Sunday, November 9, 2014


The Doctrine of the Church Tells Us ,Communion on the Tongue Is an Apostolic Tradition Statements from Popes, Saints & Church Councils St. Sixtus I (circa 115): “The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord.” St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): “The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in times of persecution.” St. Basil the Great considered Communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault. The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue receiving Holy Communion by hand. This was confirmed by the Synod of Toledo. The Synod of Rouen (650): Condemned Communion in the hand to halt widespread abuses that occurred from this practice, and as a safeguard against sacrilege. 6th Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople (680-681): Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening transgressors with excommunication. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225- 1274): “Out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.” (Summa Theologica, Part III, Q. 82, Art. 3, Rep. Obj. 8.) The Council of Trent (1545- 1565): “The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.” Pope Paul VI (1963-1978): “This method [on the tongue] must be retained.” (Memoriale Domini) Pope John Paul II: “To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained.” (Dominicae Cenae, 11)

Thursday, October 23, 2014

Healthcare Lies exposed

Now you will learn what the Obama-care LIES are going to do to you and your family: Say good-bye to your mom and dad if they are on Medicare, because the Death Panels are real, another LIE Obama said to you, and the Democratic Senate/House pushed through, not to mention Benghazi, Fast and Furious, Ebola......etc

Sunday, September 28, 2014


THE GREAT APOSTASY BEING COMMITTED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH The receiving of communion in the hand, which everyone believes is accepted in the catholic church is actually an APOSTASY. No Pope has the right to change the Doctrine of the Church! Autumn 2012 45 The Fatima Crusader St. Sixtus I (circa 115): “The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord.” St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): “The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in times of persecution.” St. Basil the Great considered Communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault. The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue receiving Holy Communion by hand. This was confirmed by the Synod of Toledo. The Synod of Rouen (650): Condemned Communion in the hand to halt widespread abuses that occurred from this practice, and as a safeguard against sacrilege. 6th Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople (680-681): Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening transgressors with excommunication. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225- 1274): “Out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.” (Summa Theologica, Part III, Q. 82, Art. 3, Rep. Obj. 8.) The Council of Trent (1545- 1565): “The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.” Pope Paul VI (1963-1978): “This method [on the tongue] must be retained.” (Memoriale Domini) Pope John Paul II: “To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained.” (Dominicae Cenae, 11) | The Doctrine of the Church Tells Us . . . Communion on the Tongue Is an Apostolic Tradition Statements from Popes, Saints & Church Councils

Tuesday, July 15, 2014


What St Faustina wrote in her Diary (This is ETERNITY WE WILL BE DEALING WITH, ITS YOU CHOICE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU AFTER THIS SHORT LIFE IS OVER. THINK ABOUT THIS) Visions of Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven according to St. Faustina The following passages are taken from the Diary of St. Faustina and they refer to her visions of Hell, Purgatory and Heaven. Very interesting. "...I saw two roads. One was broad, covered with sand and flowers, full of joy, music and all sorts of pleasures. People walked along it, dancing and enjoying themselves. They reached the end without realizing it. And at the end of the road there was a horrible precipice; that is, the abyss of hell. The souls fell blindly into it; as they walked, so they fell. And their number was so great that it was impossible to count them. And I saw the other road, or rather, a path, for it was narrow and strewn with thorns and rocks; and the people who walked along it had tears in their eyes, and all kinds of suffering befell them. Some fell down upon the rocks, but stood up immediately and went on. At the end of the road there was a magnificent garden filled with all sorts of happiness and all these souls entered there. At the very first instant they forgot all their sufferings" (Diary 153). " Today, I was led by an Angel to the chasms of hell. It is a place of great torture; how awesomely large and extensive it is! The kinds of tortures I saw: the first torture that constitutes hell is the loss of God; the second is perpetual remorse of conscience; the third is that one’s condition will never change; the fourth is the fire that will penetrate the soul without destroying it, a terrible suffering, since it is a purely spiritual fire, lit by God’s anger; the fifth torture is conditional darkness and a terrible suffocating smell, and despite the darkness, the devils and the souls of the damned see each other and all the evil, both of others and their own; the sixth torture is the constant company of satan, the seventh torture is horrible despair, hatred of God, vile words, curses and blasphemies. These are the tortures suffered by all the damned together, but that is not the end of the sufferings. There are special tortures destined for particular souls. These are the torments of the senses. Each soul undergoes terrible and indescribable sufferings, related to the manner in which it has sinned. There are caverns and pits of torture where one form of agony differs from another. I would have died at the very sight of these tortures if the omnipotence of God had not supported me. Let the sinner know that he will be tortured throughout all eternity, in those senses which he made use of to sin. I am writing this at the command of God, so that no soul may find an excuse by saying there is no hell, or that nobody has ever been there, and so no one can say what it is like. I, sister Faustina, by the order of God, have visited the abysses of hell so that I might tell souls about it and testify to its existence. I cannot speak about it now; but I have received a command from God to leave it in writing. The devils were full of hatred for me, but they had to obey me at the command of God. What I have written is but a pale shadow of the things I saw. But I noticed one thing: that most of the souls there are those who disbelieved that there is a hell. When I came to, I could hardly recover from the fright. How terribly souls suffer there! Consequently, I pray even more fervently for the conversion of sinners. I incessantly plead God’s mercy upon them. O my Jesus, I would rather be in agony until the end of the world, amidst the greatest sufferings, then offend You by the least sin. (Diary 741).

Monday, June 30, 2014


I am asking for all of you Catholics out there to pray for our Church and its leaders. We are going into a very Dark and destructive period in our Catholic Church, as our leaders are leading the flock astray. Since Vatican II Council, our leaders have falsely been leading the flock into Apostasy, slowly eroding the Reverence to the Mass,and the sanctity of our Church. Do you realize that in order to have Communion in the hand, permission must be granted by the Vatican? Do you realize that it is not necessary for a priest or a parish to receive permission from the Bishop to have the Latin Mass? Do you realize that 55% of Catholics voted for the Democratic candidate and allowed the erosion ,and the attack by Barack Obama on our religious beliefs? AND EACH ONE OF YOU CATHOLICS WILL HAVE TO ANSWER FOR WHAT IS DONE BY THIS ANTI-CATHOLIC PRESIDENT AND HIS STAFF? He and his Liberal/Socialistic staff have shown themselves to be the biggest LIARS we have ever had in the White House? That you are guilty of all that he does to destroy our Country, as you have empowered him to be able to be able to enslave the American People? And yet you will say "I DIDN'T VOTE FOR HIM TO DO THAT". Yes you did, just as much as giving some one a loaded gun, and they kill someone with it. He has attacked our Catholic Church, and yet the Cardinal invited him to Dinner. What sort of signal does that send to the whole Catholic Church? Just the same as you telling your children "don't smoke", and they see you walking around smoking. YOU HAD BETTER OPEN YOU EYES, AND BEGIN PRAYING FOR OUR CATHOLIC CHURCH AS APOSTASY HAS TAKEN HOLD OF THE VATICAN, AND FILTERED DOWN THROUGH THE CARDINAL'S.BISHOP'S, PASTOR'S, AND PRIEST'S. Look at how far our church has diminished since Vatican II Council. And don't believe that you will escape the guilt of millions upon millions of unborn children through ABORTIONS. Almighty GOD, Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit love children more than any others, how do you think Almighty GOD feels about the MURDER, of these unborn? It is up to you to be Militantly aggressive in demanding our church to return to the faith as taught by St. Peter and the Apostles. GO HAVE MERCY UPON US, AND WHAT HAS BECOME OF OUR CATHOLIC FAITH.

Tuesday, June 10, 2014


The Smoking Gun vort-2014-06-09 If you currently receive Holy Communion in the hand, you need to cease this practice. It began in the 1960’s as an abuse by bishops and priests in Holland, Belgium and parts of Germany and France. After they just started the practice on their own with no permission from Rome, they bullied Pope Paul VI into allowing it – but he is on record, multiple times as saying he opposed it. But most importantly, it is quite clear that this manner of reception diminishes reverence and most especially belief in the Real Presence of Our Blessed Lord in the most august sacrament. Even on a psychological level, its obvious. If a person REALLY believes that this is the body, the flesh, the living actual presence of God Himself – then they would treat the host with the deepest level of respect they could muster. But we all know, we see routinely, many people in parishes all over the world – strolling up for Holy Communion, clearly not in a reverential frame of mind, demonstrating this in a variety of ways. And before he Church of Nice followers start throwing around accusations of being judgmental and “how do you know what’s in people’s minds” – you yourselves routinely judge people’s interior dispositions based on their external actions. It’s called non-verbal communication. And in Catholic parishes all over the world – an AWFUL lot is being communicated by the manner in which people receive. And don’t deny it. But hey, who cares what we say. Listen to the words of Bishop Athanasius Schneider who has made it his mission to eradicate this malformation from Catholic life. He argued that receiving Communion in hand “contributes gradually to the loss of the Catholic faith in the Real Presence and in transubstantiation”. The very fact that this practice began as an abuse – this single fact alone – should jar any believing Catholic into the realization that something is wrong with it. Additionally .. bishops still need to seek out permission in order to abandon the preferred method of reception on the tongue in favor of reception in the hand.And that point is critical – the Church PREFERS, Desires, makes normal, establishes as the usual manner – reception on the tongue. This hand business is an artifact from the rebellious 1960’s that is now treated as the usual normal way. IT IS NOT! But by Bishops and priests who at the end of the day – lost their faith. Today’s bishops and priests who allow this in their diocese or parishes have been raised to believe this is normal, good and nothing to fret over. They are wrong! How many of today’s bishops ever make the connection that their complicity in what began as an abuse, and still needs special permission from Rome, is directly correlated to them having to close the parishes by the thousands? As bishop Schneider sums up most eloquently .. “The Eucharist is at the heart of the Church. When the heart is weak, the whole body is weak.” When this deceptive practice officially came to the United States in the 1970’s .. it had been going on WITHOUT permission for somewhere between 5-10 years before. And I, like many Catholics my age know – because we lived through it – it happened during our childhoods. It was brought about by the likes of Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, whose actions as the “Pope of America” brought a plague on the Church in the United States. He and any of his brother bishops created a firestorm among the faithful and that inferno is still blazing. Tens of millions of Catholics have left the faith owing in no small part to that prelate and his band of cronies back in the 60’s and 70’s. It was Bernardin who personally, against the wish of a majority of his fellow bishops who shoved this practice down the throats of the faithful. Him and his episcopal buddies. God have mercy on his soul. Watch"Slight of Hand" at

