| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 488 online users.
» 1 Member(s) | 485 Guest(s)
Bing, Google, Jules
|
|
|
| St. Martin Escapes from a Falling Pine-tree |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-13-2022, 09:48 AM - Forum: The Saints
- No Replies
|
 |
St. Martin Escapes from a Falling Pine-tree
After St. Martin was acclaimed Bishop of Tours in the year 371, he took very aggressive actions against the pagan temples and symbols, destroying one after another.
Once, in a certain village he had demolished a very ancient temple, and had set about cutting down a pine tree worshipped by the pagans as a god, which stood close to the temple.
![[Image: H238_Mar.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H238_Mar.jpg)
St. Martin destroyed the pagan idols & temples throughout Tours
The chief priest of that place and a crowd of other heathens began to oppose him. These people, who, under the influence of the Lord, had been quiet while the temple was being overthrown, would not patiently allow the tree to be cut down. Martin carefully instructed them that there was nothing sacred in the trunk of a tree, and urged them rather to honor God whom he himself served. He added that there was a moral reason for why that tree should be cut down, because it had been dedicated to a demon.
Then one of the protesting pagans who was bolder than the others said: “If you have any trust in your God, whom you say you worship, we ourselves will cut down this tree, so long as you lay yourself down in the very path where it will fall. For if, as you declare, your Lord is with you, you will escape all injury.”
Then Martin, courageously trusting in the Lord, promised that he would do what had been asked. Upon his assent, all that crowd of heathens agreed to the condition named, for they held the loss of their tree a small matter if only they could be rid of the enemy of their religion buried beneath its fall.
Accordingly, since that pine tree was hanging over in one direction so that there was no doubt about how it would fall on being cut, the pagans bound the body of Martin with ropes and placed him on the ground on that spot where, as no one doubted, the tree was about to fall.
![[Image: H238_Tre.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H238_Tre.jpg)
The cut tree turned in midair & fell the opposite direction
They began, therefore, to cut down their own tree with great glee and joyfulness, while at some distance a great multitude of wondering spectators stood to view the spectacle.
And now the pine tree began to totter and to threaten its own ruin by falling. The monks at a distance grew pale and were terrified by the danger ever coming nearer their holy Bishop. Losing all hope and confidence, they expected only the death of Martin.
But he calmly trusted in the Lord and waited courageously. Then, as the falling pine uttered its expiring crash and began to fall, it started to rush down upon him. But Martin simply held up his hand against it and made the Sign of Cross, the sign of salvation.
Then, indeed, like a spinning-top (one might have thought it were being driven back and away from the Bishop’s prostrate body), it swept around in midair to the opposite side, with such speed and force that it almost crushed the rustic audiences, who had taken their places there in what was deemed a safe spot.
Then truly, a shout was raised to Heaven. The heathen were amazed by the miracle while the monks wept for joy, and the name of Christ was in common extolled by all.
![[Image: H328_Ham.jpg]](https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/images_F-J/H328_Ham.jpg)
His hammer with these words on its grip: ‘The pagan statues fall, hit by St. Martin’s axe’
The well-known result was that on that day salvation came to that region. For there was hardly one of that immense multitude of heathens who did not express a desire for Baptism, and abandoning his impious errors, made a profession of faith in the Lord Jesus.
Certainly, before the times of Martin, very few, nay, almost none, in those regions had received the name of Christ. But through his virtues and example Christians have become so numerous that now there is no place thereabouts which is not filled with very crowded churches or monasteries. For wherever he destroyed heathen temples, there he would immediately build either churches or monasteries.
Adapted from Sulpitius Severus, The Life of St Martin de Tours, trans. by Alexander Roberts
|
|
|
| Anger As Spanish Government Celebrates Communist Party With Commemorative Postage Stamp |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-13-2022, 09:42 AM - Forum: Socialism & Communism
- No Replies
|
|
Anger As Spanish Government Celebrates Communist Party With Commemorative Postage Stamp
![[Image: Spainstamp.jpg?itok=dxbNbsJQ]](https://assets.zerohedge.com/s3fs-public/styles/inline_image_mobile/public/inline-images/Spainstamp.jpg?itok=dxbNbsJQ)
ZH [slightly adapted]| NOV 12, 2022
Authored by Steve Watson via Summit News,
The extreme leftist Spanish government has drawn the rage of many in the country after it announced a commemorative postage stamp marking the centenary of the Communist Party.
The stamp, featuring the notorious hammer and sickle imagery, is to be launched by the state controlled Correos on November 14, with 135,000 limited edition copies with a postal value of 0.75 euros.
The move has enraged many citizens, who have directed anger at Socialist Spanish leader Pedro Sánchez, with some pointing out that the Correos is currently headed up by Sánchez’s former Chief of staff.
It is estimated that Communism has resulted in more than 100 million deaths throughout its relatively short history.
Other victims of Communism are appalled by the move:
Others noted how Spain’s communist party has a history of cosy ties with the Soviet regime, involvement in war crimes during the Spanish Civil War, and has even expressed support for modern Communist dictatorships in Cuba, China, Venezuela and Nicaragua.
Spain’s current government is a coalition between Sánchez’s Socialist Worker’s Party and the extreme far left Podemos party.
The government was heavily criticised during the pandemic for instituting draconian mask, lockdown and vaccine passport policies.
A huge scandal also emerged when the elite of the Spanish business world as well as sports figures and celebrities were caught buying fake vaccine certificates in an attempt to maintain access to social freedom without taking the vaccines.
The country also finds itself in the midst of its own migrant crisis, with the leftist government routinely charged with leaving the borders wide open.
Following disturbing revelations concerning a spike in crime including rape at the hands of immigrants, the Spanish conservative populist party VOX is calling for a new referendum on immigration.
|
|
|
|
| Liturgical Time Bombs: The Destruction of the Faith thru Changes in Catholic Worship |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-12-2022, 09:37 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- Replies (6)
|
|
Liturgical Time Bombs in Vatican II: Excerpts
The Destruction of Catholic Faith Through Changes in Catholic Worship
by Michael Davies - adapted
"Ridiculum est, et satis abominabile dedecus, ut traditiones, quas antiquitus a patribus suscepimus, infringi patiamur."
"It is absurd, and a detestable shame, that we should suffer those traditions to be changed which we have received from the fathers of old."
-----The Decretals (Dist. xii, 5)
Cited by St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica, II, I, Q. 97, art. 2.
Contents:
Plans for a Liturgical Revolution?
The Rise and Fall and Rise and Fall of Annibale Bugnini
An Unsuspected Blueprint for Revolution
Detonating the Time Bombs
Omission of the Term "Transubstantiation"
Active Participation
Instruction Overshadows Worship
Protestantism and the Mass
A Ban on Kneeling for Holy Communion
Another Destructive Time Bomb-----"Legitimate Variations"
Legalizing Abuses!
The Abolition of Latin
A Pastoral Disaster
The Mass and Sacraments Reformed by a Freemason?
Destruction of the Roman Rite and Loss of Faith
Appendix I: Participation of Protestants in the Compilation of the New Rites
Appendix II: Fruits of the Liturgical Reforms with Stark Statistics
+ + +
LITURGICAL TIME BOMBS IN VATICAN II
Plans for a Liturgical Revolution?
During the first session of the Second Vatican Council, in the debate on the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani asked: "Are these Fathers planning a revolution?" The Cardinal was old and partly blind. He spoke from the heart about a subject that moved him deeply:
Quote:Are we seeking to stir up wonder, or perhaps scandal among the Christian people, by introducing changes in so venerable a rite, that has been approved for so many centuries and is now so familiar? The rite of Holy Mass should not be treated as if it were a piece of cloth to be refashioned according to the whim of each generation. [Michael Davies, Pope John's Council (Dickinson, TX: Angelus Press, 1977), p. 93]
So concerned was the elderly Cardinal at the revolutionary potential of the Constitution, and having no prepared text, due to his very poor sight, he exceeded the ten-minute time limit for speeches. At a signal from Cardinal Alfrink, who was presiding at the session, a technician switched off the microphone, and Cardinal Ottaviani stumbled back to his seat in humiliation. The Council Fathers clapped with glee, and the journalists to whose dictatorship Father Louis Bouyer claimed that the Council had surrendered itself were even more gleeful when they wrote their reports that night, and when they wrote their books at the end of the session.
Quote:["I do not know whether, as we are told, the Council has freed us from the tyranny of the Roman Curia, but what is sure is that, willy-nilly, it has handed us over (after having first surrendered itself to the dictatorship of the journalists and particularly the most incompetent and irresponsible among them."-----L. Bouyer, The Decomposition of Catholicism (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1970), p. 3.]
