Quote:“…It is important to know that in Argentina, Catholic religious congregations can only exercise their apostolate within an administrative and juridical framework conditioned by their inscription in the register of the Institutes of Consecrated Life, on the [conciliar church’s] ecclesiastical authority’s recommendation.”

Quote:“…The District Superior [Fr. Christian Bouchacourt] therefore went to him [Ed. Pope Francis when he was a Cardinal of Buenos Aires Argentina at that time] to present the problem: there [would have been] an easy solution, and that would be to declare ourselves an independent church (before Civil Law), but we did not want to do it because we are Catholic.”

Quote:6) If you access the official website of the Ministry of Religious Affairs of Argentina there is a register of Recognized religions in the country (Protestants, Buddhists, Africanists, etc.) and a Register of Institutes of Consecrated Life in the terms of Law 24483. There is a unique register for the Catholic Church and forms (with instructions) for processing STIs are on the web.

Quote:“…We continue working so that full communion and juridical framing of the Society within the Catholic Church may be achieved.”

Quote:Can. 298  §2.  The Christian faithful are to join especially those associations which competent ecclesiastical authority has erected, praised, or commended.

• The old-SSPX sought the integrity of Doctrine; no compromise.  Hence, the battles.
  
• The old-SSPX sought the Faith over the Mass.  “Lex orandi, lex credendi”.  The Law of Prayer is the Law of belief.  The other traditional groups that fell had reversed the order and put the Mass over the Faith.
  
• The old-SSPX sought conciliar/modernist Rome to convert back to Tradition first; before a practical deal.
  
• The old-SSPX placed conditions with conciliar/modernist Rome so as not to be a part of their ecumenical structure; rather, for conciliar Rome to adhere and obey to the perennial Church that binds them to their office and Baptism.  “I will place the discussion at the DOCTRINAL LEVEL: ‘Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you?  Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo XIII, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with these Popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti-Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT THE DOCTRINE OF YOUR PREDECESSORS, IT IS USELESS TO TALK!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter, Nov-Dec 1988).”  http://www.therecusant.com/dont-play-with-the-faith
  
• Etc…
  

• In the n-SSPX we have heard how they find itself [falsely] to be irregular with the conciliar Church and with an impediment in Canon Law; whereby the new-SSPX  has lost its orientation and its identity in this crisis than what Archbishop Lefebvre maintained that they are not “irregular”, the conciliar church is.  ABL thus stayed in a position to work for the Supreme Law of the Church under Her protections “prae oculis habita salute animarum, quae in Ecclesia suprema semper lex esse debet.”  “The salvation of souls is the supreme law of the Church”.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks therefore the need to have “integrity” of their institution to be regularized with a canonical status so as the people in the Novus Ordo structure can see that they are a good guys; a lowering of the standard to please men.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks the Mass over the Faith like the FSSP by adopting practical concerns over the Doctrinal concerns.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks to integrate themselves in order to convert the Romans from the inside.  However, ABL says, “The inferiors are not above the superiors”; it is a failed attempt before it begins.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks, as Bishop Fellay declared at Lille, France, on 7 May 2013, “That one could not ask Roman authorities to condemn the Council and the New Mass, because one cannot ask authorities to lose face.”
  
• The new-SSPX, as Fr. Pfluger says, needs to be reconciled sooner rather than later because it will take a long time; possibly decades if the SSPX does not do something with Rome at this time.  The new-SSPX further seeks this attachment with conciliar Rome because, as Fr. Pfluger also said in a public conference in Hattersheim, Germany, that under the current circumstances, the Fraternity’s superior does not “believe it is possible to turn down the Pope’s proposal.” He said that straying from the Pope’s wishes would lead to Sedevacantism.  [11]
  
• The new-SSPX said through Fr. Jean-Michel Gleize, professor of theology in Ecône, “the institution of the conciliar church IS the Catholic Church.”  The consequences follow with conciliarism over Catholicism.
  
• The new-SSPX  seeks unity and obedience before the Faith.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks obedience around its Superior General as a first cause of unity; not the Faith, per Fr. Rostand in his Post falls Idaho conference; and, he says also:
  
• The new-SSPX ’s direction, “is a matter of prudence; not a matter of doctrine.”  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pnYYTzTQrc
  
• The new-SSPX  is now intolerant of any of its priests who still speak of the old-SSPX
  
• The new-SSPX metes punishment and banishment for those who get in its way to be institutionally reconciled with conciliar Rome.
  
