In Full Communion With Antichrist

There is no need to belabor points that have been made on this site repeatedly in the past year, especially since there is clear by now that Jorge Mario Beroglgio has “shot his wad.” That is, all that this revolutionary and figure of Antichrist is doing at this point is repeating himself ad nauseam, ad infinitum.

Indeed, there is nothing “original” in Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s daily meanderings as it is standard, boilerplate 1970s revolutionary propaganda that oldsters such as this writer heard from pulpits and from vocations directors. There is nothing “new,” “fresh” or “original” in any of what Bergoglio has said and done.

The only thing that is “new” is that the veneer of Catholicism provided by the showman Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who was a true bishop, and his supposedly “erudite” and “refined” successor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, has been stripped away from the world to see. What was once mocked and pilloried in the pages of The Wanderer, the National Catholic Register (during its years of ownership under the Frawley family), and Catholic United for the Faith’s Lay Witness magazine in the 1980s and 1990s has now become standard-issue “teaching” at the “papal” level without any pretense of Catholicism whatsoever. This is just a logical progression of where the conciliar revolution was meant to take Catholics despite the efforts of many of us, this writer included, to defend the indefensible in the decades after the “Second” Vatican Council, especially as hope was held out in the 1980s that the Polish “pope” was going to restore order once and for all, something that was totally delusional.

Thus it is that Bergoglio’s Angelus Address of Sunday, February 23, 2014, Sexagesima Sunday and the Commemoration of Saint Peter Damian, is nothing new at all. This egregious figure of Antichrist really believes that there is no real distinction between those who are Catholics and non-Catholics, that we are all “united” by baptism:

(Vatican Radio) Following the celebration of Mass on Sunday morning with the 19 new Cardinals, Pope Francis greeted the crowds in St. Peter’s Square gathered for the Angelus prayer.
In his address to them he urged them to work for Christian unity avoiding all divisions, because he said: “a community does not belong to the preacher, but to Christ”.
Commenting on the second Reading of the Day, the Pope said that since the times described by St. Paul, Christians were divided according to whoever was leading their community.
But St Paul – Pope Francis said – explains that this way of thinking is wrong:“everything belongs to you Christ! Not to Paul, Apollos or Cephas; the world, life, death, the present and the future, everything is yours! For you belong to Christ, and Christ to God!”
And the Pope said all Christian communities are born from this belonging: dioceses, parishes, associations, movements. And even although there may be differences – he added – through Baptism we all have the same dignity, we are children of God. Our dignity – the Pope said – is in Jesus Christ. And those who have received the ministry to guide, to preach, to administer the Sacraments, must not feel that they own special powers, that they are masters. “They must put themselves in the service of the community, helping it in its journey of holiness with joy”.


The Church – said Pope Francis –“ entrusts the witness of this pastoral lifestyle to the new Cardinals”:

“Yesterday’s Consistory and today’s Eucharistic Celebration have offered us a precious occasion to experience the Catholicity, the Universality of the Church which is well represented by the variegated origins of the members of the College of Cardinals, who are gathered in tight communion around the Successor of Peter”.

And the Pope prayed that the Lord may grant these men the grace to work towards the unity of the Church, and to build this unity because – he said – unity is more important than conflict. “The unity of the Church is in Christ”.

The Pope concluded his address with an appeal for prayers for the bishops, the cardinals and the Pope so that they may serve the People of God, because – he said – the vocation of a bishop, a cardinal, the Pope is to be a servant in the name of Christ.

“Pray for us so that we may be good servants: good servants not good masters!” (No to divisions between Christians.)

This is an effort to drive a wedge between Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Holy Catholic Church. Much like Ratzinger/Benedict before him, Bergoglio believes that the “church” is “catholic” in the sense of the universality of all the baptized.

The Antipope Emeritus said the following in Cologne, Germany, on Friday, August 19, 2005:

We all know there are numerous models of unity and you know that the Catholic Church also has as her goal the full visible unity of the disciples of Christ, as defined by the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council in its various Documents (cf. Lumen Gentium, nn. 8, 13; Unitatis Redintegratio, nn. 2, 4, etc.). This unity, we are convinced, indeed subsists in the Catholic Church, without the possibility of ever being lost (cf. Unitatis Redintegratio, n. 4); the Church in fact has not totally disappeared from the world.

On the other hand, this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return:  that is, to deny and to reject one’s own faith history. Absolutely not!