Thursday, May 29, 2014

EXCERPTS FROM NewChristorChaos

Thursday, MAY 29, 2014 Excerpts from Please go to the site for the full article from Dr Droleskey May 29, 2014, the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: On the Road to Gehenna with Jorge, Abe and Omar, part four (the end, at last), is the conclusion of my four-part series covering the antipapal visit to the Holy Land that ended three days ago now, that is, on Monday, May 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Philip Neri and the Commemoration of Pope Saint Eleutherius. There are a few loose ends found at the beginning of this concluding commentary concerning the reaction of some Zionists to Jorge’s recent trip found. Most of the commentary, however, is given over to “maturation” of the “vision” of dogmatic “evolution” that Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick had in mind when he genuflected before Athenagoras I on January 5, 1964, in Jerusalem. Remember, these sorts of articles are designed to provide information for the long term, meaning that material is included in them that has been used in other articles previously. This is done out of the awareness that readers forget things occasionally and that that are always new readers who have not seen the cited sources that might be familiar to attentive readers blessed with retentive memories. Each of these series could be put into a stand-alone book or pamphlet, which is something I may try to do in the month of June to provide readers with a means of having a resource available without having to search this site. Stay tuned. This is, of course, the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s forty days’ of teaching the Apostles after his glorious Resurrection from the dead on Easter Sunday culminated this very day, Ascension Thursday, as He instructed the Eleven as follows before going up into Heaven from Mount Olivet at whose foot He had suffered His Agony in the Garden six weeks before as Saints Peter, James and John slumbered: And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Matthew 28: 16-20.) There is no “expiration” date on this command. Indeed, the commentary in the Bishop Richard Challoner version of the Douay-Rheims Bible explains that the command is in force until Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ comes in glory on the Last Day to judge the living and the dead and that His Church could never go astray, meaning, of course, that it is impossible for the Catholic Church to give any impression at all that God is pleased with false religions such as Mohammedanism and Talmudic Judaism, which is what Jorge Mario Begoglio did consistently throughout his pilgrimage to Jordan and Israel that ended three days ago now: “All power”… See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ’s church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14. (Bishop Richard Challoner Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew.) The Catholic Church can never go astray. She is infallible. She does not give us any “new ecclesiology” or “hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity” to deconstruct the meaning of dogmatic truth, thus attacking the essence of the nature of God Himself, or false ecumenism. Her pastors do not esteem the symbols and values and places of false religions and they do not engage in “inter-religious” “prayer” services. Her pastors do not teach that false religions have a “right” from God to propagate their false beliefs publicly and they do not praise those false beliefs for being “able” to “contribute” to the building of a “better” world. Pastors of the Catholic Church insist always and at all times that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order with no equivocation, uncertainty, ambiguity or obscurity of any kind. As Pope Pius XI noted in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, there is need to “strain” to “find” Catholicism in the pronouncements made by Holy Mother Church: For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.) How did Jorge Mario Bergoglio protect the integrity of doctrine during his trip to Jordan and Israel? If you don’t know answer to that question after reading this four-part series, you really don’t want to have it answered for you. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Ascended into Heaven this day. We must ascend with Him in our thoughts and prayers at all times as we refuse to have our minds and hearts poisoned by the words and the deeds of the false shepherds of the counterfeit church of conciliarism who dare to blaspheme God so regularly and so openly and/or who refuse to open their mouths in defense of the honor and majesty and glory of God when He is so blasphemed and offended. [6] They therefore who were come together, asked him, saying: Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? [7] But he said to them: It is not for you to know the times or moments, which the Father hath put in his own power: [8] But you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses unto me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth. [9] And when he had said these things, while they looked on, he was raised up: and a cloud received him out of their sight. [10] And while they were beholding him going up to heaven, behold two men stood by them in white garments. [11] Who also said: Ye men of Galilee, why stand you looking up to heaven? This Jesus who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come, as you have seen him going into heaven. [12] Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount that is called Olivet, which is nigh Jerusalem, within a sabbath day’ s journey. [13] And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode Peter and John, James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James of Alpheus, and Simon Zelotes, and Jude the brother of James. [14] All these were persevering with one mind in prayer with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren. (Acts 1: 6-14.) Yes, we can’t stand around all day long looking into the sky. There is work for us to do before Our Lord comes for us at the moment of our own Particular Judgments, which can come at any hour and on any day, and at the end of the world to judge the living and the dead. The work that we have to do is to sanctify and to save our immortal souls as members of the Catholic Church, work that requires us to be attentive to the graces that were won for us on the wood of the Holy Cross by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord Saviour Jesus Christ’s Most Precious Blood and the flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. And to cooperate with the graces that Our Lady sends we must be fortified in prayer, which is one of the reasons that we must keep most assiduously the first Novena in the history of the Church, the Novena to God the Holy Ghost. Our Lady was separated from her Divine Son when He Ascended to Heaven. She was united to Him, however, by means of her reception of His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity in Holy Communion. She was united to the Apostles and the others who prayed in the same Upper Room where He had instituted the Holy Priesthood and the Holy Eucharist at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday. She is united to us. She is our Blessed Mother. We need to ask her for all the graces that we need to save and to sanctify our souls as we eschew worldliness, which is the theme of today’s slightly revised article, and as we refuse to participate in the fraud of a false religion, conciliarism, that is replete with daily outrages given to her Divine Son, starting with the outrage that is the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service, and as we make much reparation for our sins and those of the whole world as the consecrated slaves Christ the King through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. A blessed Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to you all!

