have long considered as of having great importance in understanding this Pope: Francis shuns a millenarian view of the future of humanity where some golden age of peace within history rules; his focus rests solely on the criteria for a blessed Final Judgement as found in the Beatitudes. The criteria, therefore is Jesus himself, since the Beatitudes are in essence, a portrait of the Lord. Furthermore, the Pope sees opportunities everywhere to build bridges and to invite reconciliation. No situation or soul is beyond help or redemption in the time God allows for conversion.
This charism of the Pope is the great dividing line between those who understand him and those who do not. How can he sting like St John the Baptist, yet at other times appear far too generous? In reality, he is following the criteria of Jesus to the letter–some may say even rigidly! He condemns hypocrisy, narcissism, self- love, and a pharisaical attitude that divides between “them” and “us.” He continually invites, even demands help for the poor and marginalised. His constant criticisms in Santa Marta simply warn us that we will be judged on love, and that no defence attorney will be present if we live now as armchair Christians with a Jonah syndrome. No, the Holy Father cares deeply, he knows Jesus recoils at hypocrisy and spiritual apathy and therefore in his heart, he must give the Church some tough love. What Pope Francis is obviously aware of, is the sad reality that for even many Catholics, Jesus’ warning concerning “love growing cold” (cf. Matt 24:12) applies now more than ever. How many refuse to forgive, to apologise, to give of themselves generously? How many create their own moral code, with excuses and exemptions? How many prefer to look after their own interests no matter how much suffering they leave in their wake? This in reality is apostasy from the central Christian message: to love God and neighbour. And thus charity, repentance, mercy are watered down to such an extent that they become meaningless.
In an eschatological sense, I see Francis trying to form a Church that is far more conformed to Jesus himself; one that is authentically evangelical; one that has its foundations in the dirt and dust of its precious flock; one in which love and humility are never again overshadowed by the lust for prestige, power and worldly success. In short, this is the vision of a Church that is being prepared as the Bride fit for her meeting with the Bridegroom.
Many Traditionalists are right though: there is a war, there is a powerful enemy, there is an apocalyptic battle being waged, but they are being seduced by that same enemy. The enemy is Satan, not Pope Francis, or other Catholics who they don’t agree with. Pope Francis, as a realist, knows the depth of this spiritual war, but he also knows wounded souls (no matter how those wounds came about) need love and mercy. They need salvation and are not to be seen as enemies fighting for the other side. This attitude of mercy is entirely in line with Jesus rebuking James and John, who suggested sending down fire from heaven on those who did not welcome the Lord (Lk 9:54).
The division being caused by those opposed to the Holy Father, does nothing other than serve the cause of Satan in creating confusion and doubt in the hearts of ordinary Catholics. Satan, of course, does not care too much with “the world” –he desires far more to destroy the Lord’s work in His Church; to suffocate the sacramental life from souls and to present preaching as hypocritical nonsense. He despises this Pope because Francis shines a light on his deviousness, and because the Holy Father is willing to take risks for the sake of the lost sheep.
Pope Francis has also contributed to the Marian Era that began in the mid nineteenth century; a period of time prophesied by St Louis de Montfort as preparation for the second coming of Jesus. Not only his very personal Marian devotion, but his emphasis on the church as Mother in imitation of Mary– including the new Feast of Mary Mother of the Church– has enabled the Church to reflect ever more the Marian dimension in its mission to bring the salvation of her Son to all. The Pope’s protection of Medjugorje should also be seen in this context. This Marian dimension is essential in the years ahead because it prepares for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, when divine love will proclaim the final victory; it moulds the faithful into humble souls who imitate Mary, and who follow her command to “do whatever He tells you” (Jn 2:5).
Of course, Pope Francis, like his predecessors shuns idle speculation and sees a danger in spending time immersed in apocalyptic literature especially from private revelation. What is important, is to keep an Advent spirit of watchfulness; to continually discern the signs of the times, but always with a vision of hope for eschatological glory, and not some intra historical era that will never come. Faith tells us that we can see a dawn breaking on the horizon, from the East; we can see the signs that summer is near (Matt 24:32), but we also know that until that Day arrives, the spiritual war will become more intense. To remain loyal to the Pope and his magisterium is to have a sure guide for what is still to come; it is to help avoid the pitfalls that will inevitably hurt us, but above all, it will keep us close to Jesus Christ.
In the magisterium and prophetic voice of Pope Francis, we are told to strip ourselves of all that hinders a full adherence to the Gospel: “Along this journey, the cultivation of all that is good, progress in the spiritual life and growth in love are the best counterbalance to evil. Those who choose to remain neutral, who are satisfied with little, who renounce the ideal of giving themselves generously to the Lord, will never hold out. Even less if they fall into defeatism, for “if we start without confidence, we have already lost half the battle and we bury our talents… Christian triumph is always a cross, yet a cross which is at the same time a victorious banner, borne with aggressive tenderness against the assaults of evil”
Even if we do not know the day or the hour, we do know how to keep our lamps lit; we know how to prepare. A revolution of love, tenderness and mercy is Pope Francis’ answer to the reality of the Last Judgment, from which no one can escape, and which in a very real sense is already in progress. If holiness is grasped with both hands, then the apocalypse holds no fears; in fact it presents a wealth of opportunities to serve the Lord.
Maranatha is the prayer that can and should live joyfully in the hearts of the faithful in this season of mercy. We can take it to the poor, the sick, the lonely, announcing that their liberation is near. And even if centuries are still to pass by, the Church will live by a new evangelical urgency that will ensure the torch of hope burns bright until the true light comes to illuminate a transfigured creation. Pope Francis is playing a vital part in ensuring the Church prepares well for whatever the Lords asks it to go through in the future. Let us pray for him and his immensely important task.
COMMENTARY on Overview of the Eschatology of Francis:
The first problem with the theologian Stephen Walford, and it is a huge problem, is that he makes the pope his proximate rule of faith and not Dogma. He therefore cannot distinguish between the pope’s personal magisterium based upon his grace of state and the Magisterium of the Church based upon the attribute of Infallibility that Jesus Christ endowed His Church. Whatever the current pope says or does becomes his rule of faith and is necessarily, in his estimation, the work of the Holy Ghost. Beginning with this colossal error, he works to build a bridge between the teaching of a heretical pope and the Catholic faithful.
