Holy Name of Jesus
We give honour to the Name of Jesus, not
because we believe that there is any intrinsic power hidden in the letters
composing it, but because the Name of Jesus reminds us of all the blessings we
receive through our Holy Redeemer. To give thanks for these blessings we revere
the Holy Name, as we honour the Passion of Christ by honouring His Cross. At
the Holy Name of Jesus we uncover our heads, and we bend our knees; it is at
the head of all our undertakings, as the Emperor Justinian says in his
law-book: “In the Name of Our Lord Jesus we begin all our consultations”.
The Name of Jesus invoked
with confidence brings help in bodily needs, according to the promise of
Christ: “In my name They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick,
and they shall recover” (Mark 16, 17-18). In the Name of Jesus the Apostles
gave strength to the lame (Acts, 3, 6; 9, 34) and life to the dead (Acts 9,
40).
It gives consolation in spiritual
trials. The Name of Jesus reminds the sinner of the prodigal son's father and
of the Good Samaritan; it recalls to the just the suffering and death of the
innocent Lamb of God. It protects us
against Satan and his wiles, for the Devil fears the Name of Jesus, who has
conquered him on the Cross. In the Name of Jesus we obtain every blessing and
grace for time and eternity, for Christ has said: “If you ask the Father
anything in my name he will give it you.” (John 16, 23) Therefore the Church
concludes all her prayers by the words: “Through Our Lord Jesus Christ”, etc.
So the word of St. Paul is
fulfilled: “That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are
in heaven, on earth, and under the earth” (Phil. 2, 10).
A special lover of the Holy
Name was St. Bernard, who speaks of it in most glowing terms in many of his
sermons. But the greatest promoters of this devotion were St. Bernardine of
Siena and St. John Capistran. They carried with them on their missions in the
turbulent cities of Italy a copy of the monogram of the Holy Name, surrounded
by rays, painted on a wooden tablet, wherewith they blessed the sick and
wrought great miracles. At the close of their sermons they exhibited this
emblem to the faithful and asked them to prostrate themselves, to adore the
Redeemer of mankind. They recommended their hearers to have the monogram of
Jesus placed over the gates of their cities and above the doors of their
dwelling (cf. Seeberger, “Key to the Spiritual Treasures”, 1897, 102). Because
the manner in which St. Bernardine preached this devotion was new, he was
accused by his enemies, and brought before the tribunal of Pope Martin V. But
St. John Capistran defended his master so successfully that the pope not only
permitted the worship of the Holy Name, but also assisted at a procession in
which the holy monogram was carried. The tablet used by St. Bernardine is
venerated at Santa Maria in Ara Coeli at Rome.
The emblem or monogram
representing the Holy Name of Jesus consists of the three letters: IHS. In the
Middle Ages the Name of Jesus was written: IHESUS; the monogram contains the
first and last letter of the Holy Name. It is first found on a gold coin of the
eight century: DN IHS CHS REX REGNANTIUM (The Lord Jesus Christ, King of
Kings). Some erroneously say that the three letters are the initials of: “Jesus
Hominum Salvator” (Jesus Saviour of Men). The Jesuits made this monogram the
emblem of their Society, adding a cross over the H and three nails under it.
Consequently a new explanation of the emblem was invented, pretending that the
nails originally were a “V”, and that the monogram stands for “In Hoc Signo
Vinces” (In This Sign you shall Conquer), the words which, according to a
legendary account, Constantine saw in the heavens under the Sign of the Cross
before the battle at the Milvian bridge (312).
Urban IV and John XXII are said to have granted an indulgence of thirty
days to those who would add the name of Jesus to the Hail Mary or would bend
their knees, or at least bow their heads when hearing the Name of Jesus
(Alanus, “Psal. Christi et Mariae”, i, 13, and iv, 25, 33; Michael ab Insulis,
“Quodlibet”, v; Colvenerius, “De festo SS. Nominis”, x). This statement may be
true; yet it was only by the efforts of St. Bernardine that the custom of
adding the Name of Jesus to the Ave Maria was spread in Italy, and from there
to the Universal Church. But up to the sixteenth century it was still unknown
in Belgium (Colven., op. Cit., x), whilst in Bavaria and Austria the faithful still
affix to the Ave Maria the words: “Jesus Christus” (ventris tui, Jesus
Christus). Sixtus V (2 July, 1587) granted an indulgence of fifty days to the
ejaculation: “Praise be to Jesus Christ!” with the answer: “For evermore”, or
“Amen”. In the South of Germany the peasants salute each other with this pious
formula. Sixtus V and Benedict XIII granted an indulgence of fifty days to all
as often as they pronounce the Name of Jesus reverently, and a plenary
indulgence in the hour of death. These two indulgences were confirmed by
Clement XIII, 5 Sept., 1759. As often as we invoke the Name of Jesus and Mary
(“Jesu!”, “Maria!”) we may gain an indulgence of 300 days, by decree of Pius
X. It is also necessary, to gain the
papal indulgence in the hour of death, to pronounce at least in mind the Name
of Jesus.
PRAYER
TO JESUS IN DIFFICULTIES
O Jesus! Consolation of the afflicted! Thy name is indeed poured out
like oil; for Thou dost illumine those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of
death; Thou dost disperse the blindness of the soul and dost cure its ills;
Thou givest food and drink to those who hunger and thirst after justice. Be
also, O Jesus! my Savior, the physician of my soul, the healer of its wounds.
O Jesus! Succor of those who are in need, be my protector in temptations! O
Jesus! Father of the poor, do Thou nourish me! O Jesus! joy of the angels, do
Thou comfort me! O Jesus! my only hope and refuge, be my helper in the hour of
death, for there is given us no other name beneath the sun by which we may be
saved, but Thy most blessed name Jesus!
FEAST
OF THE MOST HOLY OF NAME OF JESUS
PRESENCE OF GOD ‑ O Jesus, make me
understand the mysteries and the treasures contained in Your most sweet Name.
MEDITATION:
I.
This Feast complements the circumcision mystery, since it was during the rite
of circumcision that the name Jesus was given to the Child. On the first day,
the Church directed our attention to the humility of the Son of God; today she
invites us to meditate upon and celebrate the glories of His Name.
That these glories flow especially from His
prodigious humiliations is clearly affirmed by St. Paul: “Brethren, Christ
humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the Cross.
For which cause God also hath exalted Him and hath given Him a Name which is
above all names: that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow” (Phil
2, 8‑10). The Church, by placing on our lips this theme from today's
Office, invites us, her children, to render grateful, pious homage to Him who
humbled Himself so profoundly for us.
The heart of every Christian should respond
to this invitation and exalt the most Holy Name of Our Savior, that is, His
very Person, for the Name of Jesus expresses what He is: Savior, Redeemer. This
sacred Name, announced by the Angel to both Mary and Joseph, was given to Our
Lord by God Himself. “Thou shalt call His Name Jesus, for He shall save His
people from their sins” (Mt 1, 21). This Name expresses and synthesizes
the great mysteries of the Incarnation and the Redemption; it is at the center
of the universe like a point of contact, like a bridge between God and all
mankind. Man can reach God only by means of Jesus and in the Name of Jesus:
“for there is no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved” (Ep: Acts
4, 8‑12).
2. Today's Mass, continuing St. Paul's
thought, offers us a majestic picture of the glory which is due the holy Name
of Jesus:
“That
at the Name of Jesus, every knee should bow, of those that are in heaven, on
earth, and under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that the Lord
Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father” (Introit). The entire Church‑
triumphant, militant, and suffering‑ is prostrate in adoration; the whole
of creation seems to be silent, having stopped in its course for a moment to
hear this most holy Name which gives glory to God and salvation to mankind.
Truly, “neither tongue can tell, nor pen express” the inestimable treasures
contained in the Name of Jesus. “Nothing sweeter can be sung, nothing more
agreeable can be heard, nothing more delightful, can be imagined than Jesus,
the Son of God” (RB). “Thy name is as oil poured out” (Ct 1, 2),
says Holy Scripture, and St. Bernard comments, “Oil gives light, it nourishes, it
anoints .... See how well this applies to the Name of the true Bridegroom. It
is light when it is preached; it is food in meditation; it is balm and healing
when it is invoked for aid .... All food is as dry husks to the soul unless it
is steeped in this oil; insipid unless seasoned with this salt. If you write,
it has no savor for me, unless I read there the Name of Jesus. If you discourse
or converse, it has no taste unless the Name of Jesus shall sound. The Name of
Jesus is honey to the mouth, music to the ear, gladness to the heart. It is
healing” (RB). Let us lovingly bless and invoke this most sweet Name
which contains all our hope and our salvation, all our life and our glory. Only
he who loves can penetrate the mysterious sweetness contained in it; only he
who loves can praise it suitably, not by words alone but by deeds; only he who
loves can bear witness to it by his entire life. “May Thy Name, O Jesus,
resound in our voices! May our actions express Thy life and our hearts love
Thee now and forever!” (ibid.).
COLLOQUY:
“O glorious Name! Gracious Name! Name full
Of love and virtue! Through You, sins are forgiven, enemies overcome, the sick
healed, and sufferers strengthened in adversity! You are the honor of
believers, the master of preachers, the comfort of those who toil, the support
of the weak. Holy desires are nourished by the ardor of Your fire; and by it,
necessary suffrages are obtained, contemplative souls are inebriated, and the
triumphant are glorified in heavenly glory! By Your most Holy Name, O sweet
Jesus, You make us reign with the Blessed, You, their glory, You who triumph
gloriously with the Father and the Holy Spirit, in perfect Unity and Trinity,
forever and ever.
“O Name of Jesus, exalted above every other
Name! O triumphant Name! O joy of Angels! O terror of hell! All hope of pardon,
of grace and of glory is found in You! O sweetest Name, You pardon the guilty,
You reform evil habits, You fill the timid with divine sweetness and drive away
terrifying visions! O glorious Name! By You, the mysteries of eternal life are
revealed, souls are inflamed with divine love, strengthened in time of
struggle, and freed from all dangers. O desirable Name! Delightful Name!
Admirable Name! Venerable Name! Little by little You raise the souls of the
faithful by Your gifts and graces to the heights of heaven. All to whom You
communicate Your ineffable grandeur, by Your power attain to salvation and
glory!” (St. Bernardine of Siena).
How good is Your Name, O Lord! Grant that
its goodness may make me, unworthy creature that I am, capable of loving and
praising You with all my heart.
I want to begin and end all my works by
invoking Your Name, and to mark all my affections, desires, undertakings,
joys, and sorrows with this sacred seal. But O Lord, I beg You, above all,
imprint Your Name on my heart and mind, so that I may always love You and think
of You.
January
is Dedicated to the Holy Name of Jesus
WHAT DOES THE NAME OF JESUS
MEAN?
The name Jesus comes from the
Greek Iesous which was derived from the Aramaic, Yeshu. It means “Yaweh is
salvation.” The name was not unique, even in biblical times, and today it is
common in Arabic-speaking East and in Spanish-speaking countries. From
apostolic times the name has been treated with the greatest respect, as honor
is due the name which represents Our Lord, himself.
The Holy Name of Jesus is, first
of all, an all-powerful prayer. Our Lord Himself solemnly promises that
whatever we ask the Father in His Name we shall receive. God never fails to
keep His word.
When, therefore, we say, “Jesus,”
let us ask God for all we need with absolute confidence of being heard.
For this reason, the Church ends her prayer with the words, “through Jesus
Christ,” which gives the prayer a new and Divine efficacy.
But the Holy Name is something
still greater.
Each time we say, “Jesus,” we give
God infinite joy and glory, for we offer Him all the infinite merits of the
Passion and Death of Jesus Christ. St. Paul tells us that Jesus merited
the Name Jesus by His Passion and Death.
Each time we say “Jesus,” let us
clearly wish to offer God all the Masses being said all over the world for all
our intentions. We thus share in these thousands of Masses.
Each time we say “Jesus,” we gain
indulgences for the Holy Souls in Purgatory, thus relieving and liberating very
many of these holy souls from their awful pains. Thus they may be our best
friends and pray for us-----they
cannot pray for themselves, however.
Each time we say “Jesus,” it is an
act of perfect love, for we offer to God the infinite love of Jesus.
The Holy Name of Jesus saves us
from innumerable evils and delivers us especially from the power of the devil,
who is constantly seeking to do us harm.
The Holy Name of Jesus gradually
fills our souls with a peace and joy we never had before.
The Holy Name of Jesus gives us strength
that our sufferings become light and easy to bear.
O Jesus, Thou the beauty
art, Of Angel worlds above!
Thy name is music to the
heart, Enchanting it with love!
Celestial sweetness
unalloyed! Who eat Thee hunger still,
Who drink of Thee still feel
a void, Which naught but Thou can fill!
O my sweet Jesus! Hear the
sighs, Which unto Thee I send!
To Thee my inmost spirit
cries, My being's hope and end!
Stay with us, Lord, and with
Thy light, Illume the soul's abyss;
Scatter the darkness of our
night, And fill the world with bliss.
O Jesus! Spotless Virgin
flower! Our life and joy! To Thee
Be praise, beatitude and
power, Through all eternity! Amen
This Feast of the Holy Name of Jesus is associated with the Feast of the Circumcision, for it is when a
child was circumcised that he received a name and was accepted as a son of
Abraham and a full member of his family.
So honored is His Holy Name that devout Catholics bow their heads (men
removing their hats) at the sound of “Jesus” both inside and outside of the
liturgy. To protect the sacredness and honor due the Holy Name, when hearing
the Name of the Lord taken in vain, it is right to pray, “Sit nomen Dómini
benedíctum!” ( “Blessed be the Name of the Lord”), to which the reply, if
overheard, is “Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum!” (“from this time forth for
evermore!”). .
While there are no special customs that I
am aware of, it is so that if we utter His Name with devotion, we receive a
partial indulgence. A plenary indulgence, under the usual conditions, may be
received if we visit a church or chapel on this day. A good thing to do to
fulfill these conditions is to recite the Litany of the Holy Name, especially
in a church or chapel.
And here are the thoughts of St. Bernard of
Clairvaux (who wrote the hymn “Iesu Dulcis Memoria” which is sung today) on the
most holy Name of Jesus:
The sweet Name of Jesus produces in us holy
thoughts, fills the soul with noble sentiments, strengthens virtue, begets good
works, and nourishes pure affections. All spiritual food leaves the soul dry,
if it contain not that penetrating oil, the Name Jesus. When you take your pen,
write the Name Jesus: if you write books, let the Name of Jesus be contained in
them, else they will possess no charm or attraction for me; you may speak, or
you may reply, but if the Name of Jesus sounds not from your lips, you are
without unction and without charm. Jesus is honey in our mouth, light in our
eyes, a flame in our heart. This name is the cure for all diseases of the soul.
Are you troubled? think but of Jesus, speak but the Name of Jesus, the clouds
disperse, and peace descends anew from heaven. Have you fallen into sin? so that
you fear death? invoke the Name of Jesus, and you will soon feel life
returning. No obduracy of the soul, no weakness, no coldness of heart can
resist this holy Name; there is no heart which will not soften and open in
tears at this holy name. Are you surrounded by sorrow and danger? invoke the
Name of Jesus, and your fears will vanish.
Never yet was human being in urgent need,
and on the point of perishing, who invoked this help-giving Name, and was not
powerfully sustained. It was given us for the cure of all our ills; to soften
the impetuosity of anger, to quench the fire of concupiscence, to conquer
pride, to mitigate the pain of our wounds, to overcome the thirst of avarice,
to quiet sensual passions, and the desires of low pleasures. If we call to our
minds the Name of Jesus, it brings before us His most meek and humble heart,
and gives us a new knowledge of His most loving and tender compassion. The Name
of Jesus is the purest, and holiest, the noblest and most indulgent of names,
the Name of all blessings and of all virtues; it is the Name of the God-Man, of
sanctity itself. To think of Jesus is to think of the great, infinite God Who,
having given us His life as an example, has also bestowed the necessary
understanding, energy and assistance to enable us to follow and imitate Him, in
our thoughts, inclinations, words and actions. If the Name of Jesus reaches the
depths of our heart, it leaves heavenly virtue there. We say, therefore, with
our great master, St. Paul the Apostle: If any man love not our Lord Jesus
Christ, let him be anathema.
FEAST OF
EPIPHANY OF OUR LORD
The Feast of the Epiphany is
the continuation of the mystery of Christmas; but it appears on the Calendar of
the Church with its own special character.
The name signifies Manifestation, implies that it celebrates the
apparition of God to his creatures… The mystery of the Epiphany brings upon us
three magnificent rays of the Sun of Justice, our Saviour… united in the one
same Epiphany three manifestations of Jesus’ glory: the mystery of the
Magi coming from the East, under the guidance of a star, and adoring the Infant
of Bethlehem as the divine King; the mystery of the Baptism of Christ, who,
whilst standing in the waters of the Jordan, was proclaimed by the Eternal
Father as Son of God; and thirdly, the mystery of the divine power of this same
Jesus, when he changed the water into wine at the marriage-feast of Cana… The
Greek Church gives this Feast the venerable and mysterious name of Theophania
signifying divine Apparition celebrating the Baptism of our Lord and
makes no special mention of the Magi having united it with the mystery of our
Saviour’s birth. In the Latin Church,
the mystery of our Lord’s Baptism is celebrated on the octave day of the
Epiphany. The third mystery of the
Epiphany, the miracle of Cana, is celebrated on the second Sunday after the
Epiphany. Dom Gueranger, The
Liturgical Year, Epiphany of Our Lord
And seeing the
star they rejoiced with exceeding great joy. And entering into the house, they
found the Child with Mary His Mother, and falling down they adored Him.
What caused the three kings to
undertake so tedious a journey?
A star which God permitted to appear in their land, at the sight of
which they were inwardly enlightened, so that they at once recognized its
signification. Let us learn from these kings who so readily responded to the
inspiration of God, by immediately undertaking so difficult a journey, to
follow without delay the promptings of divine grace, and from their zeal, and
the fearlessness with which they asked Herod where the Messiah would be found,
we should learn to seek and practice, without fear of men, whatever is
necessary for our salvation.
Why did Herod fear, and all
Jerusalem with him?
Because Herod, a proud, imperious, cruel, and therefore jealous king,
was afraid, when he heard of a new-born king, that he would be deprived of his
throne, and punished for his vices. A bad conscience is always ill at ease, and
has no peace. There is no peace to the wicked, saith the Lord God (Is. 57:21).
The inhabitants of Jerusalem feared because many of them were attached to
Herod, and others, especially the chief priests and the scribes, feared they
would be punished for their secret crimes, when the Messiah would come, of whom
they knew that He shall judge the poor with justice, and with the breath of his
lips he shall slay the wicked (Is. 11:4).
Why did Herod assemble the
chief priests and the scribes?
Partly to find from them where the Messiah was to be born, partly and
principally because God so directed it, that Herod and the chief priests,
knowing the time and place of the Messiah's birth, would have no excuse for
their infidelity. In the same way God often makes known to us, in the clearest
manner the most wholesome truths, yet we heed them as little as did the Jews
who had sufficient knowledge of the Messiah, indeed, even showed the way to the
three kings, but made no use of it for themselves, and were therefore cast
away.
Why did Herod say he wished to
adore the child?
This he did out of wicked hypocrisy and dissimulation. He had no other
intention than to put Jesus to death, and therefore affected piety to find out
exactly the time and place of His birth. Thus do those murderers of souls who
desire the fall of the innocent; they do not let their evil intentions be made
known at once, and so they put on sheep's clothing, feign piety and devotion,
until they creep into the heart from which, by flattery and irony about
religion and virtue, and by presents, they expel shame, the fear of God, and
thus murder the soul.
Why did the kings fall down and
adore Christ?
Because by the light of faith they saw in the Infant at Bethlehem God
Himself, and, notwithstanding the poverty of His surroundings, recognized in
Him the expected Messiah, the new-born king of the Jews, and by prostrating
themselves before Him paid Him the homage of their country.
Why did the kings offer gold,
frankincense and myrrh?
Because it was the ancient Eastern custom, never to appear without
presents before a prince or king, and the three kings, as the holy Fathers
universally teach, enlightened by the Holy Ghost, desired by their presents to
honor Christ as God, as king, and as man. Of this the venerable Bede writes:
“The first of the kings, named Melchior, offered gold to Christ the Lord and
king; the second, named Caspar, frankincense to the divinity of Christ; and the
third, Balthassar, myrrh, by which was expressed that Christ, the Son of man,
must die.
How can we bring similar offerings to Christ?
We offer gold to Him, when we love
Him with our whole heart, and out of love to Him, present Him our will by
perfect obedience and continual self-denial, as our will is our most precious
treasure. We also offer Him gold when we assist the poor by alms given in His
name. We offer Him frankincense when we devoutly and ardently pray to Him,
especially when we meditate upon His omnipotence, love, goodness, justice and
mercy. We offer Him myrrh when we avoid carnal desires, mortify our evil
inclinations and passions, and strive for purity of body and soul.
Why did the kings return by another way to their own country?
This they did by command of God.
From the example of the three wise men we should learn to obey God rather than
man, that we must be obedient to His directions, even if we do not understand
them; so the three kings obeyed, although they may not have understood why God
commanded them to flee from Herod. After we have found God we should walk in
the path of virtue, and not return to our old sinful ways. “Our fatherland is
paradise, heaven,” writes St. Gregory. “We have departed from it by pride,
disobedience, abuse of the senses, therefore it is needed that we return to it
by obedience, contempt of the world, and by taming the desires of the flesh;
thus we return to our own country by another road. By forbidden pleasures we
have forfeited the joys of paradise, by penance we must regain them.”
ASPIRATION Give me, O divine Savior, the faith of those
Eastern kings. Enlighten my understanding with the light which enlightened
them, and move my heart, that I may in future follow this light, and sincerely
seek Thee who hast first sought me. Grant also, that I may really find Thee,
with the wise men may adore Thee in spirit and in truth, and bring to Thee the
gold of love, the frankincense of prayer, and the myrrh of penance and
mortification, that, having here offered Thee the sacrifice of my faith, I may
adore Thee in Thy eternal glory. Amen.
EXHORTATION St. Paul says: All whatsoever you
do in word or in work, all things do ye in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ
(Col. 3:17). We should, therefore, follow the example of the saints, and
continually say, at least in our hearts: “For love of Thee, O Jesus, I rise;
for love of Thee I lie down; for love of Thee I eat, drink, and enjoy myself;
for love of Thee I work, speak, or am silent.” Thus we will accustom ourselves
to do all in the name of Jesus, by which everything is easily or at least
meritoriously accomplished.
When the Arian poison had contaminated not only a limited area, but the
whole world, almost all the bishops of the Latin Church fell into heresy. Forced by violence or deceived by guile. It was like a fog fallen upon the spirits and
hiding which road to take. In order to
be safe from this contagious plague, the true disciples of Christ had to prefer
the ancient beliefs rather than all the false novelties. St. Vincent of Lerins
THE
EPIPHANY OF OUR LORD January 6th
Presence
of God -
I recognize in You, O Jesus, the King of heaven and earth; grant that I may
adore You with the faith and love of the Magi.
Meditation:
1) “He whom the Virgin bore is acknowledged
today by the whole world…. Today is the glorious Feast of His Manifestation”
(RB). Today Jesus shows Himself to the
world as God.
The Introit of the Mass brings us at once
into this spirit, presenting, Jesus to us in the full majesty of His divinity.
“ Behold the sovereign Lord is come; in His hands He holds the kingdom, the
power, and the empire. “ The Epistle (Is 60, 1-6) breaks forth in a hymn of
joy, announcing the vocation of the Gentiles to the faith; they too will
acknowledge and adore Jesus as their God : “ Arise, be enlightened, O Jerusalem
: for thy light is come And the Gentiles
shall walk in thy light, and kings in the brightness of thy rising…. All they
from Saba shall come, bringing gold and frankincense, and showing forth praise
to the Lord. “ We no longer gaze upon
the lowly picture of the shepherds at the manger; passing before us now is the
resplendent procession of the Wise Men from the East, representing the pagan
nations and all the kings of the earth, who come to pay homage to the
Child-God.
