Remember when the Communications Director for the Basilian Fathers, Fr. Timothy Scott, sent out a Tweet suggesting that Cardinal Burke “STFU” back in February?
A lot of people were outraged by it, and they should have been.
Even so, I must admit that while I found Fr. Scott’s Tweet outrageous too, it wasn’t so much by what he said, but how and why he said it.
If he had blasted the same Tweet in Cardinal Dolan’s direction, to be very honest, I would have been more inclined to lobby for his episcopal consecration than his resignation, but that’s just me.
In any case, as crass as Fr. Scott’s message was, there does seem to be a time and a place for it, even if not in those exact words.
Case in point; the endless, spineless, faithless calls for dialogue that flow out of Rome like so much bilge on a near daily basis!
The latest puke worthy plea of this nature was reported by Vatican Information Service yesterday:
Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue: make space for dialogue with Muslims, now more than ever
It’s bad enough that these pansies can’t muster up the wherewithal to carry out the mission that Christ gave to His Church, but do we really need yet another plea for dialogue?
I mean, seriously, can’t they just stata zitt’ for a change?
(Stata zitt’ – Dialectic Italian; it’s kind of like an emphatic “SU” with “TF” implied rather than spoken.)
According to VIS, the Pontifical Council’s newly released declaration explains why they believe dialogue is so very important, saying:
Firstly because the great majority of Muslims themselves do not identify with the current acts of barbarism.
Two questions: How do they know this, and secondly, what the hell difference does it make?
The problem of Islamic barbarism has nothing to do with polling data; it has to do with the fact that Islam is a false religion that calls for violence.
The Jesuit Islamologist, Fr. Samir Khalil Samir, S.J., felt compelled to issue a statement correcting even Pope Francis after he made the equally ludicrous statement that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence” (cf Evangelii Gaudium 253).
One should note that while Fr. Samir gets the matter of Islam and violence right, he too is a product of the conciliar disorientation as clearly evidenced by the following statement made in the very same essay:
In short, the Koran and Muslims deny the essential dogmas of Christianity: the Trinity, the Incarnation and Redemption. It should be added that this is their most absolute right!
How long, O’ Lord?
The Pathetical Council continues:
Unfortunately today the word ‘religious’ is often associated with the word ‘violence’, whereas believers must demonstrate that religions are required to be heralds of peace and not violence.
The conciliar mind has been conditioned to avoid condemnations of every kind (save for the attacks leveled against those who still believe as authentic Catholics have always believed), and is therefore unable to conceive of any “religion” that isn’t inherently good.
This is precisely the evil that Pope Pius XI envisioned taking hold if ever the ecumenical dialoguers of his day were to have their way.
Addressing the problem of those in the Church who wished to arrange “conventions, meetings and addresses at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion,” including those “who with obstinacy and pertinacity deny the divine nature and mission” of Jesus Christ (e.g., Muslims), the Holy Father said:
Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy, since they all in different ways manifest and signify that sense which is inborn in us all, and by which we are led to God and to the obedient acknowledgment of His rule. (Mortalium Animos 2)
By contrast, the dialoguing flowerclerics of the New Springtime decried the “commonplace stigmatisation of Muslims and their religion,” saying:
In such a context we are called upon to strengthen fraternity and dialogue. Believers have formidable potential for peace, if we believe that man was created by God and that humanity is a single family; and even more so if we believe, as we Christians do, that God is Love. Continuing to engage in dialogue, even when experiencing persecution, can become a sign of hope. Believers do not wish to impose their vision of humanity and of history, but rather seek to propose respect for differences, freedom of thought and religion, the protection of human dignity, and love for truth.
Close consideration of this text reveals the spiritual depravity that has infiltrated even the highest places in the Rome.
Where Holy Mother Church clearly teaches that the theological virtues of faith, hope and charity are given by God in the waters of Baptism as one rises to new life in Christ, the so-called “leaders” of the Church Irrelevant appear convinced that their fruits can be produced by human effort alone, regardless of one’s religious beliefs.
Furthermore, it is clear that these poor fools have never bothered to read the unholy writ of Islam, or if they have, they simply refuse to believe their lyin’ eyes.
The “Allah” of the Qur’an (aka the figment of the false prophet Muhammad’s demon infested imagination) is not “Love;” far from it, he is an arbitrary tyrant and serial fomenter of unrest.
Not content to bastardize the theological virtues alone, the declaration goes on to mangle the cardinal virtue of fortitude, saying:
We must have the courage to review the quality of family life, the methods of teaching religion and history, and the contain [sic] of sermons in our places of worship.
Given the fact that all “religions” have been deemed good by the Captains of Newchurch, without any regard for what they actually teach, we cannot be surprised to discover that the concept of worship is also now treated as if it matters not one iota who is being worshiped!
If any additional evidence is needed to reveal the degree to which the conciliarized churchmen of today have rejected the Holy Catholic faith…
Above all, family and schools are the key to ensuring that tomorrow’s world will be based on mutual respect and brotherhood.
So much for that whole Prince of Peace thing, eh?
My friends, where is Jesus Christ in all of this?
Objectively speaking, the religion being preached here is not the Catholic faith. Truly, it is something else, and it is patently false.
I know… This is a fearful reality to acknowledge, but even Paul VI knew that the smoke of Satan had entered the sanctuary.
It’s time for all of us to man up (or woman up as the case may be) and admit that along with this smoke there is most certainly fire, and the diabolical flames have all but consumed the Catholic faith in the “official” Rome of today.
No longer can one simply accept as true even the simplest of phrases that are uttered, and even published, by the prelates of the Holy See.
It is absolutely necessary to scrutinize every last syllable these men speak, measuring them against the immutable doctrines so faithfully preserved and articulated throughout the centuries leading up to the conciliar revolution.
Holy Mother Church to whom the Faith that comes to us from the Apostles has been entrusted will never pass away. More difficult though it may be to find; it’s still accessible, in spite of the Evil One’s greatest efforts, and even with the cooperation of so many in ecclesial power.
If only they would just stata zitt’ already!
If this Fr Kramer e-mail is true, http://catholictruthblog.com/2013/12/30/, was pope francis canonically elected? Could the Consecration of Russia even be carried out?
“It is absolutely nacessary to scrutinize every last sylable these men speak..” This is so true and thank you for ploughing through this absolute mess on a regular basis.
Bergoglio is big on “Mercy”. Why can’t this papacy be merciful to every Catholic by just going away!!!! The second alternative would be duct tape neatly and securing placed over the mouth—–I hear it comes in all kinds of colors and designs—even Rainbow!
I heard this today in a news report on neo-catholic radio.
It is so patently obvious that these churchmen have lost the Faith it’s not even arguable.
Dear Mr. V.,
Your (once again- super) post and the reference to Mortalium Animos brought to mind the remark of the now departed Fr. Hesse who, paraphrasing, said–I don’t know what they want to dialogue about, conversion is never the goal.
I had the same thought months ago. I was seriously contemplating sending a box of Duck Tape (TM) for each of the liturgical seasons to match the vestments. And of course, a few rolls of ‘Rainbow’, too. Would that have been disrespectful?
Catholics who are faithful have nothing in common with Islam, a system that promotes or condones:
1. Religious genocide (aka, jihad)
2. Religious bigotry and intolerance (aka, dhimmitude)
3. Murder (aka, suicide and ‘honor’ killings)
4. Gender inequality (women are subordinate to men, gays are criminals for that reason alone)
5. Polygamy (up to four wives)
6. Pedophilia (consummated marriages with wives as young as 9 yrs old)
7. Rape (koran approves rape of female POWs)
8. Adultery (koran approves concubines, as had Mohammed)
9. Incest (koran approves marriage to first cousins)
10. Lying in name of allah (aka, taquiyya)
The existence of a literal satan, aka, ‘the deceiver’, is the only plausible explanation for why this general topic is even open for discussion.