While we laugh, we do not think, and had they not been laughing, at least some of the bishops may have wondered whether perhaps Cardinal Ottaviani might have had a point. He did indeed.
A liturgical revolution had been planned, and the Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium (CSL), was the instrument by which it was to be achieved. Very few of the 3,000 bishops present in St. Peter's would have endorsed the document had they suspected its true nature, but it would have been surprising had they done so. In his book, La Nouvelle Messe, Professor Louis Salleron remarks that far from seeing it as a means of initiating a revolution, the ordinary layman would have considered the CSL as the crowning achievement of the work of liturgical renewal that had been in progress for a hundred years. [Louis Salleron, La Nouvelle Messe (Paris: Nouvelles Editions Latines, 197?), p. 17.]
The Liturgical Movement
Let there be no mistake, there was great need and great scope for liturgical renewal within the Roman rite, but a renewal within the correct sense of the term, using the existing liturgy to its fullest potential. This was the aim of the liturgical movement initiated by Dom Prosper Guéranger and endorsed by Pope St. Pius X. It was defined by Dom Oliver Rousseau, O.S.B., as "the renewal of fervour for the liturgy among the clergy and the faithful." In his study of the Liturgical Movement, Father Didier Bonneterre writes:
Quote:In 1903 the person who was to give the movement a definite impetus had just ascended to the See of Peter, St. Pius X. Gifted with an immense pastoral experience, this saintly pope suffered terribly from the decadence of liturgical life. But he knew that a trend for renewal was developing, and he decided to do his utmost to ensure that it bring forth good fruits. That is why on November 22, 1903, he published his famous motu proprio "Tra Ie Sollecitudini," restoring Gregorian chant. In this document he inserted the vital sentence which went on to play a determining role in the evolution of the Liturgical Movement: "Our keen desire being that the true Christian spirit may once more flourish, cost what it may, and be maintained among all the faithful. We deem it necessary to provide before anything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for . . . [the purpose] of acquiring this spirit from its primary and indispensable source, which is the active participation in the most holy mysteries and the public and solemn prayer of the Church." (Tra Ie Sollecitudini, November 22, 1903). [Rev. Fr. Didier Bonneterre, The Liturgical Movement: Guéranger to Beauduin to Bugnini (Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 2002), p. 9.]
For St. Pius X, as for Dom Guéranger, writes Father Bonneterre, "the liturgy is essentially theocentric; it is for the worship of God rather than for the teaching of the faithful. Nevertheless, this great pastor underlined an important aspect of the liturgy: it is educative of the true Christian spirit. But let us stress that this function of the liturgy is only secondary." [Bonneterre, p. 10.] The tragedy of the Liturgical Movement was that it would make this secondary aspect of the liturgy the primary aspect, as is made manifest today in any typical parish celebration of the New Mass. Father Bonneterre has nothing but praise for the initial stages of the movement: "Born of Dom Guéranger genius and the indomitable energy of St. Pius X, the movement at this time brought magnificent fruits of spiritual renewal." [Bonneterre, p. 17.]
The Modernist heresy at the beginning of the twentieth century was driven underground by St. Pius X. [The story of the Modernist heresy is told in my book Partisans of Error (Long Prairie, Minnesota: Neumann Press, 1983). www.neumannpress.com] Father Bonneterre claims that Modernist theologians who could no longer propagate their theories in public saw in the Liturgical Movement the ideal Trojan Horse for their revolution and that, from the 1920's onward, it became clear that the Liturgical Movement had been diverted from its original admirable aims. He writes:
Quote:It was easy for all the revolutionaries to hide themselves in the belly of such a large carcass. Before Mediator Dei [Pius XII, 1947], who among the Catholic hierarchy was concerned about liturgy? What vigilance was applied to detecting this particularly subtle form of practical Modernism? [Bonneterre, p. 93.]
The early leaders of the movement were, writes Father Bonneterre, "largely overtaken by the generation of the new liturgists of the various preconciliar liturgical commissions." He describes this new generation as the "young wolves." In any revolution it is almost routine for the first moderate revolutionaries to be replaced or even eradicated by more radical revolutionaries, as was the case with the Russian Revolution when the Mensheviks (majority) were ousted by the Bolsheviks (minority). Just as nothing could prevent the rise to power of the Bolsheviks, nothing could prevent the triumph of the young wolves:
Quote:After the Second World War the movement became a force that nothing could stop. Protected from on high by eminent prelates, the new liturgists took control little by little of the Commission for Reform of the Liturgy founded by Pius XII, and influenced the reforms devised by this Commission at the end of the pontificate of Pius XII and at the beginning of that of John XXIII. Already masters, thanks to the Pope, of the preconciliar liturgical commission, the new liturgists got the Fathers of the Council to accept a self-contradictory and ambiguous document, the constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium. Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Lercaro and Fr. Bugnini, themselves very active members of the Italian Liturgical Movement, directed the efforts of the Consilium which culminated in the promulgation of the New Mass. [Bonneterre, p. 94.]
![[Image: v2-bugnini.jpg]](http://www.catholictradition.org/Eucharist/v2-bugnini.jpg)
Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, chief architect of the New Rite of Mass which was composed after Vatican Council II (1962-1965) and imposed upon the Church in 1969.
In 1975 Pope Paul VI took action to remove Archbishop Bugnini from his powerful position as Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship: the Holy Father dissolved the Congregation and assigned the Archbishop to Iran. Evidence shows that the Pope did this because he believed Archbishop Bugnini to be a Freemason. Archbishop Bugnini died in Teheran in 1982. Archbishop Bugnini had described the New Rite of Mass (Novus Ordo Missae) as "a major conquest of the Catholic Church." This rite of Mass continues to be celebrated in almost every Catholic church (of the Roman Rite) in the entire world.
The most influential of the young wolves, the great architect of the Vatican II liturgical revolution, was Father Annibale Bugnini. Father Bonneterre recounts a visit by this Italian liturgist to a liturgical convention which was held at Thieulin near Chartres in the late 1940's, at which forty religious superiors and seminary rectors were present, making clear the extent of the influence of the liturgical Bolsheviks on the Church establishment in France. He cites a Father Duploye as stating:
Quote:Some days before the reunion at Thieulin, I had a visit from an Italian Lazarist, Fr. Bugnini, who had asked me to obtain an invitation for him. The Father listened very attentively, without saying a word, for four days. During our return journey to Paris, as the train was passing along the Swiss Lake at Versailles, he said to me: "I admire what you are doing, but the greatest service I can render you is never to say a word in Rome about all that I have just heard." [Bonneterre, p. 52.]
Father Bonneterre comments:
Quote:"This revealing text shows us one of the first appearances of the 'gravedigger of the Mass,' a revolutionary more clever than the others, he who killed the Catholic liturgy before disappearing from the official scene." [Ibid.]
|
|
|
|
| Pope Francis once again receives pro-LGBT Fr. James Martin in meeting at the Vatican |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-12-2022, 08:30 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- Replies (2)
|
|
Pope Francis once again receives pro-LGBT Fr. James Martin in meeting at the Vatican
Pope Francis received Jesuit Fr. James Martin at the Vatican in a 45-minute audience in which the pair discussed 'LGBTQ Catholics.'
![[Image: FhSfzCMWIAEI6AJ-810x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/FhSfzCMWIAEI6AJ-810x500.jpeg)
Fr. James Martin meets with Pope Francis at the Vatican on November 11, 2022
Twitter/Vatican Media
Nov 11, 2022
VATICAN CITY (LifeSiteNews) — Notorious LGBT activist and Jesuit priest Father James Martin has again been received in audience by Pope Francis.
Martin met with the Holy Father on Friday morning after attending the Thursday plenary meeting of the Vatican’s Dicastery for Communication, for which he has served as a consultor since 2017, reportedly speaking with the Pontiff for 45 minutes, during which time the pair covered topics including “the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties, of LGBTQ Catholics.”
“It was a warm, inspiring and encouraging meeting that I’ll never forget,” Martin wrote to his 300,000-plus followers on Twitter.
In a follow-up tweet the celebrity priest, whom Pope Francis recently reappointed as consultor to the Dicastery for Communication for another five-year term, said he was “[d]eeply grateful to meet with the Holy Father in the Apostolic Palace this morning [November 11],” adding that their discussion of the experience of “LGBTQ Catholics” was “punctuated by laughter.”
No details about what was said by either of the clerics during their meeting were published.
The dissident priest has been received by Pope Francis numerous times since joining the Roman Curia, despite his open advocacy for homosexuality and confusing remarks on when life begins following the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the persecuted former Bishop of Hong Kong, Cardinal Joseph Zen, has been ignored, side-lined, and even castigated by the Pope over his ongoing trial.
