BACK

HOME

OLDER BULLETIN POSTINGS THAT REMAIN TIMELY CONTINIUE BELOW:

The Papacy is an office established by Jesus Christ. No pope can change the essential nature of the office, he can only accept it and address the duties the office imposes. If Pope Benedict XVI did not resign the office of the papacy in its entirety, he did not resign the papacy at all. If Pope Francis was not elected to the papacy in its entirety, he was not elected at all.

Following his resignation as pope in 2013, Benedict XVI became the first pope to step down from office since the resignation of Gregory XII in 1415. But unlike his predecessors who resigned, he continued to live in the Vatican and to be adorned with the clothing and regalia of a pope.

Archbishop Georg Gänswein, the private secretary of Pope Benedict XVI, said after his resignation that Benedict would continue to fulfill the spiritual duties of the papacy. Journalist Edward Pentin reported in July 8, 2017 (National Catholic Register) that Gänswein said that Francis and Benedict are not two popes "in competition" with one another, but represent one "expanded" Petrine Office with an "active" member and a "contemplative" one. He said that Benedict had not abandoned the papacy like Pope Celestine V in the 13th century but rather sought to continue his papacy in a more appropriate way given his frailty and that "Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before. It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that Benedict XVI has profoundly and lastingly transformed by his exceptional pontificate." This division of the papacy is impossible.

In light of his decision to resign, Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, the designer of the Benedict's papal coat of arms, suggested the need to create a new coat of arms for the former pope. According to the cardinal, the coat of arms of the retired pope should retain all the symbolic elements found on the shield, but all the external elements, such as the two crossed keys and the mitre, should be removed or modified as they represent an office he no longer holds.

Cordero presented a hypothetical design shown above of how he believed the new coat of arms of the pope emeritus should look, replacing the bishop's mitre with a white galero with 15 tassels, removing the two crossed keys, and placing the pope's episcopal motto "Cooperatores Veritatis" below the shield. The new coat of arms was offered to but never adopted by Benedict. He continued to use his papal coat of arms for the rest of his life and it is the papal coat of arms which was also displayed by his catafalque during his funeral at St. Peter's.

---

Comments from those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima:

Ø “I cannot say anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically – although I must say nothing – would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.” [3] [emphasis added] – Joseph Schweigel, S.J., d. 1964 (interrogated Sister Lucia about the Third Secret on behalf of Pope Pius XII on Sept. 2, 1952)[4]

Ø “In the period preceding the great triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, terrible things are to happen. These form the content of the third part of the Secret. What are they? If ‘in Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved,’ … it can be clearly deduced from this that in other parts of the Church these dogmas are going to become obscure or even lost altogether. Thus it is quite possible that in this intermediate period which is in question (after 1960 and before the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary), the text makes concrete references to the crisis of the Faith of the Church and to the negligence of the pastors themselves.” [5] [emphasis added] – Fr. Joaquin Alonso, C.M.F., d. 1981 (Cleratian priest and official Fatima archivist for over sixteen years; had unparalleled access to Sister Lucia)

Ø “The Secret of Fatima speaks neither of atomic bombs, nor nuclear warheads, nor Pershing missiles, nor SS-20’s. Its content concerns only our faith. To identify the Secret with catastrophic announcements or with a nuclear holocaust is to deform the meaning of the message. The loss of faith of a continent is worse than the annihilation of a nation; and it is true that faith is continually diminishing in Europe.” [6] [emphasis added] – Bishop Alberto Cosme do Amaral, d. 2005 (former bishop of Fatima-Leiria; remarks made in Vienna, Austria on Sept. 10, 1984)

Ø “It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Silvio Oddi, d. 2001 (Vatican diplomat and personal friend of Pope John XXIII, from whom he knew certain details concerning the Third Secret) [7]

Ø “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi, O.P., d. 1996 (personal theologian to Popes John XXIII-John Paul II) [8]

Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité,  [2], Volume 3.

Posted by OnePeterFive

Catholic Essentials!

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 evolutionistis reinterpretation 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 rears 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.

“Revelation manifests itself more and more each day… it’s always moving.”

It is a dogma of divine and Catholic faith that Revelation was completed at the death of the last Apostle!

Ideologies are bewitching; and so Paul says: “Oh foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you?” Those who preach with ideologies: everything’s right! They are bewitching: it’s all clear! But look, God’s revelation isn’t clear eh? God’s revelation manifests itself more and more each day; it is always moving. Is it clear? Crystal clear! It is Him, but we have to find it along the way. Those who think they possess the whole truth are not just ignorant, Paul goes as far as to call them ‘foolish’ for letting themselves be bewitched.

We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.

Msgr. Annibale Bugnini, L'Osservatore Romano, March 19, 196

Pope Francis, sermon, October 6, 2016

5

To tell the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This needs to be said without ambiguity: the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed!

Rev. Joseph Gelineau, S. J., a member of Msgr. Bugnini’s Concilium, on the Novus Ordo

“If you love me you will keep my commandments… He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him… If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have kept my Father’s commandments, and do abide in his love… In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and keep his commandments.” (John 14:15; 14:21; 15:10; 1 John 5:2)

Pope Francis will learn, souls are “condemned for ever” who teach the Lutheran heresy of justification & deny the Catholic dogma that to abide in “true charity” is “conditional” upon keeping the commandments!

“The way of the Church is not to condemn anyone for ever; it is to pour out the balm of God’s mercy on all those who ask for it with a sincere heart… For true charity is always unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous….

It is a matter of reaching out to everyone, of needing to help each person find his or her proper way of participating in the ecclesial com-munity and thus to experience being touched by an “unmerited, unconditional and gratuitous” mercy. No one can be condemned for ever, because that is not the logic of the Gospel!”

Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia, paragraphs 296 and 297

Pope Francis open the Youth Synod with novel ferula that is most fitting for his LGBT agenda!

Stang: The stang is a straight branch with a fork or Y at one end, and is most used in ritual circle as a type of centerpiece representing the magick of the three –the trinity– in the following ways: Earth, Sea, and Sky; Body, Mind and Spirit; God, Goddess and Unity; the three faced of the God; the three faces of the Goddess; and the crossroads of life. Stangs used today are normally five to six feet in height and are often decorated with ribbons and flowers that match the seasonal ritual. The stang also relates to the legend of the World Tree, and in some ritual groups it is the pole of libation, where gifts of food and liquid are arranged or poured by the base in honor of the Gods. This is similar to the pole erected in the center of a Voodoo rite, dedicated to Damballah, called the Ponteau Mitan. The stang is normally place at the north (the seat of all power) or directly behind the altar. A few groups, often with Druidic leanings, place the stang in the center of the circle.

Definition provided by "Magickal Necessities by Witches of the Craft"

A Forked Staff: Perfect Symbol for the Synod on Youth and with its “synodal” Blah, Blah, Blah

Fatima Perspectives #1239; By Chris Ferrara

As one website observes, when the Antichrist arrives to preach his lies among men, seducing “(if it were possible) even the elect” (Mk. 13:22), his forked tongue “will have the eloquence of angels, his honeyed words will pierce to the very heart of those who hear him. His arguments and positions will be so well presented that even those who recognize him will be hard pressed to resist what he has to say.”

The Antichrist will make the devil’s ultimate sales pitch.  For now, however, the forked tongue belongs to lesser voices, lacking all eloquence and nuance, including those who will be spouting empty demagogic slogans and emotivist rubbish at the Synod of Youth and Blah, Blah, Blah now underway in Occupied Rome.

We have heard it all before at the last phony Synod, which was merely a disguise for what Francis wanted from the beginning and shamelessly passed off as the voice of the Holy Ghost.  And now — bearing a forked staff, appropriately enough — Francis has said it all again in his homily at the beginning of this elaborate stage show for further subversion of the Church:

For we know that our young people will be capable of prophecy and vision to the extent that we, who are already adult or elderly, can dream and thus be infectious in sharing those dreams and hopes that we carry in our hearts…

May the Spirit grant us the grace to be synodal Fathers anointed with the gift of dreaming and of hoping. We will then, in turn, be able to anoint our young people with the gift of prophecy and vision…

Hope challenges us, moves us and shatters that conformism which says, “it’s always been done like this”. Hope asks us to get up and look directly into the eyes of young people and see their situations….

And this demands that we be really careful against succumbing to a self-preservation and self-centredness which gives importance to what is secondary yet makes secondary what is important.

The gift of that ability to listen, sincerely and prayerfully, as free as possible from prejudice and conditioning, will help us to be part of those situations which the People of God experience….

This disposition protects us from the temptation of falling into moralistic or elitist postures, and it protects us from the lure of abstract ideologies that never touch the realities of our people….

Here we go again: “prophesy and vision,” “dreams and hopes,” “see their situations,” eschewing “conformism,” moving beyond what is “secondary,” freedom from “prejudice and conditioning,” rejecting “moralistic or elitist postures” versus “the realities of our people.” 

In other words: another poisonous dose of situation ethics to follow the recent scandal of “permission” for Holy Communion to be administered to people who intend to continue engaging in sexual relations within “second marriages” which constitute “none other than disgraceful and base concubinage, repeatedly condemned by the Church,” to quote Blessed Pope Pius XI.

This preposterous sham of a Synod features the attendance of two communist Chinese bishops handpicked by Beijing from the ranks of the Catholic Patriotic Association, which, following the Vatican sellout of the Underground Church, promptly declared its “independence” from Rome. Francis ludicrously declared in his homily that the attendance of these puppets of Beijing and its “independent” pseudo-Church means that “the communion of the entire Episcopate with the Successor of Peter is yet more visible thanks to their presence.”

The inevitable outcome of this sham (barring a veritable miracle) will be a further erosion of the Church’s moral foundations under the specious pretext of an expression of the “ordinary Magisterium” that takes into account “situations” and “concrete realities” — as if reality and morality were somehow opposed, when in fact it is conformity to God’s moral law that leads a soul to the reality of true freedom.

God help us.  God rescue us. Holy Mother of God, intercede for us and obtain for the Church that holy and courageous Pope who will put an end to this utter madness by doing at long last what You requested of the Roman Pontiff nearly a century ago at Tuy: the Consecration of Russia to Your Immaculate Heart.

Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer.... Are our communities capable of .... accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine?

Synod of the Family, First Relatio written by Pope Francis’ Hand Picked Clerics

A Place (in eternity) is Greater than Time

“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). Jesus Christ

“Time is Greater than Space: 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.”

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, “Time is Greater than Space”

“God manifests himself in historical revelation, in history. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in history, in the processes. We must initiate processes, rather than occupy spaces.”

Pope Francis, Interview with Anthony Spadaro

Since “time is greater than space,” I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral, or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle…needs to be inculterated, if it is to be respected and applied.”

Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia

“How many times do those who are prominent, like the Pharisee with respect to the tax collector, raise up walls to increase distances, making other people feel even more rejected. Or by considering them backward and of little worth, they despise their traditions, erase their history, occupy their lands, and usurp their goods…. Worship of self carries on hypocritically with its rites and ‘prayers,’ forgetting the true worship of God which is always expressed in love of one’s neighbor.”

Pope Francis, ending sermon from the Amazonian Synod

COMMENT: How the hypocrite Francis is blind to the ‘beam in his own eye.’ The arrogant pretense that he and his Novus Ordite cronies actually know anything about the “worship of God” and the “love of one’s neighbor.” Catholic institutions of charity have collapsed since Vatican II because these institutions were staffed by countless vocations, men and women who gave their lives in the service of the love of their fellow man for the love of God. Vocations have dried up and these institutions have closed their doors because without faith, there is no charity.

Furthermore, no one, absolutely no one, has been considered of “little worth” more than Catholics faithful to our “received and approved” traditions of the Catholic Church which produced these vocations. Faithful Catholics have had their “traditions despised,” their “history erased,” their churches and shrines “occupied,” and their “goods usurped,” by the philistines of Vatican II who are the new Iconoclasts.

The Mission of Ss. Peter & Paul has set out to recover and restore this despised heritage by which alone the faith can be known and communicated to others, from which alone true charity may once more abound. May our Good God cleanse His Church from this corrupt pontificate of Francis and everything he represents.

CATHOLIC PROPHECY: "We will pull it to the ground"!

May 13, 1820: I saw also the relationship between the two popes. . . I saw how baleful would be the consequences of this false church. I saw it increase in size; heretics of every kind came into the city (of Rome). The local clergy grew lukewarm, and I saw a great darkness. . . Then, the vision seemed to extend on every side. Whole Catholic communities were being oppressed, harassed, confined, and deprived of their freedom. I saw many churches close down, great miseries everywhere, wars and bloodshed. A wild and ignorant mob took to violent action. But it did not last long.

Once more I saw that the Church of Peter was undermined by a plan evolved by the secret sect, while storms were damaging it. But I saw also that help was coming when distress had reached its peak. I saw again the Blessed Virgin ascend on the Church and spread her mantle [over it]. I saw a Pope who was at once gentle, and very firm. . . I saw a great renewal, and the Church rose high in the sky.

Sept. 12, 1820: I saw a strange church being built against every rule. . . No angels were supervising the building operations. In that church, nothing came from high above. . . There was only division and chaos. It is probably a church of human creation, following the latest fashion, as well as the new heterodox church of Rome, which seems of the same kind. . .

I saw again the strange big church that was being built there (in Rome). There was nothing holy in it. I saw this just as I saw a movement led by Ecclesiastics to which contributed angels, saints and other Christians. But there (in the strange big church) all the work was being done mechanically (i.e. according to set rules and formulae). Everything was being done according to human reason. . .

I saw all sorts of people, things, doctrines, and opinions. There was something proud, presumptuous, and violent about it, and they seemed to be very successful. I did not see a single Angel nor a single saint helping in the work. But far away in the background, I saw the seat of a cruel people armed with spears, and I saw a laughing figure which said: “Do build it as solid as you can; we will pull it to the ground.”

Blessed Anna Katherina Emmerich, Catholic Prophecy by Ives DuPont

“Necessity Knows No Law”

In 1976, the head of the UGCC, Cardinal Josef Slipyj, living in exile in Rome after 18 years in the Soviet gulag, feared for the future of the UGCC. Would it have bishops to lead it, given that Slipyj himself was now over 80? So he ordained three bishops clandestinely, without the permission of the Holy Father, Blessed (sic) Paul VI. At the time, the Holy See followed a policy of non-assertiveness regarding the communist bloc; Paul VI would not give permission for the new bishops for fear of upsetting the Soviets. The consecration of bishops without a papal mandate is a very grave canonical crime, for which the penalty is excommunication. Blessed (sic) Paul VI—who likely knew, unofficially, what Slipyj had done—did not administer any penalties.

Fr. Raymond J. DeSouza

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Pray for the conversion of Russia." Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima

Your must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators. We cannot state that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But: without Jews there would have been no Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Noble Prize winning novelist, historian and victim of Jewish Bolshevism

Why do Jewish leaders overwhelmingly support homosexual “marriage” for the U.S. (and Europe) and not for Israel? Is this what is meant by “hostility” and “innate fury”?

On May 21, 2013, Vice President Joseph Biden “praised Jewish leaders in the media... crediting them with helping change American attitudes on gay marriage.” In a speech at a Democratic National Convention reception celebrating Jewish Heritage Month, Biden claimed that the Jews were responsible for changing peoples' attitudes on gay marriage: “It wasn't anything we legislatively did. It was ‘Will and Grace,’” said Biden, referring to an NBC sitcom that went off the air nine years ago. “It was the social media. Literally. That's what changed peoples’ attitudes. That’s why I was so certain that the vast majority of people would embrace and rapidly embrace” gay marriage..... I bet you 85 percent of those changes, whether it’s in Hollywood or social media, are a consequence of Jewish leaders in the industry... The influence is immense, the influence is immense. And, I might add, it is all to the good.”

The liberal Jewish magazine Tikkun agreed with Vice President Biden's assessment: gay marriage was a Jewish creation. As Amy Dean put it: “In a few short years, same-sex marriage went from being an untouchable political hot potato to a broadly accepted civil right in eighteen states and the District of Columbia. Jews, and their social justice organizations, helped make that happen. [.....] The victories in the states around marriage equality owed much to local and national Jewish social justice groups who looked beyond the political consensus of the time. Even five years ago, many of these groups stood behind same-sex couples who wished to marry. National Jewish social justice organizations such as the National Council of Jewish Women, the Religious Action Center of reform Judaism, and Bend the Arc (on whose board I currently serve as co-chair), helped to galvanize the American Jewish community to support pro-marriage equality bills in the states. In fact, Jews can claim a fair share of the credit for bringing Americans to a tipping point of accepting marriage equality.”

E. Michael Jones, Why we Lost the Culture Wars

Jews have persecuted the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus Christ to this very day!

[The Jews are] a people who, having imbrued their hands in a most heinous outrage [Jesus’ crucifixion], have thus polluted their souls and are deservedly blind. . . . Therefore we have nothing in common with that most hostile of people the Jews. We have received from the Savior another way . . .  our holy religion. . . .  On what subject will that detestable association be competent to from a correct judgment, who after that murder of their Lord . . .  are led…  by. . .  their innate fury?

Council of Nicaea, 325 AD

That they might know that by what things a man sinneth, by the same also he is tormented.

Wisdom 11:17

Clearly explains the motives of the liturgical reformers & why the Novus Ordo is “irreformable”!

The unity of the liturgical language and of the divine worship in the Church is, therefore, a very efficient means for preserving the integrity of faith. The liturgy is, indeed, the main channel by which dogmatic tradition is transmitted; dogma is the root of all ecclesiastical life, of discipline and of worship. Worship is developed out of the doctrine of faith; in the liturgical prayers, in the rites and ceremonies of the Church the truths of Catholic faith find their expression, and can be established and proved therefrom. But the more fixed, unchangeable and inviolable the liturgical formula of prayer is, the better it is adapted to preserve intact and to transmit unimpaired the original deposit of faith. Therefore, all the primitive liturgies proclaim and prove that our faith is in perfect harmony with that of the first ages of the Church.

Unity of liturgical language and the consequent uniformity of divine worship form, finally, a strong bond for uniting indissolubly the churches dispersed all over the world, among themselves and with their common centre the Roman Church, the chief and Mother-Church of them all. The bond of a universal language of worship, which embraces the head and the members of the Church, supports and promotes everywhere the unity and the common life and operation of the Church. History confirms this; for it proves that a difference of liturgies, that is, the introduction of national languages into the liturgy, frequently gave or threatened to give rise to heresy and schism. We need only recall to mind the eastern nations, which, for the most part, have a ritual of their own and in the liturgy make use of a language different from the Latin.

While, therefore, the use of the various national languages for divine service is peculiar to the sects and to national churches, the use of the Latin as the common language for divine worship harmonizes perfectly with the essence, the object and the workings of the Catholic Church. In her bosom we behold how the Holy Ghost has “gathered all the nations from out of the babel of tongues into the unity of faith.” Being formed of “all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues,” she constitutes but one family of God, one kingdom of Christ, a kingdom not of this world, but exalted above every nation of the earth. Therefore, it is proper that the Church, when celebrating divine worship, when offering the divine Sacrifice, should make use not of the language of some one single country or nation, but of a language that is universal, consecrated and sanctified. Thus at the altar it is a figure of the heavenly Jerusalem, where all the angels and saints in unison (una voce) sing their “Holy, holy, holy” and Alleluja.

Rev. Dr. Nicholas Gihr, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass; Dogmatically, Liturgically and Ascetically Explained

God has established the ends of Divine Worship;

therefore, God it the source of all the acceptable means of divine worship!

It is for this fourfold end that sacrifices are offered : hence there are sacrifices of adoration, of thanksgiving, of petition and of propitiation. These divisions are not made according to the exclusive object of Sacrifice, but only with reference to its predominant end. This means only that in the rite of celebration and in the intention of the person offering, one of these ends is chiefly intended, without, however, excluding the others. Every sacrifice has in itself a fourfold signification : it serves at one and the same time to glorify the Divine Majesty (sacrificium latreuticum); to return thanks for benefits received (sacrificium eucharisticum); to petition for new benefits (sacrificium impetratorium); and finally, to satisfy for sin and its punishment (sacrificium propitiatorium).

In so far as sacrifice has a symbolical meaning and is a constituent part of public worship, it must positively be instituted by a legitimate authority. The sacrificial service of the Old Law was regulated and ordained by God Himself in its most minute details; in the New Law the essential elements and features of worship proceed directly from Jesus Christ — hence, first of them all, sacrifice, which constitutes the fundamental and central act of divine service. Neither to the Synagogue nor to the Church did God impart the right or the power to institute sacrifices: in His infinite mercy He Himself condescended to prescribe the sacrifices by which He would be honored and propitiated. No mere man, but our Divine Saviour alone could institute so sublime and so excellent a Sacrifice as we possess in the Holy Mass. Sacrifice is an act of worship which cannot be performed by anybody but a priest. He alone who has been especially chosen, called and empowered, that is, only the priest can and may perform the office of sacrificer. Sacrifice and priesthood are inseparably connected: no sacrifice can exist without priesthood, and no priesthood without a sacrifice. A special priesthood is, therefore, required by the very nature of sacrifice, which, as a public, solemn act of worship, must be performed in the name and for the welfare of the religious body by a duly authorized person. — Consequently, it is highly proper that only he who is, at least b his office and dignity, especially separated from sinners and sanctified, should present himself in sacrifice as mediator between an offended God and sinful man. "For every high priest taken from among men," so writes the Apostle, "is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins" (Heb. 5, i). — It is clear that it belongs to God alone to bestow the honor of the priestly vocation and office, and to determine "who belong to Him, and the holy He will join to Himself; and they whom He shall choose shall approach to Him" (Num. 16, 5).

Rev. Nicholas Gihr, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass; Dogmatically, Liturgically and Ascetically Explained

Another Neo-Con WAR: Attention will now be redirected from the debacle of Ukraine and refocused upon a smaller dog that can 'hopefully' be kicked with impunity!

Haaretz op-ed by the award-winning Israeli journalist and commentator Gideon Levy, October 11, 2023

Opinion : Israel Can’t Imprison Two Million Gazans Without Paying a Cruel Price

Behind all this lies Israeli arrogance; the idea that we can do whatever we like, that we’ll never pay the price and be punished for it. We’ll carry on undisturbed.

We’ll arrest, kill, harass, dispossess and protect the settlers busy with their pogroms. We’ll visit Joseph’s Tomb, Othniel’s Tomb and Joshua’s Altar in the Palestinian territories, and of course the Temple Mount — over 5,000 Jews on Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles) alone.

We’ll fire at innocent people, take out people’s eyes and smash their faces, expel, confiscate, rob, grab people from their beds, carry out ethnic cleansing and of course continue with the unbelievable siege of the Gaza Strip, and everything will be all right.

We’ll build a terrifying obstacle around Gaza — the underground wall alone cost 3 billion shekels ($765 million) — and we’ll be safe. We’ll rely on the geniuses of the army’s 8200 cyber-intelligence unit and on the Shin Bet security service agents who know everything. They’ll warn us in time.

We thought we’d continue to go down to Gaza, scatter a few crumbs in the form of tens of thousands of Israeli work permits — always contingent on good behavior — and still keep them in prison. We’ll make peace with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and the Palestinians will be forgotten until they’re erased, as quite a few Israelis would like.

We’ll keep holding thousands of Palestinian prisoners, sometimes without trial, most of them political prisoners. And we won’t agree to discuss their release even after they’ve been in prison for decades.

We’ll tell them that only by force will their prisoners see freedom. We thought we would arrogantly keep rejecting any attempt at a diplomatic solution, only because we don’t want to deal with all that, and everything would continue that way forever.

Once again it was proved that this isn’t how it is. A few hundred armed Palestinians breached the barrier and invaded Israel in a way no Israeli imagined was possible. A few hundred people proved that it’s impossible to imprison 2 million people forever without paying a cruel price.

On Saturday, Israel saw pictures it has never seen before. Palestinian vehicles patrolling its cities, bike riders entering through the Gaza gates. These pictures tear away at that arrogance. The Gaza Palestinians have decided they’re willing to pay any price for a moment of freedom. Is there any hope in that? No. Will Israel learn its lesson? No.

On Saturday they were already talking about wiping out entire neighborhoods in Gaza, about occupying the Strip and punishing Gaza “as it has never been punished before.” But Israel hasn’t stopped punishing Gaza since 1948, not for a moment.

After 75 years of abuse, the worse possible scenario awaits it once again. The threats of “flattening Gaza” prove only one thing: We haven’t learned a thing. The arrogance is here to stay, even though Israelis paying a high price once again.

The Devil Wants above all to be Worshiped!

The bourgeois revolution, democracy, the ‘social’ revolution, and Communism are but episodes in the vast conflict between two great principles: one embodied by integral Christianity (the Catholic Church) and the other by the anti-Church. If Satan rebelled in the name of freedom and equality vis-a-vis God, this was not merely so as ‘not to serve’; rather, it was in order to subjugate others by replacing the legitimate authority of the Most High.

Count Leon de Poncins and Emmanuel Malynski, The Occult War: JUDEO-MASONIC PLAN TO CONQUER THE WORLD, 1938

Faith Leaders Gather for 15th Annual Prayer Service at Jewish Temple

Catholic Witness | Diocese of Harrisburg | September 25, 2024

Celebrating the tapestry of rich faith traditions alive in the greater Harrisburg area, faith leaders gathered at Beth El Temple on the evening of September 22 for the annual Commonwealth Interfaith Service: Prayers for Justice and Peace. Bishop Timothy Senior joined leaders from more than a dozen faith and interfaith organizations in the hour-long annual prayer service, hosted by the Jewish community under the leadership of Rabbi Araina Capptauber, who has been at the helm since 2021. More than 75 people were in attendance.

Pennsylvania has a long history of welcoming diverse faith communities ever since William Penn, a devout Quaker, was ceded land by the British crown in the late 1600s. Nearly 400 years of peaceful co-existence has marked “Penn’s Woods” history. In 1669, the religiously persecuted Penn penned “No Cross, No Crown,” which he wrote from a prison cell prior to coming to the New World seeking freedom. As a scribe, he took aim at Catholic and Protestant Christian faith traditions in England and Ireland, extolling the virtue of the peaceful attributes of Quakers instead. It was Penn who established the diverse faith community that still exists here today.

The prayer service was called to worship by the soul stirring blowing of a shofar – a horn hollowed from the bone of a kosher animal. This ancient ritual takes place in a synagogue to announce a prayer service. Iman Farhad Rana followed with an equally moving call to worship with an olden chant. Protestant Reverend Celal Kamran then offered the Christian call to worship. The three faith traditions of Jewish, Muslim and Christian standing peacefully side by side made for a powerful witness given the current strife plaguing the world.

Bishop Senior led the second prayer, citing Gospel readings from St. Matthew. He was followed by Hindu and Quaker faith traditions.

The following prayer was read at the beginning of the service, an annual gathering aimed at fostering peace:

“We lament that our political differences lead to misunderstanding and even hatred toward those who don’t share our beliefs or our perspectives about the candidates or policies they espouse – differences that lead to divisions and even violence. May we look beyond our differences, seeking understanding rather than argument. May we have compassion toward those whose struggles may lead to choices that differ from ours. May that compassion tear down walls that divide us and build a bridge that brings us together.”

COMMENT: The report does not cite what passage from St. Matthew that Bishop Senior recited. The gospel reading from the 19th Sunday last week on the marriage feast would have been good but everyone knows that is not what Bishop Senior read. The purpose of these meetings is to publically mock the Catholic faith. Our only question: Is Bishop Senior in on the joke? Is he malicious or just another stupid Novus Ordo cleric habituated in performing memes whose meaning is lost on them? Praying to a common god for "justice and peace" in a synogogue while the Jewish confessional state of Israel has murdered more than 40,000+ children, women, elderly, and other Palestinians non-combatants over the last year and the genocide is on going.

"The Pope is Boiling"? What until his gets his eternal reward!

"In a very small circle, Pope Francis is said to have self-critically further explained himself as follows: 'It is not to be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic Church'."

Von Walter Mayr, Der Spiegel article, Criticism of Francis "The Pope is boiling", December 23, 2016, relating quote attributed to Pope Francis

“For the Jews, ‘Anti-Semitism’ is anything that is in opposition to the naturalistic Messianic domination of their nation over all the others.” Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., B.A., D.Ph., D.D.

On the Charge of Anti-Semitism in Our Time

“…Two reasons can be assigned to the fact that Our Lord’s faithful members will often be betrayed by those who should be on the side of Christ the King. Firstly, many Catholic writers speak of Papal condemnations of Anti-Semitism without explaining the meaning of the term, and never even allude to the documents which insist on the Rights of Our Divine Lord, Head of the Mystical Body, Priest and King. Thus, very many are completely ignorant of the duty incumbent on all Catholics of standing positively for Our Lord’s Reign in society in opposition to Jewish Naturalism. The result is that numbers of Catholics are so ignorant of Catholic doctrine that they hurl the accusation of Anti-Semitism against those who are battling for the Rights of Christ the King, thus effectively aiding the enemies of Our Divine Lord. Secondly, many Catholic writers copy unquestioningly what they read in the naturalistic or anti-Supernatural Press and do not distinguish between Anti-Semitism in the correct Catholic sense, as explained above, and ‘Anti-Semitism’ as the Jews understand it. …”

Fr. Fahey’s Preface in Grand Orient Freemasonry Unmasked: As the Secret Power Behind Communism by Monsignor George F. Dillon, D.D.

Jews have hated & persecuted the Catholic Church from the time of Jesus Christ to this very day!

[The Jews are] a people who, having imbrued their hands in a most heinous outrage [Jesus’ crucifixion], have thus polluted their souls and are deservedly blind. . . . Therefore we have nothing in common with that most hostile of people the Jews. We have received from the Savior another way . . . our holy religion. . . . On what subject will that detestable association be competent to from a correct judgment, who after that murder of their Lord . . . are led… by. . . their innate fury?

Council of Nicaea, 325 AD

Jewish Power is inversely proportional to the spiritual health of the Catholic Church

“Jews should not be placed in public offices, since it is most absurd that a blasphemer of Christ should exercise power over Christians.”

Fourth Lateran Council

PEW POLL published September 2024:

PEW POLL published September 2024:

COMMENT: The great majority of those claiming to be Catholic have corrupted Catholic morality. Morality follows doctrine. The Novus Ordo first became heretical, and the corruption of morality followed the corruption of the faith. Now that the Pope Francis the Vulgar with Fiducia Supplicans has permitted a new "non-liturgical" blessing for sodomite couples there will follow a dramatic increase in those in the Novus Ordo Church who believe their church should "recognize the marriages (sic) of gay and lesbian couples". The accuracy of PEW polls was recently confirmed by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) that conducted its own poll that confirmed the findings of an earlier PEW poll that found that only 63% of Novus Ordo Catholics who attend services at least once a week believed in the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation, or rather, they have sentiments that imply they may believe in the notion of the True Presence. What is becoming more evident every day is that for a faithful Novus Ordo Catholic, there is no possibility of salvation.

After 40 Years of Dialogue, Rabbi identifies papal “conundrum.”

The real conundrum that faces Benedict XVI on his visit to Israel… is should he be loyal to the Gospels which claim that only acceptance of Christ can bring the messianic age, or should he endorse Vatican II which acknowledges that Jews… can find the kingdom of God via a different route? Should he look inwards, backwards or forwards?

Rabbi Jonathan Romain, The Pope’s Jewish Dilemma, The Guardian

Explicit Supernatural Faith in God’s Revealed Truth is Necessary as a Necessity of Means for Salvation.

If you do not believe this, you do not possess Supernatural Faith!

Responses of the Holy Office under Pope Clement XI, 1703:
Q. Whether a minister is bound, before baptism is conferred on an adult, to explain to him all the mysteries of our faith, especially if he is at the point of death, because this might disturb his mind. Or, whether it is sufficient, if the one at the point of death will promise that when he recovers from the illness, he will take care to be instructed, so that he may put into practice what has been commanded him.
Resp. A promise is not sufficient, but a missionary is bound to explain to an adult, even a dying one who is not entirely incapacitated, the mysteries of faith which are necessary by a necessity of means, as are especially the mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation.
Q.  Whether it is possible for a crude and uneducated adult, as it might be with a barbarian, to be baptized, if there were given to him only an understanding of God and some of His attributes, especially His justice in rewarding and in punishing, according to this passage of the Apostle "He that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder' [Heb . 11:23], from which it is inferred that a barbarian adult, in a certain case of urgent necessity, can be baptized although he does not believe explicitly in Jesus Christ.
Resp. A missionary should not baptize one who does not believe explicitly in the Lord Jesus Christ, but is bound to instruct him about all those matters which are necessary, by a necessity of means, according to the capacity of the one to be baptized.”

COMMENT: The infamous 1949 Holy Office Letter, sent privately to Cardinal Richard Cushing of Boston for the purpose of censoring Fr. Lenard Feeney for his belief in the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, affirmed the novel doctrine of 'salvation by implicit desire'. The "implicit desire" was to be a "member of the Church" and the evidence of this "implicit desire" was a belief in a 'god who rewards and punishes'. The Letter teaches that the only requirement for salvation is found in St. Paul's Letter to the Hebrews 11:13. No longer were the belief in any revealed truth, the reception of any sacrament, or being a subject of the Roman Pontiff necessary as necessities of means for salvation. This Letter teaches that any "good-willed" Jew as a Jew, Hindu as a Hindu, Mohammedan as a Mohammedan, Protestant as a Protestant, etc., etc. are members of the Church and can obtain salvation because they believe in a 'god who rewards and punishes'. The Holy Office response of 1703 makes it clear that the belief in a God who rewards and punishes is only the natural philosophical prerequisite for receiving the gospel good-news of salvation and of itself is insufficient grounds for receiving the sacrament of Baptism.

There is yet a time of stillness and indifference. Liberalism is a twilight state in which all errors are softened, in which no persecution for religion will be countenanced. It is the stillness before the storm. There is a time coming when nothing will be persecuted but truth, and if you possess the truth, you will share the trial.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, Archbishop of Westminster

Pope tells American Catholics to choose ‘lesser of two evils’

Both the pro-abortion Harris and the anti-migrant Trump are “against life,” the pontiff has said

RT | 13 Sep, 2024

US Presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris are both “against life,” and Catholic voters should choose the “lesser evil,” Pope Francis told reporters on Friday. 

Speaking to reporters while returning to Rome from Singapore, the pontiff said that “not voting is ugly,” and that the faithful “must vote.”