It’s not just the list of symptoms above, but the very nature of the Muslim God which is reprehensibly contrary and alien to the Christian Triune God; Allah is a false god. The Muslim Allah is not bound by his Word; it is not a God that can enter into a covenant. Furthermore it is an irrational god without being supernatural. How can a patriarch, a family, a people or nation enter into a covenant with this false god the likes of irrational Allah, who cannot keep a promise. Therefore, it is clear Muslims are not children of Abraham. This supernatural reality is reflected in the natural world by raising reasonable doubts as to whether or not a Christian can even enter into a contract with Muslims.
When the Saracens were lords of Sicily the Muslims treated Catholics and Orthodox Christians as second class citizens — a Christian man had to stand up when a Muslim walked into the room, and Christians could not build edifices more than one-storey tall. Thank the Lord in heaven for the Normans and their southern Italian cousins who wrested the Island from them!
I was perplexed and deeply disturbed by Pope Benedict XVI’s apology to Muslim’s after his remarkable speech at Regensburg. At first I thought his apology and contrition for the Regensburg lecture was a sign of Christian meekness and humility, but now I’m beginning to think that apology was inconsiderate and therefore harmful to rank and file Catholics.
Who is the Ishmael referred to in the Bible?
No wonder you opened with talk of printable cuss-words.
This Pontifical Council’s words could have come straight from Michail Gorbachev’s United Religions Charter. It’s preamble describes it as a “growing global community dedicated to promoting enduring, daily interfaith co-operation, ending religiously motivated violence and creating cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings.”
-We once read that he said (paraphrasing) Dogma is the only thing standing in the way.
The Council’s quotes Pope Benedict XVI (from 2006) is a classic example of the indifferentism so central to modernist thought:
“Terrorism is all the more deplorable when it hides behind religion, thereby bringing THE PURE TRUTH OF GOD, DOWN to the level of the terrorists’ own blindness and perversion.” Islam does not possess “THE PURE TRUTH OF GOD”. .
With more indifferentism, they also write:
” we can achieve peace… if we believe that humanity is a single family.”
BAPTISM is what brings a soul into GOD’s FAMILY. Without it, we remain divided– those with Sanctifying Grace who accept the True Faith, from those still in Original Sin and anyone who who rejects even a part of the Faith.
The Gospel of John (1:12) makes that clear:
“But as many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name.  Who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”
–False ecumenism attempts to claim that by the will of man, and a redefining of the family of God, all people are His sons. This distortion of Truth leads people away from the Church.
The Council lists as expectations—respect for religious differences, and love for Truth, in the same sentence. But love for truth prevents respect for false teachings–which are what create religious differences between all other Faiths and the one Jesus sent the Apostles to teach to all Nations.
Finally, they tell us “we must (have the courage to) REVIEW:
1. The methods of teaching religion
2. The methods of teaching history,
3. and the (contents?) of sermons in places of worship.
–In other words, Be ready to strip it of anything that “offends” one of those false religions we’re so intent on placating–as we have done with the Jewish objections. .
RESULT they say: “ensuring that tomorrow’s world will be based on mutual respect and brotherhood.
( Masonic, New World Order speak)
May God intervene for the sake of His remaining “elect”
A son of Abraham had by Hagar, Sarah’s handmaid (who permitted the union believing she herself would never bear Abraham any children (but , of course, God had other plans.) Ishmael, despite Abraham’s attempt to raise him right, ‘remained a savage’. Sarah finally had Abraham cast him out for his poor treatment of her own son to Abraham Isaac.
“Islam is a false religion that calls for violence.” Like any false religion, Islam is like satanism, except satanists know exactly who they are worshipping.
Louie points out that the New Religion of, what I would call, the Post-Pius XII Vatican complex, most definitely teaches that “it matters not one iota who is being worshipped.” Meaning the Novus Ordo officially makes ‘concord’, in their fevered minds, between Christ and belial; thereby making themselves disciples of belial, and deniers of Christ. The disciples of Roncalli and his sons in the religion of ‘convergence’ (to achieve union or a common conclusion) with satan, is not Catholic.
“[I]f we believe that man was created by God and that humanity is a single family”. Adam and Eve believed this, and look what resulted from their ‘dialogue’ with satan.
PS. I learned on Chris Ferrara’s FatimaCenter piece https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCe87sEM3AUxAyhl5RhCpkcA that muslim terrorists are relearning the skill of the bow and arrow. Remember the last secret? A Bishop dressed in white under fire of bullets and (always sounded bizarre) bows and arrows. Worth noting.
It is becoming more and more apparent that Sister’s Lucy’s “diabolical disorientation” is being evidenced by direct in-your-face “satanic infiltration”. “Faith” was a ship that these jackals jumped overboard decades ago.
Thanks for that p.s. about the use of bows and arrows. Fascinating!
We also thought bows and arrows seemed odd. We wondered if it could mean shoulder fired missiles. Should have known not to dismiss the most literal interpretation.
Found this confirmation online;
“Director of Defence Information, Major General Chris Olukolade says Boko Haram members have resorted to using bows and arrows to carry out their attacks after running out of arms & ammunition. Olukolade said this while speaking to newsmen in Abuja today April 23rd. (2015)
Pope Francis praised efforts to talk with the Boko Haran kidnappers of schoolgirls, but a priest in Northern Africa says the whole thing was a farce:
“The Rev. John Bakeni, secretary of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Maiduguri, which includes the conflict regions of Borno, Adamawa and Yobe, said Boko Haram never acknowledged it was negotiating with anyone.
“This is a farce and a grand deceit,” said Bakeni. “Boko Haram has become more vicious, killing anything that moves — male, female, children, elderly …
Another report says:
“The Pope condemned the incident while worshiping at the Blue Mosque in Turkey alongside Istanbul’s chief mufti, Rahmi Yaran. Bowing his head and clasping his hands, Pope Francis prayed inside the mosque as he sought to reach out to moderate Muslims.”
After the killings continued to mount–In his letter to the Nigerian Bishops in March, “The Pope again condemned the actions of Boko Haran, but also
“prayed for peace to be restored to all parts of the country, urging Nigerians to make efforts “to favour reconciliation, to promote experiences of sharing, to extend bridges of dialogue and to serve the weakest and the excluded.”
Think there’s a a pattern emerging here?
“This is a farce and a grand deceit,” said Bakeni. “Boko Haram has become more vicious, killing anything that moves — male, female, children, elderly …
Samir, S.J., writes: “In short, the Koran and Muslims deny the essential dogmas of Christianity: the Trinity, the Incarnation and Redemption. It should be added that this is their most absolute right!”
This exclamation fits perfectly with Josef Ratzinger’s comment, on p.xxiii of Jesus of Nazareth, that “to believe that, as man, [Jesus] truly was God…exceeds the scope of the historical method”. How can we preach the Social Kingship of Christ to people to whom we “cannot demonstrate” that Jesus Christ is in fact God?
Of course, as the Pope (in this case St. Pius X) observed in Pascendi, for Modernists, “history must be atheistic:…God and all that is divine are utterly excluded”. In that way, one pulls the rug right from under the demonstration that Jesus Christ is God. This is why the objective statement, “God does not exist: Do not be shocked” becomes critical.