Epiphany, or Theophary, means the Manifestation
of God; today it is realized in Jesus who manifests Himself as God and Lord
of the world. Already a prodigy has revealed
His divinity-the extraordinary star which
appeared in the East. To the commemoration of this miracle, which holds the
primary place in the day's liturgy, the Church two others : the changing of
water into wine at the wedding feast of Cana, and the Baptism of Jesus in the
Jordan, when a voice from heaven announced, “ This is My beloved Son. “ The
Magnificat Antiphon says, “ Three miracles adorn this holy day “-three miracles
which should lead us to recognize the Child Jesus as our God and King,and to
adore Him with lively faith.
2. The verse at the Gradual of the
Mass continues the story of the Magi : “ We have seen His star in the East and
are come with gifts to adore Him. “ They saw the star and immediately set out.
They had no doubts : their unbounded faith was strong and sure. They did not
hesitate at the prospect of the trials of a long journey : they had generous
hearts. They did not postpone the journey :
their souls were ready.
A star often appears in the heaven of our
souls; it is an inspiration from God, clear and intimate, urging us to greater
generosity and calling us to a life of closer union with Him. Like the Magi, we
too must always follow our star with faith, promptness, and selfless
generosity. If we allow it to guide us, it will certainly lead us to God; it
will bring us to the One whom we are seeking.
The Magi did not give up their quest,
although the star ‑at one point‑ disappeared from their sight. We
should follow‑ their example and their perseverance, even when we are in
interior darkness. This is a trial of faith which is overcome only by the
exercise of pure, naked faith. I know that He wills it, I know that God is
calling, and this suffices for me : Sico
cui credidi et certus sum (2 Tm I , 12 ) ; I know whom I have
believed. No matter what happens; I
shall trust Him.
In this spirit let us accompany the Magi to
adore the new‑born King. “And as
they brought forth from among their treasures mystical gifts, let us from our
hearts bring forth something fit to offer Him “ (RB).
Colloquy:
O Jesus I adore You, for You are the Lord
my God. For You, my Lord, are a great
God, and a great King above all kings. For in Your hand are all the ends of the
earth,
and the heights of the mountains are Yours. For the sea is Yours, and You made
it; and Your hands formed the dry land . . .
We are the people of Your pasture and the sheep of Your hand “ (cf. Ps
94) . Yes. O, Jesus, I am one of Your lambs, one of Your creatures; and I am
happy to acknowledge my nothingness in
Your presence, and still happier to adore You, O lovely Infant, as my God and
my Redeemer. O that all nations would acknowledge You for what You are, that
all might prostrate before You, adoring you as their Lord and God!
O Lord, You can do this. Reveal Your
divinity to all mankind, and just as once You drew the Magi from the East to
You, now in like manner unite all peoples and all nations around Your manger.
You have shown me that You want my poor
cooperation year in order to bring about the coming of Your Kingdom. You wish
me to pray, suffer, and work for the conversion of those who are near and of
those who are far away. You wish that I, too, place before the manger the gifts
of the Wise Men : the incense of prayer, the myrrh of mortification and of
suffering borne with generosity out of love for You, and finally, the gold of
charity, charity which will make my heart wholly and exclusively Yours, charity
which will spur me on to work, to spend myself for the conversion of sinners
and infidels, and for the greater sanctification of Your elect.
O my loving King, create in me the heart of
an apostle. if only I could lay at Your feet today the praise and adoration of
everyone on earth!
O my Jesus, while I beg You to reveal
Yourself to the world . I also beseech You to reveal Yourself more and more to
my poor soul. Let Your star shine for me today, and point out to me the road
which leads directly to You! May this day be a real Epiphany for me, a new
manifestation to my mind and heart of Your great Majesty. He who knows You
more, loves You more, O Lord, and I want to know You solely in order to love
You, to give myself to You with ever greater generosity.
A tyrannical law, through not being according to reason, is not a law,
absolutely speaking but rather a perversion of law.
St. Thomas Aquinas
“Nicolas,
the PROSELYTE of Antioch”
And the saying was liked by all the multitude. And they chose Stephen,
a man full of faith, and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and
Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch.
Acts of Apostles 6:5
Whoever wishes to be
saved must before all else adhere to the Catholic faith. He must preserve this faith whole and
untarnished; otherwise he shall most certainly perish forever.
Athanasian Creed
And just as this one
Church cannot err in faith or morals, since it is guided by the Holy Ghost; so,
on the contrary, all other societies arrogating to themselves the name of church,
must necessarily, be guided by the spirit of the devil, be sunk in the most
pernicious errors, both doctrinal and moral.
Catechism of the
Council of Trent
"We
should not conform with human traditions to the extent of setting aside the
command of God."
St. Basil the
Great
The meaning of Sacred Dogmas, which must
always be preserved is that which our Holy Mother the Church has determined. Never is it permissible to depart from this
in the name of a deeper understanding.
Vatican Council I
Again,
between Pope Leo and Francis: 'Different styles, same substance!'
"There
are differences in style between Francis and Benedict but not in matters of
faith –" Archbishop Georg Gänswein
Archbishop Georg
Gänswein, prefect of the Pontifical Household and the personal
secretary of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, has said in an interview in the German
magazine Bunte that there are differences in style between Pope Francis
and Pope Emeritus Benedict but not in matters of faith. The Tablet reports:
‘Asked how close the relationship between Pope Francis and his predecessor was,
Archbishop Gänswein differences lay in certain matters of style and taste but
not in matters of faith. The biggest difference between them was the way they
approached people, Archbishop Gänswein said. Pope Francis walked straight up to
people and loved to embrace everyone while Pope Benedict was more reticent,
loved peace and quiet and tended to withdraw from crowds, he said.’
[.....] Bunte reports: ‘Pope Francis
often visits his predecessor and phones him.” This relationship between the two
is warm and trusting,” Archbishop Gänswein also talks about his
relationship with Pope Francis, ‘We have a very cordial
relationship. Francis Pope says clearly what he wants and what he does
not. He is decisive and appreciates the direct word. He listens to advice and
takes reasonable suggestions like.’ Protect the Pope comment: After the series
of interviews that Pope Francis has given to the press which have unsettled at
best, or deeply upset and alienated at worse, faithful and loyal Catholics, it
is time that the Holy Father and his inner circle reach out to to real
Catholics. Archbishop Georg Gänswein’s interview with Bunte may be
the first step in such overtures. There is a long way to go and a lot of
bridges have to be re-built.
Deacon Nick Donnelly, on October 11th, 2013
"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. Sometimes after
a meeting I want to arrange another one because new ideas are born and I
discover new needs. This is important: to get to know people, listen, expand
the circle of ideas."
Pope Francis
"Do you need to convince the other to become Catholic? No, no, no! Go out and meet him, he is your
brother. This is enough. Go out and help him and Jesus will do the
rest."
Pope Francis, August 7, 2013
"The Church does not engage in proselytism. Instead, she grows by
“attraction”- just as Christ “draws all to himself” by the power of his love,
culminating in the sacrifice of the Cross, so the Church fulfills her mission
to the extent that, in union with Christ, she accomplishes every one of her
works in spiritual and practical imitation of the love of her Lord."
Benedict XVI, Aparecida in 2007, a gathering of the Council of Bishops’ Conferences of Latin America and the
Caribbean (CELAM) which had a great impact on Cardinal Bergoglio. (Note:
the Aparecida document from the South American Bishop's Conference is
the structural outline for the “new evangelization.”
"Christ is
preparing a new spring time all over the earth.
I have seen its first fruits and I know that others will joyfully reap
the full harvest."
Pope Francis, CELAM,
7-28-13
“Faith
then cometh by hearing.”
For if thou confess with thy
mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him up from
the dead, thou shalt be saved. For, with the heart, we believe unto justice;
but, with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation. For the
scripture saith: Whosoever believeth in him, shall not be confounded. For there
is no distinction of the Jew and the Greek: for the same is Lord over all, rich
unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the
Lord, shall be saved. How then shall they call on him, in whom they have not
believed? Or how shall they believe him, of whom they have not heard? And how
shall they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless
they be sent, as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that preach
the gospel of peace, of them that bring glad tidings of good things! But all do
not obey the gospel. For Isaias saith: Lord, who hath believed our report?
Faith then cometh by hearing; and hearing by the word of Christ.
St. Paul, Romans 10:9-17
[Footnote: Thou shalt be saved; To “confess the
Lord Jesus,” and to “call upon the name of the Lord” is not barely the
professing a belief in the person of Christ; but moreover, implies a belief of
his whole doctrine, and an obedience to his law; without which, the calling him
Lord will save no man. St. Matt. 7. 21.]
On the Infallible Word of God -
Perhaps “august body” should be in quotation marks
The premise on which my paper is based is that over the last
thirty-five years orthodox Catholic Scripture scholarship has not simply lost a
major battle; it has lost an entire war. It has been devastated, and almost
completely wiped off the map.
Dissident, rationalistic, neo-modernist biblical scholarship has been firmly
in control ever since the 1960s in nearly all the major Catholic institutions
of higher learning, and is clearly insinuated (although not openly spelt out)
even in recent documents of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, that august
body of twenty or so top-ranking exegetes [Scripture scholars] from round the
world which advises the Church's magisterium on biblical matters.
Fr. Brian Harrison, O.S., On Rewriting the Bible, 2002
Let them
innovate in nothing, but keep the traditions.
Pope St.
Stephen I, letter to St. Cyprian, 3rd cent.
First of all they
lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject
to change, and must change, and in this way they pass to what may be said to
be, among the chief of their doctrines, that of Evolution. To the laws
of evolution everything is subject - dogma, Church, worship, the Books we
revere as sacred, even faith itself, and the penalty of disobedience is death.
The enunciation of this principle will not astonish anybody who bears in mind
what the Modernists have had to say about each of these subjects.
St. Pius X,
Pascendi
If
anyone wishes to write against this, I will welcome it. For true and false will
in no better way be revealed and uncovered than
in resistance to a contradiction, according to the saying: “Iron is sharpened by iron.”
(Prov. 27: I 7). And between us
and them may God judge, who is
blessed in eternity. Amen.
St.
Thomas, On the Perfection of the
Spiritual Life
This isn't merely a Catholic concern.
With the decline of the Catholic Church, the West as a whole has lost
its moral center of gravity. There is no
longer a huge, adamantine conservative institution to exert the restraining
influence the Church once did. Before
the Council, nobody in American public life dared to advocate abortion, and
even in private life people were ashamed of fornication and contraception. Since the Council, madly centrifugal forces
have prevailed everywhere. No wonder
many people feel that Satan is at the wheel.
Joe Sobran
Liberal enthusiasm for the Council, even more than the, (too few!)
conservative qualms, should have been a warning. Looking back, it seems obvious - to me, at
least - that the Council was conceived and conducted in the heady optimism of
the early Sixties. This mood affected,
or infected, even the Church's hierarchy.
The reforms came without the caveats and restraints that, as we see now
only too well, should have accompanied them if they were to be adopted at
all. Does anyone still believe in the
ecumenical movement that was one of the Council's great hopes? Like the Great Society (of Johnson), it now
seems an old dream from which we have sadly awakened, amid much ruin..... The
Council should have warned us most sternly that misapplications of its reforms
might produce such evil that it would have been better if the Council had never
happened at all : massive defections from the Church, weakened faith,
immorality, sacrilege, confusion, and, above all the damnation of countless
souls.
Joe Sobran, 2003
Heretics
are those who deny DOGMA and DOGMA is the "Formal Object of Divine and
Catholic Faith." DOGMA forms the foundation of the "whole knowledge
of divine things" which encompasses both the formal and the material
objects of faith.
"Faith is concerned with things that are not seen and that may be
considered as belonging to the divine."
St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 1, Art. 2
"The formal object of faith is the reality itself that is believed,
which, in the case of divine faith, is the truth of God as revealed through His
Word."
St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 1, Art. 2
"The assent of faith must be directed to the articles of faith,
which are in themselves necessary for salvation."
St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 1, Art. 4
"Faith must adhere to the articles of faith, because from these
arise the whole knowledge of divine things."
Summa Theologica, II-II, Q. 1, Art. 3
In pastoral
letter, Charlotte's Bishop Martin ends altar rails for holy Communion
National Catholic Reporter | Patricia L. Guilfoyle | Charlotte, N.C. —
December 23, 2025
Bishop
Michael Martin has established guidelines for the reception of holy Communion in the Diocese
of Charlotte to strengthen unity in worship, uphold the church's
liturgical norms and encourage active participation by the faithful.
Martin announced
the new norms in a pastoral letter that affirms the common posture of
standing to receive holy Communion, encourages priests to offer Communion
under both bread and wine more often, and calls for the broader use of trained
laypeople to serve as Eucharistic ministers.
"The liturgy of the Church is the work of God and the work on
behalf of God in the life of the Church," Martin wrote in the Dec.
17 letter. "These norms
for our diocese move us together toward the Church's vision for the fuller and
more active participation of the faithful."
In his pastoral letter, the bishop emphasized that the celebration
of the Eucharist is a communal act of worship, not only an individual act of
piety.
"Throughout
the ages and within the context of our rich liturgical traditions from the East
to the West, our unity as believers in Holy Communion is expressed through
our postures and gestures that reflect our mystical communion and unity as
fellow believers," he said.
The new guidance does not replace the diocese's general
liturgical norms established in 2005, but builds upon them and aligns
closely with the Catholic Church's universal norms (what is called
the "General Instruction of the Roman Missal") and directives set by
the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
The pastoral letter follows months of consultation with the
diocese's Office for Divine Worship and the Presbyteral Council of priests,
which represents all priests of the diocese in administrative and policy
discussions.
In his
pastoral letter, Martin affirmed the "normative posture" for
receiving holy Communion in the United States is standing, after bowing
the head as a sign of reverence.
The directive
instructs any parishes that currently use altar rails for
distributing Communion to discontinue the practice and remove any portable
kneelers or prie-dieus by Jan. 16, noting that such practices are "a
visible contradiction" to the prescribed posture of standing.
"Instead,"
his pastoral letter states, the church "emphasizes that receiving
Holy Communion is to be done as the members of the faithful go in
procession, witnessing that the Church journeys forward and receives Holy Communion
as a pilgrim people on their way."
In many churches,
altar rails are architectural elements that differentiate the sanctuary from
the nave and once were used for Communion distribution.
Over the past decade or so, a small number of churches in the diocese
reintroduced the use of rails or kneelers to distribute Holy Communion,
but most diocesan churches already follow the practice of
receiving Communion while standing, consistent with U.S. norms.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop reiterated that individuals may
not be denied holy Communion if they choose to kneel, yet he encouraged
the faithful to "prayerfully consider the blessing of communal witness
that is realized when we share a common posture."
Clergy and catechists, he added, "are to instruct communicants
according to the normative posture in the United States" and "are not
to teach that some other manner is better, preferred, more efficacious,
etc."
In guidance to pastors that accompanied the bishop's
pastoral letter, the diocese's Office for Divine Worship noted that if a
communicant wishes to kneel but is physically unable, the pastor should address
the situation privately.
"He is to
catechize and remind the person that standing to receive is no less reverent or
worthy a way to receive Our Lord," advised Fr. Noah Carter, diocesan
liturgy director. "In both ways, the communicant who is properly
disposed to receive holy Communion gains the same graces and gifts
contained in the Eucharist, regardless of standing or kneeling."
In
his letter, Martin also encouraged pastors, where and when possible, to
distribute holy Communion under the forms of both bread and wine more
often.
While affirming church teaching that Christ is fully present — body,
blood, soul and divinity — under either bread or wine, he encouraged priests to
consider the "fuller sign" of distributing holy Communion under
both kinds to foster "a deeper participation in the Eucharistic
mystery," consistent with prevailing church practice.
The bishop specifically noted that "a significant number of
parishes" did not resume distribution of the Precious Blood in the wake of
the COVID-19 pandemic. "To foster unity, it is helpful that we all
practice a similar way of distributing Holy Communion," he said.
"Parishioners who travel from parish to parish because of their
own needs may otherwise rightly question why the Precious Blood is always
available in one church and never available in another."
The pastoral letter specifically recommends distributing the
Precious Blood for at least one Mass every Sunday and for major solemnities,
including: Christmas, the Easter Vigil, Divine Mercy Sunday, Pentecost, Trinity
Sunday, Corpus Christi, Christ the King Sunday, and Holy Thursday. It also
encourages distributing holy Communion under both kinds for first
holy Communion Masses, wedding Masses, parish patronal feast days and
church anniversaries.
It reaffirms that the consecrated host may be received either on the tongue or
in the hand, at the discretion of the communicant.
It explicitly prohibits the practice of intinction — dipping the host
into the Precious Blood before placing it on the communicant's tongue — at
public liturgies.
In his pastoral letter, the bishop also encouraged parishes to enlist more
laypeople to help clergy with distributing holy Communion.
Priests and deacons are the "ordinary ministers of
holy Communion," while laypeople may serve as "extraordinary
ministers of holy Communion" when needed, such as when there are too
many communicants for the clergy to distribute Communion efficiently.
In many parishes, extraordinary ministers also take Communion to
the sick and homebound.
The diocese's existing liturgical norms already call for
extraordinary ministers in such situations and provide for people to serve in
three-year terms. The new guidelines formalize practices that are already
commonplace in the diocese and across the U.S.
They set eligibility and formation requirements, and direct parishes to
have enough eucharistic ministers "for roughly 75 communicants" at
each Mass. Parishes are also directed to invite people to serve as
extraordinary ministers and offer training at least once a year.
To be appointed as such, a layperson must: be a
practicing Catholic who has received the sacraments of initiation; be at
least 16 years old; "demonstrate a deep reverence for and devotion to the
holy Eucharist"; be "distinguished in their Christian life, faith and
morals"; and take part in the diocese's safe environment training.
COMMENT: The immemorial rule of receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic
Church is kneeling and on the tongue from the hands of a Catholic priest or
deacon. In the Latin Rite communion is distributed only under the appearance of
bread. The current practice of the Novus Ordo Church is by Indult granted by
the Vatican at the petition from the Novus Ordo National Conference of Catholic
Bishops in the United States. An Indult is a permission to NOT obey the law.
Bishop Martin's Letter begins with a lie. It ends with imposing the norms of
the Lutheran church on the Novus Ordites and his determination to prevent
anyone from building a Catholic sanctuary. The Lutherans do not believe in the
True Presence in their services and neither does Bishop Martin. The Novus Ordo
Mass was initially defined as a memorial meal, and if that is all it is, then
the Lutheran norms are perfectly reasonable and there is no problem with Bishop
Martin's arguments. But Bishop Martin is liar and therefore we cannot expect
him to acknowledge this truth. A PEW poll in 2019 found that only 26% for all
Catholics under 40 years of age (and only 63% of all Novus Ordites who go to
Mass at least once each week) believe in the Catholic dogma of the True
Presence. These Catholics under 40 years of age were raised on the current
Indult and have lost the Catholic faith. What an established practice does in
its signification is what it was intended to do. The intention of Bishop Martin
is to destroy the belief in any remaining Catholics of the True Presence. The argument
that standing better symbolizes that we are a "pilgrim people" has
been used for more than fifty years. It was a stupid argument in the beginning
and remains a more stupid argument today because the result of the practice are
evident. The Novus Ordo church has yet to publically acknowledge that their
church is on a pilgrimage
God
is TRUTH, and those who fall away from TRUTH fall away from GOD
While he (the eldest brother of the Machabees) was
suffering therein long torments, the rest, together with the mother, exhorted
one another to die manfully, saying: The Lord God will look upon the truth, and
will take pleasure in us, as Moses declared in the profession of the canticle:
'And In his servants he will take pleasure'. (II Machabees 7:5-6)
“That it should be very clear that these priests have nothing to do
with those who place in doubt… the doctrinal soundness of the Roman Missal
promulgated by Pope Paul VI, in 1970 and that their position should be without
any ambiguity and publicly known.” One of several "conditions" agreed
upon by Indult Catholics to offer or attend a Bugnini transitional Missal Mass
of 1962
COMMENT: IF Saints Peter & Paul Roman Catholic Mission were not in
York, PA, the Indult community under the Fraternity of St. Peter would not be
in Harrisburg, PA. There is not a single Catholic receiving a single sacrament
at the Harrisburg Indult who does not owe a debt of gratitude for the
sacrifices made by members of our Mission. God always keeps score.
"ALL
HERETICS ARE SCHISMATICS." St. Thomas Aquinas quoting St. Augustine
“It is not to
be excluded that I will enter history as the one who split the Catholic
Church.”
Pope Francis,
concluding remarks attributed to him in the Der Spiegel article on the Crisis
in the Catholic Church.
COMMENT: As if that was not Pope Francis' intention
and what in fact he had long been doing throughout his pontificate? The
question remains as to what name in history will Francis be known? But let's
leave that for later. The truth is that Conservative Catholics have never
gotten anything in its right hierarchical order. They stupidly thought the
“split” in the Church began when traditional Catholics were disobedient to
legitimate exercise of authority by resisting the overthrow of our
Ecclesiastical Traditions by which alone the Faith can be known and
communicated to others. Conservative Catholics are only now turning to face the
front of this conflict but they are unarmed for the fight. Pope Francis, who professed
the same doctrine as his conciliar predecessors, only drovethe wedge far deeper
into the Bark of Peter to “split” the Church. The Conservative Catholics are at
last alarmed because the Ship is taking on massive amounts of water.
Unfortunately, the poor Conservative Catholics who are raising their voices
against the corruption of Francis and his successor Leo will surely fail. Let's
call them the Dubiaists. The Dubiaists have doubts but no real convictions.
They will fail because they turned their backs against the literal meaning of
DOGMA long ago and cannot recognize heresy. They now have nothing from which to
mount their defense for DOGMA is the one and only weapon against an abusive
authority. Authority is subject only to Truth. and DOGMA is the most perfect
expression of Truth available to all men.
Greetings from Pope Leo to Father Franz
Schmidberger, SSPX
Pope
Leo extends his heartfelt congratulations to venerable Father Franz
Schmidberger, SSPX on the occasion of his fiftieth anniversary of his priestly
ordination and extends his apostolic blessing.
Friedrichshafen, Germany, December
14, 2025
COMMENT: We have publically
affirmed that the SSPX was formally regularized with modernist Rome no later than
2015 and most likely in 2012 although this is not commonly shared with its
member priests or those faithful who attend their chaples for Mass. Fr.
Schmidberger was the general superior of the SSPX after the retirement of
Archbishop Lefebvre, and after his death when Bishop Fellay became the general
superior, Fr. Schmidberger was his direct assistant. It was under the guidance
of Fr. Schmidberger that the secret negotiations with modernist Rome began in
the 1990s that would eventually lead to their regularization. This
"heartfelt" greetings and congratulations from Pope Leo is in
acknowledgment of Fr. Schmidberger's untiring commitment to betray Catholic
tradition.
"There will be two worm-ridden popes".
Blessed Virgin Mary, Our
Lady of La Salette to Melanie
The
idea that there would be two worm-ridden popes is an unofficial, unpublished
prophecy of Melanie, one of two children at the apparition of La Salette in
France. It pops up in one of her letters to Fr. Roubaud back on September 30,
1884, and it was brought to light by author Michel Corteville in his book, Découverte
du secret de La Salette. Some say that the phrase actually
translates to: “two shaky, servile, doubtful popes.” The original French reads:
Mais avant ce temps (des tribulations) il
y aura deux fois une paix de peu de durée, deux Papes vermoulus, plats,
douteux.*
TRANSLATION: “But
before this time (of tribulations) there will be twice a peace of short
duration, two worm-eaten, flat, and doubtful Popes.”
“Only take heed to yourself and guard your soul diligently.” Deut 4:9
"It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the Catholic
Church!"
Blessed Pope Pius IX
“Living Tradition,” synonym for Immanentism of
the Modernist
The term, “living
tradition,” a novelty of modernist construction given official standing at Vatican
II, conflates the subjective understanding with the objective truth, is part of
the theological justification to replace our received traditions with novelties
grounded in fantasy.
“The
root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory
notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into
account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican
Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church
with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the
realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways.
It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these
things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities
which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have
received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure
charism of truth”.
John Paul II, explaining the problems with
Archbishop Lefebvre’s consecration of four bishops from his failure to
understand the novel Vatican II definition of tradition
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
– Even JPII did not deny this dogma!
Pope Francis Teaches:
We hold the Jewish people in special regard
because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the
call of God are irrevocable” (Rom.11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an
important part of the Sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant
and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf.