Wednesday, May 14, 2014


e Hijacking of St. John XXIII’s Ecumenical Council This is a Guest Post By David Martin When the announcement was made on September 30, 2013, that Pope John XXIII was going to be canonized, glaring eyebrows went up in the Traditionalist camp. After all, saints are usually martyr figures that are persecuted for their uncompromising fidelity to the Faith, and Pope John is generally regarded as the flaming modernist who compromised the Church by convoking the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962. There is no disputing the disaster wrought by Vatican II and how it set into motion an insidious departure from tradition that has left the Holy City “half in ruins.” Even as we report on the canonization of John XXIII, the gale force of “his” conciliar tempest continues to uproot the Faith, blow apart revered Catholic practices, topple the Church's edifice, and spread doctrinal debris throughout the Church. So why the tribute? Should his “aggiornamento” be rewarded this way? Pope John deserves tribute, but it’s important that people see his canonization in the right light and that they have the inside scoop on his true intentions for Vatican II, otherwise it will appear that heresy and modernism are being glorified. For he is known as the founding father of Vatican II, which is why modernists are now beaming over the prospect of his canonization, because their hope is to see Vatican II “canonized.” But the good Lord has His own reasons for glorifying His servant John, as we will see shortly. Good Intentions The fact is that Vatican II was started with the best of resolves. Pope John’s purpose for convening the Council was not to change the Church but to restate Holy Tradition, evidenced in his opening speech on October 11, 1962: “The major interest of the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred heritage of Christian truth be safeguarded and expounded with greater efficacy.” (John XXIII) Without diluting the Faith, the pope was simply trying to adopt a more effective means of projecting the orthodox Faith to the modern world. His “update” did not include the watering down of doctrine or the alteration of liturgy, but consisted in utilizing the media and state-of-the-art technology to better project the light of tradition to a spiritually darkened world. After all, there were dangers threatening the Faith at that time, especially the evils of evolution and abortion. Apostasy was forthcoming and man was already on the eve of forgetting his Maker, so the pope was making a special effort to dispel the ensuing darkness and uphold the orthodox Faith “with greater efficacy.” To this end he and his best men worked arduously for almost three years to draft up the outline for the Second Vatican Council, known as the 72 schemas or schemata. According to the most conservative thinkers of Rome, the preparatory schemata were orthodox and worthy of use, but modernists were enraged that the Holy Father had put together the preparatory outline without conferring with them beforehand. Hence a decision was made before the Council to block Pope John’s plan for Vatican II. Council Hijacked According to Michael Davies and many others, a number of "suspect theologians" hijacked the opening session of the Council by seizing control of its drafting commissions, thus enabling them to scrap Pope John's plan and draft a new agenda of their own. A key instigator of the pack was Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx of the Netherlands, a known heretic who denied the historicity of the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection, and the Eucharist (Transubstantiation), and who had drafted and disseminated a 480-page critique aimed at rallying the progressive “Rhine bishops” to reject the original plan for Vatican II. The design of these progressivists was to revive Luther’s Reformation under the pretext of a renewal, something that Schillebeeckx openly confessed to. Pope Benedict himself pointed out in 2013 how a “virtual council” had risen up to usurp the “real Council” at Vatican II, and lamented how “it created so many disasters, so many problems, so much suffering: seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy.” (Benedict XVI, addressing the parish churches of Rome, February 14, 2013) This echoes the words of Paul VI who stated that the good efforts at Vatican II were hampered by “the devil” who came along “to suffocate the fruits of the Ecumenical Council.” (June 29, 1972) Hence it is worth recounting the opening session so that we have a clearer perspective of what really took place at the Second Vatican Council. At the center of the coup to overthrow the Council were Cardinals Alfrink, Frings, and Lienart of the Rhine Alliance. A crucial vote was to be taken to determine the members of the conciliar drafting commissions when Cardinal Lienart, a 30th degree Freemason, seized the microphone during a speech and demanded that the slate of 168 candidates be discarded and that a new slate of candidates be drawn up. His uncanny gesture was heeded by the Council and the election was postponed. Lienart’s action deflected the course of the Council and made history, and was hailed a victory in the press. The date was October 13, 1962, the 45th Anniversary of Our Lady’s last apparition at Fatima. (Fr. Ralph Wiltgen, the Rhine Flows into the Tiber) In his February 14, 2013, address to the clergy of Rome, Pope Benedict brilliantly recounts this incident at Vatican II: “On the programme for this first day were the elections of the Commissions, and lists of names had been prepared, in what was intended to be an impartial manner, and these lists were put to the vote. But right away the Fathers said: 'No, we do not simply want to vote for pre-prepared lists. We are the subject.' Then, it was necessary to postpone the elections, because the Fathers themselves…wanted to prepare the lists themselves. And so it was. Cardinal Liénart of Lille and Cardinal Frings of Cologne had said publicly: no, not this way. We want to make our own lists and elect our own candidates." The above statement is of no small significance. Herein Benedict confesses that Lienart and his clique rejected the list of candidates that John XXIII had rightfully approved in an “impartial manner,” so that they in turn could create their own list and elect their own candidates in a partial manner. And that’s exactly what they did! When the "election" resumed, a number of radical theologians were then appointed to chair the commissions, including Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, de Lubac, Schillebeeckx and others whose writings had been blacklisted under Pius XII. The liberals now occupied nearly 60% of the seats, giving them the needed power to steer the Council in their direction. Thereupon they proceeded to trash the pope’s carefully prepared agenda that had taken nearly three years to formulate. Through deceitful promises and skillful use of the media, the Council approved their plan for a new Mass on December 7, 1962, known as the “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” and this became the hub of the liturgical reform that was to set the Church on a new revolutionary course of change. The Constitution was principally the work of the infamous Annibale Bugnini whom the pope had earlier removed from two posts because of sinister activity. It in fact was the outgrowth of the one preparatory schema, drafted by Bugnini, which Vatican liberals had spared because of its designs for a new Mass. Note that Bugnini, and not the pope, was the author of the New Mass. What is mind boggling is the dictatorial force wherewith the conciliar elite took the law into their own hands and were able to junk Pope John’s outline for Vatican II without a rebuttal. With the procedural rules laid down by the pope a mere one-third vote was needed to get the schemata passed, which in fact did pass by a 40% vote. But the Rhine fathers stirred up a ruckus and insisted that this minority vote not be honored in favor of the 60% vote against the schemata, even telling the pope, “This is inadmissible!” They abhorred the orthodoxy of the preparatory outline with its strict formulations and resented the idea of having it imposed upon them by a pope who “clung to the old absolute traditions.” The pope, fearing a tumult, backed down and consented to let the Rhine fathers have their way against game rules. Though he had planned it differently, his strength failed him at this point, thus allowing the pirates of reform to wrest the Council from his hands. Hence the most meticulous and painstaking preparation ever undertaken for any council of Church history was suddenly dumped to the glee of this Council confederacy. Only the liturgical schema remained. We gather that Cardinal Tisserant, the key draftsman of the 1962 Moscow-Vatican Treaty who presided at the opening session, was at the center of this coup to usurp the Vatican Council. According to Jean Guitton, the famous French academic, Tisserant had showed him a painting of himself and six others, and told him, “This picture is historic, or rather, symbolic. It shows the meeting we had before the opening of the Council when we decided to block the first session by refusing to accept the tyrannical rules laid down by John XXIII.” (Vatican II in the Dock, 2003) This story of what happened at Vatican II is well documented and has been told in great depth by the most qualified witnesses, including Father Ralph Wiltgen, Monsignor Bandas, Michael Davies, Cardinal Heenan and many others. Archbishop Lefebvre who was on the Central Preparatory Committee for checking and overseeing all the Council documents had this to say: “From the very first days, the Council was besieged by the progressive forces. We experienced it, felt it…We had the impression that something abnormal was happening and this impression was rapidly confirmed; fifteen days after the opening session not one of the seventy-two schemas remained. All had been sent back, rejected, thrown into the waste-paper basket…The immense work that had been found accomplished was scrapped and the assembly found itself empty-handed, with nothing ready. What chairman of a board meeting, however small the company, would agree to carry on without an agenda and without documents? Yet that is how the Council commenced.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Open Letter to Confused Catholics, 1986) And this is how the modern reform was born. Pope John’s agenda for Vatican II would never resurrect from that point, but would remain buried even to this day. The rebellious “virtual council” would now proceed to put together the Vatican II we know today, including its sixteen documents and its reform of liturgy. The documents would contain elements of orthodoxy here and there, but this would only be done for cosmetic purposes. Under the pretext of a “restoration” or “reform,” the documents would apologize for tradition and attempt to unite the Catholic Church with other world religions on secular terms. That is to say, the documents themselves, and not any misinterpretation thereof, would generate the problems ahead since they would largely be penned by Peter’s enemies, and not his friends. “By their fruits you shall know them.” (Mt. 7:20) Pope John XXIII’s reluctance in releasing the Third Secret of Fatima in 1960 undoubtedly caused him unspeakable sorrow for the rest of his life, for he was now witnessing the tragic fulfillment of the Fatima Secret. The very forces of hell marched into Rome to take the Holy City captive, which was accomplished through the conciliar apparatus provided them by the rebellious Rhine fathers and their periti. This is not to say that the gates of hell had fully prevailed against the Church, but that we had arrived at that point in history when the Church would be handed over to the Gentiles, at which time “they shall tread the holy city under foot two and forty months.” (Apocalypse 11:2) It is said that the pope was struck to the heart, and in great pain, so that the cancer he had earlier contracted was greatly augmented now, leaving him only eight months to live. On his deathbed he cried out: “Stop the Council, Stop the Council,” but his “trusty” aides made sure that this didn’t circulate to the other cardinals. The Council was already too well advanced, the liberals had put too much stock in their revolution, so they weren’t about to give up their fun at this point. Fissure Created Pope John certainly made some mistakes, he wasn’t perfect. Perhaps the biggest mistake he made was to convoke the Second Vatican Council, since it provided an opening for the hidden enemy to infiltrate the Church. According to Pope Paul VI, the Council of Vatican II was that “fissure” through which “the smoke of satan entered into the temple of God.” (June 29, 1972) Even the future Pope Paul was alarmed when he learned in January 1959 that Pope John had announced the upcoming Council, to which he responded: “This holy old boy doesn’t realize what a hornet’s nest he’s stirring up!” Clearly he didn’t realize it. Nay, the calling of Vatican II wasn’t too smart, but was a huge blunder which showed poor judgment and terrible foresight. We might even say the pope was playing Russian roulette with the Church, literally. Were not the representatives of the Soviet Union present at Vatican II with a plan to get their clenched fist agenda implemented in a spiritual way with “human rights” and the “empowerment of the laity?” Maybe Pope John should have heeded those prophets that had been forecasting disaster. Popes Pius X, XI, and XII had all refrained from calling a council, fearing it would hatch the very problems we have today. But the pope somehow believed it was now time for a Council. However we have to remember that saints are not canonized for their smarts, talents, or administrative skills, but for their charity. And this, Pope John was loaded with. He was big hearted and wanted to extend the benevolence of God to all, and somehow was convinced that a united effort at the Vatican Council would avert the impending doom that hung over the world. Unfortunately his “virtuous fault” of refusing to see the evil in his fellow man blinded him to the reality of infiltrated Judases, and allowed these enemies to countermand and overrun him. Pope John has sometimes been criticized for quietly lifting the ban on some of these suspect theologians whose activities were formerly restricted by Pius XII, but conservatives have faltered in not recognizing his good intentions. The traditional Monsignor Rudolph Bandas who was one of the brilliant and outstanding periti at Vatican II understood clearly how John XXIII was being overrun and abused, and had this to say: “No doubt good Pope John thought that these suspect theologians would rectify their ideas and perform a genuine service to the Church. But exactly the opposite happened. Supported by certain Rhine Council fathers, and often acting in a manner positively boorish, they turned around and exclaimed: ‘Behold, we are named experts, our ideas stand approved.”’ Pope John’s vision of Vatican II was truly noble and well intending, though he was naïve. This excerpt from his opening speech nicely reflects his pastoral spirit: “The great desire, therefore, of the Catholic Church in raising aloft at this Council the torch of truth, is to show herself to the world as the loving mother of all mankind; gentle, patient, and full of tenderness and sympathy for her separated children.” Unfortunately this kind of talk made Vatican II progressives sick. The good pope didn’t realize he was going to get clobbered for this. The fact is that Pope John XXIII was viciously stabbed in the back by those he trusted. When they wanted their way with him they would crouch and kiss his ring, and in the next hour or minute they were plotting on how they would take Vatican II away from him. For instance Monsignor Bugnini, a notorious Freemason and sweet-talker, assured the pope that he was most committed to fostering a deepened love and appreciation for the liturgy. So the pope blindly entrusted to him the task of heading the new Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy that was established on June 6, 1960, believing that a deepened love for the old Mass would result from this. But what he failed to realize is that Bugnini and his cohorts were secretly at work drafting up a new Mass for the Church which they were determined to get passed at Vatican II. And it did pass with flying colors! The Bugnini Schema superseded all the other schemas and became the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy on December 7, 1962. (Later called Sacrosanctum Concilium) This was the document that directly led to the implementation of the New Mass in the vernacular. Yet the pope in 1960 had no idea what Bugnini and his men were cooking up for the Council. The conservative Cardinal Heenan of Westminster even says in his autobiography that “Pope John did not suspect what was being planned by the liturgical experts.” If it wasn’t bad enough that the good pope had to endure spiritual martyrdom from the devil and his agents, let us take a look at his actual death on June 3, 1963. The unofficial word is that Pope John XXIII was murdered. For when he began crying out from his deathbed to “Stop the Council,” his death suddenly ensued. Though he was ill with terminal cancer, he wasn’t supposed to die quite so soon. As they saw it, it was urgent that his outcry be silenced, so they gave him a little extra sedative to calm his nerves. We have to remember that euthanasia didn’t start with Obamacare, but existed in the hospitals even back then. Needless to say, John XXIII was persecuted and laid low. The allegations from the Sedevacantist camp that he was a Freemason display ignorance and have contributed to his martyrdom of spirit. It was the Freemasons that generated the revolt at Vatican II, but a key part of their plan was to hide and shift the blame onto the pope in order to sell their revolution and smear the pope’s reputation. Pseudo traditionalists by their detraction have effectively and unknowingly assisted the Masonic plan to discredit the papacy in these latter times. The Pope’s own Words If nothing else convinces us of Pope John’s innocence, we turn to his own words: “I repeat once more that what matters most in this life is: our blessed Jesus Christ, his holy Church, his Gospel, and in the Gospel above all else the Our Father according to the mind and heart of Jesus, and the truth and goodness of his Gospel, goodness, which must be meek and kind, hardworking and patient, unconquerable and victorious.” This angelic philosophy echoes what the saints of history have said concerning our purpose in life. Sanctity means being Christ centered with a burning aspiration to bring all men to the love and knowledge of God. With this very aspiration the pope in his opening speech at Vatican II expressed the intentions of the Council: “Its intention is to give to the world the whole of that doctrine which, notwithstanding every difficulty and contradiction, has become the common heritage of mankind—to transmit it in all its purity, undiluted, undistorted. It is a treasure of incalculable worth, not indeed coveted by all, but available to all men of good will.” Are these the words of a Freemason, a Judas, a progressivist? Or are these rather the words of a saint? Would that the pope and bishops of today would speak this way! The Church’s mission for 2000 years has been precisely to bring this deposit of Faith to mankind so that, if it were possible, the entire earth would be enkindled with its flame. The Traditional Roman Faith is that sacred legacy which God originally intended as “the common heritage of mankind,” though the Reformation did much to destroy this ecclesial unity, as did its reemergence at Vatican II. What is needed today is a true renewal of Catholic tradition, so that the Mystical Body can once again be whole as in former times, with unity and soundness. What is needed is what John XXIII originally prescribed in his opening speech at Vatican II: “…that this doctrine shall be more widely known, more deeply understood, and more penetrating in its effects on men’s moral lives. What is needed is that this certain and immutable doctrine, to which the faithful owe obedience, be studied afresh.” As John XXIII is raised to the altars of Holy Mother the Church this April 27, 2014, let us be encouraged to assume a new perspective of holy pontiff whereby we cease from blaming him for all the problems that have ravaged the Church since Vatican II. He made some mistakes which he had to pay dearly for. May he now be rewarded for all the good he proposed and all the evil he endured. And especially, may we be resolved to assist him and his Maker in the cause of restoring the Holy Roman Catholic Church to its former glory. St. John XXIII, pray for us! About the Author Matthew Matthew lives in the Greater Chicago Area. Matthew's personal interests include seeking a preservation of traditional Catholicism as practiced before the Second Vatican Council. He attends the Tridentine Latin Mass offered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP), the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), and various other orders and priests. Matthew is available to assist any parishes seeking to start the Tridentine Latin Mass or those looking for religious education materials. Specific requests should be directed to Matthew through email, as should any and all advertising inquiries. He is a postulant for the Militia Sanctae Mariae.