But putting this error aside, he brings up a question that the Catholic faithful must be able to answer clearly with the revealed truth of God. So what is wrong with the modern popes emphasis of divine mercy? The problem is essentially that they emphasize divine mercy in opposition to divine justice and not as a different facet of the same jewel. Walford seems to be correct in that the popes of the Church of the New Advent believe that we are in the last age of the Church before the second coming of Jesus Christ. They also believe that this age is the time of mercy (as if other ages were not) and not justice (as if other ages were).
Benedict/Ratzinger held an interview with Jacques Servais, S.J. conducted in October of 2015 on questions of Faith and Justification. The interview was read by the Prefect of the Pontifical Household, Archbishop Georg Gänswein, to a subsequent Conference in November 2015 on Justification and published in March of 2016. In this interview Benedict/Ratzinger places in constant opposition the attributes of God’s mercy and God’s justice repeatedly characterizing His justice as “cruelty.” He quotes in support of his theology John Paul II who was “deeply impregnated with this impulse,” and Pope Francis whom he praises for his “pastoral practice (that) is expressed in the fact that he continually speaks to us of God’s mercy.” These popes all point to the gospel description of the last judgment in which the criteria for salvation or condemnation are the corporal works of mercy. Therefore they conclude, what one believes is of no importance but rather what one does for his fellow man. Thus, after dividing justice and mercy, they drive a wedge between faith and charity. It is from this that the term “evangelization” is redefined and distinguished from “proselytism,” heretofore they have always been considered as necessary compliments as a cause is to its direct effect. Proselytism, the traditional fruit of evangelization, converting others to the true faith, is condemned as “solemn nonsense” and the new evangelization becomes only dialogue to exchange opinions for the end of promoting corporal works of mercy (which never materialize).
Wisdom is the perfect knowledge of the most important things in their right order of reference. Discounting malice, Pope Francis has no wisdom because he has no right order of reference. “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Heb 11:6). Charity, which is the friendship between God and man, is greater than Faith, which is believing what God has revealed on the authority of God, but without Faith, Charity is impossible. No one can have the friendship of God who does not believe His Truth. Acts of Charity are an extension of the virtue of Charity because they are entirely grounded upon seeing the image of God in other men. There can be no Charity without Faith, and although Charity is greater than Faith, Faith takes precedence in time. St. Thomas considers sins against Faith as the greatest of all sins because they radically separate the person from God. In the Acts of the Apostles, the apostles began the work of evangelization by making proselytes out of the Jews and pagans. When the Faithful of the Church grew from these labors, the obligation for works of Charity correspondingly increased. What did the apostles do? They established the deaconate to attend to works of Charity so that these works of Charity would not impede the work of evangelization to make new proselytes.
The second coming of Jesus Christ will be characterized by the Great Apostasy from the Faith as described by St. Paul: “Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition...” (2 Thess. 2:3). Jesus said, “Will not God revenge his elect who cry to him day and night: and will he have patience in their regard? I say to you, that he will quickly revenge them. But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth” (Luke 18:7-8)? We are now in the Great Apostasy for at no time in history has the apostasy been so generalized and extended to the summit of Church authority.
It is impossible to drive a wedge between God’s justice and God’s mercy. God is perfect Act and infinite Simplicity. He is present wherever He acts. There are no distinguished parts in God. Mercy is only possible in the context of justice and vice versa, otherwise the entire Passion of Jesus Christ becomes meaningless. Jesus does not suffer the cruelty of His passion from the direct will of the Father but from sinful men by the Father’s permissive will. It is not the cruelty of God but cruelty of sinful men. Jesus as the Son of Man willingly suffers His Passion firstly to give honor and glory to the Father in the name of mankind to the end of redeeming man from sin.
“Without faith it is impossible to please God.” It is only through Faith that Charity can exist without which the merits of the redemptive suffering of Christ’s passions cannot be personally gained. “Therefore I said to you, that you shall die in your sins. For if you believe not that I AM he, you shall die in your sin. They said therefore to him: Who art thou? Jesus said to them: The beginning (I AM), who also speak unto you” (John 8:24-25).
In the last judgment when God makes a radical public distinction between “them” and “us,” Jesus Christ will say, “When I was thirsty and you gave me to drink” (Matt 35:25). The faithful will ask, “Lord, when did we see thee… thirsty and give thee to drink?” (37). Jesus will say, “Amen I say to you, as long as you did it to one of these my least brethren [that is, ‘As many of you as have been baptized in Christ, (who) have put on Christ’ (Gal 3:27) when they were ‘born again by water and the Holy Ghost’ (John 3:5),] you did it to me.” Only the faithful can see the image of God in the other and the likeness restored by the grace of Jesus Christ in the “brethren.”
Then He will say to those on His left condemned to hell, “Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least (that is, the “brethren” of Christ), neither did you do it to me” (45). Christ dwells in the souls of the faithful by Charity. Those condemned did not see Christ in the faithful. Those who are condemned may have given a drink to the thirsty but without faith, they did not see the image of God in the other, and therefore, they did not do it for Him. They were not works of Charity but works of human philanthropy. Works of mercy do not profit for salvation without Faith. While Faith can exist without Charity, Charity cannot exist without Faith in this world. Faith will pass with death but Charity will remain. That is why the last judgment is determined by acts of mercy and not articles of Faith because at the Last Judgment everyone will believe.
The modern Church of the New Advent is in true apostasy which is, by definition, the actual denial of revealed truth. They do not do works of mercy that profit for eternal salvation because they do not have faith. Yet Walford claims, in a remarkable inversion of divine Wisdom, that apostasy is failure in works of mercy. The rank hypocrisy in this claim is evident in that Catholic institutions doing works of mercy have crumbled since Vatican II when the age of mercy supposedly got underway. And still, the popes of the Church of the New Advent do not get it. Only by preaching the faith will acts of mercy again abound. Jesus said to St. John the Baptist who resisted baptizing Him, “For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice” (Matt 3:15). The Church of the New Advent cannot have part in the mercy of God because they have no part with Him to “fulfill all justice.” The blasphemy is this: the modern popes believe they are more merciful than God.