Earlier this year, through a hand-written letter sent to Martin, the Pope addressed “LGBT Catholics” with a statement decrying their apparent “rejection” from among “a sect” within the Church. Published on Martin’s “Outreach” website, a “new LGBTQ Catholic resource,” the letter added that for supposedly LGBT individuals, “I would have them recognize it not as ‘the rejection of the church,’ but instead of ‘people in the church.’ The church is a mother and calls together all her children.”
After his last meeting with the Pope in September, Martin took to Twitter to thank Francis for his “love and affection for LGBTQ people” and his “support for all who minister among them.”
Missing from Martin’s praise for Francis, and indeed the Pope’s embrace of so-called “LGBT Catholics,” is any call to chastity, as is taught by the Catholic Church for those living with deep-seated homosexual inclinations.
The Catholic Church teaches that “‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered’ and “are contrary to the natural law,” adding explicitly that “under no circumstances can they be approved.”
Despite the Church’s clear recognition of homosexual acts as “disordered,” Martin has explicitly defended the homosexual lifestyle as “the way that God created a part of the human race.”
In September, the Jesuit priest took to social media to criticize Bishop Donald DeGrood of the Diocese of Sioux Falls over his pastoral guidelines banning Catholic students from advocating, celebrating, and expressing “same-sex attraction” and transgenderism.
“[P]eople should be able to, and encouraged to, ‘celebrate’ who they are and, more importantly, how God made them, including LGBTQ people,” Martin argued, adding that “[t]his is crucial for young people, and especially for LGBTQ youth, who feel [thanks to the bishop’s statement] ignored, rejected, condemned, marginalized and completely unwelcome in their own church.”
In a 2019 meeting with Martin, Pope Francis encouraged the dissident priest in his ministry, stating that he should “continue this way.”
|
|
|
|
| Francis Opens Novus Ordo Churches for Protestants, Forbidden for Catholics |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-12-2022, 08:20 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- No Replies
|
|
Francis Opens Novus Ordo Churches for Protestants, FORBIDDEN for Catholics
![[Image: sw3p5ddpfooeg8j216p4wp710rpwxlpoo4ogfxf....ormat=webp]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/sw3p5ddpfooeg8j216p4wp710rpwxlpoo4ogfxf.webp?format=webp)
gloria.tv | November 10, 2022
During his November 4 speech at an ecumenical meeting in Bahrain, Francis encouraged his audience to maintain the "fine habit" of making church buildings available to other communities "for the worship of the one Lord.”
He added that “the praise of God” is the “spiritual cenacle” to make unity among Christians.
This is the same Francis who is banning the celebration of Roman Mass in parish churches. It is clear from Francis' words that he sees the Novus Ordo as just another form of Protestant worship, while he opposes the Catholic liturgy.
* * *
Again, this is not Francis per se, it's the regurgitation of Vatican II.
Excerpts from Fr. Hesse's Ten Errors of Vatican II:
Ten Errors of Vatican II
[Taken from The Recusant: based on notes from a talk given by the late Fr. Gregory Hesse, STD, JCD]
Lumen Gentium 8
“This Church [the Church of Christ] constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.”
Fr. Hesse: The word subsists doesn’t tell us much in English, but in Latin “subsistere” means to exist, to be present, to lie underneath. You could say for example that the grass is subsistent to my way of walking. But it could also be subsistent to someone else’s way of walking and not just to mine. So when you say that the Catholic Church “subsists” in the Catholic Church, it is phrased that way deliberately so as not to exclude Protestants, Orthodox, etc. The architects of Vatican II were too clever to say that the Church of Christ “contains” the Protestants, the Orthodox and all those other non-Catholics. So they said that it can be found in the Catholic Church in a way that does not exclude the others. But it is defined dogma that the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church, the two are identical. Nothing outside the Catholic Church is part of the Church of Christ and nothing of the Church of Christ is outside the Catholic Church. The two are identical.
Lumen Gentium 15
“Likewise we can say that in some real way they [non-Catholic/Protestant sects] are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power.”
Fr. Hesse: What way is this “real way”? They never say. In the Gospel of St. John one can read that the Holy Ghost was given only to the Catholic Church, not to Protestants, not to the Lutheran Church, not to the Anglicans. When a Lutheran pastor baptises a baby, if it is valid, it is a sacrament stolen from the Catholic Church. If that innocent child, after being baptised, dies and goes to heaven, it goes to heaven as a member of the Catholic Church because the Lutheran pastor illicitly administered the Catholic sacrament of baptism.
Lumen Gentium 16
“But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, together with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.”
Fr. Hesse: What about the Incarnation? What about the Holy Trinity? The Koran, the Muslims’ holy book calls the idea of the Trinity an “excremental idea.” And now Vatican II tells us that they, together with us, adore the one merciful God?!? What about the First Commandment? They have another God, they have the lonely one-person Allah. We have Father, Son and Holy Ghost. “Et Verbum caro factum est,” says the last Gospel at Mass, “And the Word became flesh” I’ve never heard that Allah became flesh. This is blasphemy. It is heresy and it is blasphemy.
The idea that Muslims, Jews and Catholics are basically all the same anyway is a Freemasonic idea. It was being promoted by the Freemasons long before Vatican II, and now we have a so-called Ecumenical Council telling us the same thing too. Give me a Catholic interpretation of that quote about the Muslims together with us adoring the same God. It’s not possible. It’s just a heresy.
Unitatis Redintigratio 3
“The brethren divided from us also use many liturgical actions of the Christian religion. These most certainly can truly engender a life of grace in ways that vary according to the condition of each Church or Community. These liturgical actions must be regarded as capable of giving access to the community of salvation."
Fr. Hesse: It follows that the separated Churches and Communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church.”
The Protestant “churches,” and the Orthodox “churches,” cannot save anyone, they are not, never have been and never will be a means of salvation to anyone. They can only lead you to hell. Subjectively speaking, you might ask whether a Protestant who has lived a just life all his life, who has tried his best to find the truth, who has tried his best to avoid sin, whether perhaps for whatever reason he was not able to find out about the Catholic Church... or a Russian Orthodox living under communism all his life, who maybe never heard about the Catholic Church... whether because of that God would not send him to hell. Well, subjectively speaking perhaps, but even so objectively speaking they are living in mortal sin and outside Christ’s Church. Who knows if through an extraordinary act of grace from God, through an act of contrition, that man might die as a member of the Catholic Church. In reality, it must be highly improbable if ever possible, especially in this day and age for the likes of you and I. And, objectively speaking, for anyone to say that the Protestant sects or any religion other than the Catholic Church can be a means to salvation, that is a heresy. Here is a small sample of what the Popes and Councils have taught concerning this: “On the one hand, therefore, it is necessary that the mission of teaching whatever Christ had taught should remain perpetual and immutable, and on the other that the duty of accepting and professing all their doctrine should likewise be perpetual and immutable.
‘Our Lord Jesus Christ, when in His Gospel He testifies that those who not are with Him are His enemies, does not designate any special form of heresy, but declares that all heretics who are not with Him and do not gather with Him, scatter His flock and are His adversaries: He that is not with Me is against Me, and he that gathereth not with Me scattereth’ (St. Cyprian, Ep. lxix., ad Magnum, n. I).
- . . . The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.
. . . Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by everyone as true. ... But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”(Leo XIII, Satis Cogitum, 8 ff.)
- “And here, beloved Sons and Venerable Brothers, We should mention again and censure a very grave error in which some Catholics are unhappily engaged, who believe that men living in error, and separated from the true faith and from Catholic unity, can attain eternal life. Indeed, this is certainly quite contrary to Catholic teaching.” (Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 7)
- “This Council firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the catholic church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Catholic Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the church's sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Council of Ferrara-Florence, Session XI)
We could, if we wished, quote many, many more Popes and they all say the same thing, indeed until Vatican II one could not find any Pope or Council saying differently. So, it is clear that this one part of this one document is heretical. Therefore the whole document is heretical. Therefore the whole Council is heretical. As noted before, just one heresy would be enough to condemn the whole thing, but it doesn’t end there...
Unitatis Redintigratio 6
This document is supposedly about ‘Ecumenism’, and in this paragraph it suggests the following as a means to achieving ‘Christian unity’: “Christ summons the Church to continual reformation as she sojourns here on earth. The Church is always in need of this, in so far as she is an institution of men here on earth. Thus if, in various times and circumstances, there have been deficiencies in moral conduct or in church discipline, or even in the way that church teaching has been formulated - to be carefully distinguished from the deposit of faith itself - these can and should be set right at the opportune moment.”