Tuesday, May 6, 2014


EXCERPTS FROM Clerical Whispers: Mexican Bishop Calls Homophobia a “Mental Illness” Bishop Jose Raul Vera LopezA Mexican Catholic bishop who has been a strong supporter of LGBT issues has declared that homophobia is a “mental illness.” Is that really an accurate classification? The Billerico Project is reporting on an interview given by Bishop Jose Raul Vera Lopez to a television show, “Terra Mexico,” in which he stated: “Why would I immediately think a gay or lesbian person is perverse or depraved the moment they approach me? That’s how people who are homophobic react. It’s a mental illness in which you see gays as depraved and promiscuous. You have to be sick in the head for that.” You can view a two and a half minute video clip from the interview complete with English subtitles here: Here are some other notable quotations from the interview in regard to lesbian and gay people: “They are human beings and deserve respect. The Holy Father knows it’s a. . . .I am certain he knows because the reality is that many in the church do not want to acknowledge the scientific reality on the issue of sexuality. They want to keep homosexuality as a form of human perversion, an illness. But that is no longer the case, scientifically speaking. “ Bishop Vera Lopez also commented on Scripture citations which seem to condemn gay and lesbian persons: “We just have to read the Bible more carefully within a historical context and within a real context. The Biblical texts we have used to bash the heads of homosexuals to say they are condemned by the Bible? We have to read them much more carefully.” It is wonderful to know that this bishop is speaking out so strongly for lesbian and gay rights. One caution: I don’t think that he was using “mental illness” as a technical or clinical term. From the manner in which he is speaking on the video, he seems to be using it as a rhetorical flourish, more than a diagnosis. It is interesting to see him turn the tables on homophobic people: it is usually they who are calling lesbian and gay people “mentally ill.” And because lesbian and gay people have so often been so mislabeled with that diagnosis, I think we have to be very careful of labeling their opponents in the same way. In my experience in working with LGBT issues, homophobia is more often a result of ignorance and misguided piety than by a clinical disturbance. Another comment worth noting is that during the interview, Bishop Vera Lopez discusses the genesis of sexual orientation as being a result of hormonal influences in the womb. With all due respect to the bishop, while that is one theory, it is still simply a theory, and not totally conclusive as the effective cause of one’s homosexuality. The scientific community is still debating various theories as to the origin of sexual orientation in an individual. Despite these cautions, I am delighted to read these statements from this courageous bishop. Our church needs more leaders like him who are willing to approach LGBT issues from a knowledgeable and compassionate perspective. Bishop Vera Lopez has spoken out many times before on lesbian and gay equality. In fact, he was even summoned to the Vatican to defend his point of view, but no sanctions were administered to him.