They proclaim the era of mercy in opposition to God’s “cruel” justice while essentially removing all penitential practices during Lent while accusing traditionalist Catholics of being “seduced by Satan” and “serving the cause of Satan” by the “division… creating confusion and doubt in the hearts of ordinary Catholics” when they oppose the rank heresy of Pope Francis. The implications of this division between justice-mercy and charity-faith overturn the Catholic dogmas on justification. The Church of the New Advent has a Lutheran conception of justification. In the Servais interview Benedict/Ratzinger said:
“It seems to me that in the theme of divine mercy is expressed in a new way what is meant by justification by faith. Starting from the mercy of God, which everyone is looking for, it is possible even today to interpret anew the fundamental nucleus of the doctrine of justification, and have it appear again in all its relevance.”
Benedict/Ratzinger “interprets anew” by mischaracterizing the Catholic dogmatic teaching on justification as “the conceptuality of St. Anselm” which he says “has now become for us incomprehensible” because it necessarily includes the justice of God. He then adds:
“Only where there is mercy does cruelty end, only with mercy do evil and violence end. Pope Francis is totally in agreement with this line. His pastoral practice is expressed in the fact that he continually speaks to us of God’s mercy. It is mercy that moves us toward God, while justice frightens us before Him.”
What is worse, Benedict/Ratzinger adds that God “simply cannot leave 'as is' the mass of evil that comes from the freedom that he himself has granted. Only He, coming to share in the world's suffering, can redeem the world.” So God becomes responsible for the “mass of evil” in the world because He is responsible for granting man “freedom” and is therefore compelled by justice “to share in the world's suffering” to “redeem the world”! The end of this is that God has an obligation in justice for mercy. The corollary to this is that man has an unconditional right to divine mercy.
God is not compelled to anything outside Himself. He cannot positively will evil. He can and does permit evil only because He and He alone is capable of bring good out of evil. No man can earn God's mercy and eternal salvation on their own merits.
“Charity is man’s friendship with God based on man’s share in the Divine Life, in the happiness of God Himself. But man cannot naturally share in God’s own life. Man’s participation in the Divine Life is a free supernatural gift which God gives to man. Charity then cannot be acquired by any purely human effort. It is a gift of God infused in man’s soul by God’s goodness and generosity. Charity, like the other theological virtues, is a supernatural virtue infused in the will by God Himself. Who can give man a share in the Divine Love except God Himself?”
Rev. Walter Farrell, O. P., My Way of Life, Pocket Edition of St. Thomas
A faithful Catholic in the state of grace is able to merit eternal life and atone for his sins because of his union by grace with Jesus Christ in Charity. This is what gives value to his prayers, penances, and mortifications without which they have no value at all. This union of Charity with Christ by grace permits the faithful to not only atone for their own sins but also for the sins of others as St. Paul said, “Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the church” (Col 1:24). And thus:
“The observance of Lent is the very badge of the Christian warfare. By it, we prove ourselves not to be enemies of the Cross of Christ. By it, we avert the scourges of divine justice. By it we gain strength against the princes of darkness, for it shields us with heavenly help. Should mankind grow remiss in their observance of Lent, it would be a detriment to God’s glory, a disgrace to the Catholic religion, and a danger to Christian souls. Neither can it be doubted, but that such negligence would become the source of misery to the world, of public calamity, and of private woe.”
Pope Benedict XIV, encyclical, May 30, 1741
Without the justice of God there could be no mercy. The faithful rejoice in the justice of God for by it we are made children of God and can merit eternal life. Those who divide God's mercy from His justice and believe that eternal life awaits them without the necessity of Faith and penance are whistling in the wind. There will not have any part with God in eternal life. May God in His mercy keep us in the right Faith, a burning Charity and a penitential spirit until our last breath.
Pope Francis never kneels before the Blessed Sacrament! Why?
Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. John 6:54-59
For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 1 Cor 11:26-29
Because for Francis, 'This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?' (John 6:60)
As we suffer under the moral and doctrinal Novelties of Pope Francis, it is evident why he wanted the Novelty Master, Paul VI, to become another novel Novus Ordo saint. Montini is the man who defined the Spirit of Vatican II in one word: NOVELTY in order to please men.
The Church Teaches:
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.”
St. Paul, Galatians 1, 8-10
“Blind that they are, and leaders of the blind, inflated with a boastful science, they have reached that pitch of folly where they pervert the eternal concept of truth and the true nature of the religious sentiment; with that new system of theirs they are seen to be under the sway of a blind and unchecked passion for novelty, thinking not at all of finding some solid foundation of truth, but despising the holy and apostolic traditions, they embrace other vain, futile, uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, on which, in the height of their vanity, they think they can rest and maintain truth itself.”
St. Pius X, Pascendi
“A lamentable spectacle is that presented by the aberrations of human reason when it yields to the spirit of novelty, when against the warning of the Apostle it seeks to know beyond what it is meant to know, and when relying too much on itself it thinks it can find the fruit outside the Church wherein truth is found without the slightest shadow of error.”
Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari nos, 1834, quoted by St. Pius X in Pascendi
“It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications of a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the faithful and dwells on the introduction of a new order of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspirations of the modern soul, on a new vocation of the clergy, on a new Christian civilisation.”
Leo XIII, Jan 27, 1902, quoted by St. Pius X in Pascendi
Paul VI Replys:
“... 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; then, the Apocalypse: I am making everything new. 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...– 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.”
Paul VI, General Audience, July 2, 1969
And we remember the “miracles” attributed to Paul VI that provided “evidence” for the “sanctity” of this Novelty Master! Two cases where the medical prognosis of morally degenerate abortionists proved to be incorrect are regarded as a “miracles”!
“This second miracle attributed to Pope Paul VI concerned the healing of an unborn in the fifth month of pregnancy. According to the Catholic News Agency the mother, from Verona in Italy, had an illness that risked her own life and the life of her unborn and was advised to have an abortion.
A few days after the beatification of Paul VI by Pope Francis in October 2014, the mother prayed to the now Blessed Paul VI at a shrine in Lombardy and the baby girl was later born in good health.
The first miracle involving Pope Paul VI took place in California in the 1990s. It also concerned an unborn which was found to have a serious health problem that could mean brain damage. Doctors advised that it be aborted, but the mother entrusted her pregnancy to Paul VI. The child was born healthy. Irish Times, Feb 6, 2018
COMMENT: In Mystici Corporis Pope Pius XII said that “only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.”