I will admit that I cannot fathom how any Catholic can defend this latter statement, even by appealing to the hitherto unknown Catholic principle of “magisterial stupidity”. Then again, it is quite shocking that the Church felt it necessary, at the Vatican Council of 1869-70, to declare that “[i]f anyone shall say that the One True God…cannot be certainly known by the natural light of human reason…; let him be anathema”. Imagine! After nineteen centuries of Christianity, the Church considered it essential to solemnly teach Catholics that God exists! Talk about putting the cart before the horse! What state was the Church already in at that time?
Note that the Council says nothing here of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It specifically refers to Romans 1:20, in which St. Paul speaks of pagans. Note also that there is a world of a difference between subjectively saying, as Bergoglio also has, that “God – and this is my thinking and experience…–…is a reality”, and asserting objectively to the world and its public schools that God in fact exists.
It is absolutely true that God exists. But reading Jorge through Jorge, we find that he also “would not speak about ‘absolute’ truths'”, for which the SSPX takes him to task here. I have already mentioned Bp. Sanborn’s condemnation of his comment that “God does not exist”. For approval of Bergoglio’s thinking, however, one may look to the Italian President, who praised him to his face as follows (reported here in the Catholic Herald):
“We have been struck by the absence of all dogmatism, the distancing from positions ‘not touched by a margin of uncertainty,’ the call to leave ‘room for doubt’ characteristic of the ‘great leaders of the people of God,'” Napolitano said, quoting [Bergoglio’s] words from an interview with a Jesuit confrere published in September.
POPE BENEDICT DID NOT RESIGN THE PAPAL OFFICE, BUT ONLY RENOUNCED THE ACTIVE MINISTRY OF THE OFFICE
By: Father Paul Kramer
THE CASE OF THE DUAL PAPACY — “DEUX PAPES VERMOULU”
Father Paul Kramer
The Resignation of Benedict XVI Between History, Law and Conscience – Stefano Violi
Valuable video, with excellent True Church teachings. “The Koran calls the idea of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit…” I won’t write it out because it is the worst blasphemy. And this is the book JPII bowed to and kissed. Abomination of desolation.
Dear Louie and all,
Today we found an interview done a week ago with Cardinal Burke, which for us, presents a decisive moment of clarity about what he is willing and not willing to do to resist Papal error. We took a good look at it. Since it’s somewhat off topic and more than a couple of paragraphs, we’ve put it in the forum -His Holiness, Pope Francis. Here’s the link for anyone interested:
Sorry that link didn’t work. Trying again:
Dear ock and Charmaine,
We have no answers to this, but since you’re discussing it, it may help to consider Benedict’s comments on the issue as well:
Benedict wrote to Andrea Tornielli, a Vatican reporter with La Stampa newspaper:
“There isn’t the slightest doubt about the validity of my resignation from the Petrine ministry,” “The only condition for the validity is the complete freedom of my decision. Speculations about the invalidity of my resignation are simply absurd.”
I think your post in the forum is very good indeed and graphically illustrates the confusion and uncertainty which results when somebody goes half way, but shies from going the whole hog and indulging in some plainspeak. I do not critisise Cardinal Burke directly, because we are totally ignorant of the environment is which he must operate. Who knows what he may have in mind, or what course he may consider most prudent. I think we must just wait and see, without judging him one way, or the other at this time. If the crisis occurs in October, several prelates might be forced to take very definite and unambiguous stands.
You sound very much like us in our last post about Burke before this one. We agree those are valid points to keep in mind. We’ve basically just experienced a shift with this latest interview, from our former “reasonable hope” that he would alter his current course as things worsened, to viewing it more as requiring a miracle. Like Voris, he appears to be a good man, heroically clinging to a mistaken “rule” which he believes is God’s will. Until we get that miracle, people are being misled by the impression they leave every time the Pope’s words and deeds are mentioned. So we pray. even harder, for God to let the light dawn on them, and to mitigate the harm being done until it does.
Tolerance is not applicable to religion, which is either true or false. If false, it ought to be rejected, if true, it ought to be adhered to.
This is the clear and incontrovertible truth.
Thank you, Mr Verrechio, for defending Our Lord from attack (often from within top levels of the Church) in the public forum.
And Archbishop Cupich ought to be laicised, at minimum, for his constant attacks on Our Lord, including his recent overseeing of sacrilege at Cardinal George’s funeral Mass, when the non-Catholic Governor was given Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. This was wholly foreseeable and avoidable. If they could not organise things properly so as to ensure the safety of the Blessed Sacrament, they ought to have not given out Holy Communion.
Absolutely right. Disgust doesn’t adequately say it. One more nail in the ongoing crucifixion of the Church and more reparations to do.
DAY TO DAY DIALOGUE
Having given a detailed, authentic Catholic understanding of Divine Revelation, there appear to be two responses from muslim colleagues…1) Moved by grace, acceptance and full conversion( not seen so far…although many ask me to pray for sick family members)
2) Polite denial, or polite indifference
And so…what now?
Hope for the light of Christ to shine from within?
Pope Saint Pius X, in 1909, went into a seeming trance and received a vision: ‘What I have seen is terrible! Will it be me? or one of my successors? I saw a Pope, fleeing the Vatican, walking amidst the bodies of his priests. He will take refuge somewhere incognito. And, after a brief time, he will die a violent death.’ It sounds very much like the Fatima vision.
Yes, we’ve read that one also.
Question: If it were to happen now, wouldn’t it pretty much demolish your interregnum idea, since St. Pius X didn’t just describe the vision, but said it would happen to “a Pope” and one who would be one of his successors?
Just got this link from the Marine in our family, in response to our news about the bows and arrows B Haran is now using. Sounds like Divine intervention.
I’m not sure how the vision demolishes anything. In the Church an ‘interregnum’ is the time between the death of one Pope and the election of another, and during that time the Church ‘admits no changes’. As to the period of time between the ‘death of one Pope (true Vicar of Christ) and another’ – there’s the rub/interregnum. Because someone puts on a white cassock and is treated as the Pope doesn’t mean he is the Pope. There was a time in the history of the Church where three men wore that ‘cassock’ at the same time (over 40 years). It wasn’t certain which of them, if any, was a true Pope, yet this period is not deemed to undermine the doctrine of the perpetual successors of St Peter. Is it so preposterous to have a period where a generation of men wear the white cassock but have no Papal Grace because they are heretics?
During the Arian crisis only an exiled Remnant were left to keep up the fires of the Faith. St Athanasius made the observation, ‘they (the heretics (non-Catholics)) have the buildings but we have the Faith. This went on for decades. Yet despite all this, the Popes of the period, including Liberius, cannot be convicted of Arianism themselves.
The ‘Synthesis of all Heresies’ was laid out plainly and condemned roundly by a succession of True Popes up to and including Pius XII. We, however, live in a time when the man in the white cassock is teaching and practicing the ‘Synthesis of all Heresies’ on a daily basis, plainly, openly, obviously.
God bless your confessing Christ. ‘Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven.’ If you have a priest who is ‘tolerant’ of Mass intentions ask him to offer a Mass for the immortal souls of these people. I find when speaking with a non-Catholic about matters of Faith the only way forward is to tell the Faith as it is and make sure I live it. If people don’t want to listen or know about it, they will tell you. Even the Apostles ‘shook the dust off their feet’ at a certain point. We have free will to accept God’s grace or reject it.
With regards to ‘dialogue’ in matters of Faith as Bergoglio et al would have it – one shouldn’t be speaking of Christ as Truth to those who don’t know it! How inconsiderate, how unmerciful, how arrogant!
