The message sent by Benedict to be read aloud at the funeral of Cardinal Meisner is generating a great deal of buzz in Catholic circles, and for good reason.
Even so, some very important aspects of the text don’t seem to be getting nearly enough attention. Before we get to that, however, let’s take a moment to consider just how extraordinary this situation truly is.
We have good reason to believe that Benedict is a man “under wraps,” if you will. One might even suggest that he is being held captive to some extent.
Yes, I know… It sounds like a Dan Brown novel, but let’s not forget yet another bombshell that Benedict managed to lob into the public record; this one dated October 2014.
Recall that Benedict had responded by letter to an invitation that he received to participate in a Pontifical High Mass as part of a Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage in Rome.
“My state as a ‘cloistered monk’ does not allow me a presence that is also exterior. I leave my cloister only in particular cases, [when] personally invited by the Pope.”
Benedict plainly, albeit cleverly, informed the world that he is not “allowed an exterior presence” unless personally invited by Francis. Not allowed!
This is a far cry from what Benedict said just 20 months earlier when he announced his resignation:
“With regard to myself, I wish to also devotedly serve the Holy Church of God in the future through a life dedicated to prayer.” (Benedict XVI, February 11, 2013)
How did we get from choosing “a life dedicated to prayer” to becoming a “cloistered monk” who can only leave his cloister when personally invited by the Pope?
The solitary conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the veritable imprisonment of which Benedict spoke isn’t his own idea; it had to have come from his “superior,” that is, Francis himself.
Let’s be clear:
Benedict is not one to shoot from the hip. He chooses his words carefully. Of this we can be especially certain when it comes to a written text, and this applies to both the letter of 2014 and the one that we’re about to discuss.
With this in mind, let’s now take a closer look at the message that was read aloud at Cardinal Meisner’s funeral.
First, it seems obvious that the two men had a close relationship and spoke rather regularly. We are told, in fact, that they had spoken just the day before the cardinal died.
Benedict further relates:
“What particularly impressed me from my last conversations [NOTE: plural] with the now passed Cardinal was the relaxed cheerfulness, the inner joy and the confidence at which he had arrived.”
From the content of the message, one gets the impression that the two men had a “fraternal” relationship.
Benedict went on to relate concerning their final conversation that Cardinal Meisner was pleased to be on vacation. This is just the kind of thing one might expect to come up when good buddies shoot the breeze, right?
Sure, but don’t be fooled.
In spite of however many years their friendship went back, Cardinal Meisner was “old school” enough that there is little doubt that he saw his relationship with Benedict primarily as one of Holy Father and son.
In other words, Benedict was someone from whom the cardinal could seek guidance, and we can be certain that it was always carefully considered when given.
Note that Benedict wrote of the cheerfulness, joy and confidence at which Cardinal Meisner had arrived.
Evidently, he was Meisner’s confident even prior to this point; presumably in the lead up to the dubia.
One wonders what kind of advice, if any, Benedict may have given to Cardinal Meisner in those days…
We can only speculate, of course, but two things seem very unlikely:
Firstly, that Meisner would have failed to seek Benedict’s counsel before participating in the dubia, and secondly, that he would have added his name to the text had Benedict counseled against it.
At this, we come to the money quote:
“What moved me all the more was that, in this last period of his life, he learned to let go and to live out of a deep conviction that the Lord does not abandon His Church, even if the boat has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.”
I get the sense that Benedict may have been speaking of himself to some extent – learning to let go in this last period of life; arriving at a place of relaxed cheerfulness, inner joy and confidence in spite of the unprecedented turmoil in the Church (to say nothing of one’s own contribution to it).
Either way, I think it’s safe to say that Benedict had a hand in leading his son, Cardinal Meisner, to this point of resignation (no pun intended).
Before we discuss the capsizing Church and the extent to which it represents a cleverly delivered critique of Captain Bergoglio, I’d like to focus on that portion of the text that was read just prior as it is critically important:
“The Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination.”
Again, let us be certain that Benedict has chosen his words very carefully.
With this in mind, it would seem rather obvious, to me at any rate, that Benedict is calling our attention back to the now-famous words that he had spoken in his homily for the Pro Eligendo Romano Pontifice, the Mass for the Election of the Roman Pontiff, offered just prior to the conclave of 2005 that elected him pope.
“Relativism, that is, letting oneself be ‘tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine,’ seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.”
In this, Benedict – a veritable “cloistered monk” beholden to the whims of his “superior” – is providing a masterclass in Romanitas. He is telling all with ears to hear what he really thinks of the Bergoglian enterprise!
It seems clear to me that this text was not, as one might expect, properly vetted by Bergoglio’s operatives prior to being read. Might someone’s head roll as a result; perhaps even that of Georg Ganswein? We shall see…
In any case, it is no coincidence that we were invited to reconsider, in light of current events, that portion of Cardinal Ratzinger’s 2005 homily wherein he spoke of being “tossed about,” and this just prior to his comment concerning the Church of today being like a boat on the verge of capsizing.