(EXCEPTS FROM BY DR. THOMAS DROLESKEY) Saint Mary’s Institute is the Catholic grade school in my wife’s New York hometown, Amsterdam. It is affiliated with Saint Mary’s Catholic Church, whose pastor Rev. John Medwid pens the opening to the Saint Mary’s Institute annual newsletter. “In September at the opening Mass I officially announced that this was going to be the Year of Our Lady at SMI,” the letter began. How nice. Except that’s not what he wrote. There was someone else he had in mind to honor besides the Virgin Mary. “In September at the opening Mass I officially announced that this was going to be the Year of Lady Gaga at SMI.” That’s what he proclaimed. Apparently during mass, too. Why Lady Gaga? Was every other living or dead female or male on planet Earth or anywhere else unavailable? The answer, he explains, is “complex,” which is a euphemism for scandalous. First, he writes, “many people may not realize that Lady Gaga is the product of Catholic education.” (To which the response would be: so was Hitler.) Her real name, he tells us, is Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, as if she were some obscure Italian saint. She is a graduate of the Convent of the Sacred Heart, where — and here we’re getting to the point — “she was someone who followed her own path … It takes a great deal of courage especially for young people to blaze their own trails in life!” Exactly which trail blazed should Catholic children find commendable? Was it her attire during the nationally broadcast MTV Video Music Awards last year, watched by millions of children — a thong? Was it her video earlier this year in which she simulates all manner of sexual activities while bizarrely “resurrecting” from their tombs Michael Jackson, Mahatma Gandhi and — maybe this was it? — Jesus Christ? Was it her song “Judas” in which she proclaims: “I’m still in love with Judas, baby. Jesus is my virtue,” but “Judas is the demon that I cling to”? Was it how she constantly promotes gay themes in her music and bashes the military for its treatment of gays? Or maybe she’s a trailblazer of another sort. Speaking at a gay-left dinner in 2011, President Barack Obama began by joking, “I took a trip out to California last week, where I held some productive bilateral talks with your leader, Lady Gaga.” Medwid’s second reason for having a Catholic grade school honor Lady Gaga is also vague. It is “to highlight her immense creativity.” Was Medwid impressed when Lady Gaga said of Pope Benedict XVI, “What the Pope thinks of being gay does not matter to the world”? Maybe it was the video “Alejandro” he found so immensely creative. In it she dressed in a nun’s habit, swallowed a rosary and engaged in simulated erotic activities with her male backup dancers. As the Catholic League’s Bill Donohue put it, Lady Gaga “has now become the new poster girl for American decadence and Catholic bashing.” Maybe it was her “Marry the Night” music video in which she depicts herself having an abortion. Maybe it was the song she deliberately released on Christmas Day, “Stuck on F—-in You” (and no, nothing’s edited in the song). Maybe it’s other creative talents grade school children can admire. A couple of years ago Lady Gaga released a new fragrance called “Fame.” She referred to the scent as “a very slutty perfume.” She boasted: “It was taken out of my own blood sample, so it’s a sense of having me on your skin. I wanted to extract sort of the feeling and sense of blood and semen … “ Or is it just her mind we should celebrate, as when she stated on an MTV program in 2010: “For me this evening, if we don’t stand up for what we believe in, and if we don’t fight for our rights pretty soon, we’re going to have as much rights as the meat on our own bones. And, I’m not a piece of meat.” That statement by Lady Gaga makes just about as much sense as a supposedly Catholic grade school, bearing the highest of responsibilities – providing a moral education to children — honoring her. (Conciliar School Celebrates Year of Lady Gaga.)

Thursday, May 1, 2014


I pray for our Pope's Benedict, and Francis, every night, but I feel that Pope Francis is doing to our religion exactly what the Democrats are doing to the USA. Weakening it, and eventually destruction. A good example it the canonization process: Prior to Vatican II the Pope (and prior to the Middle Ages, the Bishops) needed to sign off on the process of canonization, you were required to have two or more miracles performed throughout your life (it's only one miracle now), two or more miracles after you were beatified (now it's 1), witnesses had to attest to these miracles, and there had to be a written history of the persons life and miracles. I'm not sure if these last two are requirements today...doesn't seem like it to me. In 1234 Pope Gregory IX made the Holy See the only authority on canonization (e.g. the Pope was now the only one who could canonize). The Congregation of Rites was formed in 1587 and it was given authority over canonization, more specifically, they (I think they were bishops) were in charge of verifying miracles and virtues. Medical examiners were also part of this Congregation. Traditionally people were canonized 180+ years after they died. A rule in 1917 was made that required you to wait 50+ years before even putting forth a candidate for canonization, this was to guard against imposters etc. It was a centralized process with the Holy See as the main authority. After Vatican II the process was decentralized, the Pope still reviewed everything, but local church officials are now in charge of gathering and verifying evidence. The wait period was reduced to 5 years. The congregation for the Cause of Saints was formed, it consists of 25 cardinals and Bishops, and they decide if the individual led a virtuous life. If no miracles were performed then the individual is deemed "Venerable." If the individual performed one miracle while living and one after beatification then they are considered a saint. There were reforms in 1983 that allowed beatification to take place anywhere in the world without the Pope's presence. The average beatification rate (beginning in the 1500's, no formal records exist before then) per Pope prior to John Paul II was 0 to 2, meaning that each Pope only canonized 2 people maximum during their tenure. The number spiked up to 12 for John Paul the II and 11 for Pope Benedict XIV. John Paul the II canonized approximately 3 people per year and Benedict canonized 6. All the math and stuff is in the 2nd link. Outline of what's required today and the steps. Old requirements compared to new.

Wednesday, April 30, 2014


FROM Jorge’s Preferential Option for Heresy and Those Who Profess It Posted on April 30, 2014 Fresh off of his “canonization” of “Saints John XXIII” and “Saint John Paul II” three days ago now, Jorge Mario Bergoglio went on something called “Twitter” to write the following: “Inequality is the root of social evil.” (See Inequality Root of all Social Evil.) Sigh. Heavy sigh. This man is obsessed. He is a 1960s/1970s revolutionary who, despite all of his protestations to the contrary, has a Marxist view of the world. Although Jorge Mario Bergoglio has repeated this mantra of “inequality is the root of social evil” repeatedly throughout the course of the past thirteen months, seventeen days, including in Evangelium Gaudium, November 26, 2013, this obsession is just another sign of his absolutely manifest rejection of the Catholic Faith. Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not realize that inequality is inherent in the nature of created things. God ordered the Nine Choirs of Angels according to a hierarchy, assigning to each a specific function. Archangels, Angels, and Principalities have been assigned to watch over the ordering of the universe down to its smallest detail, including the eternal and temporal welfare of human beings. Powers, Virtues, and Dominations have been assigned to watch over the multiplicity of causes that govern the universe. Thrones, Cherubim and Seraphim contemplate the glory of the Most Blessed Trinity. God made inequality inherent in the nature of the world and in all created things. There are distinctions between males and females, distinctions that can no amount of sloganeering or surgical mutations can eliminate. While God cares equally for all creatures, whether great or small (cf. Wisdom 6: 8), He metes out his punishment as unequally as He distributes various gifts and talents, expecting more from those to whom more has been given, thus making their punishment more severe for the misuses of that which had been given unto them. (with permission of Dr. Droleskey I have copied the above excerpts)


As we know only too well, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a mocker of doctrinal purity, claiming that the only thing that matters to God is his kind of “concern” for “the poor.” This is why he has no problem “rehabilitating” so-called “theologians whose support of unrepentant sin was so blatant that they were disciplined by the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Indeed, Bergoglio considers it his duty to “liberate” free thinkers from the confines of “small minded” would-be clerics who, he believes, live lives from that detached from the “people in the streets.” This is why he has seen to it that sanctions upon an octogenarian Irish priest who has argued for decades that moral truth can “change” were lifted: Pope Francis is believed to have intervened directly with the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) to have all sanctions on silenced Irish priest Fr Sean Fagan (86) lifted. It was confirmed to The Irish Times in Rome last night that Marist priest Fr Fagan, who has been subject to sanction by the Vatican for six years, is no longer so. The superior general of the Marist congregation in Rome, Fr John Hannan, said last night that Fr Fagan is now “a priest in good standing” where the church is concerned. It has also emerged that the change in Fr Fagan’s circumstances may have involved direct intervention by both Pope Francis and the former President of Ireland Mary McAleese. The Irish Times has learned that Mrs McAleese, who is away from Rome at the moment, wrote to Pope Francis last December requesting that he directly intervene where Fr Fagan’s case was concerned. Receipt of the letter was acknowledged by the Pope’s secretary. It is understood that the Marist congregation was informed of Fr Fagan’s changed situation at Easter. Others understood to have been approached to intervene with the Vatican on Fr Fagan’s behalf include his own congregation, the Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin, the papal nuncio Archbishop Charles Brown and the former head of the Dominicans Fr Timothy Radcliffe. For many years Fr Fagan, who has suffered ill health for some time, had been critical of rigid stances by the Vatican on issues to do with conscience and sexual morality notably in letters to this newspaper. In 2003 he published the book Does Morality Change? And in 2008 Whatever Happened to Sin? In 2010 he was informed by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that he would be laicised should be write for publication any material it considered contrary to Church teaching and should he disclose this to media. Remaining copies of his book were bought up by the Marist congregation whose website last night still carried a statement first posted in February of last year which reads that “ the writings of Fr. Sean Fagan in the book What Happened to Sin do not have the approval of or represent the views of the Society of Mary. (From