PS. when I was about 20, many many moons ago, I was walking into a movie theatre with a friend and on the street there were a couple of people standing to the side. I have no idea weather they were Catholic or not, but one of them was saying something to people as they walked passed them. When we walked passed we heard the question directed at us, ‘if you died to night would you go to heaven or hell?’ How rude, how offensive, but worse, how inappropriate. I have never forgotten it.
PS. ‘It’s where all the ‘official’ trouble began.’ http://www.novusordowatch.org/kramer.htm
I mentioned the 40 year period when there may or may not have been a Pope during the Western schism; here’s the conspiracy angel of the desecration of the Visible Church over the past few decades at the very hands of so-called Popes. Putting aside the objective heresies of Roncalli through Bergoglio, let’s look at an objective historical event. In 1958 white smoke billowed above St Peter’s Square for five full minutes while media and the crowds declared, ‘we have a pope’! The smoke then turned black and this has never been explained because the goings on in a conclave are under seal (at least until Cardinal Ratzinger became Benedict XVI because, supposedly, his enemies leaked how close the vote was). For argument’s sake, if when that first flourish of white smoke billowed up, a Cardinal was indeed elected Pope as the smoke attested (and the white smoke doesn’t go up unless he has accepted), then the Grace of the Holy Ghost rested upon that man – he was the new Pope, the Vicar of Christ. For various reasons some suggest, if a new Pope was why the white smoke rose (why else?), it may have been Cardinal Siri (he was Pius XII’s preference for the next Pope and had a good deal of support, was conservative, and would have stuck to Pius XII’s firm decision of refusing to convene a second Vatian Council because Pius said it would be disastrous for the Church). Cardinal Siri died in 1989 (if any other Cardinal was elected when the first white smoke rose, it is highly likely they would into the 1980s as well). Continuing the argument, that would mean that the pontificates of Roncalli through Wojtyla were false by every standard – without any protection from the Holy Ghost – and that Benedict was the next actual Pope, elected after the death of the his predecessor, ‘Siri’. Within that scenario, Benedict, if he had in any way been threatened into resigning, still is the Pope – any coercion invalidates the resignation. I guess we have all heard stories about the sorts of threats that can be made against the Pope to manipulate him (it has even been rumoured that the annihilation of whole populations has been has been used as a threat). The above would be a way of having a ‘pope’ who has no ‘interference’ from the Holy Ghost, because the True Pope has been exiled from his office, while an interloper busily does his worst.
I’ll keep an eye open for you at St. Gertrude’s tomorrow. OK? 🙂 🙂
Yip! That’s the story of the “sedeimpediti”. They say Cardinal Siri took the name Gregory XVII and left a successor, of whom we know nothing. They quote released American intelligence documents to back the story up. It mostly hangs on the evidence of a single Oriental priest. There is an allegation that the Russians had assembled and hidden an atomic device in Rome and threatened to detonate it, if necessary. I suppose nothing is impossible. One day we will know if there was any truth in it.
I don’t know what Fr Scott said since I don’t tweet but what I can say is that the PCID is talking rubbish. There is no place for dialogue with Muslims other than to tell them they are wrong in following an unbalanced founder who preached a confused pagan/Judeo/Christian heresy.
Muslims have been given a choice. They can evangelise, or force convert, or capture and sell into slavery, or massacre, or allow groups to continue to exist provided they acknowledge Allah and pay the Jizya, a concession which can be withdrawn at any time. All these have at one time or another been declared by their founder and therefore it is up to them, personal preference and circumstance.
But all of this is orthodox Islam. And they all have the same aim, to establish the Caliphate by whatever of these means is appropriate to the person and circumstances.
The Vatican is in a mess at present. A complete and utter shambolic mess. The present Pope is, how shall I put it, doing nothing to make things any better .
Fr Scott is just typical of the incompetence, ignorance and frankly, fear, that besets so many in the Church at present.
There’s a much greater chance of you ending up at an indult TLM or reverently done N.O.
-We make use Rosary power;
-there are two of us
– plus our kids and grandkids pray daily for our intentions.
(it’s a mob effort)
I think the only appropriate prayer in these times for those who are frightened by the apparent diabolic disorientation in the institutional Church is “Our Lord please shorten these days, but Your will be done, not ours.”
That’s the story. Whatever the white smoke was about (someone had accepted – that can’t be doubted – whatevefr came of that I guess we will never know), Cardinal Siri, if he had been chosen would have refused, he said so himself in an interview he gave shortly before he died.
Lord Jesus Christ,
Son of God,
Have mercy on me, a sinner.
Very interesting, but I can’t understand what Cardinal Siri was trying to say. I can’t make sense of it?
I agree. Perhaps its not the best translation, the interview was in Italian. It was taken from the pages of a book about Cardinal Siri, the Italian author interviewed him. Not having read the book it is possible that the quotes need more context.
the page that links the pdf is here:
“Close consideration of this text reveals the spiritual depravity that has infiltrated even the highest places in the [sic] Rome… If any additional evidence is needed to reveal the degree to which the conciliarized churchmen of today have rejected the Holy Catholic faith… My friends, where is Jesus Christ in all of this?… Objectively speaking, the religion being preached here is not the Catholic faith. Truly, it is something else, and it is patently false… I know… This is a fearful reality to acknowledge,… It’s time for all of us to man up … and admit that … the diabolical flames have all but consumed the Catholic faith in the “official” Rome of today… No longer can one simply accept as true even the simplest of phrases that are uttered, and even published, by the prelates of the Holy See. It is absolutely necessary to scrutinize every last syllable these men speak, measuring them against the immutable doctrines so faithfully preserved and articulated throughout the centuries leading up to the conciliar revolution.”
Louie’s words in this post. I say AMEN to each one of them. Anybody who doesn’t, speak now, or forever hold your peace.
One has three choices: Correction! One has TWO choices: (I’m lumping SSPX with NO because they recognise the conciliar popes, pray in union with them and seek recognition by them. For now let’s just forget about that they (SSPX) are also schismatic from the conciliar popes, because that is too confusing and starts getting weird and bizarre.)
Just bear in mind that according to infallible Magisterial teaching a Pope can’t be a heretic and a heretic can’t be Pope; that the Church is indefectable and that a Pope is prevented from teaching error leading to perdition of souls, by the Holy Ghost.
OK, so bearing that in mind, one has two choices:
2. Catholicism i.e. sedevacantism i.e. adherence to every jot and tittle of the Catholic Faith as taught by Our Lord, the Apostles, Scripture, Tradition and Holy Mother Church from Pentecost until 1958, i.e. up to the “conciliar revolution” (Louie’s words.)
Make your choice and remember you are betting your soul on it.
In Chris Ferrara’s Fatima Perspectives ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDYY_HrtR_E&index=10&list=PLtLZ3BcBezkL2hG9_7HnqTBmDrYT-jOw_ ) on Islam, he quote’s Éric Zemmour (a liberal Jewish French intellectual) who calls Berogoglio a ‘post-Christian pope’ saying he belongs to a ‘Christianity without Dogmas’ which has thrown its spiritual heritage ‘in the dustbin.’
I wish I’d hear more “inappropriate” comments like that. At least those misguided protestants have some zeal. That’s something to work with. I’d count that as somewhat refreshing in the ocean of masonic religious indifference that I see.
Hell, invite em out for a cup of coffee and try to plant some seeds of Truth. At best, the Good Lord will use you to win Him a soul. At worst, you’ll knock off some Purgatory time. Lol.