(See, continuity can be useful!)
It is helpful to know that this imagery is Scriptural in a twofold sense.
In 2005, then Cardinal Ratzinger was referring to St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians:
That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness by which they lie in wait to deceive. (Eph. 4:14)
At that time, the soon-to-be Pope Benedict XVI was speaking of “dictatorship” as that worldly point of view opposed by the Church. He immediately went on to describe this opposition thus:
“We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man … a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth.”
In 2017, by contrast, Benedict is calling our attention back to his words of 2005 while speaking of the present state of affairs inside the Church. He is telling us that the “dictatorship” has entered her very bosom.
Yes, I understand, it entered primarily via the Almighty Council; a point lost on men like Benedict, but be that as it most certainly is, his indictment of Dictator Bergoglio stands.
Wicked, crafty, cunning, lying in wait to deceive… A man who does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.
Is this not a fitting description of he who masterminded the Synods in order to pave the way for Amoris Laetitia?
As I stated, the seafaring imagery under discussion is Scriptural in a twofold sense. The second concerns the Church as a boat that has taken on so much water as to be on the verge of capsizing.
And behold a great tempest arose in the sea, so that the boat was covered with waves, but he was asleep. And they came to him, and awaked him, saying: Lord, save us, we perish. And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up, he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm. But the men wondered, saying: What manner of man is this, for the winds and the sea obey him? (Matthew 8:24-27)
From this, we can glean a couple of things.
One, in the eyes of the world, the Church is fast crumbling to the point of irrelevancy; so much so that her detractors are moved to taunt the faithful in the manner of the Pharisees:
Your Church is beaten and bloodied. Where is your Lord now; sleeping?
Through the eyes of faith, however, while we recognize the severity of the ecclesial crisis as much or more than anyone, we know that it only appears as if Our Lord has left us to perish. We know that He is ever the true Head of His Church, and He will not let her fail.
More specifically as it concerns Dictator Bergoglio, this scene from the Gospels is highly relevant.
In the interest of space, I invite you to read (or reread as the case may be) the following post from June 2015: The Church will doubt as Peter doubted…
There you will find a treatment of Our Lady’s warning as given at Fatima and the commentary of Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli (the future Pope Pius XII) concerning it:
“This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul … A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God.”
In the above-mentioned scene described in Matthew’s Gospel, Bergoglio is represented (if you will allow) by Peter who is among those who ask of Jesus, What manner of man is this?
Long story short, he knows that Jesus is a man, but he doubts that He is God.
As I argue in the post linked above, the entire Bergoglian menace rests upon just such a Christological heresy; namely, doubt concerning the divinity of Jesus Christ.
In conclusion, it seems as if the most profound aspect of Benedict’s message as read at the funeral of Cardinal Meisner has been overlooked by many:
Having painted this dreadful and stunningly accurate portrait of the Dictator Bergoglio, Benedict issued a call directed at the entire episcopate:
“The Church stands in particularly pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship…”
Bishops of the world, are you listening?
Pope Benedict might just as well have spoken in Navajo code. Our shepherds hear but do not comprehend. They do not comprehend because they seemingly have lost their Faith. Nothing in this big, welcoming, accompanying, non-rigid, non-doctrinal world could possibly be cause for concern.
When PB partially abdicated he said he had a mystic experience but didn’t explain what exactly he meant by that. Did God actually direct him to stand aside for PF to be installed in the Papal Office thus instituting a dual papacy? Did He also insist PB keep the papal regalia? Is He also protecting his telecommunications from being tapped?
By this stage I believe most Catholics recognize that PB is a virtual prisoner in the Vatican as those in charge want to keep a tight grip on him. His proclamation that “The Church stands in particular pressing need of convincing shepherds who can resist the dictatorship of the spirit of the age and who live and think the faith with determination” is welcome but extremely late, as practically all members of the present Hierarchy are wolves in shepherds clothing. Our main hope in getting rid of PF was stymied by the now defunct Prefect of the CDF.
Maybe PB’s Memoirs, which undoubtedly are stashed away somewhere safe, could be quickly resurrected & published. Once in the public domain this present pontiff might just decide to take the first flight out of Rome to Argentina & join the other Peronists drinking mate & let the restoration of the True Faith (which he doesn’t believe in) grow in strength & depth which Christ intended it to. He’s yesterday’s man, no follower of Christ & well beyond his ‘sell by’ date. So are his Cabinet of liberal & free thinkers, cocaine snorting sodomites hanging out in the once hallowed place called the Vatican.
Benedict is one of the makers of the pit that he is trapped in, Vatican II.
Benedict is trapped in the prison he made, Vatican ll.