“You must choose the lesser evil,” he elaborated. “Who is the lesser evil? That lady, or that gentleman? I don’t know. Whether it is the one who is chasing away migrants, or the one that kills children, both are against life.”

If elected, Trump has promised to close off the US’ southern border and lead “the largest deportation operation in American history.” Harris has vowed to sign a law guaranteeing the same access to abortion as under Roe v. Wade, a landmark Supreme Court decision that was overturned in 2022.

Roe v. Wade protected a woman’s right to seek an abortion, but certain restrictions on this right – for instance, bans on abortion past the second trimester of pregnancy – were set out in subsequent legislation. Harris’ running mate, Tim Walz, signed a bill in 2023 allowing abortions to be performed up to the moment of birth.

“To send migrants away, to leave them wherever you want, to leave them … it’s something terrible, there is evil there. To send away a child from the womb of the mother is an assassination, because there is life. We must speak about these things clearly,” Pope Francis told reporters on Friday.

COMMENT: Once again Pope Francis displays a frightening incompetence on moral questions. No Catholic "must vote" without serious qualifications. No Catholic is obligated to "choose the lesser evil". To choose neither by refusing to vote is a perfectly acceptable Catholic moral act. A Catholic may choose the lesser of two evils when he is obligated to choose but no obligation exists. To vote is to accept a process established by a ruling elite that has selected the two evil choices. If everyone refused to vote that act would itself disenfranchise the ruling elite.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò - On the New World State Religion

In an interview on Fox News titled The Church of Environmentalism, journalist Tucker Carlson has brought to light a contradiction that may have escaped the notice of many, but which is extremely revealing. Carlson recalls that the U.S. Constitution prohibits any state religion, but for some time the governing Democratic party has imposed on the American people the globalist cult. A religion in all respects, all-encompassing, with its green agenda, woke dogmas, cancel culture, priests of the World Health Organization and prophets of the World Economic Forum.
In the name of the globalist religion, its adherents demand that all citizens behave in accordance with the morality of the New World Order, accepting uncritically and with an attitude of devout submission, the doctrines defined ex cathedra by the Davos Sanhedrin. Citizens are not required merely to share the motivations that justify the health, economic or social policies imposed by governments, but to give their blind and irrational assent. It is not allowed to contest the psycho-pandemic, argue the groundlessness of climate alarms, oppose NATO’s provocation of the Russian Federation with the Ukrainian crisis or refuse to stand by as children are corrupted with LGBTQ obscenities.
The high priests of this religion have even reached the point of theorizing human sacrifice by means of abortion and euthanasia: a sacrifice required by the common good, so as not to over-populate the planet or over-burden public health. Adherence to globalism is not optional: it is the State religion, and the State "tolerates" non-practitioners only to the extent that their presence does not prevent society from exercising this cult. The public act of vaccination represented a sort of "baptism" in the globalist faith, the initiation into worship.
The "church of environmentalism" defines itself as inclusive, but it does not tolerate dissent. Those who do not accept the anti-Gospel of Davos are ipso facto heretics and must therefore be punished, excommunicated, separated from the social body, and considered public enemies.
This State religion has spread to all the nations of the Western world, whose leaders were converted to the globalist "Word" by the apostle of the Great Reset, Klaus Schwab, its self-proclaimed "pope" who is invested with an infallible and incontestable authority. On the website of the World Economic Forum, we find the list of "prelates" of globalism. A very powerful, highly organized network, widespread not only at the top of institutions, but also in universities and courts, in companies and hospitals, in peripheral bodies and local municipalities, in cultural and sports associations, so that it is impossible to escape indoctrination even in a provincial primary school or a small rural community.
Tucker Carlson’s observation highlights the deception to which we are subjected daily by our rulers: the theoretical imposition of the secularism of the State has served to eliminate the presence of the true God from the institutions, while the practical imposition of the globalist religion serves to introduce Satan into the institutions, with the aim of establishing that dystopian New World Order in which the Antichrist will claim to be worshipped as a god, in his mad delirium to replace Our Lord.

Conservative Catholics: Liberal in principle and conservative in practice can only be jarred from their complacency by someone like Pope Francis. At least some recognize that unqualified obedience is non-Catholic.

The power that Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors is, in an absolute sense, a mandate to serve. The power of teaching in the Church involves a commitment to the service of obedience to the faith. The Pope is not an absolute monarch whose thoughts and desires are law. On the contrary: the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism. […..] To put this question into sharp relief: the feet of whom should be washed in the Mass of Maundy Thursday? Those of men or of women? The feet of Christians or non-Christians? Why? With all due respect I submit that any answer based solely on “. . . because the pope did it” is insufficient if not downright ultramontane. Such reasoning will not do. Such positivism is simply foreign to the Catholic faith. Papal preference is not the arbiter of the church’s liturgy: sound liturgical and theological principles are. The Bishop of Rome exercises his authority rightly when, in liturgical matters, he bases his judgments on these principles. If he ignores them in his judgments or personal practice he risks causing confusion, scandal, and disunity. The exercise of authority in respect of the sacred liturgy and the personal liturgical behavior of all popes, prelates, other clergy, and laity are rightly evaluated according to these criteria.

Dom Alcuin Reed, 2014

"All religions are paths to reach God. They are—to make a comparison—like different languages, different dialects, to get there. But God is God for everyone. If you start to fight saying 'my religion is more important than yours, mine is true and yours isn't', where will this lead us? There is only one God, and each of us has a language to arrive at God. Some are Sheik, Muslim, Hindu, Christians; they are different ways to God."

Pope Francis addressing non-Catholic children in Singapore, September 12, 2024

COMMENT: Pope Francis is not just a simple heretic, he is an apostate. Anyone who holds Pope Francis as their proximate rule of faith will follow him to hell!

“Remember, O man, that dust thou art, and to dust thou shalt return.”

"An excessive desire for liberty at the expense of everything else is what undermines democracy and leads to the demand for tyranny." Plato

In a 2022 lecture at Notre Dame, Alasdair MacIntyre argued that the claims and conceptions of universal and inalienable human dignity as reflected in documents such as the 1948 United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in various post-war European constitutions are puzzling, since this dignity requires a duty of respect to everyone just for being human, no matter their behavior or character, so Stalin the mass murderer has as much dignity and deserves as much respect as Mother Teresa. Aquinas’ view of dignitas as interpreted by Charles De Koninick is a challenge to this view, for it assigns human dignity, not to the mere fact of being human, but to the end to which we are called, which is supernatural, union with God, which might not be attained due to one’s choices on earth against those common goods which enable our attainment of the supernatural end, and so human dignitas could be lost. According to this view, the 20th-century concept of human dignity is much too individualistic, and because it is not based in justice and the common good, can only provide negative prescriptions against the undignified treatment of humans. It is unable to provide positive prescriptions that enable persons to obtain the common goods and the virtues they need to attain their supernatural end. For MacIntyre, we need to speak of human dignity in terms of justice, what we owe to each other for the sake of enabling persons to attain their personal and common goods and final end, which is the knowledge and love of God in this life and the next.

Thaddeus Kozinski, PhD, Introduction to his article, From Liberal Democracy to Global Totalitarianism

ABCs of the Spiritual Life

MAN HAS a twofold nature, the one superior, the other inferior. The first is generally termed reason, the second is called appetite, sensuality, or passion. Reason is the distinguishing property of man, and he is not considered responsible for the primary impulses of his appetite unless his superior faculty confirms the choice.

The entire spiritual warfare, consequently, consists in this: the rational faculty is placed between the Divine will above it and the sensitive appetite below it, and is attacked from both sides------God moving it by His grace, and the flesh by its appetites strive for victory.

It is apparent, then, that inconceivable difficulties arise when persons who during their youth have contracted vicious habits resolve to change their life, mortify their passions, and break with the world in order to devote themselves to the service of God.

The will is violently attacked by Divine grace and by its own sensual appetites, and wherever it turns, it absorbs these withering attacks with the greatest difficulty.

This onslaught is not experienced by those who are firmly settled in their way of life, whether in virtue by conforming to the will of God, or in vice by indulging their sensual desires.

No one should delude himself that he can acquire virtue and serve God in the proper way, unless he is willing to undergo a violent struggle. He must conquer the difficulty he will experience when he deprives himself of the pleasures, great or small, to which he has been viciously attached.

The result is that very few attain any great degree of perfection. After conquering their greatest vice, after undergoing tremendous exertions, they lose courage and fail to pursue their objective. And this when only small trials are to be overcome, such as subduing the feeble remnants of their own will, and annihilating some weaker passions which revive and then completely regain their hearts.

Many persons of this type, for example, do not take what belongs to others, but they are passionately attached to what is their own. They do not use any illegal methods of aggrandizement, but instead of spurning advancement, they are fond of it and seek it by any means they think lawful. They observe the appointed fasts, but, on other days, they indulge in the most exotic delicacies. They are very careful to observe chastity, and yet they refuse to give up their favorite amusements, even though they constitute great obstacles to a spiritual life and real union with God. Since these things are so highly dangerous, particularly for those who do not recognize their bad results, they must be dealt with very cautiously.

Without such caution, we may be assured that most of our good acts will have as attendants, slothfulness, vanity, human respect, hidden imperfections, conceit, and a desire for the notice and approval of others. Dom Lorenzo Scupoli, The Spiritual Combat

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

By their fruits they are known!

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

Thence came:

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

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

3. the restoration and vigorous strengthening of ecclesiastical discipline,

4. the advancement of the clergy in zeal for

· learning and

· piety,

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

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

· a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and

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

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

Thence came:

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

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

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

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

o its wise decrees were neglected.

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

Is this what Pope Francis means by “fleshless theology that becomes ideology”?

I likewise receive and accept the rites of the Catholic Church which have been received and approved in the solemn administration of all the aforesaid (seven) sacraments. [.....]

I resolutely assert that images of Christ and the ever virgin mother of God, and likewise those of the other saints, are to be kept and retained, and that due honour and reverence is to be shown them. [.....]

Likewise all other things which have been transmitted, defined and declared by the sacred canons and the ecumenical councils, especially the sacred Trent, I accept unhesitatingly and profess; in the same way whatever is to the contrary, and whatever heresies have been condemned, rejected and anathematised by the Church, I too condemn, reject and anathematise. This true Catholic faith, outside of which none can be saved, which I now freely profess and truly hold, is what I shall steadfastly maintain and confess, by the help of God, in all its completeness and purity until my dying breath, and I shall do my best to ensure that all others do the same. This is what I, the same Pius, promise, vow and swear. So help me God and these holy gospels of God.

Profession of Faith, Blessed Pope Pius IX before the bishops of the Church at the opening of the First Vatican Council

"Let everything that conflicts with ecclesiastical tradition and teaching, and that has been innovated and done contrary to the examples outlined by the saints and the venerable Fathers, or that shall hereafter at any time be done in such a fashion, be anathema."

Second Council of Nicaea

Our Lady of LaSalette

“Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.” “The demons of the air, together with the Antichrist, will work great wonders on the earth and in the air, and men will become ever more perverted. God will take care of His faithful servants and men of good will; the Gospel will be preached everywhere, all peoples and all nations will have knowledge of the Truth.”

Blessed Virgin Mary addressing the children at LaSalette, September 19, 1846

“When the Secret has been scorned, misunderstood ... held back for money, one must be surprised at nothing. The Church will endure forever, our Lord said so; but among the teaching members of the Church, what traitors, what apostates, what mercenaries, what sectarians, who bear the imprint or the sign of the beast with ten horns St. John speaks of in his vision on Patmos! But this beast similar to the Lamb, who rises out of the earth, isn't it the figure of faithless ecclesiastics? I firmly believe so. Happy those who die in God's grace, for those who live will see sad and terrifying things. We still haven't reached the beginning of the end.”

Melanie Calvat, visionary of LaSaletter, Letter to Fr. Roubaud, January 2, 1892), quoted by Solange Hertz

"Souls who are God's friends can guess the Secret's meaning without help, and the others won't want to because it applies to them too closely. Melanie Calvat, to her spiritual director in 1903, quoted by Solange Hertz

Outrage as Vatican drops ‘Before Christ’ for ‘Before Common Era’

Simon Caldwell | August 30, 2024

Catholics have accused the Vatican of betraying Jesus by substituting the term “Before Christ” with “Before Common Era” in official documentation.

The traditional term BC was replaced by BCE in the English translation of a July letter by Pope Francis on the role of literature in Christian formation.

Ann Widdecombe, a convert to the Catholic faith and a former Conservative Party minister, was among the Catholics all over the world who were angered by the move.

“If the Vatican is doing that then it is a complete betrayal,” said Miss Widdecombe.

“If the Vatican is removing the name of Christ from official documentation it’s a complete betrayal.”

The use of the secular term BCE comes in paragraph 12 of the letter, which refers to the address of St Paul before the Areopagus that was described in the Acts of the Apostles.

The paragraph reads: “This verse contains two quotations: one indirect, from the poet Epimenides (sixth century BCE), and the other direct, from the Phaenomena of the poet Aratus of Soli (third century BCE), who wrote of the constellations and the signs of good and bad weather.”

The document represents a major departure from the Church’s perspective of history, which it frames from the arrival of the Messiah.

The Church has always numbered years either “BC”, meaning “Before Christ”, or “AD” – Anno Domini, or in the year of Our Lord, to represent the era of the Church.

The term BCE was used from the 1800s by Jewish scholars who did not acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah.

It has crept into popular usage with the increased secularism of Western societies and the rejection of any concept of God, and is often controversial.

BCE appears only in the English translation of the Pope’s letter. BC remains the preferred abbreviation for the translations into Italian, French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Polish and Arabic.

COMMENT: Is Pope Francis now a Jew? It was the Jews who refused to use Anno Domini and are now imposing it in political, social and academic circles. Regardless if Francis or the Jews recognize Anno Domini, Jesus Christ is God who created time and His incarnation is the singular most important event in all history. It is Pope Francis who is denying this unyielding fact.

Tikkun olam (Hebrew תיקון עולם, literally, 'repair of the world') is a concept in Judaism, often interpreted as aspiration to behave and act constructively and beneficially. Documented use of the term dates back to the Mishnaic period (ca. 10-220 AD), (that is, the time when the oral traditions of the Jews were committed to the written form in the Mishna, also called the Oral Torah). Since medieval times, kabbalistic literature has broadened use of the term. In the modern era, among the post-Haskalah (Jewish enlightenment, 1770-1880) movements, tikkun olam is the idea that Jews bear responsibility not only for their own moral, spiritual, and material welfare, but also for the welfare of society at large. For many contemporary pluralistic rabbis, the term refers to "Jewish social justice" or "the establishment of Godly qualities throughout the world". Wikipedia

COMMENT: Jews repeatedly since the time of Jesus Christ are the passionate creators and principle instigators of ideological movements conceived as necessary for the moral and material improvement of political and social order. When one after the other proves to be a political and social failure, it is simply dropped and they move on to another. They recognize a ‘fall from grace’ because they recognize the ‘world needs to be repaired.’ Since they have rejected Jesus Christ, the incarnate Logos, the eternal Wisdom of the Father, they have rejected His divine plan for the ‘repair of the world’ and in its place offer what Fr. Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp. described as “Organized Naturalism” in opposition to the Supernatural Order of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, the truth of the matter is that whoever is not working for God is working for the Devil. There is no middle ground. As Jesus said, “He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth” (Matthew 12:30).

Where Tikkun Olam can lead

OPINION: Stalin’s Jews

We mustn't forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish

Israel News | ynetnews | Sever Plocker

Here's a particularly forlorn historical date: More than 100 years ago, between the 19th and 20th of December 1917, in the midst of the Bolshevik revolution and civil war, Lenin signed a decree calling for the establishment of The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage, also known as Cheka. 

Within a short period of time, Cheka became the largest and cruelest state security organization. Its organizational structure was changed every few years, as were its names: From Cheka to GPU, later to NKVD, and later to KGB. 

We cannot know with certainty the number of deaths Cheka was responsible for in its various manifestations, but the number is surely at least 20 million, including victims of the forced collectivization, the hunger, large purges, expulsions, banishments, executions, and mass death at Gulags. 

Whole population strata were eliminated: Independent farmers, ethnic minorities, members of the bourgeoisie, senior officers, intellectuals, artists, labor movement activists, "opposition members" who were defined completely randomly, and countless members of the Communist party itself.

In his new, highly praised book "The War of the World," Historian Niall Ferguson writes that no revolution in the history of mankind devoured its children with the same unrestrained appetite as did the Soviet revolution. In his book on the Stalinist purges, Tel Aviv University's Dr. Igal Halfin writes that Stalinist violence was unique in that it was directed internally. 

Lenin, Stalin, and their successors could not have carried out their deeds without wide-scale cooperation of disciplined "terror officials," cruel interrogators, snitches, executioners, guards, judges, perverts, and many bleeding hearts who were members of the progressive Western Left and were deceived by the Soviet regime of horror and even provided it with a kosher certificate. 

All these things are well-known to some extent or another, even though the former Soviet Union's archives have not yet been fully opened to the public. But who knows about this? Within Russia itself, very few people have been brought to justice for their crimes in the NKVD's and KGB's service. The Russian public discourse today completely ignores the question of "How could it have happened to us?" As opposed to Eastern European nations, the Russians did not settle the score with their Stalinist past.

And us, the Jews? An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name "Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU's deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin's collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system. After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the "bloodthirsty dwarf."

Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his Book "Stalin: Court of the Red Star", Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women.

Stalin's close associates and loyalists included member of the Central Committee and Politburo Lazar Kaganovich. Montefiore characterizes him as the "first Stalinist" and adds that those starving to death in Ukraine, an unparalleled tragedy in the history of human kind aside from the Nazi horrors and Mao's terror in China, did not move Kaganovich. 

Many Jews sold their soul to the devil of the Communist revolution and have blood on their hands for eternity. We'll mention just one more: Leonid Reichman, head of the NKVD's special department and the organization's chief interrogator, who was a particularly cruel sadist. 

In 1934, according to published statistics, 38.5 percent of those holding the most senior posts in the Soviet security apparatuses were of Jewish origin. They too, of course, were gradually eliminated in the next purges. In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a "carnival of mass murder," "fantasy of purges", and "essianism of evil." Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history. 

The Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but rather, as Stalinists, communists, and "Soviet people." Therefore, we find it easy to ignore their origin and "play dumb": What do we have to do with them? But let's not forget them. My own view is different. I find it unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does amazingly despicable things. 

Even if we deny it, we cannot escape the Jewishness of "our hangmen," who served the Red Terror with loyalty and dedication from its establishment. After all, others will always remind us of their origin.

“Don’t Jews still believe in a Messias to come?” asks the credulous Christian. “And don’t they believe in the same Biblical Heaven and Hell that we do?”

The answer to both these questions is — no. And it is an emphatic “No!” as the subsequent Jewish testimony will verify.

Concerning the Messias: The Jews of today reject the notion of a personal redeemer who will be born of them and lead them to the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies. The Jews believe that the whole Jewish race is to be elevated to a position of prosperity and overlordship and that, when this happy day arrives (the Messianic Age), they will have achieved all that is coming to them by way of savior and salvation. In his recent book, The Messianic Idea in Israel, Jewish theologian Dr. Joseph Klausner explains: “Thus the whole people Israel in the form of the elect of the nations gradually became the Messiah of the world, the redeemer of mankind.”

Concerning Heaven and Hell: A succinct summary of Jewish teaching on “life after death” was given in the May, 1958 issue of B’nai B’rith’s National Jewish Monthly. Under the caption, “What Can A Modern Jew Believe?” there appeared: “Judaism insists that ‘heaven’ must be established on this earth. The reward of the pious is life and happiness in this world, while the punishment of the wicked is misery on earth and premature death … By hitching its star to the Messianic future on this earth, Israel became the eternal people.” The article goes on: “The best Jewish minds have always held that a physical hereafter is a detraction from mature belief.” And the conclusion: “There is neither hell nor paradise, God merely sends out the sun in its full strength; the wicked are consumed by its heat, while the pious find delight and healing in its rays.”

Fr. Leonard Feeney, MICM, The Point, October 1958

“In the name of the Gospel, and in the light of the Encyclicals of the last four Popes, Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Pius X, I do not hesitate to affirm that this indifference to religion which puts on the same level the religion of divine origin and the religions invented by men in order to include them in the same skepticism is the blasphemy which calls down chastisement on society far more than the sins of individuals and families.”

Cardinal Désiré Félicien François Joseph Mercier, Archbishop of Mechelen in Belgium and Catholic scholar, 1918, The Lesson of Events, quoted by Fr. Denis Fahey in The Kingship of Chirst and Organized Naturalism

Infallibility is primarily and essentially an attribute of the God's Church because it is an attribute of God

“Infallibility is not a quality inherent in any person, but an assistance attached to an office”

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning (1808-1892)

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

Novel theory: Dogma contains “perennial truths” and contingent accretions.

My fundamental impulse, precisely from the Council, has always been to free the very heart of the faith from under any ossified strata, and to give this heart strength and dynamism. This impulse is the constant in my life.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Salt of the Earth

The steps taken by the Council towards the modern era which had rather vaguely been presented as ‘openness to the world’ [aggiornamento], belong in short to the perennial problem of the relationship between faith and reason that is re-emerging in ever new forms.... The Council had to find a new definition of the relationship between the Church and the modern age.... Here I shall cite only John XXIII’s well-known words, which unequivocally express this hermeneutic when he says that the Council wishes “to transmit the doctrine pure and integral, without any attenuation or distortion”. And he continues: “Our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure, as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our age demands of us…” It is necessary that “adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness…” be presented in “faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine, which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another…”, retaining the same meaning and message.... It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking upon it and a new relationship with it.

Pope Benedict XVI, speech to Roman Curia on Dec 22, 2005, outlining his papal agenda

Catholic teaching: Dogma is the irreformable formal object of Divine and Catholic Faith

For the doctrine of faith which God has revealed has not been proposed like a philosophical invention, to be perfected by human ingenuity; but has been delivered as a divine deposit to the Spouse of Christ, to be faithfully kept and infallibly declared. Hence, also, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is perpetually to be retained which our holy Mother the Church has once declared; nor is that meaning ever to be departed from, under the pretence or pretext of a deeper comprehension of them.

Vatican Council I

Ugly fact ignored by Reform of Reform – Bugnini was appointed by Paul VI, his work was approved and imposed by Paul VI, and his work accurately reflected the novel principles of liturgical innovation adopted in 1948 and approved at Vatican II

Sacrosanctum Concilium, Vatican II document on the liturgy, is the justification for Bugnini’s Novus Ordo

The order to promote urgently a liturgical reform is in SC §§ 1, 14, 25, 31, 40, 43, 50, 63b, 128.
• The encouragement of the participation of the faithful in the liturgy is stated in §§ 11, 14, 18, 19, 21, 27, 41, 53, 114, 121, 124.
• In § 12 communitarian prayer is recommended.
• In § 30 acclamations and dances are advised.
• Inculturation is counseled in §§ 37-40, 112, 119.
• Communion under two species is counseled in §55.
• In §§ 62, 67-82 a complete change in the ceremonies of the sacraments and sacramentals is imposed.
• The reform of Divine Office is decreed in §§ 87-88, 91-93, 97.
• The reform of the liturgical year is ordered in § 107.
• The introduction of liturgical modern art is approved in § 123.
• The suppression of the statues in the churches is recommended in § 125.
• The change of sacerdotal vestments is allowed in §128.

Atila S. Guimarães, Tradition in Action

“This dialogue should serve to strengthen our common hope in God in the midst of an increasingly secularized society. Without this hope, society loses its humanity.”

Benedict XVI, addressing Jewish Community, Berlin, Germany, September 22, 2011

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

96% of Jewish Leaders Support Abortion, 93% believe that homosexuality is not wrong!

The study also found that on a variety of issues involving sexual morality that have roiled other religious groups, Jews are much more liberal than other Americans. Jews take a less critical view of homosexuality, abortion, birth control and pornography than do Gentiles,” the study found. In each case, Jewish leaders are even more tolerant than the Jewish public.

For example, 48 percent of non-Jews say homosexuality is wrong, compared to 23 percent of Jews and 7 percent of Jewish leaders. And while 56 percent of non-Jews support abortion rights, 88 percent of Jews and 96 percent of Jewish leaders do.

Only 38 percent of Jews support allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools, compared to 65 percent of non-Jews; 39 percent of Jews would allow the teaching of creationism, compared with 63 percent of non-Jews; and 22 percent of Jews would support vouchers that could be used at religious schools, compared with 43 percent of non-Jews.

Pew Charitable Trusts, examining the contemporary role of religious groups in the United States

What “Religious Submission” to the ‘Ordinary Authentic Magisterium’ Actually Means

Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent just because in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power [i.e., extra-ordinary magisterium] of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary Teaching Authority [ordinary and universal magisterium], of which it is true to say: “He that heareth you, heareth Me.” [Luke 10:16]. 

Pius XII, Humani Generis, par. 20.

COMMENT: This quotation taken from Pope Pius XII is now referenced to support the Novus Ordo Church’s claim that every Catholic must give unconditional submission of his “mind and will to the authentic magisterium” of Pope Francis. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical is referring to the “ordinary and universal magisterium” and this can be clearly seen for two reasons: The examples provided by Pope Pius XII that follow this statement in his encyclical refer specifically to modern theological novelties that reject, for example, the infallible teaching of the Church on the inerrancy of sacred scripture, the identity of the Church and the Mystical Body of Christ, and the nature of Original Sin. These are all examples of the “ordinary and universal” magisterium that Vatican I dogmatically defined as “infallible.”

The other reason is God cannot bind the authority of His Truth to what can and have in the past contained errors. Fr. Joseph Fenton, in an article published in the AER in 1949 entitled, On the Doctrinal Authority of Papal Encyclicals, documents specific historical errors published in those documents. Whenever the pope teaches by virtue of his grace of state from the ‘authentic ordinary magisterium’, his teaching must be accepted by a religious submission which is always and necessarily a prudent and conditional submission to the personal teaching authority of the pope. Such conditional acceptance of the word of God is not possible when the pope teaches infallibly by engaging the “extra-ordinary magisterium” or the “ordinary and universal magisterium” of the Church from which alone it can be said without qualification whatsoever, “He that heareth you, heareth Me.” [Luke 10:16].

The modern encyclical by Pope Francis on global warming/earth worship, for example, is wholly conscribed within a very narrow and tenuous ideological framework that has little or nothing to do with Catholic doctrine or morality. This document has nothing to do with the “ordinary and universal” magisterium. It is entirely a product of the personal authentic ordinary magisterium of Pope Francis teaching by his grace of state. Anyone to whom the document is addressed is free to toss the document in the trash along with the junk mail if he, upon mature consideration, finds it to be a novelty and, in its overall tone, an ideological screed divorced from natural truth.

On the Necessity of Baptism

"By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death... so that in them there may be washed away by regeneration, what they have contracted by generation, ‘For unless a man is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God’ (John 3:5)."

Council of Trent, Session 5, Canon 4 on Original Sin ....

"Particular texts (in sacred Scripture) where the Church has defined that such is the meaning are few. The following texts have been dogmatically defined:

· Romans 5:12 on Original Sin

· John 3:5 on Baptism

· Words of institution on the Holy Eucharist

· John 20:23 on the remission and retention of sin

· James 5:14 on the establishment of the sacrament Extreme Unction

· Matthew 16:16 & John 21:15 on the universal jurisdiction of the St. Peter and the papacy

....... From John 3:5 there is established the absolute necessity of baptism and that real and natural water is necessary for baptism (Council of Trent, Session V, Canon 4 Denz. 791, 858)

Fr. Sixtus Cartechini, De Valore notarum theologicarum et de criteriis ad eas dignoscendas, 1951, Chap. 7

Two response from a recent lengthy interview with Msgr. Carlo Maria Viganò are republished below:

Msgr. Carlo Maria Viganò

Interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall

August 9, 2024

What should lay Catholics do if the Traditional Latin Mass is banned by the Vatican?

The Tridentine Mass is a priceless treasure for the Holy Church. It has been “canonized” by its centuries-old use in which we see the voice of Sacred Tradition expressed. If the Hierarchy, abusing its power against the purpose that the Lord has given it, prevents the celebration of the ancient Mass, it commits an abuse, and this prohibition is null.

Priests and bishops should show more courage, continuing to celebrate the ancient rite and refusing to celebrate the Novus Ordo. They would probably face sanctions from the Vatican, but they ought to ask themselves what sanctions will await them when they have to answer before the Lord’s tribunal for not having fulfilled their duty, preferring servile obedience to the powerful rather than obedience to God.

The laity should organize themselves into small communities by purchasing the churches that are now up for sale or by setting up home chapels, and by seeking out priests willing to celebrate the Mass and Sacraments for them according to the Apostolic rite and by helping them materially to carry out their ministry.

What are your thoughts on the Fraternity of Saint Peter (FSSP), the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest (ICKSP), and the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX)? Do you encourage people to attend their Masses? 

The former Ecclesia Dei institutes were born from the Vatican’s intention to weaken the Society of Saint Pius X after the Episcopal Consecrations of 1988, which, having given itself an apostolic succession, was able continue its apostolate even after the death of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The “authorization” to celebrate the Tridentine Liturgy – which until then had been completely excluded – had and still has as its condition the acceptance of the “post-conciliar magisterium” and the licitness of the Novus Ordo. This premise is completely unacceptable, because it reduces the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass to a ceremonial question, while instead it is evident that the Tridentine rite summarizes in itself all the doctrine and spirituality of the Catholic Faith, in antithesis to the Protestantized rite of Paul VI that ecumenically silences that Faith. Whoever celebrates the Mass of Saint Pius V cannot accept Vatican II. In fact, from the beginning, many priests who had left the Society of Archbishop Lefebvre and had joined the Ecclesia Dei institutes continued to have strong reservations and, so to speak, played on the equivocation of a tacit acceptance that the Vatican itself did not ask to be made explicit.

In 2007, Benedict XVI recognized the legitimacy of the traditional Liturgy, declaring that the Traditional Latin Mass was the “extraordinary form” of the Roman Rite, alongside the “ordinary form” of the Novus Ordo. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reveals Ratzinger’s Hegelian approach, which in the coexistence of two forms of the same rite sought to compose the synthesis between the thesis of the traditional Mass and the antithesis of the Montinian rite. But even in that case, the ideological basis of the Motu Proprio was in fact moderated by practice, and so the end result of Summorum Pontificum was relatively positive, at least in the spread of the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass that today’s younger generations had never experienced. Young priests and many of the faithful have embraced the Apostolic Rite, discovering its beauty and intrinsic coherence with the Catholic Faith. In the face of the success of the Mass of all time, the Motu Proprio Traditionis Custodes drastically limited the liberalization of Summorum Pontificum, declaring that the right of every priest to celebrate the traditional Mass had been abolished and reserving it only to the former Ecclesia Dei institutes. Thus an “Indian reservation” of more or less conservative clerics who depend on Bergoglio has been created, who are required to profess the conciliar faith through the concelebration of the new rite at least once a year: something that practically all the priests of these institutes are forced to do, willingly or not. On the other hand, it does not seem to me that the bishops and cardinals who support them have expressed any reservations about the Council or about the doctrinal, moral, and liturgical deviations of the post-conciliar period and of Bergoglio himself. It is difficult to expect from subordinates a combativeness that eminent Prelates have never demonstrated.

These institutes are therefore under blackmail. If with Summorum Pontificum it was plausible to think of an attempt at liturgical peace that would leave conservatives free to choose the rite they prefer (in a vision that was, so to speak, liberal), with Traditionis Custodes the clergy who celebrate and the faithful who attend the Traditional Latin Mass are burdened by the ecclesial stigma of backwardness, of the rejection of Vatican II, of pre-conciliar rigidity. In this case, synodality and parrhesia yield to the authoritarianism of Bergoglio, who, however, does speak an uncomfortable truth: the Ancient Rite calls into question the ecclesiology and theology of Vatican II and as such does not represent the conciliar church. The illusion of liturgical peace has therefore been shattered miserably in the face of the evidence of the irreconcilability of two rites that “excommunicate” each other, just like the two churches – the Catholic Church and the synodal church – of which they are a cultic expression.

In the case of the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the ritual and ceremonial question seems to prevail over the doctrinal one, and it is no coincidence that amidst the general dissolution that exists, the Canons of Gricigliano seem to be exempt from opposition and ostracism: they do not represent a problem, because they do not question the new course in the slightest and indeed have extensive citations of conciliar documents in their Constitutions. The other institutes are also surviving, but it remains to be seen how they intend to respond to the coming future restrictions.

The Society of Saint Pius X, after fifty years of activity, is showing signs of tiredness, and sometimes it seems that its silence about the horrors of Santa Marta is motivated by a tacit agreement of non-belligerence, perhaps in the hope of being able to become the collector of conservatism and of part of Catholic traditionalism, once Bergoglio has eliminated “the competition” of the former Ecclesia Dei institutes. My fear is that this hope will in the end lead to ratifying the de facto schism that is already present in the Church, forcing Catholics to leave the official church, as if they, and not the Roman Hierarchy, were in a state of schism. Once the critical voices are eliminated, Bergoglio would find himself with “his own” heretical church, from which the priests and faithful who do not accept the permanent revolution have been banished.

As for the faithful, I believe it is necessary to understand the situation of great disorientation and anarchy that is present in the Church. Many Catholics who have discovered the Traditional Latin Mass are no longer able to attend the Montinian rite, and it is understandable that they are “content” – so to speak – with the Tridentine Masses celebrated by the former Ecclesia Dei institutes, without however accepting the compromises that are required of their priests. But it is a situation that sooner or later will have to be clarified, especially if the acceptance of conciliar and synodal errors becomes the conditio sine qua non of the enjoyment of the Traditional Latin Mass. In that case the faithful must act coherently and seek out priests who are not compromised with the synodal church. The horrors of this “pontificate” are in any case eroding the consensus of the Clergy with regard to Bergoglio: a traditional faction could decide not to follow him on the failed path he has undertaken.

What would you say to lay people who have no access to the Traditional Latin Mass?