This definition of those who are members of the Church founded by Jesus Christ, outside of which there is neither the forgiveness of sins nor the possibility of salvation, authoritatively affirms the definition formulated by St. Robert Bellarmine. This teaching guides the practical implications of the three dogmas regarding salvation, that is: the necessity of receiving the sacraments; the necessity of professing the true faith (cannot be a heretic); and the necessity of being a subject of the Roman pontiff (cannot be a schismatic). A necessary correlative of these dogmas follows that the true obedience of those subject to the Roman pontiff is conditional upon the Roman pontiff defending the true faith and the true sacraments. Just as a child who disobeys the unjust command of a parent who commands sin does not cease thereby to being a subject of his parent, no Catholic who defends the true faith and the true sacraments when attacked by the Roman pontiff ceases to being his subject.
What Cardinal Zen needs to do (but is surely unable) is to affirm that Dogma is the proximate rule of faith, and therefore, he cannot in conscience permit faithful Catholics in China to be forced under the jurisdiction of the formally heretical bishops that make up the Communist government Patriotic Catholic Church in China. He should then consecrate bishops for the faithful Catholics in China without a papal mandate. He can even justify his actions by using the same argument offered by Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re in his open letter to Cardinal Zen, that is, “the expression independent Church can no longer be interpreted in an absolute manner as ‘separation’ from the Pope, as was the case in the past.” If this can be applied to the Communist government Church, it can applied to the those who profess the true faith in the underground Catholic Church.
Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission denies that we are an “independent” Church although this is what we are accused of by the hierarchy and ‘devout’ members of the Church of the New Advent. It is not an argument but a form of ad hominem attack as a means to beg the real questions regarding our public defense of Catholic truth. We can be grateful that Cardinal Re has scuttled their hypocritical posturing. But putting that aside, who do we think is telling the truth in this article posted below? Did Benedict/Ratzinger really play the major role in this betrayal of the Chinese Catholics as Cardinal Re claims and not Pope Francis? We expect that soon everyone will learn that Cardinal Re is telling the truth and Benedict/Ratzinger is perhaps a whole lot worse than Pope Francis. Extra-ordinary Pope Benedict/Ratzinger will prove to be the Ringmaster of this scandal; Ordinary Pope Francis will prove to be just another clown.
Vatican letter attacks Cardinal Zen, says Chinese 'patriotic' church is no longer 'independent'
LifeSiteNews | Riccardo Cascioli | Feb 29, 2020 | Reprint from The Daily Compass
Cardinal Joseph Zen is an obstacle for the Church in China, and from now on the Catholic Church can be formed by independent churches. This is the essence of an explosive and incredible letter sent on February 26 to all the cardinals by the Dean of the Sacred College, Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, that The Daily Compass has been shown exclusively. It marks a fierce and unheard of frontal attack on the 88-year-old archbishop emeritus of Hong Kong, the intrepid opponent of the secret agreement between China and the Holy See signed in Beijing on September 22, 2018.
It is an unprecedented gesture, made even more significant by the fact that is the first official act (protocol number 1/2020) of the new Dean of the Sacred College. Re was appointed as Dean on January 18 as a result of the Motu Proprio by which Pope Francis surprisingly made the deanship a position that now has a 5-year term limit, thereby retiring Cardinal Angelo Sodano.
The letter is intended to be a response to the letter that Cardinal Zen addressed to his brother cardinals last September 27, but Cardinal Re also makes explicit reference to various other interventions by Zen. The cardinal is well-known for speaking out boldly on behalf of so-called “clandestine” Chinese Catholics who are being humiliated and condemned by the 2018 agreement that still remains secret.
The first point of the letter declares the alleged continuity between Pope Francis and his predecessors regarding possible agreements with China: “In their approach to the situation of the Catholic Church in China, there is a profound symphony of the thought and action of the last three pontificates, which out of respect for the truth have favored dialogue between the two parties, not opposition.” Thus it attributes to Saint John Paul II “the idea of reaching a formal agreement with the governmental authorities on the appointment of bishops,” recalling that he “favored the return to full communion of bishops consecrated illicitly over the years, beginning in 1958.”
Cardinal Re then launches into a direct attack on Cardinal Zen, whose crime is that he has said many times that “it would be better to have no agreement rather than a ‘bad agreement.’” According to Re, “the last three popes did not share this position and supported and accompanied the drafting of the agreement that, at the present time, seemed to be the only one possible.”
These affirmations made by Cardinal Re constitute a grave distortion of reality, because it is obvious that Saint (sic) John Paul II and Benedict XVI took an approach that is markedly different from that of the present pontificate. If it is true that they had a great desire for dialogue with China and dedicated many efforts to it, it is equally true that this dialogue was exclusively a function of their goal of helping the Chinese Church – divided between the “patriotic” church and the “clandestine” church – to be reconciled.
At the same time, they consistently reaffirmed the non-negotiable points for an agreement, which had to respect religious freedom and the identity of the Church, including the freedom to appoint bishops. The harsh responses of Saint (sic) John Paul II to Chinese provocations over the appointment of bishops bears witness to this, as does his decision to proceed with the canonizations of the Chinese martyrs on October 1, 2000, despite the harsh objections of Beijing, and also Benedict XVI’s May 27, 2007 Letter to Chinese Catholics, to cite only a few of the most egregious examples.
Cardinal Re then goes on to deny a statement by Cardinal Zen that the agreement signed in September 2018 could be “the same one that Pope Benedict had at the time refused to sign.” The Dean assures his fellow cardinals that he has verified this in the Archive of the Secretariat of State and makes an astounding declaration: “Pope Benedict XVI had approved the draft of the Agreement on the appointment of Bishops in China, which it was only possible to sign in 2018.”
And so, according to Cardinal Re, the secret Agreement also bears the signature of Benedict XVI, a sensational revelation that at this point requires proof: the documents of the Secretariat of State cited by Cardinal Re and the secret agreement of 2018 need to be made public so as to verify such affirmations. If this were shown to be true, one could only deduce that Pope Benedict XVI had reneged on everything he had publicly written, such as for example in his famous already-mentioned May 2007 Letter to Chinese Catholics, whose radical difference to the approach laid out by Re we show in another article. Moreover, Re does not explain why, if Benedict XVI had given his placet to the Agreement, it was not already signed ten years ago.