I do not believe Bergoglio’s papal election is valid- nor do I believe Benedict’s resignation is valid. The cardinals violated UDG- something that even the Dubia Cardinals will not admit (at least not publicly). Benedict’s resignation is invalid as it was coerced. I still believe Benedict is the pope. Perhaps Benedict will say such on his death bed with many witnesses around. I am seeing many people on numerous blog sites (even OnePeterFive) who say the same thing.
I also believe that the post conciliar fake church cannot be reconciled with pre-Vatican II Magisterial teaching (Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Traditional Latin Mass verses the Novus Ordo Mass). The SSPX is right. If you cannot find a TLM to attend, then look for any Catholic Eastern rite Liturgy.
Cardinals Burke and Sarah (and any other cardinals who have eyes to see and ears to hear) must admit that Vatican II is a complete disaster along with the Novus Ordo. In doing so, they will finally recognize the lie the entire Church has embraced over the last fifty plus years. They will also have to admit that Archbishop Marcel Lefevre of the SSPX was right about everything. The Third Great Schism is upon us.
May God have mercy on His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church! Mary, Mother of God, Our Lady of Fatima- PRAY FOR US!
Bergoglio did get one thing right in the last four years. Most clerics and prelates only seem to care about “three hots and a cot”, pensions, and their “careers” as opposed to fulfilling the sacramental vocations to the priesthood & episcopate. Funny in a twisted kind of way, isn’t it? Sad, indeed.
“The Church will doubt as Peter doubted”, is such an excellent post that really says it all! “Has Peter’s doubt as to the divinity of Christ in some way managed to infiltrate and infect those who speak in the name of the Church, up to and including Peter’s successor?” Without a doubt!
“Make it known to My ministers that given they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My command, that they will follow him into misfortune…” Our Lord to Sister Lucia at Rianjo, Spain, in 1931.
We have all seen this terrifying prophecy unfold for decades. Pope Benedict should know what’s going on, he has read the 3rd Secret. But, this prophecy affects him directly as he is one of the ministers!
A Pope Francis would not exist if Pope Benedict had done his duty and fulfilled the simple requests made at Fatima. That can’t happen as long as the culture of the Council rules the day. Logic dictates that something terrible will have to happen to drain the Modernist swamp.
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU, AL. THE EVIDENCE IS SO COMPELLING as to leave no doubt whatsoever. The 3RD. SECRET of FATIMA is UNFOLDING in front of our eyes. QUITO, LOURDES, FATIMA and AKITA are happening right now in FULL STRENGTH, beginning in 1960. Now the BLIND ARE LEADING THE BLIND straight to HELL. APOSTASY in the MAKING. And Jesus said, ” When I return to earth, shall I find FAITH ?” , Luke 18,8. Given that ONLY 15 % of CATHOLICS go to MASS on SUNDAY, and considering that most of these go to the NOVUS ORDO, what can we say about Jesus’ FOREWARNING about our times, now?
And the Faithful said…”AMEN!”
jacobum JULY 17, 2017
And the Faithful said…”AMEN!”
Al, the SC, do you even read what you write. In one paragraph you say you believe B16 is still the real pope and in the next paragraph you say the conciliar church is fake. Yet you believe B16 is the real pope of a fake church. That my friend is classic cognitive dissonance.
Tom, yes, I read what I wrote. I am not a Sedevacantist. My point is simply that the College of Cardinals violated the conclave protocol laid down by JPII. Thus, I believe, that the conclave that “elected” Bergoglio is invalid (the vote). I also believe that Benedict is a “prisoner” inside the Vatican walls. Benedict is, in my opinion, still the pope as I believe his resignation was coerced by the St. Gallen Mafia. Have a heart, I work 16 hours day right now!
Yet you take your precious off hours to follow this hot mess of a situation. God bless you for your faithfulness. May you win Powerball soon. 🙂
PF and his cohorts remind me of prisoners subduing guards and taking over the prison. It’s madness, chaos, as the newly “free” and power-crazed men roam throughout the building, destroying what they can, bullying their weaker enemies, having their energies spent in mayhem. It gets wild, before it gets quiet. They are in full throes right now, but they will run out of steam, even prisoners let loose have to sleep, and sooner or later, something will happen to put them back in their cage and, it’s over. I am not saying this is the answer. Frankly I don’t know anymore what the answer is or if there is one. We know too much about our Bishops and Cardinals now. There’s no going back. The latest hateful attack in Civilta Cattolica should be the final straw. My God, they hate Americans. We must be doing something very right.
I have no understanding of this thing with PB. This will sound wrong, I’m sure, but I have to say I hardly care anymore. He abdicated. His thoughts on it all now seem pretty irrelevant.
Ok I can understand the reasoning behind the whole forced abdication. There is merit to that reasoning. Its the fake church aspect that makes me scratch my head. Is it a fake church or a real church?