Fr. Hesse: The morals of the clergy have often needed reforming throughout the history of the Church. But the idea of “reforming” Church teaching (or its ‘formulation’) is something entirely different. And the distinction introduced here between “Church teaching” and “the deposit of the Faith itself” is completely false. Here is what a recent Pope taught regarding this bogus distinction:
Quote:“12. How so great a variety of opinions can clear the way for the unity of the Church, We know not. That unity can arise only from one teaching authority, one law of belief, and one faith of Christians. But We do know that from such a state of affairs it is but an easy step to the neglect of religion or “Indifferentism,” and to the error of the modernists, who hold that dogmatic truth is not absolute but relative, that is, that it changes according to the varying necessities of time and place and the varying tendencies of the mind; that it is not contained in an immutable tradition, but can be altered to suit the needs of human life.
13. Furthermore, it is never lawful to employ in connection with articles of faith the distinction invented by some between “fundamental” and “non-fundamental” articles, the former to be accepted by all, the latter being left to the free acceptance of the faithful. The supernatural virtue of faith has as its formal motive the authority of God revealing, and this allows of no such distinction.” (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, 1928)
Dignitatis Humanae 2
This is perhaps the best known error of Vatican II, perhaps because its consequences are so visible, or because is an error which so many Popes fought against right up to the Council. Here’s what the document actually says: “This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.
Fr. Hesse: The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.” The supposed reason or grounds for this error, human dignity, is also itself wrong. As Pope St. Pius X said “The only dignity of man is in his being a Catholic.”
If I really thought that I had religious liberty, I would find an easier religion to belong to. Why not be an Anglican? They have nicer churches, they are more musical, their laws are not as strict... But I am not an Anglican, I am a Catholic because I do not have ‘religious liberty’, I have no choice: I am bound in conscience to be a Catholic if I want to save my soul. G.K. Chesterton said “If I were not a Catholic, I would have a harem.”
“Religious freedom” or “religious liberty” has been condemned by Popes Gregory XVI, Pius IX, St. Pius X, Pius XI and Pius X. You are not free to choose your religion. You are bound in conscience to become a Catholic and to join the Catholic Church in order to save your soul. If you choose not to, you go to hell. Nobody can coerce someone into thinking something they do not want to think or believing something they do not want to believe. But the laws of a Catholic state can prevent the followers of a false religion from practising in public, from trying to make converts, from trying to spread their false doctrine and false morals, etc. Look at the catastrophic numbers of millions of souls today leaving the Church to join ‘evangelical’ protestant sects in countries where before the council everyone was Catholic: South America, the Philippines, etc. These formerly Catholic countries were forced to change their constitutions so as to no longer give the Catholic religion pride of place. All this disaster as a result of just two paragraphs in one of the sixteen documents of this robber council. As noted above, just one error is enough. One heresy makes the whole document heretical, and one heretical document makes the whole council heretical.
|
|
|
|
| Prophecy of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich on the Troubles in the Church |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-11-2022, 02:35 PM - Forum: New Rite Sacraments
- No Replies
|
|
Prophecy of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich on the Troubles in the Church
Transcript:
In this video we share the Prophecy of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich view on the troubles in the Church.
“The Mass was short. The Gospel of Saint John was not read at the end.
I saw other martyrs, not now but in the future…
I saw secret followers ruthlessly undermining the great Church.
Near them I saw a terrible monster coming out of the sea.
All over the world, good and pious people, especially the clergy, were harassed, tortured, and thrown into prison.
I had a feeling that one day they would become martyrs.
I saw a strange church built against every rule. " Angels did not oversee the work of construction. There was nothing in that church that came from on high…
There was only division and chaos.
It is most likely a church that is a human work, following the latest fashion.
"I saw how sinister the consequences of this false church would be. I saw her dimensions increase; heretics of all kinds came to the city (Rome).
The local clergy became lukewarm, I saw great darkness…
Then it seemed that the vision was spreading in all directions.
Entire Catholic communities were oppressed, harassed, persecuted, and deprived of their liberty.
I saw many churches closing, great suffering everywhere, wars and bloodshed.
A savage and ignorant mob committed violent acts.
But it doesn't take long. "
"Among the strangest things I saw were the long processions of bishops.
I was made aware of their thoughts and their words through images that came out of their mouths.
Their guilt towards the faith was shown through external disfigurement.
Some had only a body, with a dark cloud instead of a head.
Others had only heads, their bodies and hearts were like thick vapors.
Some were lame, others were taken away; others slept or staggered. "
"Those I saw I think were almost all the bishops of the world, and only a small number were perfectly righteous. "
"I saw that many pastors allowed themselves to be drawn into ideas that were dangerous to the Church.
They are building a great, strange and unusual Church.
Everyone had to be allowed into it in order to be united and have the same rights: Protestants, Catholics and followers of all kinds.
Such was to be the new Church.
But God had other plans.
"Once again, I saw that Peter's Church was being undermined by a secret plan, while storms were damaging it.
But I also saw the help that will come when the troubles reach their peak.
I saw the Blessed Virgin descending over the Church again and spreading her mantle over her. ”
Thank you for supporting my channel.
May God bless you and keep you!
|
|
|
|
| 'Conciliar Masses and Doctrines are like Grains of Incense to Idols' |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-11-2022, 08:47 AM - Forum: In Defense of Tradition
- Replies (1)
|
|
The following is the conclusion to Bishop Tissier de Mallerais' study, "Is there a Conciliar Church?"
Quote:To not belong to the conciliar church is a grace and a providential witness
Blessed are those who are not in this “communion of the profanes”, who are providentially excluded from it or threatened to be excluded from it! O happy relegation and dereliction! The vocation of the priestly Society of St. Pius X, since it’s erection by the Catholic Church in 1970 and the decree of praise with which it was honoured in 1971, has never been to receive the benedictions and recognitions of this conciliar church!
It was without a doubt necessary that this priestly society, along with all the families of Tradition, be like the lighted torch not to be put under the conciliar bushel, but on the candlestick of the pillory, in order to enlighten all those who are in the house of God.
It was certainly providential that according to the ways of providence, this healthy part of the Church having become like the divine Master, a stumbling block and a stone rejected by the builders of the conciliar ecclesiastical dissociety, be transformed into cornerstone and keystone of the indestructible Catholic cathedral. Our inflexible witness to the true Church of Jesus Christ, to the priesthood and the royalty of Christ, Priest and King, requires on the part of the conciliar church the exclusion and the ostracism pronounced against us and what we represent.
But in the same way that Saint Joseph in his exile in Egypt carried the Infant Jesus and His divine Mother, so too does the traditional family in her exile carry the Church in her, without being exclusive in the glorious role, but having the marrow and heart of it, in integrity and incorruption. It carries in her by consequence the roman pontiff, who being the successor of Peter will liberate her someday from a long captivity and will come out of her great illusions, to proclaim as once the first Pope did at Caesar Philippi to his Divine Master; ” You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God!“
Thenceforth, if we are complicated we will regret being deprived of the conciliar communion and its apparent ecclesiastical communion and will be unhappy and worried, always on the quest for a solution.
If on the other hand we have the faith and simplicity of a child we will look simply for what witness we can give to the Catholic faith. And we will find that it is first the witness of our existence, of our permanence, of our stability, as well as the profession of our Catholic faith whole and entire and our refusal of the conciliar errors and reforms.
A witness is absolute. If I give witness to the Catholic Mass, to Christ the King, I must abstain from conciliar Masses and doctrines. It is like the grain of incense to the Idols; it is one grain or no grains at all. Therefore it is “not at all”. And after this witness there is also persecution, which is normal on the part of the enemies of this faith, who want to reduce to nothing our diametrical opposition to the new religion, and this will go on for as long as it pleases God that they persevere in their perverse plans. Is it not God himself who put this enmity between the race of the devil and the children of Mary? Inimicitias ponam!
And so, as soon as we perceive in the collectedness of our contemplation this particular vocation which is ours, adapted by God to the current crisis, we acquire a perfect uprightness and great peace; uprightness incapable of cooperating with the enemy, and peace without bitterness. We run to it, we bond to it and we cry as with Saint Therese of the Child Jesus, “In the Church my Mother I find my vocation!” And we ask this great saint: “ Obtain for me the grace of having in the Church and for the Church the soul of a martyr or at least that of a confessor of the faith!“
|
|
|
|
| Montana shamed as residents vote ‘No’ on measure to protect babies after they’re born: ‘Unimaginable |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-11-2022, 08:30 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Montana shamed as residents vote ‘No’ on measure to protect babies after they’re born: ‘Unimaginable’
Pro-life activist Abby Johnson tweeted, 'They’re basically saying they want the babies left out to die'
Fox News | November 11, 2022
Conservatives on Twitter tore into Montana residents after they voted "No" on a Republican-backed referendum to ensure medical care for babies delivered alive at any point in pregnancy, including those delivered after botched abortions.