It does not mean uniformity in all expressions of theology and spirituality, in liturgical forms and in discipline. Unity in multiplicity, and multiplicity in unity:  in my Homily for the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul on 29 June last, I insisted that full unity and true catholicity in the original sense of the word go together. As a necessary condition for the achievement of this coexistence, the commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed; it must constantly grow and mature. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Ecumenical meeting at the Archbishopric of Cologne, August 19, 2005.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is simply the “maturation” of the “commitment to unity must be constantly purified and renewed” as it “grows and matures.”

What the conciliar revolutionaries believe, however, is opposed to the Divine Constitution of the Catholic Church, something that Father Francis Connell illustrated over fifty-six years ago now:

“To characterize the relation between Catholics and Protestants as ‘unity-in-diversity’ is misleading, inasmuch as it implies that essentially Catholics are one with heretics, and that their diversities are only accidental. Actually, the very opposite is the true situation. For, however near an heretical sect may seem to be to the Catholic Church in its particular beliefs, a wide gulf separates them, insofar as the divinely established means whereby the message of God is to be communicated to souls–the infallible Magisterium of the Church–is rejected by every heretical sect. By telling Protestants that they are one with us in certain beliefs, in such wise as to give the impression that we regard this unity as the predominant feature of our relation with them, we are actually misleading them regarding the true attitude of the Catholic Church toward those who do not acknowledge Her teaching authority. (Father Francis Connell, Father Connell Answers Moral Questions, published in 1959 by Catholic University of America Press, p. 11; quoted in Fathers Dominic and Francisco Radecki, CMRI, TUMULTUOUS TIMES, p. 348.)

Obviously, this is as true of the conciliar sect itself as it defects from the Catholic Faith and promotes multiple heresies, including that concerning the very nature of Holy Mother Church herself.

The conciliar “popes” and “bishops” have trod the path of religious indifferentism  since the abandonment of the belief that the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church in favor of the “solution” by proposed by Father Ratzinger at the “Second” Vatican Council” (at the recommendation of a Lutheran “observer”), namely, that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church (Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964). This is all based upon the fallacious belief that the Orthodox churches and Protestant sects have gained “legitimacy” over time merely because that have existed for a long time.

No, I am not making this up.

One of the Jesuit “theologians” whose writings certainly influenced Jorge Mario Bergoglio was the late Father Walter Burghardt, S.J., who wrote that Protestant sects would not have existed and multiplied if it had been in violation of God’s will for this to occur. Never mind the fact that God has given man a free will to accept or to reject Him and the Sacred Deposit of Faith that He has revealed and entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. No, the likes of Walter Burghardt and those he influenced, such as Bergoglio, believe that the very existence of Protestant sects proves that they have the favor of God.

This very heresy has been preached in front Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Benedict XVI by the Capuchin friar who helped to “bless” “Cardinal” Bergoglio in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in 2006 with the “assistance of various charismatic Protestant “ministers,” Father Raniero Cantalamessa, O.FM., Cap.:

Yet, at the Vatican’s Good Friday Liturgy, 2002, the Preacher to the Papal Household, Capuchin Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa, said the other religions “are not merely tolerated by God …. but positively willed by Him as an expression of the inexhaustible richness of His grace and His will for everyone to be saved.” (4)

4. All quotes from Fr. Cantalamessa’s sermon are from the April 2, 2002 Catholic News Service report. (As found in John Vennari, From Pentecostalism to Apostasy by John Vennari)

“It is more important that men and women become holy,” Cantalamessa said, standing in the center of a magnificent basilica erected to celebrate the earthly might of Catholicism and the papacy, “than that they know the name of the one Savior.” (National Catholic Reporter, reporting on the same 2002 Good Friday “homily”)

One can preach such heresy when one believes that doctrine is unimportant, when one believes that doctrine has little or nothing to do with believing in and following Christ the King as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church. Father Raniero Cantalamessa shares his “pope’s” disdain for doctrine, something that he made clear in an Advent “homily” at the end of 2012:

Last time we meditated on Paul’s conversion as a metanoia, a change of mind, in the way of conceiving salvation. Paul, however, did not convert to a doctrine, be it also the doctrine of justification through faith; he converted to a person! Before a change of thought, his was a change of heart, the encounter with a living person. Often used is the expression “stroke of lightning” to indicate a love at first sight that sweeps away every obstacle; in no case is this metaphor more appropriate than for St. Paul.