Immediately after this, there is the passage that is most pregnant with consequences for the universal Church: “The Agreement provides for the intervention of the authority of the Pope in the process of the appointment of Bishops in China. Even starting from this certain fact, the expression independent Church can no longer be interpreted in an absolute manner as “separation” from the Pope, as was the case in the past.” These affirmations leave one speechless: “independent Churches” can be simultaneously in communion with the Pope, a declaration that has implications far beyond the Chinese Church and proposes a new ecclesiology. But this is exactly what Pope Benedict XVI denied in the Letter to Chinese Catholics, declaring the statutes of the Patriotic Association to be “irreconcilable with Catholic doctrine.” And yet, as far as we can tell, the secret Agreement has legitimized them.
Cardinal Re is clearly aware of the implications of these statements, so much so that immediately afterwards he explains that we are at a moment of “epochal change” which gives rise to consequences “both on the doctrinal and practical level.” Thus he explicitly says that doctrinal changes have been enacted in order to arrive at the Agreement with the Chinese government. This is a very serious affirmation, as one can easily guess: it is the exact opposite approach to the one expressed publicly by Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
The rest of the letter goes on to cite the harshest criticisms of the Agreement made by Cardinal Zen, declaring them to be “objections” to the “pastoral guidance of the Holy Father toward “clandestine” Catholics,” making a reference to the fact that the Pope has repeatedly listened to Cardinal Zen’s reasoning and read “his many missives.” Cardinal Zen thus becomes the easy scapegoat for the prolongation of “tensions and painful situations” that divide the Chinese Church despite the efforts of the pope and his collaborators.
In other words, the letter of Cardinal Re – who obviously did not write on his own initiative – is truly a call to his brother cardinals to isolate Cardinal Zen, even to the point of making one think that the elimination of the Archbishop emeritus of Hong Kong is part of the secret agreement. But Cardinal Re should explain to us why it is that persecution against Catholics in China has intensified since the agreement was signed while the Holy See has remained completely silent. And he should also explain why the Patriotic Association, now recognized by the Holy See, has never expressed so much as a desire for communion with Rome.
Archbishop Viganò responds to criticism of Cardinal Zen: Vatican has delivered the Chinese Church to the enemy
Full text of letter by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to Cardinal Joseph Zen
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò | LifeSiteNews | Feb 29, 2020
This is Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, former Apostolic Nuncio to the United States of America.
I have followed deeply — sharing in prayer your suffering — your many heartfelt appeals to Pope Bergoglio concerning the tragic situation of the Martyr Church in China, which he himself has culpably aggravated through the treacherous and wicked secret Agreement signed by Holy See with the Chinese Communist Government.
Your heartfelt appeals, dear Brother in Christ, have systematically been unheeded and even mocked in a hypocritical and perverse way. As for Cardinal Parolin, he has acted as a mere reckless executor of an evil order from above.
I read this morning the ignominious and shameful letter that Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re has addressed to all the cardinals against you. I am deeply saddened and indignant, and I wish to express to you all my affection, prayer and fraternal solidarity in the episcopate.
You are a courageous Confessor of the Faith and you have all my esteem and veneration!
Unfortunately, in the Vatican lying has been set into the system, truth has been totally overturned, and the most perverse deception is shamelessly practiced even by the most unsuspected figures, who have now given themselves over to acting as accomplices of the Adversary. They have even gone so far as to say that “Pope Benedict XVI had approved the draft Agreement” signed in 2018, when instead we all know of his strenuous resistance and repeated disapproval of the conditions imposed by a persecutory and bloody regime.
The Vatican has done everything and more to deliver the Chinese Martyr Church into the hands of the Enemy: it did so by signing the Secret Pact; it did so by legitimizing excommunicated “bishops” who are agents of the regime; it did so by the deposition of legitimate bishops; it did so by forcing faithful priests to register with a church that has succumbed to the Communist dictatorship; it does so on a daily basis by keeping silent about the persecutory fury that has gained unprecedented strength, precisely since the signing of that unfortunate Agreement. It is now doing so with this ignoble letter to all the cardinals, which is aimed at accusing you, denigrating you, and isolating you.
Our Lord assures us that nothing and no one will ever be able to snatch from His hands those who resist the infernal enemy and his acolytes, conquering them “by the Blood of the Lamb” and by the testimony of their martyrdom (cf. Rev. 12:11).
Your example, dear Cardinal, and the very high price you are paying to defend the Cause of God and His Church, gives us a salutary jolt, it rips us from the inertia and habituation with which we are passively witnessing the surrender of the Catholic Church, at its highest levels and in its hierarchy, to heresy and apostasy, by following the Prince of this world, who is a liar and murderer from the beginning (cf. Jn 8:44).
Parce, Domine, parce populo tuo, quem redemisti, Christe, sanguine tuo, ne in aeternum irascaris nobis.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò
Titular Archbishop of Ulpiana Apostolic Nuncio
How Queer! Secretary of the HomoLobby redefines Lenten ‘penitential’ practices for the Church of the New Advent. He makes fasting taste appetizing!
Pro-gay (sic) priest James Martin: ‘Lent is a time to engage more deeply with LGBT people’
The Jesuit suggested that 'spiritual exercises' focus on 'LGBT people.'
LifeSiteNews | Doug Mainwaring | March 2, 2020 – Pro-homosexual Jesuit priest James Martin redefined the meaning of Lent in an interview for the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the powerhouse LGBT lobbying organization in Washington, D.C.
Martin said that Lent is a time to prepare for Easter and to understand the sufferings of Christ, but then quickly switched gears and suggested that the lives of LGBT persons reflect the suffering of Christ.
“So one of the invitations for Catholics (during Lent) is to unite yourself with people who are suffering, including LGBT people,” Martin said.
Lent is “a time for people to engage more deeply with LGBT people,” he declared.
The remainder of the published interview focused not on a Christocentric understanding of Lent but on how homosexual and the gender-confused people can be made to feel more comfortable about continuing their self-proclaimed sexual/gender identities and activities within the Catholic Church.