On election day, Montana voters were given the option to affirm or deny Legislative Referendum 131 being signed into law. With nearly all the votes in as of Thursday afternoon, the Associated Press called the race.
With 95% of the vote in, 52.4% of Montana resident voted "No" on the referendum, as opposed to 47.6% who voted "Yes."
If residents had voted "Yes," the referendum would have enacted a law guaranteeing any infant born alive at any stage of pregnancy protections as a "legal person" and would impose criminal penalties on any health care worker that doesn’t provide adequate medical care to these babies.
The measure comes from House Bill 167, sponsored by Republican state representative Matt Regier. Kaiser Health News reported that Regier intended the bill and referendum "to protect infants who have survived abortions from being denied medical care and being left to die."
Pro-life Twitter users were outraged that Montana voted to deny the referendum, accusing the state’s residents of voting "to let babies die."
That’s how filmmaker and conservative influencer Robby Starbuck described the "No" vote. He tweeted, "Montana voted to let babies die. Let that sink in. All this would have done is force doctors to give care to a living human baby, including if they’re born alive after an abortion. What a dark, horrific day."
Defense attorney and conservative commentator Marina Medvin tweeted, "Police are required to give medical care to homicidal maniacs who shoot at them. Society demands that convicted serial killers be given medical care and food in prison. But Montana says that innocent babies should not be given milk or medical care. This doesn’t compute."
Pro-life user "Eudaimonia" tweeted, "Colorado moved to legalize shrooms and Montana says that babies born prematurely aren’t legal persons but tell me more about the slippery slope ‘fallacy.’"
The March for Life Twitter account lamented the vote, tweeting, "Abortion has wounded our nation so deeply that we are refusing to ensure proper medical care for newborn infants."
Actor and conservative James Woods wrote, "For a state to vote against compassionate care for an infant born alive is unimaginable, expected MAYBE from the usual moral hellholes like NY and CA, of course, but Montana?! The Left’s war on the unborn is legendary, grooming now sadly part of their jihad, but outright murder?"
Conservative journalist Ian Miles Cheong put it bluntly, tweeting, "It’s now legal to kill babies in Montana. America is so f-----."
Pro-life activist Abby Johnson was disturbed by the results of the vote, tweeting, "I’m horrified that even ONE person would vote in Montana to deny babies healthcare after they’ve already been born. They’re basically saying they want the babies left out to die. We need Jesus to save our nation. Desperately."
Daily Wire senior editor Cabot Phillips remarked, "Montana has voted to let babies die on operating tables if they survive an abortion attempt. We deserve the judgment we will face for our wickedness."
|
|
|
|
| John Kerry spills the beans: They want to replace capitalism with a new economic system |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-11-2022, 08:00 AM - Forum: Great Reset
- No Replies
|
|
John Kerry spills the beans at U.N.’s COP27 meeting: They want to replace capitalism with a new economic system
Pope Francis also recently called for a ‘new economic system’
LH [slightly adapted, emphasis in the original] | November 10, 2022
The World Economic Forum’s climate change agenda was “modeled” off the effort to roll out vaccines during the Covid pandemic, John Kerry said during a COP27 panel discussion in Egypt on Tuesday.
That means we can all look forward to high-pressure, coercive government tactics, and not only from the government but from corporate elites.
Appearing alongside WEF President Børge Brende and various corporate executives, U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry said that it is urgent for the private sector to pair with governments to realize the goal of preventing the global temperature from rising and to save lives in the allegedly looming global climate crisis, Breitbart reported.
Kerry said in a speech before the panel:
“We have an enormous challenge before us to bring to scale new technologies and to harness the deeply capable capacity of private sector entrepreneurs in order to bring them to the table because without it, no government has enough money… we need everybody behind this.”
King Charles has made similar statements, that we need nations to pool their resources and raise a trillion dollars to combat climate change.
Kerry further promoted the WEF’s launch of its First Movers Coalition, a program to get the private sector involved in advancing the climate agenda, which he said was “needed to create demand signals in the market where they didn’t exist, which takes boldness, it takes courage from these executives who have made the decision to be a part of this.”
So there you have it. These globalists are on a mission to destroy not only the individual freedom that millions of Westerners have enjoyed in the Post-World War II era, but they also plan to destroy what’s left of the market capitalism that led to a prosperous middle class. As long as the middle class is prosperous, it remains independent and capable of critical thinking. Wipe out their wealth and you wipe out their ability to make their own decisions based on individual critical thinking.
Kerry admitted this was the goal in his COP27 speech when he said “we need to create demand signals in the market where they didn’t exist.” They want to artificially create demand where none exists for things like vaccines, electric cars, fake meat grown in labs, replacing animal protein with crickets and other insects, solar and wind power in place of reliable coal and oil.
That’s not how capitalism works. But that’s what they’re going to try to force upon the world through ESGs and a Chinese point system that punishes those businesses and individuals who refuse to go along with the new system of government and corporate coercion.
French President Emmanuel Macron was also heard speaking at COP27 about the demise of capitalism.
“The capitalist model can no longer work,” Macron reportedly said.
Pope Francis has also called for replacing capitalism with a “new economic model” in the aftermath of Covid. In his recent book, he called for a “new economic system.”
The Catholic News Agency reports that, in his general audience address of September 30 in the San Damaso Courtyard of the Vatican, the pope criticized capitalism, calling it “unfair” and “unsustainable.”
Quote:“And certainly we cannot expect the economic model that underlies unfair and unsustainable development to solve our problems. It has not and will not, because it cannot do so, even though some false prophets continue to promise the ‘trickle-down’ that never comes.”
So by purposely drying up the food supply, paying farmers not to produce, forcing them to drastically reduce the use of fertilizers, making them cull their herds of livestock and replace that protein in the human diet with crickets and other insects, this is somehow going to be more “sustainable” and feed more people? This is the World Economic Forum/United Nations agenda that Pope Francis promotes, so don’t believe him when he says he’s for a more equitable, sustainable, peaceful world.
This pope is a deceiver. John Kerry is a deceiver. They talk about climate change in a context that makes people think they’re trying to benefit humanity. But when you lift the veneer of rhetorical altruism, what you find is an extremely anti-human line of policies that support the greater U.N. depopulation agenda.
According to the Independent Sentinel, Francis “wants the UN – the dictator’s club – to lead the world with this new system that sounds a lot like the World Economic Forum’s system.”
That’s because it is all the same tyrannical system being promoted right now by the four-legged beast — the political, the economic/corporate, the academic/media and the religious/spiritual realms.
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Viganò: Francis Church ‘no longer Church’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-11-2022, 07:20 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- Replies (1)
|
|
Archbishop Viganò: Francis Church ‘no longer Church’
'This rupture, this violent tear, was consummated on the spiritual level at the moment in which the authority of the prelates was secularized, just like what happened in the civil sphere.'
![[Image: IMG_3909-810x500.jpeg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/IMG_3909-810x500.jpeg)
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò
Nov 10, 2022
Editor’s note: Below is an exchange of letters between a cloistered nun and Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò. The first part of the piece is the nun’s letter to His Excellency, the second part is His Excellency’s reply.
(LifeSiteNews) — Most Reverend Excellency,
I am writing to you on the occasion of the coming Feast of Christ the King, and I permit myself to share with you a certain fundamental question:
Is there still any meaning in celebrating and invoking the grace that this liturgical feast so longed for when it was instituted?
If the King of kings and Lord of lords (cf. 1 Tim 6:15; Apoc. 19:16) were to return today in His glory, would He still recognize His Spouse, the Church?
By asking these questions, I will seem irreverent and lacking faith in the promise, “the gates of hell shall not prevail” (Mt 16:19), that resonates as a hope to cling to for those few survivors of the wind of mortal apostasy that has invaded the Church. Well, the provocative tone of these questions summarizes the feeling of confusion of the few remaining faithful, faithful in searching for some reference to the Magisterium, a valid Sacrament, and coherence of life among the shepherds. I turn to you as to a “Voice in the desert” that so many times has illuminated so many lost and disheartened souls.