If he did abdicate, he abdicated as the leader of the (false) vatican 2 church. If he was forced to resign, then he was forced to resign as the leader of the (false) vatican 2 church. Six of one and half-dozen of the other.
Archbishop Lefebvre interview:
“Fideliter: Rather than a question of liturgy, you often say, it is now a question of Faith which stands between us and present- day Rome.
Archbishop Lefebvre: Certainly the question of the liturgy and the sacraments is very important but it is not what is most important. What is most important is the question of the Faith. As far as we are concerned, the question is settled. We have the Faith of all time, of the Council of Trent, of the Catechism of St. Pius X, of all the Councils and of all the Popes prior to Vatican II.
For years they have striven in Rome to show that everything that was in the Council was perfectly in conformity with Tradition. Now they are taking off the mask. Cardinal Ratzinger had never stated his mind with such clarity. There is no Tradition. There is no longer any Deposit of Faith to transmit. Tradition in the Church is what the Pope today says. You must submit to what the Pope and the Bishops today say. For them that is what tradition is, their famous “living tradition”, the only reason for our being condemned.
Now they are no longer seeking to prove that what they say is in conformity with what Pius IX wrote, with what the Council of Trent promulgated. No, that is all over, that is out of date as Cardinal Ratzinger says. It is clear, and they might have said so sooner. It was not worth their getting us into talks and discussions with them. Now we have the tyranny of authority because there is no rule. There can no longer be any reference to the past.
In one sense the situation is becoming clearer. It is more and more proving that we are right. We are dealing with people who have a different philosophy from ours, a different way of seeing things, who are influenced by all the modern subjectivist philosophers. For them there is no fixed truth, there is no dogma. Everything is in evolution. That is a wholly Masonic way of thinking. It is truly the destruction of the Faith. Fortunately, we ourselves are continuing to lean on Tradition!”
The rhetorical cunning of Ratzinger is unmatched, it would seem. He very cleverly affirms the problem at hand, time and again, which he defines and yet he essentially never admonishes the problem nor those responsible for proffering it. He simply states “the problem” very eloquently and then the reader is left to suppose that he is opposed to “the problem”, which he develops in rhetoric, and yet he never states clearly and existentially his oppositional position to said problem. In fact, he simply never condemns the problem nor its purported perpetrators. Joseph Ratzinger without doubt is a Modernist quo Modernist and yet he remains cleverly disguised in his eloquent rhetorical constructions, however, when one carefully reads his literary work over time, it is patently clear that his foundation in thinking is evolutionary relativism. See the critical and extensive Thomistic analysis of Joseph Ratzinger, using Ratzinger’s own works, by James Larson here: http://www.waragainstbeing.com/parti-article12. Ratzinger is an apostate to the One True Faith and it would seem that he always has been since his early days as theologian and professor. He is a wolf dressed in the clothing of a sheep. As an apostate to the Faith, outside the One True Church thus, he simply cannot be the Holy Roman Pontiff. It takes the faith of a child to embrace this reality, as painful as it may be.
Quoting you now, to establish an example of the slight-of-hand, which Ratzinger uses rhetorically.
“Again, let us be certain that Benedict has chosen his words very carefully.
With this in mind, it would seem rather obvious, to me at any rate, that Benedict is calling our attention back to the now-famous words that he had spoken in his homily for the Pro Eligendo Romano Pontifice, the Mass for the Election of the Roman Pontiff, offered just prior to the conclave of 2005 that elected him pope.
‘ “Relativism, that is, letting oneself be ‘tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine,’ seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.” ‘
What he accomplishes here is to define “the problem” as, “Relativism”, which he then describes in detail and in the midst of that discussion he literally stakes the claim that this “Relativism”, as he stated, “…seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times.” He is affirming “Relativism” as “…seems [to be] the only attitude that can cope with modern times.” And after stating all that, he never condemns any of it. This is classic Ratzinger speak.
Another example is even more stunning, as in it, he denies the divinity of Christ Jesus without actually stating this denial and accomplishes this with the diabolical cunning of affirming one truth of Christ’s ontology, His humanity, and simply leaving out the other, His divinity. Now quoting you of him:
“At that time, the soon-to-be Pope Benedict XVI was speaking of “dictatorship” as that worldly point of view opposed by the Church. He immediately went on to describe this opposition thus:
‘ “We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man … a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceit from truth.” ‘ ”
Ratzinger here, with the most perspicacious cunning, says, “…the Son of God, the true man…”. The object of which he speaks in this sentence is a, “different goal”, and then he defines that goal as, “…the Son of God, the true man…”. He never proclaims “the Son of God”, as God, rather simply as “the true man”. The Catholic way of unequivocally speaking of Jesus the Christ’s dual natures is to clearly state them: True God and True Man–two intellects, two wills, one divine Essence. He speaks of Christ as “…the Son of God” but not “as God” in the divine Person of the Son. This is the classic casuistry of the Gnostic Sect which Joseph Ratzinger was the pope of and not the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which he undermined in his language his entire clerical career. His is the smiley face of Lucifer, while Jorge Bergoglio is the jingoistic face of the apostate, conciliar church, which can only remain as the church of the Antichrist, as Our Lady of LaSalette promised, “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Spot on In caritas. The Late Fr Villa , had Ratzinger sorted. Once his publishing in one of his speeches or perhaps a book Ratzinger’s “denial of the divinity of Christ” it was only a matter of time before left the stage – exit left; On top of that was the allegations against him of taking part in child sacrifice in France in some chateau, as the witness described to the European Commission investigating these outrages.