The Jesuit suggested Lenten “spiritual exercises” in the form of questions for Catholics, focusing not on their relationship with Jesus Christ, but on their relationships with LGBT persons.
“Can you exercise humility, which is a virtue during Lent, and listen to people that you might not understand?” said Martin, pushing the idea that any negative impressions about the goodness of homosexuality and transgenderism are nothing more than “misunderstanding” based on “old stereotypes.”
He also suggested that God might want to reveal himself to Catholics through homosexuals.
“Can you be open to the fact that God may want to meet you through this LGBT person?” asked Martin, adding, “the person you thought was other is actually the person who reveals God to you.”
As for “LGBT Catholics,” Martin pointed out that Jesus healed many people, and what he wants to do in the lives of self-identified homosexuals and the transgendered today is not to heal their proclivities or find God-given strength to master their same-sex inclinations, which the Church teaches are “disordered,” but to have them feel like they are no longer “on the margins” of the Church.
“I hope … that the LGBTQ community can feel welcome in their own church,” he concluded. […..]
Pope Francis comments on the Resistance to his Heresy
“But when I realize that there is real resistance, of course it displeases me. Some people tell me that resistance is normal when someone wants to make changes. The famous ‘we’ve always done it this way’ reigns everywhere, it is a great temptation that we have all faced. … I cannot deny that there is resistance. I see it and I am aware of it. There is doctrinal resistance, which you all know better than I do. For the sake of mental health, I do not read the websites of this so-called “resistance.” I know who they are, I am familiar with the groups, but I do not read them, simply for my mental health. If there is something very serious, they inform me so that I know about it. You all know them … It is a displeasure, but we must move ahead. Historians say that it takes a century before a Council puts down roots. We are halfway there.
“When I perceive resistance, I try to dialogue, when dialogue is possible. But some resistance comes from people who believe they possess the true doctrine and accuse you of being a heretic. When I do not find spiritual goodness in these people, because of what they say or write, I simply pray for them. It pains me, but I do not dwell on this feeling for the sake of mental hygiene.
Pope Francis the Destroyer, addressing a private meeting with ninety fellow Jesuits, January 16, 2018, Santiago de Chile. Their conversation was transcribed by Fr. Antonio Spadaro, editor of La Civilta Cattolicà, and was published in Italian with the Pope’s approval.”
COMMENT: “True doctrine” is possessed by all faithful Catholics who hold DOGMA as their rule of faith. Pope Francis does not. He believes that he is the rule of faith. Whatever he says and does is what every Catholic must say and do. Francis rejects DOGMA and that is why he is a heretic. He judges those who hold DOGMA as their rule of faith as a sign that “these people” are without “spiritual goodness.” What is evident is that Francis, who babbles that “time is greater than space,” cannot be dissuaded from his commitment to destroy. He will not listen to those who offer filial correction and he does not accept evidence of the rotten fruits from Vatican II because it takes “a century before a Council puts down roots.” We are supposed to believe that in another fifty years we will really see the springtime of Vatican II? Unfortunately, at the current rate of decline there will not be a Catholic Church in another fifty years. God being God, this will not happen. Unfortunately for Francis, since he cannot repent, he will pay awful price for all eternity.
“Liberalism is the belief that any part of God's creation is not subject to His to domain.”
Fr. Denis Fahey
“Don’t get me wrong Sisters. I am sure your hearts are in the right place. OK, but you know, somebody has got to lift the scab, the festering scab that is the Vatican.”
Jerry Fletcher, Conspiracy Theory, addressing two nuns, 1997
If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation, ANATHAMA SIT.
Council of Trent, Canon 5, On the Sacrament of Baptism
St. Martin restores a Catechumen to Life so that he may be Baptized
AS Hilarius had already gone away, so Martin followed in his footsteps; and having been most joyously welcomed by him, he established for himself a monastery not far from the town. At this time a certain catechumen joined him, being desirous of becoming instructed in the doctrines and habits of the most holy man. But, after the lapse only of a few days, the catechumen, seized with a languor, began to suffer from a violent fever. It so happened that Martin had then left home, and having remained away three days, he found on his return that life had departed from the catechumen; and so suddenly had death occurred, that he had left this world without receiving baptism. The body being laid out in public was being honored by the last sad offices on the part of the mourning brethren, when Martin hurries up to them with tears and lamentations. But then laying hold; as it were, of the Holy Spirit, with the whole powers of his mind, he orders the others to quit the cell in which the body was lying; and bolting the door, he stretches himself at full length on the dead limbs of the departed brother. Having given himself for some time to earnest prayer, and perceiving by means of the Spirit of God that power was present, he then rose up for a little, and gazing on the countenance of the deceased, he waited without misgiving for the result of his prayer and of the mercy of the Lord. And scarcely had the space of two hours elapsed, when he saw the dead man begin to move a little in all his members, and to tremble with his eyes opened for the practice of sight. Then indeed, turning to the Lord with a loud voice and giving thanks, he filled the cell with his ejaculations. Hearing the noise, those who had been standing at the door immediately rush inside. And truly a marvelous spectacle met them, for they beheld the man alive whom they had formerly left dead. Thus being restored to life, and having immediately obtained baptism, he lived for many years afterwards; and he was the first who offered himself to us both as a subject that had experienced the virtues of Martin, and as a witness to their existence. The same man was wont to relate that, when he left the body, he was brought before the tribunal of the Judge, and being assigned to gloomy regions and vulgar crowds, he received a severe sentence. Then, however, he added, it was suggested by two angels of the Judge that he was the man for whom Martin was praying; and that, on this account, he was ordered to be led back by the same angels, and given up to Martin, and restored to his former life. From this time forward, the name of the sainted man became illustrious, so that, as being reckoned holy by all, he was also deemed powerful and truly apostolical.
SULPITIUS SEVERUS, ON THE LIFE OF ST. MARTIN (note: Sulpitius Severus was a contemporary of St. Martin of Tours, knew the Saint and obtained his information on the life of St. Martin entirely from primary and reliable sources.)
Once Again, Pope Francis Corrupts the Literal Meaning of Holy Scripture. This time to overthrow all Catholic Morality!