“… 3. But those pastors who did not care for the sheep, those were hirelings who used to feed themselves alone. On this account the Prophet addresses them, saying to them:— O you pastors who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture, hear the word of the Lord. Thus says the Lord: Lo! I will visit My sheep as the pastor visits his flock in the day of the whirlwind, and I will require My sheep at your hands. O foolish pastors, with the wool of the sheep you clothe yourselves, and the flesh of the fatlings you eat, and the sheep you do not feed. That which was sick you did not heal, and that which was broken you did not bind. The weak you did not strengthen, and the lost and the scattered you did not gather together. The strong ones and the fatlings you guarded, but with harshness you subdued them. The good pastures you yourselves graze upon, and what remains you trample with your feet. The pleasant waters do you drink, and whatever remains you defile with your feet. And My sheep have eaten the trampled (herbage) which your feet have trampled, and they have drunk the waters which your feet have defiled. These are the greedy and base pastors and hirelings, who did not feed the sheep, or guide them well, or deliver them from the wolves. But when the Great Pastor, the chief of pastors, shall come, He will call and visit His sheep and will take knowledge of His flock. And He will bring forward those pastors, and will exact an account from them, and will condemn them for their deeds. And those who fed the sheep well, them the Chief of Pastors will cause to rejoice and to inherit life and rest. O stupid and foolish pastor, to whose right hand and to whose right eye I committed my sheep. Because you said concerning the sheep, let that which dies, die, and let that which perishes perish, and whatever is left, let them devour the flesh of one another; therefore, behold I will make blind your right eye and I will wither up your right arm. Your eye which regarded a bribe shall be blinded, and your hand which did not rule in righteousness shall waste away. Zechariah 11:9, 17 And as for you, my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, you are men; but I am the Lord your God. Ezekiel 34:31 Behold henceforth will feed you in a good and rich pasture. Ezekiel 34:14 …”
Don’t worry your pretty little heads pastors, the lay people will take up your slack….
from THE Eye-Witness blog.
This from a prayer of Pope Pius XI for the Feast of Christ the King: ‘Be Thou King of all those who even now sit in the shadow of idolatry or Islam, and refuse not Thou to bring them into the light of Thy kingdom.’
This prayer has been passed down orally in our family through several generations now–we believe orginally said with home consecrations in the early to mid 1900’s:
“Most sweet, Jesus, humbly kneeling at Thy feet, we renew the consecration of our family to Thy Divine Heart. Be Thou our King, forever. In Thee we have full and entire confindence.
May Thy Spirit penetrate our thoughts, our desires, our words, and our works.
Bless our undertakings, share in our joys, in our trials, and in our labors.
Grant us to know Thee better, to love Thee more, and to serve Thee without faltering.
By the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Queen of Peace, set up thy Kingdom in our country; enter closely into the midst of our families and make them Thine own through the solemn enthronement of Thy Sacred Heart, so that soon one cry may resound from home to home:
“May the Triumphant Heart of Jesus be everywhere loved, blessed and glorified, forever. Honor and Glory to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus, and Mary.”
Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.”
Like we say in the Bronx—“Yeah, right.”
a perseverant & charitable Catholic soul has put this work:
in audio form here:
Arms for the combat.
He abideth patiently,
He understandeth mercifully,
He forgiveth easily,
He forgetteth utterly
14th C scribe
“[A]uthentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence” (cf Evangelii Gaudium 253).”
33 Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,
34 Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
Long list of Koranic exhortations to violence here: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm
“Unfortunately today the word ‘religious’ is often associated with the word ‘violence’, whereas believers must demonstrate that religions are required to be heralds of peace and not violence.”
## There is not an ice cream in Hell’s chance that that will be heeded by Muslims – least of all by those who slaughter Christians & other non-Muslims.
“Vatican City (AsiaNews) – This morning, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue issued a statement about the” risks of increasing hatred, violence, terrorism and the growing and commonplace stigmatisation of Muslims and their religion.” In such a context, Christians “are called upon to strengthen fraternity and dialogue.””
##I’d like to see the people responsible for that dialoguing while they are being drowned, crucified, blown up, raped, enslaved, massacred, shot, buried alive, or burned alive. Muslims are unpopular because a significant number of them are lying, raping, child-abusing, Nazi-like thugs. Such people can no more be dialogued with than the S. S. or the Gestapo could have been. It is not possible to dialogue with those who seek one’s destruction, and if the Vatican cannot see that, it is a danger to Catholics – to the West, indeed.
If “most Muslims are against killing in the name of God”, why is their opposition to it well-nigh inaudible ? The Charlie Hebdo march was very public – why are Muslim protests, assuming they occur, not equally public ? There have been a few declarations that ISIS is unIslamic – but that is a long way from an explicit condemnation of the crimes of Muslim terrorists. It would be totally unacceptable for the CC not to condemn terrorism & thuggery & other crimes by Catholics – why can we not expect the same unambiguous, explicit & forthright condemnations of Muslim evildoing from imams & muftis ?
“Believers have formidable potential for peace, if we believe that man was created by God and that humanity is a single family; and even more so, if we believe, as we Christians do, that God is Love.”
## But Muslims do not believe that Allah is Love. Sorry to spoil matters by bringing in tiresome things like, y’know, facts, but there it is.
“Continuing to engage in dialogue, even when experiencing persecution, can become a sign of hope. Believers do not wish to impose their vision of humanity and of history, but rather seek to propose respect for differences, freedom of thought and religion, the protection of human dignity, and love for truth.”
## Is there a decent and inoffensive way to say that this unmitigated balderdash ? More brainless & reality-denying rubbish, presumably the work of someone on very powerful marijuana, is hard to imagine. Harry Potter is more realistic than this. For barking mad idiotic lunacy, this asinine drivel is difficult to beat.
“The world expects those who claim to adore God to be men and women of peace who are capable of living as brothers and sisters, regardless of ethnic, religious, cultural or ideological differences’ (Ankara, 28 November 2014).”
1. I do not care a bent pretzel what “the world expects”. Stuff the world & its expectations. What matters is to live the Faith.
2. Muslims, for the gajillionth time, are not interested in “living as brothers and sisters, regardless of ethnic, religious, cultural or ideological differences” – not with non-Muslims.
3. The Vatican’s obsession with a fantasy Liberal Anglican type of Islam is a disgrace.
What we meant to ask more specifically, was, won’t whoever is reigning as Pope when this prophecy is fulfilled as stated, have to be, according to St. Pius’ own words, an actual Pope, i.e. one of his successors? Or do you think his use of the term could also refer to an anti-Pope? We ask this, because he was not prone to exaggeration, from what we see of his writings, and was very shaken up by the vision. Identifying the person in it as one of his “successors” seems a strong indication of confirmed validity, and at the same time, with such an “inspiration” we would expect him to choose other words if he was given reason to suspect any fraudulent occupation of the Chair. Does this seem reasonable?
Dear de Maria,
We’re really only praying for God to make His truth and will known to ALL of us, and for no one to miss out on receiving the Holy Eucharist during such confused times as these .
So it’s all good. 🙂 🙂
From liberalism to liberation—
That’s an uncomprimising condemnation.
The New Order of Liberalism/Modernism taught by VII was condemned by:
Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos (1832)
Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura and Syllabus of Errors (1864)
Pope Leo XIII in Immortale Dei (1865) and Libertas Humana (1888)
Pope Pius XI in Quas Primas (1925) and Mortalium Animos (1928)
Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis (1943)
Regarding the worship that the Modernist New Order has imposed: “To use the words of a well-known Cardinal, Alfredo Ottaviani, in 1969: “[The Novus Ordo Missae] represents a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent.” The Novus Ordo Missae, contradicts previous infallible teachings and decrees of the Catholic Church, such as:
Pope St. Pius V’s Quo Primum and De Defectibus,
the Council of Trent’s decree on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass (Session XXII),
Pope Leo XIII’s Apostolicae Curae (1896),
Pope Pius XII’s Mediator Dei (1947),
Pope Pius XII’s Sacramentum Ordinis (1948).