I understand the torment that many feel at not being able to attend the Tridentine Mass. It is like being deprived of the very Presence of the Lord and of the Graces that the Holy Sacrifice spreads on souls and on the Church. But we must remember that throughout history, many Catholics, both in distant lands not yet reached by missionaries and also in times of persecution, have found themselves unable to attend Mass except on rare occasions. A Catholic can survive without the Mass, but not without the Faith. If Faith is therefore indispensable for salvation, it is important that every Catholic nourish his or her religious education by taking up the Tridentine Catechism again and nourishing the intellect and the heart in such a way as to resist the contagion of the Novus Ordo and its degenerations. We must pray that the Lord sends workers for His harvest, and we must support the few priests who are still faithful.

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

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

The Dogma defines two revealed doctrinal truths:

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

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

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

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

St. Fulgentius

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

St. Fulgentius

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

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

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

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

St. Fulgentius

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

St. Eugene IV, Cantate Domino

Ladislaus, CathInfo

"THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.  THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE."

“Let him heed what the blessed apostle Peter preaches, that sanctification by the Spirit is effected by the sprinkling of Christ’s blood (1 Pet. 1:2); and let him not skip over the same apostle’s words, knowing that you have been redeemed from the empty way of life you inherited from your fathers, not with corruptible gold and silver but by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, as of a lamb without stain or spot (1 Pet. 1:18).  Nor should he withstand the testimony of blessed John the apostle: and the blood of Jesus, the Son of God, purifies us from every sin (1 Jn. 1:7); and again, This is the victory which conquers the world, our faith.  Who is there who conquers the world save one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?  It is He, Jesus Christ, who has come through water and blood, not in water only, but in water and blood.  And because the Spirit is truth, it is the Spirit who testifies.  For there are three who give testimony – Spirit and water and blood.  And the three are one.  (1 Jn. 5:4-8)  IN OTHER WORDS, THE SPIRIT OF SANCTIFICATION AND THE BLOOD OF REDEMPTION AND THE WATER OF BAPTISM.  THESE THREE ARE ONE AND REMAIN INDIVISIBLE. NONE OF THEM IS SEPARABLE FROM ITS LINK WITH THE OTHERS.”

Pope St. Leo the Great, dogmatic letter to Flavian, Council of Chalcedon, 451

“Also the epistle of blessed Leo the Pope to Flavian… if anyone argues concerning the text of this one even in regard to one iota, and does not receive it in all respects reverently, let him be anathema.”

Pope St. Gelasius, Decretal, 495

Pope Francis praises nun for opening ‘trans home’ for men claiming to be women, calls them ‘girls’

Pope Francis told the 'nun of the trans' that 'God who did not go to the seminary or study theology will repay you abundantly. I pray for you and your girls.'

LifeSiteNews | NEUQUÉN, Argentina | August 18, 2020 – After a controversial nun opened in Argentina a residence for ‘trans women’ — men who choose to identify as women — Pope Francis praised her work, referring to the men as “girls.”

Sister Mónica Astorga Cremona, 53, known locally in Argentina as the “Nun of the Trans,” cut the ribbon on the new complex of twelve small apartments dedicated solely to housing men claiming to be women and their partners.

Upon hearing the news the Pope responded in a communication, according to the nun, “Dear Monica, God who did not go to the seminary or study theology will repay you abundantly. I pray for you and your girls.”

The Supreme Pontiff, according to the nun, referred to the males, reported to be between 40 and 70 years old, as “girls.”  

“Do not forget to pray for me. May Jesus blesses (sic) you and may the Holy Virgin take care of you,” he added, according to a report to Newsflare.

Last year, Cardinal Raymond Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider, joined by other prelates, issued a public declaration of truths of the faith where they called it a rebellion and “grave sin” for a man to “attempt to become a woman.”

“The male and female sexes, man and woman, are biological realities created by the wise will of God (see Gen. 1: 27; Catechism of the Catholic Church, 369). It is, therefore, a rebellion against natural and Divine law and a grave sin that a man may attempt to become a woman by mutilating himself, or even by simply declaring himself to be such, or that a woman may in like manner attempt to become a man, or to hold that the civil authority has the duty or the right to act as if such things were or may be possible and legitimate (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2297),” the document states. 

Pro-LGBT Jesuit priest Fr. James Martin was delighted with the Pope’s congratulatory words to Sister Monica Cremona, saying in a Tweet:  “Wow. Pope Francis sends his support for a Catholic sister in Argentina who ministers to transsexual women.” [.....]

EXCLUSIVE: Abp. Viganò Clarifies His Position Following DDF Ruling — Part I
Matt Gaspers | July 19, 2024

In this exclusive interview, which will continue in a further installment, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò clarifies various aspects of his position following the Vatican’s announcement that he was “found guilty of the reserved delict of schism” on July 4 by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF). In this first installment, he explains more precisely what he means when he distinguishes the Catholic Church from the “conciliar church,” describing it as “an overlap of two entities — Church and anti-church — in the same Hierarchy,” something which he says “constitutes the ‘masterstroke of Satan’ that Archbishop Lefebvre denounced from the beginning.”
“The same Masonic lobby that for over two centuries has systematically demolished civil governments, has managed to penetrate the Catholic Church,” he says, “to impose a series of radical changes that subvert the magisterial teaching of two thousand years.” And this “coup d’état,” which he believes includes “the usurpation of the Apostolic See,” began “with the Second Vatican Council.”
Since the Council, Archbishop Viganò emphasizes that internal enemies have “organized themselves so that they are at the head of the Church, so that they can promulgate heresy from the See of Peter by imposing it as a truth to be believed by virtue of the authority of the Roman Pontiff, and so that they can silence every voice of dissent with canonical sanctions and excommunications,” perhaps alluding to his own situation vis-à-vis the Vatican.
He reiterates his belief that Francis is not the Pope while also commenting on what he calls a “paradox,” namely, “that the head of the ‘conciliar church,’” referring to Francis, “who is heretical and apostate, can also be considered Pontiff of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, and as usurping from Our Lord the voice of His Bride so as to dishonor her and Jesus Christ Himself.”
“The problem is therefore not whether we are in the Church,” he concludes, “but rather whether those who usurp her authority to demolish the Church are part of the Church. They are the ones who must be kicked out — not us!”

Remember? The SSPX has been in “doctrinal” discussions with Rome since 1997. A faithful Catholic who keeps DOGMA as his proximate Rule of Faith will exhaust any “doctrinal discussions” with a Modernist in a few hours at most if he is patient. The SSPX like the Modernists in Rome both hold that DOGMA is just a human axiom that approximates the truth but must necessarily be continually purged of its human accretions and purified as deeper theological insights are discovered!

The overheard plans are nearly identical to comments from an important Italian liturgist in an interview published by France’s LaCroix earlier this month. Andrea Grillo a lay professor at the Pontifical Athenaeum of St Anselmo in Rome, billed by La Croix as “close to the Pope,” is intimately familiar with Summorum Pontificum. Grillo in fact published a book against Summorum Pontificum before the papal document was even released.

Grillo told La Croix that Francis is considering abolishing Summorum Pontificum. According to Grillo, once the Vatican erects the Society of Saint Pius X as a Personal Prelature, the Roman Rite will be preserved only within this structure. “But [Francis] will not do this as long as Benedict XVI is alive.”

The plan, as related to LifeSite, involved making an agreement with the Society of St. Pius X and, with that agreement in place, sequestering those Catholics wanting the TLM to the SSPX. For most, that would strip them of access to the TLM since there would not be nearly enough SSPX priests to service Catholics wanting the TLM worldwide.

LifeSiteNews, 2017

COMMENT: We have been warning the faithful since 2012 that the SSPX hierarchy has already been regularized within the Novus Ordo Church. They are committed to bringing the priests and laity associated with them along for the ride. Ultimately, the SSPX will be filled with Conservative Catholics who have not and cannot defend the Catholic faith and tradition because they uniformly reject DOGMA as the proximate Rule of Faith. They will overwhelm the few faithful Catholics attending Mass at SSPX chapels. The SSPX will then introduce the reform measures to the 1962 Bugnini transitional Missal to bring about, in time, one expression of the “Roman rite.”

en.news

Francis Allowed SSPX To Ordain Whomever They Wish

The Society Pius X is “completely regular,” James Bogle, a former Una Voce President, told Gloria.tv at the Roman Forum in Gardone, Italy (video below).
en.news | July 29, 2023 Bogle is a barrister in London. He counseled in the cases of Archie Battersbee (2010-2022) and Alfie Evans (2016-2018), who were sentenced to death by British courts, the latter despite interventions by the Polish, Italian and Vatican governments.
Francis "recognised" all Pius X sacraments, including marriage and confession, Bogle notes. In March 2015, Bishop Fellay was appointed a Vatican judge for all annulments and clerical misdemeanours in Pius X.
Fellay told Bogle in May 2015 that Francis had written him a personal letter allowing him to ordain "whomever he wants", without having to consult the local bishops. Bogle calls this not just a recognition but a "special privilege".
A member of the Order of Malta, Bogle believes Francis has "saved" the order. At the 2014 Chapter General, a group of Germans were elected to the governing body and then tried to secularise the order by marginalising the professed members.
Francis stepped in and acted as a dictator, overriding all laws, codes and the Order's constitution. This led to the expulsion of the Germans. Francis’ authoritarian and “frankly not legal” style worked in the Order's favour “by accident”, says Bogle.
As for Francis' desire to close monasteries, Bogle recalls a dissolved monastery in Amalfi, Italy. Its historic building was worth €80M. With Francis' knowledge, the nuns were told that they were being suppressed and had to leave the convent.
For Bogle, Francis is reversing some fundamentals of the faith and thus “destroying the Church”. But given his treatment of Pius X he calls him "self-contradictory" and a “complex figure”.

Sacrament of Baptism: Significance of the Baptismal Character and why it is absolutely necessary for salvation. Explains why St. Ambrose said regarding catechumens who die before receiving the sacrament of Baptism, they are “forgiven but not crowned”.

To be baptized is to become one with the Church, and one with Christ. Thus the ritual can say: “enter into the temple of God, that you may have part with Christ, unto life everlasting.” The two ideas are correlative: to be baptized into the Church and to be baptized into Christ; they are the visible and invisible aspects of the same real effect. [….]

The effecting this incorporation into Christ, Baptism marks the soul as permanently His; it stamps upon the soul a spiritual “character”, or, as antiquity more commonly called it, a “seal”. For this reason, and putting the cause for the effect, the rite of Baptism was itself called “the seal”, or “the seal of faith”, or “the seal of water”, or “the seal of the Trinity” (which last appellation endures still in the liturgical prayers for the dying, wherein God is asked to remember His promises to the soul that in its lifetime was “stamped with the seal of the Most Holy Trinity”).

The word “seal” derives from a group of texts in St. Paul, which suggest this stamping of the soul at Baptism: “And in Him (Christ), you too, when you had heard the word of truth, the good news of your salvation, and believed in it, were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the promise” (Eph. 1:13); “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in Whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph. 4:30). However, nowadays we are accustomed to speak rather of the baptismal “character”, a term that suggests the text wherein Christ is called “the brightness of His (the Father’s) glory and the image (in Greek, character) of His substance” (Hebr. 1:3).

Basically, two words give the same meaning: a seal imprints an image, and a “character”, in the original sense of the word, means image. Baptism, therefore, stamps the soul with the image of Christ, Who is Himself the image of the Father. And in the Scripture, this stamping is attributed to the Holy Spirit, Who is the Spirit of Christ. The fact that we are stamped with such a character is clearly defined by the Council of Trent:

“If anyone says that by the three Sacraments, to wit, Baptism, Confirmation and Orders, there is not imprinted in the soul a Character, that is a certain spiritual and indelible sign on account of which they cannot be repeated; let him be anathem.” (Denz. 852).

The Council of Trent teaches that this seal, once stamped on the soul, is indelible. Just as Baptism irrevocable makes one a member of the Church, so also it irrevocably makes one a member of Christ. Not the gravest sin, nor even final impenitence and self-condemnation to eternal separation from Christ in Hell, can avail to erase this baptismal seal. And the indelibility of the seal is the immediate reason why Baptism can never be repeated, once it has been validly received. [….]

The sense in which Baptism stamps us with the image of Christ is suggested in the rite itself, by the anointing which follows the ablution. It is done with Sacred Chrism, a mixed unguent of oil and balm, specially consecrated by the bishop on Holy Thursday. Kings and priests in antiquity (and even today) were anointed with chrism in token of their royal and priestly dignity. And the baptism anointing signifies, therefore, that the new Christian has entered into the “royal priesthood” of the Christian people, and shares in the royal Priesthood of Christ Himself. He bears the image of Christ, inasmuch as Christ was the Priest of all humanity, Who offered Himself in sacrifice on the Cross.

The baptismal seal or character, therefore, endows the Christian with a priestly function, and a priestly power. It is not that special power and function given by the Sacrament of Holy Orders to certain selected members of the Church, who are made her official ministers, and authorized to offer her sacrifice and dispense her Sacraments. But it is the priestly function and power which is common to all the members of the Body of Christ. As He was born as Priest, His whole life orientated toward the Passion and Death which wad His priestly Sacrifice, so too, they are priests from their birth into the Christian life at Baptism; and their lives are essentially orientated toward sacrifice, in a double sense.

First of all, they receive a function and a power with respect to the ritual Sacrifice of the Church, which is the Mass. [….] They are empowered to assist actively in the offering of the Mass, as members of the Church, in whose name her specially qualified members, priests and bishops, offer the Mass, which is the sacrifice of the whole Church through her official ministers. In union with the Priest, the Christian offers up Christ as a Victim Who belongs to him and to Whom he belongs. An unbaptized person cannot do this….

Secondly, the baptismal character consecrates the Christian to sacrifice in a wider sense: it gives him the function, the duty, the power to lead a life of sacrifice, since He is in the image of Christ whose life was one long sacrifice – a life of complete obedience to the will of His Father: “I seek not My own will, but the will of Him Who sent Me” (Jn. 3:50).The will of the Father is the supreme law of the Christian’s life; it is all embracing and all pervasive; and constant and total obedience to it necessarily gives a sacrificial quality to the whole of life, since it demands the renunciation of many ideas, and a steady refusal to be led by one’s own emotions or to seek one’s own pleasure and profit – in a word, it demands the sacrifice of selfishness in all its forms. St. Peter, therefore, was thinking of Baptism when he wrote:

“Lay aside therefore all malice and all deceit, and pretense, and envy, and all slander…. Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon (i.e., on Christ) into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:1,5).

Rev. John J. Fernan, S.J., Theology, Christ Our High Priest, Baptismal Seal

Mandatory Reading for Catholic INDULTISTS!

“The liturgical books promulgated by Saint (sic) Paul VI and Saint (sic) John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique only expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.”

Pope Francis, Traditionis Custodes

“Responding to your requests, I take the firm decision to abrogate all the norms, instructions, permissions and customs that precede the present Motu proprio, and declare that the liturgical books promulgated by the saintly (sic) Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, constitute the unique only expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. I take comfort in this decision from the fact that, after the Council of Trent, St. Pius V also abrogated all the rites that could not claim a proven antiquity, establishing for the whole Latin Church a single Missale Romanum.”

Pope Francis, explanatory letter accompanying Traditionis Custodes

COMMENT: It has not occurred to Conservative Catholics that Pope Francis is being brutally honest with them. They have accepted the false presuppositions of Summorum Pontificum: that is, the immemorial Roman rite is a simple matter of Church discipline subject to the arbitrary will of the legislator; that the 1962 Bugnini Transitional Missal (BTM) is the immemorial Roman rite; that the 1962 BTM has never been outlawed; that the 1962 BTM is the “right” of all Catholics because it has not been outlawed; that the BTM is the Extra-ordinary form and the Novus Ordo is the Ordinary form of the Roman rite expressing a single lex orandi/lex credendi; etc., etc.

Pope Francis is being honest but not entirely forthcoming. He “takes comfort in this decision” because St. Pius V suppressed all rites that had less than 200 years of “proven antiquity.” Pope Francis is doing the same thing. The BTM of 1962 has less traditional standing than the Novus Ordo! When are the Conservative Catholics going to wake up! How many times do they have to be told? The 1962 BTM is not the immemorial Roman rite and it is now legally suppressed. Therefore, turn to the “received and approved” immemorial Roman rite used before Bugnini ever touched it. This rite is established by immemorial custom and Catholic DOGMA. Whomsoever says that this “received and approved” rite may be changed or set aside for a new rite by any pastor of the churches whomsoever, is condemned, anathematized. Pope Francis is a “pastor” of the Church and this divine truth applies just as much to him and his predecessors as to every other Catholic.

It is also true that the Novus Ordo Missae is the “only unique” expression of the “lex orandi” of the Novus Ordo Church because it determines the Novus Ordo’s “only unique” lex credendi. This is public confession that the Novus Ordo and the Catholic Church do not have the same faith!

We recommend that all the faithful Catholics step aside and pray to God to quickly and thoroughly cleanse His Church.

This article and commentary is worth re-reading for understanding the mind, or rather, the mindlessness of Pope Francis!

Pope: Traditionalism is ‘dead memory’ and ‘paganism of thought’

CRUX | Elise Ann Allen | Aug 5, 2022 | Senior Correspondent

ROME – While Pope Francis was on his “penitential pilgrimage” in Canada last week, most of the focus was on his effort to heal historic wounds with Indigenous peoples related to Canada’s residential school system. The hope is that the Catholic Church can turn over a new leaf – rather than represent an assault on Indigenous cultures and traditions, it will help to defend and preserve them.

Now, only days after returning to Rome, attention has turned to the remarks the pope made in Canada out of the spotlight, about the church’s own tradition, especially the liturgy and the ongoing battle over the Traditional Latin Mass.

“It is important to have respect for tradition, the authentic one,” Francis said, speaking to members of the Jesuit order in Canada during a private conversation July 29. He described tradition as “the living memory of believers,” whereas “traditionalism” means “the dead life of our believers.”

Tradition, the pope said, “is the life of those who have gone before us and who go on. Traditionalism is their dead memory. From root to fruit, in short, that is the way.”

When looking to the origin of something, it must be seen as a point of reference, “not a particular historical experience taken as a perpetual model, as if we had to stop there,” he said.

Under this mentality, he said, “’Yesterday it was done like this’ becomes ‘it always has been done like this,’” and even necessary change becomes problematic. He called such a mindset “a paganism of thought.”

“Changes needed to be made, and they were made. Law cannot be kept in a refrigerator. Law accompanies life, and life goes on. Like morals, it is being perfected,” he said.

Both the church and society have made important changes over time on issues such as slavery and the possession of atomic weapons, he said, adding that the moral life is also “progressing along the same line.”

This slow development resulting in change is something taught by Saint Vincent of Lérins, he said, and quoted a phrase from the saint: “The dogma of the Christian religion must follow these laws. It progresses, consolidating over the years, developing with time, deepening with age.”

According to this concept, he said, human thought and development “grows and consolidates with the passage of time. Human understanding changes with time, and human consciousness deepens.”

Francis said it is “wrong” to view the church’s doctrine as “monolithic, to be defended without nuance.”

Asked about the importance of liturgy in priestly and religious formation, specifically for the Jesuits, Pope Francis said, “When there is conflict, the liturgy is always mistreated.”

The pope said the aim of his actions on the liturgy, including his decision to restrict the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, has been “to follow the line taken by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, who had allowed the ancient rite and asked for subsequent verification.”

“The most recent verification made it clear that there was a need to regulate the practice, and above all to avoid it becoming a matter, let us say, of ‘fashion’ and remaining instead a pastoral question,” he said.

Last year, Pope Francis tightened permissions for celebration of the pre-Vatican II Latin Mass, the use of which had been liberalized under his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI.

According to the decree Traditionis Custodes, priests who wish to celebrate the 1962 liturgy must now get permission from their bishop to continue doing so. Any priest ordained after the issuance of the new norms who wishes to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass must submit a formal request to their bishop, and the bishop in turn must consult with the Vatican before granting permission.

Francis also charged bishops with determining specific times and locations where the Traditional Latin Mass can be celebrated and prohibited the designation of new parishes exclusively dedicated to the Old Rite liturgy.

While exceptions have been made for communities and priestly societies with a special attachment to the traditional liturgy, the decision was met with intense blowback from so-called “traditionalist” communities in the church, who argued that the measure was “cruel” and divisive.

In his remarks to the Jesuits in Canada, Francis said he looks forward to further studies that will refine the church’s reflection on the topic, saying the liturgy “is the people of God’s public praise!”

The topic of traditionalism also came up on Pope Francis’s return flight to Rome.

When responding to a question on whether the church would ever reconsider its position on the use of contraceptives by Catholic couples, he said, “A church that does not develop its thinking in an ecclesial sense is a church that goes backwards.”

“This is the problem today of many who say they are traditional,” he said, saying these people are not traditional, but “backward-looking.” Rather than going forward, he said, they move backward “with no roots: it has always been done like this; last century it was done this way.”

Francis called this backward movement “a shame,” and repeated his remarks to the Jesuits, saying, tradition itself “is the living faith of the dead,” this “backward-looking” gaze of those who profess themselves as traditionalists, “is the dead faith of the living.”

Tradition is the root and is the “inspiration for the church to move forward,” he said, saying this movement “is always vertical.”

“It is important to understand well the role of tradition, which is always open, like the roots of the tree, and the tree grows,” he said, calling tradition in this sense “the guarantee of the future.”

“It is not a museum piece,” he said. “If you conceive tradition as closed, this is not the Christian tradition. It is always the juice of the roots that carries you forward.”

Pope Francis praised the work done by the country’s bishops to prepare for his visit and their unity in their process of healing and reconciliation with Indigenous communities.

“When an episcopate is united, then it can deal with the challenges that arise,” he said, saying miracles can happen “when the church is united.”

COMMENT:

The Vatican News Service says that Pope Francis has invoked the teaching of St. Vincent of Lerins since his election to the papacy. St. Vincent has been a favorite of traditional Catholics from the time of Vatican II, consequently, it is not surprising to see Francis the Progressive Ideologue attempt to recruit the great saint and Church father in support of his ideology. What is more to the point, he wants St. Vincent to be seen as an opponent of tradition. Is this a possible legitimate misunderstanding? Someone clearly does not understand the teaching of St. Vincent. A case of legitimate development is provided by Pope Francis who cites the moral ‘development’ of capital punishment from being morally permissible and sometimes a morally necessary act to what is now become an intrinsically evil act against the dignity of the human person. This is clearly impossible in legitimate development for an act to go from what it was to what it was not. This ‘development’ is a perfect contradiction and God does not change.

How is it possible that the mind of Pope Francis could see a moral development in the face of perfect contradiction, which offends the first principle of the understanding, that is, that a thing cannot be and not be at the same time? The answer is in the spiritual formation of Pope Francis. Francis was Jesuit trained in a spirit of Anti-Thomism. Not just grossly neglecting a classical realist formation as most modern clerics underwent but an active opposition to traditional Catholic realistic philosophy and theology. Pope Francis hates St. Thomas and rejects everything he taught.

As Carroll Quigley explained, the Nominalist ascendency (which denies the reality of essence) during the 14th century discarded Thomistic metaphysics, logic and epistemology ultimately leading to the Reformation and Enlightenment errors. Metaphysics of St. Thomas grasped the objective reality of things as they are hierarchically constituted by God; logic established the rules of validity (not the rules of truth) of subjective mental thought; and epistemology providing the bridge between the objective world and the subjective rational mind. The rule was that for truth, the mind must conform with objective reality. Nominalism discarded Thomistic hierarchical metaphysics for a neo-platonic dualism; it discarded Aristotelian logic for mathematical relationships; and it discarded Thomistic epistemology offering nothing in its place because they made the erroneous assumption that the objective world entirely conforms with mathematical logic and can be expressed perfectly in mathematical formulas. Their rule was that the truth of the world must conform with the logical rationalistic mind. With the realization over time that the objective world was not logical or reasonable or conformable to mathematical determination led to three common errors: skepticism, empiricism, and semantics.

Skeptics despaired that the mind could know any truth. The Empiricists simply became pure utilitarianists; whatever worked was true enough. The Semanticists answer was to overturn the rules of logic and rationality in the mind itself. They held and hold that since the objective world was not rational or logical, neither should the mind be rational or logical. The first thing the semanticists did was to discard the first principles of the understanding, that is, the principle of contradiction: a thing is what it is, and it is not what it is not, was held to be a useless mental construct. They hold that words must be fluid to take on new and original meanings so as to be better conformed to the objective world which is always changing, that is, they reject being and embrace becoming. This follows from their Nominalism that denies any that there is any fixed essence in the real world.

Francis is a Semanticists. Words for Francis have no fixed meaning. He like all nominalists denies any fixed essence or, when viewed from the perspective of what a thing can do or what can be done to it, he denies any fixed nature. He sees no problem when faced with the complete inversion of morality. He has no mental problem of contradiction when he supports restoring the pagan traditions of North American Indians while denying the same right to Catholics faithful to their traditions. The solution for Semanticism is not simply returning to Thomistic epistemology and metaphysics but a radical rejection of Nominalism. Francis requires a complete and integral conversion to the Catholic faith. He has been personally paganized by his Jesuit formation.

According to Carroll Quigley (who no friend of Catholic faith) George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four is the story of a semanticists’ dystopia with Newspeak and Double Think: the Ministry of Peace wages war, the Ministry of Plenty produces scarcity of goods and services, slavery is called freedom and freedom slavery. Francis the Semanticist has produced a dystopian Church of the New Advent. Francis says “Backwardism is a sin” and so ‘Forwardism is a virtue’ necessary to arrive at the progressivists ideologues idea of heaven. But the “backwardism” of pagan Indians is a virtue. Pope Francis the Hypocrite (“Who am I to judge? ”) after actively participating in a pagan Indian ceremony judges the “thoughts” of faithful Catholics accusing them of “paganism of thought.” Even the word hypocrite can be rehabilitated for Francis!

At the behest of the Jews, Pope Francis wants to rehabilitate the reputation of the Pharisees. In 2019 he directed the Pontifical Biblical Institute, co-sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, to conduct an inter-religious conference entitled, “Jesus and the Pharisees: an Interdisciplinary Reappraisal.” The goal of both Francis and the Jews is to rehabilitate the reputation of the Pharisees who conspired the death of Jesus Christ for the end of “helping to combat anti-semitism” and legitimize the Talmudic religion and its debased morality. Soon we will learn that the hypocrites are Catholics faithful to tradition while the Pharisees were unfortunately misunderstood by the writes of the gospel narratives.

Francis does not believe in God’s hell and God does not believe in Francis’ semantic progressivism. There is no progressive ideology in hell and no matter how much Francis will want to call the hell fire “cold, cool or refreshing” it will still burn eternally where the “worm dieth not.”

Pius XII - the man responsible for planting the seed of liturgical destruction!

Fr. Annibale Bugnini had been making clandestine visits to the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique (CPL), a progressivist conference centre for liturgical reform which organized national weeks for priests.
Inaugurated in Paris in 1943 on the private initiative of two Dominican priests under the presidency of Fr. Lambert Beauduin, it was a magnet for all who considered themselves in the vanguard of the Liturgical Movement. It would play host to some of the most famous names who influenced the direction of Vatican II: Frs. Beauduin, Guardini, Congar, Chenu, Daniélou, Gy, von Balthasar, de Lubac, Boyer, Gelineau etc.

It could, therefore, be considered as the confluence of all the forces of Progressivism, which saved and re-established Modernism condemned by Pope Pius X in Pascendi.
According to its co-founder and director, Fr. Pie Duployé, OP, Bugnini had requested a “discreet” invitation to attend a CPL study week held near Chartres in September 1946.

Much more was involved here than the issue of secrecy. The person whose heart beat as one with the interests of the reformers would return to Rome to be placed by an unsuspecting (?) Pope (Pius XII) in charge of his Commission for the General Reform of the Liturgy.
But someone in the Roman Curia did know about the CPL – Msgr. Giovanni Battista Montini, the acting Secretary of State and future Paul VI – who sent a telegram to the CPL dated January 3, 1947. It purported to come from the Pope with an apostolic blessing. If, in Bugnini’s estimation, the Roman authorities were to be kept in the dark about the CPL so as not to compromise its activities, a mystery remains. Was the telegram issued under false pretences, or did Pius XII really know and approve of the CPL? [.....]

This agenda (for liturgical reform) was set out as early as 1949 in the Ephemerides Liturgicae, a leading Roman review on liturgical studies of which Fr. Annabale Bugnini was Editor from 1944 to 1965.
First, Bugnini denigrated the traditional liturgy as a dilapidated building (“un vecchio edificio”), which should be condemned because it was in danger of falling to pieces (“sgretolarsi”) and, therefore, beyond repair. Then, he criticized it for its alleged “deficiencies, incongruities and difficulties,” which rendered it spiritually “sterile” and would prevent it appealing to modern sensibilities.
It is difficult to understand how, in the same year that he published this anti-Catholic diatribe, he was made a Professor of Liturgy in Rome’s Propaganda Fide (Propagation of the Faith) University. His solution was to return to the simplicity of early Christian liturgies and jettison all subsequent developments, especially traditional devotions.
These ideas expressed in 1949 would form the foundational principles of Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium. For all practical purposes, the Roman Rite was dead in the water many years before it was officially buried by Paul VI.

Dr. Carol Byrne, How Bugnini Grew Up under Pius XII

Baptism imprints in your soul a spiritual character, which no sin can efface. This character is a proof that from this time you do not belong to yourself, but that you are the property of Jesus Christ, who has purchased you by the infinite price of his blood and of his death. You are not of yourself, but you are of Christ; wherefore, St. Paul concludes, “that the Christian should no longer live for himself, but for Him who died and rose again for him;” that is to say, that the Christian should live a life of grace, and that he should consecrate to his Redeemer his spirit, his heart, and all his actions. […..]

First, is true penance; for, as the holy Council of Trent teaches, penance is no less necessary for those who have sinned after Baptism, than Baptism is necessary for those who have not received it. The Holy Scripture informs us, that there are two gates by which we are to enter into heaven—baptismal innocence, and penance. When a Christian has shut against himself the gate of innocence, in violating the holy promises of Baptism, it is necessary that he should strive to enter by that of penance; otherwise there is no salvation for him. On this account, Jesus Christ, speaking of persons who have lost innocence, says to them: “Unless you do penance, you shall all perish.”

But in order that penance may prevent us from perishing—it must be true Penance. Confessors may be deceived by the false appearance of conversion, and it is too often the case; but God is never deceived. If, therefore, those who receive absolution are not truly penitent and worthy of pardon, their sins are not forgiven before God. In order to do true penance, it is not sufficient to confess all our sins and to fulfill what is enjoined on us by the priest. There are two other things which are necessary: First; to renounce sin with all your heart, and for all your life… and second; to fly the occasions of sin, and to use the means to avoid it.

St. John Eudes, Man’s Contract with God in Baptism

Amoris Laetitia was published in 2016. No answer or corrective action to this "appeal" was ever made. That is because no clarification was ever needed. Why? That is because the "numerous propositions in Amoris Laetita (that) can be construed as heretical upon the natural reading of the text" is exactly what the author intended! So in 2016 these "academics and pastors" were "not accusing the pope of heresy", but what about now?

“Amoris Laetitia.... scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous...”

Catholic academics and pastors appeal to the College of Cardinals over Amoris Laetitia

A group of Catholic academics and pastors has submitted an appeal to Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals in Rome, requesting that the Cardinals and Eastern Catholic Patriarchs petition His Holiness, Pope Francis, to repudiate a list of erroneous propositions that can be drawn from a natural reading of the post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris laetitia. During the coming weeks this submission will be sent in various languages to every one of the Cardinals and Patriarchs, of whom there are 218 living at present.
Describing the exhortation as containing “a number of statements that can be understood in a sense that is contrary to Catholic faith and morals,” the signatories submitted, along with their appeal, a documented list of applicable theological censures specifying “the nature and degree of the errors that could be attributed to Amoris laetitia.”

Among the 45 signatories are Catholic prelates, scholars, professors, authors, and clergy from various pontifical universities, seminaries, colleges, theological institutes, religious orders, and dioceses around the world. They have asked the College of Cardinals, in their capacity as the Pope’s official advisers, to approach the Holy Father with a request that he repudiate “the errors listed in the document in a definitive and final manner, and to authoritatively state that Amoris laetitia does not require any of them to be believed or considered as possibly true.”

“We are not accusing the pope of heresy,” said a spokesman for the authors, “but we consider that numerous propositions in Amoris laetitia can be construed as heretical upon a natural reading of the text. Additional statements would fall under other established theological censures, such as scandalous, erroneous in faith, and ambiguous, among others.” [......]

SOON TO BE THE EXCLUSIVE HOME FOR THE EVER FLUID BUGNINI TRANSITION MISSAL OF 1962

Maybe the common ground is “does not care for doctrine”?

“A pope (Francis) who does not care for doctrine, who looks at the people, and who has known us in Argentina. And he appreciated our work in Argentina. And that's why he sees us with a good disposition while in the same time he is against conservatism. This is like a contradiction. But I have been able to verify several times that he really does things personally for us.”

Bishop Bernard Fellay, SSPX, 2017

A Personal Prelature for SSPX: comment from 2017

Bishop Fellay then commented on a project of Personal Prelature which had been offered to the SSPX in the summer of 2015. As he already said on January 26, 2016, such a canonical structure fits the needs and the actual apostolate and presence of the Society all over the world. He revealed that the written proposal given to the SSPX foresees that prelate should be a bishop. How would the prelate be designated? The Pope would choose amongst the three names presented by the SSPX through its own elections. It is also foreseen, said Bishop Fellay, that other auxiliary bishops would be given to the Society.

Everything that exists now will be recognized all over the world. And the faithful also! They will be in this Prelature with the right to receive the sacraments and teachings from the Society’s priests. It will be also possible to receive religious congregations, as it is in a diocese: Capuchins, Benedictines, Carmelites, and others. This prelature is a Catholic structure which is not under the [authority of the local] bishops. It is autonomous.”

The Angelus, SSPX publication for United States District, 2017

“Cultivate a great desire to be firmly rooted in the sublime virtue of confidence. Do not fear, but be courageous in serving and loving our Most Adorable and Amiable Jesus, with great perfection and holiness. Undertake courageously great tasks for His glory, in proportion to the power and grace He will give you for this end. Even though you can do nothing of yourself, you can do all things in Him and His help will never fail you, if you have confidence in His goodness. Place your entire physical and spiritual welfare in His hands. Abandon to the paternal solicitude of His Divine Providence every care for your health, reputation, property and business, for those near to you, for your past sins, for your soul’s progress in virtue and love of Him, for your life, death, and especially for your salvation and eternity, in a word, all your cares. Rest in the assurance that, in His pure goodness, He will watch with particular tenderness over all your responsibilities and cares and dispose all things for the greatest good.”