So as to fulfil the Prophesy of St Nilus who among many things predicted the events of these times. Quote: “And, the impious one! – he will so complete science with vanity that it will go off the right path and lead people to lose faith in the existence of God in three hypostases.”
The son of destruction is running rampant in our days, dishing out salvation to the ignorant and unbaptised, now it seems- while limp clergy hide in silence. The Apostasy St Nilus spoke of in the 5th century, has now come to pass.
Well, the current post-VII conciliar church seems like a parallel pseudo-church. Certainly, elements of the Catholic Church subsist within the “fake” church along side of Catholic Church (sorry about using the word “subsist” as the VII documents also use, but I don’t know how else to put it). Tom, it’s going to take a future Council/pope to sort all of this out. I wish I had all the answers, but I don’t. And, my friend, the fact that I don’t greatly bothers me.
Confusion! Confusion! Confusion! The devil loves confusion! “Diabolical disorientation” We have been warned. It is Here. It is Now.
“O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.”
I think the following parable in Matthew 13; 24-30 explains it best: “The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man that sowed good seeds in his field.  But while men were asleep, his enemy came and oversowed cockle among the wheat and went his way.  And when the blade was sprung up, and had brought forth fruit, then appeared also the cockle.  And the servants of the goodman of the house coming said to him: Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? whence then hath it cockle?  And he said to them: An enemy hath done this. And the servants said to him: Wilt thou that we go and gather it up?  And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it.  Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.”
And we deserve this, and God allows this.
Adveniat regnum tuum, fiat voluntas tua.
That is how I see it too, Rich. Its all fake. Fake popes for a fake church.
It’s unseemly for you to bring up such tripe–allegations of Benedict being involved in child sacrifice in a chateaux in France. Cite your sources! I never realized such fringe elements hung out here.
Are you a bad sede?
Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly interpreted the words of Scripture, “The spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man” (1 Cor 2:15), as applicable to Popes. And he concluded saying definitively that no one can “judge” a Pope. “To judge,” for Boniface VIII, was not to make a dogmatic or moral appraisal about the thinking or the conduct of a Pope, but rather to attribute to oneself the power of deposing him. Boniface VIII was indirectly dealing with the case of the King of France, Philip the Fair, who pretended he could depose and make Popes.
Now, when someone affirms today that the conciliar Popes are not Popes, that person implicitly is attributing to himself that power. Even when, to avoid such arrogance, a person says that the Pope automatically ceases to be Pope and therefore the See is vacant, it seems to me that he does not have the right to conclude “therefore the seat is vacant” because here he directly enters the prohibited zone.
The sede is like someone who – watching Our Lord Jesus Christ pass on the Way of the Cross, covered with blood and spittle, faltering under the weight of the enormous Cross – would say: “This disfigured man cannot be the Son of God.”
Nonetheless, that Man was the true God. For the observer to be convinced of it, he would need to have recourse to a supernatural reasoning: “This is the Man I saw practicing and preaching the good, curing the paralytic and blind, resurrecting Lazarus, multiplying the bread to feed the multitudes. This is the Man who I saw denouncing the unfaithful Jews and, for this very reason, He was unjustly persecuted and condemned to death. This Man is now here before me, heading to His mysterious and supreme sacrifice. By offering Himself to death, He is opening eternal life for all of us.”
Analogously, the Church today is the same Church we have seen in the past glorifying God in her Holy Worship, in her Divine Office, in her Hierarchy and Papacy, in her Religious Orders. She is the Church Who civilized the barbarians and educated the peoples for earth and heaven, who built civilizations of incomparable glory, who destroyed evildoers of all kinds everywhere, who opposed the Devil and his cohorts – Masons, Jews, heretics and schismatics. For the latter reason, she was infiltrated by her enemies and today she is doing what they want her to do.
This is not the hour to abandon the Mystical Body of Christ to her enemies and run off to some solitary forest to avoid personal inconveniences. This is the hour to enter the battle with increased vigor, to re-conquer every inch of soil the enemies took and rebuild in that place the same sacred institution more militant, pure and glorious than ever, so that she will be ready to face, under the protection of Our Lady, all other possible enemies until the end times.