Commentary of Pope Francis on Mark 10, 1-12:
Jesus does not answer whether it (divorce) is permitted or not. He does not enter into their (the Pharisees’) classic casuistry. Because they (the Pharisees) thought of faith merely in the framework of “one may not” or “one may” – up to which point one may, up to which point one may not. Thus logic of casuistry: Jesus does not enter into it. And He Himself poses a question: “Now, what did Moses command you? What is written in your law?” And they explain the permission which Moses gave to write a divorce certificate and to dismiss a woman from marriage; and it is they who went into a trap, yes. Because Jesus calls them “hard hearted”: “only because you are so hard hearted, he has given you this law,” and He spoke the truth. Without casuistry, without permissions. The truth.
This is the way of Jesus – it is quite clear – it is the path from casuistry to truth and mercy. Jesus leaves aside the logic of casuistry. To those who wanted to test him, to those who thought of this logic of ‘it is possible’, he termed them – not here, but in another passage of the Gospel – hypocrites. Even with the fourth commandment, they denied assistance to their relatives with the excuse that they had given a good offer to the Church. Hypocrites. The casuistry is hypocritical. It is a form of hypocrisy. ‘You can – you cannot’ … which then becomes more subtle, more evil: I? I can up to this point but from here to here, I cannot. This is the deception of casuistry.
Pope Francis, commentary on Mark 10:1-12
Commentary on Pope Francis’ Commentary on Mark 10, 1-12:
It is hardly possible to be this ignorant. Even a person without faith simply reading the words of this scripture passage and reporting on the literal meaning would articulate a better understand than Pope Francis. The only alternative possible is a willful corruption of the text to bring it into the service of a perverse ideology.
Firstly, Jesus does not beg the question of the Pharisees. He answers it directly and forcefully on a much higher plane. The simple answer is, “it is lawful in your law because Moses permitted it” because of the “hardness of your hearts.” But the higher answer is given by Jesus wherein He indirectly declares his divinity to the Pharisees by asserting His authority to set aside the law of Moses and reestablish the original intent of God for His creation. Only God can give this answer to the Pharisees' question. The reason Francis does not find an answer in Jesus' reply is because he does not believe that Jesus is God any more than the Pharisees did. Divorce was an indult granted by God through Moses to the Jews because of their “hardness of hearts.” His followers would by the grace of God rise above this “hardness of heart” and will be able to keep the law of God. Therefore, the indult granted by Moses is made void by the Word of God. The final answer is divorce is not permitted by the law of God and those who divorce and remarry are guilty of adultery.
Secondly, the science of moral theology concerns what one must do or not do to avoid sin. It is the science of limits which cannot be crossed without offending God either venially or mortally. The science of mystical and aesthetical theology deals with what one must do or not do to become a saint. Casuistry is a scholastic method of case study to help understand and apply the actual principles of moral theology in particular cases where conflicting obligations exist. Casuistry, like all human acts, can be perverted from its proper end which is to avoid sin. When its end become to permit sin it becomes the science of the Pharisees which can be studied today in the Jewish Talmud. Francis’ morality is Talmudic and not Catholic. The example provided by Francis of the perverse Jewish casuistry that permitted the Jews to break the 4th commandment by claiming that their personal wealth could not be used to support their needy parents because it was set aside for the temple is analogous to what Francis has done by permitting Catholics to live in unrepentant adultery and receive the sacraments of Penance and Holy Communion. In both cases, the law of God is overturned. The hypocrisy of Francis is oozing from his every pore. That is what a perverted casuistry is. Francis the Hypocrite is characterizing all good and necessary moral inquiry as a perverted casuistry which he opposes to “truth and mercy.” He is making war on all morality. There is no opposition between “truth and mercy” and its practical application in moral theology. The very science of moral theology deals with what “one may not” or “one may” do to keep the friendship of God. It was Jesus who said, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” The sign of the love of God is the keeping of His commandments. Francis by trashing the entire field of moral theology is heaping contempt on the law of God. He embodies everything that Jesus condemned so severely in the Pharisees. The condemnations that Jesus leveled at the Pharisees can be heaped upon this most perverse man.
Lastly, this is the morality of Martin Luther and his sect. Luther taught that it was impossible to keep the law of God and no one should even try. This was specifically condemned at the Council of Trent.
Just a reminder just to whom Pope Francis has betrayed the Catholic faithful of China by placing them under the jurisdiction of the CPCA!
Francis-approved communist parallel Chinese ‘church’ approves abortion, contraception
The government-established 'church' cannot deviate from the Communist Party's position, which includes support for forced abortion.
LifeSiteNews | Dorothy Cummings McLean | BEIJING, China, February 20, 2020 ― The confusion around the Vatican’s concordat with China and its state-founded version of the Catholic Church has been compounded by the failure of the so-called Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) to transmit the Gospel of Life.
According to expert Steven Mosher, the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association is in lockstep with the pro-abortion, pro-contraception Chinese Communist government when it comes to life issues.
“The CPCA cannot deviate from the Party's position, since it is controlled by the Party,” Mosher told LifeSiteNews yesterday.
“Moreover, the CPCA has affirmed that national laws supercede Church, or canon, law,” he added.
“And the Party's position is that contraception, abortion and euthanasia are moral.”
An American consultant to the Vatican on China, Msgr. Anthony Figueiredo, now 55, admitted to the National Catholic Register early in 2018 that the government-appointed bishops of the CPCA support China’s totalitarian two-child policy.
“I spoke with some of these bishops and some of the officials at the bishops’ conference on issues such as abortion, the two-child family policy; and certainly in those areas, and I won’t hide this, they do back the government on those areas, because I think they feel they need to,” Figueiredo said.
“They need to because they’re part of [the Patriotic Association], there’s a loyalty to the government,” he continued. […..]
Catholics progressively uncomfortable in the progressive Church of the New Advent
Polish church silences Kazakhstan bishop
The Tablet | Johnathana Luxmoore | February 24, 2020
The former Archbishop of Karaganda in Kazakhstan, Jan Lenga, has been banned from preaching and celebrating Mass by the Polish Church for describing Pope Francis as the antichrist and refusing to include him in prayers.
"Canon Law empowers the local diocesan bishop to take disciplinary steps which might halt the spread of scandal among the faithful," Fr Artur Niemira, chancellor of the central Wloclawek diocese, said in a statement to Poland's Catholic Information Agency, KAI.