St. John Eudes, The Life and Kingdom of Jesus in Christian Souls

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

Pope Francis in Evangelii Gaudium Smears Faithful Catholics as “Neo-pelagians”:

Catholics faithful in keeping God’s moral law and believing His revealed truth are “self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism [who] observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style [characterized by a] narcissistic and authoritarian elitism [which is a] manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.”

94. This worldliness can be fuelled in two deeply interrelated ways. One is the attraction of gnosticism, a purely subjective faith whose only interest is a certain experience or a set of ideas and bits of information which are meant to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keep one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings. The other is the self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism of those who ultimately trust only in their own powers and feel superior to others because they observe certain rules or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style from the past. A supposed soundness of doctrine or discipline leads instead to a narcissistic and authoritarian elitism, whereby instead of evangelizing, one analyzes and classifies others, and instead of opening the door to grace, one exhausts his or her energies in inspecting and verifying. In neither case is one really concerned about Jesus Christ or others. These are manifestations of an anthropocentric immanentism. It is impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium

While in the same document he has this to say about the possibility of salvation for “Non-Christinas”:

254. Non-Christians, by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”.

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium, this teaching of Pope Franics references the teaching of the International Theological Commission.

“By God’s gracious initiative” is pure invention. God has never revealed this fable. This is Pelagianism by definition. This is what a Pelagian heretic affirms that salvation is possible through being “faithful to their own consciences.” Catholic dogmas, formal objects of divine and Catholic faith, affirm that supernatural faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and subjection to the Roman Pontiff are necessary as necessities of means to obtain eternal salvation. Pope Francis is a Pelagian heretic. So where is his source material for this error? He cites as his authority the International Theological Commission which teaches:

10. Exclusivist ecclesiocentrism—the fruit of a specific theological system or of a mistaken understanding of the phrase extra ecclesiam nulla salus—is no longer defended by Catholic theologians after the clear statements of Pius XII (sic) and Vatican II the possibility of salvation for those who do not belong visibly to the Church (cf, e.g., Vatican II, LG 16; GS 22).

Christocentrism accepts that salvation may occur in religions, but it denies them any autonomy in salvation on account of the uniqueness and universality of the salvation that comes from Jesus Christ. This position is undoubtedly the one most commonly held by Catholic theologians, even though there are differences among them.

International Theological Commission, Christianity and the World Religions, 1997

This is the fundamental doctrine of Neo-Modernism that holds that Dogmas need not be taken in a literal sense because they are always undergoing evolutionary development in an effort to achieve a closer approximation of truth. Catholics believe, as St. Pope Pius X said, dogmas are “truths fallen from heaven.” Pope Pius XII never denied the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Those who claim he did are simply liars. Vatican II on the other hand did, and Vatican II cites as its authority for the denial of the dogma that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, the heretical 1949 Holy Office Letter that teaches that the one and only thing necessary for salvation is the ‘desire to do the will of a god who rewards and punishes’. This can be known by natural philosophy and is simply a necessary presupposition to receiving the Gospel message. The 1949 Holy Office Letter and Vatican II are teaching Pelagianism. The very error that Pope Francis attributes to faithful Catholics who believe the revealed truths of our faith and keep our immemorial traditions. Is it any wonder that Pope Francis who denies the necessity of faith, the sacraments, membership in the Church, and submission to the Roman Pontiff as necessary for salvation as necessities of means would then thoroughly corrupt the definition of “genuine evangelization”?

Catholics who “observe certain rules (like keeping the Ten Commandments or believing Catholic dogma) or remain intransigently faithful to a particular Catholic style (the “received and approved rites customarily used in the solemn administration of the sacraments” Trent)” are guilty of “self-absorbed promethean neopelagianism... narcissistic and authoritarian elitism [that is a] manifestation of an anthropocentric immanentism... [whereby, it is] impossible to think that a genuine evangelizing thrust could emerge from these adulterated forms of Christianity.”

Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium

What is “Genuine evangelization”? Pope Francis said: “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us. ..... I believe I have already said that our goal is not to proselytize but to listen to needs, desires and disappointments, despair, hope” (Interview with Italian journalist and atheist Eugenio Scalfari). He also said in answer to a question from a Lutheran girl, “It is not licit that you convince them of your faith; proselytism is the strongest poison against the ecumenical path.” On another occasion he said, “Proselytism among Christians, therefore, in itself, is a grave sin.”

How is this possible? Proselytism means to seek converts. A “proselyte” is a convert. It was the Great Commission given by Jesus Christ to His Church: “Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:15-16) The goal of “preaching” is to bring other to “believe” the revealed truth and become members of the Church through “baptism” so that they may become a “proselyte,” like one of the first deacons of the Church, Nicolas in Acts 6:5, and be “saved.”

“Genuine evangelization” is the act of proselytism and the fruit of evangelization is proselytes. “By their fruit you shall know them.” In South America alone there have been more than 40 million Catholics lost to the faith since Vatican II. This is the fruit of the “new evangelization” of Pope Francis which does not seek converts at all because he sees no reason to convert.

So who in end is “self-absorbed promethean neo-pelagian”? Prometheus was eternally punished for his hubris of defying the gods while Pope Francis does the same thing by “intransigently” overturning God’s revealed truth. His heresy is the fruit of his own “narcissistic and authoritarian elitism” to believe that he is better than God. He proposes an “adulterated form of Christianity” which explains why he promotes Catholic divorce. Heretics always permit divorce because marriage is the metaphor used by God to describe His relationship to His Church and to each of His faithful. The heretic cannot stand the integrity of the metaphor and always permits divorce. This is the unmistakable sign that Pope Francis is a heretic.

"Not a stone upon a stone" - Comment on the Gospel from the 9th Sunday after Pentecost

The 'Western Wall' (Wailing Wall) in Jerusalem is held by Jews as a remnant of Herod's Temple destroyed by the Romans in 72 A.D. Yet, Jesus prophesized not only that the Temple would be destroyed but also that there would not remain a "stone upon a stone." So how is it that there remains a large wall on the western side at the south end of the 'Temple Mount'? Some Catholics claim the prophecy of Jesus was referring only to the edifice itself and not the entire foundation for the Temple. Jesus words must be taken in literally unless there it is clearly manifest that the metaphorical sense is intended exclusively. Therefore, the 'Wailing Wall' where the Jews worship is not a remnant of the ancient Temple, and the 'Temple Mount', on which is currently situated the Al-Aqsa mosque and the "Dome of the Rock", is not the location of the Temple destroyed in 72 A.D. The 36 acre 'Temple Mount' is actually the location of the Roman fortress Antonia built by Herod.

What is the evidence for this? The current popular claim is the fortress Antonia was located on a five-acre section on the north-west side of the 'Temple Mount' while the Temple occupied the remaining 30 acres. Five acres is far too small to accommodate a Roman legion (6,000 soldiers plus auxiliary staff) which we know from the writings of Flavius Josephus that the fortress Antonia did in fact hold. Many Roman fortresses have been examined by archeologists and they typically are between 45 and 55 acres but some are as small as 36 acres. As far as the area needed for the Temple of Herod itself, consider this, the ancient pagan temple complex at Baalek in Lebanon built by the Romans is less than six acres in total area and encloses the largest temple to Jupiter in the Roman Empire as well as a smaller temple dedicated to Bacchus and another to Venus. The Temple built by Herod was a single temple and much smaller in overall dimensions.

Furthermore, when Solomon was designated by King David to succeed him (3 Kings 1), King David directed the prophet Nathan and the high priest Sadoc to take Solomon on the king's mule to be anointed king at the "Gihon spring" with oil taken from the tabernacle. The Gihon spring is located in the City of David directly south and adjacent to the present-day 'Temple Mount'. There Solomon was anointed with oil taken from the Tabernacle, proclaimed king and celebrated by the populace with great jubilation and the sounding of trumpets that could be heard outside the city. The Temple built by Solomon was in the same location as the Tabernacle established by King David on the threshing floor of the land he purchased Areuna the Jebusite as God had commanded by the mouth of Gad (2 Kings 24 and 2 Paralipomenon 3:1).

The water from the Gihon spring was essential for the sacrificial offerings of the Temple. There is no living water source on the 'Temple Mount' which was required in the washing of the priests and the sacrifices offered. The water source for the Antonia fortress was provided by large cisterns located just north of the Antonia fortress and under the 'Temple Mount' that are still present today.

There is a Catholic tradition the there was a church called the Church of the Judgment that was built over and enclosed the Rock that is now enclosed under the Dome of the Rock built by the Moslems in 692 A.D. The Dome of the Rock is located directly north of the Al-Aqsa mosque on the 'Temple Mount'. The Church of the Judgment was destroyed either by the Persians who conquered Jerusalem in 614 A.D. with the help of 26,000 Jewish allies during the Byzantine-Sasanian War 602-628 A.D. (during which many churches were destroyed including the Church of the Ascension on Mount Olivet), or the church was destroyed by the Moslems who conquered Jerusalem in 637 A.D. No living Jew at the time would have knowledge of the exact location of Herod's Temple because the Jews were forbidden to enter Jerusalem by the Romans since the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135 A.D. on the pain of death. Two hundred years later, the Catholic emperor Constantine permitted the Jews to enter Jerusalem once a year on the feast of Tisha B'Av (the ninth of Av) which is regarded as the saddest day in the Jewish calendar because it is the anniversary of the destruction of both the Temple of Solomon and the Temple of Herod! Be that as it may, many of the pillars used in the construction of the interior of the Dome of the Rock have Christian markings indicating that they were salvaged from a destroyed Catholic church.

The Rock itself is regarded (WIKI) as The Foundation Stone (Hebrew אֶבֶן הַשְּׁתִיָּה, romanized: ʾEḇen haŠeṯīyyā,  lit. 'Foundation Stone'), or the Noble Rock (Arabic:الصخرة المشرفة, romanized: al-Saḵrah al-Mušarrafah, lit.  'The Noble Stone') is the rock enclosed by the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. It is also known as the Pierced Stone, because it has a small hole on the southeastern corner that enters a cavern beneath the rock, known as the Well of Souls. Traditional Jewish sources mention the stone as the place from which the creation of the world began. Jewish sources also identify its location with that of the Holy of Holies. Yet, it is not possible for a threshing floor to be around a large rock or stone.

Before the Muslim conquest, the Rock was enclosed in the Church of the Judgment because it is believed to have been the place where the condemned stood to hear the judgment against them by the Roman authorities. The Rock is held to be where Jesus stood when His official condemnation was decreed by Pontius Pilate and thus, if it is the stone where the "creation of the world began," it is the stone from which the creation of the world began anew. John 19:13 says: "Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew Gabbatha." Lithostrotos in Greek refers to a stone and Gabbatha in Hebrew an elevated place. According to St. Mary Agreda after Jesus was condemned by Pilate the decree of condemnation, which she quotes in its entirety, was then formally read to the Jewish mob assembled outside the north entrance to Fortress Antonia where Jesus was taken to bear His cross.

Of the Temple of Herod destroyed in 72 A.D. there does not remain a "stone upon a stone".

The Papacy is an office established by Jesus Christ. No pope can change the essential nature of the office, he can only accept it and address the duties the office imposes. If Pope Benedict XVI did not resign the office of the papacy in its entirety, he did not resign the papacy at all. If Pope Francis was not elected to the papacy in its entirety, he was not elected at all.

Following his resignation as pope in 2013, Benedict XVI became the first pope to step down from office since the resignation of Gregory XII in 1415. But unlike his predecessors who resigned, he continued to live in the Vatican and to be adorned with the clothing and regalia of a pope.

Archbishop Georg Gänswein, the private secretary of Pope Benedict XVI, said after his resignation that Benedict would continue to fulfill the spiritual duties of the papacy. Journalist Edward Pentin reported in July 8, 2017 (National Catholic Register) that Gänswein said that Francis and Benedict are not two popes "in competition" with one another, but represent one "expanded" Petrine Office with an "active" member and a "contemplative" one. He said that Benedict had not abandoned the papacy like Pope Celestine V in the 13th century but rather sought to continue his papacy in a more appropriate way given his frailty and that "Therefore, from 11 February 2013, the papal ministry is not the same as before. It is and remains the foundation of the Catholic Church; and yet it is a foundation that Benedict XVI has profoundly and lastingly transformed by his exceptional pontificate." This division of the papacy is impossible.

In light of his decision to resign, Cardinal Andrea Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, the designer of the Benedict's papal coat of arms, suggested the need to create a new coat of arms for the former pope. According to the cardinal, the coat of arms of the retired pope should retain all the symbolic elements found on the shield, but all the external elements, such as the two crossed keys and the mitre, should be removed or modified as they represent an office he no longer holds.

Cordero presented a hypothetical design shown above of how he believed the new coat of arms of the pope emeritus should look, replacing the bishop's mitre with a white galero with 15 tassels, removing the two crossed keys, and placing the pope's episcopal motto "Cooperatores Veritatis" below the shield. The new coat of arms was offered to but never adopted by Benedict. He continued to use his papal coat of arms for the rest of his life and it is the papal coat of arms which was also displayed by his catafalque during his funeral at St. Peter's.

IN SANGUINE TUO

Homily on the external Solemnity of the Most Precious Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ

Redemisti nos, Domine, in sanguine tuo, ex omni tribu, et lingua, et populo, et natione: et fecisti nos Deo nostro regnum.

Rev 5:9-10

Dear brothers and sisters,

First of all, allow me to share with you my serenity of mind in facing this trial. I experienced the same inner peace when, a few years ago, I rediscovered the Traditional Mass, which since then I have never stopped celebrating exclusively and which has brought me back to the beating heart of our holy Religion, to understand that being united to Christ the Priest in the offering to the eternal Father must necessarily be translated into the mystical immolation of oneself on the model of Christ the Victim, in restoring the divine order in which Charity consumes us with love for God and neighbor, and shows us how incomprehensible – as well as unacceptable – it is to modify anything of this perfect order that the Holy Church anticipates on earth precisely by placing the Cross at the center of everything. Stat Crux dumvolvitur orbis.

For sixty years, however, along with the world, volvitur et ecclesia. The ecclesial body has also lost its point of stability: yesterday, in the mad attempt to adapt to the world by softening its doctrine; today, in the deliberate desire to erase the Cross, a sign of contradiction, in order to please the Prince of this world. And in a world hostile to the Cross of Christ, it is not possible to preach Christ, and Christ crucified, because this is “divisive” for a “human brotherhood” from which the fatherhood of God is excluded. It is not surprising, therefore, that those who proclaim the Gospel without adaptations are considered enemies. Christians of all ages, and among them the Pastors in the first place, have always been opposed and fought and killed precisely because of the incompatibility between the Civitas Dei and the civitas Diaboli. The Lord taught us: “If they have persecuted me, they will persecute you also; if they have kept my word, they will also keep yours” (Jn 15:20).

A few days ago, a church enslaved to the world put me on trial for schism and condemned me with excommunication for having openly professed the Faith that the Lord by my Episcopal Consecration ordered me to preach; the same Faith for which the Martyrs were killed, the Confessors persecuted, priests and Bishops imprisoned or exiled. But how can we even think that it is the true Church that strikes its children and its Ministers, and at the same time welcomes its enemies and makes their errors its own? This Church, which calls itself “conciliar and synodal,” is a counterfeit, a counter-church, for which everything begins and ends in this life, and which does not want to accept anything eternal precisely because the immutability of the Truth of God is intrinsically alien to the permanent revolution that it has welcomed and promotes.

If we were not persecuted by those who are hostile to the Cross, we would have to question our fidelity to Christ, who from that Throne of pain and blood struck a mortal blow against the Enemy of the human race. If our Ministry could be “tolerated” in some way, it would mean that it is ineffective and compromised, if only because of the implicit acceptance of an impossible coexistence between opposites, of a hermeneutic of continuity in which there is room for truth and error, light and darkness, God and Belial. That is why I consider this sentence of the Roman Sanhedrin as causing clarity: a Catholic cannot but be in a state of schism with those who refuse the Profession of Faith in Charity. There can be no communion with the one who first broke the supernatural bond with Christ and with His Mystical Body. Nor can there be obedience and submission to an adulterated version of the Papacy in which authority has deliberately withdrawn from Christ, the first principle of that authority, to be transformed into tyranny.

Thus, just as in the morally necessary choice to return to the Apostolic Mass I rediscovered the true meaning of my priesthood, so too in the decision to denounce the apostasy of the modernist and globalist hierarchy I rediscovered the meaning of my Episcopate, of being a Successor of the Apostles, a witness of Christ and a Pastor in His Church.

Timidity, human respect, opportunistic evaluations, thirst for power, or corruption have led many of my Brothers to make the simplest choice: to leave the Lord by Himself in His Passion and mingle with the crowd of His executioners, or even just to stand by for fear of going against the high priests and scribes of the people. Some of them, like Peter, repeat the “I do not know Him” so as not to be brought before the same Sanhedrin. Others stay closed in their cenacle, content not to be tried and condemned. But is this what the Lord wants of us? Is this what He has called us to in choosing us as His Ministers and as proclaimers of His Gospel?

Dear brothers, bless these times of tribulation with me, because it is only in infirmitate that we have the certainty of fulfilling God’s Will and sanctifying ourselves with His Grace. As Saint Paul says: My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness (2 Cor 12:9). Our being docile instruments in the Lord’s hands is the indispensable premise for ensuring that His work is truly divine.

We are asked only to follow him: Veni, et sequere me (Mt 10:21); to follow Him leaving everything else, which is to make a radical choice. We are asked to preach His Gospel, to baptize all nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, to keep faithfully all the precepts that the Lord has commanded us to observe (Mt 28:19-20). We are asked to pass on intact what we have received – tradidi quod et accepi – without additions, without changes, without omissions. And to preach the Word opportune, importune, enduring everything: in omni patientia et doctrina (2 Tim 4:2). We are asked to take up our cross every day, to deny ourselves, to be ready to climb Calvary and be crucified with Christ to rise with Him, to share in His victory and triumph in the blessed eternity of Heaven. We are asked to complete in our flesh what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions, for the good of his Body which is the Church (Col 1:24). Pastors need to return to belonging to Christ, shaking off the oppressive yoke of a servitude to the world that makes them accomplices in the ruin of the Church.

From the Most Sacred Heart, pierced by a spear, flows the infinite Grace of the Sacraments and especially of the Catholic Priesthood. It ensures the perpetuation of Christ’s redemptive action throughout History, so that the perfect Sacrifice of the divine Victim – who entered the Sanctuary once and for all through his own blood (Heb 9:12) – may continue to be offered under the sacramental species to the Eternal Father. In the same way, when the Church appears defeated and is given up for dead, a spear in Her side renews the flow of blood and water, laying the foundation for a future restoration and guaranteeing the preservation of the Priesthood, the Mass, and the Sacraments: of Tradition. It will be that blood and water that will irrigate this land parched and split by drought, thirsty for the True and the Good, so that the semen Christianorum may sprout and bear fruit.

Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the form of sheep, but who inwardly are ravenous wolves (Mt 7:15). With these words, significantly proposed by the Liturgy of this Seventh Sunday after Pentecost and which we will read in the last Gospel, the Lord warns us against those who usurp the gift of prophecy in order to contradict the Faith that he revealed and taught the Apostles so that it might be faithfully handed down the centuries. The Lord does not say: Beware of those who sow error, but of false prophets. Who are these false prophets, these pseudochrists of whom Sacred Scripture speaks? For false Christs and false prophets will arise and perform great portents and miracles, so as to mislead even the elect if possible. Behold, I have foretold it to you (Mt 24:24-25). These are the hirelings, the false shepherds, those whom we can recognize ex fructibus eorum, by their fruits, by what they do (Mt 7:16-20). We know the fruits and we have them before our eyes: the planned destruction of the Lord’s Vineyard by His own vinedressers.

What is imputed to me as a crime in order to declare me schismatic and condemn me to excommunication has been put on the record of a trial that condemns not me, but my accusers, the enemies of the Cross of Christ. When the eclipse that darkens the Church ends and Our Lord returns to be at the center of the lives of his ministers, those who are ostracized today will find justice, and those who have abused their power to disperse the Lord’s flock will have to answer to His tribunal and to that of History. We will continue to do what all Catholic Bishops have done, often being persecuted by them.

And we will continue in our work even if it is hindered by those who usurp the power of the Holy Keys against the Church Herself. The authority of the Pastors – and that of the Supreme Pontiff – is in the hands of false pastors, who as such count precisely on our respect for the Hierarchy and on our habitual obedience to make us accept the betrayal of Christ and the ruin of souls. But authority comes only from Christ, who wants all to be saved and to reach eternal blessedness through the one Ark of Salvation. If the vicarious authority on earth preaches salvation from false religions and the uselessness of Christ’s Sacrifice, it breaks the umbilical cord that binds it to Him, thereby delegitimizing itself. We do not separate ourselves from Holy Mother Church, but rather from the mercenaries who infest her. We do not refuse obedience and submission to the Pontiff, but rather to those who humiliate and tamper with the Papacy against the Will of Christ. Let us not impugn the revealed Truth – quod Deus avertat! – but rather the errors that all the Popes have always condemned and that today are imposed by those who want to make the Holy Church the servant of her enemies (Lam 1:1), by those who delude themselves that they can keep the ecclesial body alive by separating it from its Head who is Christ.

We do not have a Pontiff who can judge and excommunicate us. If there were a Pope I would not even have been put on trial, nor excommunicated or declared schismatic, because we would both profess the same Faith and would receive Communion at the same altar. If today Bergoglio is putting me on trial to condemn and excommunicate me, it is precisely because he makes a public profession that he belongs to another religion and that he presides over another church – his church, the synodal church – from which I am “expelled” because I am a Catholic and, indeed, a stranger to it.

Pray, dear brothers. Pray first of all for the faithful and the ministers who live the contradiction of moral belonging to the true Church of Christ and at the same time belonging to the false church of the usurper Bergoglio, so that they may shake themselves from their torpor and line up underneath the Cross, bearing witness to the Truth. Pray for those Bishops and priests who humbly, and despite their infirmities, serve the Lord. Let us not nullify the Most Precious Blood that he shed for us, and indeed let us make sure that we can repeat with Saint Paul: Gratia Dei in me vacua non fuit (1 Cor 15:10). This Blood will descend today on our altar, and it will continue to descend there as long as the Church has Bishops who can perpetuate the Priesthood and priests who celebrate the Holy Sacrifice, according to the rite handed down to us by Sacred Tradition. For this reason, let us act with a serene heart and in the conviction that what I am doing is in conformity with God’s will. And so may it be.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

July 7, 2024
Dominica VII post Pentecosten

COMMENT: The latest encyclical of Pope Francis is entitled, Bishop of Rome. In this document prepared for the ongoing Synod on Synodality Francis/Bergoglio offers an understanding of the papacy that is conformable to that professed by the schismatic Orthodox bishops who hold that the pope is only the first among equals and that he does not exercise universal jurisdiction over the Church founded by Jesus Christ. This conception is antithetical to the dogma declared at Vatican I. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is rejecting the papal claims of Francis/Bergoglio primarily on the grounds that the office that Francis/Bergoglio accepted is not the office of the papacy but something altogether different. He could not and cannot have accepted an office that he, in fact, publically denies that exists.

Is this true? I do not know. There is no way to judge the matter authoritatively. There is plenty of evidence that the bishops can judge a pope who has become an open and manifest heretic as Francis/Bergoglio is but where are the bishops holding ordinary jurisdiction that themselves who are free from heresy? Our duty is to keep the faith and refuse any obedience to any exercise of authority that directly or indirectly undermines that faith in its profession and/or in its practice.

It is unfortunate that the Vatican was able to institute an illegal and immoral administrative "extra-judical" process against Archbishop Viganò without at least the Archbishop's open declaration that such a process is a direct violation of canon law. He should demand his full canonical rights to a public contentious hearing with all accusations of crimes and his own defense in written format for all the faithful.

For Every Faithful Catholic: The Principle of Unity is Faith, the Bond of Unity is Charity!

The Novus Ordo has broken the Principle of Unity with Tradition because they first broke the Bond of Unity of Faith and thus, the unity with God.

But love must not be wrought in our imagination but must be proved by works... Oh Jesus, what will a soul inflamed with Your love not do? Those who really love You, love all good, seek all good, help forward all good, praise all good, and invariably join forces with good men and help and defend them. They love only truth and things worthy of love. It is not possible that one who really and truly loves You can love the vanities of earth; his only desire is to please You. He is dying with longing for You to love him, and so would give his life to learn how he may please You better. O Lord, be please to grant me this love before You take me from this life. It will be a great comfort at the hour of death to realize that I shall be judged by You whom I have loved above all things. Then I shall be able to go to meet You with confidence, even though burdened with my debts, for I shall not be going into a foreign land but into my own country, into the kingdom of Him whom I have loved so much and who likewise has so much loved me.

St. Teresa of Jesus

“Taking this plurality of forms seriously avoids hegemonic tendencies and mitigates the risk of reducing the message of salvation to a single understanding of ecclesial life and its liturgical, pastoral, or moral expression. The web of relations within a synodal Church, made visible in the exchange of gifts between the Churches and guaranteed by the unity of the College of bishops headed by the bishop of Rome, is a dynamic guardian of a unity that can never become uniformity.”

Instrumentum Laboris for Second Session of Synod on Synodality, October 2024

COMMENT: The Church of Synodality, under the Francis/Bergoglio the "bishop of Rome", is open to a variety of messages regarding salvation, a variety of human forms of worship, and a variety of opinions as to what constitutes the moral law because the Church of Synodality IS NOT the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church founded by Jesus Christ. It is open to everything except the Catholic faith and "received and approved" immemorial worship of God which it abhors. Truth is One; error is always a plurality. By their fruits they are known.

Comments from those who have read the Third Secret of Fatima:

Ø “I cannot say anything of what I learned at Fatima concerning the third Secret, but I can say that it has two parts: one concerns the Pope. The other, logically – although I must say nothing – would have to be the continuation of the words: In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved.” [3] [emphasis added] – Joseph Schweigel, S.J., d. 1964 (interrogated Sister Lucia about the Third Secret on behalf of Pope Pius XII on Sept. 2, 1952)[4]

Ø “In the period preceding the great triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, terrible things are to happen. These form the content of the third part of the Secret. What are they? If ‘in Portugal the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved,’ … it can be clearly deduced from this that in other parts of the Church these dogmas are going to become obscure or even lost altogether. Thus it is quite possible that in this intermediate period which is in question (after 1960 and before the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary), the text makes concrete references to the crisis of the Faith of the Church and to the negligence of the pastors themselves.” [5] [emphasis added] – Fr. Joaquin Alonso, C.M.F., d. 1981 (Cleratian priest and official Fatima archivist for over sixteen years; had unparalleled access to Sister Lucia)

Ø “The Secret of Fatima speaks neither of atomic bombs, nor nuclear warheads, nor Pershing missiles, nor SS-20’s. Its content concerns only our faith. To identify the Secret with catastrophic announcements or with a nuclear holocaust is to deform the meaning of the message. The loss of faith of a continent is worse than the annihilation of a nation; and it is true that faith is continually diminishing in Europe.” [6] [emphasis added] – Bishop Alberto Cosme do Amaral, d. 2005 (former bishop of Fatima-Leiria; remarks made in Vienna, Austria on Sept. 10, 1984)

Ø “It [the Third Secret] has nothing to do with Gorbachev. The Blessed Virgin was alerting us against apostasy in the Church.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Silvio Oddi, d. 2001 (Vatican diplomat and personal friend of Pope John XXIII, from whom he knew certain details concerning the Third Secret) [7]

Ø “In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.” [emphasis added] – Cardinal Mario Luigi Ciappi, O.P., d. 1996 (personal theologian to Popes John XXIII-John Paul II) [8]

Frère Michel de la Sainte Trinité, The Whole Truth about Fatima, [2], Volume 3.

Posted by OnePeterFive

Vatican-backed interfaith opened 2-16-23 - Esteemed by all excepting God and His friends!

LifeSiteNews | June 17, 2021

“The ‘Abrahamic Family House,’ a juxtaposition of three places of worship on Saadiyat Island in Abu Dhabi – one Muslim, one Jewish and one Christian – will open in 2022, according to a release from Higher Committee of Human Fraternity echoed by the Abu Dhabi Government Media Office and by Vatican News, the Vatican’s own media service run by the Dicastery for Communication.

The ‘Abrahamic Family House’ is an architectural complex in which the three so-called ‘Abrahamic’ religions, or (abusively), the ‘religions of the Book’ born of God’s promise to Abraham, are presented side by side in places of worship of equal proportions, set in a triangle around a ‘common ground,’ a garden where believers can meet and enter into ‘dialogue’ with each other.

The projected interfaith complex presents itself as an embodiment of the Abu Dhabi Document on Human Fraternity signed by Pope Francis and Imam Al-Tayeb of the Sunni Al-Azhar University of Cairo, and the ‘Higher Committee for Human Fraternity’ to which the joint declaration gave birth, and has been ‘endorsed’ and is being ‘closely followed’ both by Pope Francis and the Grand Imam.

Together with photos of the construction site, which show the foundations of the three religious buildings while one of them appears to be nearing completion, the release revealed the names officially chosen for the three religious buildings.”

"Pope Francis won't ever speak ex cathedra."

Cardinal Fernandez, during press conference introducing Dignitas Infinita

COMMENT: God has revealed that He will never permit His Church to bind doctrinal or moral error on His faithful. This promise has been invariably kept throughout the history of the Church including the time of Vatican II and its aftermath. Vatican II was a pastoral council of churchmen teaching by their grace of state by virtue of their personal magisterium. The pope and the council never engaged the Magisterium of the Church to teach without the possibility of error. Consequently, the errors of Vatican II reflect only on the heresy and weakness of individual churchmen.

The fact that Pope Francis "won't ever speak ex cathedra" could mean anything. It could mean that he is not the pope but only the "bishop of Rome" and therefore cannot engage the Magisterium even if he wanted to. It could mean that he does not recognize the Magisterium of the Church and will not engage what he does not believe in. This would imply that he does not believe in the office of the papacy with its universal jurisdiction, and therefore, the office which he assumed is not the papacy but something of his own imaginary construction. Pope Francis may be just another Pontius Pilate and does not know or care what truth is. Maybe he is just another habitual liar. Maybe he is the pope and knows that if he puts his ass into the chair of Peter and tries to bind the Catholic conscience to his doctrinal error and moral corruption it will be the last thing he ever tries to do. Time will tell.

LifeSiteNews | Vatican City | Michael Haynes | Jul 5, 2024 — The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) announced July 5 that it had declared former U.S Nuncio Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò to be guilty of “schism” and automatically excommunicated.

In a statement issued without warning to the Holy See press corps, the DDF stated that its Congress met on July 4 to decide against Viganò. The statement read:

On 4 July 2024, the Congress of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith met to conclude the extrajudicial penal process referred to in canon 1720 CIC against the Most Reverend Carlo Maria Viganò, titular Archbishop of Ulpiana, accused of the reserved delict of schism (canons 751 and 1364 CIC; art. 2 SST).

His public statements manifesting his refusal to recognize and submit to the Supreme Pontiff, his rejection of communion with the members of the Church subject to him, and of the legitimacy and magisterial authority of the Second Vatican Council are well known. 

At the conclusion of the penal process, the Most Reverend Carlo Maria Viganò was found guilty of the reserved delict of schism. 

The Dicastery declared the latae sententiae excommunication in accordance with canon 1364 § 1 CIC. The lifting of the censure in these cases is reserved to the Apostolic See. This decision was communicated to the Most Reverend Viganò on 5 July 2024.

Under the terms of the latest edition of Canon Law, one who is excommunicated is prohibited from offering the sacraments. 

On June 20, Viganò revealed that the DDF had, by way of a letter dated June 11, begun an “extrajudicial penal trial” against him, accusing the prelate of “the crime of schism.”

Issued by Monsignor John Kennedy, who leads the DDF’S Disciplinary Section, the Vatican’s letter alerted him to “the crime of schism of which he has been accused (public statements which result in a denial of the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church; denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; a rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council).”

Rebuffing the accusation, Viganò stated at the time that “I claim, as Successor of the Apostles, to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, with the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted doctrinal, moral, and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully preserved.”

He further added that “I repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical management of power, exercised against the purpose that legitimizes authority in the Church: an authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and as such must obey Him alone.”

In an expansive statement issued June 28, the former U.S. nuncio issued a blistering response to the DDF’s charge of schism, attesting that “[a] schismatic sect accuses me of schism: this should be enough to demonstrate the subversion taking place.”

Bottom of Form

Continuing, the archbishop stated: 

… in order to separate myself from ecclesial communion with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, I would have to have first been in communion with him, which is not possible since Bergoglio himself cannot be considered a member of the Church, due to his multiple heresies and his manifest alienness and incompatibility with the role he invalidly and illicitly holds.

Turning the Vatican’s charges against them, Viganò then accused Pope Francis of schism, writing:

I accuse Jorge Mario Bergoglio of heresy and schism, and I ask that he be judged as a heretic and schismatic and removed from the throne which he has unworthily occupied for over 11 years. This in no way contradicts the adage Prima Sedes a nemine judicatur, because it is evident that, since a heretic is unable to assume the Papacy, he is not above the Prelates who judge him.

Archbishop Viganò has been contacted for comment in response to the Vatican’s ruling, and this report will be updated accordingly.

COMMENT: Luther, the heretical and eventual schismatic Augustinian priest, was granted a canonical trial before any judicial determination of heresy was concluded. Why was Luther granted his canonical rights while Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was not? Why was Luther given a formal canonical trial while Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò was given the immoral and illegal application of an administrative “extrajudicial” process? It is because the former case was to determine TRUTH while the latter case was to conceal and destroy it. Archbishop Viganò was given the semblance of canonical due process for public consumption while denying its substance. The declaration that Archbishop Viganò as “excommunicated” is a change of his juridic standing in the Church. No administrative process, which is what an extrajudicial process is, can be used against any Catholic accused of a crime without his consent when it involves a change of his juridic standing in the Church. This shame, this farce, only condemns those who have perpetuated it.