Rom. 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign
religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and
to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes. 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God
who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word. Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium
The Church officially recognizes that the
People of Israel continue to be the Chosen People. Nowhere does it say: “You
lost the game, now it is our turn.” It is a recognition of the People of
Israel.
Pope Francis, On Heaven and Earth
The Catholic Church Teaches:
Hebrews
7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its
weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews
10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the
first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2
Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old
Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it
taken away”;
Hebrews
8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no
place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians
2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against
us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope
Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the
place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death
Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old
Testament to the Cross”;
The
Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the
abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council
of Florence: [This council] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that
the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosiac law, which
are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because
they were established to signify something in the future, although they were
suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been
signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and
that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law
and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ
could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after
the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been
observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but
after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed
without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time
observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it
declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate
in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino
Council
of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were
able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal
Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many
Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St.
John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this
Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that
the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no
one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty
years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows
what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on
Galatians, Ch 3);
St.
Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have
received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows
and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah
also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that
I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of
Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been
partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given
them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel,
that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness
of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin
Martyr: “Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it,
and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous
one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and
the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same
new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I
will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of
Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
John Paul II: “Christ fulfills the
divine promise and supersedes the old law.” (Redemptoris Mater)
Taken from Robert Sungenis, The
Old Covenent: Revoked or Not Revoked?
Pope Leo: Don’t let tension between tradition, novelty become ‘harmful polarizations’
EWTN | Victoria Cardiel | October 27, 2025
Pope Leo XIV said at a Mass on Sunday that
no one in the Church “should impose his or her own ideas” and asked that
tensions between tradition and novelty not become “ideological contrapositions
and harmful polarizations.”
“The supreme rule in the Church is love. No
one is called to dominate; all are called to serve,” Leo said in St. Peter’s
Basilica on Oct. 26.
“No one should impose his or her own
ideas; we must all listen to one another,” he continued. “No one is excluded;
we are all called to participate. No one possesses the whole truth; we must all
humbly seek it and seek it together.” [.....]
COMMENT: The problem
is this: the love of novelty is an ideology, Tradition along with sacred
Scripture is divine revelation. The Church always and everywhere has condemned
novelty until Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Church of Novelty embraced it. The
conflict between novelty and tradition is the conflict between God's revelation
and demonic lies; the conflict between the Church and the World. Those who are
faithful to tradition do not "impose their own ideas" but defend
God's revealed truth against the novelty of the world. The Novus Ordo Novelty
Church is "seeking truth"; the Church of Jesus Christ possesses it.
Pope Leo like his predecessor likes to characterize tradition as rigid and dead
and the novelty of modernism as mature and hopeful. This was once an intensely
debated matter but, at this time, after all the wreckage of the last 50 years
all tradition has to do is to point at the fruit of Vatican II novelty. Both
Leo and his predecessor Francis worked in South America. The total population
of South and Central America is about 600 million. Since Vatican II about 300
million have apostatized from the Catholic Church. These last two popes have
personally presided over the greatest apostasy over the shortest period of time
in the history of the Catholic Church. Anything Leo has to say, as long as he
is not sitting in the Chair of Peter, must be examined in light of this record.
Fruit of
Vatican II - Apostasy
In Honduras,
the country of the once most powerful man in the Roman Curia under
Francis/Bergoglio, Cardinal Rodríguez Maradiaga, a personally corrupt and immoral
man who had been a bishop in the capital
since 1978, first as auxiliary then as Archbishop for 30 years, the
hierarchy led by him managed the
amazing feat of transforming that country in the first Catholic-minority nation
in Central America, a vertiginous fall from 94% to 46% in the same period -
and the same happened in Uruguay, across the Rio de la Plata from (Bergoglio's
home) Buenos Aires.
Rorate Caeli
Data Collapse of Catholic Faith in Latin America from 2014 presided
over by Pope Leo/Provost and his predecessor Francis/Begoglio
The “received and approved rites of the Catholic Church,
accustomed to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments”:
…..Because, as we will see, Catholics must
celebrate only the “received and approved
rites” of the Church as a matter of Divine Law.
God revealed this truth in Scripture
through St. Paul. Before St. Paul teaches the Corinthians liturgical and
theological details concerning the Holy Mass (consecration formula, Real
Presence), he prefaces his teaching by affirming: “For I have received of the Lord that
which I also delivered unto you…”
(I Cor 11:23). St. Paul says again: “For I delivered unto you first of all,
which I also received” (1Cor 15:3). In these and other verses, St. Paul
emphasizes that we must believe and practice only what we have “received” from
Christ and the apostles which has been “delivered” unto us, and which includes
the liturgical rites of the Church. This is a divinely revealed truth and a
matter of Faith.
The
Church has taught this divine truth throughout her history. For example, in the
Papal Oath of Coronation, which originates at least as far back as Pope St.
Agatho in 678 A.D. (and which was set aside by Paul VI), every Pope swore to
change nothing of the “received tradition.” Pope
Pius IV’s Tridentine Profession of Faith, which is binding on the souls of all
Catholics, likewise expresses this principle by requiring adherence to the “received and approved rites of the
Catholic Church used in the solemn administration of the sacraments.” The “received and approved rites of the Church”
originate from the Spirit of Christ and the traditions of the apostles which
have been handed down to us through the ages.
Because the “received and approved rites” are part of the Church’s infallible
expression of the unchanging Deposit of Faith, as inspired and nurtured by the
Holy Ghost, they cannot be set aside or changed into new rites. This is why the
Ecumenical Council of Trent (1545-1563) infallibly declared:
“If anyone says
that the received and approved
rites of the Catholic Church, accustomed to be used in the
administration of the sacraments, may be despised or omitted by the ministers
without sin and at their pleasure, or
may be changed by any pastor of the churches to other new ones, let him be
anathema.”
Because the Council declares anathema (that
is, condemned, or severed from the Body of Christ) anyone who would set aside
or change into new rites the already “received
and approved rites” of the Church, proves that adherence to the “received and approved rites” is a
matter of Divine Law. The absolute necessity to preserve the substance of the
Church’s ancient liturgical rites is a requirement of the Faith because the rites
preserve and express that Faith. To hold that the Church’s rites can change
implies a belief that the Church’s doctrines can change, because the rites
preserve and express the doctrines. Hence, those who do not preserve the
Church’s rites (by omitting or changing them) are objectively anathema because they sin
against the Faith itself.
In light of the foregoing
condemnation, the Holy Council of Trent directed that the Roman Missal be
restored so that the faithful would know once and for all what is the “received and approved rite” of Mass.
To that end, Pope St. Pius V issued his papal bull Quo Primum Tempore to legally codify “the decrees of the Holy Council of Trent”
and render a definitive application of the Divine Law dogmatized by the
Council. This judgment mandated a single usage of the Roman rite for the Latin
Church, with some minor exceptions for usages greater than 200 years old, “in order that what has been handed down by
the most holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the rest of the churches
may be accepted and observed by all everywhere.” Hence, the sainted Pope
declared the oft-called “Tridentine
Mass” to be the “received and
approved rite” of the Church, and which precluded the creation of any “new
rite” of Mass in the future. Further, because Quo Primum is an infallible application of
Divine Law (that is, we must use only the “received
and approved rites”), St. Pius V rightly declared the decree to be
irreformable and valid forever.
This brings us to the inevitable and
troubling question: Is the
Novus Ordo a “new rite” of Mass that comes under the anathema of the Council of
Trent, as definitively interpreted by St. Pius V in Quo Primum? The name of the
rite itself (Novus Ordo
which means “new order” or “new ordinary” of the Mass) certainly suggests the
same. More importantly, so do the words of Pope Paul VI. In his November 19,
1969 General Audience address, Paul VI refers to the Novus Ordo as a “new rite” of
Mass several times, for example: “We wish to draw your attention to an event
about to occur in the Latin Catholic Church: the introduction of the liturgy of
the new rite of the Mass.”
He also says, “In the new rite you will find the relationship between the
Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist...”
We also consider the statements of
the members of Paul VI’s liturgical commission that created the New Mass, such
as the secretary and head of the commission, Fr. Annibale Bugnini, who said:
“It is not simply a question of restoring a valuable masterpiece, in some cases
it will be necessary to provide new
structures for entire rites…it will truly be a new creation.” Bugnini’s
assistant, Fr. Carlos Braga, also stated that the New Mass has “an entirely new foundation of
Eucharistic theology” and whose “ecumenical requirements” are “in harmony with
the Church’s new positions.”
Fr. Joseph Gelineau, one of the most influential members of the commission,
also said: “To tell you the truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass. This
needs to be said without ambiguity: the
Roman rite as we knew it no
longer exists.” Therefore, both Paul VI and his appointed
authors of the Novus Ordo admitted that the New Mass is not the rite “received”
from tradition, but rather a rite created by innovation – an entirely
unprecedented act in the history of the Church.
But we should not rely on these
statements alone. While they may reveal the intent of the innovators, it is
still necessary to look at the substance of the Novus Ordo rite itself. As we have seen, the
Council of Trent and St. Pius V intended to preserve the substantial identity
of the Roman rite forever. If the New Mass does not preserve this identity,
then it cannot be considered the “received
and approved rite” of the Catholic Church no matter what anyone says. Even
the Second Vatican Council, which did not (and could not) mandate the creation
of a new rite of Mass, recognized this truth by directing that the rites “be revised carefully in the light of sound
tradition” with “due care being
taken to preserve their substance.”
The Council of Trent’s condemnation
of omitting or changing the “received
and approved rites” into “new rites”
is best understood by referring to one of the oldest maxims of the Church’s
sacred theology: “legem credendi statuit lex orandi.”
This is a Latin phrase which means “the rule of prayer determines the rule of
faith” (often referred to as “lex
orandi, lex credendi”). In other words, the way we pray determines
what we believe. If a liturgical tradition which expresses a doctrine of the
Faith is altered or removed altogether, the underlying doctrine will
necessarily be compromised. This is why the “received and approved rites” must be faithfully preserved and
never transformed into “other new ones”
as declared by Trent.
…… However, the Novus Ordo Missae deviates from the Roman Missal
of St. Pius V to such an extent that it no longer retains the substantial
identity of the Roman rite. Even before the introduction of such abuses as
audible canons, vernacular and versus
populum (toward the people) celebrations, lay ministers, Communion
under both species, Communion in the hand to standing communicants and the
like, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci advised Paul VI that “the Novus Ordo
represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the
Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the
Council of Trent.” Consequently, Cardinal Ottaviani (who, as head of the
Holy Office, was responsible for safeguarding the doctrine of the Faith), in
his famous intervention, concluded that the Novus Ordo was indeed a different
rite of Mass.
For example, Ottaviani says: “To abandon a liturgical tradition which
for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace
it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it
implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division – a liturgy which
teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic
Faith – is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an
incalculable error.” He also says,
“It is obvious that the New
Order of Mass has no intention of presenting the Faith taught by the
Council of Trent. But it is to this Faith that the Catholic conscience
is bound forever.” Accordingly, Ottaviani appealed to Paul VI “not to deprive us of the possibility of
continuing to have recourse to the integral
and fruitful Missal of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your
Holiness, and so deeply venerated by the whole Catholic world.” Therefore,
both the critics and the
creators of the New Mass, including Paul VI himself, agree that the
Novus Ordo differs
in substance from
the Tridentine Missal and, hence, constitutes a “new rite” of Mass.
John Salza, J.D., The Novus Ordo Mass and Divine Law, excerpt from Catholic Family
News
He failed on
two occasions, 1942 & 1952, to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of
Mary as our Lady requested! He
contributed his share in liturgical destruction by establishing the liturgical
commission under Bugnini in 1948 and having Bea, his personal confessor,
undertake a new Latin translation of the Psalms.
“I am concerned
about the messages of the Virgin to the little Lucia of Fatima. This
persistence of the Good Lady in face of the danger that threatens the Church is
a divine warning against the suicide that the alteration of the Faith, in its
liturgy, its theology, and its soul, would represent. I hear around me
innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame
of the Church, reject her ornaments, and make her remorseful for her
historical past.”
Pope Pius XII,
1933
And now, addressing the “false prophets that exploit fear
and hopelessness to sell magical formulas of hate and cruelty,” Pope Francis
again insults the Catholic Faith as known and practiced by all our forefathers!
COMMENT: Pope Francis often
referenced St. Vincent of Lérins as if his understanding of Tradition is in
accord with that of the great Church Father.
It most certainly was not which is evident to anyone familiar with his
writings. This corruption can only be attributed to malice. Francis the Lutheran and St. Vincent the
Catholic did not profess the same Faith and only one of them is the Faith
without which it is impossible to please God.
Francis characterized faithfulness to the revelation of God as
“rigidity” which was itself attributed to deeper psychological and moral
failings of traditional Catholics. “Love is not rigid,” claimed Francis while
he counseled the overthrow of God’s commandments, but St. John the Apostle of
Love and devotee of the Sacred Heart reports a very different Gospel of Jesus
Christ:
· If you love me, keep my commandments. John 14:15
· If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; as I also have
kept my Father’ s commandments, and do abide in his love. John 15:10
· He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them; he it is that loveth
me. And he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father: and I will love him,
and will manifest myself to him. John 14:21
· Jesus answered, and said to him: If any one love me, he will keep my
word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our
abode with him. John 14:23
· In this we know that we love the children of God: when we love God, and
keep his commandments. 1 John 5:2
· And by this we know that we have known him, if we keep his
commandments. 1 John 2:3
Love is never lax or slothful in its pious
attention to duty. The laxism and sloth
of Pope Francis was because without Faith, he had no true love of God.
Leo the Homosexual following in the way of Francis the
Homosexual.
Pictured below is Leo and Francis both greeting
homosexual "married" couples for public photo-ops. The other pictures
are Francis and Leo both slumming around with the pervert James Martin.
The Vatican is in the hands of the Homosexual Lobby. We
must pray to God to purge His Church of this gross perversion.
Preaching to the DEAF!
You gather here today, present-day
apostles, as the Church and, therefore, the world stand perched on the edge of
a cliff. And yet you who are entrusted with the keeping of souls choose to
speak not a word of the spiritual danger which abounds. Today we stand on the cusp of all
that has been prophesied about the Church and the abominations which would come
forth in these times, a time when all of hell attacks the Church of Jesus
Christ, and a time when the fallen angels of hell no longer seek entry into her
sacred halls but instead stand inside, peeking out of her windows and unlocking
doors to welcome in more diabolical destruction.
Do you not know that Our Lord will
send forth His avenging angels to heap coals of fire upon the heads of those
who were called to be His apostles and who have not guarded what He has given
unto them?
And yet almost all of you, my
brothers, stood by silently watching as the Synod on Synodality took
place, an abomination constructed not to guard the Deposit of Faith, but to
dismantle it, and yet few were the cries heard from you – men who should be
willing to die for Christ and His Church.
The Synod’s final document has
been released, yet with the sleight of hand which is so characteristic
of the Francis-controlled Vatican. By drawing attention to the issues which
worried many, they have slipped in what was always their real goal without
anyone even noticing. What they were after in the first place was the
dismantling of Christ’s Church by replacing the structure of the Church as
Our Lord instituted it with a diabolically-inspired new structure of
“synodality” which in actuality is a new church that is in no way Catholic.
Bishop Joseph Strickland, former bishop of
Tyler, TX who was removed from his office by Pope Francis the Diabolical for
preaching Catholic truth, addressing the U.S. bishops gathered at their annual
meeting
Latae sententiae crimes in the
external forum require a determination of guilt!
“A sentence
declaratory of the offence is always necessary in the forum externum, since in
this tribunal no one is presumed to be excommunicated unless convicted of a
crime that entail such a penalty.”
Pope
Benedict XIV, De syndod, X, I, 5
COMMENT: Recently
a group of young men and women missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints (Mormons) were doing their required missionary work in
central city York. A friendly theological discussion took place on the steps of
our Mission chapel. The friendly exchanged ended and the climate cooled when
the question about the exact number of Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's wives
was brought up. Mormons believe that Jesus Christ founded one Church. They
believe that that Church became corrupted and God abandoned it. God then,
centuries later, reconstituted His Church when the angel Moroni lead the
illiterate Joseph Smith to a hidden book and provided him with mystical
spectacles permitting him to read it. When you ask a Mormon how is it that Jesus
Christ promised to be with His Church until the end of time and taught that
marriage is between one man and one woman until death, why is it that they
believe Joseph Smith or Brigham Young and not believe Jesus Christ? They answer
by walking away. Jesus Christ uses the metaphor of marriage to describe His
relationship with His Church and with each of the faithful individually. Every
man-made heretical and schismatic sect eventually repudiates marriage because
they cannot abide the metaphor. Luther permitted bigamy. The Orthodox permit
divorce and remarriage three times. Joseph Smith had "up to forty
wives" and Brigham Young had "fifty-six wives, twenty-one had
never been married before; seventeen were widows; six were divorced; six had
living husbands; and the marital status of six others is unknown. Nine of his
wives had previously been plural wives of Joseph Smith, and Young was sealed to
them as a proxy for Smith" (WIKI). The first clue to the Mormons that they were being lead into a spiritual desert was
polygamy but some like the desert. Mormons claim that Brigham Young saw the
light and abandoned the practice for the Latter Day Saints but this occurred
only after the U.S. government told they to give it up or get out. Although
Mormons are no longer polygamists, they permit divorce and "temple"
remarriage which is just serial polygamy. These "missionaries" now
know that Jesus Christ did not abandon His Church and will not do so no matter
how corrupt churchmen become. The Catholic Church alone offers the possibility
of salvation.
It’s Official: Mormon Founder Had Up
to 40 Wives...
Mormon leaders have acknowledged for the first time that the church’s
founder and prophet, Joseph Smith, portrayed in church materials as a loyal
partner to his loving spouse Emma, took as many as 40 wives, some already
married and one only 14 years old.... The biggest bombshell for some in the essays is that Smith married women
who were already married, some to men who were Smith’s friends and followers.
Religious Liberty from Vatican II has its root in the
Americanist Heresy
On
every side the dread phantom of war holds sway: there is scarce room for
another thought in the minds of men. The combatants are the greatest and
wealthiest nations of the earth; what wonder, then, if, well provided with the
most awful weapons modern military science has devised, they strive to destroy
one another with refinements of horror. There is no limit to the measure of
ruin and of slaughter; day by day the earth is drenched with newly-shed blood,
and is covered with the bodies of the wounded and of the slain. Who would
imagine as we see them thus filled with hatred of one another, that they are
all of one common stock, all of the same nature, all members of the same human
society? ....We implore those in whose hands are placed the fortunes of nations
to hearken to Our voice. Surely there are other ways and means whereby violated
rights can be rectified. Let them be tried honestly and with good will, and let
arms meanwhile be laid aside.
Benedict
XV, Ad beatissimi apostolorum,
November 1, 1914
“We
consider the establishment of our country’s independence, the shaping of its
liberties and laws, as a work of special Providence, its framers ‘building
better than they knew,’ the Almighty’s hand guiding them. We believe that our
country’s heroes were the instruments of the God of nations in establishing
this home of freedom; to both the Almighty and to His instruments in the work
we look with grateful reverence. And to maintain the inheritance of freedom
which they have left us, should it ever–which God forbid—be imperiled, our
Catholic citizens will be found to stand forward as one man, ready to pledge
anew ‘their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.’”
Archbishop
(soon to be Cardinal) James Gibbons, addressing the American bishops at the
Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884 attended by 14 archbishops and 61
bishops.
Moved
to the very depths of our hearts by the stirring appeal of the President of the
United States, and by the action of our national Congress, we accept
whole-heartedly and unreservedly the decree of that legislative authority
proclaiming this country to be in a state of war. Inspired neither by hate nor
fear, but by the holy sentiments of truest patriotic fervor and zeal, we stand
ready, we and all the flock committed to our keeping, to cooperate in every way
possible with our President and our national government, to the end that the
great and holy cause of liberty may triumph and that our beloved country may
emerge from this hour of test stronger and nobler than ever. Our people, as
ever, will rise as one man to serve the nation.
Pledge
of U.S. Catholic Archbishops, April 18, 1917; sent to President Woodrow Wilson
by Cardinal James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, the leading Catholic
prelate in the United States.
“The
primary duty of a citizen is loyalty to country. It is exhibited by an absolute
and unreserved obedience to his country’s call.”
Cardinal
James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore (1877-1921), April 1917 in support of
the U.S. declaration of war against Germany and Austria-Hungary. The Balfour
Declaration agreement committed the British to deliver Palestine into Jewish
hands in return for the Jews bringing the United States into WWI in support of
the British. Cardinal James Gibbons was the chief propagator of the heresy of
Americanism which became settled Novus Ordo doctrine after Vatican II
(religious liberty) primarily by the work of Fr. John Courtney Murray who
greatly admired Cardinal Gibbons. Gibbons did his best to align American
Catholics with Jewish interests to bring the United States into the Great War.
In doing so Gibbons worked directly to undermine the peace plans of Pope
Benedict XV. Pope Benedict devised a generous peace plan and contacted Cardinal
Gibbons to do what he could to influence the United States government to back
his offer of a negotiated peace. Gibbons did nothing of the sort. While giving
lip service to the Pope's peace plan six months too late, he in fact never contacted
President Wilson or any official of the government to even mention Pope
Benedict's peace plan. Gibbons was too busy building the National Catholic War
Council (NCWC) and supporting the call of universal military service. The
purpose of the NCWC as Gibbons said in a letter to all American bishops was to
form “the mental and moral preparation of our people for the war.”
To Congar's
credit, he at least told the truth about what he helped destroy!
“It cannot be denied that the Declaration on Religious
Liberty does say materially something else than the Syllabus of 1864; it even
says just about the opposite of
Propositions 15 and 77 to 79 of this document..... I collaborated on the
final paragraphs which left me less satisfied.
It involved demonstrating that the theme of religious liberty was
already contained in Scripture. Now, it isn't there.”
Cardinal
Yves Marie Joseph Congar, O.P., forbidden to teach by the Church and
whose books were suppressed in the early 1950s, made a peritus at Vatican II by
Novus Ordo St. John XXIII, and is considered by many to have been the most
influential of all the periti. He was raised to the cardinalate by Novus Ordo
St. John Paul II. He rejected the dogmatic teaching of Trent which his teacher
and mentor, Fr. Marie-Dominique
Chenu, O.P., derisively called “Baroque
theology”.
Excerpts from the Diary of Msgr. Joseph Fenton:
·
“He
[Cardinal Ottaviani] remarked that we were on the eve of the Council, and that
no one knew who the Council’s theologians were to be.” (Sept. 28, 1962)
·
“It is a
crime that we did not take the Anti-Modernist Oath. Poor O[ttaviani] must have
failed to have our own profession passed by the central commission. It
contained his condemnation of [Fr. John Courtney] Murray [the Americanist heretic
who structured the Council teaching on Religious Liberty].” (Oct. 9, 1962)
·
“I had
always thought that this council was dangerous. It was started for no
sufficient reason. There was too much talk about what it was supposed to
accomplish. Now I am afraid that real trouble is on the way.” (Oct. 13,
1962)
·
“I
started to read the material on the Liturgy, and I was shocked at the bad
theology. They actually have been stupid enough [to say] that the Church
is ‘simul humanam et divininam, visibilem et invisibilem’ [at the same
time human and divine, visible and invisible]. And they speak of the Church
working ‘quousque unum ovile fiat et unus pastor’ [until there be one fold
and one shepherd], as if that condition were not already achieved.” (Oct. 19, 1962)
·
“I do not
think that any little work on our part is going to bring good to the Church. We
should, I believe, face the facts. Since the death of [Pope] St. Pius X the
Church has been directed by weak and liberal popes, who have flooded the
hierarchy with unworthy and stupid men. This present conciliar set-up makes
this all the more apparent. [Fr.] Ed Hanahoe, the only intelligent and
faithful member of [Cardinal] Bea’s secretariat has been left off the list of
the periti. Such idiots as [Mgr. John
S.] Quinn and the sneak [Fr. Frederick] McManus have been put on. [Fr. George]
Tavard is there as an American, God help us. From surface appearance it
would seem that the Lord Christ is abandoning His Church. The thoughts of many
are being revealed. As one priest used to say, to excuse his own
liberalism, which, in the bottom of his heart he knew was wrong, ‘for the
last few decades the tendency in Rome has been to favor the
liberals.’ That is the policy now. We can only do what we can to
overt an ever more complete disloyalty to Christ.” (Oct. 19, 1962)
·
“[Fr.] Ed
Hanahoe gave me two books on Modernism. In one of them I found evidence that
the teaching in the first chapter of the new schema on the Church [that became
the Vatican II dogmatic constitution Lumen
Gentium] and the language are those of [the excommunicated Modernist Fr.