I wanted to share with you this little story that happened to me:
Quote:A few days ago, a lady who brought some donations to the convent said to me: ‘You know, I don’t follow these things very much, but it seems to me that the direction the Church has taken lately is not so good…!’ From the way she spoke, the tone of her voice, I perceived that she was embarrassed for expressing herself in this way to someone whom she believed represented that ‘Church’ that she had just questioned. I could make a great speech to her: my answer was a simple appeal about the need to intensify our personal prayer, leaving the lady in her ignorance and allowing me to ‘identify’ with that ‘church’ that I do not really feel I represent… The sensation was one of great impotence, in the impossibility of being able to give exhaustive and truthful answers. A few minutes earlier I had read the exhortation of Pope Pius XI when, one hundred years ago in his Encyclical Ubi Arcano Dei he had exhorted Catholics about their duty to hasten the return of the social kingship of Christ. A sort of ‘moral duty,’ of a personal and collective commitment.
Is this commitment still valid? And how should we put it into practice if the “Church” is no longer the “Church”?
The letter Ubi Arcano Dei was the beginning of the institution of the Feast of the Kingship of Christ, which took place in 1925 precisely in order to avoid the mess that we have experienced in the recent years. In that encyclical, the Kingship of Christ was understood as the remedy to secularism and to all of those errors that – at a distance of one hundred years – have been generously welcomed by many prelates, bishops, cardinals, and even he who presents himself as the representative of Christ and who under this insignia has promoted the ruinous acceleration of the flock “deceptively” entrusted to him.
Francis is considered to be the pope, albeit an apostate, but is he the pope? Was he ever the pope?
When Pilate asked Jesus what truth was, despite having Truth Himself right in front of him, the gaze of Christ, the Judge of the world, penetrated the mediocrity of the weak man who stood before him. Pilate trembled for a moment, but the glamor of his personal pride prevailed. Christ the King returns today in the same form and looks the bishops and cardinals in the eye, those who do not recognize the Crown of Thorns that He has worn in their place, assuming the price of their betrayal, their pride, and their unworthy blindness.
I recall having read in the Diary of Saint Faustina Kowalska – the saint of Mercy – that one day Jesus appeared to her completely scourged, covered in blood and crowned with thorns: he looked her in the eyes and said to her “The bride must resemble Her Bridegroom.” The saint understood what was meant by that call to “nuptiality,” to sharing everything. Probably this is the form of recognition of the Kingship of Christ that our historical moment is demanding personally of every true Catholic.
Yes, it seems to me that this is the vocation of the “true Church” in our time: of that little flock which, meeting the gaze of Christ the King mistreated and disfigured by blasphemy and perversion, still has the courage to give a response of love, fidelity, and consistency of conscience that is unable to deny Him, because otherwise it would deny Christ the King just as did Pilate, Herod, and all the leaders of the people.
I do not hide from you that with these lines I wanted to ask for one of your essays, which are full of Christian hope for the little remnant that is bewildered because it is without a Shepherd, without the representative of Christ who ought to guard and defend the Church entrusted to him.
I have asked you some questions that many are asking with such sorrow in their hearts, and I am certain that the Holy Spirit will give you the answers that will rekindle expectation for the return of the triumph of the Kingdom of Christ in society, in every heart, and over the entire face of the earth!
“Pacificus vocabitur, et thronus eius erit firmissimus in perpetuum!”
– A cloistered nun
Archbishop Viganò’s reply
Reverend and dearest Sister,
I read the letter you sent me with keen interest and edification. Permit me to respond to as well as I can.
Your first question is as direct as it is disarming: “If the King of Kings and Lord of Lords were to return today in His glory, would he still recognize His Bride, the Church?” Of course He would recognize Her! But not in the sect that eclipses the See of Peter, rather in the many good souls, especially in the priests, men and women religious, and in many simple faithful souls, who, even if they do not have horns of light on their brow as Moses did (Ex 34:29), are still recognizable as living members of the Church of Christ. He would not find Her at Saint Peter’s, where worship has been offered to an unclean idol; nor at Santa Marta, where the artificial poverty and inflated humility of the Tenant are a monument to his immense ego; nor at the Synod on Synodality, where the fiction of democracy serves to complete the dismantling of the divine edifice of the Catholic Church and to impose scandalous ways of life; not in the dioceses and parishes in which the conciliar ideology has replaced the Catholic Faith and cancelled Tradition. The Lord, as Head of the Church, recognizes the pulsating and living members of His Mystical Body and those who are dead and rotting, having been snatched from Christ by heresy, lust, and pride, and who are now subject to Satan. So yes: the King of kings would recognize the pusillus grex, even if he had to look for it gathered around an altar in an attic, a cellar, or the middle of the woods.
You mention that the promise of the Non prævalebunt may resound “as a hope to cling to,” and that “the provocative tone of these questions summarizes the feeling of confusion of the few remaining faithful, faithful in searching for some reference to the Magisterium, a valid Sacrament, and coherence of life among the shepherds.”
Our Lord’s promise to St. Peter is provocative, in a certain sense, because it starts from two assumptions: the first is that the gates of hell will not prevail, which tells us nothing about the level of persecution that the Church will have to endure. The second, a logical consequence of the first, is that the Church will be persecuted but not defeated. For both, we are asked to make an act of Faith in the word of the Savior and in His omnipotence, along with an act of humble realism, acknowledging our weakness and the fact that we deserve the worst punishments, both among the “modernists” and also among the “traditionalists.”
You ask me how to put into practice the appeal of Pius XI for the restoration of the social Kingship of Christ, “if the ‘Church’ is no longer the ‘Church.’” Certainly, the visible church, to which the world gives the name of Catholic Church and of which it considers Bergoglio as Pope, is no longer Church, at least with regard to those cardinals, bishops, and priests who convincedly profess another doctrine and declare themselves to be adherents of the “conciliar church” in antithesis to the “preconciliar church.” But are you and I, and the many priests, religious and faithful, part of that church or of the Church of Christ? To what extent can we superimpose the Bergoglian church and the Catholic Church, accepting that they are superimposable in some aspect? The problem is that the conciliar revolution has torn the bond of identity between the Church of Christ and the Catholic hierarchy.
Before Vatican II it was unthinkable that a pope could have openly contradicted his predecessors in doctrinal or moral questions, because the hierarchy was very clear about its role and its moral responsibility in administering the power of the Holy Keys and the authority of the Vicar of Christ and the shepherds. The Council, beginning right with the anomalous definition it gave of itself and with the rupture with the past present in the elimination of the canons and anathemas, showed how it is possible, for anyone who does not have moral sense, to hold a sacred role in the Church even though unworthy in the three aspects that you have duly enumerated: “Magisterium, valid Sacrament, and coherence of the life of the Shepherds.” These shepherds, deviants in doctrine, morality, and liturgy, do not feel bound to the fact that they are vicars of Christ, and of thus being able to govern the Church only if their authority is exercised coherently with the purposes that legitimize it. This is why they abuse their own power, usurp an authority whose divine origin they deny, and humiliate the sacred institution which in some way guarantees the authority of those Shepherds.
This rupture, this violent tear, was consummated on the spiritual level at the moment in which the authority of the prelates was secularized, just like what happened in the civil sphere. Wherever authority ceases to be sacred, sanctioned from above, exercised in the place of He who combines in himself the spiritual authority of Supreme Pontiff and the temporal authority of King and Lord, it is there corrupted into tyranny, sold with corruption, and commits suicide in anarchy. You write: “Christ the King returns today in the same form and looks the bishops and cardinals in the eye, those who do not recognize the Crown of Thorns that He has worn in their place, assuming the price of their betrayal, their pride, and their unworthy blindness.” In those same features, dear sister, we must recognize the Holy Church. And as we were scandalized in seeing her Head humiliated and mocked, scourged and bleeding, wearing the robe, holding a reed, and crowned with thorns, so we are scandalized now in seeing in an analogous way the entire Church Militant laying prostrate, wounded, covered with spit, insulted, and mocked. But if the Head wanted to embrace the Sacrifice by humiliating Himself even unto death, death on a Cross, for what reason would we presume to merit a better end, since we are His members, if we really wish to reign with Him? On which throne is the Lamb seated, if not on the royal throne of the Cross? Regnavit a ligno Deus: this was the triumph of Christ; this will be the triumph of the Church, His Mystical Body. You rightly comment: “The Bride must resemble Her Bridegroom.” And you continue: “Yes, it seems to me that this is the vocation of the ‘true Church’ in our time: of that little flock which, meeting the gaze of Christ the King mistreated and disfigured by blasphemy and perversion, still has the courage to give a response of love, fidelity, and consistency of conscience that is unable to deny Him, because otherwise it would deny Christ the King just as did Pilate, Herod, and all the leaders of the people.”