Homosexual priests charged with pederasty against Catholic adolescents are afforded full canonical due process The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith headed by then Cardinal Ratzinger from 1981 until 2004 assumed jurisdiction over these cases because, as Ratzinger said the faith itself was an aggrieved party in the scandal. After he became pope, Benedict removed the most egregious offenders. In the last two years of his pontificate before his resignation (2011 and 2012) three hundred and eighty-four offending priests were laicized. Everyone of these homosexual predators were given canonical due process. None were administratively laicized by an extrajudicial process without their consent. As reported in the New York Times, “By 2006, the Church had spent $2.6 billion settling sexual-abuse cases, as Berry wrote in the 2010 edition of Vows of Silence.”

Now the down-graded Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) still has the primary duty of defending the faith. The primary and essential cause and sign of the unity of the One Church is the FAITH. The DDF publically ignores the charges of heresy against Pope Francis and Vatican II Council leveled by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò as if the faith itself is no longer an “aggrieved party” deserving of a canonical hearing and canonical defense! Without the faith it is impossible to please God. The DDF does not possess the faith it is obligated to defend. The entire presupposition of the DDF is that the pope is the proximate rule of faith and any divergence from his will is the definition of schism and heresy. This is not only not Catholic it is idolatry. Dogma is the proximate rule of faith to which the pope himself is subject as well as the DDF.

How does this differ from the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre by Pope John Paul II? JPII excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre was a mere public expression of his canonical opinion that the act of consecrating bishops without a papal mandate is an ipso facto excommunicable offense. Therefore, in his opinion, Archbishop Lefebvre was excommunicated. This did not even reach the level of an administrative extrajudicial process. The ignorant simply took the opinion of the pope as the law of the Church!

The consecration of bishops is not necessarily an excommunicable offense. Bishops were often consecrated without a papal mandate in the former Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact countries and communist China on many occasions in our own times. The point is that the law is hierarchical. The salvation of souls is the highest law to which all others laws are subjected. There was a context for the consecration of bishops in communist controlled countries and there was a context for the consecration of bishops by Archbishop Lefebvre. The context was never addressed which canonical due process would insure.

Archbishop Lefebvre was denied his canonical rights by JPII for the same reason that Francis and his DDF are denying Archbishop Viganò his canonical rights. The Novus Ordo Church cannot defend its doctrinal, moral, and liturgical corruptions because they are indefensible so it must necessarily destroy the accuser. JPII's excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre only made an impression on those who believe that the opinions expressed by the pope are above the law and the pope has the power and authority to act unjustly against God and His Church. Church history records a number of these abuses of authority as well as a number of subsequent corrections. St. Philip Neri and St. Catherine de Ricci rejoiced at the determination by a papal ad hoc committee that Savonarola was innocent of the crimes for which the corrupt Borgia pope had accused, tried and executed him. When God sets things aright, as He most assuredly will do, everyone will know why Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò is in heaven and Francis and his DDF minions, unless there is serious repentance, are not.

The abrogation of Summorum Pontificum got the Neo-Traditionalists all stirred up. They have professed their ‘faith’ in the inerrancy of Vatican II and their understanding that the Novus Ordo and the traditional Roman rite are one and the same liturgy in two divergent forms. In return for this corruption of truth they were granted an Indult, which became a grant of legal privilege, which has now again has become an indult, to worship according to the immemorial traditions of the Church, which they hold as simple accidents of the faith subject to the arbitrary will of the legislator. These crumbs that have fallen from the table of Benedict/Ratzinger have been swept away by Francis because, it is a fact of law, that what is accepted as a privilege can no longer be claimed as a right.

For several decades now, we have lived in the “Tyranny of the Present.” Tradition is forgotten and, precisely because it is forgotten, our responsibilities for the future are also dismissed. The liturgical experimentation that led to the Novus Ordo was the epitome of Vatican II: it has given the Catholic hierarchy the liturgical-theological basis for their current promotion of the “here and now” as the supreme aim of the Church.

With Summorum Pontificum, the most consequential pontifical legislative act since 1969, Benedict XVI upended this new materialistic logic: by opening the gates of the past, he once again placed the Church on the path of eternity and immortality (sic).
Summorum Pontificum is now under threat, with the survey being conducted whose consequences are uncertain. There was a Church before the present reality, there will be a Church forever: and the Sacred Liturgy she celebrates here, with true Traditional and Apostolic imprint, has always been and should always be, not a reflection of the banality of the moment, but a prefiguration of her immortality as Bride of Christ and her Paschal Feast with the Lord for all Eternity, outside the limitations of our present existence.

Rorate Caeli

All law proceeds from the reason and will of the lawgiver; the Divine and natural laws from the reasonable will of God; the human law from the will of man, regulated by reason. Now just as human reason and will, in practical matters, may be made manifest by speech, so may they be made known by deeds: since seemingly a man chooses as good that which he carries into execution. But it is evident that by human speech, law can be both changed and expounded, in so far as it manifests the interior movement and thought of human reason. Wherefore by actions also, especially if they be repeated, so as to make a custom, law can be changed and expounded; and also something can be established which obtains force of law, in so far as by repeated external actions, the inward movement of the will, and concepts of reason are most effectually declared; for when a thing is done again and again, it seems to proceed from a deliberate judgment of reason. Accordingly, custom has the force of a law, abolishes law, and is the interpreter of law.

St. Thomas Aquinas

Just insider confirmation to what is common knowledge: Pope Francis, the CEO of the HomoLobby

Francis is the first ever pope to use the word “gay.” He has LGBTQ friends, and he has appointed many LGBTQ friendly and supportive cardinals, archbishops and bishops.... Catholics who reject LGBTQ are “homophobic.”

Fr. James Martin, S.J., Homosexual Jesuit priest sermon at a LGBTQ Novus Ordo celebration

The United States Empire is no different!

The imperial city (Rome) endeavours to communicate her language (religion, philosophy, law, government and general cultural values) to all the lands she has subdued to procure a fuller society and a greater abundance of interpreters on both sides. It is true, but how many lives has this cost! And suppose that done, the worst is not past, for… the wider extension of her empire produced still greater wars… Wherefore he that does but consider with compassion all these extremes of sorrow and bloodshed must needs say that this is a mystery. But he that endures them without a sorrowful emotion or thought thereof, is far more wretched to imagine he has the bliss of a god when he has lost the natural feelings of a man.

St. Cyprian, Epistle to Donatus

Getting What We Deserve

THE MOST EVIDENT MARK of God’s anger and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world are manifested when He permits His people to fall into the hands of clerics’ who are priests more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds.
Instead of nourishing those committed to their care, they rend and devour them brutally. Instead of leading their people to God, they drag Christian souls into hell in their train. Instead of being the salt of the earth and the light of the world, they are its innocuous poison and its murky darkness.
St. Gregory the Great says that priests and pastors will stand condemned before God as the murderers of any souls lost through neglect or silence. Tot occidimus, quot ad mortem ire tepidi et tacentes videmus. Elsewhere St. Gregory asserts that nothing more angers God than to see those whom He set aside for the correction of others, give bad example by a wicked and depraved life.
Instead of preventing offenses against His Majesty, such priests become themselves the first to persecute Him, they lose their zeal for the salvation of souls and think only of following their own inclinations. Their affections go no farther than earthly things, they eagerly bask in the empty praises of men, using their sacred ministry to serve their ambitions, they abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world, and in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits.
When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people, and is visiting His most dreadful anger upon them. That is why He cries unceasingly to Christians, “Return, O ye revolting children . . . and I will give you pastors according to my own heart” (Jer. 3, 14-15). Thus, irregularities in the lives of priests constitute a scourge visited upon the people in consequence of sin.
St. John Eudes, The Priest: His Dignity and Obligations

SSPX Two-Cent Opinion:

The Vatican Activates Extrajudicial Proceedings Against Archbishop Viganò

FSSPX News | June 24, 2024

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò published on the internet the letter from the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF). It notified him of his summons to appear at the DDF Palace on June 20, after the opening of an “extrajudicial” criminal trial against him. 

A Little Explanation

What is an extrajudicial criminal trial? According to the DDF Vademecum published on June 5, 2022, the extrajudicial criminal trial, sometimes called an “administrative trial,” is a form of criminal trial which reduces the formalities provided for in the judicial trial in order to accelerate the course of justice. It does not eliminate the procedural guarantees required for a fair judgment.

For offenses reserved to the DDF, it is up to the DDF alone, on a case-by-case basis, ex officio or at the request of the Ordinary, to decide whether to proceed this way. Just like a judicial trial, an extrajudicial criminal trial can take place at the DDF – which is the case for Viganò – or be entrusted to a lower authority.

The Accusations Made by the DDF

The decree of summons mentions the charge Viganò will face during the trial. The crime of schism is put forward, because of certain public affirmations negating the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church: denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis; rupture of communion with him; and rejection of the Second Vatican Council.

Following this summons, Viganò published a communiqué, available online, to respond to these accusations. He defends himself in various ways, invoking the doctrinal wanderings of the current pontificate; rejecting neo-modernist errors; and asserting his case compares to that of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, also summoned in his time to the Palace of the former Holy Office .

There is, however, one point which significantly differentiates him from the founder of the Society of Saint Pius X: Archbishop Viganò makes a clear declaration of sedevacantism in his text. In other words, according to him, Pope Francis is not pope.

How does he explain this? Because of a “defect of consent” from Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio when accepting the papacy. That is, according to Viganò, Cardinal Bergoglio considered the papacy as something other than what it really is. He accepted the pontifical office without fully consenting, and this error resulted in the nullity of his acceptance. His pontificate would therefore be that of a place-holder.

Archbishop Lefebvre and the Society he founded have not ventured down that perilous road. 

COMMENT: The SSPX has already been regularized by Rome. This is easily proved. Although they have been regularized informally sub rosa this is not generally known by all their members and it is purposely concealed from those who attend their chapels. This criticism of Archbishop Viganò is offered to distance themselves from his accusation that Pope Francis is a heretic and schismatic. The leadership of the SSPX has taken the 1989 Profession of Faith and Oath of Fidelity to Pope Francis in which they vow unconditional obedience to his "authentic magisterium" and promise to abstain from any public criticism of the Pope that has not been approved by Rome.

There are several problems with this publication. Their "little explanation" regarding extrajudicial proceedings is incorrect. An "extrajudicial criminal trial" is an administrative process that cannot be used against any Catholic defendant without his consent who is accused of a crime if their conviction would change their juridic standing in the Church. The crime of heresy and schism changes the juridic standing of the accused in the Church. Instituting an extrajudicial process in a criminal accusation is just an attempt to deny the accused his canonic rights of due process. Archbishop Viganò is canonically entitled to demand a contentious canonical judicial process. He can also demand that the arguments be in a written format rather than oral, and he is free to publish Rome's accusations and arguments as well as his replies. Rome not only must objectively prove the criminal charges of schism and heresy, they must establish subjective imputability of the crime.

Pope Francis is not just guilty of "doctrinal wanderings", but of objective heresy which is defined as the denial of Catholic dogma. The "pastoral council", Vatican II, committed many "doctrinal wanderings" that directly corrupted Catholic dogma and there are multiple examples of this. The reason the "SSPX has not ventured down that perilous road" of declaring Pope Francis and Vatican II as heretical is because the SSPX does not hold dogma as the proximate rule of faith. The definition of heresy IS the denial of dogma and if you do not believe in dogma, you cannot call anyone a heretic. The SSPX has been in constant "dialogue" with Rome for more than 25 years. Dialogue is the exchange of opinions. Dogma is the affirmation of divine Truth. If the SSPX had appealed to dogma against the modernists in Rome the dialogue would have ended in a few hours.

Archbishop Viganò has not declared that he is a sedevacantist. Sedevacantists believe that the crime of heresy and schism automatically removes a pope from the office of the papacy. Most of them believe that there has not been a pope since Pius XII. It is calumny to publish this accusation. Archbishop Viganò has offered the opinion that there are irregularities regarding the election of Pope Francis in that his conception of the papacy is in fact heretical and that therefore the office he accepted and ascended to does not exist. This has been offered as an opinion. The SSPX and other conservatives are afraid of being to close to the truth and thus their criticism of Archbishop Viganò will only get worse. The coward always accuses the brave of being 'imprudent'!

Pope Francis the Amazed - It all depends on what "spirit" you are listening to!

“The problematic is primarily ecclesiological. I do not see how it is possible to say that one recognizes the validity of the Council — though it amazes me that a Catholic might presume not to do so — and at the same time not accept the liturgical reform born out of Sacrosanctum Concilium, a document that expresses the reality of the Liturgy intimately joined to the vision of Church so admirably described in Lumen gentium.” ……

"Let us abandon our polemics to listen together to what the Spirit is saying to the Church. Let us safeguard our communion. Let us continue to be astonished at the beauty of the (Novus Ordo) Liturgy. The Paschal Mystery has been given to us. Let us allow ourselves to be embraced by the desire that the Lord continues to have to eat His Passover with us. All this under the gaze of Mary, Mother of the Church."

Pope Francis the Low and Vicious, Desiderio Desideravi, his apostolic letter on liturgical formation

COMMENT: Nice to see Pope Francis getting to the meat of the matter: How can “one recognizes the validity of the Council…. and not accept the liturgical reform.” So let’s “amaze” the deaf and dumb and repeat again, the Vatican II Council was merely a pastoral council that has proven to be a pastoral failure by every objective criterion that measures pastoral success or failure. The Pope can babble all he wants about “Time is greater than space,” but after 60 years that psychological lollipop can only pacify the brain dead. Nothing, absolutely nothing, from Vatican II binds the conscience of the Catholic faithful regarding any matter of doctrine, morals or worship when that teaching contradicts or contravenes directly or indirectly the Catholic faith, morals or immemorial traditions. The Council is the work of churchmen teaching by their grace of state and has nothing to do with the Magisterium of the Church teaching by virtue of the Church’s attributes of Infallibility and Authority. If this were not the case, then God would have failed in His divine promise to preserve His Church from formal error, for as everyone knows but does not like to say, the Vatican II Council is clearly heretical in many of its direct pronouncements and their implications. The most important error of the Council was declared by the Novus Ordo Saint John XXIII in his opening address where he stated that the purpose of the Council was to reformulate Catholic truth with new words and new images. This is the heresy of Neo-modernism which postulates the heretical opinion that there exists a disjunction between the truth of dogma and the words to express that truth. The very purpose of Vatican II was heretical and its fruit has abundantly revealed this ugly fact. Pope Francis in his direct endorsement of sexual perversion by his active associations with homosexuals and abortion by his public praising of the likes of Nancy Pelosi, is evidence of this fact. He hates the immemorial Roman rite of Mass because he hates God and everything that pertains to His acceptable worship. The immemorial Roman rite of Mass is the Holy Sacrifice of the Cross. The Novus Ordo is a memorial meal, the offering of Cain, ‘the fruit of the earth and the work of human hands’.

LifeSiteNews | Jun 20, 2024— The Vatican’s Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) has instigated an “extrajudicial penal trial” against Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, accusing the prelate of “the crime of schism.”

In an email signed by Monsignor John Kennedy of the dicastery’s Disciplinary Section and sent to the Italian archbishop, who served as papal nuncio to the United States from 2011 to 2016, the dicastery summoned Viganò to the Vatican on June 20 that he “may take notice of the accusations and evidence concerning the crime of schism.” Namely, the dicastery notified the archbishop that he stands accused of making “public statements which result in a denial of the elements necessary to maintain communion with the Catholic Church; denial of the legitimacy of Pope Francis, rupture of communion with Him, and rejection of the Second Vatican Council.”

In response, Viganò defended himself stating:

In the face of the Dicastery’s accusations, I claim, as Successor of the Apostles, to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, with the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted doctrinal, moral, and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully preserved.

Regarding the accusations against him “as an honor,” Viganò stressed his desire to “repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical management of power, exercised against the purpose that legitimizes authority in the Church: an authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and as such must obey Him alone.”

After arguing that “[no] Catholic worthy of the name can be in communion with this ‘Bergoglian church,’ because it acts in clear discontinuity and rupture with all the popes of history and with the Church of Christ,” Viganò asked Catholics to “pray that the Lord will come to the aid of His Church and give courage to those who are persecuted for their Faith.”

Attendite a falsis prophetis

Announcement regarding the start of the extrajudicial criminal trial for schism (Art. 2 SST; can. 1364 CIC)

The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith has informed me, with a simple email, of the initiation of an extrajudicial penal trial against me, with the accusation of having committed the crime of schism and charging me of having denied the legitimacy of “Pope Francis” of having broken communion “with Him” and of having rejected the Second Vatican Council. I have been summoned to the Palace of the Holy Office on June 20, in person or represented by a canon lawyer. I assume that the sentence has already been prepared, given that it is an extrajudicial process.

I regard the accusations against me as an honor. I believe that the very wording of the charges confirms the theses that I have repeatedly defended in my various addresses. It is no coincidence that the accusation against me concerns the questioning of the legitimacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and the rejection of Vatican II: the Council represents the ideological, theological, moral, and liturgical cancer of which the Bergoglian “synodal church” is the necessary metastasis.

It is necessary for the Episcopate, the Clergy and the People of God to seriously ask themselves whether it is consistent with the profession of

the Catholic Faith to passively witness the systematic destruction of the Church by its leaders, just as other subversives are destroying civil society. Globalism calls for ethnic substitution: Bergoglio promotes uncontrolled immigration and calls for the integration of cultures and religions. Globalism supports LGBTQ+ ideology: Bergoglio authorizes the blessing of same-sex couples and imposes on the faithful the acceptance of homosexualism, while covering up the scandals of his protégés and promoting them to the highest positions of responsibility. Globalism imposes the green agenda: Bergoglio worships the idol of the Pachamama, writes delirious encyclicals about the environment, supports the Agenda 2030, and attacks those who question the theory of man-made global warming. He goes beyond his role in matters that strictly pertain to science, but always and only in one direction: a direction that is diametrically opposed to what the Church has always taught. He has mandated the use of experimental gene serums, which caused very serious damage, death and sterility, calling them “an act of love,” in exchange for funding from pharmaceutical companies and philanthropic foundations. His total alignment with the Davos religion is scandalous. Wherever governments at the service of the World Economic Forum have introduced or extended abortion, promoted vice, legitimized homosexual unions or gender transition, encouraged euthanasia, and tolerated the persecution of Catholics, not a word has been spent in defense of the Faith or Morals that are threatened, or in support of the civil battles of so many Catholics who have been abandoned by the Vatican and the Bishops. Not a word for the persecuted Catholics in China, with the complicity of the Holy See, which considers Beijing’s billions more important than the lives and freedom of thousands of Chinese who are faithful to the Roman Church. In the “synodal church” presided over by Bergoglio, no schism is recognized among the German Episcopate, or among the government-appointed Bishops who have been consecrated in China without the mandate of Rome. Because their action is consistent with the destruction of the Church, and therefore must be concealed, minimized, tolerated, and finally encouraged. In these eleven years of “pontificate” the Catholic Church has been humiliated and discredited above all because of the scandals and corruption of the leaders of the Hierarchy, which have been totally ignored even as the most ruthless Vatican authoritarianism raged against faithful priests and religious, small communities of traditional nuns, and communities tied to the Latin Mass.

This one-sided zeal is reminiscent of Cromwell’s fanaticism, typical of those who defy Providence in the presumption of knowing that they are finally at the top of the hierarchical pyramid, free to do and undo as they please without anyone objecting to anything. And this work of destruction, this willingness to renounce the salvation of souls in the name of a human peace that denies God is not an invention of Bergoglio, but the main (and unmentionable) purpose of those who used a Council to contradict the Catholic Magisterium and to begin to demolish the Church from within, in small steps, but always in a single direction, always with the indulgent tolerance or culpable inaction – if not the explicit approval – of the Roman authorities. The Catholic Church has been slowly but surely taken over, and Bergoglio has been given the task of making it a philanthropic agency, the “church of humanity, of inclusion, of the environment” at the service of the New World Order. But this is not the Catholic Church: it is her counterfeit.

The resignation of Benedict XVI and the appointment by the St. Gallen Mafia of a successor in line with the diktats of the Agenda 2030 was intended to allow – and has succeeded in allowing – the global coup to take place with the complicity and authoritative support of the Church of Rome. Bergoglio is to the Church what other world leaders are to their nations: traitors, subversives, and final liquidators of traditional society who are certain of impunity. Bergoglio’s defect of consent (vitium consensus) in accepting his election is based precisely on the evident alienity of his action of government and magisterium with respect to what any Catholic of any age expects from the Vicar of Christ and the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles. Everything that Bergoglio does constitutes an offense and a provocation to the entire Catholic Church, to her Saints of all times, to the Martyrs who were killed in odium Fidei, and to the Popes of all times until the Second Vatican Council.

This is also and principally an offense against the Divine Head of the Church, Our Lord Jesus Christ, Whose sacred authority Bergoglio claims to exercise for the detriment of the Mystical Body, with an action that is too systematic and coherent to appear to be the fruit of mere incapacity. In the work of Bergoglio and his circle, the Lord’s warning is put into practice: Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the guise of lambs, but who are ravenous wolves at heart (Mt 7:15). I am honored not to have – and indeed I do not want – any ecclesial communion with them: theirs is a lobby, which conceals its complicity with the masters of the world in order to deceive many souls and prevent any resistance against the establishment of the Kingdom of the Antichrist.

In the face of the Dicastery’s accusations, I claim, as Successor of the Apostles, to be in full communion with the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, with the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiffs, and with the uninterrupted doctrinal, moral, and liturgical Tradition which they have faithfully preserved.

I repudiate the neomodernist errors inherent in the Second Vatican Council and in the so-called “post-conciliar magisterium,” in particular in matters of collegiality, ecumenism, religious freedom, the secularity of the State, and the liturgy.

I repudiate, reject, and condemn the scandals, errors, and heresies of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who manifests an absolutely tyrannical management of power, exercised against the purpose that legitimizes Authority in the Church: an authority that is vicarious of that of Christ, and as such must obey Him alone. This separation of the Papacy from its legitimizing principle, which is Christ the High Priest, transforms the ministerium into a self-referential tyranny.

No Catholic worthy of the name can be in communion with this “Bergoglian church,” because it acts in clear discontinuity and rupture with all the Popes of history and with the Church of Christ.

Fifty years ago, in that same Palace of the Holy Office, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was summoned and accused of schism for rejecting Vatican II. His defense is mine; his words are mine; and his arguments are mine – arguments before which the Roman authorities could not condemn him for heresy, having to wait instead for him to consecrate bishops so as to have the pretext of declaring him schismatic and then revoking his excommunication when he was already dead. The scheme is repeated even after half a century has demonstrated Archbishop Lefebvre’s prophetic choice.

In these times of apostasy, Catholics will find in Pastors faithful to the mandate received from Our Lord an example and an encouragement to abide in the Truth of Christ.

Depositum custodi, according to the Apostle’s exhortation: as the time approaches when I will have to give an account to the Son of God of all my actions, I intend to persevere in the bonum certamen and not to fail in the witness of faith which is required of each one who, as Bishop, has been endowed with the fullness of the priesthood and constituted Successor of the Apostles.

I invite all Catholics to pray that the Lord will come to the aid of His Church and give courage to those who are persecuted for their Faith.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

June 20, 2024
S.cti Silverii Papæ et Martyris
B.ti Dermitii O’Hurley, Episcopi et Martyris

COMMENT: An "extrajudicial" process is intended to deny Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò his canonical rights of due process while still giving the external appearance of a legitimate legal process. This same immoral and illegal process was done with our pastor, Fr. Samuel Waters. Canon law forbids any administrative process that permanently effects the juridic standing of any Catholic or for the removal of any cleric from office. A priest cannot be administratively laicized without his consent. There are several published letters on our web page from Fr. Waters to the archdiocese of Philadelphia specifically declaring Fr. Waters' intent to remain a Catholic priest and demanding canonical due process, Archbishop Charles Chaput, the ordinary of Philadelphia at that time, in open conspiracy with the Vatican Dicastery for the Clergy, issued an administrative laicization. They then published the administrative order at the same time with the laicization of another priest who was convicted of child pornography and laicized only after a ten-year canonical process that was respective of all his legal rights. This act of Chaput to smear the name of Fr. Waters was both illegal and grossly immoral, but since when does legality or morality of the matter been an obstacle to the outlaw and degenerate? Forgiveness of sin requires all three elements of penance: contrition, confession and satisfaction Archbishop Chaput committed a sin for which making satisfaction is impossible.

Rome is attempting to do the same thing to Archbishop Viganò. Schism is a canonical crime. The Church's contentious canonical judicial process is required for the crime of schism because schism permanently changes the juridic standing of the defendant in the Church. The judicial process requires those making a criminal charge to clarify and prove the existence of a delict and assess the imputability of the delict to the defendant. It can be done orally or in writing. Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission has been demanding a contentions canonical due process for the alleged crimes of heresy and schism that were made by the diocese of Harrisburg. Our demands have been ignored for more than twenty years. Why? They cannot prove their charges.

A extrajudicial canonical process is a contradiction in terms because when it is imposed against the defendant's will an extrajudicial process CANNOT be canonical! Recommendation: Now that the charge of schism has been publically made for calling into question the canonical legitimacy of Pope Francis' papacy and the Vatican II Council, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò should demand canonical due process and then demand written arguments be presented by all parties. He should refuse any cooperation with "extrajudical" processes that are intended to deny canonical rights and expose it for the fraud that it is. The Vatican II Novus Ordo Church likes to talk about the dignity of the human person unless he gets in their way and then "dignity be damned"!

The Novus Ordo is a new order lex orandi to make a new order lex credendi!

In every liturgical year the whole revelation of faith returns, mystery by mystery, dogma by dogma, precept by precept, upon our intelligences and upon our hearts. The lex credendi is the lex orandi, and the worship of the Church preaches to the world without, and to the faithful within the sanctuary. To those that are without, it is a visible and audible witness for the kingdom of God: to those that are within, it is a foresight and a foretaste of the beauty and the sweetness of the worship of eternity. If preachers will follow the Church as it moves year by year in the cycle of eternal truths, and will explain pastorally in simple and manly words the epistles and gospels by which the Church, or rather the Holy Ghost, teaches us the meaning of the feast and fast as they come and go, they will year by year declare to their flocks the whole counsel of God.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, 1897

LifeSiteNews | Michael Haynes | Jun 13, 2024

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican has unveiled a pivotal document on the papacy, which contains numerous calls to fundamentally alter the understanding of the practice of papal primacy and authority in order to aid ecumenism and synodality.

Billed as “the first document to summarize the entire ecumenical debate on the service of primacy in the Church since the Second Vatican Council,” the document is the fruit of almost four years of “truly ecumenical and synodal work.” The text presents the results of a process initiated by the Dicastery for the Promotion of Christian Unity (DPCU) in 2020, which saw the 25th anniversary of Ut Unum Sint.

The document, drawn up under the guidance of the DPCU, has received input from “Orthodox and Protestant theologians,” as well as the Roman Curia and the Synod of Bishops. As such, the text is a “study document”: not presenting a new line which the Vatican is set to adhere to – at least not yet – but giving a strong indication of probably future direction on the papacy which may soon emerge, partially from the Synod on Synodality.

As with many elements of the Catholic Church today, ecumenism is at the fore. The dicastery summarized that following Vatican II the “ecumenical dimension” of the papacy “has been an essential aspect of this ministry.”

Writing his preface to the 150-page document, DPCU prefect Cardinal Kurt Koch noted that:

It is our hope that it will promote not only the reception of the dialogues on this important topic [the papacy], but also stimulate further theological investigation and practical suggestions, ‘together, of course,’ for an exercise of the ministry of unity of the Bishop of Rome ‘recognized by all concerned’ (UUS 95).

Indeed, The Bishop of Rome appears to present the blueprint for a new understanding of the papacy and papal primacy in the 21st century, an era marked by a focus on ecumenism and “synodality.” As noted in the document itself:

The following pages offer a schematic presentation of (1) the responses to Ut unum sint and documents of the theological dialogues devoted to the question of primacy; (2) the main theological questions traditionally challenging papal primacy, and some significant advances in contemporary ecumenical reflection; (3) some perspectives for a ministry of unity in a reunited Church; and (4) practical suggestions or requests addressed to the Catholic Church. This synthesis is based both on the responses to Ut unum sint and on the results of the official and unofficial dialogues concerning the ministry of unity at the universal level. It uses the terminology adopted by these documents, with its advantages and limitations.

Windswept House? Primacy or committees?

The document’s theological arguments and essays are followed by a summary along with “practical suggestions or requests addressed to the Catholic Church” regarding the future exercise of the office of the papacy. As with other elements of current ecclesial life, the text bears a peculiar resemblance to Malachi Martin’s Windswept House, in which the globalist and Masonic-aligned cardinals are attempting to force the “Slavic Pope” to resign by arguing that for him to do so would help the damaged unity of the Church, and improve relations between the (heterodox) bishops and the pope.

Though not aimed at forcing Pope Francis to resign – since he has approved of The Bishop of Rome and ordered its promulgation, the DCPU’s text appears aimed at changing the papacy generally, not at any pope in particular. The “principles for the exercise of primacy in the 21st century” present a change in understanding of the papacy which would be at the service of ecumenism and synodality, the text outlines.

Papal primacy, the DCPU’s text states, should be intimately linked with synodality – reflecting the current wave of thought sweeping through the Church at the instigation of Pope Francis. “A first general agreement is the mutual interdependency of primacy and synodality at each level of the Church, and the consequent requirement for a synodal exercise of primacy,” the DCPU’s text reads.

Another point agreed on by the numerous ecumenical bodies involved in writing the text is that the papacy should be understood in a new sense by opening the door to decentralization of power. In this light, a call is made for synodality to be effected by granting more power to the “regional” levels of the Catholic Church, and “a continuing ‘decentralization’ inspired by the model of the ancient patriarchal Churches.”

Moving on, the text then presents the “practical suggestions” from all the ecumenical dialogues and bodies involved, before adding a further couple of suggestions from the DCPU in particular.

Even before the concrete and “practical suggestions” are presented – giving the DCPU’s ecumenical assessment on how to increase ecumenical unity and synodality by changes to the papacy – the subtext is remarkably clear: in the modern “enlightened” age in which the Church now exists, and given the self-understanding of “synodality” which is now endemic, papal primacy should be quietly faded out.

First change: Primacy a historical fad?

First on the DCPU’s list of “practical suggestions” is a call for a “re-interpretation” of the teachings of Vatican I – the council which issued the dogmatic constitution Pastor Aeternus which outlines the primacy and infallibility of the pope, two ecumenical stumbling blocks. Pastor Aeternus reads:

We teach and declare that, according to the Gospel evidence, a primacy of jurisdiction over the whole Church of God was immediately and directly promised to the blessed apostle Peter and conferred on him by Christ the lord… Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ Himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole Church.

These teachings appear to be in the crosshairs of the DCPU via The Bishop of Rome. They call for “a Catholic ‘re-reception,’ ‘re-interpretation,’ ‘official interpretation,’ ‘updated commentary’ or even ‘rewording’ of the teachings of Vatican I.” The document states that some of the contributors to its compilation have argued that Vatican I’s “teachings were deeply conditioned by their historical context, and suggest that the Catholic Church should look for new expressions and vocabulary faithful to the original intention but integrated into a communio ecclesiology and adapted to the current cultural and ecumenical context.”

“Deeply conditioned by the historical context,” should be interpreted as “no longer acceptable for the brave, modern world in which we now live.”

Second change: Stick to the diocese of Rome to ‘renew’ the papacy

Continuing the Windswept House theme, the DCPU presents its second suggestion for how to alter the papacy. Just as the scheming cardinals in Windswept House presented a forced papal resignation as a good thing for ecclesial unity, so also the DCPU presents a stripping of papal power as a means to “renew the image of the papacy.”

The DCPU issues a request for “a clearer distinction between the different responsibilities of the Bishop of Rome,” which would, it argues, aid his “ministry of unity.” This call includes the desire for how “other Western Churches might relate to the Bishop of Rome as primate while having a certain autonomy themselves” – arguably translated as “will the Pope please consider himself just the bishop of an important diocese, and allow other ‘primates’ to enjoy some equitable power like he does?”

Indeed, the DCPU goes so far as to make this very argument, removing the need for the customary interpretation of Vatican-style linguistics. “A greater accent on the exercise of the ministry of the Pope in his own particular Church, the diocese of Rome, would highlight the episcopal ministry he shares with his brother bishops, and renew the image of the papacy,” the DCPU recommends.

Third change: Ecumenism demands more synodality, including for the papacy

If it was not already clear that the two watchwords of the modern church are “ecumenism” and “synodality,” the DCPU makes such crystal clear in its third suggestion on how to reassess the papacy. The DCPU wrote that the theological dialogues involved in compiling the document had identified how “a growing synodality is required within the Catholic Church,” which would be evidenced by increasing the authority of bishops’ conferences. The text reads:

Putting an emphasis on the reciprocal relation between the Catholic Church’s synodal shaping ad intra and the credibility of her ecumenical commitment ad extra, they identified areas in which a growing synodality is required within the Catholic Church. They suggest in particular further reflection on the authority of national and regional Catholic bishops’ conferences, their relationship with the Synod of Bishops and with the Roman Curia.

At the universal level, they stress the need for a better involvement of the whole People of God in the synodal processes. In a spirit of the ‘exchange of gifts,’ procedures and institutions already existing in other Christian communions could serve as a source of inspiration.

Fourth change: More ecumenical meetings

Pope Francis has continued to champion the cause of ecumenical meetings between religious leaders throughout his papacy, increasingly linking it to the current Synod on Synodality. These encounters appear set to continue under the spirit of The Bishop of Rome, since the DCPU highlights them as its fourth recommended change.

“A last proposal is the promotion of ‘conciliar fellowship’ through regular meetings among Church leaders at a worldwide level in order to make visible and deepen the communion they already share,” the text reads. “In the same spirit, many dialogues have proposed different initiatives to promote synodality between Churches, especially at the level of bishops and primates, through regular consultations and common action and witness.”

Commentators have long expressed concerns about the effect of such ecumenical meetings (like holding joint Catholic-Anglican vespers in the Basilica of St. Paul’s outside the Walls in Rome) since they create the impression that the Catholic Church and the Pope are on an equal footing with all the multitude of religions customarily represented at such events.

Speaking to this correspondent in Rome last year, Bishop Athanasius Schneider attested that modern ecumenism “undermines the truth that there is only one Church of God and this is the Catholic Church, the Church of Peter, united with the Holy See, the chair of Peter – the popes.”