Wednesday, April 23, 2014


all news calendar SSPX news & events You are here:homenews-eventsnews"we vigorously protest these canonizations" "We vigorously protest these canonizations" April 22, 2014 District of the USA In his newest Superior General's Letter, Bishop Fellay explains the double problem behind the canonizations of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II due to take place on April 27th. Letter to Friends and Benefactors no. 82 Dear friends and benefactors, If on April 27th John XXIII and John Paul II are canonized, the act will present a double problem to the Catholic conscience. Firstly, the problem of the canonization itself: how can it be possible to offer to the whole Church as an example of sanctity the instigator of Vatican Council II and the Pope of Assisi and human rights? But there is also the deeper problem of what will appear to be an unprecedented recognition of catholicity: how is it possible to put the Church’s stamp of approval and sanctity on the teachings of such a Council, which inspired all of Karol Wojtyla’s action and whose rotten fruits are the indisputable indication of the Church’s self-destruction? This second problem offers the solution: the errors contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and in the reforms that followed, especially in the liturgical reform, could not possibly be the work of the Holy Ghost, who is at once the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Holiness. That is why it seems necessary to us to recall the principal errors and the fundamental reasons for which we cannot subscribe to the novelties of the Council and of the reforms that came of it, any more than to these canonizations that hope to “canonize” Vatican II. For this reason, as we vigorously protest these canonizations, we wish to denounce the undertaking that has denatured the Church since Vatican Council II. Here are its principal elements. I. The Council Whereas the Council was prepared itself to be a shining light in today’s world (if those pre-conciliar documents in which we find a solemn profession of safe doctrine with regard to today’s problems, had been accepted), we can and we must unfortunately state that, in a more or less general way, when the Council has introduced innovations, it has unsettled the certainty of truths taught by the authentic Magisterium of the Church as unquestionably belonging to the treasure of Tradition. […] On all these fundamental points the traditional doctrine was clear and unanimously taught in Catholic universities. Now numerous texts of the Council on these truths will henceforward permit doubt to be cast upon them. […] Thus driven to this by the facts, we are forced to conclude that the Council has encouraged, in an inconceivable manner, the spreading of Liberal errors.[1] II. An ecumenical conception of the Church The expression “subsistit in” (Lumen gentium, 8) means that the Church of Christ has in the separate Christian communities a presence and an action that are distinct from the Church of Christ’s subsistence in the Catholic Church. Taken in this sense, the expression denies the strict necessity of identifying the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, which had always been taught, especially by Pius XII, both in Mystici corporis[2] and Humani generis[3]. The Church of Christ is present and active as such, that is, as the unique ark of salvation, only where the Vicar of Christ is present. The Mystical Body of which he is the visible head is strictly identical to the Roman Catholic Church. The same declaration (LG, 8) also recognizes the presence of “salvific elements” in non-Catholic Christian communities. The decree on ecumenism goes even further, adding that “the Spirit of Christ does not refrain from using these churches and communities as means of salvation, which derive their efficacy from the fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.” (UR, 3) Such statements are irreconcilable with the dogma “No salvation outside of the Church,” which was reaffirmed by a Letter of the Holy Office on August 8, 1949. A separated community cannot cooperate with the action of God, since its separation is a resistance to the Holy Ghost. The truths and the sacraments that it may maintain can have good effects only in opposition to the erroneous principles on which these communities are founded and which separate them from the Mystical Body of the Catholic Church, whose visible head is the Vicar of Christ. The declaration Nostra aetate says that non-Christian religions “often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men,” although such men must find in Christ “the fullness of religious life;” it also “regards with sincere respect those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and doctrines.” (NA, 2) Such a claim must be criticized just as the preceding one. When coupled with heresy or schism, the sacraments, the partial truths of the Faith, and Scripture are in a state of separation from the Mystical Body. That is why, even though using such means, the sect as such cannot be a mediator of grace or contribute towards salvation, for it is deprived of supernatural grace. The same must be said for the ways of thinking, living, and acting that are found in non-Christian religions. These texts of the Council already favor the latitudinarian conception of the Church condemned by Pius XI in Mortalium animos, as well as the religious indifferentism that was also condemned by all the Popes from Pius IX to Pius XII.[4] All the initiatives inspired by ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue, the most visible example being the Assisi meeting in 1986, are only the practical application, “the visible illustration, the concrete lesson, a catechesis that can be understood by all” (John Paul II) of these conciliar teachings. But they also express the indifferentism denounced by Pius XI, when he reproved the hope that it would one day be possible to lead the peoples without difficulty, in spite of their religious differences, to a brotherly agreement on the profession of certain doctrines considered as a common basis of the spiritual life. […] Joining in with the partisans and propagators of such doctrines means turning completely away from the divinely revealed religion.[5] III. A collegial and democratic conception of the Church 1. After having shaken the Church’s unity of Faith, the texts of the Council also disturbed the Church’s unity of government and hierarchical structure. The expression “subjectum quoque” (LG, 22) means that the college of bishops united to the Pope as to their head is also, besides the Pope alone, the habitual and permanent subject of the supreme and universal power of jurisdiction in the Church. This is an open door to a decrease in the Sovereign Pontiff’s power, or even to its being challenged, at the risk of endangering the unity of the Church. This idea of a permanent double subject holding primacy is in fact contrary to the Church’s teaching and practice, especially to the constitution Pastor aeternus of Vatican I (DS 3055) and Leo XIII’s encyclical Satis cognitum. Only the pope holds in a habitual and constant manner the supreme power, which he communicates only in special circumstances to councils, when so doing appears opportune to him. 2. The expression “common priesthood” proper to all baptized souls, distinct from the “ministerial priesthood,” (LG, 10) does not explain that only the latter can be taken in the true and proper sense of the word, while the former can be taken in a mystical and spiritual sense only. This distinction was clearly stated by Pius XII in his speech on November 2, 1954. It is absent from the texts of the Council and opens the door to a democratic orientation of the Church, condemned by Pius VI in the bull Auctorem fidei (DS 2106 [Denzinger]). This tendency of having the people participate in the exercise of power is seen also in the multiplication of all sorts of organizations, in conformity with the new canon law (canon 129 §2). It loses sight of the distinction between the clergy and the laity, a distinction which is of divine right. IV. False natural human rights The declaration Dignitatis humanae makes the false claim that men have a natural right in religious matters. Until now the Tradition of the Church unanimously recognized that non-Catholics have the natural right not to be forced by the civil power to adhere (by intention in the internal forum and by practice in the external forum) to the one true religion. It also authorized, at least in some circumstances, a certain tolerance for the exercise of false religions in the public external forum. Vatican II recognized as the natural right of every man not to be prevented by the civil authorities from practicing a false religion in the external public forum. The Council claimed that this natural right of freedom from constraint by the civil authorities was also a civil right. The only laws limiting this right would pertain to the purely civil order of secular society. Thus the Council obliged civil governments no longer to discriminate for religious motives and to establish a juridical equality between the true and false religions. This new social doctrine is opposed to the teachings of Gregory XVI in Mirari vos and of Pius IX in Quanta cura. It is based on a false conception of human dignity as something purely ontological, and not moral. Consequently, the constitution Gaudium et spes teaches the principle of the temporal domain’s autonomy (GS, 36), i.e., the denial of the social kingship of Christ that was taught by Pius XI in Quas primas, and it opens the door to temporal society’s independence from the commandments of God. V. The Protestantization of the Mass The new rite of the Mass, “represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXIII of the Council of Trent.”[6] By its omissions and equivocations, the new rite of Paul VI attenuates the identification of the Mass with the sacrifice of the Cross to such an extent that the Mass seems much more a simple memorial than a sacrifice. This reformed rite also obscures the role of the priest, putting the accent on the action of the community of the faithful. It gravely diminishes the expression of the propitiatory end of the sacrifice of the Mass, which is expiation and reparation for sin. These defects forbid us to consider this new rite as legitimate. On January 11th and 12th of 1979, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith asked Archbishop Lefebvre the following question: Do you maintain that a faithful Catholic can think and claim that a sacramental rite, particularly that of the Mass approved and promulgated by the Sovereign Pontiff, can be inconsistent with the Catholic Faith, or favens haeresim? He answered: This rite does not in itself profess the Catholic Faith as clearly as the old Ordo missae, and therefore it can favor heresy. But I do not know to whom it should be attributed or whether the Pope is responsible. What is unbelievable is that a Protestant-leaning, and therefore favens haeresim, Ordo missae can have been issused by the Roman Curia.[7] These grave defects forbid us from considering this new rite as legitimate, from celebrating it, and from advising anyone to assist at it or participate positively in it. VI.The New Code, expression of the Conciliar novelties According to the very words of John Paul II, the new Code of Canon Law of 1983 represents “a great effort to translate into canonical language”[8] the teachings of Vatican Council II, including—and especially—the seriously faulty points we have already mentioned. “Among the elements which characterize the true and genuine image of the Church,” explained John Paul II: we should emphasize especially the following: the doctrine which considers the Church as the People of God, and hierarchical authority as a service; the doctrine which considers the Church as a communion and which, therefore, determines the relations which should exist between the particular churches and the universal Church, and between collegiality and the primacy; the doctrine which teaches that all the members of the People of God, each in his proper way, participate in the threefold office of Christ: the priestly, prophetic and royal offices. To this teaching is attached the one concerning the duties and rights of the faithful, and particularly of the laity; and finally, the Church’s commitment to ecumenism. This new code of law underscores a false ecumenism of the Church by allowing the reception of the sacraments of penance, holy eucharist, and extreme unction from non-Catholic ministers (canon 844), and by encouraging ecumenical hospitality in authorizing Catholic ministers to administer the sacrament of holy eucharist to non-Catholics. Canon 336 repeats and accentuates the idea of a double permanent subject of the primacy. Canons 204 §1, 208, 212 §3, 216 and 225 stress the equivocal notion of the common priesthood and the correlative idea of the People of God. Lastly, there is also a false definition of marriage in this new Code, in which the precise object of the matrimonial contract and the hierarchy of its ends no longer appear. Far from encouraging the Catholic family, these novelties open a breach in matrimonial morality. VII. A new conception of the Magisterium 1. The constitution Dei Verbum states imprecisely that, With the passing of time, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth, until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her. (DV, 8) This lack of precision opens the door to the error of a living and evolving Tradition, which was condemned by St. Pius X in the encyclical Pascendi and the Anti-modernist Oath. For the Church can “move toward the fullness of divine truth” only in that it gives a more precise expression of the truth, not in the sense that the dogmas proposed by the Church could receive “a different meaning from that which the Church meant and still means.” (Dei Filius, DS 3043) 2. Benedict XVI’s speech on December 22, 2005 attempted to justify this evolutionary conception of a living Tradition and thus to clear the Council of responsibility for any rupture with the Tradition of the Church. Vatican II wished “to redefine the relationship between the faith of the Church and certain essential elements of modern thought.” And in order to do so, its teachings …reviewed or even corrected certain historical decisions. But in this apparent discontinuity the Council actually preserved and deepened the inmost nature and true identity [of the Church], which is that of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us; it is a subject that increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God. This explanation supposes that the unity of the Church’s Faith reposes not upon an object (for there is a discontinuity, at least on the points we have underlined, between Vatican II and Tradition), but upon a subject, in the sense that the act of faith is defined much more by the believers than by the truths believed. This act becomes principally the expression of a collective conscience, and no longer a firm adherence of the intelligence to the truths revealed by God. Yet Pius XII taught in Humani generis that the Magisterium is the “immediate and universal rule of truth in matters of faith and morals,” the objective truth of the deposit of the Faith, whose sources are Holy Scripture and Tradition. And the constitution Dei Filius of Vatican Council I also taught that this deposit is not “a philosophical invention that can be completed by human ingenuity,” but that it was “confided to the Spouse of Christ that she might guard it holily and declare it infallibly.” (DS 3020) 3. Pope John XXIII’s opening speech (October 11, 1962) and his allocution to the Sacred College on December 23, 1962, obviously attribute to Vatican Council II a very particular, so-called “pastoral” intention, by which the Magisterium is supposed to “express the Faith of the Church according to the modalities of investigation and literary formulation of modern thought.” Paul VI’s encyclical Ecclesiam suam (August 6, 1964) repeats this idea, saying that the Magisterium of Vatican II aims to inject the Christian message into the stream of modern thought, and into the language, culture, customs, and sensibilities of man as he lives in the spiritual turmoil of this modern world (#68); in particular, in announcing the truth, there will be no thoughts of external coercion. Instead we will use the legitimate means of human friendliness, interior persuasion, and ordinary conversation. We will offer the gift of salvation while respecting the personal and civic rights of the individual. (#75) The pastoral constitution Gaudium et spes maintained that the Council, first of all, wishes to assess in this light those values which are most highly prized today and to relate them to their divine source. Insofar as they stem from endowments conferred by God on man, these values are exceedingly good. Yet they are often wrenched from their rightful function by the taint in man’s heart, and hence stand in need of purification. (GS, 11) From these values of the world came the three great novelties introduced by Vatican II: religious liberty, collegiality, and ecumenism. 4. So on the authority of this immediate and universal rule of the revealed truth that is the constant Magisterium, we contest the new doctrines that are contrary to it. That is exactly the criterion given by St. Vincent of Lerins: The criterion of truth and, moreover, of the infallibility of the Pope and of the Church, is its conformity to Tradition and to the deposit of the Faith. Quod ubique, quod semper—That which is taught everywhere and always, in space and in time.[9] But Vatican II’s doctrine on ecumenism, collegiality and religious liberty is a new doctrine, contrary to Tradition and to the public law of the Church, which is itself based on divinely revealed principles, which are thus immutable. We conclude from this that the Council, having wished to propose these novelties, is deprived of a constraining magisterial authority, to the very extent that it proposes them. Its authority is already doubtful because of the new so-called “pastoral” intention mentioned in the preceding paragraph. It seems moreover certainly null and void in the matter of the various points on which it contradicts Tradition (see above, I to VII, 1). Faithful to the constant teaching of the Church, along with our venerated founder Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and following his example, we have never ceased to denounce the Council and its major texts as one of the principal causes of the crisis shaking the Church from top to bottom, penetrating into her “very entrails” and her “veins,” to use the forceful language of St. Pius X. The more we study the matter, the more we realize just how accurate was the analysis Archbishop Lefebvre presented with an extraordinary clarity in the Aula on September 9, 1965. Allow us to use his own words concerning the conciliar constitution on “The Church in Today’s World” (Gaudium et spes): This pastoral Constitution is not pastoral, nor does it emanate from the Catholic Church. It does not feed Christian men with the Apostolic truth of the Gospels and, moreover, the Church has never spoken in this manner. We cannot listen to this voice, because it is not the voice of the Bride of Christ. This voice is not that of the Spirit of Christ. The voice of Christ, our Shepherd, we know. This voice we do not know. The clothing is that of the sheep. The voice is not the voice of the Shepherd, but perhaps that of the wolf.[10] The fifty years that have gone by since speech have only confirmed his analysis. Already on December 7, 1968, only three years after the closing of the Council, Paul VI had to admit that: “The Church is in a time of anxiety, of self-criticism; one might even say of self-destruction.” And on June 29, 1972, he recognized that “By some crack the smoke of Satan has entered into the temple of God; it is doubt, incertitude, problems, anxiety, confrontation.” He realized it, but did nothing. He continued the conciliar reform whose promoters had not hesitated to compare it to the French Revolution of 1789, or the Russian Revolution of 1917. We cannot remain passive; we cannot be accomplices to this self-destruction. That is why we invite you, dear friends and benefactors, to remain firm in the Faith, not to let yourselves be troubled by these novelties of one of the most terrible crises that the Holy Church must undergo. May the Passion of Our Lord and His Resurrection comfort us in our fidelity, in our unshakeable love for God, for Our Lord, true God and true Man, for His Holy Church, divine and human, in an unfailing hope… in Te speravi non confundar in aeternum. May the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary deign to protect us all, and may her triumph soon come! Winona, Palm Sunday, April 13, 2014 +Bernard Fellay