The above observations from the CMRI site.
Sadly, I suspect the majority of people would accept the devil in a white cassock in order to ‘have a pope’. And, sadly, the devil will continue to exploit that acceptance.
Sr Lucia tells us that she and her fellow seers saw, ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it a bishop dressed in white. We had the impression it was the Holy Father…’
Bull Cum Ex Apostolatus [16 Feb. 1559], Pope Paul IV
— “Further, if ever it should appear that any bishop (even one acting as an archbishop, patriarch or primate), or a cardinal of the Roman Church, or a legate (as mentioned above), or even the Roman Pontiff (whether prior to his promotion to cardinal, or prior to his election as Roman Pontiff), has beforehand deviated from the Catholic faith or fallen into any heresy, We enact, decree, determine and define: — “Such promotion or election in and of itself, even with the agreement and unanimous consent of all the cardinals, shall be null, legally invalid and void.”
I found your article most interesting. The best I have read so far. It really makes one wonder. One point that really hits me is the absolute necessity of having a true Pope first – to keep the Holy Ghost out of the way, so to speak – and thus allow the anti-pope to operate free of Divine intervention:
“… And why had they bothered electing him at all, if only to usurp his rightful authority? What was their motive? Did they actually intend to ensure the election of an impostor in the form of the jovial Roncalli who, as the Rev. Charles-Roux has noted, implicated himself by taking the name of a former anti-pope, John XXIII, as his own?
Of course! Their motive was simple, and diabolically clever. By electing a true pope, then illegally thrusting him aside, all within the secrecy of the conclave, they could go on to engineer the election of a bona fide anti-pope. Otherwise they could be certain that the Holy Ghost would get in the way, as He had been known to do before, transforming whatever weak man they might put forth as a candidate into a real pope. This way, however, having already elected Siri, they could be sure Roncalli would not be so empowered. Yes, they knew exactly what they were doing. Lacking the divine guidance given a true pope, Roncalli would instead do their nefarious bidding. Whereas a genuine pontiff would be infallibly protected against espousing heresy, or promoting the ruin of the Church, he would not. Not knowing any better, however, the vast majority of Catholics would be fooled into thinking the man who occupied the papal throne was legitimate and do what he ordered…”
This does make satanic sense! It really makes one wonder! In any event, if there is an impeded Pope, it doesn’t affect the sedevacantist position at all. We adhere to the same Deposit of Faith that he would protect if he was not impeded. If we knew he was there, we would obey and follow him. We simply do not know who he is, nor do we know, for certain, if he is there. But it does make one wonder!
Salvamur has got me thinking about the Siri thesis. Yes, if it turned out that there had in fact been an impeded Pope all along, then we sedevacantists were mistaken in thinking there had been a long interregnum, but there would be no sin in making an honest mistake – we simply did not know he was there and in the meantime we kept the Faith. I agree, St. Pius X does seem to imply a valid successor/Pope which, if the thesis is true, would have been Cardinal Siri, who did take refuge incognito and who was possibly murdered. His Successor, allegedly Gregory XVIII, is even more incognito. This thesis does provide a possible way in which the Papacy might be restored – a true Pope would simply emerge publicly with incontrovertible proof of his legitimacy.
Two things give me pause. Would a true Pope swear obedience to anti-popes, as Cardinal Siri did? A shepherd lays down his life for his sheep. Would threats of murder dissuade a true Pope? On the other hand, threats of mass annihilation might well do so? Our Lady and others did predict that the Church would be eclipsed and the Church is eclipsed. This thesis could explain the mechanism whereby the eclipse Of the Church was accomplished and also a possible mechanism whereby the Papacy might be restored. When (please God) we get to heaven we will know all the answers, in the meantime let us just cling to the Faith of our Fathers.
Hello to replies above.
To your question, Indignus, it would seem that Pius X certainly thought he was seeing a genuine Pope since he thought it might even be a vision of what would happen to him. In a comment, I think it’s below somewhere, I mentioned how in Sr Lucia’s testimony she recalls how the ‘bishop dressed in white’ gave the ‘impression’ of being a pope. It is only later that a papal figure appears whom she refers to as the Holy Father without equivocation. Could this imply that she saw a false pope (the ‘bishop dressed in white?)
Hello Peter: Regarding the idea of an ‘impeded Pope’ – that’s a fabulous term if such a scenario has taken place. What we know is that, as you said in a comment below, it is Magisterial teaching that by Divine Law (absolutely unchangeable) a heretic has no authority. And if someone is elected to the Holy See and former heresy comes to light, his election is ‘null and void’. That Bergoglio is a pertinacious heretic is obvious in that he is consciously (he certainly looks awake) and publically fighting against Divine Law, with regards to marriage, homosexuality, false-faiths, atheism, even hell.
PS. ‘Pope Paul IV, in Cum Ex Apostolatus, Pope Innocent III in Si Papa, and theologians teach that a heretical pope is deposed by God.’
To your last comment, Peter. We will know when we have a True Visible Pope again. We will watch with joy as he anathematizes VII (which in the Fatima Prophecies, Our Lady called ‘an evil Council’), restore the Roman Rites and issue quite a number of excommunications to some very important people. Until then…
Our U.S. Supreme Court is starting hearings on new cases re: same-sex marriage…
” … in Sr Lucia’s testimony she recalls how the ‘bishop dressed in white’ gave the ‘impression’ of being a pope. It is only later that a papal figure appears whom she refers to as the Holy Father without equivocation. Could this imply that she saw a false pope (the ‘bishop dressed in white?)”
I never spotted that in Sr. Lucia’s testimony before. What you surmise makes perfect sense to me. It fits the facts .
Here’s an item that fits well with your title line. Sure we can refute it, and Our Lord promised victory in the end, but in the meantime–right now–things are headed rapidly downhill.
Australian activist (who has come to save America) Tanya Cohen, says,
“If freedom of speech does not protect racism – which everyone agrees that it doesn’t – then why should freedom of speech protect anyone trying to argue against a woman’s human right to make decisions about her own body? Freedom of speech should never be a license to oppose human rights, to spread lies and ignorance, or to argue against the common good.”
Come, Lord Jesus. Save us from these fires of hell.
Dear Indignus Famulus, Thank you for that great prayer. I must learn it.
Thank you, Indignus Famulus.
Don’t know if this response will get near the post it meant for, but it’s in reply to your comment which said:
“Salvamur has got me thinking about the Siri thesis. Yes, i it turned out that there had in fact been an impeded Pope all along, then we sedevacantists were mistaken in thinking there had been a long interregnum, but there would be no sin in making an honest mistake – we simply did not know he was there and in the meantime we kept the Faith. ”
This is the point about which we are most concerned right now. It’s a lot riskier for you or any sedevacantist, to take the stand you do, than it is to remain with what they call the N.O. Church, and work towards correcting any errors we spot.
#1. Because of the reception of the Eucharist which Our Lord made paramount to having live within us.
#2. Because staying away from Mass–watching it on TV at home for example, rather than attending an available one, is against the laws of His Church, which He says are binding in heaven.
Granted, you will be individually judged according to your conscience, as far as you personally are concerned. But our experience with most sede vacantists on blogs such as this one, is that it is more the exception than the rule to find people who are not trying to gain as many converts to it as possible.
So if you are wrong, as you said is possible above, you are responsible before God for taking on a role of the magisterium, and personally leading others away from the Truth and the sacraments so necessary for their salvation. Making statements declaring the Eucharist, Mass, and Confession invalid, for example. To us that is far more serious than a simple well-intentioned error.