George Tyrrell [who died outside the Catholic Church and was denied
ecclesiastical burial]. May God preserve His Church from that chapter. If it
passes, it will be a great evil. I must pray and act.” (Sept. 24, 1963)
Paul VI
declared Novus Ordo Saint. So just what is a “Novus Ordo Saint”?
A Novus Ordo
Saint is a man-made saint. Contrasted with Catholic saints who are God-made
saints. In virtue of their union with God they are sanctified, and therefore,
Catholic Saints exhibit heroic virtue in their lives. God confirms their
sanctity by working miracles through their intercession and thus, a cult of
veneration (dulia) develops and spreads throughout the Church. The Church
recognizes God's evidence that they are saints and declares this fact to the
universal Church. Contrary to this, Novus Ordo Saints are man-made saints and
their elevation to the title of sainthood is for the purpose of promoting the
human ideology exemplified in their lives. There is no real cult of veneration
(dulia) among the faithful to Novus Ordo Saints. Since God does not work true
miracles through the intercession of man-made saints, only man-made miracles
are required for the beatification of man-made Novus Ordo Saints. Finally, the
Novus Ordo beatification process does have a promotor fidei, the
so-called “devil’s advocate,” although his role has been change as the promotor ideologiae. The greatest
difference between Catholic Saints and Novus Ordo Saints is that the former are
in heaven and the latter, very well may not be.
COMMENT ON THE
MODERN MIND DEVOID OF GOD’S GRACE
“But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given [the common
man] a rubber stamp, a rubber stamp inked with advertising slogans, with editorials,
with published scientific data, with the trivialities of tabloids and the
profundities of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man's
rubber stamp is the twin of millions of others, so that when these millions are
exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. [...] The amazing
readiness with which large masses accept this process is probably accounted for
by the fact that no attempt is made to convince them that black is white.
Instead, their preconceived hazy ideas that a certain gray is almost black or
almost white are brought into sharper focus. Their prejudices, notions, and
convictions are used as a starting point, with the result that they are drawn
by a thread into passionate adherence to a given mental picture.”
Edward Bernays, from his book, The Minority Rules, 1927. Bernays was a Jewish double nephew of
Sigmund Freud and a pioneer in public relations and propaganda. He was called
"the father of public relations" in his obituary. Bernays was named
one of the 100 most influential Americans of the 20th century by Life Magazine.
He was the subject of a full-length biography called The Father of Spin
(1999) and later an award-winning 2002 documentary for the BBC called The Century of the Self. (Wiki)
"Pray for the
conversion of Russia." Blessed Virgin Mary at Fatima
Your must
understand. The leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They
hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured
and slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse. The
October Revolution was not what you call in America the "Russian
Revolution." It was an invasion and conquest over the Russian people. More
of my countrymen suffered horrific crimes at their bloodstained hands than any
people or nation ever suffered in the entirety of human history. It cannot be
understated. Bolshevism was the greatest human slaughter of all time. The fact
that most of the world is ignorant of this reality is proof that the global
media itself is in the hands of the perpetrators. We cannot state that all Jews
are Bolsheviks. But: without Jews there would have been no Bolshevism. For a
Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth. The blood maddened Jewish
terrorists murdered sixty-six million in Russia from 1918 to 1957.
Aleksandr
Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008), Noble Prize winning novelist, historian and victim of
Jewish Bolshevism
American Catholic Apostasy: PEW POLE 2025
29% of U.S. Catholics say they attend
Mass weekly.
59% of Catholics say abortion should be
legal.
76% U.S. Catholics say society should be
accepting of homosexuality.
61% U.S. Catholics support legal
homosexual "marriage."
80% of Catholics view Pope Francis
favorably.
84% of U.S. Catholics say they have a favorable view of Leo although
67% say they know little about Leo, and 25% know nothing at all.
Pope Leo XIV commemorates Nostra Aetate anniversary with interfaith
celebrations
Catholic NewsAgency | Vatican City |Kridina
Millare | Oct 29, 2025
Pope Leo XIV joined faith leaders on
Tuesday to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, the Church’s
declaration on building relationships with non-Christian religions.
Approximately 300 representatives of world
religions and cultures joined the Holy Father for an evening ecumenical prayer
service for peace organized by the Community of Sant’Egidio and held at the
Colosseum in Rome.
“Peace is a constant journey of
reconciliation,” the Holy Father said at the Oct. 28 event.
Thanking religious leaders for coming
together in Rome, he said their interfaith meeting expressed their shared
“conviction that prayer is a powerful force for reconciliation.”
“This is our witness: offering the immense treasures of ancient
spiritualities to contemporary humanity,” he said.
“We need a true and sound era of
reconciliation that puts an end to the abuse of power, displays of force, and
indifference to the rule of law,” he added. “Enough of war, with all the pain
it causes through death, destruction, and exile!”
In his remarks, the pope urged people not to be indifferent to the “cry
of the poor and the cry of the earth” in their pursuits for peace in countries
scarred by ongoing conflict and injustice.
“In the power of prayer, with hands raised
to heaven and open to others, we must ensure that this period of history,
marked by war and the arrogance of power, soon comes to an end, giving rise to
a new era,” he said.
“We
cannot allow this period to continue. It shapes the minds of people who grow
accustomed to war as a normal part of human history,” he continued.
Pope Leo and other religious leaders lit
candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed commitment to engage in
interfaith dialogue.
Several people waved small blue banners
with the word “peace” in different languages while Pope Leo and the other
religious leaders lit candles to symbolize their shared prayer and renewed
commitment to engage in interfaith dialogue.
After the prayer gathering at Rome’s iconic landmark, the Holy Father
returned to the Vatican to join colorful celebrations jointly organized by the
Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue and the Dicastery for Promoting Christian
Unity.
To mark the 60th anniversary of Nostra Aetate, several multicultural music
and dance performances were held inside the Vatican’s Paul VI Audience Hall as
well as a presentation highlighting papal initiatives to promote the Church’s
dialogue with other religions since the pontificate of Pope Paul VI.
Pope Leo’s appearance and special address
toward the end of the two-hour gathering highlighted the Church’s reverence for
all people and its desire to collaborate with others for the common good.
“We belong to one human family, one in origin, and one also in our
final goal,” he said. “Religions everywhere try to respond to the restlessness
of the human heart.”
“Each in its own way offers teachings, ways of life, and sacred rites
that help guide their followers to peace and meaning,” he said.
Emphasizing the common mission shared among people of different religions
to “reawaken” the sense of the sacred in the world today, the Holy Father
encouraged people to “keep love alive.”
“We have come together in this place
bearing the great responsibility as religious leaders to bring hope to a
humanity that is often tempted by despair,” Leo said.
“Let us remember that prayer has the power
to transform our hearts, our words, our actions, and our world,” he said.
COMMENT: Now for the third
time in his short pontificate Leo/Provost quotes Leonard Boff's Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor. Boff
is a former Franciscan priest who was censored by the liberal Cardinal
Ratzinger when he headed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under
the liberal JPII for his extreme Marxist liberation theology. Boff is famous
for his development of an integrated theology of Marxism, Gaia cult earth
worship and "social justice." He was admired by Francis/Bergoglio and
he is admired thrice as much by Leo/Provost. The picture with its Satanic
imagery was reportedly published by the Vatican. Leo/Provost, like
Francis/Bergoglio, wants to restore native American culture and religious
traditions. It should be remembered that Christopher Columbus encountered
cannibalism on his second voyage of exploration and ritual murder was
widespread not only among the Aztecs and Incas but in smaller tribes across
both North and South America as reported by Jesuit missionaries. In the
interfaith celebrations at the Vatican a young native American boy half dressed
paraded an image of a snake into the assembly before Leo/Provost. Is this the
native American tradition that the Vatican wants to recover?
Doctrinal Note on Marian titles: Mother of the faithful, not
Co-redemptrix
The document of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith, approved
by Pope Leo XIV, offers clarifications on titles applied to the Blessed Virgin
Mary, and calls for special attention to the use of the expression, “Mediatrix
of all graces.”
Vatican News
The Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith
on Tuesday, 4 November 2025, published Mater populi fidelis (“The Mother of the
Faithful People”), a Doctrinal Note “On Some Marian Titles Regarding Mary’s
Cooperation in the Work of Salvation.” Signed by the Prefect, Cardinal Víctor
Manuel Fernández, and the Secretary for the Dicastery’s Doctrinal Section,
Monsignor Armando Matteo, the Note was approved by the Pope on 7 October.
Mater populi fidelis (MPF) is the fruit of
a long and complex collegial effort. It is a doctrinal document on Marian
devotion, centred on the figure of Mary, who is associated with the work of
Christ as Mother of believers. The Note provides a significant biblical
foundation for devotion to Mary, as well as marshalling various contributions
from the Fathers, the Doctors of the Church, elements of Eastern tradition, and
the thought of recent Popes.
In this positive framework, the doctrinal
text analyses a number of Marian titles, encouraging the adoption of some of
those appellations and warning against the use of others. Titles such as
“Mother of Believers,” “Spiritual Mother,” “Mother of the Faithful” are noticed
with approval in the Note. Conversely,
the title of “Co-redemptrix” is deemed inappropriate and problematic. The title
of “Mediatrix” is considered unacceptable when it takes on a meaning that
excludes Jesus Christ; however, it can used appropriately so long as it
expresses an inclusive and participatory mediation that glorifies the power of
Christ. The titles “Mother of Grace” and “Mediatrix of All Graces” are
considered acceptable when used in a very precise sense, but the document also
warns of particularly broad explanations of the meaning of the terms.
Essentially, the Note reaffirms Catholic
doctrine, which has always emphasised that everything in Mary is directed
towards the centrality of Christ and His salvific work. For this reason, even
if some Marian titles admit of an orthodox interpretation through correct
exegesis, Mater populi fidelis says it is preferable to avoid them.
In his presentation of the Doctrinal Note,
Cardinal Fernández expresses appreciation for popular devotion but warns
against groups and publications that propose a certain dogmatic development and
raise doubts among the faithful, including through social media. The main
problem in interpreting these titles applied to Our Lady, he says concerns the
way of understanding Mary's association with Christ's work of redemption
(paragraph 3).
Co-redemptrix
Regarding the title “Co-redemptrix,” the
Note recalls that “some Popes have used the title “without elaborating much on
its meaning.” Generally, it continues, “they have presented the title in two
specific ways: in reference to Mary’s divine motherhood (insofar as she, as
Mother, made possible the Redemption that Christ accomplished) or in reference
to her union with Christ at the redemptive Cross. The Second Vatican Council
refrained from using the title for dogmatic, pastoral, and ecumenical reasons.
Saint John Paul II referred to Mary as ‘Co-redemptrix’ on at least seven
occasions, particularly relating this title to the salvific value of our
sufferings when they are offered together with the sufferings of Christ, to
whom Mary is united especially at the Cross” (18).
The document cites an internal discussion within
the then-Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which in February 1996 had
discussed the request to proclaim a new dogma on Mary as “Co-redemptrix or
Mediatrix of all graces.” Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was opposed to such a
definition, arguing, “the precise meaning of these titles is not clear, and the
doctrine contained in them is not mature. […] It is not clear how the doctrine
expressed in these titles is present in Scripture and the apostolic tradition.”
Later, in 2002, the future Benedict XVI
expressed himself publicly in the same way: “The formula ‘Co-redemptrix’
departs to too great an extent from the language of Scripture and of the
Fathers and therefore gives rise to misunderstandings… Everything comes from
Him [Christ], as the Letter to the Ephesians and the Letter to the Colossians,
in particular, tell us; Mary, too, is everything that she is through Him. The
word ‘Co-redemptrix’ would obscure this origin.”
The note clarifies that Cardinal Ratzinger
did not deny the good intentions behind the proposal, nor the valuable aspects
reflected in it, but nonetheless maintained that they were “being expressed in
the wrong way” (19).
Pope Francis also expressed his clear
opposition to the use of the title Co-Redemptrix on at least three occasions.
Tuesday’s Doctrinal Note concludes: “It is
always inappropriate to use the title ‘Co-redemptrix’ to define Mary’s
cooperation. This title risks obscuring Christ’s unique salvific mediation and
can therefore create confusion and an imbalance in the harmony of the truths of
the Christian faith. […] When an expression requires many, repeated
explanations to prevent it from straying from a correct meaning, it does not
serve the faith of the People of God and becomes unhelpful” (22).
Mediatrix
The Note emphasises that “the biblical
statement about Christ’s exclusive mediation is conclusive. Christ is the only
Mediator” (24).
At the same time, MPF recognises “the fact
that the word ‘mediation’ is commonly used in many areas of everyday life,
where it is understood simply as cooperation, assistance, or intercession. As a
result, it is inevitable that the term would be applied to Mary in a
subordinate sense. Used in this way, it does not intend to add any efficacy or
power to the unique mediation of Jesus Christ, true God and true man” (25).
Further, “it is clear that Mary has a real
mediatory role in enabling the Incarnation of the Son of God in our humanity”
(26).
Mother of believers and Mediatrix of all graces
Mary’s maternal role “in no way obscures or
diminishes” the unique mediation of Christ, “but rather shows its power […]
Understood in this way, Mary’s motherhood does not seek to weaken the unique
adoration due to Christ alone but, rather, seeks to enkindle it.”
Therefore, the Note states, “one must avoid titles and expressions that
present Mary as a kind of ‘lightning rod’ before the Lord’s justice, as if she
were a necessary alternative before the insufficiency of God’s mercy” (37b).
Thus, the title “Mother of Believers”
“enables us to speak of Mary’s role in our relation to our life of grace”.
However, MPF goes on to urge caution concerning the use of expressions that may
convey “less acceptable notions” (45).
“Cardinal Ratzinger already affirmed” for example, “that the title
‘Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces’ was not clearly grounded in Revelation.” So,
the Note continues, “in line with this conviction, we can recognize the
difficulties this title poses, both in terms of theological reflection and
spirituality” (45). In fact, “no human person — not even the Apostles or the
Blessed Virgin — can act as a universal dispenser of grace. Only God can bestow
grace, and he does so through the humanity of Christ” (53).
“Some titles, such as ‘Mediatrix of All Graces,’ have limits that do
not favour a correct understanding of Mary’s unique place,” MPF explains,
adding, “In fact, she, the first redeemed, could not have been the mediatrix of
the grace that she herself received” (67).
Nonetheless, the Doctrinal Note
acknowledges that “the term ‘graces,’ when seen in reference to Mary’s maternal
help at various moments in our lives, can have an acceptable meaning. The
plural form expresses all the aids — even material — that the Lord may grant us
when He heeds His Mother’s intercession” (68).
COMMENT: Amazing to hear these apostates chirping
about the lack of "precise meaning" of theological terms while
obscurity in definition is, and has been since Vatican II, the calling card of
the Novus Ordo theologian and prelates. They like to muddle what is clear. Let's
start with the title, "Mother of Believers" and "Mother of the
Faithful." These are, in fact, worthy titles of the Mother of God and
frequently occur in St. Mary of Agreda's City of God, yet the Novus Ordo
clerics would never be found offering a precise definition and meaning for the
term "faithful" and then identify exactly who the
"faithful" are.
The term "faithful" has a precise
Catholic definition. It refers to those who have been baptized into the
Catholic Church and profess the one, holy, catholic and apostolic faith. By
virtue of this incorporation by baptism they have become "children of
God." They faithfully believe all the truths that God has revealed on the
authority of God the Revealer. Only those who have become thus members of the
Mystical Body of Christ share by participation in His divine nature and become
brothers and sister of Jesus Christ and therefore, sons of His Mother. This
definition excludes all heretics, schismatics, Jews, pagans, and any other form
of idolaters. Novus Ordo clerics heretically teach that everyone is a child of
God by virtue of the Incarnation. Everyone by nature is a creature of God
created in His image and likeness with the spiritual soul with the powers of
reason and free will, but every creature is born in original sin and cut off
from the friendship of God. He is only a "child of God" in potentia. Without the sacrament of
Baptism and the Catholic faith they can never become "children of
God." This obscurity of definition as to who is a child of God and thus a
child of the Blessed Virgin Mary ultimately obscures what is necessary as a
necessity of means to obtain salvation.
The title Mediatrix of all grace is long
established and of sound and precise theological understanding. Those that
pretend otherwise are ignorant, proud, and deceitful. They have no excuse. 'The
law of prayer determines the law of belief' is, as affirmed by St. Pius X in Pascendi, a canon of faith from the time
of Celestine I, that is, a dogma of the Catholic Church. The immemorial Roman
rite has a Mass in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of all grace
celebrated on May 31 established by Pope Benedict XV. Regarding this feast, Dom
Gaspar Lefebvre, O.S.B. of the Abby of St. Andrew teaches:
"The will of God is that we should
have everything through Mary," says St. Bernard. The Father has sent us
His Son, but His will was to make His coming depend upon the Fiat of the
Virgin, which He commanded to the angel Gabriel to solicit on the day of the
Annunciation.
The Father and the Son send us the Holy Ghost,
but it is through Mary that He comes down to men. On the day of Pentecost,
according to an ancient Tradition, the heavenly fire which descended on the
Cenacle first rested on Mary, and then on the apostles. This is a figure of
what happens every day in the Church where the Holy Ghost is sent invisibly
into our souls. "All the gifts of the Holy Ghost are distributed by Mary
to those whom she chooses, whenever she wishes and as much as she wishes,"
says St. Bernardine of Siena.
The graces which the Holy Ghost pours down
on us are due to the merits of Christ on Calvary; but in order that God may
bestow them on the world, it is necessary that Mary should intervene. Having
cooperated by her divine maternity and by her sufferings at the foot of the
Cross in the Incarnation and Redemption, she has deserved to co-operate when
they are continually applied to creatures by the most High. "By the
communion of sorrows and of will between Christ and Mary," says St. Pius
X, "she has deserved to become the dispenser of all the blessings which
Jesus acquired for us by His blood" (Encyclical 2-2-1904). Such is His
will, but it is essential that she should constantly intercede for each one of
us. This she does, relying on the blood of Christ by whom she was herself saved,
and who alone saves us. This actual intervention of Mary plays a preponderating
part in the salvation of the world. It is important that we should realize
this, and it is the object of the feast of Mary Mediatrix of all Graces. A
clear idea of the fact may be obtained by simple reading the texts of the Mass
and Vespers.
"Through the Virgin," says St.
Bernardine of Siena, "life-giving graces flow from Christ, who is the
head, into His mystical body." "Through her," adds St.
Antoninus, "come from heaven all the graces granted to the world."
"What all the saints united to thee may obtain for us by their
intercession," writes St. Anselm, "thy pleading alone may obtain
without the help of their prayers." The maternal solicitude of Mary for
the whole human race is therefore continual, and it is because of this that
unceasingly, through the Mass, the sacraments, the hierarchy and other channels
of grace, the merits of Calvary are applied to our souls. "We may
affirm," declared Pope Leo XIII, "that by the will of God, nothing is
given to us without Mary's mediation, in such a way that just as no one can approach the almighty
Father but through His Son, so no one, so to speak, can approach Christ but
through His Mother" (Encyclical, 9-22-1891).
Let us therefore not consider as of small
importance the efforts made to establish this point of doctrine of Mary's
mediation, since this doctrine enables us to understand the divine plan, and
clearly manifests the mediation of the Son of God of which it is a corollary.
St.
Mary of Agreda at the Coronation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Heaven,
writes that Jesus Christ addressed the entire heavenly assembly of angels and
saints saying:
"My
Father and eternal God, this is the Woman, that gave Me my human form in her
virginal womb, that nourished Me at her breast and sustained labors for Me,
that shared in my hardships and co-operated with Me in the works of Redemption.
This is She, who was always most faithful and fulfilled our will according to
our entire pleasure; She, pure and immaculate as my Mother, through her own
works, has reached the summit of sanctity according to the measure of the gifts
We have communicated to Her; and when She had merited her reward and could have
enjoyed it forever, She deprived Herself of it for Our glory and returned to
attend to the establishment, the government, and instruction of the Church
militant; and We, in order that She might live in it for the succor of the
faithful, deferred her eternal rest, which She has merited over and over again.
In the highest bounty and equity of our Providence it is just, that my Mother
should be remunerated for her works of love beyond all other creatures; and
toward Her the common law of the other mortals should not apply. If I have
merited for all infinite merits and boundless graces, it is proper that my
Mother should partake of them above all the others who are so inferior; for She in her conduct
corresponds to our liberality and puts no hindrance or obstacle to our infinite
power of communicating our treasures and participating them as the Queen and
Mistress of all that is created."
Sanctifying
grace is the created participation in the divine nature. The Blessed Virgin is
the "Queen and Mistress of all that is created." In this Mass the
Church prays:
"
O Lord Jesus Christ, our Mediator with the Father, who hast appointed the most
blessed Virgin, Thy mother, to be our mother also and our mediatrix before
Thee: Grant that whosoever draweth nigh to Thee to beseech any benefit, may
receive all things through her and rejoice.
Rev.
Gregory Alastruey's theological work titled, The Blessed Virgin Mary, says that, "There are five principle titles and offices due
Mary, the Mother of God, by reason of her cooperation in redemption: Mediatrix,
Co-redemptrix, Mother of Christians, Patroness or Advocate, and Queen and
Mistress of the universe. I would recommend those who deny this proper
honor to the Mother of God obtain a copy of the book and have their stupidity
erased. I do not say, ignorance erased because willful ignorance is stupidity. Fr. Alastruey affirms that
"Mary is truly mediatrix of the human race and this doctrine pertains to
the deposit of faith." He then draws from Scripture, the Fathers, and
theologians in support of this truth. He proves from the Church Fathers that
the word "mediatrix" was explicitly used by St. Ephrem, St.
Epiphanius, St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil of Seleucia, St. Andrew of Crete, St
Germanus of Constantinople, St. John Damascene, St Theodore, St. Antoninus and
Denis the Carthusian. He draws richly from the divine liturgy from both Eastern
and Roman traditions. The errors of the Protestant heretics are addressed and
exposed which are curiously the same as expressed by the Novus Ordo popes.
Lastly,
it is worth asking Why do the Novus Ordo popes hate these proper titles of the
Mother of God? The answer is simple. The Blessed Virgin asked the three
children at Fatima on June 13, 1917, "Are you willing to offer yourselves to God to bear all the sufferings
He wills to send you, as an act of reparation for the sins by which He is
offended, and of supplication for the conversion of sinners?" To which
question all answered, "Yes, we are willing." The Mother of God said
on July 13 after the children had seen a vision of Hell, "Sacrifice
yourselves for sinners, and say many times, especially whenever you make some
sacrifice: O Jesus, it is for love of You, for the conversion of sinners, and
in reparation for the sins committed against the Immaculate Heart of
Mary." On August 19 (the apparition did not occur on the August 13 because
the children were in prison) the Mother of God continued saying, "Pray,
pray very much, and make sacrifices for sinners; for many souls go to hell,
because there are none to sacrifice themselves and to pray for them." The
Blessed Virgin is asking the children to be co-redemptors and co-mediators of
grace with her in union with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for the conversion
and salvation of sinners. If the title of Co-Redemtrix and Mediatrix of all
Grace can be taken away from the Mother of God then no one is responsible to do
penance for their own sins or the sins of others. This falls back to the
Protestant heresy on the dogma of justification and the very nature of our
incorporation into the divine nature in the Mystical Body of Christ.
Leo/Provost, like his predecessor Francis/Bergoglio, believes that proselytism
is "solemn nonsense." They attack the titles to excuse their own
faithless sloth. They are working to obscure the very means of salvation. As
Jesus Christ said: "But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites;
because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not
enter in; and those that are going in, you suffer not to enter" (Matt
23:13).
Pope
Leo is just another heretic who denies the Blessed Virgin Mary her just titles
of Mediatrix of all Grace and Co-Redemtrix. Only a few days ago, he celebrated
with heretics, schismatics, Jews, Moslems, and a variety of idolaters a shared
communion praying to their common god a united petition for peace in the world.