Wednesday, April 16, 2014


Father Benedict Baur, O.S.B, wrote of the events of this day, Spy Wednesday, in The Light of the World: The Church suffers with Christ. She has suffered similar experiences, for often in the course of her history many of her children have proved traitors to their Lord and Redeemer. This is as mysterious as it is terrifying–an apostle turned traitor. He who had been selected from among millions for the special love and esteem of Christ, sells his benefactor for thirty pieces of silver. He who stands, “let him take heed, lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). “Watch ye and pray that ye enter not into temptation” (Matt. 26:41). Christ sees the traitor approaching, and although He knows his foul plan, He does not withdraw. He offers His cheek to be kissed. He has feelings only of love and kindness even for this traitor. He even calls him friend. In effect He says: Even if you no longer love Me, I will love you and am prepared to forgive you the injury you are doing to Me. Christ shows no bitterness; He has no harsh reproach even for Judas. For this fallen apostle He has only sympathy. What did Judas gain? Thirty pieces of silver and the curse of God. He received a small temporal reward for his treachery and was burdened with a remorse of conscience that drove him to eternal damnation. This is the mysterium iniquitatis, the mystery of iniquity. Sin, the blindness and perversity of the human heart, is indeed a mystery. If the Lord were not so full of kindness and understanding, if He did not love us much beyond our deserts, what would become of us? Even an apostle can become a traitor. The Church makes a recompense to Christ for the disgrace heaped upon Him by Judas. “In the name of Jesus let every knee bow of those that are in heaven, on earth, and under the earth; for the Lord become obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Therefore the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father” (Introit). He is obedient to the Father, even submitting to the traitor. That was the will of the Father, and it was sufficient for Christ. Why has the traitor come to betray Christ? What has brought Him? Poor blind apostle! Poor blind Christians! Why do they expend their energies on everlasting worries? Why do they toil so eagerly for money? Why do they seek so avidly for offices, high positions, and the esteem of men? Very often to achieve their ambitions they jeopardize their chances for eternal happiness. Often they forsake religion and neglect the sacraments. What remains to them from all the temporal advantages they may gain? They soon prove empty; this discovery drove Judas to despair and suicide. “Simon, sleepest though? Could thou not watch one hour with Me?” With these words, spoken by Christ to Peter, the Church calls upon us at Lauds not to leave the Savior alone in His suffering and humiliation. At least during Holy Week let us remain close to Christ. That this may be easier for us, we are led to St. Mary Major. Behold the mother. Behold how Mary suffers with Jesus. Mary represents the Church suffering with Christ. Each of us should imitate Mary in her suffering with her Son.With her we should follow Him with sympathetic hearts and stand under His cross on Calvary. May not Christ address us the sad words “Couldst thou not watch one hour with Me? . . . He does not sleep, but hastens to betray Me to the Jews” (Responsory at Matins). It is often true that the friends of Jesus sleep while His enemies are hard at work. (Father Benedict Baur, The Light of the World, Volume I, pp. 420-421) We must, of course, recognize that the lords of conciliarism play the role of Judas Iscariot, perhaps without even realizing it, every day of their lives as they betray the Holy Faith and hand over countless souls to the devil as a result. This is just one of the many reasons that we can never be “una cum” any of the apostates in the false church of conciliarism who see fit to blaspheme God on deceive souls with one falsehood after another on a daily basis. We must be sorry for our sins, making an especially good and thorough Confession of them this Holy Week, remembering that we are not better than–and are probably very much worse than–most others. As much as we may have done the bidding of the devil in our lives, however, the adversary knows that those of us who are trying to reform our lives are not his friends, that we hate our sins and that we want to grow in holiness so as to be more pleasing in the sight of the Most Blessed Trinity at all times and thus better able to oppose the schemes of the enemies of Christ the King in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who are always so hard at work to betray the true Faith by their unswerving fealty to the apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges of their false religion. We must pray to Our Lady for the courage to flee from the Judases in the counterfeit church of conciliarism so that we will not become their enablers in their constant betrayals of the Catholic Faith, begging her to help us to pray extra Rosaries for the conversion of the modern Judases, each of whom is loved by her Divine Son with an infinite love that wills their eternal salvation and would welcome them back to the fold of the true Faith if they repented of their crimes and abjured their errors before they died. Our Lady is the archetype of Holy Mother Church. She is without stain of sin or the least trace of error of any kind. So is Holy Mother Church. Holy Mother Church takes refuge in the arms of Our Lady in her Basilica in Rome today, Saint Mary Major. Holy Mother Church rushes into the arms of the Blessed Mother to make reparation for the infidelity of the traitor Judas Iscariot and to plead for her children to be faithful always unto the point of their dying breaths. Holy Mother Church can no more give us error or blasphemy or sacrilege or be a participate in various apostasies than can the Blessed Virgin Mary. What more proof do we need that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is a Judas “church” filled with modern-day Judases, for whom we must pray but with whom we must have no association in the slightest at any time for any reason whatsoever. The hour of shadows approaches. We are about to enter into the Paschal Triduum of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s Passion, Death and Resurrection. May reject the ways of Judas Iscariot once and for all as we cleave to Our Lady with the purity of Saint John the Evangelist and the penitent spirit of Saint Mary Magdalene, praying as many Rosaries during this days on which our sins subjected the God-Man to unspeakable horrors and caused our dear Blessed Mother to be pierced through and through with the Fourth through Seventh Swords of Sorrow. Finally, please do remember to pray today for the repose of the soul of late Cyndi Adele Frances Cain, whose Requiem Mass will be offered in San Diego, California, by Father Gerard McKee, CMRI, at 10:30 a.m., Pacific Daylight Saving Time, remembering to keep her husband, Michael Cain, and their two sons, Kellin and Kevin, in your prayers as well. Eternal rest grant unto her, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon her. May her soul and all of the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen. Our Lady of Sorrows, Pray for us.