Rushintuit-I’m not sure if your comment was meant for me. In any event, I was merely quoting the warnings of Our Lady of Fatima. Anyone who does not think we are living through this “diabolical disorientation” is living in blissful ignorance and can either by pitied or envied.
So many posters still hang on to the hope that the ship will be righted again. Faithfulness to orthodoxy will return to Rome. The evils and errors of the “new mass” will be rejected and the truth of the traditional Mass will be recognized universally again. So many keep thinking the Church will be fixed. All the while we have faithfulness to doctrine. Recognition of Christ as King. The Mass of the Ages continues the sacrifice of more than 2,000 years. It just ISN’T where most folks think it is. They confuse the Church with those who SEEM to flow with continuity from the pre-Vatican II Church. We confuse those who occupy almost all of what have been Catholic offices and real estate with the Church. They no longer are and haven’t been for 50-plus years. Yes, Archbishop Lefebvre was right about everything. He still is, only now it has become obvious against the backdrop of the Great Heretic. The Church Archbishop Lefebvre helped preserve is still among us and available. Stop wishin’ and hopin’ to save the false, new sect and find the true Church that remains. So you really think John XXIII and JPII are saints, declared so infallibly by true Catholics? Do you think Paul VI will be a saint when they inevitably “canonize” him to validate the new “mass?” We can’t save the “church” because what we’re all hoping will turn around isn’t really the Church anymore. Many are called; few are chosen. Find one of the lifeboats floating away from the sinking ship of the false church and save yourselves…and as many others as you can assist. When I’m at my Latin Mass only 45 minutes from my home, it might as well be a world–and decades–away from the insanity that is mistaken for the Church today. Why do we seem so surprised that so few priests, bishops and cardinals stand up for Christ and His Church? It’s because they are no longer Catholics….if they ever were.
My comment was not directed at anyone. It seems like most of the commenting effort here concerns Sedevacantism. My two posts are meant as an FYI. I would guess that we agree on everything bad that is coming out of Modernist Rome.
I agree with your assessment of the sedes, in that they would say of Christ, who, in carrying His Cross,….”This disfigured man cannot be the Son of God.” The sedes seem to believe that the Church cannot suffer a persecution and passion, just as Our Lord did. They seem, to me, to be angry with God for allowing such a thing to happen.
I do not, however, agree that we need necessarily place ourselves at the forefront of the battle in the Church (conciliar church). If the conciliar church does not give allowance to practice our Faith in a truly Catholic manner, then it’s acceptable to find a way to practice our faith properly, even if it means attending an SSPX or independent chapel. We must saves our own souls first, and if possible work for the restoration if we are able.
Rushintuit–Thanks. If “everything bad is coming out of Modernist Rome”, I’m staying away from anything to do with them including the fake “mass”.
Caimbeul–The Adorable Body of Our Lord was battered and disfigured for our sins. What we are witnessing from Francis and the V2 “church” is ugly corruption from within which is persecuting Our Lord’s Church. Please do not equate the two.
I recommend you read the writings of Rev Fr Villa who was commissioned by Padre Poo to work with Cardinal Ottiavani and Bacci to expose devil worship in the hierarchy. Read how they said a black mass in the Vatican and in Charlotte Sth Carolina simultaneously. Web site chiesa viva. If you have email i will post you these writings. Believe it or not.
Yes, it is an ugly corruption from within. And yet God has allowed it, has He not? Do you believe that God could not have stopped the corruption if He wanted to?
Good afternoon Caimbeul,
Our Lady of LaSalette: “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.”; “The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.”; “The Church will have a frightful crisis.”. Take some time and beg our Lady of LaSalette, our Mother, our love, as the Mother of the One Who Is Love, to captivate and imbue your mind with the truths that she spoke there, at LaSalette, in 1846 and 33 years later in 1879 at Knock, Ireland, where she did not utter even one word, pure silence as when she stood at the foot of her Beloved Son’s Holy and Singular Cross when He was aged 33 years, along with Saint John, the virgin and Evangelist, the one Christ Jesus especially loved, as he was also with her there at Knock. (http://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/a060_Knock_2.html ). For just a moment, ask yourself the simple question: “Would, even if she could, our Lady and our Mother as the Mother of God, ever mislead us one iota as to the truths of that which she promised were coming, that which we now find in our very midst?” Of course she would not as she cannot mislead, as God does not deceive and she is one with Him, sharing in the very Bosom of His Triune Godhead, in His very divinity, in such a way that none other creature will ever know nor see. And so, when our Lady promises that the Church will have a “frightful crisis”, ask yourself, “can that not only be a crisis in which the existentially manifest, as an experienced reality in the flesh, development of horror and terror within the Church as church and the world writ large, while constructed under the preternatural guidance of Lucifer and invoked by his useful minions and emissaries on earth, who at once, are the men dressed in the robes of Holy Mother Church, in their grandest of deceptions, hate Her as they hate Christ with a diabolical rage and passion, be such that the very contemplation of it would do nothing less than take your very breath from your mouth?”