While the Vatican heavily promotes interreligious actions, Schneider stated that “such gestures, or inter-religious meetings, are undermining these truths, and therefore these actions have to change.”

He added that Catholics must ensure that charity is always practiced with non-Catholics, but they must also inform non-Catholics “that they are unfortunately in an objective error, and that they are called by God to join the Holy Mother Church which is the Catholic Church, which is the will of God.”

Goodbye to the ‘universal Church’

Amongst the specific aims of the DCPU’s own direct recommendations, which conclude the text, is a peculiarly convoluted argument against understanding the Catholic Church as “universal.” “It seems particularly necessary to clarify the meaning of the expression ‘universal Church,’” the DCPU writes, employing another standard phrase, “clarify the meaning,” which is more correctly interpreted as “reject.”

The DCPU declared that “since the 19 century, the catholicity of the Church has often been understood as its worldwide dimension, in a ‘universalistic’ way.” This understanding, Cdl. Koch’s dicastery argues, “does not take sufficient account of the distinction between the Ecclesia universalis (the ‘universal Church’ in the geographical sense) and the Ecclesia universa (the ‘whole Church,’ the ‘entire Church’), the latter being the more traditional expression in the Catholic magisterium.”

By having “a merely geographical notion of the catholicity of the Church,” the DCPU wrote that a risk exists of “giving rise to a secular conception of a ‘universal primacy’ in a ‘universal Church,’ and consequently to a secular understanding of the extension and constraints of such a primacy.”

Instead, the DCPU urged a shift in the understanding of the universal Church and the power necessary to govern such a universal body. “Roman primacy should be understood not so much as a universal power in a universal Church (Ecclesia universalis), but as an authority in service to the communion between the Churches (communio Ecclesiarum), that is to the whole Church (Ecclesia universa).” That is to say, once the language is stripped away, the papacy should not seek to exercise its divine authority – the authority outlined in Pastor Aeternus – and instead work on using a restrained practice of power to foster ecumenical unity.

Conclusion

Tying all its many pages together, The Bishop of Rome concludes by urging the acceptance of the suggestions and recommendations made, in order to make a renewal – an unqualified renewal – of the “exercise of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome” and to further aid ecumenical unity.

“Building on the above principles and recommendations, which are fruits of common ecumenical reflection, it may be possible for the Catholic Church to renew the exercise of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome and to propose a model of communion based on ‘a service of love recognised by all concerned’ (UUS 95),” the text opines.

As is already widely documented, modern ecumenism has as its aim simple unity, not unity as outlined in the traditional teaching of the Church. For the papacy to become directly subordinated to the modern form of ecumenism would appear to be the next stage in a long process of ecumenical “walking together” – together, but away from truth.

COMMENT: In the Creed, faithful Catholics profess their belief in "One, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church." The Church is "One" in its faith, its worship, its sacraments and its governance. The essential presupposition of ecumenism is that the Church is NOT One and therefore unity is a goal the Church must pursue. The purpose of ecumenism is to obtain unity that the Church does not possess. Therefore, ecumenism begins with heresy in its denial that the Church is One possessing perfect unity as the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. Whatever follows from this heresy in ecumenical acts always leads to greater error. For example, the ecumenical act of Novus Ordo worship that was created with Protestant help to foster unity between Protestants and Catholics was formally defined:

“The Sunday Supper, or Mass, is the sacred meeting or congregation of the people of God assembled, the priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.”

[“Cena dominica, sive Missa, est sacra synaxis, seu congregatio populi Dei in unum convenientis, sacerdotale praeside, ad memoriale Domini celebrationem ...”]

Istitutio Generalis Missalis Romani, Article 7

This is an accurate descriptive definition of the Novus Ordo and it is also a fitting descriptive definition of a Protestant communion service. In their denial that the Church founded by Jesus Christ possess unity, the Novus Ordo committed a greater error in corrupting divine worship.

Now Pope Francis is simply compounding heresy with greater heresy. The principle cause and sign of unity in the Church is the faith. The pope is only secondarily and accidently a sign and cause of unity of the Church therefore, the pope is just as much subject to the faith as every other baptized Catholic.

Pastor aeternus is the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church of Christ, issued by the First Vatican Council, July 18, 1870. The document defines four doctrines (i.e.: a defined doctrine is called a dogma) of the Catholic faith: 1) the apostolic primacy conferred on Peter, 2) the perpetuity of the Petrine Primacy in the Roman pontiffs, 3) the meaning and power of papal primacy, and 4) Papal Infallibility - infallible teaching authority (Magisterium) of the Pope.

Pastor aeternus says that the Magisterium of the Church, that is, the teaching authority of the Church grounded upon the Church's attributes of Authority and Infallibility that only the pope stands in potentia to, is derived from the universal jurisdiction conferred by Jesus Christ on St. Peter as a reward for his profession of faith and passed on to all his successors in the papal office until the consummation of the world. Heretical Protestants deny that the Magisterium is part of the content of God's divine revelation. The Schismatic Orthodox deny that the Magisterium is part of the God's act of revelation when they deny the jurisdiction of the pope, and thus deny his teaching authority that is derived from his jurisdiction, to make God's revelation known.

The immediate problem for Francis is that, while heresy does not necessarily remove the pope from the office, the heresy of denying the jurisdiction of the papal office is to deny the office itself and is a deeply schismatic act. This heresy and schism may constitute an indirect form of personal abdication of the office. Thus the title of the document, "The Bishop of Rome." The question now, Is it possible to possess an office that you deny exists?

Not only do we know God through Jesus Christ, but we only know ourselves through Jesus Christ; we only know life and death through Jesus Christ. Apart from Jesus Christ we cannot know the meaning of our life or our death, of God or of ourselves. Thus without Scripture, whose only object is Christ, we know nothing, and can see nothing but obscurity and confusion in the nature of God and in nature itself.

Blaise Pascal, Pensées

---

In light of the synodal process leading to the rejection of Catholic DOGMA of Vatican I, Pastor aeternus, reprint from last year:

Vatican releases Synod document calling for discussion of women, LGBT Catholics, church authority and more

AMERICA, the Jesuit Review | Gerald O'Connell | June 20, 2023

The secretariat for the synod has published the working document, known by its Latin title instrumentum laboris, for the first session of the General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops on synodality that will be held in the Vatican, Oct. 4 to Oct. 29. The second session will be held in October 2024.

“A synodal church is founded on the recognition of a common dignity deriving from baptism, which makes all who receive it sons and daughters of God, members of the family of God, and therefore brothers and sisters in Christ, inhabited by the one Spirit and sent to fulfil a common mission,” said the document.

However, it said, many Catholics around the world report that too many baptized persons—particularly L.G.B.T. Catholics, the divorced and civilly remarried, the poor, women and people with disabilities—are excluded from active participation in the life of the church and, particularly, from its decision-making structures.

The 50-page text was presented at a press conference in the Vatican on June 20 by Cardinals Mario Grech and Jean Claude Hollerich S.J., secretary general and relator general of the upcoming synod, respectively, and Father Giacomo Costa, S.J., the consultor of the synod’s secretary general.

Cardinal Grech described the working document as “the fruit of a synodal process” that started on Oct. 10, 2021, and “involved the whole church” in an exercise of listening to the people of God.

Cardinal Grech described the working document as “the fruit of a synodal process” that started on Oct. 10, 2021, and “involved the whole church” in an exercise of listening to the people of God. The first phase was articulated in three stages: at the local churches with consultation of the people of God (clergy and laity); at the bishops’ conferences, which engaged in a discernment process about the input from the local churches; and at the continental levels, where input from around the world was synthesized.

“Where the bishops started and accompanied the consultation, the contribution has been very alive and profound,” the cardinal said, and the bishops were enriched with “a fruitful ministry.”

The document brings together “the fruits” of the synodal journey since October 2021. Unlike the working documents for past synods, which were intended to be amended, improved and voted upon, this document is designed as “a practical aid for the conduct” of the October assembly at which there will be more than 350 participants (including laymen and around 45 women, both lay and consecrated), not a text to be amended.

The document states that it “is not a document of the Church’s Magisterium, nor is it the report of a sociological survey; it does not offer the formulation of operational indications, goals and objectives, nor a full elaboration of a theological vision.” It is “part of an unfinished process.” It draws on but also goes beyond the insights of the first phase and articulates “some of the priorities that emerged from listening to the People of God, but avoids presenting them as assertions or stances. Instead, it expresses them as questions addressed to the synodal assembly,” which “will have the task of discerning the concrete steps which enable the continued growth of a synodal church, steps that it will then submit to the Holy Father.”

Significantly, the working document does not offer a theoretical understanding of synodality but rather presents “a dynamic vision of the ways in which synodality has been experienced” in different church communities and cultures worldwide during the almost two-year synodal journey. It articulates “the insights and tensions that resonated most strongly with the experience of the church on each continent” and identifies “the priorities to be addressed in the first session of the synod.”

According to the working document, the synodal journey so far “has made it possible to identify and share the particular situations experienced by the church in different regions of the world.” These experiences include “too many wars,” “the threat represented by climate change,” “an economic system that produces exploitation, inequality and a throwaway culture” and “cultural colonialism that crushes minorities.”

It points to “situations of persecution to the point of martyrdom” and “emigration that progressively hollow out communities.” It mentions the situation of “Christian communities that represent scattered minorities within the countries in which they live” and “the aggressive secularization that seems to consider religious experience irrelevant, but where there remains a thirst for the Good News of the Gospel.”

In many regions, it says, “the churches are deeply affected by the crisis caused by various forms of abuse, including sexual abuse and the abuse of power, conscience and money.” It describes these as “open wounds, the consequences of which have yet to be fully addressed” and says the church must be “penitent” and intensify its commitment “to conversion and reform.”

It says the October synod takes place in a context that is “diverse but with common global features,” and participants will be asked “to listen deeply to the situations in which the church lives and carries out its mission.”

It says the synodal journey so far has revealed the existence of “shared questions” and “part of the challenge of synodality is to discern the level at which it is most appropriate to address each question.” That same journey also showed there are shared tensions in the church, but, the document says, “we should not be frightened of them, nor attempt at any cost to resolve them, but rather engage in ongoing synodal discernment” so that these tensions can “become sources of energy and not lapse into destructive polarizations.”

At the press conference, Cardinal Grech said “one of the discoveries” on the synodal journey that started on Oct. 10, 2021, was the method of “conversation in the Spirit,” which will now be used in the October synod.

Father Costa described this method as “shared prayer in view of a common discernment, by which participants prepare themselves through personal reflection and prayer” before the discussion. He said this method “opens ‘spaces’ in which to face together controversial subjects, around which in both society and in the church there are often clashes and confrontation, in person or through social media.”

The consultation phase has shown how this method offers “a practical alternative to polarization in the church,” Father Costa said.

To enable this method to be used at the October 2023 synod, where there will be hundreds of participants, Father Costa revealed that the assembly will be held in the Paul VI Audience Hall of the Vatican and its members will be divided into small groups of 12 people. They will work in these groups, then gather in plenary sessions and share their input.

Part A of the working document, called “For a synodal church, An Integral Experience,” highlights “the characteristic signs” of a synodal church and emphasizes that “conversation in the Spirit” is the way forward for this kind of church.

Cardinal Hollerich said the working document “leads us to a matter of discernment, a discernment about the concretization of communion, mission and participation,” which Part B of the document lists as the three priority issues for the synodal church.

Cardinal Hollerich explained that “each of these three priorities is linked to five worksheets. These [are] five approaches [that] take into consideration the diversity of persons as well as the diversity of the different social, cultural and religious contexts we have experienced during the synodal process.”

Each of the worksheets contains many questions for discernment that cannot all be listed here, but reveal the wide-ranging and even radical nature of what it means to be a synodal church, a church that includes and is not judgmental. The many questions raised around the world that are recognized in the document relate to the role of women in the church (including the women’s diaconate), the ways of exercising authority in the church at all levels including the papacy, ecumenical and interreligious relations, the need for a new language in church communication, the need for renewal of the formation in the seminary, the question of the ordination of mature married men in some regions, the approach to the divorced and remarried Catholics and to L.G.B.T. people, the preferential option for the poor, the preferential option for young people, the care of our common home and much more.

As the two cardinals and Father Costa made clear at the press conference, the synod on synodality cannot be reduced to single issues; its mandate is much broader than any one issue. Indeed, to reduce it to one or other issue would be to radically distort what the synod is really about. As the working document states clearly, the synod has three main priorities—communion, participation and mission—and these require bringing about a profound conversion and cultural change in the way of being church in the 21st century. It is not about making another church but a different church, as Pope Francis, quoting Yves Congar O.P., one of the great theologians of the Second Vatican Council, said in his speech to the synod in October 2021.

Below are the five main questions for discernment linked to each of the three priorities. The full list of questions can be found here.

Communion

1. How does the service of charity and commitment to justice and care for our common home nourish communion in a synodal Church?

2. How can a synodal Church make credible the promise that “love and truth will meet” (Ps 85:11)?

3. How can a dynamic relationship of gift exchange between the Churches grow?

4. How can a synodal Church fulfill its mission through a renewed ecumenical commitment?

5. How can we recognise and gather the richness of cultures and develop dialogue amongst religions in the light of the Gospel?

Mission

1. How can we walk together towards a shared awareness of the meaning and content of mission?

2. What should be done so a synodal Church is also an ‘all ministerial’ missionary Church?

3. How can the Church of our time better fulfill its mission through greater recognition and promotion of the baptismal dignity of women?

4. How can we properly value ordained Ministry in its relationship with baptismal Ministries in a missionary perspective?

5. How can we renew and promote the Bishop’s ministry from a missionary synodal perspective?

Participation

1. How can we renew the service of authority and the exercise of responsibility in a missionary synodal Church?

2. How can we develop discernment practices and decision-making processes in an authentically synodal manner that respects the protagonism of the Spirit?

3. What structures can be developed to strengthen a missionary synodal Church?

4. How can we give structure to instances of synodality and collegiality that involve groupings of local Churches?

5. How can the institution of the Synod be strengthened so that it is an expression of episcopal collegiality within an all-synodal Church?

COMMENT:

It's all in how you frame the question that directs the group to the "correct answer" the Synodal Church is looking. For example, "Communion" question #2 refers to Psalm 85:11. In a Catholic bible it is 84:11 and the actual verse is: "Mercy and truth have met each other: justice and peace have kissed." The Synodal Church, using a Protestant reference, changes the tense from past perfect to the future tense and translates the word justice as love. For what end can we guess this perversion is intended? And what do these questions about "missionary" church possible mean when proselytism is rejected as the proper end for which Jesus Christ instituted His Church? The use of the Encounter Group is entirely foreign to the Catholic spirit because it attacks the freedom of the human will. The American Psychological Association says:

"Encounter Group: a group of people who meet, usually with a trained leader, to increase self-awareness and social sensitivity, and to change behavior through interpersonal confrontation, self-disclosure, and strong emotional expression." It is a group of individuals in which constructive insight, sensitivity to others, and personal growth are promoted through direct interactions on an emotional and social level. The leader functions as a catalyst and facilitator rather than as a therapist and focuses on here-and-now feelings and interaction rather than on theory or individual motivation."

The entire Synod on Synodality is nothing but more employing the experimental psychological techniques of encounter developed by Jewish psychologists on the modern Church of the New Advent. It was these same methods that were used on the Catholic religious orders in the 1960s that brought about their destruction. Carl Rogers used these same psychological methods on the Jesuits order at the time Pope Francis/Bergoglio began his novitiate. They are now being employed by Francis the Destroyer to corrupt what is left of the Catholic Church and form it in his own image. He claims to head a "listening church" while he cannot keep his own mouth shut. That is because Francis only wants to listen to himself. That last thing he wants to listen to is the voice of anyone who contradicts his ideology, especially the voice of the dead, that is, the voice of tradition that constitutes, with sacred Scripture, the Remote Rule of Faith for all Catholics. It is Francis that is a committed anti-Catholic Ideologue and every faithful Catholic must recognize this fact. The proximate Rule of Faith is Dogma. If every faithful Catholic keeps this Truth as the guide of their faith and actions nothing Francis can do can bring them any personal harm.

---

Early recognition of the psychological weaponization of Encounter Groups

An assessment of the danger of the Encounter Group published in the New York Times in 1974!

Encounter Movement, a Fad Last Decade Finds New Shape

New York Times | Jan 13, 1974 | Robert Reinhold

BERKELEY, CA—The encounter group movement, which became something of a national fad in the nineteen‐sixties, has evolved into a new, more mature and gentler form:

Having largely discarded its more extreme and coercive aspects, along with extravagant assertions of instant personal redemption, the encounter concept has quietly found an accepted place in such established institutions as schools, churches, industry and even the military and sports.

Meanwhile, persistent doubts about the effectiveness as well as possible hazards of encounter groups are being sorted out in the first rigorous appraisals of the groups and their consequences.

These studies, performed here in Berkeley and at Stanford University, are finding that, while many people benefit enormously from the openness and baring of emotions fostered by encounter, there are dangers to be guarded against.

Tried by Millions

By now millions of Americans have touched, walked and talked their way through some type of .encounter session. Encounter is loose term for a variety of group techniques, such as T‐groups, sensitivity training, sensory awareness, Synanon psychodrama, gestalt therapy and others, that are used as means of personal growth for ostensibly healthy persons

The encounter; or “human potential techniques are so routine today that the pioneers at the Eselen Institute and elsewhere have already departed for new psychological frontiers. Amid the dazzling succulents and eucalyptus trees on the broken California coast at Big Sur, the Esalen leaders are moving into the spiritual orbit of ‘transpersonal’ psychology—oriental meditation, mysticism, “psychosynthesis"’ and other techniques of achieving new heights of self‐awareness.

Others have been experimenting with such methods as “rolfing,” “feldenkrais,” “bioenergetics,” in which massage and physicals are used to increase awareness.

A Variety of Method

Encounter methods vary widely, but a group typically consists of eight to 18 persons led by a “facilitator.” The members are urged to express their emotions toward one another openly, both physically and verbally. Mutual trust, openness, honesty and naturalness, are the watchwords, and the assumption is that this stripping away of psychological defenses is healthy and will enhance both interpersonal relationships and self‐awareness.

“A lot of mistakes were made during the youthful period,” says John Levy, executive officer of the Association for Humanistic Psychology, the San Francisco‐based organization to which many of the practitioners of encounter belong.

“The movement suffered from excess enthusiasm—it made promises that could not hold up. There are still plenty of encounter groups, but you don't hear about them anymore. They are not the cutting edge."

Encounter may be passé in the compulsive California and New York milieus that nurtured it, says William C. Schutz of Esalen, author of “Joy” and other popular works on encounter, but in Athens, GA and Rock Island, IL, and for the overwhelming majority of Americans, encounter is just beginning.

Searing Experience

Whether or not its assumptions are valid, encounter evidently filled a real need in a depersonalized technological world. Millions flocked to “growth centers,” like oases in a psychological desert, Where they could go through the searing but often uplifting experience of spilling out their doubts and fears.

But as in most fads, the phonies, fast‐huck artists, incompetents and predators soon moved in. illequipped and sometimes sadistic leaders started groups, the idea was exploited in the movies, and on stage. The Concord Hotel offered “encounter singles weekends,” and a “group therapy” restaurant was opened in New York.

Still, the potential value of encounter has attracted a growing number of conventionally trained psychologists and psychiatrists. Carl Rogers, the psychologist who is often called the father of the movement, has termed encounter “the most rapidly spreading social invention of the century, and probably the most potent.”

‘A Psychic Whorehouse’

Even such a harsh critic of encounter as Prof. Sigmund Koch of Boston University agrees that the movement is “the most visible manifestation of psychology on the American scene:” He has denounced it as providing “a convenient psychic whorehouse for the purchase of a gamut of well‐advertised existential ‘goodies’: authenticity, freedom, wholeness, flexibility, community, love, joy. One enters for such liberating consummations but settles for psychic strip tease.”

Such complaints notwithstanding, encounter has had a profound impact upon many facets of American life. In Louisville, for example, educators credit it with helping rescue the school system. Faced with, the second‐highest dropout rate in the country (after Philadelphia), a demoralized staff, and bitter racial division, the schools obtained a three‐year Federal grant ‘in 1969 to re-staff 14 schools with 1,000 teachers trained in encounter.

Called Project Transition, the program involved not only the teachers but also students, parents and community leaders. Robert Myers, a co‐director, says it was a “terrific impetus for change in a school system that was sinking.”

Reports of Suicide

Countless individuals, meanwhile, report that their lives have been improved by group experiences. But there have also been disturbing reports of breakdowns, divorces and even suicides precipitated by encounter groups.

What has been lacking until recently were objective, tightly controlled studies to determine if groups really change behavior. What do groups do? What are the dangers? What skills are needed for leaders? Are the effects lasting? Is it worth it?

Some preliminary answers to these questions are beginning to emerge from ‘a massive study here supported by $1.25‐million from the National Institute of Mental Health. Directed by Dr. Jim Bebout of the Wright Institute in Berkeley, the study is evaluating 1,500 persons who participated in 150 groups over a three‐year period at the University’s Young Men's Christian Association in Berkeley.

The groups, mostly low‐keyed sessions led by non‐professionals, were observed and analyzed, and each member was asked to evaluate his attitudes and feeling before, during and after the experience. The results are still undergoing computer analysis, but some preliminary findings:

Ø Encounter groups do work in that they consistently improve self‐satisfaction, self-reliance and comfort with sexuality, and lessen loneliness, alienation and social inhibition.

Ø Groups do little to improve productivity in work or school.

Ø Professional therapists do not usually do well as leaders. “They could not drop their professional bag,” Dr. Bebout said.

Two Casualties Found

Of the 1,500 members, Dr. Bebout said, only two could be considered casualties: an obese woman who was rejected by the rest of the group and young man who fell in love with the leader, who rejected him.

Dr. Bebout offers the following advice to those considering joining a group:

“Pick a leader willing to share your experience with you and not work on you without telling you what he is doing. Make sure some proportion of your group is on your side. If the first two meetings are full of silences, attacks, tensions and obscure methods and general non-sharing, then pack up and go home.”

A smaller, different kind of study performed at Stanford University produced somewhat more ‘'negative” results. Unlike the Berkeley study, the Stanford study used well‐known professional group leaders who led 210 students in 18 groups designed to represent a broad range of techniques, including T‐groups, gestalt, transactional analysis, marathon, basic encounter and others.

Higher Casualty Rate

The results of the study, performed by Dr. Morton A. Lieberman, Dr. Irvin D. Yalom and Matthew. B. Miles, were recently published by Basic Books under the title “Encounter Groups: First Facts.” The study found that one‐third of the participants benefited from their experiences, while the rest either dropped out or had negative experiences. This proportion did not compare unfavorably with conventional psychotherapy.

The study turned up an alarming 10 per cent casualty rate, with a casualty defined as a person who was more psychologically distressed or maladapted eight months after the group than before. One girl, for example, dropped out and sought emergency psychiatric aid after the third meeting, at which she was called “a fat Italian mama with a big Shiny nose.”

Verdict Is Mixed

All in all, the Stanford study returned a mixed verdict. “When one strips away the excesses and the frills, the ability of such groups to provide a meaningful emotional setting in which individuals can overtly consider previously prohibited issues cannot be ruled out as an important means for facilitating human progress,” the study said. But it added, “Encounter groups present a clear and evident danger if they are used for radical surgery in which the product will be a new man.”

Those who improved, Dr. Yalom said in an interview, were those who got something intellectual out of the experience.

Partisans of the encounter concept have faulted the Stanford study on various grounds, saying that some distress is a prerequisite to enduring change, and that the attack oriented techniques used in some of the Stanford groups are no longer in vogue.

More Care Needed

Even so, many of the more responsible leaders agree that more care needs to be taken to screen out persons with histories of mental instability, and to train leaders better. Dr. Julian Silverman, a psychologist who heads Esalen's program at Big Sur, agrees that much damage has been done in groups and says, “We are very concerned about getting better training of leaders.”

Dr. Bernard Rappaport, a psychiatrist at Esalen who has written two survey papers on the movement for the National Institute of Mental Health, argues that “the benefits far out shadow the casualties,” but he agrees that reservations and cautions are good. ‘We need an ethic of responsibility,” he says.

“Now the approach is much gentler,” said Mr. Levy of the Association for Humanistic Psychology. “There is less encouragement of coercive approaches. Big wild breakthroughs are exciting to watch for a while, but not all that productive. People are respecting the dignity of others.”

"That meaning of sacred dogmas... must always be maintained which Holy Mother Church declared once and for all, nor should one ever depart from that meaning under the guise of or in the name of a more advanced understanding."

First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius

Doctrinal Development leads to Dogma; Dogma leads to other necessary truths

“Certainly there is to be development and on the largest scale. Who can be so grudging to men, so full of hate for God, as to try to prevent it? But it must truly be development of the faith, not alteration of the faith. Development means that each thing expands to be itself, while alteration means that a thing is changed from one thing into another. The understanding, knowledge and wisdom of one and all, of individuals as well as of the whole Church, ought then to make great and vigorous progress with the passing of the ages and the centuries, but only along its own line of development, that is, with the same doctrine, the same meaning and the same import.”

St. Vincent of Lèrins

COMMENT: Change can be either accidental (a “development” according to St. Vincent) or substantial (an “alteration” according to St. Vincent). A boy growing to manhood constitutes a series of accidental changes. A boy changing into a dog constitutes a substantial change and this only happens in Hollywood fantasy. A sinner becoming a saint is an accidental change and this is an accidental change that the Neo-modernist heretics refuse to make. They instead want the Church to substantially change into an institution that will accommodate their love and complacency in sin. Pope Francis, for example, says that the morality of capital punishment has evolved to the point that it is now known to be intrinsically evil in that it is ‘opposed to the dignity of man and contrary to the spirit of the gospel.’ Capital punishment changing from a morally permissible to intrinsically evil act constitutes a substantial change and therefore impossible as a legitimate development. There are many reasons why Neo-modernists, like Pope Francis and his conciliarists predecessors, deny the reality of substance but this is an important one. Trying to enroll St. Vincent of Lèrins in their defense is not a misunderstanding but just another lie.

COMMENT: There are now over 400 Jewish organizations that profess that abortion is necessary in the practice of their religion. This means that with the imposition of abortion mandates, the Jewish religion was imposed as a national state religion in the U.S.A.

Jewish groups blast the end of Roe as a violation of their religious beliefs NPR | Joe Hernandez

While some have celebrated justices' decision striking down Roe v. Wade as a win for religious freedom, some religious Jews say prohibitions on abortion violate their religious beliefs.

Interpretations vary across Judaism, but some religious Jews believe that a fetus is part of the parent's body and that a baby is only considered a person once it takes its first breath.

According to the Women's Rabbinic Network, some of the religion's most sacred texts view a fetus as a soul only once it's born.

"Therefore, forcing someone to carry a pregnancy that they do not want or that endangers their life is a violation of Jewish law because it prioritizes a fetus over the living adult who is pregnant," the group said in a statement.

"This must be understood as a violation of the United States Constitution which guarantees our freedom to practice our religion and also our freedom from the dictates of other religions," it added.

A number of Jewish organizations blasted the opinion, arguing that it would lead to religious violations against Jews.

"Jewish tradition prioritizes the safety of women carrying a child," the American Jewish Committee said in a statement. "Overturning abortion access, as numerous states already have, denies individuals health care options consistent with their religious beliefs, including many in the Jewish community, thereby presenting issues of religious freedom and privacy." [....]

Baptism alone unites the individual Faithful to Christ

The death of Christ is the universal cause of man’s salvation: but a universal cause has to be applied to particular effects. Thus it was found necessary for certain remedies to be administered to men by way of bringing Christ’s death into proximate connection with them. Such remedies are the Sacraments of the Church. And these remedies had to be administered with certain visible signs: -- first, because God provides for man, as for other beings, according to his condition; and it is the condition of man’s nature to be led through sensible things to things spiritual and intelligible: secondly, because instruments must be proportioned to the prime cause; and the prime and universal cause of man’s salvation is the Word Incarnate: it was convenient therefore that the remedies, through which that universal cause reaches men, should resemble the cause in this, that divine power works invisibly through visible signs.

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra gentiles, Book IV, Chap. 56.

How Far Modern Judaism is identified with Freemasonry

Although the Jewish role in Freemasonry is for many reasons difficult to deal with, some acquaintance with that aspect of the subject is essential for an intelligent grasp of the whole. It is a common belief among Catholics and others that Freemasonry is somehow or other closely associated with modern Judaism. Our present purpose is to discuss how far such a belief is well-founded, and what is the nature of the relations between the two. We may say at once that the available evidence points at least to the following general conclusions: 1) That much of the external trappings of Freemasonry, such as its ritual, its terminology, its legends, etc., are of Jewish origin; 2) that the philosophy or religion of esoteric Freemasonry (that is of the inner circles and controlling power) is practically identical with the doctrines of the Jewish Cabala, which is the religion of philosophy of a certain section of the Jews; 3) that a certain group, probably very few in number, but of immense influence and power, are leading Freemasons; and 4) that a somewhat larger group of very influential Jews pursue the same ends as Freemasons, and use similar means, and are at least in close alliance with them.

Rev. E. Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, 1930.

“Naturalism is more than a heresy: it is pure undiluted anti-christianism. Heresy denies one or more dogmas; Naturalism denies that there are any dogmas or that there can be any. Heresy alters more or less what God has revealed; Naturalism denies the very existence of revelation. It follows that the inevitable law and the obstinate passion of Naturalism is to dethrone Our Lord Jesus Christ and to drive Him from the world. This will be the task of Antichrist and it is Satan's supreme ambition.... The great obstacle to the salvation of the men of our day, as the Vatican I Council points out in the first Constitution of Doctrine, what hurls more people into hell nowadays than at any other epoch, is Rationalism or Naturalism... Naturalism strives with all its might to exclude Our Lord Jesus Christ, Our One Master and Saviour, from the minds of men as well as from the daily lives and habits of peoples, in order to set up the reign of reason or of nature. Now, wherever the breath of Naturalism has passed, the very source of Christian life is dried up. Naturalism means complete sterility in regard to salvation and eternal life.”

Cardinal Pie of Poitiers (1850-1880), considered as principle theologian of the social Kingship of Jesus Christ, his writing were on the night stand of St. Pius X.

COMMENT: Politics is concerned with the organization of life within a community. Liberalism is Naturalism in politics. It begins by denying Original Sin and presupposes natural goodness. It is then faced with the reality of fallen human nature and objective sin for which it is at a loss to comprehend. It consequently is constantly theorizing alternative causes for sin such as racism, sexism, feminism, etc. and proposing legal and social solutions such as communism which necessarily lead to ruin. Yet never to be dismayed, the Liberal always blames the failure of his programs on others who did not follow their plan of action with enough purity, with enough rigor, for sufficient time. Current articles from the Jesuit magazine, America, posted on their web site include: The Devastating Effect of Conversion Therapy on LGBT Catholics; Should Catholic Schools Teach Critical Race Theory?; Father James Martin (homosexual advocate) reviews a new little show called 'Friends.'; What Catholics can do to fight Islamophobia; Is it safe to bring my unvaccinated, unmasked 10-month-old to Mass? The Jesuits, who are responsible for the spiritual formation of Pope Francis, are Catholic apostates who have embraced Naturalism. Baptism should be considered an absolute impediment to joining the Order.

Novus Ordo Church: The Lesser and Disordered Good

"A good proportionate to the common condition of human nature is found in many..., but the good that is above the common condition of nature is a small number... And since eternal bliss, consisting in the vision of God, surpasses the common condition of nature, there are but a few who are saved. And this shows the mercy of God that raises some to that salvation that the majority of men do not attain." St. Thomas Aquinas

COMMENT: All that God has created is good coming from that hand of God. All creation is hierarchically directed to the glory of the greatest good which is God Himself. Man is created in the image of God which consists in the spiritualization of a soul with the powers of reason and will. The reason of man is directed to know truth and the will of man is created to choose good. Man fails to obtain salvation when he lives on lies and thus the good he chooses is not good enough. It is not a good enough because it is a good that has a disordered reference to God and a disordered reference to God's creation. It is a disordered lie. Every saint commenting on the number saved says that very few men are saved. Jesus Christ said that the way of salvation is straight and the gate narrow while the way to damnation is broad and the gate wide. We are to strive to enter by the narrow gate with the few and turn away from the many. The narrow gate demands that the reason adheres to truth and the will to the greatest good which is God. The Novus Ordo Church uniformly is complacent and satisfied with lies and "a good proportionate to the common condition of human nature found in many." There is no possibility for salvation for anyone who is satisfied with lies and a lesser disordered "good proportionate to the common condition of human nature."

BEAKING NEWS:

Archbishop Viganò accuses Pope Francis of ‘the same abuses’ as Cardinal McCarrick

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò has taken to social media to accuse Pope Francis of 'committing the same abuses' as the notorious Cardinal McCarrick, an allegation he says was 'personally confided' to him by a 'former novice' of Francis.

LifeSiteNews | Wed May 29, 2024 — In a social media post on Wednesday, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò accused Pope Francis, who he refers to by his surname Bergoglio, of committing “the same abuses” as the notorious, now-laicized Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. 

On 23 June 2013 when I met Bergoglio at the Domus Sanctæ Marthæ – as already extensively reported in my Memorial of August 22, 2018 – he asked me ex abrupto: «What is Cardinal McCarrick like?»

“I replied to him: ‘Holy Father, I don’t know if you know Cardinal McCarrick, but if you ask the Congregation for Bishops, there is a dossier this big. He corrupted generations of seminarians…,'” the former U.S. apostolic nuncio continued, adding that “Bergoglio remained impassive and completely changed the subject.”

“His reaction is not surprising,” Archbishop Viganò wrote. “Bergoglio himself committed the same abuses when he was Master of Novices of the Society of Jesus in Argentina, as personally confided to me by one of his former novices.”

Concluding, the archbishop stated: 

Bergoglio does not want to oust homosexual seminarians and priests: he rather wants to complete the work of infiltration and corruption of the clergy through homosexuality and pedophilia, so that by declassifying the serious sinfulness of sodomy and corruption of minors the door opens on the civil front to decriminalization of these crimes. On the other hand, the same scurrilous terminology typical of the environments that the Argentine Jesuit deplores in words, betrays his familiarity with corrupt people accustomed to speaking to him in this way.