He continues to ignore the peace plan offered by the Blessed Virgin Mary,
Mediatrix of all Grace, at Fatima. Pope Leo will soon learn that those who
insult the Mother have made an enemy of the Son.
This
demonstrats the fruit of the “New Evangelization” - which is shameless
apostasy!
Brazil: Catholic Church on
the decline
Catholic Church loses
followers to Evangelicals
Between 2000 and 2010, the number of
Brazilians describing themselves as Catholics has dropped by 12.2%. This record
fall brings the proportion of Catholics down to 65% – the lowest share since
religious affiliations was first surveyed in 1872. In 2000, 74% of the
population had classified themselves as Catholics.
Brazilian census: Catholic population falls to 57%
Catholic News Agency | Nathália
Queiroz | Sao Paulo,
Brazil, Jun 9, 2025
The percentage of Brazilians who identify
as Catholic fell to 56.75% in 2022, a reduction of 8.4% compared with 2010,
according to data from the 2022 demographic census released by the Brazilian
Institute of Geography and Statistics. [....]
“The Rosary is the most powerful weapon for
defending ourselves on the field of battle.”
… The decadence
which exists in the world is without any doubt the consequence of the lack of the
spirit of prayer. Foreseeing this disorientation, the Blessed Virgin
recommended recitation of the Rosary with such insistence. And since the Rosary
is, after the holy Eucharistic liturgy, the prayer most apt for preserving
faith in souls, the devil has unchained his struggles against it.
Unfortunately, we see the disasters he has caused.
… We must
defend souls against the errors which can make them stray from the good road. …
We cannot and we must not stop ourselves, nor allow, as Our Lord says, the children
of Darkness to be wiser than the children of Light … The Rosary is the most
powerful weapon for defending ourselves on the field of battle.
Sr. Lucy of
Fatima, Letter to Dom Umberto Pasquale
“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
John
Henry Newman: A Novus Ordo Saint and, fittingly, a Doctor of the Novus Ordo
Church
"I see much danger of an English
Catholicism of which Newman (Cardinal John Henry Newman) is the highest type. It
is the old Anglican, patristic, literary, Oxford tone transplanted into the
Church. It takes the line of deprecating exaggerations, foreign devotions,
Ultramontanism, anti-national sympathies. In one word, it is worldly
Catholicism."
Cardinal Manning, Primate of England, Letter
to Monsignor Talbot, written in 1866, the second year of his reign as
archbishop
Salvation by
“Implicit” Faith?
But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to
God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him. Heb. 1,
6
Of course charity itself is
impossible without faith and hope. Could
anyone love a man if he did not believe it was possible to be or become his
friend? Or if he despaired of ever
gaining his friendship? So it is with
man in relation to God as He is in Himself.
Man must believe it is possible to attain a perfect friendship with God
in Heaven and he must hope to attain this friendship through God’s power before
he can love God as his supernatural destiny.
Fr. Walter Farrell, O. P. and
Fr. Marin Healy, My Way of Life – The
Summa Simplified for Everyone
Looming ahead is the
Great Apostasy predicted by St. Paul to the Thessalonians when the Antichrist,
“the man of sin” (2 Thess. 2: 3), will engage mankind in wholesale flight from
God and reality. From him can be
expected perfect acquiescence to the three temptations by which the devil
failed to seduce Christ in the desert.
Turning stones into bread by substituting false teaching for true
doctrine, he will confirm the satanic religion by false miracles, (that is
“lying wonders”), as it were casting himself down from the pinnacle of the
temple to be borne up by spiritual hands.
Given “all the kingdoms of the world and all their glory” (Matt. 4: 8-9)
in return for falling down and adoring Satan, Antichrist the King will
establish a universal empire in the fallen angel’s name. Aping as closely as possible Christ’s
consummation of the law and the prophets, he will capitulate in his person the
whole of the world’s apostatic tradition.
Solange Strong Hertz, Apostasy
in America
The Reason the
Message of LaSalette is Rejected or Unknown? They Are NOT 'Her People'!
It was 1846
and France was suffering social and political upheaval. Catholic churches had
been abandoned and the Sacraments neglected… On the eve of the Feast of Our
Lady of Sorrows, eleven-year-old Maxim Giraud and fourteen-year-old Melanie
Mathieu beheld a luminous sphere, radiating like the sun, curiously unfolding
before their eyes. Gradually they made out a woman seated with her face in her
hands, weeping. She slowly arose and crossed her arms on her breast, her head
some what inclined.
The children
were drawn immediately to the lady's tears that adorned her face like perfectly
cut diamonds glimmering the in the sun's rays. Her dynamic features were framed
delicately in a white-satin headdress, on which rested a crown of roses, a
bouquet in all shades of reds and pinks. A crucifix with pincers on one end and
a hammer on the opposite end hung over her satin shawl, which was lined with
more roses. The Madonna wore a long ivory dress embroidered in precious pearls
and a yellow apron tied neatly to her waist. Wearing pearl slippers that peeked
out from underneath her satin robe, she sheltered herself atop a bouquet of
roses.
"Come to
me, my children," she tenderly addressed the two who stood afar,
motionless. "Be not afraid. I am here to tell you something of the
greatest importance."
As soon as
they were in touching distance of her, she began to speak with the urgency of
an ending world:
"If my
people will not obey, I shall be compelled to loose my Son's arm. It is so
heavy, so pressing that I can no longer restrain it."
She told the children that her Son was especially
concerned that people were not keeping holy Sunday, and that religion had lost
its place in their country…. "You will make this known to all my people;
you will make this known to all my people," she repeated to them. Solange
Hertz, Our Lady of LaSalette
"It is a sin to believe there is salvation outside the
Catholic Church!"
Blessed Pope Pius IX
The Church is One, Holy, Catholic Apostolic,
and Roman : unique, the Chair founded on Peter. Outside her fold is to
be found nether the true faith nor eternal salvation, for it is impossible to
have God for a Father if one does not have the Church for a Mother.
Blessed Pope Pius IX, Singulari Quidem
The Great Error of Vatican
II –
The “pastoral” blunder that
there exists a disjunction between Divine Revelation and Dogma
The greatest concern of the
Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine
should be guarded and taught more efficaciously….. the authentic doctrine…
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. And it is the latter that must
be taken into great consideration with patience if necessary, everything being
measured in the forms and proportions of a Magisterium which is predominantly
pastoral in character. Pope John XXIII,
Opening Speech for Vatican II
Peace Plan of Our Lady of
Fatima
1.
WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA REQUEST?
At Fatima Our Lady said that God wished to
establish in the world devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Our Lady said
that many souls would be saved from Hell and the annihilation of nations
averted if, in time, devotion to Her Immaculate Heart were established
principally by these two means:
A. the Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate
Heart of Mary by the Pope together with the world's bishops in a solemn public
ceremony, and
B. the practice or receiving Holy Communion (and
other specific devotions of about 1/2 hour in duration) in reparation for the
sins committed against the Blessed Virgin Mary, on the first Saturdays of five
consecutive months--a practice known to Catholics as "the First Saturday"
devotion.
2.
HAVE THESE REQUESTS OF OUR LADY OF FATIMA BEEN HONORED?
No, not entirely. A
number of the Faithful practice the "First Saturday" devotion, but
Russia has yet to be consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in a solemn
public ceremony conducted by the Pope together with the world's Catholic
bishops.
In 1982 the last
Fatima seer, Lucia, when a cloistered nun living in Coimbra, Portugal, was
asked if an attempted consecration by Pope John Paul II had sufficed. She
replied that it did not suffice, because Russia was not mentioned and the
world's bishops had not participated. Another attempted consecration in 1984
likewise did not mention Russia or involve the participation of many of the
world's bishops, and Sister Lucia stated immediately afterwards that this
consecration, too, had failed to meet Our Lady's requirements.
3. WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA WARN?
It warns that if the
requests of Our Lady of Fatima for the Consecration of Russia and the First
Saturday devotion are not honored, the Church will be persecuted, there will be
other major wars, the Holy Father will have much to suffer and various nations
will be annihilated. Many nations will be enslaved by Russian militant
atheists. Most important, many souls will be lost.
4.
WHAT DOES THE MESSAGE OF FATIMA PROMISE?
The Message of
Fatima promises that if the requests of Our Lady of Fatima are carried out
"My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will Consecrate Russia
to Me, which will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to
mankind."
The
United States is, as much as Israel, guilty for the Genocide of the Palestinian
People.
“I love Israel. I’m with you all the way...... Thanks to
the bravery and incredible skill of the Israeli Defense Forces and Operation
Rising Lion, the forces of chaos, terror, and ruin now stand weakened,
isolated, and totally defeated.”
“The story of fierce Israeli
resolve and triumph since October 7 should be proof to the entire world that
those who seek to destroy this nation are doomed to bitter failure.”
President Donald Trump, addressing the Israeli Knesset with Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
“Donald Trump is the greatest friend that the State of Israel
has ever had in the White House. No American president has ever done more for
Israel, and, as I said in Washington, it ain’t even close. It’s really not a
match.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressing Israeli
Knesset with President Trump
"It is sentiments like these (from President Trump) – backed by a long list of pro-Israel actions
over two terms, including moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognizing
Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights, recognizing Jewish claims in Judea
and Samaria for a 'Greater Israel', brokering the Abraham Accords, striking
Iran alongside Israel, decapitation strikes against Iranian and Hamas peace
negotiators, and directly supporting the Israeli genocide of Gaza with over $30
billion direct aid, billions more in indirect air with military, intelligence,
logistical and political support both in the United States and at the United
Nations including censorship in mainstream media and suppression of free speech
at college campuses."
Catholic political commentary
“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
Good Night, Sweet Princeton! By Fr. Leonard Feeney, 1952
Maritainism is a system of thought which
allows Catholics to be both Catholic and acceptable in the drawing rooms of
Protestant and Jewish philosophers. Maritainism is not a seeking and a finding
of the Word made flesh. It is a perpetual seeking for un-fleshed truth in an
abstract scheme called Christianity. Maritainism is the scrapping of the
Incarnation in favor of a God Whose overtures to us never get more personal or
loving than the five rational proofs for His existence. This plot to encourage
only pre-Bethlehem interest in God takes its name from its perpetrator, that
highly respected religious opportunist, Jacques Maritain.
The slightest acquaintance with Maritain’s
history is sufficient to indicate how awry he must be in his Catholicism. He is
a former Huguenot who married a Jewish girl named Raïssa. During their student
days in Paris, both Jacques and Raïssa felt a double pull in the general
direction of belief. Intellectually they were attracted to the religious self-sufficiency
of a Jewish intuitionist named Henri Bergson. Sociologically they were
attracted to the spurious Catholicism of Leon Bloy, a French exhibitionist who
made a liturgy of his own crudeness and uncleaness and tried to attach it to
the liturgy of the Church. At some point in their association with an
unbaptized Bergson and an unwashed Bloy, the Maritains figured out that there
was a promising future ahead of them in Catholicism.
Jacques Maritain is noted for his
solemn-high, holier-than-thou appearance. For this reason, more than one priest
reports that by the time a Maritain lecture is over, any priest who is present
has been made to feel that the Roman collar is around the wrong neck and that
perhaps he, the priest, ought to put on a necktie and kneel for Maritain’s
blessing.
One explanation of Maritain’s distant
expression is that he fancies himself to be the Drew Pearson of the Christian
social order. Judging by Maritain’s passion for the abstract, the fulfillment
of all his prophecies will come in an era when mothers can sing such songs as
“Rock-a-bye Baby, on the Dendrological Zenith,” and children recite such
bedtime prayers as “The Hail Mariology.”
Jacques Maritain prefers Thomism to Saint
Thomas Aquinas and, similarly, he much prefers the notion of the papacy to the
person of the Pope. He could not, however, turn down the prestige of an
appointment as French ambassador to the Vatican. Maritain went to Rome, but he
protected himself against over exposure to Italian faith by visits to Dr.
George Santayana. In Maritain, Santayana recognized a brother, the kind of
European intellectual cast-off that is annually being grabbed-up by American
Universities.
That Jacques Maritain should now be found
preaching at Princeton University is not so strange. It did not require too
much insight on Princeton’s part to see that a Catholic who hates Franco,
speaks at Jewish seminaries, and favors “theocentricity” in place of Jesus,
would be a bizarre, but harmless, addition to anybody’s faculty club.
Perhaps Princeton realized also that a
Catholic’s admirers are a good measure of his militancy. Among Maritain’s more
prominent sympathizers are John Wild, Charles Malik and Mortimer Adler (N.B.
Adler was converted and received into the Catholic Church in 1999 only 18 months
before he died at 98 years of age), who are, respectively, an Anglican, a Greek
schismatic, and a Jew. Naturally Maritain could not insult intellectuals like
these by telling them that although they are outside the Church they can get
into Heaven because of their “invincible ignorance.” It was necessary that
Maritain concoct a new way of getting around the dogma, “No Salvation Outside
the Catholic Church.”
After a lot of abstract deliberation,
Maritain decided that a man could be “invisibly, and by a motion of his heart,
a member of the Church, and partake of her life, which is eternal life.”
According to Maritain’s new covenant, the important salvation-actions in our
world are no longer a head bowed to the waters of Baptism, a hand raised in
Absolution, a tongue outstretched to receive Jesus in the Blessed Sacrament. “A
motion of his heart,” says Maritain, is all that is required before a man may
partake of eternal life.
The Sacred Heart might have saved Himself a
lot of inconvenience had He only known this, one Friday afternoon on Calvary.
COMMENT: Jacques Maritain was Paul VI’s favorite philosopher. Maritain's reputation as a great philosopher is based on his supposed integration of the Scholastic principles of St. Thomas with the modern world. He had a world-wide reputation and following that extending beyond his
native France to hold visiting professorships
at Princeton and the University of Chicago, as well as a visiting lecturer at Notre Dame, Yale, Harvard, and the University of Toronto. Pope Paul VI publicly confessed his
profound respect and influence by
Maritain’s thought on his Credo of the People of God (1968). At
the close of the Second Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, the pope’s “Address
to Men of Thought and Science” was dedicated to his “dear friend and mentor, Jacques Maritain.” Pope Paul offered Maritain a cardinal’s hat, but the philosopher declined
it. Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom—Dignitatis Humanae—which teaches that the dignity of man is so exalted
that he possesses the inalienable right to neither conform his mind to God’s
revealed truth nor obey God’s commandments, drew as its inspiration Maritain’s book Man and the State (1951) which is an
articulation of the language
of “rights” that Dignitatis
Humanae employs.
“By
their fruit you shall know them!”; & by their fruit you had better well
know them!
For such false
apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of
Christ. And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of
light. Therefore it is no
great thing if his (Satan's) ministers be transformed as the ministers of
justice, whose end shall be according to their works.
II Corinthians
11:13-15
The order of divine justice exacts that
whosoever consents to another's evil suggestion, shall be subjected to him in his punishment; according to II Peter
2:19: "By whom a man is overcome, of the same also he is the
slave."
St. Thomas Aquinas
The proper literal understanding of this dogma from the
Council of Trent:
Canon 4 on the sacraments in
general: If anyone says that the
sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous,
and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God
through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary
for each one, let him be anathema.
The Dogma defines two revealed doctrinal truths:
1.
If anyone says: that the sacraments of the
New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be
anathema.
2.
If anyone says: that without the
sacraments or (if anyone says) without the desire of the sacraments
men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, let him be
anathema.
Both the Sacrament of Baptism and the will to
receive the Sacrament are necessary for salvation!
“But
God desired that his confession should avail for his salvation, since he preserved him in this life until the
time of his holy regeneration.” St. Fulgentius
“If anyone is not baptized, not only in
ignorance, but even knowingly, he can in no way be saved. For his path to salvation was through the confession,
and salvation itself was in baptism.
At his age, not only was confession
without baptism of no avail: Baptism
itself would be of no avail for salvation if he neither believed nor
confessed.” St. Fulgentius
Notice,
both the CONFESSION AND THE BAPTISM are necessary for salvation, harkening back
to Trent’s teaching that both the laver AND the “votum” are required for
justification, and harkening back to Our Lord’s teaching that we must be born
again of water AND the Holy Spirit.
In fact, you see the language of St. Fulgentius reflected in the Council of
Trent. Trent describes the votum (so-called “desire”) as the PATH
TO SALVATION, the disposition to Baptism, and then says that “JUSTIFICATION
ITSELF” (St. Fulgentius says “SALVATION ITSELF”) follows the dispositions in
the Sacrament of Baptism.
Yet another solid argument for why Trent is teaching that BOTH the votum
AND the Sacrament are required for justification.
“Hold
most firmly and never doubt in the least that not only all pagans but also all
Jews and all heretics and schismatics who end this present life outside the
Catholic Church are about to go into the eternal fire that was prepared for the
Devil and his angels.” St. Fulgentius
“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes,
professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church,
not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share
in life eternal; but that they will go into the ‘eternal fire which was
prepared for the devil and his angels.’”
Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino
Ladislaus, CathInfo
We will see
the same from Pope Leo!
The
end of dialogue is to produce opinion. The purpose of logical argument is to
appeal to the intellect to arrive at truth.
Rhetoric appeals to the will and poetry to the imagination. The emphasis
of the Novus Ordo Church since Vatican II on dialogue is therefore a
repudiation of any claim to truth offering in its place only the opinions of
churchmen. It is the debasement of Jesus Christ’s gospel from Truth to just
another opinion, from historical fact to mythology. It is only incidental that
Novus Ordo Church, having turned its back against the truth, has also turned
away from rhetoric and poetry which explains why it is both effeminate and
ugly.
“The Church will have to opt for dialogue as her style and method,
fostering an awareness of the existence of bonds and connections in a complex
reality. . . . No vocation, especially within the Church, can be placed outside
this outgoing dynamism of dialogue . . . . [emphasis added].”
Pope Francis’ Instrumentum
Laboris, XV ORDINARY GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF SYNOD OF BISHOPS: YOUNG
PEOPLE, THE FAITH AND VOCATIONAL DISCERNMENT
And
thus, the 'spirit of Vatican II' - dialogue so that everyone can reach an
accomodation of error and the repudiation of logical argument appealing to
truth!
“Don’t proselytize; respect others’ beliefs. We can inspire others
through witness so that one grows together in communicating. But the worst
thing of all is religious proselytism, which paralyzes: ‘I am talking with you
in order to persuade you,’ No. Each person dialogues, starting with his and her
own identity. The church grows by attraction, not proselytizing.”
Pope Francis
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 an explicit 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. can
be 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.
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
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 Leo calls for unity in climate action on 10-year anniversary of
Laudato si’
Pope Leo XIV appealed to all of humanity to unite, overcome
differences, and work together to respond to climate change and ecological
destruction
The Tablet | Aili Winstanley Channer | 02
October 2025
He was speaking to climate activists and
religious leaders commemorating the ten-year anniversary of the encyclical Laudato si’ at Castel Gandolfo
yesterday.
It was the opening of the three-day
“Raising Hope for Climate Justice” conference organised by the Laudato si’
Movement in collaboration with ecclesial and institutional partners. Pope Leo reiterated Pope
Francis’ concern about “those who deride climate change” in the 2023
Apostolic Exhortation Laudate
Deum, and asserted, “there
is no room for indifference”.
He asked, “What must be done now to ensure that caring for our common
home and listening to the cry of the earth and the poor do not appear as mere
passing trends or, worse still, that they be seen and felt as divisive issues?”
Attendees at the conference include
Christine Allen of Cafod. Bishop John Arnold, the lead bishop for the
environment for the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, said, “Pope Leo reminded us that Pope
Francis had emphasised that ‘the most effective solutions will not come from
individual efforts alone, but above all from major political decisions on the
national and international levels’. More than ever, we need to work together,
to think of future generations, and take urgent action if we are to truly
respond to the scale of this climate crisis: a crisis which affects those who
are poorest and most vulnerable and have done least to cause it.”
This view reflects Pope Leo’s call for ecological conversion at all
levels of society, including by strengthening democracy: “Citizens need to take
an active role in political decision-making at national, regional and local
levels. Only then will it be possible to mitigate the damage done to the
environment.”
Pope Leo was joined by Marina Silva, Brazil’s
minister of the environment and climate change and the head of the United
Nations Global Ethical Stocktake, an initiative to foster societal reflection
on ethical responsibility for climate change ahead of the 2025 UN Conference of
Parties (COP30), which will be held in Belem, Brazil, in November. Pope Leo
expressed his hope that COP30 and other upcoming international summits “will listen to the cry of the
Earth and the cry of the poor, families, indigenous peoples, involuntary
migrants and believers throughout the world”.
But Pope Leo also emphasised that although these challenges are “of a
social and political nature”, they are “first and foremost of a spiritual
nature: they call for conversion”. He reaffirmed the spiritual
importance of caring for the Earth as God’s creation and its inseparability
from our responsibility towards the poor and vulnerable: “We cannot love God, whom we
cannot see, while despising his creatures. Nor can we call ourselves disciples
of Jesus Christ without participating in his outlook on creation and his care
for all that is fragile and wounded.”
The film star Arnold Schwarzenegger, known for his roles in
high-profile action films as well as his climate activism as Governor of
California and head of the Schwarzenegger Climate Initiative, spoke alongside
Pope Leo and called him an “action hero” for his message on the environment.
Pope Leo smiled as he began his address. He affirmed the crucial and diverse
contributions made to mitigating the crisis by every individual at the
conference: “There is
indeed an action hero with us this afternoon: it is all of you, who are working
together to make a difference.”
As he closed, he said: “God will ask us if we have cultivated and cared
for the world that he created, for the benefit of all and for future
generations, and if we have taken care of our brothers and sisters. What will
be our answer?”
Pope Leo XIV Blesses Huge 20,000-Year-Old Chunk Of Greenland Ice
Forbes | Leslie Katz | Oct 06, 2025
Pope Leo XIV stood on stage at a climate
conference in Rome last week and laid his right hand on a massive chunk of ice,
blessing it.
This wasn’t just any ice. It had broken off
the vast Greenland Ice Sheet, a key regulator of global climate that’s
shrinking quickly as it melts due to climate change. The resulting rise in
global sea levels could flood many tens of millions of homes, scientists warn.
Danish-Icelandic artist Olafur Eliasson
transported the ice to the Raising Hope Conference with the help of Danish
geologist Minik Rosing to serve as a stark symbol of how quickly the world’s
glaciers are disappearing.
“Lord of life, bless this water,” the pope
said after touching the dripping ice. “May it awaken our hearts, cleanse our
indifference, soothe our grief and renew our hope through Christ our lord.”
Eliasson is known for his installation
art using light, water, and air. Eliasson called it “striking” to
witness the pope bless the 20,000-year-old piece of Greenlandic glacial ice.
“We felt the presence of the fragile ice underscored the importance of
recognizing that nature is not separate from humanity,” the artist wrote on
Instagram.
COMMENT: Pope Leo,
celebrating the 10th anniversary of Laudato si', the earth worshiping
encyclical of Pope Francis, blessed a block of Ice to counteract the diabolical
forces of global warming striking a grave and focused posture that was in
marked contrast to the stupidity of the gesture. The act says a lot more about
Leo than it does about climatology. Leo, like Francis, is believer in the pagan
Gaia cult of Mother Earth worship. Leo refers twice in his sermon to the
"Cry of the Earth, the Cry of the Poor." Leo took this phrase from
Francis' Laudato si' and Francis took
the quote without attribution from Leonard Boff's Cry of the Earth, Cry of the Poor. Boff is a former Franciscan
priest who was censored by the liberal Cardinal Ratzinger when he headed the
CDF under the liberal JPII for his extreem Marxist liberation theology. Boff is
famous for his development of an integrated theology of Marxism, Gaia cult
earth worship and "social justice." He was admired by Francis and he
is admired twice as much by Leo.