Let us see how this change of heart shines from the text just heard. He speaks of the “surpassing worth” (hyperechon) of knowing Christ, and it is known that in this case, as in the whole Bible, to know does not indicate only an intellectual discovery, having an idea of something, but a vital and profound bond, an entering into relation with the object known. The same is true for the expression “that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share in his sufferings.” “To know sharing in sufferings” does not mean, obviously, to have an idea, but to experience suffering.

It so happened that I read this passage in a particular moment of my life in which I also found myself before a choice. I was concerned with Christology, I had written and read so much on this argument, but when I read “that I may know him,” I understood all of a sudden that that simple personal pronoun “him” (autòn) contained more truth about Jesus Christ than all the books written or read about him. I understood that, for the Apostle, Christ was not an ensemble of doctrines, heresies, dogmas; he was a living person, present and very real who could be designated with a simple pronoun, as is done, when one speaks of someone who is present, indicating him with the finger.

The effect of falling in love is double. On one hand there is a drastic reduction to one, a concentration on the person loved that makes all the rest of the world pass to a second plane; on the other hand, it renders one capable of suffering anything for the person loved, accepting the loss of everything. We see both these effects realized to perfection at the moment in which the Apostle discovers Christ: “For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as refuse.”

He has accepted the loss of his privileges of “Jew of Jews,” the esteem and friendship of his teachers and fellow countrymen, the hatred and commiseration of all those who did not understand how a man like him was able to allow himself to be seduced by a sect of fanatics without art or position. In the second Letter to the Corinthians is found the impressive list of all the things suffered for Christ (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:24-28).

The Apostle himself found the word that alone contains all: “Christ has made me his own.” It could also be translated as seized, fascinated, or with an expression of Jeremiah, “seduced” by Christ. Those in love do not hold back, it has been done by so many mystics at the height of their ardor. I have no difficulty, therefore, imagining Paul who, in an impetus of joy after his conversion, shouts alone to the trees on the seashore that which he would later write to the Philippians: “Christ has made me his own! Christ has made me his own!” (Father Cantalamessa’s 2nd Advent Sermon)

This Modernist effort to separate the “person” of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ from the doctrines that He Himself has revealed and entrusted to His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication for the salvation of the men for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross is blasphemy of the highest order. How can there be a “division” between what Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has taught and His Person? The Act of Faith which we pray every day teaches us that God Himself has revealed His truths to us:

O my God, I firmly believe that Thou art one God, in three Divine Persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost: I believe that Thy Divine Son became Man, and died for our sins, and that He will come to judge the living and the dead.  I believe these and all the truths which the Holy Catholic Church teaches, because Thou hast revealed them, Who can neither deceive nor be deceived.  Amen.

It is not possible to love Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ truly and perfectly unless one submits to everything He has revealed to us through His Catholic Church without one iota of dissent. The conciliar revolutionaries, including the likes of of Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis and Raniero Cantalamessa reject this, dismissing doctrines that have been defined and defended by the authority of the Catholic Church, which is guided infallibly in these proclamations by the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, and dismissing as irrelevant the heresies that have come from the devil to deceive souls that have been denounced, condemned and anathematized by Holy Mother Church under the inspiration and protection of the same God the Holy Ghost.

It must remembered in this regard that Ratzinger/Benedict himself went into Protestant church buildings and spoke words of reaffirmation to those who were present, including when he visited the Lutheran church in Rome, Italy, on Laetare Sunday, March 14, 2010:

And this poses for us the question of ecumenism:  sorrow at having broken this “we”, at having split the one path into so many paths. As a result the witness we must give is obscured and love cannot find its full expression. What must we say in this regard? Today we hear many complaints about the fact that ecumenism has reached a stalemate and that there are mutual accusations. Yet I think we should first of all be grateful that so much unity already exists. It is wonderful that today, Laetare Sunday, we can pray together, sing the same hymns, listen to the same word of God, explain it and seek to understand it together; that we look to the one Christ whom we see and to whom we wish to belong and that, in this manner, we are already witnessing that he is one, the One who has called us all and to whom, in the deepest way possible, we all belong. I believe that above all it is this that we should show the world:  not every sort of dispute and conflict, but joy and gratitude at the fact that the Lord is granting this to us and that real unity exists that can become ever deeper and become increasingly a testimony of Christ’s word, of Christ’s way in this world. Of course, this must not satisfy us, although we must be grateful for these shared dimensions. Yet the fact that in the essentials, in the celebration of the Blessed Eucharist we are unable to drink from the same cup, we are unable to gather round the same altar, cannot but fill us with sorrow for it is we who are guilty of this, we who cloud this testimony. It must make us inwardly restless on our journey toward greater unity in the knowledge that, basically, the Lord alone can give this to us. For a unity agreed by us would be a human act, hence brittle, like everything made by the human hand. Let us give ourselves to him, let us seek to know and love him, to see him ever better. Let us therefore allow him to lead us, truly, to full unity, for which we should pray with every urgency at this moment. (Visit to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Rome.)