The protection and promotions granted to countless corrupt and perverted cardinals, bishops and priests; the buses of transvestites invited on several occasions to the Vatican; private hearings for transsexual and homosexual couples in concubinage; the scandalous LGBTQ+ media spotlight granted to James Martin, S.J.; the shameful promotion of Tucho Fernandez to Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith; the recent appointments of two Canons of Santa Maria Maggiore who are known throughout the city of Rome as homosexuals, all confirm Bergoglio’s membership of the lobby to which he owes his nomination (and I am deliberately not calling it his ‘election’).

LifeSiteNews has reached out to Archbishop Viganò to determine what specifically he is accusing Francis of doing but has yet to receive a reply. 

As for McCarrick, he was once one of the most influential prelates in the United States. Ordained by New York’s Cardinal Francis Spellman in 1958, he was eventually named archbishop of Washington in 2000 and a cardinal in 2001. After retiring, the then-cardinal maintained his influence as a globe-trotting fundraiser.

His ecclesiastical career came to a definitive end only in 2017, after a credible allegation that he had sexually molested a teenage boy was received by the Archdiocese of New York. It was then discovered by the public that rumors of his predatory behavior had swirled around Church circles for decades and that settlements had been made to victims.

McCarrick was laicized in 2019 after a Vatican investigation concluded that he had sexually abused both children and adults, including young priests and seminarians.

COMMENT: This IS NOT really "breaking news" but rather authoritative confirmation of what has been common knowledge for years! Just this past month (May 2024), Pope Francis held his first ever last "World Day for Children" which featured a trans-sexual male drag dancer to entertain thousands of children. I would not even let Pope Francis the Pervert pet my dog. Jesus Christ began and ended His public life by cleansing the temple. That this will happen again is certain. Pray God that it be soon.

LOCAL NEWS Harrisburg Diocese:

Lebanon Parish Celebrates Vocation of Sister Margaret Bender, the Last Religious Sister in the Community

The Catholic Witness | Vasandra Chesser | May 31, 2024

Sister Margaret Bender is currently the last religious Sister in Lebanon County, one of the Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, who have served in the Diocese of Harrisburg for over 100 years. With Sister Margaret’s retirement at the end of May, her longstanding presence in the Lebanon community is being celebrated, along with the fruits of her ministry. [.....]

The Sisters of St. Francis of Philadelphia, which included Sister Margaret’s own aunt among the congregation, serve in a variety of ministries, including in schools, hospitals and orphanages. The orphanages, located in New Jersey and Massachusetts, were of special meaning for Sister Margaret specifically, as that is where her aunt served. As those children grew up, they still remembered her aunt and kept in touch, sending her cards and letters as they moved throughout their lives. It was a clear sign of how much of a positive impact she had on those children, just as Sister Margaret has had a positive impact on the Lebanon community. [.....]

“One could say it’s a sad day for the city of Lebanon. Sister Margaret represents the last religious Sister in the entire county. When Sister came here, back in the 1970s, there were other communities of Sisters, and we’re grateful for them,” Father Laicha said, adding, “When we think about it, so many Sisters resided here in the community of Lebanon, and we are better for them. And so it is sad to see our dear Sister leave us. We should take pause hearing this. I believe it’s an important opportunity for all of us to pray for vocations for our Diocese, and yes, my friends, for the whole Church. Nothing would make me prouder to see, once again, a young girl in our parish enter religious life.”

Father Laicha said that Sister Margaret’s simple life, dedicated to the Church, was one to emulate. He concluded, “This parish is indeed very proud of you, and yes, all that you have accomplished and represent as a religious Sister of St. Francis. St. Cecilia’s is going to be very different, Sister Margaret, without your presence.”

COMMENT: "The last religious Sister in Lebanon County" receiving 'communion-in-the-hand' in her farewell Novus Ordo celebrating the death of all religious nuns in Lebanon has yet to see the connection between what she is doing in this picture and the dissolution of all religious nuns in Lebanon County, Diocese of Harrisburg. The priest Fr. Michael Laicha of St. Cecilia Parish is equally stupid. This is the fruit of Vatican II and those that dismiss this destruction with such slogans as "time is greater than space" richly deserve the punishment that awaits them. Jesus Christ warned His faithful saying, "By their fruit you shall known them." Well, we know them. We see clearly their blinded minds, their corrupted wills and their wooden hearts. They have made a career of destoying the immemorial traditions of the Catholic faith alone by which the faith can be known and communicated to others. They are reaping what they have sown.

Understanding Impact of Trauma and Supporting Survivors is Focus of Annual Clergy Day

The Catholic Witness | Jen Reed | May 31, 2024

Father Kenneth Schmidt, director of the Trauma Recovery Program from the Diocese of Kalamazoo, Michigan, was the guest presenter for Clergy Day. He spoke to the Diocesan priests about the impact of childhood trauma and why its effects are so long-lasting.

Consciously or unconsciously, survivors of trauma seek safe places to reveal their pain and seek healing. When priests are trained to effectively receive and respond, survivors can find the help they need and desire.

That’s the message Father Kenneth Schmidt, Director of the Trauma Recovery Program, told priests of the Diocese of Harrisburg during a recent presentation on ministering to survivors of trauma.

The Trauma Recovery Program, sponsored by the Diocese of Kalamazoo, was established in 2002 as an initial response to the clergy sexual abuse crisis and the subsequent Charter for the Protection of Children and Young people, which set forth procedures and guidelines for prevention of abuse and healing for survivors.

Before long, the 10-week program of small-group sessions for survivors of abuse by clergy attracted many others who were suffering with other types of trauma from childhood events, and so the program expanded to help restore the lives of those individuals as well. [.....]

COMMENT: "Trauma Recovery Program" established in response to the sexual abuse of minors by clerics and administered by those who did the trauma, those who covered the trauma up, those who refuse to identify the true cause of the trauma as homosexual clerics committing the sin of pederasty, and those who still refuse to remove homosexuals from clerical state and prohibit their admission into seminaries. This is a cheap public relations gimmick. There can be no cure without an accurate diagnosis. Question: Is this part of the reorganization plan that moved the Diocese of Harrisburg out of bankruptcy? Is this the part of the restructuring that is supposed to assure the court and the public that the problems that caused the moral corruption in the Diocese and its subsequent insolvency from legal claims are adequately and effectively being addressed?

Modernists and Neo-Modernists are willfully blind to Essence, that is, they are in the end the most heatless of all!

Here is my secret. It is very simple. It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; What is essential is invisible to the eye.

Antoine de Saint Exupéry, The Little Prince

Pope Francis says ‘conservative’ bishops have ‘suicidal attitude’ & ‘Deniers of climate change’ are ‘foolish’ during 60 Minutes interview

In a recent CBS interview: Certain of the U.S. episcopate have been notable in defending elements of Catholic teaching, often in seeming juxtaposition to Francis’ own stance – including such men as Bishop Joseph Strickland and Cardinal Raymond Burke. 

Pope Francis, labeled skeptics of the climate change narrative as ‘foolish’ for not believing ‘research.’

LifeSiteNews | VATICAN CITY | Michael Haynes | May 17, 2024 — Pope Francis has described “conservative” bishops as having a “suicidal attitude” due to being closed “inside a dogmatic box.”

“A Conservative is one who clings to something and does not want to see beyond that,” Francis said in response to a question about “conservative bishops in the United States” the CBS “60 Minutes” interviewer described as opposing Francis’ “efforts to revisit teachings and traditions.” 

“It is a suicidal attitude because one thing is to take Tradition into account and to consider situations from the past, but quite another is to be closed up inside a dogmatic box,” continued Francis.

His comments were part of an hour-long interview with CBS’s Norah O’Donnell. Conducted in late April, a small segment of the interview was released at the time, with the full hour to be aired on CBS this Sunday and Monday. 

In a previous clip from the interview, Francis denigrated critics of climate change argument as “foolish.”

“There are people who are foolish, and foolish even if you show them research; they don’t believe it,” Francis declared. “Why? Because they don’t understand the situation or because of their interest, but climate change exists.”

In contrast, Dr. John Clauser – Nobel Prize winner in Physics in 2022 alongside two other scientists, for his work in the field of quantum mechanics – has argued that “misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience.” 

“In turn,” he added, “the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists. In my opinion, there is no real climate crisis.”

Responding to the latest clip, a former U.S. Papal Nuncio, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, supported Francis’ statement. “For once Bergoglio is absolutely right: conservatism wants to ‘preserve’ the outward appearances of Tradition without the doctrinal substance that makes it alive,” he said. 

Conservatism is the attitude of those who criticize the excesses of the synodical church but are careful not to question its causes, which are to be found in Vatican II. Conservatism is really a “suicidal behavior” because it creates an artificial “dogmatic box,” made of Novus Ordo ad orientem with Roman chasubles and Gregorian chants and also of Vetus Ordo; made of selected quotations of some conciliar documents, accidentally not contrasting with the Catholic Magisterium of all time; made of the apotheosis of John Paul II and the regret of Benedict XVI, whom we all loved.

Continuing, Viganò differed with Francis with regard to Tradition, saying that “Tradition is not conservatism; Tradition is not a ‘dogmatic box’ because it draws from the clear and pure water of the divine source, drawing from Grace and fidelity to the Gospel and the Depositum Fidei the lifeblood that makes it capable of looking to the future without denying the past.”

COMMENT: Pope Francis is boring. Now that his ideology and modus operandi have been sufficiently exposed there is no depth to the man or his mind. He is an intellectual fraud. His goofy stupid style has long been played out. The only reason for giving him media coverage is for the enemies of Jesus Christ to mock the Catholic Church. A comment is in order regarding Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò's response.

There is a confusion of terminology that needs to be clarified. Francis is attacking "conservative" Catholics, not Catholics faithful to tradition which is a necessary attribute of any Catholic who hopes to obtain salvation. It is true that Traditional Catholics are in fact locked in a "dogmatic box". Dogma is divine revelation that has been formally defined by the God Himself through the Magisterium of His Church. It is a divine truth with the added attribute of precision and clarity of definition directed to all the faithful. Dogma is formulated for the mind of man as the most intelligible truth knowable from which other truths may confidently be deduced. Dogma is the formal object of divine and Catholic faith and constitutes the proximate rule of faith for all the faithful. Heresy is defined as the denial of dogma.

It would be absurd to criticize a mathematician as being "closed in a dogmatic box" because he held to the truth that 2+3=5. It is absurd because conforming the mind to reality is NOT mentally restrictive but, on the contrary, expansive and opens the possibility of true intellectual development. The certainty of dogmatic truth is more certain than the mathematical truth that 2+3=5 because dogma is directly revealed by God and not indirectly deduced from God's natural law. For Francis dogmatic truth is a "box" because He holds the revelation of God in contempt and regards it as of no greater authority than another dated ideology.

The trouble with conservative Catholics is that they do NOT cling to dogma as a definitive truth revealed by God but, on the contrary, they are infected with the Neo-modernist heresy that believes that there exists perennial truths and human accretions in dogma that must be developed and refined over time. Francis is incorrect in making that accusation that conservative Catholics are bound to dogmatic truth.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò agrees with Francis that conservative are in a "dogmatic box" because conservative Catholics only want the trappings of tradition without the doctrinal substance. He characterizes the mindless clinging to Vatican II teachings as a "dogmatic box". The problem is is that is not what Francis means by "dogmatic box" and it only confuses the matter by using the term "dogma" equivocally.

Archbishop Viganò is absolutely correct in saying that conservative Catholics only want the trapping of tradition and deny its doctrinal substance.

The Authority of the Pope, as it is with every one of the faithful, is subject to the Faith and not vice versa as the Neo-Modernists would have it!

v “Peter is called a rock, and the foundations of the Church are planted in his faith.” St. Gregory of Nazianzen

v “Faith is the groundwork of the Church, because of the faith, and not of the person of Peter, it was said, that the gates of death should never prevail against it.” St. Ambrose

v “He (Christ) called him Peter, that is, the rock, and praised the foundations of the Church which was built on the Apostle’s faith. St. Augustine

v “Peter was made for us a living rock, on which, as on a foundation, the faith of the Lord rests, and on which the Church is erected.” St. Epiphanius

v “He (Christ) did not say Petrus, but Petra, because He did not build His Church upon the man, but upon the faith of Peter.” St. John Chrysostom

v “Peter so pleased the Lord by the sublimity of his faith, that, after being admitted to the fruition of bliss, he received the solidity of an immovable rock, on which the Church was so firmly built, as to bid defiance to the gates of hell and the laws of death. St. Leo the Great

v “On this rock, namely, on the unshaken faith, to which thou owest thy name, I will built my Church.” Caesarius the Cistercian

Quotations taken from Fr. F. X. Weninger, D.D., On the Apostolical and Infallible Authority of the Pope when teaching the faithful and on his relation to a General Council

God cannot be offered anything less than everything!

God is Sufficient to Himself and Does Not Need Any Creature:

Let us consider that the first reason why we are useless servants arises from the greatness, sufficiency and plenitude of God, Who calls Himself Sadai, that is, “sufficient to Himself,” because He is so sufficient to Himself and replete with good, that He has no need of us nor of any creature of heaven or earth. Even the God-Man, Jesus Christ our Lord, says: “I have said to the Lord: Thou art my God, for thou hast no need of my goods” (Ps 15, 2).

The fact that God has no need of our goods is an infallible mark of His divinity. That is why, when we offer or give anything to God, we sacrifice it to Him, that is, annihilate it before Him, to testify thereby that He has no need of anything. If anyone presented a valuable horse to a governor and were to kill the animal when offering it, the governor would not be pleased because the gift would be useless to him. But the greatest service we can render to God is to sacrifice and annihilate our offerings, to testify thereby that He has no need of them. This why Jesus Christ sacrificed Himself on the Cross. Now, if Jesus Christ is not necessary to God, and if all the angels and saints and the Blessed Virgin can say: “We are unprofitable servants,” with how much greater truth can we say it?

Let us rejoice that God is so replete with every conceivable good; let us be glad to be useless because He is quite sufficient to Himself.

St. John Eudes, Meditations on Various Subjects: 8th Meditation on Humility

External Profession of Faith

Both God and the Church command the external profession of faith.

The DIVINE PRECEPT to profess one’s faith externally is easily gathered from the words of St. Paul: “The heart has only to believe, we are to be justified; the lips have only to make confession, if we are to be saved” (Rom. x, 9-10), and it follows from the very nature man himself who must worship God not only with his mind but also with his body. This precept is both affirmative and negative in character. Its negative aspect forbids man to deny his faith externally, which he may do either directly—by formal infidelity—or indirectly, by some action which externally gives a clear indication of denial of faith even though the agent himself has no intention of denying his faith. Thus, for example, a person indirectly denies his faith by partaking of the Protestant communion even though in his own mind he does not believe that Christ is present in that communion. It is never permissible to deny one’s faith either directly or indirectly, because every denial of faith is a grave insult to God since it undermines the authority of God and the reverence due to Him. Hence Christ’s threat: “Whoever disowns me before men, before my Father in heaven I too will disown him” (Matt. X, 32). But although it is never lawful to deny one’s faith, occasions do arise when it is permissible to conceal or dissemble one’s faith, as will be explained later.

According to St. Thomas the divine precept obliges man to make an external profession of his faith when failure to do so would detract from the honour due to God or cause injury to the spiritual welfare of one’s neighbour.

1. The honour due to God demands an external profession of faith: a) when a man is questioned by public authority (not by private persons) about his faith; b) when a person is provoked even by private individuals through hatred of religion to a denial of his faith in word or deed.

2. The spiritual welfare of our neighbour requires an external profession of faith when grave scandal would ensue from its omission (v.g., Libellatici amongst the early Christians).

Dominic Prummer, Handbook Moral Theology

NOTE: Our immemorial ecclesiastical traditions are necessary attributes of the Faith because, without them, there can be no “external profession of the faith.”

“If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema.”

Council of Trent, Canon XIII, On the Sacraments

“The favorite comeback of progressives is that ‘the liturgy kept developing over time, so you can’t say that Catholics ‘always’ worshiped this or that way.’ But that is a superficial response. The deeper truth is that Catholics have always worshiped according to the liturgy they have received, and any development occurred within this fundamental assumption of the continuity of the rituals, chants, and texts. The work of the Consilium of the 1960s rejected (N.B. actually, rejected by Rev. Annibale Bugnini in 1948) this assumption in altering almost every aspect of the liturgy, adding and deleting material according to their own theories. Therefore what they produced is not and can never be an expression of Catholic tradition; it will always remain a foreign body.”

Peter Kwasniewski, Ph.D.

“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, Hertfordshire, London, The Talmud, 1878, from Introduction, p. 30

You must understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The October Revolution was not what you call in America the “Russian Revolution.” It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators. We cannot state that all Jews are Bolsheviks. But: without Jews there would have been no Bolshevism. For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish terrorists murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Nobel-Prize winning novelist, historian and victim of Jewish Bolshevism

“Neither Jewish ethics nor Jewish tradition can disqualify terrorism as a means of combat. We are very far from having any moral qualms as far as our national war goes. We have before us the command of the Torah, whose morality surpasses that of any other body of laws in the world: ‘Ye shall blot them out to the last man.’”

Yitzhak Shamir, Israeli Prime Minister 1986-1992, 1943 Quote taken from “Document: Shamir on Terrorism (1943)” Middle East Report 152

St. John Eudes: “That there is a special contract made between God and man in Baptism.”

THE name of contract is given to any agreement entered into by two or more persons, in which the parties contracting incur mutual obligations. This clearly shows that a contract. has been entered into by the most Blessed Trinity and you in Baptism; since you have incurred many obligations towards the Blessed Trinity, and the Blessed Trinity has also obliged itself in regard to you. What is the nature of this contract? It is a reciprocal contract of gifts, the highest and most entire that can “enter into the heart of man to conceive;” for in making it you are obliged to give yourself entirely and forever to God; you have renounced all things to be united to Him, and for Him, and God on his part has given Himself entirely to you. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, come to you and take up their abode in your soul, in order to confer honors and benefits on you. They enrich you ‘with spiritual treasures to render you worthy of their three divine Persons.

It is a contract of adoption, since God the Father has taken you for his child, and has conferred on you the right of his inheritance with his only Son, and you have taken God for your Father, and have promised to entertain for him all the love and respect which a child owes to a so good a parent. “Consider,” writes St. John the Evangelist, “what love the Father has testified to you in wishing that you should be called, and that you should, really, be his children.”

Behold the admirable effect of the contract which you have made with God in Baptism, from being the child of wrath and an heir of hell, you have become the child of God and an heir to heaven! What you should not do to acknowledge the infinite goodness of God in your regard?

It is a contract of alliance with the Son of God, since in receiving Baptism you have united yourself to him as to your head, your master, and your sovereign, and since the Son has taken you for His servant and one of the members of his body, which is his Church. How great is the goodness of God, says St. Paul to the newly converted Christians of Corinth; “By whom you arc called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”

What were you before Baptism but the unhappy slave of Satan, and subject like him to eternal punishment? But by Baptism you have been delivered from this unhappy subjection, through the divine alliance which you have contracted with Jesus Christ, which procures you the enjoyment of eternal happiness, if you observe all its conditions.

Finally, it is a contract of alliance with the Person of the Holy Ghost; for faith teaches us, that the Holy Ghost takes the Christian soul as his spouse, and that the Christian reciprocally takes the Holy Ghost for his spouse. In consequence of this sacred alliance, the Holy Ghost calls you “his sister and his spouse,” and as, of yourself, you are poor indeed, he adorns your soul with all the gifts necessary to render it worthy of him, and he comes to take up his abode in it, and to consecrate it as his temple and his sanctuary. […..]

When you had been presented to the church to receive Baptism, you were treated as a person in the possession of the devil, for the priest pronounced over you the exorcism of the church, commanding the wicked spirit to depart from you, and to give place to the Holy Ghost.

This ceremony teaches you that by original sin you were really in possession of the devil, and that he abided in you, but that, through Baptism, he has been cast out of you; that your soul has been purified from the horrible stain which disfigured it, and that the Holy Ghost, having sanctified and ornamented it with his grace, comes to take up his abode in it. […..]

That Baptism imprints in your soul a spiritual character, which no sin can efface. This character is a proof that from this time you do not belong to yourself, but that you are the property of Jesus Christ, who has purchased you by the infinite price of his blood and of his death. You are not of yourself, but you are of Christ’s therefore, St. Paul concludes, “that the Christian should no longer live for himself, but for Him who died and rose again for him;” that is to say, that the Christian should live a life of grace, and that he should consecrate to his Redeemer his spirit, his heart, and all his actions. […..]

The Priest introduced you into the Church, by saying, “Enter into the house of God, that you may have eternal life.” This ceremony teaches you that Baptism enables you to enter into the Society of Jesus Christ, and of all the faithful who compose the house or family of God. By this entry, you begin to partake of all the good works of the faithful and you acquire a right to the sacraments, to the prayers, and to all the other good works which are done in the Church. Moreover, in entering into the Church, you have become her child, and have been made a child of God, the heir of God, and co-heir of Jesus Christ; you entered into society and communion with the angels and all the blessed who are in Heaven. By this ceremony you are likewise taught that, in order to be united to Jesus Christ, and to have eternal life, it is necessary to be a member of the Church, and to persevere therein to the end, believing all she teaches, obeying all she commands.

St. John Eudes, excerpt from Man’s Contract with God in Baptism

COMMENT: St. John Eudes makes clear what every faithful Catholic should already know, that is, it is by virtue of the sacrament of Baptism received with Faith that makes a person a Child of God. The Neo-modernist popes since Vatican II heretically teach that everyone is a child of God by virtue of the Incarnation of the Logos, the Word becoming flesh, where the second Person of the Trinity, by personally uniting Himself with our human nature, thereby elevated all humanity to being children of God by virtue of this shared humanity. For them, Baptism is only an outward sign signifying what has already taken place. It reduces Baptism from a performative sign that is necessity of means for salvation to a simple necessity of precept which obligates only those who feel some inner compulsion to obey. It is this fundamental corruption of revealed truth that makes modern ecumenism with such events as the blasphemous “Prayer Meeting at Assisi” possible. For them the “spiritual character” imprinted on the soul at Baptism is meaningless. The “spiritual character” is both the sign of and cause of the adoption as Sons of God. The character is like a receptacle that makes the reception of the sacramental grace of adoption possible. Those who have the character of the sacrament without the sanctifying grace of adoption will suffer the greatest torments of all in hell.

It is an unfortunate fact that the many traditional Catholics and conservative Catholics believe this tripe and profess that any “good-willed” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. can be a child of God, a member of the Church, a temple of the Holy Ghost and an heir to heaven by virtue of being a “good” Protestant, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist, etc., etc. This error is derived essentially from the more fundamental error of denying Dogma as Dogma, by overturning Dogma in its very nature. For these Neo-modernists, Dogma is not the revealed truth of God but only a human axiom open to unending refinement and new interpretations.

But the truth is that Dogma is divine revelation formally and infallibly defined by the Magisterium of the Church. It is irreformable in both the truth it declares 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.

Pope Francis called for a 'new global financial charter' by 2025 that would be centered on climate change and 'ecological debt' in a keynote address at the Vatican-organized 'Climate Crisis to Climate Resilience' conference.

LifeSiteNews | VATICAN CITY | Michael Haynes May 16, 2024 – Addressing a Vatican-hosted climate change conference, Pope Francis called for a “new global financial charter” by 2025 that would be centered on climate change and “ecological debt.”

“There is a need to develop a new financial architecture capable of responding to the demands of the Global South and of the island states that have been seriously affected by climate catastrophes,” Pope Francis said on Thursday, May 16.

Outlining a three-fold action plan to respond to the “planetary crisis,” Francis told the participants that any such action must be centered around financial action. 

“The restructuring and reduction of debt, together with the development of a new global financial charter by 2025, acknowledging a sort of ecological debt – we must work on this term: ecological debt – can be of great assistance in mitigating climate changes,” he said, appearing to allude to an already existing but as yet unpublished charter.

The Pope’s three-fold plan also highlighted his call for “policy changes” based on climate adherence and the reduction of warming, fossil fuel reliance, and carbon dioxide: 

First, a universal approach and swift and decisive action is needed, capable of producing policy changes and decisions. Second, we need to reverse the curve of warming, seeking to halve the rate of warming in the short space of a quarter of a century. At the same time, we need to aim for global de-carbonization, eliminating the dependence on fossil fuels. 

Third, large quantities of carbon dioxide must be removed from the atmosphere through environmental management spanning several generations.

Francis’ call for finance-related policies to implement climate change goals will have been met especially warmly by certain attendees of the Vatican’s conference. Among the numerous participants and speakers at the three-day event were ardent pro-climate change advocates California Gov. Gavin Newsom, London Mayor Sadiq Khan, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Massachusetts lesbian Gov. Maura Healey, along with academics and politicians from South America, Africa, Italy, and Taiwan.

Newsom and Khan – both of whom have implemented sweeping and highly controversial measures in the name of climate change – spoke respectively on “The Gold Standard – Climate Leadership in the Golden State” and “Governance in the Age of Climate Change.” Khan also wrote in the U.K.’s The Tablet that he joins his voice to that of Francis “to support climate resilience efforts and advocate for climate justice.”

Green finance for the future

While no further details were given about the charter Pope Francis referred to, in recent years increased attention has been paid to coordinating climate policies with finance, performing “debt for nature swaps” in line with the World Economic Forum’s policies, and addressing “ecological debt” itself, which is a term itself employed regularly by Francis. 

Last October 4, Francis published a second part to his 2015 environmental encyclical letter Laudato Si’ in the form of the Apostolic Exhortation Laudate Deum, in which he issued stark calls for “obligatory” measures across the globe to address the issue of “climate change.”

COMMENT: Warnings of the New Ice Age where the common party line in the 1960s. Then the Climate Ideology Central Command directed everyone to drop Global Freezing and switch to Global Warming because the data did not support global freezing. After years of Global Warming hysteria the Climate Ideology Central Command directed everyone to drop Global Warming because of insufficient date to support the claim and switch to Climate Change which is a much more nebulous term that anything can be attributed to and, best of all, requires no data at all. Around 2018 the Climate Ideology Central Command instituted a new slogan: "System Change NOT Climate Change" which is nothing but an open admission that the real purpose of Climate Ideology was always political, financial and monetary control on a global scale which many have been saying from the beginning.

All of Francis' "System Change NOT Climate Change" friends are militant endorsers of abortion and euthanasia who call for a world population of 500 million. Or to express it conversely, they want to see 7.5 billion people eliminated. His friends are part of what Fr. Dennis Fahey politely called "organized naturalism" that has revealed itself to be purely demonic pagan earth worship. There is no possibility of even a system of commutative and distributive justice based upon natural law.

Francis has made common cause with the enemies of Jesus Christ the King.

[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

Only Those in the State of Grace Can Be “Numbered Among the Children of God.”

Saying within themselves, repenting, and groaning for anguish of spirit: These are they, whom we had some time in derision, and for a parable of reproach. We fools esteemed their life madness, and their end without honour. Behold how they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints. Therefore we have erred from the way of truth, and the light of justice hath not shined unto us, and the sun of understanding hath not risen upon us. We wearied ourselves in the way of iniquity and destruction, and have walked through hard ways, but the way of the Lord we have not known. What hath pride profited us? or what advantage hath the boasting of riches brought us? All those things are passed away like a shadow, and like a post that runneth on, And as a ship that passeth through the waves: whereof when it is gone by, the trace cannot be found, nor the path of its keel in the waters: Or as when a bird flieth through the air, of the passage of which no mark can be found, but only the sound of the wings beating the light air, and parting it by the force of her flight; she moved her wings, and hath flown through, and there is no mark found afterwards of her way: Or as when an arrow is shot at a mark, the divided air presently cometh together again, so that the passage thereof is not known: So we also being born, forthwith ceased to be: and have been able to shew no mark of virtue: but are consumed in our wickedness. Such things as these the sinners said in hell: For the hope of the wicked is as dust, which is blown away with the wind, and as a thin froth which is dispersed by the storm: and a smoke that is scattered abroad by the wind: and as the remembrance of a guest of one day that passeth by.

Wisdom 5:3-15

Iconoclasm Revisited: The Great Neo-Modernist Heresy – The belief that there exists a merely accidental relationship between the “revealed truths” and the dogmatic “manner of stating those truths and theological doctrines.”

Students must learn to distinguish between on the one hand revealed truths, which all require the same assent of faith, and on the other hand the manner of stating those truths and theological doctrines. As far as the formulation of revealed truths is concerned, account will be taken of what is said by, among others, the declaration of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Mysterium Ecclesiae, n. 5: “The truths which the Church intends actually to teach through its dogmatic formularies are, without doubt, distinct from the changing conceptions proper to a given age and can be expressed without them, but it can nonetheless happen that they will be expressed by the magisterium, in terms that bear traces of those conceptions. Account having been taken of these considerations, it must also be said that from the beginning the dogmatic formularies of the magisterium have always been appropriate for communicating revealed truth and that, remaining unchanged, they will always communicate it to those who interpret them properly”. Students should therefore learn to make the distinction between the “deposit of faith itself or the truths which are contained in our venerable doctrine”, and the way in which these truths are formulated; between the truths to be proclaimed and the various ways of perceiving them and shedding light upon them; between the apostolic Tradition and strictly ecclesiastical traditions, and at the same time they should learn to recognize and respect the permanent value of dogmatic formulations. From the time of their philosophical formation, students should be prepared to appreciate the legitimate diversity in theology which derives from the different methods and language theologians use in penetrating the divine mysteries. From which it follows that different theological formulations are often more complementary than contradictory.

The Ecumenical Directory

NOTE: The full title of the “Ecumenical Directory” is Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism. It was approved by Pope John Paul II on March 25, 1993 and published on June 8 by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity as a general executive decree of the Catholic Church. It supplanted the Directory for the Application of the Decisions of the Second Vatican Council Concerning Ecumenical Matters, issued during the pontificate of Pope Paul VI.

From Adam to this day, divine worship that is acceptable to God has always been, without exception, the creation of God.

Christ chose the Cenacle In which to celebrate the Passover, because there lived, died, and were buried Melchisedech, David, Solomon and all the kings of David’s family till the Babylonian Captivity.

Melchisedech comes into history under this name in the account of the four Mesopotamian kings, who went into Palestine, captured Lot, Abraham’s nephew, and started for home. Abraham roused his servants, fell on them at night, rescued Lot, took their spoils, and returning passed by Salem, as Jerusalem then was named.

“But Melchisedech, the king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was a priest of the most high God, blessed him and said: ‘Blessed be the most high God by whose protection thy enemies are in thy band.’ And be gave him tithes of all.”

Here for the first time in Holy Writ we find a priest “of the most high God” offering the “bread and wine” of the Passover and Mass. Eight centuries of silence pass, and 1,100 years before Christ, David wrote of Christ’s priesthood: “Thou are a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech.” Then this great pontiff-king appears no more, in Holy Writ, till St. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews mentions him eight times as a type of Christ. [.....]

But here for the first time in history, comes forth another order of priests, this mysterious Melchisedech offering bread and wine of the Last Supper and Mass. To him Abraham offered tithes—the tenth part of the fruits of his victory. Therefore Melchisedech’s priesthood was higher than that of Abraham; it was to be eternal; it pointed to Christ’s priesthood of the Last Supper and of the Catholic Church. The whole prophetic scene in that vale beside the sacred city was emblematic of the future.

[.....] Who was Melchisedech? St. Paul says: “Without father, without mother without genealogy, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life, but likened unto the Son of God, continueth a priest forever.”

Fr. James L. Meagher, D.D., How Christ Said the First Mass

To live together as brother and sister? Of course I have high respect for those who are doing this. But it’s a heroic act, and heroism is not for the average Christian. I would say that people must do what is possible in their situation. We cannot as human beings always do the ideal, the best. We must do the best possible in a given situation. Cardinal Kasper, Commonweal, May 7, 2016

If a divorced and remarried person is truly sorry that he or she failed in the first marriage, if the commitments from the first marriage are clarified and a return is definitively out of the question, if he or she cannot undo the commitments that were assumed in the second civil marriage without new guilt, if he or she strives to the best of his or her abilities to live out the second civil marriage on the basis of faith and to raise their children in the faith, if he or she longs for the sacraments as a source of strength in his or her situation, do we then have to refuse or can we refuse him or her the sacrament of penance and communion, after a period of reorientation? [.....]

Cardinal Walter Kasper, The Gospel of the Family

Pope Francis makes the error of Kasper his own!

49. In such difficult situations of need, the Church must be particularly concerned to offer understanding, comfort and acceptance, rather than imposing straightaway a set of rules that only lead people to feel judged and abandoned by the very Mother called to show them God’s mercy. Rather than offering the healing power of grace and the light of the Gospel message, some would “indoctrinate” that message, turning it into “dead stones to be hurled at others.”

122. We should not however confuse different levels: there is no need to lay upon two limited persons the tremendous burden of having to reproduce perfectly the union existing between Christ and his Church, for marriage as a sign entails “a dynamic process…, one which advances gradually with the progressive integration of the gifts of God.”

Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia

Rene Descartes, the Catholic, and Immanuel Kant, the Protestant, the twin pillars of modern philosophical atheism!

“I cannot forgive Descartes; in all his philosophy he did his best to dispense with God. But he could not avoid making Him set the world in motion with a flip of His thumb; after that he had no more use for God.”

Blaise Pascal, Pensees

“The Jews are enemies of God and foes of our holy religion.”

St. Pio of Pietrelicina

Calvary of Padre Pio by Joseph Pagnossin, 1978 Padua, Italy, page 91

Did one of the main Vatican II documents distort the Words of Our Lord in the Gospel?

Those who wish to apply a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ to Vatican II, or who deny that there can be any opposition or rupture between the documents of that council and Catholic tradition, or who claim that the assertion that the authentic teachings of Vatican II formally contradict the tradition of the Church is false, might consider the following passage from the council’s pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes:

Gaudium et Spes 24: ‘Quapropter dilectio Dei et proximi primum et maximum mandatum est.’

For non-Latinists, this claim (it is a complete sentence in the conciliar document) can be translated as follows: ‘For love of God and of neighbour is the first and greatest commandment’. No Latin is needed to realize that this is a flat contradiction of the teaching of Christ. There is a deliberate allusion in Gaudium et Spes 24 to the wording of the divine teaching it is contradicting, as can be seen from looking at the Vulgate text of that teaching:

Matthew 22:35-39: “Et interrogavit eum unus ex eis legis doctor, temptans eum; ‘Magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege? Ait illi Iesus: ‘diliges Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, et in tota anima tua, et in tota mente tua. Hoc est maximum et primum mandatum. Secundum autem simile est huic: diliges proximum tuum, sicut teipsum.’”