If
the ice block is 20,000 years old then the Genesis creation account and the
global flood of Noe is reduced to mythology and not divine revelation. The fact
is, ancient mythology ended with the Christian revelation of Jesus Christ but
the modern scientific world is doing its best to resurrect the cult of
mythology. The world likes to talk about the scientific fables of Big Bang,
primordial soups with lightening bubbling forth proteins that congeal into
cellular life with the teleological purpose of producing the DNA of Darwinian
man. These fables are believed and shamelessly pandered by our neo-modernists
popes. The absurdity is that the neo-modernists popes have embraced the myths
of scientology when science itself has discredited their claims. Scientists
have been predicting global flooding of coastal areas for the last fifty years
with no evidence of rising sea levels. Global warming is not science. It is
liberal ideology applied to climatology that always calls for a one-world governance
to enforce its dictatorial and anti-Catholic mandates. The alleged global
warming is always without exception a man made assault on Mother Earth that
requires the ritual murder of 6.5 billion people for a world
"sustainable" population of 500 million for expiation. Never is it
considered in their calculus that the
increase of global temperature would make available millions of more
acres of arable land and lengthen the growing season in millions of additional
acres creating a massive increase in the food supply and areas of habitable
land. Scientists have no idea whatsoever if global warming, if it is in fact
happening at all, would have overall beneficial or harmful effects. While Pope
Leo is a resident in Rome he might ask what became of Rome's ancient Port City
of Ostia which was at the time of Jesus Christ located directly on the sea at
the mouth of the Tiber River. It is today three kilometers from the coast.
Citizens of Ostia may have lost their beach front property but they are not
under water.
Exsurge Domine - USA; Archbishop Carlo Maria
Viganò
The Association Exsurge
Domine is committed to provide
assistance, support and material aid for clerics, religious and consecrated persons
who are victims of the Bergoglian Regime. It is of highest importance to act,
to defend the immutable Tradition of the Catholic Faith, to preserve and
promote the Apostolic Mass, and to save Christendom. In this decisive moment,
we must choose to counter evil, or be swallowed up by its most pestilent
breath. Only those who fight as the Maccabee’s did shall merit victory.
DEFENDE ECCLESIAM TUAM
In
many nations that are no longer Catholic-such as England, Germany or the
Netherlands, for example-you can still see small chapels carved out of attics
and cellars, or home altars hidden in invisible closets or niches: they were
used for the clandestine celebration of Mass in times of persecution, when it
was a crime to be faithful to the Church of Rome and priests had to hide to
avoid imprisonment or the death sentence. Without going back to Diocletian,
even in the 16th and 17th centuries “papists” were considered a threat, and
were barely tolerated as long as they had no churches, convents, seminaries, or
schools.
These persecutions are recurring today,
in perhaps a less bloody form, and the perpetrators are not Lutherans or the
thugs of Olivier Cromwell, but Cardinals, Bishops and Prelates of the Conciliar
sect, infiltrated into the Vatican and well determined to wipe out all traces
of the “old religion” and the “old Mass” that they have replaced with the
religion of ecology, of welcome, of inclusiveness, of the New World Order.
The apostasy we are experiencing is not
very different from that of the bishops who swore allegiance to Henry VIII in
order not to lose rents and benefits: the difference is that today the act of
obedience is required toward Bergoglio, the Second Vatican Council,
the Novus Ordo, the “synodal church,” Pachamama.
Those who do not yield, those who remain
faithful to the Priesthood or Religious Vows are ostracized, mocked, vilified,
persecuted and above all deprived of ministry, a dwelling place and means of
livelihood. Without mercy, without charity, without humanity.
Exsurge
Domine is
the response of those who do not surrender to this betrayal of the modernist
Hierarchy: it joins us to our brothers of past ages, to the faithful who gave
hospitality to the monk wanted by the soldiers of Elizabeth I, a hot meal to
the nun with no convent left in revolutionary France, a hiding place to the
Mexican priest pursued by the soldiers of the Masonic government. We can help
those persecuted priests, religious men and women who in anonymity, silence,
and humble acceptance of trials show us the suffering face of Christ ascending
Golgotha.
Let us therefore prove that we know how
to accompany the Faith we profess with good works, with prayer, with charity
and almsgiving. For these priests, these friars, these nuns can stop the arm of
divine Justice and give hope for the future in our children.
“Exsurge Domine – USA”
Address: PO Box 121, Rice Lake, WI 54868
Email:
info@exsurgedomineusa.org
501(c)3 approved Tax Code: 93-3884604
EXCERPT: The Vatican has been
covering-up the crimes of homosexual pederasts since 1922 but the practice
became actively enforced policy since 1962!!!
The total payouts by the Catholic Church for sex abuse claims in the
United States have exceeded $5 billion over the past two decades with almost
all of this for homosexual crimes.
FROM FORGIVENESS, TO SILENCE... TO BETRAYAL, By
Michael Kenny
THE FEAR OF SCANDAL: A DEEPENING MOTIF
As the Church gained public visibility and
institutional structure, the fear of scandal – that is, anything that could
bring shame or doubt upon the Church – grew proportionally. This concern is not
without biblical foundation. Apparently Christ Himself warned that:
“Scandals must come, but woe to the one
through whom they come.”
In a world where the Church was often
maligned, the temptation to protect its reputation – even at the cost of truth
– grew strong.
This approach reached its most formal
expression in the 20th century.
CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS: CODIFYING SECRECY
In 1962, the Vatican issued a secret
instruction titled CRIMEN SOLICITATIONIS. Which laid out procedures
for dealing with priests accused of using the confessional to solicit sexual
acts (an update of canon 904 in 1741). While its original focus was on
confessional abuse – a particularly grievous offense – it extended its
protocols to cover ALL sexual misconduct by clergy, including child abuse.
This document mandated strict secrecy:
“Cases of this nature are subject to the strictest pontifical secret –
under pain of excommunication.”
This meant the victims, witnesses, and
Church authorities were all bound by silence, ostensibly to protect the
sacrament and the dignity of the Church. But in practice, this secrecy
protected the perpetrators and silenced the victims.
The same theological instinct that once
prompted Origen to counsel forgiveness now found its legal expression in
institutional concealment.
The Church fathers were not wrong to value
forgiveness. But forgiveness without justice is not sanctity – it is surrender.
And the Church must never surrender the innocent to the sins of the powerful.
THE COST OF MISAPPLIED MERCY
What unites the early Christian response to
personal violation with the institutional culture of silence centuries later is
a tragic misapplication mercy – a prioritizing of the Church's image, or of the
offender's soul, over the immediate demands of justice and the protection of
the innocent.
In the name of forgiveness, the Church
failed to act.
In the name of avoiding scandal, it created
a greater one.
In the name of unity, it tolerates wolves
among the sheep.
The very teachings of Christ – meant to
uphold truth, protect the weak, and heal the broken – were twisted into
realizations for secrecy and inaction.
TOWARD A NEW ETHOS OF ACCOUNTABILITY
The path forward must involve more
than policy reform. It requires a re-examination of the Church's spiritual
instincts – a return to the full Gospel, where mercy and justice walk hand in
hand.
Forgiveness does not mean the abandonment
of truth.
Compassion does not mean the protection of
the predator.
The Church must rediscover the moral
courage to expose evil, even when it dwells in its own house.
EPILOGUE: A WAR ON INNOCENCE
There is a deeper layer to this crisis.
Darker than secrecy. Worse than betrayal. It is diabolical.
Satan hates God. This hatred is total,
consuming and unrelenting. But Satan can't hurt God directly – God is beyond
his reach. So he strikes where it hurts most: at what God loves – CHILDREN.
Jesus told us to let the children come to
Him. Jesus warned about the millstone. So, what then is a perfect way for
Satan's followers to do his bidding and please him, and hate God at the same
time...
VIOLATE A CHILD, and do it wearing the robes of Christ
In this perverse inversion of the
priesthood, the altar becomes a hunting ground, and the confessional, a trap.
[....]
COMMENT: The problem was
magnified in the 1983 Code of Canon Law protecting homosexual predators. Their
hypocrisy is evident when compared to the treatment given to Fr. Samuel Waters.
Homosexual predators are given the full canonical rights of due process while
Fr. Waters was denied canonical due process for the "crime" of offering
the "received and approved" immemorial Roman rite of Mass.
COMMENT: From the 1917 Code
of Canon Law, clerical homosexual predators and other sex offenders who were found guilty were laicized and
turned over to the state for suffer criminal penalties. Such a response was
necessary to restore justice, protect the faithful, and begin the hard work of
rebuilding. Everything changed in 1922 with a new canon law which required all
bishops of the world to violate mandatory reporting laws of the state by
concealing child abuse and homosexuality by clerics from criminal state law
enforcement. This document, Crimens Sollicitationis, was included in
the 1983 Code of Canon Law and remained in force until 2001.
Abp. Vigano the former apostolic nuncio to
the United States was required first by Crimens Sollicitationis and then by Sacramentum Sanctitatis
Tutela of 2001 and then by Graviora Delicta of 2010 to conceal
any knowledge of sexual crimes by clergy from public disclosure. The
“Spotlight” investigation of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in 2002
revealed that many clerics found guilty of child sexual abuse were repeatedly
returned to Catholic ministry where they repeated their crimes on new children.
Following this investigation, the United States was the only country that
received an exemption from the Vatican policy to conceal sexual abuse from
state criminal law enforcement.
Canon 1341 of the current 1983 Code of
Canon Law, requires bishops whenever possible to ask priests to stop committing
crimes, instead of punishing them for their actions. What is perhaps worse,
Canon 1324 in the 1983 Code is used to decrease punishment for pedophiles on
the grounds that pedophiles have less freedom than non-pedophiles to control
their perverse passions. Thus, a diagnosis of pedophilia lessens culpability
and imputability of the crime of pedophilia. As a result, bishops have
concluded pedophiles should receive a lesser punishment for pedophilia than
other sex offenders.
The SSPX follows the 1983 Code and has used
it cover up sexual offenders within the SSPX. This includes the former district
superios in the United States for the SSPX, Fr. Arnaud Rostand who was
sentenced to a French prison after conviction of homosexual pederasty in
France, Spain and Switzerland against seven boys on scouting trips between 2002
and 2018. The purpose of this is not detraction of the SSPX but to point out an
ugly fact that every faithful Catholic should be aware of when receiving their
sacraments, attending their schools or participating in their supervised camps
and other summer activities. They as an organization follow the Vatican policy
to cover up any crimes of sexual abuse of children.
"Only the Prudent man can be brave."
Josef Pieper
Pro-abortion Sen. Durbin says he’s ‘overwhelmed’ by Pope Leo’s apparent
defense of his award
‘It is amazing to me. It’s quite a moment,’ Durbin said about Pope Leo
appearing to support the pro-abortion and pro-LGBT senator’s ‘lifetime
achievement award’ from Cdl. Blase Cupich.
LifeSiteNews | Emily Mangiaracina | Oct
2, 2025 — Pro-abortion Senator Dick Durbin said he is “overwhelmed” by
Pope Leo XIV’s apparent support for his “lifetime achievement award” from
Cardinal Blase Cupich.
Leo on Tuesday appeared to imply that he
was not opposed to Cupich’s decision to give the award to the radically
pro-abortion and pro-LGBT Durbin, when asked about the matter by a journalist.
“I think that it is very important to look
at the overall work that a senator has done during … 40 years of service in the
United States Senate,” he stated. “I understand the difficulty and the tensions
but I think, as I myself have spoken to in the past, it is important to look at
many issues that are related to what is the teaching of the Church.”
“Someone who says I’m against abortion but
says I’m in favor of the death penalty is not really pro-life. Someone who says
I’m against abortion but I’m in agreement with the inhuman treatment of
immigrants in the United States, I don’t know if that’s pro-life,” Leo then
said. He went on to conclude, “So, they are very complex issues, I don’t know
if anyone has all the truth on them.”
On the same day Leo appeared to defend Sen.
Durbin receiving the lifetime award from Cupich, the pro-abortion politician
announced that he will decline the award from the Archdiocese of Chicago after
facing a strong backlash, including criticism from several U.S. bishops.
Durbin told NBC News he was surprised by
“the level of controversy” over the award, and that he declined it “because the
reaction has been so controversial against the cardinal who proposed it, and I
see no point in going forward with that.”
Commenting on the pope’s defense of his
award, Durbin said, “It is amazing to me. It’s quite a moment. I didn’t expect
it. I didn’t know it was gonna happen.”
As the Lepanto Institute has pointed out on
X, Durbin’s award violates the very laws of Cupich’s archdiocese. Bishop Thomas
Paprocki of Springfield has affirmed, “The U.S. bishops have clearly taught
that support for abortion disqualifies individuals from receiving honors from
Catholic institutions.”
Durbin’s award, and Leo’s failure to
denounce his award, is even more shocking considering that since his election
to the U.S. Senate in 1997, Durbin has supported every possible brutal method
of abortion, as well as even post-abortion infanticide: He voted against the
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,
and the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act.
He also supported legislation aimed at
codifying and expanding Roe v. Wade – the “Women’s Health Protection Act” –
despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that it was unconstitutional.
COMMENT: Pope Leo is defending the pro-abortion
Sen. Durbin while at the same time slandering faithful Catholics. His appeal to
the 'seamless garment,' subsequently called the "consistent ethic of
life," is grounded on the Vatican II novelty that the dignity of the human
person is so great that he is not obligated to believe the truths that God has
revealed or obey the commandments God. The novelty was developed by his
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago in 1984 who was a notorious and clever
homosexual who did as much damage to the Church as the notorious Cardinal
Theodore McCarrick. To say as Leo has that Catholics who oppose abortion are
not really pro-life if they do not oppose the death penalty for convicted
murderers is to claim that a murderer has a greater right to life than his victim.
As for opposing unjust wars the homosexual crowd and their liberal Catholic
supporters have done precious little over the last 35 years.
Vatican Council I listing the beneficial Fruits of the
Council of Trent which are in every detail exactly the opposite which we have
seen from Vatican Council II
Now this redemptive providence appears very clearly in unnumbered
benefits, but most especially is it manifested in the advantages which have
been secured for the Christian world by ecumenical councils, among which the council of Trent requires special
mention, celebrated though it was in evil days.
Thence came:
1. a closer definition and more fruitful
exposition of the holy dogmas of religion and
2. the condemnation and repression of errors;
thence too,
3. the restoration and vigorous strengthening
of ecclesiastical discipline,
4. the advancement of the clergy in zeal for
·
learning and
·
piety,
5. the founding of colleges for the training
of the young for the service of religion; and finally
6. the renewal of the moral life of the
Christian people by
· a more accurate instruction of the faithful, and
· a more frequent reception of the sacraments. What is more, thence also
came
7. a closer union of the members with the
visible head, and an increased vigour in the whole Mystical Body of Christ.
Thence came:
1. the multiplication of religious orders and
other organisations of Christian piety; thence too
2. that determined and constant ardour for the
spreading of Christ’s kingdom abroad in the world, even at the cost of shedding
one’s blood.
While we recall with grateful hearts, as is
only fitting, these and other outstanding gains, which the divine mercy has
bestowed on the church especially by means of the last ecumenical synod, we
cannot subdue the bitter grief that we feel at most serious evils, which have
largely arisen either because
o the authority of the sacred synod was held in contempt by all too many,
or because
o its wise decrees were neglected.
First Vatican Council, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Faith, listing some of the manifold beneficial fruits from
the Council of Trent!
Regarding the Sin of Schism
and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
There
are no manifest acts of schism with one and only one important exception which
will be identified below. This means there are no acts that are necessarily
always and everywhere evidence of a schismatic motive in the internal forum
excepting one. Contrasted, for example, with abortion and blasphemy which are
acts that are manifest sins because they can never be done with a morally right
intention; the act itself reveals the intent of the internal forum as being
vicious. These are always and everywhere necessarily mortal sins. As St. Paul
says, "Some men's sins are manifest, going before to
judgment: and some men they follow after" (1Tim 5:24). St. Paul gives
specific examples of "manifest sins": "Nor the
effeminate, nor liers with mankind (sodomites), nor thieves, nor covetous, nor
drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of
God" (1 Cor 6:10). What exactly is the schismatic motive that a
contentious canonical process must discover for conviction and attribution of
imputability of the crime?
The
canonical definition for both heresy and schism are taken directly almost
verbatim from St. Thomas Aquinas: "Schismatics are those who refuse to
submit to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to hold communion with those members of
the Church who acknowledge his supremacy." Schism is the repudiation of
the universal jurisdiction of Sovereign Pontiff and communion with those who
accept it. It is the burden of the canonical trial to prove the schismatic
intention for all schismatics are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff but not
all who are disobedient to the Sovereign Pontiff are schismatics. St. Thomas'
in his examination identifies schism as a specific species of sin. St. Thomas says, "Hence the sin of schism is,
properly speaking, a special sin, for the reason that the schismatic intends to sever
himself from that unity which is the effect of charity: because charity
unites not only one person to another with the bond of spiritual love, but also
the whole Church in unity of spirit." The genus to which schism belongs is acts opposed to peace which is
the fruit of "that
unity which is the effect of charity." Regarding peace, St. Thomas
continues: "Peace implies a twofold union... The first is the result of
one's own appetites being directed to one object; while the other results from
one's own appetite being united with the appetite of another: and each of these
unions is effected by charity." All acts that disturb the fruit of peace
are directed against the cause of peace which is charity."
Acts
of disobedience against properly constituted authority are only acts of schism
when the intention is to overturn the peace of unity caused by charity. This
intention constitutes the species
difference of schism from other acts opposed to peace, as St. Thomas says, the
schismatic "intends
to separate himself from the unity that charity makes" (Q.39, a.1.) among the faithful. St.
Thomas is offering an essential
definition of schism which is the best of all definitions because it is the
most intelligible because it identifies the essence.
Schism, just as other acts opposed to peace enumerated by St. Thomas, which
include discord, contention,
war, strife and sedition, requires contextualization. Specifically for the case
of Archbishop Viganò, St. Thomas says that morality of contention, which is the opposition to
another in speech, is determined by the intention: "As to the intention,
we must consider whether he contends against the truth, and then he is to be
blamed, or against falsehood, and then he should be praised." Archbishop
Carlo Maria Viganò's "contention" against Pope Francis is the
contention of truth against falsehood and is therefore praiseworthy and not
schismatic. This is why a canonical trial is called "contentious" for
it is intended to reveal who is contending for truth.
The
poles of contention are truth-falsehood which is the same for dogmas of faith.
As St. Jude admonishes: "I was under a necessity to write unto you: to
beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the
saints" (Jude 1:3). Schism is the rejection of the divinely revealed truth
of papal universal jurisdiction, a dogma of faith since Vatican I. Schism is
manifested by disobedience but all disobedience is not schism. Obedience to God
is unqualified. All other acts of obedience are morally good only to the degree
that they are properly regulated by the virtue of Religion which is the primary
subsidiary virtue under Justice. Any act of obedience that violates the virtue
of Religion is a sin. The virtue of Religion above all requires that we
"give unto God the things that are God's." This first and necessary
act of obedience is to believe all that God has revealed and to keep his
commandments. Without this first necessary condition, it is impossible to keep
the greatest commandment to love God above all things and it is impossible to
have "the unity that charity makes."
Archbishop
Carlo Maria Viganò was administratively "excommunicated" for
"schism" because the administrative process avoided the canonical
requirement to prove that his intent was to "separate himself from the
unity that charity makes" among the faithful. They denied the right of
Archbishop Viganò to defend himself in a contentions forum against the charge which would
obviously have included discussing the heretical acts of Pope Francis which are
manifest. The ultimate purpose of the canonical process is to determine truth
and bring those who have deviated from truth back from error. But for many the
contention itself irrespective of truth or falsehood is the manifest evidence
of schism. The reason for this will become clearer after discussing the
relationship in the context of faith and charity, and heresy and schism.
Schismatics
"refuse to submit to the Sovereign Pontiff" because they deny that
the pope possesses universal jurisdiction conferred by God for the legitimate exercise of the
papal office which produces unity and peace. Universal jurisdiction of the pope
is a divinely revealed truth that was dogmatized at Vatican I Council. St.
Thomas says:
"Heresy and schism are distinguished in
respect of those things to which each is opposed essentially and directly. For
heresy is essentially opposed to faith, while schism is essentially opposed to
the unity of ecclesiastical charity. Wherefore just as faith and charity are different virtues, although
whoever lacks faith lacks charity, so too schism and heresy are different
vices, although whoever is a heretic is also a schismatic, but not
conversely."
Since
the universal jurisdiction of the pope has become a dogma at Vatican Council I,
a schismatic is now also conversely always a heretic. Importantly, faith
precedes charity. "Without faith, it is impossible to please God"
(Heb 11-6) because "whoever
lacks faith lacks charity." The keys of universal jurisdiction were
promised to St. Peter after his profession of faith which is its proximate
material cause. Many Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine and St. John
Chrysostom, describe an analogical identity of the rock (petra) with divine faith,
with St. Peter, with Jesus Christ the "cornerstone," and the Church
itself. The faith proceeds
and is the proximate cause of the universal jurisdiction conferred by Jesus
Christ because faith is indispensible to the bond of unity which is charity. Cardinal Henry Edward Manning wrote:
“The
interpretation by the Fathers of the words ‘On this rock; etc. is fourfold, but
all four interpretations are not more than four aspects of one and the same
truth, and all are necessary to complete its full meaning. They all implicitly
or explicitly contain the perpetual stability of Peter’s faith...:’
“In
these two promises [i.e. Lk 22:32, Mt 16:18] a divine assistance is pledged to
Peter and to his successors, and that divine assistance is promised to secure
the stability and indefectibiity of the Faith in the supreme Doctor and Head of
the Church, for the general good of the Church itself.”
Cardinal
Henry Edward Manning, “The Vatican Council and Its Definitions: A Pastoral
Letter to the Clergy”, p. 83-84, 1870
All this is nicely summed up by St. Paul who
admonishes "that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called;
With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in
charity. Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the
bond of peace. One body and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of
your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Eph. 4:1-5). The primary and essential cause and sign of
the unity in the Church is the faith. The pope is only secondarily and
accidentally the sign and cause of unity in the Church. If the pope falls from
the faith he is to be confronted as St. Paul did to St. Peter when he
"walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel" and accommodated
the Judaizers leading others into "dissimulation" (Gal. 2:11). If the
pope is a heretic he "lacks faith (and) lacks charity". Without
charity he breaks the bond of unity in the Church and necessarily becomes
schismatic. Manifest Heresy is the one and only sin that identifies a
schismatic because it manifests a schismatic intent.
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
Mons. Carlo Maria Viganò: Replies to the claim that obedience is
unqualified even when the faith itself is in question!!
NON SEQUITUR
Further Clarifications in Response to the Reply of
Prof. Daniele Trabucco
I can only agree with almost everything that Professor Trabucco has stated in
response to my comment [1]. As he writes at the Duc in Altum blog [2]:
A saint who obeys a disciplinary measure that is unjust but not
contrary to faith (as in the case of Padre Pio) performs an act of heroic
self-denial, because he recognizes that even in harshness and iniquity, a
command does not break the bond with the revealed deposit of faith. The
situation, however, is different when an ecclesiastical authority commands something
that contradicts faith: in that case, the order is no longer authentically
disciplinary but is transformed into a deviation that strikes at the very
rationale of the authority. Here, refusal is not rebellion, but fidelity.
Given that this principle is valid – and
which I agree with sine glossa – I find it difficult to accept as valid the
exception that Trabucco adds immediately afterwards:
However […] such refusal can never translate into schismatic acts, nor
into attitudes that cause public scandal. For if it is true that discipline and
faith complement each other, it is equally true that discipline, as a visible
order, also serves to preserve the unity of the Church. And unity is part of
the supernatural common good of the Mystical Body. Therefore, the truth of
faith cannot be defended at the cost of tearing apart ecclesial communion.
It is true that “discipline, as a visible
order, also serves to safeguard the unity of the Church. And unity is part of
the supernatural common good of the Mystical Body.” But the unity achieved
through obedience is the effect, not the cause, of the profession of the same
Faith: the faithful are united in the Church under the authority of the Roman
Pontiff because they believe the same doctrine, not the other way around. And
this is the error that undermines Professor Trabucco’s argument on obedience.
The refusal to obey an ecclesiastical authority, when that authority commands
something that contradicts the Faith, cannot constitute an attack on unity,
because it is the illegitimate order of the Superior that is schismatic and
scandalous in nature, not the disobedience of the subject who remains faithful
to God.
If the refusal to obey an illegitimate authority or order “is not rebellion,
but fidelity”; if the Regula Fidei is the supreme principle that finds its
rationale in the Truth coessential and consubstantial with God [3]; if
obedience itself, as a moral virtue, is ordered toward the good and therefore
toward the Truth – because Faith and discipline, as Professor Trabucco states,
“though different in object, are united in purpose: the glory of God and the
salvation of souls” – how can the Professor affirm: “Therefore, one cannot
defend the truth of faith at the cost of tearing apart ecclesial communion”?