In that heinous understanding, know with metaphysical certitude Caimbeul, that indeed our Lord and our God, Christ the King, will allow all of it to occur as He sees fit from all eternity, as we imagine the French Revolution anteed up, experienced around the entire globe simultaneously, and with diabolical persistence. God in His infinite love as Love Himself (Deus Caritas Est), simply cannot take one iota of our free will from us and as thus we are left with the looming cataclysmic catastrophe that is continuing to crescendo in our very midst, the likes of which the world has hardly before seen a glimpse of, in any particular place and time. What we are experiencing is Nietzsche’s, “Will to Power” dialectic, in its fullest manifestation, as this culture writ large denies the reality of being, as being finds its only possible genesis in Being Himself, as this Will to Power dialectic is in antithetical opposition to Christ’s Truth to Power reality as Reality Himself.
We also know with certitude, as from the lips of our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God begotten not made, in the Gospel of John, chapter 14; 27: “Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you. Not as the world gives, do I give it to you. Do not let your hearts be troubled or afraid.” Almighty God will use our evil to bring about His good as Goodness Himself. We also know with certitude, that more souls will be saved in this time, as a result of the certain cataclysm in our midst, than would have been saved as this culture of the “will to power” dialectic continued to simmer in its godless misery. I pray this helps. In caritas.
Is an act of humility too much to ask?
I have read
“At this moment in time thechurch has two sails that are blowing in the opposite direction causing greatdiscord within the Church. On the Right: an extreme conservative wind wanting to blow our boat back to the becalming out-of-date swamp of pre-1962. On the
Left: an extreme liberal wind wanting to blow our boat into rapids where faith
and morals are thrown overboard”.
But we can go forward in UNITY OF PURPOSE by hoisting a third sail one
of Humility, the true (only) sail that the Holy Spirit blows upon, bringing
arrogance to its knees and folly does not have to be appeased.
Is the true Divine Mercy Image an Image of Broken man?
Pope Francis says we need be a Church of mercy and so we do, but more
importantly we need to be a humble Church, as Gods Mercy received in humility
guarantees spiritual growth, which wells up into eternal life.
I agree with the four cardinals in that this statement from
Veritatis Splendor “conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions
to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of
their object” as God’s Word (Will) is inviolate. Individual we can only stand
before His Divine Mercy in humility as we can never justify sin.
I all so agree with this statement by Pope Francis “the Eucharist
‘is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and nourishment for
the weak”. It’s the sick and supplicant who need the doctor, not the well and
How can the two statements be reconciled “With God all things are
possible” as only God can square the circle.
Throughout history God has made His Will know to mankind through
his Saints, Spiritual leaders and Prophets. And at crucial times His Will has
be revealed in a way that that cannot be misunderstood by His people.
God’s Word (Will) given to Sister Faustina
“Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the
inscription: “Jesus, I Trust in Thee.”
The Divine Mercy Image that the Church displays today is an affront
to God, instigated by nationalistic pride and those who would pacify the
powerful it has nothing to do with humility.
As The true Divine Mercy Image is an Image of Broken Man
“Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription:
“Jesus, I Trust in Thee.” “I desire that this picture be venerated first in
your chapel and then throughout the whole world”
Sr. Faustina acted immediately in singular (pure) intent; no one else
can paint this picture, as no one else can SEE what she saw. The picture she
painted, sketched, (no matter how badly) must be venerated and no other, to do
so knowing it is not the painting commanded by God (His Word is inviolate) is
to commit blasphemy.
The Church acknowledges that Sr Faustina received a direct visual
and verbal request to “paint an Image according to the vision you see” God’s
Word is Inviolate this is our most fundamental belief and sits at the base of
all the Sacraments. His Word is not open for debate it cannot contradict itself
and must not be touched by man, it is impossible for it to be God’s Word (Will)
and not His Word (Will) at the same time.
For clarity the church teaches that divine revelation ended with the apostles.
The visual and verbal request given by God to Sr. Faustina may not be an
additional revelation but it is a communiqué endorsed by the Church that
incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and for that reason it is binding on
the Church in that the true image painted by Sr. Faustina (one of Broken Man)
must be venerated and no other.
Sister Faustina was very poorly educated and it is fair to assume
that if her superiors had accepted her painting as they should have done (they
would have known that Gods Word is inviolate) she would have also. Earthly
hands violated Gods Word to fit their own earthly vision of goodness as they
could not accept the reality that they were been asked by God to show human
Any revelations after the first revelation now must be considered
suspect, as from that time onwards earthly hands were distorting the Word
(Will) of God.