So much unity?

So much unity?

To Pope Leo XIII for help:

Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which is the first of those bonds which unite man to God, and whence we receive the name of the faithful – “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. iv., 5). That is, as there is one Lord and one baptism, so should all Christians, without exception, have but one faith. And so the Apostle St. Paul not merely begs, but entreats and implores Christians to be all of the same mind, and to avoid difference of opinions: “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms amongst you, and that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment” (I Cor. i., 10). Such passages certainly need no interpreter; they speak clearly enough for themselves. Besides, all who profess Christianity allow that there can be but one faith. It is of the greatest importance and indeed of absolute necessity, as to which many are deceived, that the nature and character of this unity should be recognized. And, as We have already stated, this is not to be ascertained by conjecture, but by the certain knowledge of what was done; that is by seeking for and ascertaining what kind of unity in faith has been commanded by Jesus Christ. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

As was the case with his predecessor, Wojtyla/John Paul II, and his is the case now with his successor, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI remains without any regard at all for the honor and glory and majesty of God as he dared to lend credibility to false places of worship and dares to state publicly that those who reject the following errors can give any kind of “witness” other than that which is false:

  1. Lutherans do not believe that Our Lord instituted a visible, hierarchical church.
  2. Lutherans thus reject Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility.
  3. Lutherans believe that one is saved by making a “profession of faith” in Our Lord, “confessing” their sins to Him privately without the mediation of an alter Christus acting in persona Christi in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance, meaning that there is very little that one can do to “lose” his “salvation” thereafter.
  4. Lutherans believe that the minister is the president of the gathered assembly, not one who offers the unbloody re-presentation of Our Lord’s Sacrifice of the Cross to His Co-Equal Father in Spirit and in Truth.
  5. The Lutheran teaching on the Eucharist is heretical, specifically rejecting the Catholic teaching on the meaning of Transubstantiation (see in, with and under“).
  6. As noted above, Lutherans reject Apostolic (Sacred) Tradition as a source of Divine Revelation.
  7. Lutherans teach that each individual is his own interpreter of what is contained in Sacred Scripture.
  8. Lutherans reject the Marian dogmas defined by the authority of the Catholic Church.
  9. Lutherans reject Purgatory as taught and defined by the authority of the Catholic Church.
  10. Regardless of the conciliar Vatican’s Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, the Lutheran concept of Justification was condemned by the Council of Trent, which happened to have met under the infallible guidance and protection of God the Holy Ghost.

So much Unity?

Joint witness?

How about so much apostasy and betrayal?

And it is beneath contempt for the false “pontiff” to have spoken of any kind of “mutual fault” for Martin Luther’s revolution that shed so much blood and has devastated so many countless numbers of souls (Unity will only come from God, Benedict says).

Mutual fault?

The fault is entirely on the side of the lecherous, drunken heretic named Martin Luther, a corrupt monk who wanted to find a “theology” to justify himself in his own refusal to reform his life and to keep his vow of celibacy inviolate.

Gone from the minds of the conciliar revolutionaries are words such as those written by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, and Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943, that have been cited in recent articles on this site. Also gone from the minds of these figures of Antichrist are the words below, contained in Pope Leo XIII’s Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 29, 1984, that were addressed to the Orthodox but apply to Protestants as well:

Weigh carefully in your minds and before God the nature of Our request.  It is not for any human motive, but impelled by Divine Charity and a desire for the salvation of all, that We advise the reconciliation and union with the Church of Rome; and We mean a perfect and complete union, such as could not subsist in any way if nothing else was brought about but a certain kind of agreement in the Tenets of Belief and an intercourse of Fraternal love.  The True Union between Christians is that which Jesus Christ, the Author of the Church, instituted and desired, and which consists in a Unity of Faith and Unity of Government. (Pope Leo XIII, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 20, 1894.)