Given an absolute principle, how is it possible to derogate from it with an
exception that makes unity in obedience absolute while the Truth becomes
relative and secondary to obedience?
In fact, just the opposite is true: ecclesial communion cannot be defended at
the cost of tearing apart the Truth of the Faith, because it is obedience that
is ordered to the Faith, and not vice versa [4].
I would add that anyone who contradicts, adulterates, or silences the Faith is
the first to cause scandal, especially if he finds himself in the position of
exercising coercive force as an ecclesiastical Superior over a priest or
religious. It is the duty of every baptized person to defend and proclaim sound
doctrine and to denounce anyone in authority who abuses it, causing grave scandal
to the common people. They are rightly accustomed to obeying—instinctively, I
would almost say—the authority of the Hierarchy and consider its deviation
unthinkable under normal circuмstances. This is especially true for the
priest subject to the jurisdiction of his Superiors and the sanctions they can
impose: dutiful disobedience to an abusive and illicit order entails canonical
sanctions for anyone who dutifully resists, as Trabucco hopes. This punishment
of the disobedient is the scandal – not the act of denouncing the corruption of
ecclesiastical authority. Just as it is a scandal that heretics, schismatics,
corrupt individuals, and notorious fornicators are not prosecuted but rather
encouraged, while anyone who denounces the crisis, identifies its causes, and
identifies those responsible, who have fraudulently held power for sixty years
and can abuse it at will, is declared schismatic and excommunicated.
The Communion of Saints—which is the archetype and model of ecclesial
communion—is founded in God, who is Truth, not obedience. God is not obedient,
because that would presuppose an authority superior to Him. The obedience of
the Son—factus obœdiens usque ad mortem (Phil 2:8)—is a unity of will (idem
velle) between the Three Divine Persons, without an internal hierarchical
relationship between Them [5]. At the same time, God is the primary recipient
of all obedience, because by obeying the Superiors to whom He has granted
authority, we also obey God. But obedience cannot exist if the Superior who asks
to be obeyed does not in turn recognize God’s authority over himself. Such
obedience would accept the premise, even if only theoretical, of being able to
disobey God in order to obey men, contravening the precept of Saint Peter (Acts
5:29) and making earthly authority self-referential and therefore potentially
tyrannical. In this, the concept of synodality is shown to be absolutely
subversive of the order willed by God, in that it tampers with the monarchical
structure of the Church—on the model of Christ the King and Pontiff who is her
Head—by placing sovereignty in the hands of “the people” (even if in reality,
power, as in civil republics, is in the hands of an elite) and by affirming
“that Christ wanted His Church to be governed in the manner of a republic.” [6]
Only universal submission to a true and good God makes obedience a sure means
of sanctity for those who obey their Superiors. And this is why we have both
reason and the Sensus Fidei: to discern when obedience is a virtuous act and
when instead “it transforms into a deviation that strikes at the very rationale
of authority.”
If Professor Trabucco recognizes the possibility that ecclesiastical superiors
may issue orders contrary to Faith or Morals (a possibility confirmed by daily
abuses of authority against traditional Catholics and the equally daily
tolerance of unprecedented scandals), he must also acknowledge the possibility
that subordinates may reject the illegitimate orders of their superiors. The
Church’s hierarchical ladder allows for appeal to a higher authority when one
finds oneself in conflict with another authority subordinate to it. But if the
highest echelons of the hierarchical ladder—in this case, the Roman Pontiff and
the Roman Dicasteries—are themselves implicated in a general subversion of the
Faith (beginning with Leo’s recent declaration that “we must change attitudes”
before we can change doctrine [7]), it is clear that hierarchical recourse is
impracticable and that no earthly authority can remedy the disobedience of
those who are Superiors.
In a nutshell: amidst the obvious general disobedience of Church Authority to
God’s law at all levels, how can a priest or a simple believer subjected to
this Authority remain obedient to it, if one is still bound to continue to obey
God rather than men?
The true h0Ɩ0cαųst of the will that the mystics speak of is
this: knowing how to be obedient unto death, even death on a cross, in
obedience to God. But never, under any circuмstances, can one even
imagine sycophantically obeying heretical and schismatic Superiors, for fear of
shattering “with acts of a schismatic nature” the apparent unity of their
church. Because the unity they claim is a simulacrum, a fiction, a grotesque
imposture hiding the indifferentism of the synodal pantheon, which includes
both the conservatives of Summorum Pontificuм as well as the LGBTQ+
progressives of James Martin, both Our Lady of Fatima as well as the Pachamama,
the Mass of the ages along with the Novus Ordo. The only inalienable dogma is
that everyone must recognize the Second Vatican Council: its ecclesiology, its
morality, its liturgy, its saints and martyrs, and above all its excommunicated
people and its heretics—that is, the “radical traditionalists” who refuse to be
tamed by the new synodal demands. As for the rest of what we believe, Leo has
explicitly said that one can safely gloss over it in the name of
ecuмenical and synodal unity, including the Filioque of the Creed. But
not Vatican II: it is the founding act of a church born in 1962 which claims
the authority of the True Church, from whose Magisterium, however, it distances
itself and opposes it.
We therefore find ourselves before an Authority—the supreme authority—that is
clearly disobedient to Christ, the Head of the Mystical Body, but which,
usurping Christ’s authority, claims to decide in what respects those subject to
it must obey it, disobeying God’s commands.
Can we even imagine recognizing this authority as legitimate and owing it
obedience, lest we tear apart the “unity” that the Hierarchy has already
shattered with its own disobedience to God? How could we possibly ratify its
abuses, making ourselves accomplices of those who are betraying the Truth?
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop, 23 September 2025
NOTE
1 – Cfr. https://exsurgedomine.it/250917-trabucco-ita/
2 – Cfr. https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2025/09/21/a-proposito-di-obbedienza-note-sulle-osservazioni-di-monsignor-vigano/
3 – Saint Augustine, De Trinitate, VIII, 2: God is truth itself – ipsa veritas
–, and everything that is true comes from Him, because He is the origin of all
truth.
4 – The decree of the Holy Office of 20 December 1949 condemning the
ecuмenical movement also recalls this: This unity cannot be achieved
except in the recognition of Catholic truth.
5 – Saint Augustine, In Joannis Evangelium tractatus, 51, 8: Christ’s obedience
is not a diminution of His divinity, but an expression of His perfect union
with the Father, for the will of the Son is one with that of the Father.
6 – Pius VI, Brief Super Soliditate of 28 November 1786 condemning
Febronianism. This doctrine fits into the context of the Enlightenment and the
tensions between the temporal power of states and the authority of the Catholic
Church, promoting a vision that limited the primacy of the Pope and
strengthened the autonomy of national Churches and local bishops. Febronius
(the pseudonym of Johann Nikolaus von Hontheim, Bishop of Trier) argued that
the authority of the Pope was not absolute, but derived from the universal
Church, understood as the community of the faithful and bishops. Febronianism
also influenced the Council of Pistoia (1786), in which there appeared
heretical demands that are substantially identical to those that would
re-appear in Vatican II.
7 – Cfr. https://chiesaepostconcilio.blogspot.com/2025/09/papa-leone-parla-con-elise-ann-allen-di.html
8 – Cfr. https://youtube.com/watch?v=IkPJn2L9BBs&si=oGcPhGwR5nxQ6jva
TO KNOW THE FAITH, YOU MUST
KNOW THE RULE
The Rule of
Faith was given to the Church in the very act of Revelation and its
promulgation by the Apostles. But for this Rule to have an actual and permanently
efficient character, it must be continually promulgated and enforced by the
living Apostolate, which must exact from all members of the Church a docile
Faith in the truths of Revelation authoritatively proposed, and thus unite the
whole body of the Church, teachers and taught, in perfect unity of Faith. Hence
the original promulgation is the remote Rule of Faith, and the continuous
promulgation by the Teaching Body, (i.e.: DOGMA) is the proximate Rule.
Rev. Scheeben’s
Manual of Catholic Theology
“O Timothy, keep that which is
committed to thy trust, avoiding
the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so
called. Which some
promising, have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.” St. Paul,
letter to his disciple, Bishop St. Timothy (1 Timothy 6:20-21)
... We wish to make our own the
important words employed by the Council; those words which define its spirit,
and, in a dynamical synthesis, form the spirit of all those who refer to it, be
they within or without the Church. The word “NOVELTY”,
simple, very dear to today’s men, is much utilized; it is theirs... That
word... it was given to us as an order, as a program... It comes to us directly
from the pages of the Holy Scripture: “For, behold (says the Lord), I create
new heavens and a new earth”. St. Paul echoes these words of the prophet Isaiah
(II Corinthians 5, 17); then, the Apocalypse: “I am making everything new” (II
Corinthians 21, 5). And Jesus, our Master, was not He, himself, an innovator?
“You have heard that people were told in the past ... but now I
tell you...” (Matthew 5) – Repeated in the “Sermon on the Mount”.
It
is precisely thus that the Council has come to us. Two terms characterize it:
“RENOVATION” and “REVISION”. We are particularly keen that this “spirit of
renovation” – according to the expression of the Council – be understood and
experienced by everyone. It responds to the characteristic of our time, wholly
engaged in an enormous and rapid transformation, and generating novelties in
every sector of modern life. In fact, one cannot shy away from this spontaneous
reflection: if the whole world is changing, will not religion change as well?
Between the reality of life and Christianity, Catholicism especially, is not there
reciprocal disagreement, indifference, misunderstanding, and hostility? The
former is leaping forward; the latter would not move. How could they go along?
How could Christianity claim to have, today, any influence upon life?
And
it is for this reason that the Church has undertaken some reforms, especially
after the Council. The Episcopate is about to promote the “renovation” that
corresponds to our present needs; Religious Orders are reforming their
Statutes; Catholic laity is qualified and found its role within the life of the
Church; Liturgy is proceeding with a reform in which anyone knows the extension
and importance; Christian education reviews the methods of its pedagogy; all
the canonical legislations are about to be revised. And how many other
consoling and promising novelties we shall see appearing in the Church! They
attest to Her new vitality, which shows that the Holy Spirit animates Her
continually, even in these years so crucial to religion. The development of
ecumenism, guided by Faith and Charity, itself says what progress, almost
unforeseeable, has been achieved during the course and life of the Church. The
Church looks at the future with Her heart brimming with hope, brimming with
fresh expectation in love... We can say... of the Council: It marks the onset
of a new era, of which no one can deny the new aspects that We have indicated
to you.
Pope
Paul VI, General Audience of July 2, 1969
And Then, Only Three Years
Later:
Through
some cracks the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: there is doubt,
uncertainty, problematic, anxiety, confrontation. One does not trust the Church
anymore; one trusts the first prophet that comes to talk to us from some
newspapers or some social movement, and then rush after him and ask him if he
held the formula of real life. And we fail to perceive, instead, that we are
the masters of life already. Doubt has entered our conscience, and it has
entered through windows that were supposed to be opened to the light
instead....
Even
in the Church this state of uncertainty rules. One thought that after the
Council there would come a shiny day for the history of the Church. A cloudy
day came instead, a day of tempest, gloom, quest, and uncertainty. We preach
ecumenism and drift farther and farther from the others. We attempt to dig
abysses instead of filling them.
How
has all this come about? We confide to you our thought: there has been the
intervention of a hostile power. His name is the Devil; this mysterious being
who is alluded to even in the letter of St. Peter. So many times, on the other
hand, in the Gospel, on the very lips of Christ, there recurs the mention of
this enemy of man. We believe in something supernatural (post-correction:
“preternatural”!), coming into the world precisely to disturb, to suffocate
anything of the Ecumenical Council, and to prevent that the Church would
explode into the hymn of joy for having regained full consciousness of Herself
(!!).
Pope
Paul VI, June 29, 1972
Pope Leo on LGBTQ: ‘We have to change attitudes before we ever change
doctrine’
In this first extended interview he’s just done with Crux Now, Leo XIV
has basically said that the Church’s teaching on sexual morality could change.
LifeSiteNews
| Sep 18, 2025
Friends,
you are not going to believe this.
In
this first extended interview he’s just done with Crux Now, Leo XIV
has basically said that the Church’s teaching on sexual morality could change.
He actually even went there and implied that he could – in his words – “change
the Church’s teaching” on women’s ordination.
Take
a listen to what he said first on sexual morality. This is what he says after
having been talking about LGBT issues for a while:
People want the Church doctrine to
change, want attitudes to change. I think we have to change attitudes before we
ever change doctrine.
That’s
right, he’s strongly implying – well, he’s saying – that
Church teaching could shift, if attitudes change first.
Might
that be why we’ve had so much LGBT stuff in Rome lately, from Fr. James Martin
to the LGBT pilgrimage? Are they trying to get our “attitudes to change”?
And
what do you think the so-called “LGBT Catholics” are hearing when they hear Leo saying such a thing? It’s a very
clear invitation and instruction: work to change attitudes, then we can change
the teaching. Wow.
And
rather than stating such changes were impossible, Leo said he thought it
was unlikely that it would happen soon:
I find it highly unlikely, certainly in
the immediate future, that the Church’s doctrine in terms of what the Church
teaches about sexuality, what the Church teaches about marriage [will change].
Later,
instead of stating that the Church’s teaching could not change, he
merely said that he thought that it would remain the same:
I think that the Church’s teaching will
continue as it is, and that’s what I have to say about that for right now.
You think it’s
going to continue as it is? Aren’t you supposed to be the Pope – the one
responsible for making sure that it continues as it is?
Look
friends, this is just stunning. Catholic teaching on sexual morality –
including the sinfulness of homosexual acts, as well as fornication, adultery
and others – aren’t matters of probabilities or personal conjecture, or
contingent and waiting to be changed.
They’re
definitive, grounded in both the natural law and divine revelation – and so
they’re incapable of being changed.
Reason
alone tells us that sexual activity outside marriage – and thus, obviously, all
sexual activity between two same sex couples – is contrary to the natural law.
This
is also and separately a dogma – divinely revealed in Scripture and
proposed by the universal ordinary magisterium of the Church.
Vatican
I taught that such truths which are to be believed with divine and Catholic
faith.
Female ordination
Leo
also talked about the possibility of the ordination of women to the diaconate
in similar terms:
What the synod had spoken about
specifically was the ordination, perhaps, of women deacons, which has been a
question that’s been studied for many years now. There’ve been different
commissions appointed by different popes to say, what can we do about this? I
think that will continue to be an issue.
Ok,
so in the early Church, there was indeed an office of “deaconess” – but
everyone knows that these women were not ordained to any sacramental holy
order of the diaconate.
But
Leo calls even this into question by equating the female diaconate with that of
the permanent diaconate established after the Second Vatican Council. He gives
a long anecdote about meeting deacons and their wives in Rome before
concluding:
[T]here are parts of the world that
never really promoted the permanent deaconate, and that itself became a
question: Why would we talk about ordaining women to the diaconate if the
diaconate itself is not yet properly understood and properly developed and
promoted within the church?
He
also expressed his willingness for study and debate on the matter to continue,
saying he was “certainly
willing to continue to listen to people,” and pointing to the study
groups in Rome on the subject. “We’ll walk with that and see what comes,” he said.
But
do you know what’s even more shocking? Leo said this:
I at the moment don’t have an intention
of changing the teaching of the Church on the topic.
Friends,
if you say a thing like that, it’s clear what you think. You’re saying
you do have the power to “change the teaching of the Church.”
The immutability of dogma
But
the teaching of the Church says that this isn’t possible. Can that be changed
too?
Vatican
I denied that the Pope could change the Church’s teaching or
introduce new dogmas. It taught:
For the holy Spirit was promised to the
successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some
new doctrine.
It
goes on to say that the purpose of the papacy is to safeguard and preserve the
deposit of faith. Not to consider whether the time is right to change it.
Oh,
some will say, we’re not talking about changes. This is just a development
of dogma.
Come
on. That’s what they always say to justify this stuff. And anyway, Leo was
pretty clear: he’s the one who was talking about changing Church teaching.
And
anyway, that defense is excluded too. There’s a legitimate sense of the
development of doctrine, but changing the meanings of dogmas to something
totally different isn’t it.
Such
an idea has been condemned time and again by the Church.
Pope Pius IX condemned, in the Syllabus of Errors, the idea that divine
revelation is “subject to a continual and indefinite progress.”
Vatican I declared that the “meaning
of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained” and that “there must never be
any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more
profound understanding.”
That same
Council anathematized anyone who says dogma can be assigned “a sense
different from that which the Church has understood and understands.”
Pope St Pius X cited all these
teachings in his encyclical Pascendi
Dominici Gregis against Modernism.
In his Oath
Against Modernism, he also required clergy to profess that dogma is handed
down “in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport.”
This oath also states that the idea “that
dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one
which the Church held previously” is a – get this –
“heretical misrepresentation.”
Grave implications
“Heretical”
is a big word. But the truth is clear: homosexual acts are intrinsically
disordered, marriage is between one man and one woman, and these teachings
cannot change.
As
I said above, both the Church’s teaching on sexual morality, and the
immutability of dogma are the sorts of truths we have to believe with divine
and Catholic faith.
The
censure attached to the obstinate denial or doubt of such truths is
indeed heresy. (Can. 751 of 1983 CIC, Can. 1325 of 1917 CIC)
So,
where does that leave us?
The
hugely problematic situation of Leo XIV raising hopes for an impossible change
in the future.
And
claiming the power to change Church teaching, which he certainly does not have.
And…
publicly doubting (or even denying) these two sets of truths in a video
interview – which, as I said, is heresy.
You
know what St. Paul said about those who try to introduce new dogmas, doctrines
or Gospels:
If I, or an angel from heaven, preach to
you a Gospel different to that which we have preached to you, which you have
received: let him be anathema.
COMMENT: The very essence of the Modernist heresy is the denial of immutability
of dogma because they deny that dogma is divine revelation of an immutabile
truth from an immutable God. The Modernist believe that dogma is not a truth
revealed by God but rather a human expression of the subjective religious sentiment
and therefore dogma must change over time as the human sentiment changes. Leo
the Heretic professes that the "attitudes" of Catholics will change
only gradually. therefore, when there is a sufficient number expressing the new
attitude then the dogmas will change to express the new religious attitude. It
is absolutely impossible to hold this belief and be a faithful Catholic at the
same time. Leo is just another Bergoglian who will bring ruin to himself and
others.
Pope Leo is now the CEO of the same HomoLobby his
predecessor chaired! It is impossible to be a defender of homosexuality and a
Catholic at the same time.
Bishop Schneider: Vatican ‘LGBTQ pilgrimage’ an ‘abomination,’ Pope Leo
must make ‘public reparation’
Pope Leo must ‘urgently’ make reparation after the Vatican endorsed an LGBT
Jubilee ‘pilgrimage’ and allowed unrepentant homosexuals to pass the Holy Doors
at St. Peter’s, Bishop Schneider said.
LifeSiteNews | Sept 10, 2025— Bishop
Athanasius Schneider expressed “horror” at the Vatican’s endorsement of the
“LGBTQ Jubilee pilgrimage,” rebuking priests who support homosexuality as
“spiritual criminals” and “murderers of souls.”
“My
reaction was a silent cry of horror, indignation, and sorrow,” the auxiliary of
Astana, Kazakhstan, said regarding the Vatican’s approval of an LGBT-themed
“pilgrimage” on its Jubilee website, in an interview with Diane Montagna, a
journalist in Rome.
Montagna had highlighted the fact that
photos captured an array of rainbow paraphernalia in St. Peter’s Basilica, as
well homosexual male couple “brazenly holding hands there, one with a backpack
saying F*** the Rules,” at the conclusion of their “pilgrimage.”
What took place there could be described as
an “abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,” in the words of
Christ (cf. Mt. 24:15), said Bishop Schneider.
He pointed out that the embrace of
homosexuality by these “pilgrims” contradicted one of the very key meanings of
the Jubilee Year and the Holy Door: “Leading man to conversion and penance,” as
Pope John Paul II explained in the Bull of Indiction of the Holy Year
2000.
“There were no signs of repentance and
renunciation of objectively grave homosexual sins … on the part of the
organizers and participants in this pilgrimage,” noted Schneider. “To pass
through the Holy Door and participate in the Jubilee without repentance, while
promoting an ideology that openly rejects God’s Sixth Commandment, constitutes
a kind of desecration of the Holy Door and a mockery of God and the gift of an
indulgence.”
The bishop had strong words for the Vatican
authorities who “collaborated de facto” in this open rejection of God’s
commandment, expressed aptly in the “f*** the rules” message.
“They stood by and allowed God to be mocked
and His commandments to be scornfully cast aside,” said Schneider.
When asked to compare it to the Pachamama
scandal, he noted that while direct transgression of the First Commandment is
even more grave, the endorsement of sodomy – a sin that cries to Heaven for
vengeance – “amounts to a form of indirect idolatry.”
“Both events must be publicly repaired by
the Pope himself. This is urgently needed, before it is too late, for God will
not be mocked,” said the bishop.
Bishop Francesco Savino, vice president of
the Italian Bishops Conference, welcomed “everyone” to receive Holy Communion
at a Mass for the “pilgrims,” Montagna then pointed out. Schneider affirmed
that assent to “all of the Church’s teaching” is a precondition for receiving
Christ in the Eucharist, as was expressed by St. Paul: “Anyone who eats and
drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. (1 Cor.
11:29).
He added that this has been clearly stated
by the Catechism of the
Catholic Church: “Anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not receive
Communion without having received absolution in the sacrament of penance”
(n.1415).
Furthermore, it notes, “Sacred Scripture
‘presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, [and] tradition has
always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.… Under no
circumstances can they be approved’ (n. 2357).”
Thus, by granting these LGBT groups passage
through the Holy Door and approving their “pilgrimage,” Vatican authorities in
effect rejected “the very doctrine they are bound to uphold.”
Schneider said his message for participants
in the LGBT “pilgrimage” is one of compassion, and he called for all Christians
to show compassion towards not just those living homosexual lifestyles, but
those who support its legitimization and “persist in it unrepentant and even
proudly.”
“For when a person consciously rejects
God’s explicit commandment prohibiting any sexual activity outside a valid
marriage, he places himself in the gravest danger – that of losing eternal life
and being eternally condemned to Hell,” said the prelate.
“True love for such persons consists in
calling them, gently yet persistently, to genuine conversion to God’s revealed
will,” he continued, adding that such people are “ultimately unhappy” even when
they have suppressed their conscience.
“We must be filled with great zeal to save
these souls, to free them from poisonous deceits. Those priests who confirm
them in their homosexual activity or in a homosexual lifestyle are spiritual
criminals, murderers of souls, and God will demand a strict account from them,”
Schneider declared.
To those who defend Pope Leo XIV amid the
Vatican’s approval of the LGBT scandalous “pilgrimage” because he did not
receive a delegation from them or send them a message, Schneider said that “one
cannot reasonably presume naivety on his part,” because it was “entirely
foreseeable” that an LGBT activist group would take advantage of the Holy Door
to promote their sinful lifestyle.
Furthermore, by meeting with Father James
Martin, S.J., a heretical pro-LGBT priest, as well as pro-homosexual “marriage”
Sister Lucia Caram, Pope Leo XIV has expressed that he is not opposed to their
“heterodox and scandalous teaching and behavior – particularly since the Holy
See offered no clarification afterward and did not correct Fr. James Martin’s
triumphant messages circulated on social media,” noted Schneider.
He pointed out that in doing so, Pope Leo
XIV broke with the precedent of all popes before Francis, who “neither received
officially nor posed for photographs with those who, by word or deed, openly
rejected the doctrinal and moral teaching of the Church.”
“There is a common saying that goes: ‘Qui
tacet consentire videtur’ – ’He who is silent is taken to agree,’” Schneider
added.
The prelate called upon all Catholics to
“make a collective act of reparation for the outrage committed against the
sanctity of God’s house and the holiness of His commandments,” and implored
Pope Leo XIV to follow in the footsteps of Pope John Paul II, who Montagna
noted had denounced the first “World Pride” event in Rome during the Great
Jubilee of 2000.
“Should Pope Leo XIV make public acts of
regret and even reparation, he will lose nothing; should he fail to do so, he
will forfeit something before the eyes of God – and God alone matters,” said
Schneider.