Sister Faustina was uneducated coming from a very poor family with
only three year’s very basic education. Hers were the humblest tasks in the
convent. She was very innocent and trusting we can deduce this because after
her first vision she immediately attempted to paint Jesus herself and for this
reason I believe her vision was genuine and received in total trust.
Her diaries reflect a particular
culture and type of devotion at a particular time in the Church but are more in
keeping with those who would propagate such devotions. We need to look at her
spiritual advisor Fr Michal Sopocko who appears to have overseen her diaries
and commissioned the first fraudulent image of Divine Mercy, and in doing so
violated her trust in God.
The Church has acknowledged that the Word (Will) of God had been given
to her, its actions confirm this, we have a picture in God’s House, with the
words “Jesus I trust In thee” But the picture is not the one commanded by God,
it is a worldly image of goodness, it pertains to the senses and is made in
man’s own image, it has nothing to do with Trust.
The present Divine Mercy Image is a self-serving
IMAGE of Clericalism, definition of CLERICALISM: a policy of maintaining or
increasing the power of a religious hierarchy. Their actions show that they did
not trust in His mercy and were only concerned with a worldly image of
goodness, the very same problem which has led to the cover up of the on-going
child abuse scandal and refusal to acknowledge its historical culture within
the Church emanating from Rome.
The original picture by Sister Faustina in its brokenness relates to
spiritual beauty (goodness) as it pertains to humility. The pure (humble) in
heart shall see God The True Divine Mercy image calls for the leadership of the
Church to give account for themselves, before God and mankind while at the same
time healing so many past and on-going injustices.
To do this the elite within the Church need to act out these instructions
given by Jesus Christ to His Church
“I desire that this picture be
venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “
Commencing in Rome by recapturing (Staging) the original ceremony by
displaying the present self-serving blasphemous Divine Mercy Image an image of
Clericalism, then remove (Destroy) it publicly and re-place it with the true
image an Image of Broken Man and in humility venerate it in a symbolic way that
cannot be misunderstood by mankind, then re-enact this action with the help of
the bishops throughout the whole Church (World).
If this were to happen a Transfiguration would
occur within the Church at this moment in time that would resurrect the true
face of Jesus Christ, a face that reflects Truth and humility before all those
she is called to serve in love and compassion. From this base one of humility
before God the Church can proceed to tackle many of her on-going
problems/dilemmas as it would permit the Church to give access to the Sacrament
of Holy Communion (Spiritual Food) to all baptised Catholics who for whatever
reason apart from the sin against the Holy Spirit, who presently cannot receive
the Sacrament of Reconciliation the means to do so.
As an example; To those in second relationships,
permit them to partake in Holy Communion in making a public acknowledgement of
their need of God’s Divine Mercy just prior to receiving the Eucharist by
venerating the true Image of Divine
Mercy an image of Broken Man, saying these words from the heart publicly
“Jesus I Trust in You”
Then as the recipient approaches the priest for communion after his /her
public confession the priest could say (or words to the effect of) “Welcome to
the path/way of salvation/confession/reconciliation receive The body of Christ”
in doing so acknowledging the on-going commencement to receiving the full
sacrament of Reconciliation, by doing so His outward sign of inward grace His
Divine Mercy is manifest at that moment in time as having been given by God
Himself to the recipient before His Church (People/Faithful) full absolution
has not given by the Church as they dwell in His Divine Mercy as he/she returns
to his/her sinful situation (Entanglement with evil) but a journey of HOPE in
that spiritual growth has commenced, this must be clearly understood by the
laity in regards to the indissolubility of marriage.
The need for the teaching on birth control in Humanae Vitae can also be
strengthened by encouraging the laity who practices it, to acknowledge it
openly before the Church in accepting their own human frailty, before partaking
of the bread of life in Venerating The True Image of Divine Mercy an image of
broken man, a reflection of themselves before God in the Eucharist. In
acknowledging their dependence on His Mercy they give glory to our Father in
heaven in bearing witness to the Truth, teaching others by their example to
serve the Truth and walk in humility before our Creator and in doing so
encourage all to confront that which enslaves mankind, our own sinfulness.
“Paint a picture according to the vision you see
and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture
be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “
This is a missionary call instigated by our Lord to
the whole Church to Evangelizing through the action of Humility, a disarming
action in its honesty, that embrace all in its simplicity, as we encounter our
brothers and sisters who stand and seek
direction at the crossroads (Difficulties) of life.
kevin your brother
Kevin, Sr Faustina’s message was suppressed for decades by Rome. It took a modernist heretic like JP2 to “approve” the apparition. You would be better off not reading anything written by Rome after V2. Just reading your post it becomes obvious how you have been corrupted by modernism. Start with a real Pope, Pope St Pius X, and read Pascendi.