• The new-SSPX seeks to be understood in confusion and ambiguities, like conciliar Rome, rather than to speak straight forward and upright like its founder.
  
• Etc…
  

• The [False] lifting of the Latin mass; while declaring the Novus Ordo mass as the only Ordinary Mass, July 2007. [13]
  
  
• Lifting the [false] excommunications from 4 of the 6 bishops, Jan. 2009. [14]
  

• Provided a deception also with the SSPX Doctrinal Commission with modernist Rome – ending in nothing, 2009-2011. [15]
  
• Emergency meeting for all SSPX heads at the SSPX district house Albano Italy addressing the Vatican’s doctrinal Preamble and formalities toward the acceptance with modernist Rome, (This was the special meeting Bp. Williamson was not invited to attend as a SSPX Bishop), Oct. 2011.  [16]
  
• The 2012 Great Reveal.  Two leaked letters: one from the three SSPX Bishops addressing neo-Menzingen’s General Council mindset and pre-emptive deal with Rome,  April 7, 2012 [17]  ; and the General Council’s scandalous reply, April, 14, 2012.  [18]  (Followed over the years by many more leaked internal letters, including from modernist Rome, and many public News Interviews and conferences.)
  
• The next day, Bishop Fellay representing the whole of the SSPX publicly compromised on Doctrine and Constitution sending to modern-Rome their Doctrinal Declaration, April 15, 2012 [19]  proclaiming there is an agreement with the beliefs of the conciliarists; and unity is above Doctrine.
  
• B. Fellay depressed his plan was reveal, sent a June 2012 letter to Pope Benedict XVI, saying he will overcome the difficulties…give him some more time to effect the new changes.  [20]
  
• 2012 SSPX General Chapter Six-Conditions publicly accepts the principle and practice of Vatican II; thereby transferring the treasures of “Tradition” to be under modernist-Rome.  (Here too, Bp. Williamson was not invited to attend as a SSPX bishop), July 2012 [21]
  
• Bp. Fellay expelled his opposition ousting Bp. Williamson Oct 2012 [22], and consecutively a large number of SSPX priests and friend priests, along to disassociate from the Dominicans of Avrille France and the Benedictines in Brazil. 
  
• By 2014, together over 100 priests expelled.  The new-SSPX continued to remain steadfast in their course with modernist Rome…
  

• * SSPX received Canonical Jurisdiction of Association of Diocesan Right, April 2015.[23]
  
• Followed by, Bp. Fellay received as a judge at the Rota Romana, the highest appellate tribunal of the Church, thus regularizing his broad authority, and provides for first-instance international Canonical jurisdiction within the whole of the new-SSPX, announced in May 2015.  [24]
  
• Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for CONFESSIONS in Dec. 2015.  [25]
  
• Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for ORDINATIONS in June 2016.  [26]
  
• Extended In Jure, a universal jurisdiction for MARRIAGES in March 2017.  [27]
  

 Cardinal Pietro Parolin, will lead proceedings in a papal conclave if it happens before he turns 80 in 2035.



Cardinal Re (L) & Cardinal Parolin ®
Mario Tama/ Adam Berry/Getty Images

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re incenses Pope Benedict XVI’s coffin, Jan 2023.

Quote:The voting process is carried out in three phases. The first phase, which can be called the pre-scrutiny, comprises:

1) the preparation and distribution of the ballot papers by the Masters of Ceremonies, who give at least two or three to each Cardinal elector;

2) the drawing by lot, from among all the Cardinal electors, of three Scrutineers, of three persons charged with collecting the votes of the sick, called for the sake of brevity Infirmarii, and of three Revisers; this drawing is carried out in public by the junior Cardinal Deacon, who draws out nine names, one after another, of those who shall carry out these tasks;

3) if, in the drawing of lots for the Scrutineers, Infirmarii and Revisers, there should come out the names of Cardinal electors who because of infirmity or other reasons are unable to carry out these tasks, the names of others who are not impeded are to be drawn in their place. The first three drawn will act as Scrutineers, the second three as Infirmarii and the last three as Revisers.

Pope Francis and then-new Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, attend a mass with newly appointed cardinals at St Peter’s Basilica on February 23, 2014 in Vatican City, Vatican.

• Archbishop Lefebvre’s mission—why the SSPX was founded and what it stood for.
  