Your letter, dearest sister, is for all of us an opportunity to reflect on the mystery of the passio Ecclesiæ that is so near to what is happening in these terrible times. And I conclude by recalling the “provocation” of the Non prævalebunt: just as the Savior knew the shadow of the tomb, so we must know it will happen to the Church, and perhaps it is already happening. But He will not allow his Holy One to know corruption (Ps 16), and He will make Her rise just as He Himself rose from the dead. In this sense, the words “The Bride must resemble the Bridegroom” acquire their full significance, showing us how only by following the Divine Bridegroom up the steep slope to Golgotha will we be able to merit to follow Him in glory to the right hand of the Father.
I exhort you to draw spiritual profit from these thoughts, as I impart to you and your dear fellow sisters my fullest and fatherly blessing.
+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop
4 November 2022
S.cti Caroli Borromæi, Pont. Conf.
|
|
|
|
| Archbishop Chaput Defends Traditionis Custodes |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-10-2022, 08:56 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Archbishop Chaput Defends Traditionis Custodes
gloria.tv [adapted] | November 9, 2022
Many Roman Rite Catholics reject many parts of [failed, ambiguous, and disasterous] Vatican II, lamented former Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput, 78, during the Eucharistic Symposium in Arlington Cathedral (October 22, see original link for video).
"You don’t have to scratch them very hard before they bleed anti-Council thoughts and sentiments,” he manipulated. Arlington diocese in particular experienced one of the world's worst crackdowns on the Roman Mass. Thirteen Masses were shut down.
According to Chaput, Francis published Traditionis Custodes out of fear that the numbers of “those anti-Council folks were [suddenly?] beginning to increase, especially among young seminarians and young priests, and he wanted to make sure that the direction the Church headed at the time of the Council would be followed into the future.”
He believes "personally" that Francis’ way was "harsh and imprudent," but he "understands" why Francis felt he had to act at the present time.
***
Posted in the comments section of the above post:
|
|
|
|
| Vermont Passes Constitutional Amendment Legalizing Killing Babies in Abortions Up to Birth |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-09-2022, 11:43 AM - Forum: Abortion
- No Replies
|
|
Vermont Passes Constitutional Amendment Legalizing Killing Babies in Abortions Up to Birth
LifeNews | Nov 9, 2022
Montpelier, Vermont
Aborting viable, late-term unborn babies for any reason is now a “right” in the Vermont Constitution.
On Tuesday, state voters approved Proposal 5, a pro-abortion constitutional amendment, on the ballot by a massive margin, with 72 percent in favor, the VT Digger reports. According to election results, 22 percent voted against the amendment and 6 percent did not vote.
Most expected the amendment to pass in the deeply Democratic state. Abortions already are legal for basically any reason up to birth in Vermont, but the amendment will stop the state legislature from enacting any limits in the future.
“We knew it was an uphill battle to actually be able to successfully share the truth of what the ramifications of this amendment would be,” said Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, who opposed the amendment. “I still believe that if Vermonters really understood the implications, they would not have supported it.”
Polls consistently show that a strong majority of Americans oppose late-term abortions, but the amendment did not make it clear to voters that it will allow late-term abortion on demand.
It states, “That an individual’s right to personal reproductive autonomy is central to the liberty and dignity to determine one’s own life course and shall not be denied or infringed unless justified by a compelling State interest achieved by the least restrictive means.”
Disturbingly, state Democrat leaders “roared and whooped” for joy late Tuesday after learning that Vermont will continue to allow abortions up to birth.
Here’s more from the report:
Quote:The amendment had the full-throated support of the Vermont Democratic Party and its most high-profile officeholders and candidates, who, like their national counterparts, sought to make abortion a top issue in this election. At the party’s election night party at Hula in Burlington, the room roared and whooped after party chair Anne Lezak announced the amendment’s passage minutes after 9 p.m.
“So many of you stepped up and knocked on doors and went to rallies and contributed and talked to your neighbors and made sure that people were not bamboozled by the ridiculous falsehoods we heard,” Lezak said. “And this just makes me very, very proud of all of us.”
The Vermont Right to Life Committee and state Catholic leaders spent months warning voters about how extreme the amendment will be, according to the Catholic News Agency.
This amendment “promises to enshrine unlimited, unregulated abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy in our state’s founding document” and “would permanently block any attempt to protect the unborn — even those who can survive outside the womb,” the Diocese of Burlington wrote in a bulletin published just prior to the vote.
But pro-abortion groups spent a lot of money to flood voters with advertisements promoting the amendment and received a lot of friendly news coverage. Those fighting to pass the amendment included the ACLU of Vermont, the League of Women Voters of Vermont, Alliance for a Better Vermont and Planned Parenthood Vermont Action Fund, according to VT Digger.
California and Michigan voters also passed pro-abortion amendments to their state constitutions Tuesday.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the infamous Roe v. Wade ruling in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health and returned the abortion issue to voters. Now, more than a dozen states are enforcing laws that protect unborn babies from abortion and more are fighting in court to do so. New research estimates up to 10,000 unborn babies already have been saved from abortion as a result.
|
|
|
|
| Catholic Church in England 'returns' relic of Catholic St. Chad to Anglican Cathedral |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-09-2022, 10:38 AM - Forum: General Commentary
- No Replies
|
|
Saint’s relic returns to cathedral 500 years on
![[Image: 943560d38a104d5025538cda3e32c91cb033a3cb.jpg]](https://archive.ph/J8Slo/943560d38a104d5025538cda3e32c91cb033a3cb.jpg)
The Dean of Lichfield at the new shrine of St Chad, which contains a relic of the monk saved from Henry VIII’s men and passed from priest to priest for centuries
November 07 2022 The Times
Almost 500 years after the Reformation, a shrine to St Chad has been rebuilt in [the now-Anglican] Lichfield Cathedral thanks to a gift of a relic by the Catholic Church.
The donation, a piece of bone belonging to the seventh-century Anglo-Saxon monk, is to be returned to the Staffordshire cathedral, where the saint’s remains lay for almost 800 years. The relic was disturbed in the 16th century when Henry VIII began plundering the Church’s wealth.
It is hoped that the shrine, to be opened to mark the 1,350th anniversary of Chad’s death, will bring pilgrims to pray at the [Anglican] cathedral.
Chad was born in Northumbria about 634 and died in Lichfield in 672. He was the abbot of several monasteries and served as a bishop in Northumbria and Mercia. The Venerable Bede, an early historian, wrote extensively about him ... .
On his death, he was buried in Lichfield. His remains were moved in 700 to the site where Lichfield Cathedral now stands, with his body kept in a “little wooden house”, according to Bede.
The Dean of Lichfield, the Very Rev Adrian Dorber, said that in the Middle Ages his remains were placed in “a gorgeous mediaeval tomb chest” as part of a lavish new shrine.
When Henry VIII’s men came in 1538, Arthur Dudley, a canon, rescued the saint’s bones. They were passed from priest to priest for centuries.
About 200 years ago, Chad’s remains were divided between a site in France and St Chad’s Cathedral, a Catholic basilica in Birmingham. Relics are venerated more commonly in the Catholic tradition than in Anglican churches.
The relic has been given to Lichfield Cathedral as a gift from the Catholic Archdiocese of Birmingham as “a token of the growing friendship and quest for Christian unity between churches that have been divided since the 16th century”.
It will be brought to Lichfield today by Monsignor Timothy Menezes, the Dean of St Chad’s Cathedral. It will be taken in a silver reliquary to the Church of St Chad, a parish church in Lichfield.
The small fragment of bone can be seen through a glass panel in the cross-shaped reliquary.
It will then be moved to Lichfield Cathedral and installed tomorrow in the Lady Chapel in a new shrine.
Dorber said: “The cathedral was built as a pilgrimage church, a shrine church. In 1972, a memorial stone was placed where the shrine was [and] they commissioned a very beautiful icon of Chad in the 1980s which was placed where we thought the shrine was and it very quickly became a natural place for prayer and veneration.
“Given that the bones were moved from that very place, people began to think: ‘Would it not be nice or proper for some of [his remains] to be repatriated to Lichfield as part of our historical continuity?’ And there’s the fact that we’ve got a patron saint who was perhaps one of the most approachable, humble and delightful people in the whole communion of saints, according to the Venerable Bede.”
|
|
|
|
| Dutch bishop leaves ‘vile’ Synod on Synodality: ‘The Holy Spirit has absolutely nothing to do with i |
|
Posted by: Stone - 11-09-2022, 08:05 AM - Forum: Vatican II and the Fruits of Modernism
- No Replies
|
|
Surprise, surprise...
Dutch bishop leaves ‘vile’ Synod on Synodality: ‘The Holy Spirit has absolutely nothing to do with it’
'Among the protagonists of this process are to me a little too many defenders of gay marriage, folks who don't really think abortion is a problem
and never really show themselves defenders of the Church's rich creed, wanting above all to be liked by their secular surroundings.'