“May Our Holy Father Pope Leo XIV take to
heart the following words of Our Lord which He once spoke through St. Bridget
of Sweden to one of his predecessors (Pope Gregory XI)”:
Uproot, pluck out and destroy all the vices of your court! Separate
yourself from the counsel of carnal-minded and worldly friends and follow
humbly the spiritual counsel of My friends. Get up like a man and clothe
yourself confidently in strength! Start to reform the Church that I purchased
with My Own Blood in order that it may be reformed and led back spiritually to
its pristine state of holiness, for nowadays more veneration is shown to a
brothel than to My Holy Church. My son, heed My counsel. If you obey Me in what
I told you, I will welcome you mercifully like a loving father. Bravely
approach the way of justice and you shall prosper. Do not despise the One Who
loves you. If you obey, I will show you mercy and bless and dress you and adorn
you with the precious pontifical regalia of a holy pope. I shall clothe you
with Myself in such a way that you will be in Me and I in you, and you shall be
glorified in eternity (The Book of Revelations, Book IV, chap. 149).
Argumentum ex concessis
Notes in the Margin of an
Article by Abbé Claude Barthe
For if you live according to the flesh,
you will die;
but if by the Spirit you
put to death the deeds of the flesh, you will live.
Rom 8: 13
The
essay by Abbé Claude Barthe’s, recently published in an Italian translation at
Aldo Maria Valli’s blog Duc in altum [1], deserves some attention. What
is most interesting in it is not so much his assessment of the newly elected
Leo XIV, nor the pragmatic realism with which he recognizes Prevost’s
continuity with his predecessor or calls for a loosening of restrictions on the
traditional liturgy.
Abbé Barthe writes:
There is a paradox, even a risk, for
those who invoke freedom for the traditional liturgy and catechism: that of
being granted a sort of “authorization” for liturgical and doctrinal
Catholicism. We have already cited as an example the paradoxical situation that
arose in the 19th-century French political system, when the most staunch
supporters of the monarchical Restoration, enemies in principle of the modern
freedoms introduced by the Revolution, continually fought to be granted a space
for life and expression, freedom of the press, and freedom of teaching. All
things being equal, in the ecclesiastical system of the 21st century, at least
in the immediate future, a relaxation of the ideological despotism of the
Reformation could be beneficial. But while it may be advantageous in the short
and medium term, it could ultimately prove radically unsatisfactory.
What I believe should be highlighted is
the not-so-veiled warning that Abbé Barthe addresses to those who resort to the
adversary’s arguments to gain legitimacy in the ecclesial world, applying
the argumentum ex concessis [2]. In this case, “those who invoke freedom
for the traditional liturgy and catechism” – and who condemn Bergoglian
synodality – appeal to that same synodality so that the “Summorum
Pontificum communities” may be recognized as one among the many
expressions of the composite ecclesial polyhedron.
Abbé Barthe’s denunciation reveals
not a paradox, but the paradox, the contradiction that
fundamentally undermines any claim to orthodoxy on the part of self-styled
conservatives: the acceptance of the revolutionary principles of the so-called
“synodal church” as the (incomplete, moreover) counterpart to being tolerated
by it. In reality, this exchange is far from equal. The “synodal church” merely
applies to conservatives the same legitimacy of existence it grants to any
other “movement” or “charisma” present in the multifaceted ecclesial fabric,
but it carefully avoids acknowledging that their demands might go beyond a mere
aesthetic and ceremonial concession. The unwritten contract between
conservatives and the post-Bergoglian Hierarchy stipulates that the “liturgical
preferences” of a group of clerics and faithful can be tolerated if and
only if they refrain from highlighting the heterogeneity, incompatibility,
and alienation between the ecclesiology and the entire doctrinal framework
underlying the Vetus Ordo and those expressed in the reformed
Montinian rite.
Abbé Barthe does not ignore the critical
issues: referring to Leo XIV’s Electors, he calls them “all of the conciliar
menagerie,” demonstrating a certain courage, especially considering his public
role and his dependence on those Prelates. Nor does he ignore the
deception embraced by those who exploit religious liberty to invoke
for themselves a tolerance that is not denied even to the worshippers of
Amazonian idols.
The deception is twofold: not only
because of the paradox that Abbé Barthe has rightly highlighted; but also and
above all because of a much worse trap, consisting of accepting at least
implicitly the forced, unnatural, and impossible separation between the
ceremonial form of the rite and its doctrinal substance.
This is an operation
of de-signification of the Liturgy, which consists in being
recognized with the right to celebrate in the Tridentine Rite on the condition
that the celebrant does not also accept the doctrinal and moral implications of
that rite. But if that “Summorum priest” accepts this principle, he must
also accept its inverse application. Indeed, the moment one admits that the
Liturgy can be celebrated without regard for the traditional doctrine it
expresses – a doctrine the “synodal church” does not recognize and considers to
be other than itself – one ends up accepting that even the reformed
liturgy can ignore the errors and heresies it insinuates, errors which no
Catholic worthy of the name can absolutely ratify. In doing so, however, one
plays into the hands of the adversary, under the illusion of being more cunning
than the devil. It all comes down to a question of dress and choreography, of
aesthetics and sentiment that satisfies or does not satisfy personal taste, as
Cardinal Burke’s recent words confirmed: “You don’t take something so rich
in beauty and begin to strip away the beautiful elements without having a
negative effect.” [3] Nothing could be more alien to the mindset of the
Roman Liturgy, according to which the beauty of ceremonies is such because it
is a necessary expression of the Truth it teaches and the Good it practices.
The “synodal church” includes
conservatives in its coveted pantheon not only because it gives them
what they want – solemn pontifical liturgies celebrated by influential
prelates, without doctrinal implications – but also because none of the Holy
See’s interlocutors has the slightest intention of demanding more; and even if
someone were to dare ask for more, the gatekeeper on duty –
literally, the ostiarius –would promptly intervene, calling for
“prudence” and “moderation,” more concerned with preserving his own prestige
than with the fate of the Catholic resistance. This is accompanied by the “Zip
it” [4] policy advocated by Trad Inc. [5], according to which the possible
concessions the moderates hope to obtain from Leo suggest they should not
criticize him openly so as not to alienate him.
The path of being persecuted, ostracized,
and excommunicated do not seem to be among the options for my brothers: it
seems they are already resigned to a fate of tolerance, in which they can
neither be truly Catholic nor fully synodal; neither friends of those who fight
the enemy infiltrated into the Church, nor of those who seek to replace her
with a human surrogate of Masonic inspiration. The Lord will hold these
lukewarm priests accountable with greater severity than He will many poor
parish priests who have other, more pressing pastoral priorities. Let us hope
that Abbé Barthe’s warning does not fall on deaf ears, for the hour of battle
approaches, and to be found defenseless and unprepared, in these circumstances,
would be irresponsible.
And it is precisely in times of
persecution that we must rediscover the relevance and validity of the words of
Saint Vincent of Lérins:
In ipsa item catholica ecclesia magnopere
curandum est ut id teneamus quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum
est; hoc est etenim vere proprieque catholicum. [6]
If anything does not meet these three
criteria – semper, ubique, et ab omnibus – it must be rejected as
heretical. This norm protects us from the errors spread by false pastors, in
the serene certainty of acting in accordance with Tradition and thus being able
to compensate, due to the present state of emergency, for the absence of
ecclesiastical authority.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
3 September MMXXV
S.cti Pii X Papæ, Conf.
FOOTNOTES
1 – Abbé Claude Barthe, Leone, il pompiere nella Chiesa
divorata dal fuoco della divisione. Ma quale unità ricerca?, published
at Duc in Altum on August 9, 2025 – https://www.aldomariavalli.it/2025/08/09/analisi-leone-il-pompiere-nella-chiesa-divorata-dal-fuoco-della-divisione-ma-quale-unita-ricerca/ – English translation: https://www.resnovae.fr/the-pontificate-of-leo-xiv-a-transitional-stage/
2 – Argumentum ex concessis is a rhetorical and logical
technique in which an interlocutor uses the premises, arguments, or claims
accepted by an opponent to construct their own argument, often to refute them
or demonstrate the inconsistency of their position. This strategy is based on
the idea of temporarily accepting the opponent’s claims (the “concessions”) and
using them to draw conclusions that either challenge them or support their own
thesis.
3 – Cfr. https://x.com/mljhaynes/status/1954919906492747838
4 – Cfr. https://www.radiospada.org/2025/09/leone-xiv-lipotesi-zip-e-la-contropartita-per-i-conservatori-una-strategia-gia-tentata-e-che-lascia-perplessi-in-7-punti/
5 – “Trad Inc.” is the American expression which refers to
conservative believers and blogs organized like companies, which operate
according to market logic and are dependent on their shareholders.
6 – Commonitorium, 2. “In this same Catholic Church, we must take
the greatest care to maintain what has always been believed, everywhere and by
all; this is in fact truly and properly Catholic.”
COMMENT: It is encouraging
for us who have refused the compromises of faith that conservative Catholics
have made in return for their privileged Indult to have a man of Archbishop Carlo
Maria Viganò's stature
agree and defend what we have been doing at Ss. Peter & Paul Roman Catholic
Mission for the last 25 years. We hope and pray that he may have a greater
influence on other resistance bishops and priests.
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:
3.
If anyone says: that the sacraments of the
New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, let him be
anathema.
4.
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
John Cardinal Newman, another Novus Ordo "saint" soon to be
declared a "Doctor" of the Novus Ordo Church, comments following the
dogmatic declaration of papal infallibility.
“But
we must hope, for one is obliged to hope it, that the Pope (Pius IX) will be
driven from Rome, and will not continue the Council (Vatican I), or that there
will be another Pope. It is sad he should force us to such wishes.”
John
H. Newman, Letter to his companion, Fr. Ambrose St. John, 22 August, 1870
“We
have come to a climax of tyranny. It is not good for a Pope to live 20 years.
It is anomaly and bears no good fruit; he becomes a god, has no one to
contradict him, does not know facts, and does cruel things without meaning it.”
John
H. Newman, The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, v. XXVI by Charles
Stephen Dessain
"This (Divine) law, as apprehended in
the minds of individual men, is called "conscience;" and though it
may suffer refraction in passing into the intellectual medium of each, it is
not therefore so affected as to lose its character of being the Divine Law, but
still has, as such, the prerogative of commanding obedience."
John Henry Cardinal Newman
"It seems, then, that there are
extreme cases in which Conscience may come into collision with the word of a
Pope, and is to be followed in spite of that word."
John Henry Cardinal Newman
COMMENT: Pope Gregory XVI
said, "This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and
erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be
maintained for everyone." Conscience is not the Divine Law. St. Thomas
says that, "Conscience is nothing else than the application of knowledge
to some action." He is referring to the knowledge of the Law of God. The
Law of God, whether the eternal law or the positive revealed law of God, is the
objective criteria by which the conscience is obligated to use as the standard
by which any judgment regarding the moral goodness or evil of any particular
act is made. All men are obligated to
obey their conscience because they are obligated to apprehend the objective
Divine Law as the proper criteria. They are not free to invent their personal
subjective criteria in determining what is the right or the wrong thing to
do. Liberalism claims the exact
opposite. It is a fundamental axiom of liberalism that the conscience is free
to establish its own moral criteria. This has been condemned by popes Gregory
XVI, PiusIX and Pius X. John Henry Cardinal Newman can be identified as the
"Spirit of Vatican II."
Hermeneutics of Continuity/Discontinuity
The woman saith to him: Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet. Our
fathers adored on this mountain, and you say, that at Jerusalem is the place
where men must adore. Jesus saith to her: Woman, believe me, that the hour
cometh, when you shall neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, adore the
Father. You adore that which you know not: we adore that which we know; for
salvation is of the Jews. But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true
adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth. For the Father also
seeketh such to adore him. God is a spirit; and they that adore him, must adore
him in spirit and in truth.
John 4:19-24
Novus Ordo Doctrine: Moslems and Novus Ordo Catholics
Worship the same God!
CCC 841, quoting the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church,
Lumen Gentium 16, from Vatican II, declared:
"The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the
Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold
the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God,
mankind’s judge on the last day."
CCC 841 also references Vatican II’s Declaration on the Relation of the Church
to Non-Christian Religions, Nostra Aetate,
3, that makes the teaching of the Council perhaps even clearer:
"The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the
one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the
Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit
wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the
faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to
God."
Catholic Church Doctrine: Catholics and Moslems DO
NOT worship the same God.
“Now
the Samaritans had a false idea of God in two ways. First of all, because they
thought He was corporeal, so that they believed that He should be adored in
only one definite corporeal place. Further, because they did not believe that
He transcended all things, but was equal to certain creatures, they adored
along with Him certain idols, as if they were equal to Him. Consequently, they
did not know Him, because they did not attain to a true knowledge of Him. So
the Lord says, you adore that which you do not know [John 4:22], that is, you do not adore God
because you do not know Him, but rather your imagination, by which you
apprehend something as God, just as the Gentiles also walk in the foolishness
of their mind (Eph 4:17).” St.
Thomas Aquinas, Commentary On John 4:22
“How
then did the Samaritans know not what they worshipped? Because they thought
that God was local and partial; so at least they served Him, and so they sent
to the Persians, and reported that the God of this place is angry with us [2
Kings 26], in this respect
forming no higher opinion of Him than of their idols. Wherefore they continued
to serve both Him and devils, joining things which ought not to be joined.” St. John Chrysostom, Homily 33 On The Gospel
of John
COMMENT: When
Jesus said to the Samaritan Woman, "You adore that which you know
not," He is not saying that they adore the One True God that they are
ignorant of. He is saying, that in their ignorance they do not know who they
are adoring meaning that they are adoring in ignorance a devil, for "all
the gods of the gentiles are devils" (Psalm 95:5). Jesus then says, that
"true adorers shall adore the Father in spirit and in truth..... they that
adore him, must adore him in spirit and in truth." To adore in
"spirit" means that to adore God you must be baptized and made sons
of God for as Jesus said: "Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born
again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God That
which is born of the flesh, is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit, is
spirit" (John 3:5-7). And to adore in "truth" means who must
believe what has been revealed by God. Without the true faith it is
"impossible to please God" (Hebrews 11:6). As such, right knowledge
of God is essential to true worship. This is the great sin of Modernism and
Neo-modernism: They make a right knowledge of God impossible!
Hermeneutics
of Continuity/Discontinuity
Catholic
Faith:
Physical
substances come into being through the union of substantial form and primary matter.
The Soul is the Substantial Form of the Human Body; it is immortal and will be
judged after the death of the person and directed to Heaven or Hell for all
eternity awaiting to be joined again to its Body at the Resurrection of the
Dead for the Last Judgment.
“In order that
all may know the truth of the faith in its purity and all error may be
excluded, we define that anyone who presumes henceforth to assert defend or
hold stubbornly that the rational or intellectual soul is not the form of the
human body of itself and essentially, is to be considered a heretic.”
Council of
Vienne
Neo-Modernists
Ideology: [Ratzinger quotes provided by James Larson, War Against Being]
“The medieval
concept of substance has long since become inaccessible to us.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Faith and the Future
“The proper
Christian thing, therefore, is to speak, not of the soul’s immortality, but of
the resurrection of the complete human being [at the Final Judgment] and of
that alone… The idea that to speak of the soul is unbiblical was accepted to
such an extent that even the new Roman Missal (i.e.: the Novus Ordo) suppressed
the term anima in its liturgy for the dead. It also disappeared from the ritual
for burial.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
“‘The soul’ is our term for that in us which
offers a foothold for this relation [with the eternal]. Soul is nothing other
than man’s capacity for relatedness with truth, with love eternal.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
“The challenge
to traditional theology today lies in the negation of an autonomous,
‘substantial’ soul with a built-in immortality in favor of that positive view
which regards God’s decision and activity as the real foundation of a
continuing human existence.”
Rev. Joseph
Ratzinger, Eschatology: Death and Eternal
Life
And those who
have denied the reality of substantial
being are those who are responsible for the “dictatorship of relativism.”
“Every
day new sects are created and what Saint Paul says about human trickery comes
true, with cunning which tries to draw those into error (Eph 4, 14).
Having a clear faith, based on the Creed of the Church, is often labelled today
as a fundamentalism. Whereas, relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed
and ‘swept along by every wind of teaching,’ looks like the only attitude
(acceptable) to today’s standards. We are moving towards a dictatorship of
relativism which does not recognise anything as for certain and which has as
its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.”
Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, Homily of the Dean of the College of Cardinals, 2005
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 was 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
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
Wisdom is only
possible for those who hold DOGMA as the Rule of Faith!
Besides, every dogma of faith is to the
Catholic cultivated mind not only a new increase of knowledge, but also an
incontrovertible principle from which it is able to draw conclusions and derive
other truths. They present an endless field for investigation so that the
beloved Apostle St. John could write at the end of his Gospel, without fear of
exaggeration: “But there are also many other things which Jesus did: which if
they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to
contain the books that should be written.”
The Catholic Church, by enforcing firm belief
in her dogmas—which are not her inventions, but were given by Jesus
Christ—places them as a bar before the human mind to prevent it from going
astray and to attach it to the truth; but it does not prevent the mind from
exercising its functions when it has secured the treasure of divine truth, and
a “scribe thus instructed in the kingdom of heaven is truly like a man that is
a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old.” He
may bring forth new illustrations, new arguments and proofs; he may show now
applications of the same truths, according to times and circumstances; he may
show new links which connect the mysteries of religion with each other or with
the natural sciences as there can be no discord between the true faith and true
science; God, being the author of both, cannot contradict Himself and teach
something by revelation as true which He teaches by the true light of reason as
false. In all these cases the householder “brings forth from his treasure new
things and old.” They are new inasmuch as they are the result of new investigations;
and old because they are contained in the old articles of faith and doctrine as
legitimate deductions from their old principles.
Fr. Joseph Prachensky, S.J., The Church of
Parables and True Spouse of the Suffering Saviour, on the Parable of the Scribe
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
Again, in the Office for the feasts of our Lady,
the Church applies the words of Sirach to the Blessed Virgin and thus
gives us to understand that in her we find all hope: In me is all
hope of life and of virtue. In Mary is every grace: In me is all
grace of the way and of the truth. In Mary we shall find life and eternal
salvation: Those who serve me shall never fail. Those who explain me
shall have life everlasting (Sir. 24:25, 30, 31--- Vulgate). And in the Book
of Proverbs: Those who find me find life and win favor from the Lord (8:35).
Surely such expressions are enough to prove that we require the intercession of
Mary.
St. Alphonsus de Liguori, The Glories of Mary
THE NOVUS ORDO CHURCH OF SLOTH AND ENVY
The first effect of charity is joy in the goodness
of God. But this joy can only live through the union of man’s will with God in
charity. And charity demands that man keep all the commandments. Charity
demands a fellowship in good between God and man. When the effort to live in
this fellowship in good begins to appear too difficult to man he begins to be
sorrowful about the infinite goodness of God. This sorrow weighs down the
spirit of man and leads him to neglect good. This sorrow is the sin of sloth,
sorrow about the goodness of God. Sloth is a capital sin. It leads men into
other sins. To avoid the sorrow or weariness of spirit which is sloth men will
turn from God to the sinful pleasures of the world.
When a man falls victim to sloth and is sorrowful
because of the goodness of God it is only natural that he will begin to be
grieved also at the manifestation of the goodness of God in other men. He will
resent good men simply because they are good. This resentment is envy, hatred
of someone else’s good. Since the love of our neighbor flows from our love of
God, it is natural that when we cease to love God’s goodness, we will also
begin to hate the goodness of men. Envy, like sloth, is a capital sin. It will
lead men to commit other sins to destroy the goodness of their neighbors.
When a man’s heart is filled with sloth and envy
the interior peace of his soul which was the effect of charity is destroyed.
The loss of the interior peace leads to the destruction of the peace of
society. When a man’s heart is no longer centered in God, then his life loses
all proper direction. When the love of God is gone he has nothing left but the
love of himself. When a man loves himself without loving God then he can brook
no opposition to his own judgment or arbitrary will. He can tolerate goodness
in no one else. He will even, by the sin of scandal, by his own words and
example, lead other men into sin. He must disagree with all men. He must
dispute with them, separate himself from them, quarrel with them, go to war
with them, set the whole of the community at war with itself.
Wherever the goodness of God is most manifest,
there will the heart of the man who no longer loves God be most energetic in
sowing the seeds of discord, contentiousness, strife and war. That is why
religion and the true Church of God are so viciously attacked in the world
today. Those who do not love God are driven by sloth and envy to attack God’s
tabernacle on earth.
Fr. Walter Farrell and Fr. Martin Healy, My Way of Life, Pocket Edition of St. Thomas
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 Laetitia (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" did "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.” [......]
Atheists are really anti-theists. They oppose the God who
is God with an idol of their own making.
No atheist chooses merely to deny God. For the
atheist’s spiritual posture against God is at the same time his posture in
preference for some other Being above God. As he dismisses the true God he is
welcoming his New God. Why must this be so? Because every personal commitment
of man presupposes, deep in the metaphysical core of his being, a hunger for
being as truth and goodness. Man is intrinsically burdened with an incurable
hunger for transcendence. If being abhors a vacuum, the vacuum it most
violently shrinks from is the total absence of Infinite Being. And history
demonstrates that man is inconsolable without the True God.
Fr. Vincent Miceli, S.J., The Gods of Atheism
‘When men
choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they
believe in anything.’
There are men who will ruin themselves and ruin
their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale (of the
Catholic faith). This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith;
that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the sword that cuts their own
fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes. … (The atheist fanatic)
sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He
offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the
altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary
ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some
one who (he affirms) never lived at all.
G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy
“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
Cardinal Burke offers the
correction for two mistranslations in the English publication of the Motu
proprio of Pope Francis, “TRADITIONIS CUSTODES”
Art. 1. The
liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI (sic) and Saint John Paul II
(sic), in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique only expression of
the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
Art. 4. Priests
ordained after the publication of the present Motu Proprio, who wish to
celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962, should must submit a formal
request to the diocesan Bishop who shall consult the Apostolic See before
granting this authorization.
"Not a stone upon a stone" - 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 Catholic church known as the Church of the Judgment (destroyed
by the Persians) 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".
Leo XIV Reinstates Convicted Child-Porn Priest who was protected by
Francis
Carlo Alberto Capella was
Vatican diplomat who was convicted by a Vatican tribunal of possessing and
sharing child pornography. Capella admitted guilt to the charges. He is the
only one who has served a prison sentence in the Vatican jail for this crime or
for any sexually related crime against minors.
Monsignor Capella was ordained a priest in
1993 for the Archdiocese of Milan. After studies of canon law he entered
the Vatican diplomatic corps. He was assigned to the papal nunciature in India
in 2003 and to the nunciature in Hong Kong in 2007. In 2008 he was created Chaplain of His Holiness,
which entitled him to the title of Monsignor. In 2011 he was
transferred to the Vatican to serve in the Secretariat of State. In 2016 he was
assigned to the papal nunciature to the United States.
In 2017, Capella was recalled to the
Vatican by Pope Francis after United States officials informed the Vatican
that he was under investigation for possession and sharing of child
pornography. The government of Canada has issued a warrant for his arrest,
alleging that during his time in Canada in December, 2016 he had possessed and
shared child pornography. He was returned to the Vatican which claimed
diplomatic immunity for Capella protecting him from prosecution in the United
State or Canada.
In 2018, he was convicted and sentenced to
five years in prison, which he served in the Vatican jail. As of 2021, he was
allowed out during the day to work in an office that sells papal blessings. In
2023, following the end of his prison sentence, Capella was permitted to return
to work in the Vatican Secretariat of State.
Now Pope Leo XIV has reinstated Msgr. Capella to a senior diplomatic
position in the Vatican Secretariat of State.
COMMENT: Pope Leo is protégé
of Francis to whom he owns his promotions to bishop and cardinal. It was
Francis who protected this pervert from criminal charges in the United States
and in Canada and now it is Francis' protégé who has restored him the a high
level position in the Vatican. This does not portend well for any serious
reform of the Novus Ordo Church which has become a sinecure for homosexuals and
others perverts.
From Tradition In Action:
You don't have to be a liturgical EXPERT to see that there is no essential difference in the act!
The question is: Is there any essential
difference in the actors?
Top: St. Patrick Catholic Church, Chatham, New Jersey, August 22, 2021
Bottom: First Lutheran Church, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, July 6, 2025
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