Saturday, April 12, 2014

Where is the Bishop while this is happening?

While their diocese in St. Paul Minneapolis is being destroyed, and this is happening all over the USA. Where is the accountability to the USCCB? Is there any? Or can Priest, PASTORS, and Deacons follow the sheep instead of being shepherds and leading the sheep as Jesus wanted? Watch this, and now you will see why our Catholic Church is falling apart . *Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis Contact Information: Father Michael Tegeder's regular Transubstantiation of the Blessed Earthen Rock Ceremony done as a part of the Roman Catholic Mass of all time that is done on a regular basis in Minneapolis Minnesota as part of the Native American Pagan Esoteric Mass Ceremony to Honor Holy Mother Earth. "In this video, a priest and deacon in good standing with the Archdiocese, engage in occult pagan rituals. The rocks here being blessed by Deacon Joseph Damiani and Father Michael Tegeder...They are said to be the bones of the "Earth Mother" and are heated up by fire for the use in sweat lodges and accompanying spirit journeys."

Saturday, April 5, 2014


From, and the genius of Dr Droleskey: It [the Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation. Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people, but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently, but so ,that, when danger of death is imminent, they be baptized in the form of the Church, early without delay, even by a layman or woman, if a priest should be lacking, just as is contained more fully in the decree of the Armenians. . . . It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.)

Wednesday, April 2, 2014


April 2, 2014, Article (FROM Posted on April 2, 2014 April 2, 2014, Feast of Saint Francis of Paola and the Commemoration of Wednesday in the Fourth Week of Lent: Today’s new article, Jorge Keeps It Kosher, reviews the extent to which the kitchen staff at the Casa Santa Marta had to follow the directions of a Talmudic rabbi to make the kitchen oven and utensils acceptable for use in the preparation of a Kosher meal that was served on January 16, 2014, to a group of Argentine Talmudists including the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Abraham Skorka, who were being hosted by none other than Rabbi Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself. Bergoglio knows how to keep a Kosher kitchen, and his “doctrine,” such as it is, is perfectly in accord with the “reform” branch of Talmudism. This is relevant now as the false “pontiff” will be visiting the Holy Land from May 24, 2014, to May 26, 2014. He’s got a schedule jam-packed filled with opportunities to display his great affection for the beliefs, symbols, practices and places of worship of false religions. Then again, he should know. He’s got the beliefs, symbols, practices and places of worship of his own false religion, conciliarism. Finally, I ask prayers for the repose of the soul of Mr. Pierre Delfausse, who died in Carmel-by-Sea, California, at the age of ninety-seven on March 14, 2014. I received word of his death from my eldest first cousin, who turned seventy years of age on March 4, 2014. Pierre was my father’s first cousin, making him my first cousin once removed. I met Pierre, who was born on January 10, 1917, in Woodhaven, Queens, New York, in Carmel in 2000 when speaking in California. He told me upon greeting me, “You have your grandfather’s [his own Uncle Ed's] gait.” Well, that was the first time I was told that I had carried myself like Edward Martin Droleskey! Pierre kept a very good log of the Delfausse family tree. I had a fascinating visit with nearly fourteen years ago. Please join us in praying for the repose of the soul of Mr. Pierre Delfausse. Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon him. May his soul and all of the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

Tuesday, April 1, 2014


FROM THE ObamaDeathCare It would be very tempting to offer regular commentaries on the insanity taking place in the world of naturalism. Perhaps more than half of the over two hundred articles published on this site in calendar year 2012 covered the quadrennial farce that is an American campaign for the office of President of the United States of America. This year, however, there have been fewer such commentaries as the threat to souls--and thus of the entirety of all social order itself--posed by Jorge Mario Bergoglio is greater than that posed by other figures of Antichrist in the world today, such as Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro. Mind you, this is not to minimize the real danger posed by Obama/Soetoro himself to the eternal welfare of souls. Not at all. It is, however, to state yet again that Obama/Soetoro's rise to power has been made more possible by the counterfeit church of conciliarism's "official reconciliation" with the anti-Incarnational principles of the modern civil state that is utterly defenseless against the triumph of statism as it does not recognize any authority above "the people" and the text of whatever constitution, written or unwritten, that is supposed to govern its operation. If one can, though, deconstruct, if not ignore, the plain words of Sacred Scripture as Protestants and Modernists do it is fairly easy to deconstruct, if not ignore, the plain words of a constitution of even of an unjust immoral law itself. The laws of God and of men mean nothing to men who are gods and laws unto themselves, and such men have nothing to fear whatsoever from Jorge Mario Bergoglio as long as they "serve the poor." (Ed. note obamacare is following Englands National Health Care, which euthanized 136,000 people in 2010 according to their own website That was enough to sicken me, and I have not checked since 2011 to see their updates)

The effect of Pope Francis' Meeting with the Argentinian dictator

EXCEPTS FROM www.newchristorchaos, from its brilliant founder. "Married Lesbian couple" to have daughter baptized - and first the "two mothers" will be confirmed in the Cathedral Where else? In Argentina, ¡naturalmente! From La Voz: Daughter of two mothers will be baptized in the Cathedral Next Saturday, April 5, Umma Azul will be baptized in the Cathedral [of Córdoba, Province of Córdoba, Argentina] and president Cristina Fernández [de Kirchner] could be the godmother. She is the daughter of Karina Villarroel and Soledad Ortiz, the two Cordoba women who contracted matrimony a little over a year ago, and regarding whom a controversy came about due to the request for leave [for matrimonial reasons] in the Provincial Police by the first one. [The civil "marriage" of same-sex couples has been legal in Argentina since 2010.] ... Karina and Soledad had to demand the authorization of the Archdiocese. "I had an audience with Archbishop Carlos Ñáñez so that he would give the order, and he confirmed to me that there will be no problem in the Cathedral," she explained. [The Cathedral] Parish priest Carlos Varas will preside at er the ceremony The two ladies will receive Confirmation on the same day and, at 10:30 the baptism of Umma Azul will take place, with a godfather who is a friend of the family and two godmothers, the President and a friend. ... Meanwhile, Karina, who belongs to the police force of the Province, is still struggling for the recognition of a legal demand of a 180-day maternity leave, even though she was not the pregnant mother. ... The Police assured that the woman abandoned the job. La Nación adds that "this will be, according to Church sources, 'the first baptism of the child of a homoparental [sic] family' to be celebrated in a Catholic building in the country." Now, we are all in favor of early baptism - but is not there something in baptism related to the probability of the child being raised in the Catholic faith... faithfully? Canon 868, §1, n. 2, of the Code of Canon Law is clear: Can. 868 §1. For an infant to be baptized licitly: 1/ the parents or at least one of them or the person who legitimately takes their place must consent; 2/ there must be a founded hope that the infant will be brought up in the Catholic religion; if such hope is altogether lacking, the baptism is to be delayed according to the prescripts of particular law after the parents have been advised about the reason. The Córdoba Archdiocese told La Nación that "the prelate asked Varas [the pastor] to inform the couple, made up of two women, to place 'special attention' in the election of the sponsors, so that the child 'may grow in the' Catholic 'faith'." [sic!] Speaking to news agency "DyN, Church sources recognized that the procedure to authorize a baptism with such characteristics "WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE COMPLICATED IF JORGE BERGOGLIO WERE NOT POPE"