![[Image: Bishop-Robert-Mutsaerts-4-810x500.jpg]](https://www.lifesitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Bishop-Robert-Mutsaerts-4-810x500.jpg)
Bishop Robert Mutsaerts
Rorate Caeli
Nov 8, 2022
(LifeSiteNews) – Bishop Robert Mutsaerts, the auxiliary bishop of the Diocese of ’s-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands, has published a statement on his blog, commenting on the Synod on Synodality, especially its October 27 new working document “For a synodal Church: communio, participatio, mission,” which is calling for a female diaconate and uses the language of the LGBT agenda. He announced that he has left the synodal process.
In his statement (see full translation below, as kindly provided to LifeSite by Fr. Cor Mennen), Bishop Mutsaerts called this synodal process “vile.”
He states “God is out of the picture in this vile synodal process,” adding that “the Holy Spirit has absolutely nothing to do with it.” He went on to say:
Quote:Among the protagonists of this process are to me a few too many defenders of gay marriage, folks who don’t really think abortion is a problem and never really show themselves defenders of the Church’s rich creed, wanting above all to be liked by their secular surroundings.
Bishop Mutsaerts is not the only one to reject the happenings surrounding this synodal process that is to last until 2024. Cardinal Gerhard Müller called it a “hostile takeover of the Church of Jesus Christ” and invited Catholics to resist, comparing the current Church crisis with that of the 4th-century Arian crisis. He even said that, in light of the spreading of the LGBT agenda in the Church, “one does not have to obey an obviously heretical bishop just for reasons of formal fidelity.” Blind obedience such as this, he continued, “would be cadaveric obedience, which not only contradicts reason but also faith.”
Bishop Athanasius Schneider, auxiliary bishop of Astana, Kazakhstan, recently agreed with the German cardinal, pointing out that the process itself is steered and influenced by a certain agenda, calling it “manipulation” by churchmen “who push their own ideological agenda.”
Both Cardinal Mario Grech and Cardinal Jean-Claude Hollerich, who have been called by Pope Francis to play leading roles in this synodal process, are promoters of the LGBT agenda – for example the approval of homosexuality – within the Catholic Church.
In response to these heterodox positions that are being aired and promoted during the synodal process, Bishop Mutsaerts remarks: “How unpastoral, how unloving. People want sincere answers. They don’t want to go home with more questions. You’re keeping people away from salvation.”
“I have since dropped out of the synodal process,” he concluded.
RELATED: Swiss bishop condemns the Synod on Synodality as a ‘marketing campaign’ for heresy
Please see here Bishop Robert Mutsaerts’ statement on the Synod of Synodality:
Synodal process as an instrument to change the Church?
On Thursday, Oct. 27, the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops in Rome presented the working document for the Continental Phase of the Synod “For a synodal Church: communio, participatio, mission”. This took place at a press conference chaired by Cardinal Grech held at the Holy See press center in Rome. The document was entitled “Increase the space in your tent” (Isaiah 54:2). Based on all the final documents of the meetings in the various continents, the Secretariat of the Synod of Bishops then compiles the Instrumentum Laboris, the working document for the 2023 and 2024 Synod meetings.
The mantra of the process is: listen. To whom? To everyone. The working document contains a goodly number of quotes. “These quotations were chosen because they express in a particularly powerful, beautiful or precise way feelings that are expressed more generally in many reports. The synodal experience can be read as an avenue of recognition for those who do not feel adequately recognized in the Church.” The contours of the synodal process are becoming increasingly clear. It provides a megaphone for non-Church views. The document indicates what the synodal path should ultimately lead to: “This means a Church that learns by listening how to renew its evangelizing mission in light of the signs of the times, in order to continue to offer humanity a way of being and living in which all can feel included as protagonists.”
Who are those who feel excluded? Par. 39: “Among those who call for a more meaningful dialogue and a more welcoming space, we also find those who, for various reasons, feel a tension between belonging to the Church and their own loving relationships, such as: remarried divorced people, single parents, people living in polygamous marriages, LGBTQ people, etc.” In short, those who do not agree with the teachings of the Catholic Church. What the working document seems to suggest is that we compile a list of complaints and then debate them. The mission of the Church is a different one. Which is not: examine all opinions and then let’s come to an agreement. Jesus commanded us something else: proclaim the truth; it is the truth that will make you free. Particularly curious is the comment that the Church pays no attention to polygamy. For that matter, the document does not pay any attention to traditionalists. Those also feel excluded. Indeed, they are literally so by Pope Francis (Traditionis custodes). Apparently, there is no empathy for this group.
To date, the synodal process is more like a sociological experiment and has little to do with the Holy Spirit supposedly sounding through all. That could almost be called blasphemous. What is becoming increasingly clear is that the synodal process is going to be used to change a number of Church positions, with the Holy Spirit then also being thrown into the fray as an advocate, even though the Holy Spirit has really breathed something counterintuitive throughout the centuries. Above all, what can be gleaned from the listening sessions is an evaporated faith, no longer practiced, and not accepting the Church’s positions. People complain that the Church does not accept their views. This is not entirely true, by the way. The Flemish and German bishops go a long way with them, which is actually much more tragic. They no longer want to call sin, sin. Hence conversion and repentance are no longer discussed.
Predictable is the call for the admission of women to the priesthood: “the active role of women in the governing structures of church bodies, the possibility for women with adequate training to preach in parishes, and a female diaconate and priesthood.” A futile exercise given that the last three pontificates have explicitly stated that this is an impossibility. In politics, everything is open to discussion and debate. In the Church it is not. We have such a thing as Church doctrine that is not subject to time and place. But the working document really seems to question everything. For example, in par. 60 we read, “The call to the conversion of ecclesial culture, for the salvation of the world, is concretely linked to the possibility of establishing a new culture, with new practices and structures.” And then this: “The bishops are asked to find appropriate ways to carry out their task of validating and approving the final document and ensuring that it is the fruit of an authentic synodal journey, respectful of the process that has taken place and faithful to the different voices of the People of God in each continent.” Apparently, the office of bishop is reduced to simply implementing what is ultimately the greatest common denominator as the outcome of a raffle of opinions. The final closing stage of the synodal process cannot but turn out to be a Babel-like confusion. Predictably, all those who do not get it their way will say they are being excluded. In advance, this is a recipe for disaster. If everyone gets their way – which is not actually possible – the disaster is complete. Then the Church will have denied itself and squandered its identity.
At the presentation of the working document, Cardinal Grech was going much too far in stating that the Church’s task is to act as an amplifier of every sound coming from within the Church, even if it is contrary to what the Church has always proclaimed. That was once different. At the time of the Counter Reformation, the Church was crystal-clear about what its views were. You convince people by standing for the Catholic faith with reasoned and full conviction. You convince no one by merely listening and leaving it at that. The annoying thing is that the bishops were instructed to listen and then to document what was said. These reports were then collected at the Church province level and then forwarded to Rome. Reports that included the necessary heresies with the signature of the bishops’ conference. We could not do otherwise, but I am by no means happy about it. Several cardinals, by the way, also aired this in Rome, asking once again what synodality actually is. There was no clear answer.
Jesus took a different approach. He listened to the two disappointed disciples who were on their way to Emmaus. But at one point He took the floor and made it clear to them that they were going astray. That led them to turn around and return to Jerusalem. If we don’t turn around we end up in Emmaus and are even further from home than we already are.
One thing is clear to me. God is out of the picture in this vile synodal process. The Holy Spirit has absolutely nothing to do with it. Among the protagonists of this process are to me a few too many defenders of gay marriage, folks who don’t really think abortion is a problem and never really show themselves defenders of the Church’s rich creed, wanting above all to be liked by their secular surroundings. How unpastoral, how unloving. People want sincere answers. They don’t want to go home with more questions. You’re keeping people away from salvation. I have since dropped out of the synodal process.
+Rob Mutsaerts
Translation kindly provided by Father Cor Mennen
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wga.hu%2Fart%2Fc%2Fc...ipo=images]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wga.hu%2Fart%2Fc%2Fcarreno%2Fmass_mat.jpg&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=133f0ce7cdfbb66b63e22cb8d331264c1463ac511c1515f2e3438d722d233bba&ipo=images)
![[Image: kbc6wrgc3jlhicn8yf7mjqxygjksioc6zc2vc44....ormat=webp]](https://assistant.gloria.tv/1z94gyaCTBei3D8MsGrYwjE6j/kbc6wrgc3jlhicn8yf7mjqxygjksioc6zc2vc44.webp?format=webp)