• The warning signs of betrayal—how the seeds of compromise were planted years before 2012.
  
• The GREC conspiracy—a secretive effort to bring SSPX under Vatican II’s control.
  
• The shift in doctrine—how SSPX leadership prepared its priests and faithful for submission.
  

So many errors of Pope Francis are rooted in Vatican II.
From the very liberal America Magazine, The Jesuit Review:

Vatican II called for a common date for Easter in the East and West. Will it ever happen?



Pope Francis meets with Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople in the library of the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican Sept. 30, 2023, ahead of an ecumenical prayer vigil for the Synod of Bishops in St. Peter's Square. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)

How Pope Pius XI defended the history of Genesis, special creation of St. Adam
Before becoming Pope Pius XI, Fr. Achille Ratti wrote a theological work supporting Adam’s special creation – an argument he upheld throughout his life, countering growing scientific and theological shifts toward evolution.

Quote:Our Holy Father, Pope Pius XI, in private audiences, from time to time recalled with pleasure this work of his (“which cost him no little labor”), and reconfirmed his conclusions.[2]

Quote:Great theologians of the early centuries of the Christian era, like Saint Augustine, did not read Genesis as history. It’s only in the last hundred years, mostly in the United States, that you have people coming up with a radically different view.

Quote:What is to be held of the first origin of man as regards the body, according to faith and sound theology?

The answer is this: It is clear from divine revelation that the first parents, not only regarding the soul, but also regarding the body, were formed by God himself, not by simple concurrence, but by direct and immediate action, although not creative.

Quote:Ratti distinguishes the formation of the body as “not creative” in the strict sense that the body was not called into being out of nothing like the soul was, but rather was formed from the material of mud and the rib. St. Thomas Aquinas defines creation in the unequivocal sense as the original emanation of each thing into being from nothing:

Quote:“‘To create is to make something from nothing’… we must consider not only the emanation of a particular being from a particular agent, but also the emanation of all being from the universal cause, which is God; and this emanation we designate by the name of creation … it is impossible that any being should be presupposed before this emanation. For nothing is the same as no being. Therefore as the generation of a man is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘not-man,’ so creation, which is the emanation of all being, is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘nothing.’[3]

However, per Aquinas, the whole man, as a composite of both body and soul, can be said to have been created out of “not-man” in that immediate and simultaneous action, as he was brought from a state of non-being into being in all of his principles:

“Creation does not mean the building up of a composite thing from pre-existing principles; but it means that the ‘composite’ is created so that it is brought into being at the same time with all its principles … for creation is the production of the whole being, and not only matter.”[4]

Quote:In the first place, then, we must show the way to find out whether a phrase is literal or figurative. And the way is certainly as follows: Whatever there is in the Word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be referred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative.[5]

Quote:Is the formation of the body from mud impossible to reconcile with purity of life or sound doctrine? Certainly not. Pope Leo XIII likewise cites “the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine – not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires…[6] Does reason or necessity compel us to believe that an all-powerful God could not create a body from mud? Certainly not! Therefore, we ought to take the words literally.

Quote:It remains to say a few things about the antiquity of human origin. Holy Scripture nowhere expressly presents a complete chronology which extends to the creation of Adam; but what it sparsely reports presents no little difficulty, especially if one considers the discrepancies between the Hebrew text and the Septuagint and Samaritan versions; but the Vulgate version follows the Hebrew text.

Even greater and far more numerous discrepancies occur among the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers. Cardinal Meignan counts one hundred and fifty different calculations, none of which can be called reprobate; in fact, Des Vignoles collected more than two hundred different indications of the time from Adam to Christ, the minimum of which he counts as 3,483 years, the maximum as 6,984. It is true that in all the aforesaid calculations, a common foundation was sought in the Holy Scriptures themselves. For, after certain minor difficulties, it was seen that the following numbers of years could be gathered from inspired books.

From Adam to Noah’s flood:

according to the Vulgate and Hebrew text… 1,656

according to the Samaritan text… … … … 1,306

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 2,242

From Noah’s flood to Abraham’s birth:

according to the Vulgate… … … … …292 or 293

according to the Samaritan text… … … … … 942

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 1,183

From Abraham to Christ’s birth:

with hardly a few decades of difference… 2,190

Having said this, it follows that neither Holy Scripture nor Tradition contains a chronology of the human race that is at least completely defined. Here again, it is certainly possible to follow any of the chronologies received here and there in the Church.