Though we can understand your reasons for wanting to share what you have come to believe, we see this as a far greater risk to your own future well-being and that of others, than it seems you are acknowledging here.
Not being certain who is right about the Pope’s status, is very different from these declarations of invalidity of the Sacraments, don’t you think? Both seem to us to be beyond our “place” to formally judge, which is why we’re very concerned about all those who take it upon themselves to do so, and lead others to follow them.
We pray every day for all of us to come to more certainty on these important matters, through Divine intervention.
Prayers are needed that we quit promoting NFP as not sinful and we need to quit beleiving that NFP is Church teaching when NFP says that one can separate the primary purpose of marriage of procreation and education of children for God’s glory from the secondary purpose of unity. This grave erroneous teaching is why we are in the absolute mess we are in today in regards to sexual morality and marriage and why 99 percent of the Catholics are so weak at properly defending and upholding marriage. They themselves are weak in understanding or are weak in the willingness to embrace our Lord’s teaching and order on the meaning and purpose of marriage. Here is a quote from Pius XI’s Casti Connubii: “And now, Venerable Brethren, We shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due the offspring, which many have the audacity to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people… by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to ggratify their desires without their consequent burden. Others say that they cannot on one hand remain continent nor on the other hand can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of the family circumstances. But, No reason, however grave, may be put forward by anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose, sin against nature, and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
If one is no longer in any doubt, however, that the Novus Ordo substantially diverges from the perennial Doctrines, Worship and Disciplines of the Holy Mother Church, one has an obligation before God to desist. We are not called to mock Christ (feminized ‘worship’) as a substitute for Worship pleasing to God rather than pleasing to man. We are not called to be heretics as a substitute for holding to the true teachings, and we are not called to adopt worldy discicplines as a substitute for holy ones.
1. What I said about the Siri thesis stands true. It is not possible to assert with certitude that an impeded Pope does not exist. If he does, we do NOT know about him. We DO know with certainty that conciliar popes are NOT valid and that the NO religion is a false, non-Catholic religion. That statement has been affirmed in every post since I joined this site.
2. Adhering to the Catholic Faith as proclaimed from Pentecost until the conciliar, masonic revolution, involves absolutely NO RISK AT ALL. It is the ONLY course a true Catholic CAN take.
3. To consort with heretics is to aid and abet them. You, who do know better, validate the anti-popes and their invalid mass by your presence every time you attend. You give scandal to other souls, who may be having doubts and then, knowing what good, sincere people you are, say to themselves,well, if Indignus attends, the NO then it must be fine. Read Mortalium Animos and see what the Holy Father said about praying with heretics.
4. You can do NOTHING about the errors you spot. You as laymen have neither authority, nor position to make any change in the NO, EXCEPT by publicly stating your disdain and repugnance and by WALKING OUT and having NOTHING to do with them. That is EXACTLY what sedevacantists DO and WHY they do it.
5. It is your Catholic DUTY to warn other innocent souls of the abominations that you ARE aware of, which they are NOT. Catholics are OBLIGED to defend the Faith, to evangelise and spread the TRUE FAITH – not its counterfeit. That is what you CAN do to correct the errors you spot.
6. You do NOT receive valid Communion in the NO “ordinary” form. You are eating bread. Read the Sacramental theology involved. It is NOT I who say so, very eminent theologians say so.
7. One is NOT guily of sin by not attending Mass, if there is no valid Mass to attend. Attending an invalid mass IS SINFUL. Both those statements are according to Church Law. I virtually assist at the Catholic Mass and receive the reality of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. You do not.
8. I AM trying to gain as many converts from the false NO religion for the Catholic Faith as I can. That is the whole thrust of my effort as a faithful, loyal Catholic. That is trying to save souls.
9. I said sedevacantists may prove to be wrong in the opinion that we are in an interregnum, should it prove correct in the long term that there had in fact existed an impeded Pope. I NEVER said I might be wrong concerning the truth of sedevacantism. You are prone to misquoting people.
10. I am certain of the “pope’s” status – he is a heretic and an anti-pope.
11. I take NOTHING upon myself. I formally judge NOTHING. But I do have God-given brains enough to believe and try to practice the Catholic Faith that has been taught for nearly two thousand years. I believe what I have been TAUGHT. I teach nobody anything of my own. I SHARE the Catholic Faith, within the limits of my ability and according to my station, with those that have ears to hear. That is my DUTY.
Please do not take offense, but your comment did call for some plainspeak. 🙂 🙂
PS. Please read this monograph regarding the invalidity of NO Sacrament of Eucharistic Consecration:
Dear Anastasia and all,
As you know, Pope Pius XII quoted Pius XI, affirmed Casti Canubi, and, went on to further explain it in great detail, and in a way that directly contradicts the claims you have written here.
— You asked to end the last discussion we had about this, and we were at the same point of impasse. We have no wish to side-track the blog with another long one like that, and suggest you go to Forum.
–So we’ll simply respond once here with what the Pope said (in the above link that contradicts you.
“The individual and society, the people and the State, the Church itself, depend for their existence, in the order established by God, on fruitful marriages. Therefore, to embrace the matrimonial state, to use continually the faculty proper to such a state and lawful only therein, and, at the same time, to avoid its primary duty WITHOUT A GRAVE REASON, would be a sin against the very nature of married life.
–SERIOUS MOTIVES , such as those which not rarely arise from medical, eugenic, economic and social so-called “indications,” MAY EXEMPT HUSBAND AND WIFE from the obligatory, positive debt FOR A LONG PERIOD OR EVEN FOR THE ENTIRRE PERIOD OF MATRIMONIAL LIFE. FROM THIS IT FOLLOWS THAT THE OBSERVANCE OF THE NATURAL STERILE PERIODS MAY BE LAWFUL, FROM THE MORAL VIEWPOINT: AND it IS LAWFUL IN THE CONDITIONS MENTIONED.
–. If, however, according to a reasonable and equitable judgment, there are no such grave reasons either personal or deriving from exterior circumstances, the will to avoid the fecundity of their union, while continuing to satisfy to tile full their sensuality, can only be the result of a false appreciation of life and of motives foreign to sound ethical principles.
The individual and society, the people and the State, the Church itself, depend for their existence, in the order established by God, on fruitful marriages. Therefore, to embrace the matrimonial state, to use continually the faculty proper to such a state and lawful only therein, and, at the same time, to avoid its primary duty WITHOUT GRAVE REASON, WOULD BE A SINn against the very nature of married life.
—He then goes on to describe different situation that would require continuous absention, such as when the mother could not survive a pregnancy, physically.
Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, eugenic, economic and social so-called “indications,” may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life. From this it follows that the observance of the natural sterile periods may be lawful, from the moral viewpoint: and it is lawful in the conditions mentioned. If, however, according to a reasonable and equitable judgment, there are no such grave reasons either personal or deriving from exterior circumstances, the will to avoid the fecundity of their union, while continuing to satisfy to tile full their sensuality, can only be the result of a false appreciation of life and of motives foreign to sound ethical principles.
We’ll end this here, as we have no wish to debate this topic which it stalemates when you denying Pius XII’s and Paul VI’s correctness and authority, whenever we cite them. Suggest a Forum, again.
p.s. Sorry about that slaughtered second last sentence. Suffice it to say, we see no meeting of the minds on this issue, and would appreciate your not responding to our posts with statements attempting to re-open a debate on it. Fair enough?
p.s. That request applies only to direct replies to us—not trying to inhibit your general posting in any way.