This text from Gaudium et Spes suffices to prove that the teachings of the Second Vatican Council are not without error, and that fidelity to Christ’s teaching requires that parts of it be rejected. It is also a fruitful starting point for reflection and investigation into the ideology and motivations of the progressive leadership of that council, and into the degree to which the Council Fathers as a whole accepted their responsibility for preserving the divine deposit of faith. (This text was pointed out to me by a Catholic professor of theology who must remain anonymous.)

Dr. John Lamont, posted by Rorate Caeli

Jewish neo-con foreign policy which seeks to rule the world has produced one disaster after another for its "friend" the United States and nothing but death and destruction for everyone else. 165 of 195 nations of the world, including India and China with 35% of the world’s population, have refused to join in sanctioning Russia, leaving the U.S., not Russia, relatively isolated and friendless. Millions have died in Serbia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Ukraine and now Gaza costing trillions of dollars without any geopolitical benefit whatsoever to those paying for it including their indebted children, their indebted children's children, their indebted children's children's children, etc. etc.

“We endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global power.”

Wolfowitz Doctrine, articulated in 1992 by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under Secretary of Defense, which became the guiding principle for Neo-con foreign policy strategy for world domination in a “unipolar” world. This is what is meant by Francis Fukuyama’s 1992 book, The End of History and the Last Man, celebrating “the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.” 

The Yankee rules of engagement for prosecuting war has a long and unvarying history!

“We make war only upon armed men, and we cannot take vengeance for the wrongs our people have suffered without lowering ourselves in the eyes of all those whose abhorrence has been excited by the atrocities of our enemies, and offending against God to whom vengeance belongs.”

General Robert E. Lee, to the Army of Northern Virginia, after U.S. Generals Sherman and Sheridan subjected civilian populations in the South to rape, looting, burning their homes and slaughtering livestock, leaving women and children unprotected from winter and starvation. 

Traditional Carmelite Nun Starts New Discalced Community in Florida

CatholicFamilyNews | Brian Mershon | April 29, 2024

SAVANNAH, Georgia — Sister Loretta-Maria of the Blessed Trinity and the Rosary, a Carmelite nun for six years, is founding a new, autonomous lay association for women that will be under the rule of St. Teresa of Avila (1515-1582). She was among a handful or religious sisters formerly living in the Carmelite monastery in Savannah, Georgia that was suppressed and closed by the Carmelites in late 2022 under the instruction Cor Orans issued in April 2018 by the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life. The original story was published by LifeSiteNews.

Sister Loretta-Maria said she hopes to found a community of women religious who consecrate their lives to the religious service of contemplation under private vows of poverty, chastity and obedience, while living their lives on 10 acres of land near of High Springs, Florida, where a new monastery is being built.

“We are not affiliated or associated with a diocese or with the Cor Orans Federated Carmelite Order. We consider ourselves a de facto association of women religious and founded our monastic-styled community as an autonomous, private institution. We intend to build our own monastery on our own land. In Christ, Bishop Athanasius Schneider has given us his blessing to serve the Holy Roman Catholic Church as an autonomous monastic community and has blessed our monastic building fund project for this purpose,” Sister Loretta-Maria said.

Sister Loretta-Maria is the founding Sister and is serving as president of the 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation for the building fund. She said that a superior will be determined later. They plan to live out their lives in accord with Canon 215 of the Code of Canon Law. A detailed explanation of Canon 215 (and Canon 310):

Two Canons that pertain to individuals seeking to establish a new Religious community are Canons 215 and 310:

Can. 215 The Christian faithful are at liberty freely to found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world and to hold meetings for the common pursuit of these purposes.

Can. 310 A private association which has not been established as a juridic person cannot, as such, be a subject of obligations and rights. Nevertheless, the members of the Christian faithful associated together in it can jointly contract obligations and can acquire and possess rights and goods as co-owners and co-possessors; they are able to exercise these rights and obligations through an agent or a proxy.

The community will be privately regulated. The future Traditional Carmelite Monastery will be called Our Lady Co-Redemptrix Carmelite Monastery and will have a chapel dedicated to Our Lady of Sorrows, where Sister Loretta-Maria hopes to have the Traditional Latin Mass and sacraments celebrated daily.

“All we want is to live a quiet, simple and private life of prayer and solitude, to participate in the Mass of the Ages, raise a few chickens and plant some vegetables,” Sister Loretta-Maria said. “We will follow the Discalced Carmelite Constitutions written by Holy Mother Saint Teresa of Avila, the Rule of Carmel written by Saint Albert of Jerusalem, as well as various Carmelite ceremonials and spiritual manuals that have governed the Traditional Discalced Carmelite Order since its founding.”

“We discerned in prayer that building our new autonomous Monastery is the only way in this day and age to protect ourselves from having a repeat of what was witnessed at Savannah Carmel and to protect our vocations from the oppression of liberal theologians, Sister said. “Our 501c3 nonprofit, Habit Forming Sisters Corporation, is for the express and exempt purpose of building this religious monastery and supporting the lives of the Carmelite Community we have established. All of this was another insurance to legally protect our community from the forcible seizure of all the property and assets that was witnessed previously.”

COMMENT: The doctrine of the TWO SWORDS addresses the duties within the Church established by Jesus Christ, Sovereign King and High Priest. The Church membership includes all who have been baptized into Jesus Christ and profess the Catholic faith. The Church includes both religious and lay members. The spiritual sword of authority of the Church is wielded by the clerical members of the Church headed by the Pope who exercises universal spiritual jurisdiction. The temporal sword of authority is wielded by lay members of the Church, (formerly members of the nobility), who are called upon to establish the Kingship of Jesus Christ in the temporal realm. In the Pater Noster, after we worship the name of God we pray, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." It is through the lay wielding of the temporal sword that the 'will of God' may be done in the Christian regulation of social and political life under the Kingship of Jesus Christ. The spiritual authority is to provide the doctrinal foundation and the moral prudential guidance as well as the sacramental life of grace to accomplish this end as far as fallen human nature allows. Many of the great ecumenical councils of the Church were called by lay authority including the council that ended the Western Schism when there were three papal claimants.

There is no separation of Church and State historically and this includes Christendom. Lay leadership has historically exercised some authority in the appointments of clerics as well as examples of clerical excommunication of lay leaders who have betrayed the faith. There has always been tension between the boundaries of these respective authorities and the practical exercise has been fluid over specific historical and cultural circumstances but the existence of the two swords and their distinct powers have never been denied by any Catholic.

Through the exercise of the spiritual sword, the Vatican control of religious societies has become of weapon of suppression and destruction of Catholic religious life. What these Carmelite sisters are doing is exercising their vocation be removing themselves from the Vatican control of their community by their canonical right as "lay" Catholics to practice their faith. They are doing exactly what the lay members of Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission have done since our foundation in 2002. The temporal sword may very well be an important means by which God reestablished His Church until a holy pontiff is again wielding the spiritual sword.

When arguing with a Neo-Modernist Novus Ordite Remember -

Modern Mind, Modern Thought: Don't be surprised when you at last discover that the Modern Mind is Mindless and Modern Thought is Thoughtless!

Modem Thought shirks definition. In all truth it is a giant’s task to extract a clear-cut and intelligible statement of what it exactly means by the terms it uses. For a definition requires thought; it requires a close examination and analysis of the nature of the thing to be defined, an accurate discrimination between its essentials and accidentals, and a painstaking comparison of that thing with similar things in order to discern what it has in common with them, and then to pick out just that specific note which makes it the thing that it is and different from everything else. All that, I say, calls for accurate and connected reasoning, and Modern Thought is quite unequal to the task. For it moves in a twilight of half-intelligence where it sees vague shapes and transforms them into monsters. Make the experiment of this for yourselves; if you will, take up the print of Modern Thought, some of which I shall presently indicate, and see what travesties it can make of the ideas of “dogma,”“faith,”“theology,”“metaphysics,”“God,”“morality,” etc., as well as of “civilization,”“culture,”“science” and “progress.” To whatever other tortures it may subject these words, or with whatever welter of brilliant sentences it may mix them—define them it does not.

All this is the same as saying that Modern Thought is flippant, cynical, skeptical, irrational and thoughtless—no one of which is the mark of thought truly so-called. In the face of searching questions, Modern Thought is as irresponsible as Boccacio’s “Cymon,” who:

Shunned the Church and used not much to pray,

He trudged along, unknowing what he sought,

And whistled as he went for want of thought.

It is difficult to speak of a flippant thing without oneself seeming to indulge in flippancy. Yet, were I to take Modern Thought very seriously and to define its most serious aspect, I could do no more than say that it is an attitude of mind which prefers to interpret life and judge the world not in the light of principles, tradition and authority, but according to a mood prompted by the moment and by the expediency of immediate environment—or the gravitation of man’s lower nature.

In justice to Modern Thought let it be said that at is not consistent with itself, for, while it spurns authority, it will nevertheless place the blindest reliance on any “authority” that serves its mood and temper, and this mood can, with the greatest ease, swing from the namby-pambiest optimism to the murkiest pessimism. And, if besides being observant persons you are moderately well read in history, it will soon break upon your realization that, after all, there is nothing modern about this mental affliction. It is as ancient as the day when Adam and Eve maimed their souls and bodies in Paradise in a fit of independence; it is as ancient as Heracitus, Epicurus, and the classic pagans. Its mood and their mood are essentially the same, the setting alone is different, the chief difference being that to-day the printing-press, the cinema and the radio (the T.V. and the Internet) offer the neo-paganism so many more facilities to waft itself abroad and spread the contagion of its mood.

Rev. Demetrius Zema, S.J., The Thoughtlessness of Modern Thought, Conference at Fordham University, 1933

“The Devil is fighting a decisive battle”
Sr. Lucy also told me:

“Father, the Devil is fighting a decisive battle against the Virgin and, as you know, what most offends God and what will gain him the greatest number of souls in the shortest time is to gain the souls consecrated to God. For this also leaves unprotected the field of the laity and the Devil can more easily seize them.
“Also, Father, tell them that my cousins Francisco and Jacinta made sacrifices because they always saw the Blessed Virgin was very sad in all her apparitions. She never smiled at us. This anguish that we saw in her, caused by offenses to God and the chastisements that threaten sinners, penetrated our souls. And being children, we did not know what measures to devise except to pray and make sacrifices. …”
 Referring to the vision of Hell that Our Lady showed her and Jacinta and Francisco, she said:
“For this reason, Father, it is my mission not just to tell about the material punishments that will certainly come over the earth if the world does not pray and do penance. No, my mission is to tell everyone the imminent danger we are in of losing our souls for all eternity if we remain fixed in sin.
“Father, we should not wait for a call to the world from Rome on the part of the Holy Father to do penance. Nor should we wait for a call for penance to come from the Bishops in our Dioceses, nor from our Religious Congregations. No, Our Lord has often used these means, and the world has not paid heed. So, now each one of us must begin to reform himself spiritually. Each one has to save not only his own soul, but also all the souls that God has placed on his pathway.
“Father, the Blessed Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world, but I understood this for three reasons:
“The first is because she told me that the Devil is engaging in a battle with the Virgin, a decisive battle. It is a final battle where one party will be victorious and the other will suffer defeat. So, from now on, we are either with God or we are with the Devil; there is no middle ground.
“The second reason is because she told me, as well as my cousins, that God is giving two last remedies to the world: the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. And, being the last remedies, that is to say, they are the final ones, means that there will be no others.

“And the third, because in the plans of the Divine Providence, when God is going to chastise the world He always first exhausts all other remedies. When He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever, then, as we say in our imperfect way of talking, with a certain fear He presents us the last means of salvation, His Blessed Mother.
 If we despise and reject this last means, Heaven will no longer pardon us, because we will have committed a sin that the Gospel calls a sin against the Holy Spirit. This sin consists in openly rejecting – with full knowledge and will – the salvation that is put in our hands.
 ”Also, since Our Lord is a very good Son, He will not permit that we offend and despise His Blessed Mother. We have as obvious testimony the history of different centuries where Our Lord has shown us with terrible examples how He has always defended the honor of His Blessed Mother.
 ”Prayer and sacrifice are the two means to save the world. As for the Holy Rosary, Father, in these last times in which we are living, the Blessed Virgin has given a new efficacy to the praying of the Holy Rosary. This in such a way that there is no problem that cannot be resolved by praying the Rosary, no matter how difficult it is - be it temporal or above all spiritual - in the spiritual life of each of us or the lives of our families, be they our families in the world or Religious Communities, or even in the lives of peoples and nations.
 ”I repeat, there is no problem, as difficult as it may be, that we cannot resolve at this time by praying the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, sanctify ourselves, console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.
 ”Then, there is devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Most Holy Mother, holding her as the seat of mercy, goodness and pardon and the sure door to enter Heaven. This is the first part of the Message referring to Our Lady of Fatima, and the second part, which is briefer but no less important, refers to the Holy Father.”

Sister Lucy of Fatima to Fr. Augustin Fuentes in 1957

Israel, with the material and political support of the United States, has in GAZA, which is an open air prison of 17 sq/miles with a population of 2.1 million Palestinians, in last seven months:

· Killed: at least 34,596 people, including more than:

Ø More than 14,500 children killed

Ø 8,400 women killed

· Missing: more than 8,000 who are most likely buried under the rubble and soon will be counted with the dead

· Injured: more than 77,816 people with only 11 of 35 hospitals only partially functioning, unable to care for the injured

· Hundreds of Thousands currently in state of starvation

· More than half of Gaza’s homes have been destroyed or damaged

· 80% of commercial facilities destroyed

· 73% of school buildings destroyed

· 11 out of 35 hospitals are partially functioning

· 83% of groundwater wells not operational

· 267 places of Moslem worship that were used as places of refuge destroyed

Palestinian Ministry of Health in the occupied West Bank report on May 2, 2024

"A day will come when the Jewish Nation will cease to oppose order and will turn in sorrow and repentance to Him Whom they rejected before Pilate. That will be a glorious triumph for the Immaculate Heart of Our Blessed Mother. Until that day dawns, however, their naturalistic opposition to the True supernatural Order of the world must be exposed and combated."

Rev. Denis Fahey, C.S. SP., The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation

Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity

Catholic Church Teaches:

“That the mystical body of Christ and the Catholic Church in communion with Rome are one and the same thing, is a doctrine based on revealed truth.”

Pius XII, Humani Generis

(Modernism teaches that) “the formulas which we call dogma must be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change. Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.”

Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi, 1907

With truly lamentable results, our age, casting aside all restraint in its search for the ultimate causes of things, frequently pursues novelties so ardently that it rejects the legacy of the human race. Thus it falls into very serious errors, which are even more serious when they concern sacred authority, the interpretation of Sacred Scripture, and the principal mysteries of Faith. The fact that many Catholic writers also go beyond the limits determined by the Fathers and the Church herself is extremely regrettable. In the name of higher knowledge and historical research (they say), they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas.

Pope St. Pius X, Lamentabili Sane, 1907

The Vatiacan II Church Teaches:

“Church of Christ… subsits in the Catholic Church.”

Lumen Gentium, Vatican II

NOTE: The author of this term, “subsist in,” was Pastor Wilhelm Schmidt, a Protestant minister who made the suggestion to Cardinal Augustin Bea, the ecumenist, modernist biblical scholar, patron of Fr. Annibale Bugnini, and confessor to Pope Pius XII, who in turn recruited the support of Fr. Joseph Ratzinger who then convinced Cardinal Josef Frings of Cologne to bring the matter to the Council. This story was personally verified by Fr. Franz Schmidberger, First Assistant to the Superior General of the SSPX, by directly contacting Pastor Schmidt.

The problem remains if Lumen Gentium strictly and exclusively identifies the Mystical Body of Christ with the Catholic Church, as did Pius XII in Mystici Corporis. Can we not call it into doubt when we observe that not only is the attribute “Roman” missing, but also that one avoids saying that only Catholics are members of the Mystical Body. Thus they are telling us that the Church of Christ and of the Apostles subsistit in, is found in the Catholic Church. There is consequently no strict identification, that is exclusive, between the Church of Christ and the “Roman” Church. Vatican II admits, fundamentally, that non-Catholic Christians are members of the Mystical Body and not merely ordered to it.

Yves Cardinal Congar

Church of Christ is not exclusively identical to the Roman Catholic Church. It does indeed subsist in Roman Catholicism but it is also present in varying modes and degrees in other Christian communities. (Bold face in original).

Avery Cardinal Dulles, a member of the International Theological Commission

It is difficult to say that the Catholic Church is still one, Catholic, apostolic, when one says that the others (other Christian communities) are equally one, Catholic and apostolic, albeit to a lesser degree. ---- at Vatican Council II, the Roman Catholic Church officially abandoned its monopoly over the Christian religion.

Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx

Concretely and actually the Church of Christ may be realized less, equally, or even more in a Church separated from Rome than in a Church in communion with Rome. This conclusion is inescapable on the basis of the understanding of Church that emerges from the teaching of Vatican Council II.

Fr. Gregory Baum

And we now ask: What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?... This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (Unitatis Redintegratio) the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world. On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return: that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!

Pope Benedict XVI, addressing Protestants at World Youth Day, August 19, 2005

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Offers Clarification (?):
QUESTION: What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?
RESPONSE:
Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”, that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all the elements that Christ himself instituted. “This one Church of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organized in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him”.
In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium ‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church, in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.

REPLY:

Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, and many other Protestant groups recite the Nicene Creed professing a belief in the “one, holy, catholic, apostolic Church.” They clearly do not define the word “catholic” in the same sense as Roman Catholics do. Is the CDF giving a Catholic or Protestant meaning to the word “catholic” when it explains the words “subsist in”? Is the comment of Cardinal Congar explaining the significance of the failure to use the word “Roman” important to our understanding of the CDF’s response? Is this a cleaver corruption of dogmatic truth through dissembling corruption of language? Should we be grateful to Cardinal Congar for his open and honest comments? Since the “ecumenism of return” is rejected then, do Protestants that do not have to “return” to the Roman Catholic Church already belong to the “Church of Christ”? Is there salvation in the “Church of Christ” separated from the Roman Catholic Church? It is a Dogma, an article of divine and Catholic faith, that there is one universal Church of the faithful outside of which there is no salvation.

Modernism and Neo-Modernism, built upon linguistic Deconstructionism which denies the intentionality of language, “fabricates a fictitious reality.” The Novus Ordo Church can only offer just another “pseudo-reality” to modern man and not the Absolute Truth of God's revelation. The worst thing of all is that most Novus Ordo Catholics are “satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language.” No wonder Pope Francis hates the “Absolute Truth” and declared it to be “idolatrous” and “godless”!

Plato's literary activity extended over fifty years, and time and again he asked himself anew: What is it that makes the sophists so dangerous? Toward the end he wrote one more dialogue, the Sophist, in which he added a new element to his answer: “The sophists,” he says, “fabricate a fictitious reality.” That the existential realm of man could be taken over by pseudo-realities whose fictitious nature threatens to become indiscernible is truly a depressing thought. And yet this Platonic nightmare, I hold, possesses an alarming contemporary relevance. For the general public is being reduced to a state where people not only are unable to find out about the truth but also become unable even to search for the truth because they are satisfied with deception and trickery that have determined their convictions, satisfied with a fictitious reality created by design through the abuse of language. This, says Plato, is the worst thing that the sophists are capable of wreaking upon mankind by their corruption of the word.

Josef Pieper, Abuse of Language - Abuse of Power

St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are, therefore, two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church.

Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907

“Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.” (I John 4:1)

“But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil.” (Matt 5:37)

The Spirit of Intended Ambiguity that animated Vatican II

It would be most inconvenient for the articles of our Constitution to be rejected by the Central Commission or by the Council itself. That is why we must tread carefully and discreetly. Carefully, so that proposals be … formulated in such a way that much is said  without seeming to say anything: let many things be said in embryo and in this way let the door remain open to legitimate and possible postconciliar deductions and applications: let nothing be said that suggests excessive novelty and might invalidate all the rest.

Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, L’Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965

Even Paul VI proclaimed the necessity of PROSELYTISM! He was progressive but apparently not progressive enough for Francis the Apostate!

“Through this wordless witness these Christians stir up irresistible questions in the hearts of those who see how they live: Why are they like this? Why do they live in this way? What or who is it that inspires them? Why are they in our midst? Such a witness is already a silent proclamation of the Good News and a very powerful and effective one. […..] Nevertheless this always remains insufficient, because even the finest witness will prove ineffective in the long run if it is not explained, justified – what Peter called always having ‘your answer ready for people who ask you the reason for the hope that you all have’ – and made explicit by a clear and unequivocal proclamation of the Lord Jesus. The Good News proclaimed by the witness of life sooner or later has to be proclaimed by the word of life. There is no true evangelization if the name, the teaching, the life, the promises, the kingdom and the mystery of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God, are not proclaimed.”

Pope Paul VI, Evangelii nuntiandi

“I’ve said it many times: proselytism is not Christian. Today I felt a certain bitterness when a woman approached me with a young man and a young woman, and said to me: ‘Your Holiness, I am from South Africa. This boy was a Hindu and converted to Catholicism. This girl was Anglican and converted to Catholicism.’ She told me in a triumphant way, as though she was showing off a hunting trophy. I felt uncomfortable and said to her, ‘Madam, evangelization yes, proselytism no’.”

Pope Francis the Apostate, to Jesuit community in Mozambique, September 2019

COMMENT: In about twenty years we will be celebrating the 500^th anniversary of the beginnings of Jesuit missionary work throughout the world. These missionaries provided regular detailed journal submissions to their superiors regarding the work of proselytism which included exactly to whom they preached the Gospel with their successes and failures in gaining Catholic converts, the very purpose of their work. Many of these documents are available on line. A brief review of them is enough to see what a vulgar reprobate they would consider Francis/Bergoglio. He actively works to obstruct the grace of God in the work of salvation of souls.

Cardinal Fernández’s Dignitas Infinita condemns abortion, gender theory but is silent on homosexuality

In the newly released text Cardinal Victor Fernández criticizes abortion and the rejection of gender differentiation as attacks on human dignity, while neglecting to discuss homosexuality.

LifeSiteNews | Vatican City | Michael Haynes | Mon Apr 8, 2024 — Cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández has released his long-anticipated document on human dignity, written in line with Pope Francis’ encyclical Fratelli Tutti and modern teaching on dignity, which condemns abortion and surrogacy while notably remaining silent on homosexuality.

Released via press conference April 8 – the transferred feast of the Annunciation – the new text, Dignitas infinita, aims to highlight a line from Fratelli Tutti – namely, that “dignity exists ‘beyond all circumstances.’” 

“The Declaration strives to show that this is a universal truth that we are all called to recognize as a fundamental condition for our societies to be truly just, peaceful, healthy, and authentically human,” wrote Fernández, prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF) and from whose office the document emerged. 

As summarized by Andrea Tornielli (editorial manager for the Vatican’s Dicastery for Communication) the document aims to address issues outside of the bioethical sphere:

The new text thus contributes to overcoming the dichotomy that exists between those who focus exclusively on defending nascent or dying life while forgetting so many other attacks against human dignity and, conversely, those who focus only on defending the poor and migrants while forgetting that life must be defended from conception to its natural conclusion.

Summarizing his lengthy text, Fernández wrote that “the Church, with the present Declaration, ardently urges that respect for the dignity of the human person beyond all circumstances be placed at the center of the commitment to the common good and at the center of every legal system.”

He had earlier decried how a modern misconception of dignity is “occasionally misused to justify an arbitrary proliferation of new rights, many of which are at odds with those originally defined and often are set in opposition to the fundamental right to life.”

While mentioning the Church’s condemnation of abortion and euthanasia, the text only mentions “sin” on two occasions – both of which occurred in the same sentence in section 22. The treatment of gender theory was critical, but only critical, whilst Pope Francis – under whose authority the document was written – has been much more condemnatory in his remarks.

Key also is the absence of any mention, much less condemnation, of homosexuality. In a text given to denoting teaching on human dignity, and the ways in which is is gravely violated, such an omission appears striking.

COMMENT: While it is good to see the condemnations of abortion, euthanasia, IVF and transgenderism from the Vatican, it is unfortunate that it is done for the wrong reasons. There is no reference to divine law and only passing reference to natural law. The grounds for opposition to these perversions in overwhelmingly argued from human dignity. In this respect this current document is analogous to Paul VI's condemnation of artificial birth control in Humanae vitae when Paul VI based his opposition against artificial contraception upon humanist arguments rather than arguments grounded upon natural law, divine law, the constant tradition and previous Magisterial teaching of the Church.

The entire argument of Dignitas Infinita is, as the title indicated, based upon the “infinite (sic) dignity” of the human person. This theory of the “infinite dignity” of the human person is derived from a false modernist philosophy of personalism and the theology of Vatican II.

He Who is “the image of the invisible God” (Col. 1:15),(21) is Himself the perfect man. To the sons of Adam He restores the divine likeness which had been disfigured from the first sin onward. Since human nature as He assumed it was not annulled, by that very fact it has been raised up to a divine dignity in our respect too. For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man. Vatican II, Gaudium et spes, Church in the Modern World

From this presupposition, the document Dignitatis Humanae (On Religious Freedom) was developed which taught:

A sense of the dignity of the human person has been impressing itself more and more deeply on the consciousness of contemporary man, and the demand is increasingly made that men should act on their own judgment, enjoying and making use of a responsible freedom, not driven by coercion but motivated by a sense of duty. The demand is likewise made that constitutional limits should be set to the powers of government, in order that there may be no encroachment on the rightful freedom of the person and of associations. This demand for freedom in human society chiefly regards the quest for the values proper to the human spirit. It regards, in the first place, the free exercise of religion in society. This Vatican Council takes careful note of these desires in the minds of men. It proposes to declare them to be greatly in accord with truth and justice. To this end, it searches into the sacred tradition and doctrine of the Church-the treasury out of which the Church continually brings forth new things that are in harmony with the things that are old. [.....] This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. Vatican II, Dignitatis Humanae, Religious freedom

This teaching of Vatican II forms the ground for this current document, Dignitas Infinita, by the downgraded Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. The document references for its authority Vatican II nine times, JPII nineteen times, Benedict XVI twelve times, Paul VI six times, Pius XII once, Pius XI once, and Pope Francis an amazing seventy-five times! It is clearly a Neo-Modernist product developed from a humanist ideology. Jesus Christ is referenced only eight times and these references are always ideologically driven, such as, in repeating Gaudium et spes, it says again: “By uniting himself with every human being through his Incarnation, Jesus Christ confirmed that each person possesses an immeasurable (sic) dignity simply by belonging to the human community; moreover, he affirmed that this dignity can never be lost.”

The problem with this Vatican II teaching is that it is not true which is easily apparent in the used of the words “infinite” and “immeasurable,” attributes of God and God alone, to describe the dignity of man. In the Incarnation, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity DID NOT unite Himself with all humanity. He united Himself with a single human nature when the Holy Ghost overshadowed the Immaculate Virgin Mary and she became the Mother of Jesus Christ, both God and Man. The human flesh of the Man-God became the material cause of the redemptive grace for all mankind when he suffered and died on the cross and rose again from the dead on the third day. Through faith those who believe in His name, received the sacraments of Baptism (born again of water and the Holy Ghost) and the Holy Eucharist, every individual man can then become united with Jesus Christ and by this union be raised to the dignity of being a Son of God by grace. All humanity stand in potentia to this dignity but only those who are members of the Catholic Church and in the state of grace possess this dignity in actu. This dignity can be lost by mortal sin and yet by recovered by sacramental penance. Without the dignity of being a son of God there is no hope whatsoever of salvation. St. Paul makes this teaching clear in his letter to the Romans that the true dignity of man is found only in his participation in the glory of God:

· “For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God.” Rom. 3:23

· “By whom (Jesus Christ) also we have access through faith into this grace, wherein we stand, and glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God.” Rom. 5:2

· “For we are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life.” Rom. 6:4

· “Because the creature also itself shall be delivered from the servitude of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of God.” Rom. 8:21

· “I have therefore glory in Christ Jesus towards God.” Rom. 15:17

Vatican II teaches something altogether different. The Neo-modernists believe that by virtue of the Word becoming flesh, human nature itself was “infinitely” dignified to the exalted level that no person was anymore obligated to believe in God's revealed truth, obey His commandments, or worship God according to his “received and approved” immemorial rites. This is such an absurd abuse of the first principles of the understanding that it is evident that it is impossible to reason anyone out of this opinion because it is impossible that they could have ever reasoned themselves into it in the first place! All rights are derived from duties is Catholic truth. They have inverted this claiming that rights determine duties and the duty to worship God, believe His revelation and keep His commandments cannot impose any obligation on any creature who possesses the exalted human dignity to do whatever he pleases!

Vladimir Soloviev, the Catholic Russian philosopher and defender of the Kingship of Jesus Christ, who died in 1900 at the age of 47 in extreme poverty, said that justice is the practical application of truth. Dignitatis Humanae from Vatican II affirms that aspirations of modern man to Religious freedom are “greatly in accord with truth and justice.” They are not. If man possessed a right to worship idols than God would be unjust for punishing idolaters and the Vatican II teaching on “infinite dignity” is just another form of idolatry that has led to generalized human degradation. The Vatican II teaching of human dignity is just one big lie and the practical application of lies is called injustice. Francis claims that he discovered the moral truth that none of his predecessors could discover that all capital punishment for whatever reason is intrinsically evil because of the “infinite dignity” of the human person. Now a murderer has a greater right to life than the his victim. Or in the case of abortion, the mother's convenience has a greater standing that the life of her child. Now Francis might argue against this claim but his argument has no greater validity than the mother who wants the abortion. After all, in the conflict of rights between two “infinite dignities” than what is to stop mightier from being right?

Francis the Solipsist, the longer he lives the more self-referential his theological productions. Unfortunately for Francis, unless he repents, he will learn that in hell the only evidence for “infinite... immeasurable human dignity” that “can never be lost,” will be that the punishment is eternal.

Criminal Courts now indicting faithful Catholic priests for criticism of Homosexual pederast clergy!

Catholic priest in Switzerland faces ‘hate crime’ trial over article criticizing homosexual clergy

The trial against Fr. Manfred Hauke for publishing an article by Polish priest, Fr. Draiusz Oko, critical of predatory, homosexual clergy began on Monday in Bellinzona, Switzerland.

LifeSiteNews | Andreas Wailzer | April 10, 2024 — Catholic priest and theology professor Fr. Manfred Hauke has to stand trial at a criminal court in Switzerland for publishing an article critical of homosexual clergy.

Katholisch.de reports that the trial against Hauke started on Monday at the criminal court in Bellinzona, Switzerland. The court case was triggered after the German priest appealed a fine that he received in December 2022.

Hauke, who teaches theology at the University of Lugano, Switzerland, is accused of violating a ban against “discrimination” and “inciting hatred” against homosexuals for publishing an article as the publisher of the magazine Theologisches in 2021.

The article was authored by Polish priest Fr. Draiusz Oko and highlighted cases of abuse by homosexual priests and bishops and detailed mechanisms used by “homoclans” or a “homomafia” of predatory clerics to avoid accountability.

Oko described such groups as “a colony of parasites” that “cares first of all for itself, and not for the hosts at whose expense it lives” and as a “homosexual plague” or a “cancer that is even ready to kill its host,” among other things. He stressed that “the existence of such powerful clans” attested to by both Pope Francis and Pope Benedict XVI “is an obvious logical, ethical, and dogmatic contradiction to the very essence of the Church and her teaching.”

In May 2022, Oko and 91-year-old Fr. Johannes Stöhr, the editor responsible for publishing the article in the journal, were sentenced to fines of € 3,150 and € 4,000, respectively, by a German court.

Fr. Wolfgang Rothe, a dissident, scandal-plagued priest with the Archdiocese of Munich, confirmed that he was the one who reported Oko, Stöhr, and Hauke to German authorities.

Rothe, who is openly homosexual, is one of the most aggressively outspoken promoters of the LGBT agenda in the Catholic Church in Germany.

In 2004, Rothe was involved in a major Church scandal when he had to step down as vice-rector of a seminary in St. Pölten, Austria, after child pornography and photographs depicting homosexual activity involving seminarians and staff emerged. Photos also showed Rothe kissing a man. The seminary was eventually shut down by the Vatican’s special investigator, Bishop Klaus Küng.

DOGMA, the proximate rule of faith for the faithful:

According to Fr. Joseph Fenton, editor of the American Ecclesiastical Review:

· Dogmas are “truths,” not precepts.

· Dogmas are “teachings we are obliged to believe with the assent of divine and Catholic faith.”

· Dogmas are defined “truths” which the “apostles of Jesus Christ preached to His Church.”

· Dogmas are “truths” that have been “supernaturally communicated or revealed by God Himself.”

· Dogmas “constitute the central or primary object of the Church’s infallible teaching activity.”

A dogma is by definition immutable and unchangeable. The denial of any dogma makes one a heretic by definition.

· Hence, also, that understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually retained, which Holy Mother Church has once declared; and there must never be recession from that meaning under the specious name of deeper understanding.  Therefore... let the understanding... be solely in its own genus, namely the same dogma, with the same sense and the same understanding.

Vatican I, Dei Filius

· Let nothing of the truths that have been defined ( i.e.: dogmas) be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added; but let them be preserved intact, in word and meaning. 

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos

· [Dogma must be understood] by the very sense by which it is defined and must be held to be by itself a sufficient demonstration, very sure and adapter to all the faithful. 

Ven. Pope Pius IX, Inter Gravissimas, 1870

· If anyone shall have said that it is possible that to the dogmas declared by the Church a meaning must sometimes be attributed according to the progress of knowledge, different from what the Church has understood and understands: let him be anathema. 

Vatican I, Dei Filius

· [Regarding dogma] nothing else is to be believed other than the words; and I hold that this absolute and unchangeable truth, which was preached by the Apostles from the earliest times, is to be understood in no other way than by the words. 

Oath Against Modernism

BELOW –

PREVIOUS BULLETIN POSTS THAT ARE NOT OUTDATED

HOME | About Us | Open Letters | Make a Contribution | Directions | Contact Us |

Pearl of York | Mass Schedule | List of Closed Parishes in the Diocese of Harrisburg |

| Announcements |

Why Move to Central Pennsylvania? | Canned Answers to Stale Objections