Quote:Though they posited various dates for Christ’s birth, all the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers who mentioned the subject taught a recent creation as a matter of faith in Scripture, in opposition to the old-earth mythologies of the pagans (not, as some have said, simply due to their ancient scientific conceptions). The Church teaches:

“In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. [7]

Even modernist bible scholar M.J. Lagrange had to admit the substantial sensus fidelium on the young earth within the Church over the centuries, regardless of the differing proposed dates. Lagrange found himself arguing that the ancient Fathers had been right to interpret Genesis 1-11 as teaching a young chronology, because the text indeed does teach it, even though it is not true, and that God intentionally used their errant belief in the historicity Genesis 1-11 to bring them to spiritual truths, as they would not have otherwise been able to grasp them if he had explained them at that time in a manner fitting with what we now “know” through science.

This is heresy, because we are bound to hold that whatever Scripture teaches is inerrant, and that such inerrancy extends not just to spiritual truths but also to statements touching history and the natural world[8]. However, in defending this position Lagrange aptly exposed the ridiculous inconsistency of those “concordists” who try to defend one tenet of Scripture (i.e., the universal flood) by denying that another tenet (i.e., the young chronology) was ever upheld by the Church:

“Then came the turn of the philologists. It seemed to them that there would never have been time enough for the formation of languages had the Deluge swallowed up all mankind … but, in point of fact, the arguments of the scientists were only conclusive if biblical chronology were upheld…And so, when the universality of the Deluge was defended by this [concordist] school, they held that biblical chronology was non-existent. They went so far as to foster the delusion that Catholic opinion had never admitted a chronology, because it did not agree as to its limits: as though the differences of opinion, reached as the result of so much painful effort, did not suppose a common groundwork known to all.“[9] (emphasis added)

By the very admission of this preeminent modernist, to believe that the tradition of the Church on the biblical chronology was either non-existent, insubstantial, or due to mistaken exegesis, is delusional, but to accept an old universe is to believe that Scripture teaches falsehood. Therefore, the best option for a pious Catholic is to believe in the young universe – “young” only in relation to the uniformitarian extrapolations of naturalists, and not in relation to any objective chronology of the world.

The Catacombs would like to recommend a new traditional Catholic Resistance website, The Catholic Trumpet!

Contact: thecatholictrumpet@gmail.com

Quote:Who We Are

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, your unwavering source for defending Catholic tradition against the modernist compromises within the SSPX, the Fake "Resistance" and beyond. Our mission is to expose the gradual erosion of the true Faith since Vatican II, documenting every betrayal and deviation from the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. We provide meticulously sourced content from trusted traditional Catholic websites, offering clear warnings for any sources that do not fully align with a true Catholic uncompromising stance.

-The ☩ Trumpet

Quote:Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com

September 2, 2024

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, the uncompromising voice in the defense of Catholic tradition and truth. This platform is dedicated to exposing the modernist compromises and deviations within the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and other similar entities, calling all faithful Catholics to rally against the errors that have infiltrated the Church since Vatican II.

At TheCatholicTrumpet.com, we blow the trumpet on the gradual erosion of the true Faith through false accords, compromises, and the adoption of modernist practices that undermine the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Here, we document and analyze every instance of betrayal, compromise, and contradiction that has taken place within the SSPX, standing firm in the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre's unwavering dedication to the pre-Vatican II Church.

This website is not just a repository of information; it is a clarion call to all traditional Catholics to remain vigilant and steadfast. We provide a wealth of resources, including meticulously sourced documents, critical analyses, and insights into the ongoing battle for the soul of the Church. From the errors propagated by the New Mass to the subtle compromises made in dialogue with modernist Rome, TheCatholicTrumpet.com is your go-to source for the truth.

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to dedicated outlets like TheRecusant.org and TheCatacombs.org, whose hard research and comprehensive sourcing have laid the groundwork for our mission. While we have no official association with these outlets, we are fans of their work and aim to amplify their efforts by providing succinct snippets from their long publications, helping to illuminate the path for those seeking clarity amidst the confusion.

Join us in our mission to restore the true Catholic Faith and resist the tide of modernism. Together, by the grace of Our Lady, we will reclaim the Church and see the reign of Christ the King restored.


-The ☩ Trumpet