"Archbishop Lenga is to refrain from delivering sermons and publicly conducting the liturgy. This same ban also applies to contacts with the media."
The ruling was made public following a series of declarations by the 69-year-old retired Ukrainian-born archbishop, a member of the Marian order, who quit his Kazakhstan see in 2011 and now lives in an order house at Lichen in central Poland, by arrangement with the Vatican.
The KAI agency said Lenga had "issued controversial claims undermining the authority of the reigning Pope Francis, and refusing to name him during Masses". It added that the ban on public appearances had been imposed by Bishop Wieslaw Mering of Wloclawek and would remain in place until further restrictions were announced by the Vatican.
In May 2019, Archbishop Lenga co-signed a 40-point "Declaration of Truths" opposing aspects of the Pope's teaching, alongside the American Cardinal Raymond Burke, the Polish-born Archbishop Tomasz Peta of Astana in Kazakhstan, and the retired Polish-speaking Cardinal Janis Pujats of Latvia.
In a book-length interview, still circulating in Polish on YouTube, he said he still recognised Benedict XVI as Pope and had dropped the name of the "usurper and heretic" Francis from his Mass prayer intentions.
"Bergoglio has not confirmed himself in the faith and is not passing that faith to others, he is leading the world astray," said the archbishop, who trained secretly in Soviet-ruled Latvia and Lithuania and was appointed Kazakhstan's first bishop in 1991 and Archbishop of Karaganda in 1999. "He proclaims untruths and sins, not the tradition which has endured for 2000 years... He proclaims the truth of this world, which is precisely the truth the devil".
“From this definition it can be easily gathered what men belong to the Church and what men do not. For there are three parts of this definition: the profession of the true Faith, the communion of the Sacraments, and the subjection to the legitimate Pastor, the Roman Pontiff. By reason of the first part are excluded all infidels, as much those who have never been in the Church, like the Jews, Turks and Pagans; as those who have been and have fallen away, like heretics and apostates. By reason of the second, are excluded catechumens and excommunicates, because the former are not to be admitted to the communion of the sacraments, the latter have been cut off from it. By reason of the third, are excluded schismatics, who have faith and the sacraments, but are not subject to the lawful pastor, and therefore they profess the Faith outside, and receive the Sacraments outside. However, all others are included, even if they be reprobate, sinful and wicked.”
St. Robert Bellarmine
The ‘Bergoglio Business Plan’! Now that “apologetics” is nothing more than “subtle theoretical discussions” over “opinions” and “proselytism is solemn nonsense,” how do they measure “strong Christian witness,” “effective evangelization,” “fruitful ecumenical spirit,” and “constructive dialogue”? If the “Mission of the Church in the World” is the supreme law… the salus animarum, how does any of this contribute towards fulfilling this “Mission”? It is never “easy to achieve such a goal” under the best of conditions because to obtain salvation is to enter by the “narrow gate.” Now that every material sign to measure success toward this goal has been destroyed by the modern Church how can they possibly have any idea what they are doing?
Today we will present a summary of the work done in recent months to develop the new Apostolic Constitution for the reform of the Curia. The goal to be reached is always that of promoting greater harmony in the work of the various Dicasteries and Offices, in order to achieve a more effective collaboration in that absolute transparency which builds authentic synodality and collegiality.
The reform is not an end in itself, but a means to give a strong Christian witness; to promote a more effective evangelization; to promote a more fruitful ecumenical spirit; to encourage a more constructive dialogue with all.
The reform, strongly advocated by the majority of the Cardinals in the context of the general congregations before the conclave, will further perfect the identity of the same Roman Curia, which is to assist the Successor of Peter in the exercise of his supreme pastoral office for the good of and in the service of the universal Church and the particular Churches. This exercise serves to strengthen the unity of faith and communion of the people of God and promote the mission of the Church in the world.
Certainly, it is not easy to achieve such a goal. It requires time, determination and above all everyone’s cooperation. But to achieve this we must first entrust ourselves to the Holy Spirit, the true guide of the Church, imploring the gift of authentic discernment in prayer.
It is in this spirit of collaboration that our meeting begins, which will be fruitful thanks to the contribution which each of us can express with parrhesía, fidelity to the Magisterium and the knowledge that all of this contributes to the supreme law, that being the salus animarum. Thank You.
Pope Francis, on the agenda of the Consistory for the Reform of the Roman Curia
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
Explains why Novus Ordo Catholics have dumped the season of Septuagesima and do not do penance for Lent – they have dialogued themselves out of Original Sin!
The account (of Genesis 3) tells
us that sin begets sin, and that therefore all the sins of history are
interlinked. Theology refers to this state of affairs by the
certainly misleading and imprecise term ‘original sin’. What does this mean? Nothing
seems to us today to be stranger or, indeed, more absurd than to insist upon
original sin, since, according to our way of thinking, guilt can only be
something very personal, and since God does not run a concentration camp, in
which one’s relatives are imprisoned because he is a liberating God of love,
who calls each one by name. What does original sin mean, then, when we interpret it
Finding an answer to this requires nothing less than trying to understand the human person better. It must once again be stressed that no human being is closed in upon himself or herself and that no one can live of or for himself or herself alone. We receive our life not only at the moment of birth but every day from without – from others who are not ourselves but who nonetheless somehow pertain to us. Human beings have their selves not only in themselves but also outside of themselves: they live in those whom they love and in those who love them and to whom they are ‘present.’ Human beings are relational, and they possess their lives – themselves – only by way of relationship. I alone am not myself, but only in and with you am I myself. To be truly a human being means to be related in love, to be of and for. But sin means the damaging or the destruction of relationality. Sin is a rejection of relationality because it wants to make the human being a god. Sin is loss of relationship, disturbance of relationship, and therefore it is not restricted to the individual. When I destroy a relationship, then this event – sin – touches the other person involved in the relationship. Consequently sin is always an offense that touches others, that alters the world and damages it. To the extent that this is true, when the network of human relationships is damaged from the very beginning, then every human being enters into a world that is marked by relational damage. At the very moment that a person begins human existence, which is a good, he or she is confronted by a sin- damaged world. Each of us enters into a situation in which relationality has been hurt. Consequently