Like I said before Pius XII who ushered in Bugnini, who began Novus Ordo Type changes to the Easter liturgy and is known to be a vacilating Pope when it came to the liturgy most certainly in his private letter to the Italian midwives contradicts Pius XI’s encyclical on the primary purpose of marriage and it’s separation from the secondary purpose of unity in marriage. His statement on being able to observe the infertile period for grave reasons also contradicts Acta Apostolicae Sedis from April 20, 1944 that responded to the question put forth to the Holy Office’s Acta Apostolicae Sedis (an official organ of the Holy See) that asked, “May one subscribe to the opinion of certain modern authors who deny that the principle end of marriage is the begetting and education of children, or who teach that the secondary ends are not essentially subordinated to the primary ends, but are equally primary and independent?” The reply was “no”
Since the reply is “no” then unity can never be independent of procreation.
I can see how one who has practised or promotes NFP for grave reasons hangs on to this private letter to the Italian midwives by the vacillating Pope PiusXII to ease their conscience when they wish toseparate procreation from unity during conjugal relations.No doubt Pius XII had his work cut out for him during those roaring 40’s and 50’s. Nonetheless his particular and seriously unfortunate comment on separating procreation from unity during conjugal relations in this one detrimental letter is not infalible since it clearly contradicts the teachings on the hierarchy of marriage as stated in Pius XI encyclical Casti Connubii.
I so much wish people to know that in order to stand a chance at defending the sanctity of marriage for our children,grandchildren and great grandchildren and future Catholics it is imperative to stand against and instruct against false misleading teachings in regards to marriage.
This is not just for some selected few on this blog that I shout from the rooftops on this serious crucial issue of marriage it is for all those who need to hear it. After all isn’t the sanctity of marriage one of the most hotly and publicly debated topics as we speak? I realy don’t beleive I am sidetracting that far off from the topics at hand.
Dear Anastasia, Everyone, particularly husbands and wives, parents and young boys and girls ought to read Casti Connubi and parents ought to teach it to their children. This, because we cannot rely on bishops and priests to teach it.
Thank you Linda. Everyone should also listen to the sad debate that went on with the supreme court today on marriage.Notice how this debate shows the “done deal” in the minds pf the judges that says that we can all of course agree that the primary purpose of marriage is not procreation and education of children but the ‘love’ of acouple for one another when speaking of what marriage is of course now primarily and only based on. The belief that procreation and the education of children is completly off limits in the arguments to defend and define marriage now thanks to the age of the contraceptive, feminist and NFP mentality. Our hands are officially tied due to the inversions of the hierarchy of marriage and the making of the unity of the couple as independant from procreation for the defining of marriage which is what has ushered in the devastation of sodomite unions and their protection under the law to even raise children in their sickening perverted ways.
Wow are we ever paying big time for the inversion and separation of the hierachies of purposes of marriage. Way to go modernism with your “deeper” meaning of marriage mantra and your misguided understanding of ‘love’ in marriage.
David Christopher (Augustine) Peshek
March 27, 1963 – December 6, 2014
Resident of Walnut Creek
David Christopher Peshek, 51, passed after a sudden illness at the Kaiser Foundation Hospital in Walnut Creek, California on December 6, 2014. David was born on March 27, 1963, the fifth of six children born to the late Jack Raymond and the late Helen Marie (née Sherry) Peshek of Avon Lake, Ohio.
A proud graduate and band member of Avon Lake High School, he also attended Kent State University where he studied English and was involved in many LGBT and other worthy causes.
David began his career managing events and bartending in Cleveland, after which he became a career florist, consultant and instructor, as well as event planner with clients in Cleveland, Chicago, Naples and Providence. He was also an accomplished chef, boater and dancer.
In 2001 David moved to Chicago, where he met his life partner Robert Fournier. They then made their home in Boston. In 2004 they relocated to Providence, Rhode Island where David began his studies for the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults under the tutelage of Rev. Stephen Almano, former Vatican Ambassador to Israel and Palestine. David, raised a Methodist, characterized himself spiritually during this time as “a bird in flight with no place to land.”
In 2012, David joined the Roman Catholic Church at its Easter Vigil in the Cathedral of SS. Peter and Paul of the Providence Diocese, taking Augustine as his confirmation name. He received his First Holy Communion this night from his brother, Deacon Tom Peshek of the Cleveland Diocese, who will also serve at David’s funeral and memorial Masses. In Providence David served as Lecturer and Eucharistic Minister and joined the Knights of Columbus.
David and Robert were joined in marriage in 2013 in Contra Costa County, as witnessed by his aunt, Dolores Sherry. A celebration of the marriage with family and friends took place in Avon Lake, Ohio on June 26, 2014.
David was at once child-like, affectionate, and caring to all. Enthusiastic about his conversion to Catholicism, David felt warmly welcomed by the changing Church, and felt he held a very special place in God’s plan to help build tolerance.
Firmly welcomed the Oakland Diocese, at the time of his death David was the Grand Knight of the Christ the Light Parish Council (No. 15919) and a member of the Color Corps and Faithful Scribe of the Knights of Columbus Fourth degree Francis B. Drass Assembly (No. 1880). As Grand Knight, David was passionate about recruiting, and he participated enthusiastically in many Columbian initiatives, particularly providing for the hungry and children of incarcerated parents.
He is survived by his spouse, Robert Fournier; siblings Tom (Carolyn), Sherry (Jim) Kepic, Cliff (Stephanie), Kevin, and Jennifer (Kevin) Hirshman; his aunt, Dolores Sherry; and great aunt, Isabel Lee; and by many nieces and nephews, cousins and the many friends and lives he touched.
On Saturday, January 17, 2015, beginning at 9:00 a.m., a rosary led the by the Knights of Columbus and funeral Mass will be celebrated at the Cathedral of Christ the Light in Oakland, California. Knight’s procession and committal in the Cathedral Mausoleum to follow.
A Memorial Mass will also be celebrated at St. Mary’s Church in Chardon, Ohio on Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 11:00 a.m.
In Lieu of any flowers or remembrances, contributions in David’s name can be made to Knights of Columbus Christ the Light Council No. 15191 for their continued good works, which may be sent to the Council c/o The Parish Office, Cathedral of Christ the Light, 2121 Harrison Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612.
I post this article because it portraits very well the dark times we are living under. Here we have an active sodomite who was “married” to another man who not only joined the Catholic Church but the KoC.
Notice he welcomed the shift of the church towards “tolerance” and that that was what moved him to join the CC.
Notice that a funeral mass was conducted in the cathedral “church of light” in Oakland. The one ran for bishop Vann. An article by Louie was written not too long ago on the building and this bishop.
Christ is being mocked, constantly mocked by the Novus Ordo institution – there is no doubt that that mockery is actually built into the works, words and ways of Novus Ordoism. The mission of so many people who claim to belong to Christ these days has nothing to do with Truth, but everything to do with ‘confirming people in their errors’, as if such a thing could ever be an act of mercy. The Catholic practice of observing the commandments of God, in contradiciton to the ‘commandments’ of the world or man is overcome by Novus Ordoism.
There, but by the Grace of God, go I.
Diabolic. This man ought never have been baptised as he refused to renounce his life of manifest mortal sin. And then continually receiving Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. What sacrilege! No mention of Confession. The bishop and priests responsible for such crimes against God ought to be removed from ministry. They are working for the damnation of souls. Reparation! Reparation! Reparation!s
I just sent the quote from Casti Connubii to my daughter and a daughter-in-law. I applaud your fortitude in this battle. Years ago, after reading an article in an HLI newletter in which a medical doctor wrote that God had kept NFP a secret from us for millions of years, I knew in my Catholic soul that it was wrong.
St. Jeanne d’Arc, pray for us in this battle.