The conciliar revolutionaries do not believe this. They believe that “some unity” is “good enough.”

There is a great and very sad irony in all of this.

That is, by believing that there is “some unity” or “so much unity” between Catholics and Protestants and the Orthodox, the conciliar “popes” have taught it is an “ecumenism of the heart.” This “spiritual ecumenism” was the handiwork of the late Abbe Paul Couturier, a direct disciple of the late Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., the infamous theological and biological evolutionist. “Spiritual ecumenism,” the belief that is the desire to be “one” rather than conversion to the true Faith is what matters to God, was that was condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928. This condemnation has been ignored by the conciliar “popes” as Couturier was referenced at footnote fifty in Wojtyla/John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, and cited explicitly by Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on August 19, 2005, in the address cited earlier in this commentary.

In other words, “partial communion” is what matters. And in this, you see, the conciliar revolutionaries are of one mind and one heart with those in the “recognize while resist” movement” who believe that “partial adherence” to the Catholic Faith is “good enough” to maintain them as Catholics in good standing and as legitimate office-holders within the Catholic Church.  This is indeed quite ironic.

As we know, however, the Catholic Church teaches that one must adhere to everything that is contained in the Deposit of Faith without exception. One who does not do so is simply not a Catholic.

Saint Francis de Sales pointed this out in 1622. Pope Leo XIII did so Two hundred seventy-four years later:

With reference to its object, faith cannot be greater for some truths than for others. Nor can it be less with regard to the number of truths to be believed. For we must all believe the very same thing, both as to the object of faith as well as to the number of truths. All are equal in this, because everyone must believe all the truths of faith–both those which God Himself has directly revealed, as well as those he has revealed through His Church. Thus, I must believe as much as you and you as much as I, and all other Christians similarly. He who does not believe all these mysteries is not Catholic and therefore will never enter Paradise. (Saint Francis de Sales, The Sermons of Saint Francis de Sales for Lent Given in 1622, republished by TAN Books and Publishers for the Visitation Monastery of Frederick, Maryland, in 1987, pp. 34-37.)

The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. “There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition” (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. “No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic” (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

Pope Benedict XV taught the same thing in his first encyclical letter, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914, reminding us as well of something that is categorically rejected by the counterfeit church of conciliarism and the conciliar “popes”: the Social Reign of Christ the King:

24. It is, moreover, Our will that Catholics should abstain from certain appellations which have recently been brought into use to distinguish one group of Catholics from another. They are to be avoided not only as “profane novelties of words,” out of harmony with both truth and justice, but also because they give rise to great trouble and confusion among Catholics. Such is the nature of Catholicism that it does not admit of more or less, but must be held as a whole or as a whole rejected: “This is the Catholic faith, which unless a man believe faithfully and firmly; he cannot be saved” (Athanas. Creed). There is no need of adding any qualifying terms to the profession of Catholicism: it is quite enough for each one to proclaim “Christian is my name and Catholic my surname,” only let him endeavour to be in reality what he calls himself.

25. Besides, the Church demands from those who have devoted themselves to furthering her interests, something very different from the dwelling upon profitless questions; she demands that they should devote the whole of their energy to preserve the faith intact and unsullied by any breath of error, and follow most closely him whom Christ has appointed to be the guardian and interpreter of the truth. There are to be found today, and in no small numbers, men, of whom the Apostle says that: “having itching ears, they will not endure sound doctrine: but according to their own desires they will heap up to themselves teachers, and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables” (II Tim. iv. 34). Infatuated and carried away by a lofty idea of the human intellect, by which God’s good gift has certainly made incredible progress in the study of nature, confident in their own judgment, and contemptuous of the authority of the Church, they have reached such a degree of rashness as not to hesitate to measure by the standard of their own mind even the hidden things of God and all that God has revealed to men. Hence arose the monstrous errors of “Modernism,” which Our Predecessor rightly declared to be “the synthesis of all heresies,” and solemnly condemned. We hereby renew that condemnation in all its fulness, Venerable Brethren, and as the plague is not yet entirely stamped out, but lurks here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully here and there in hidden places, We exhort all to be carefully on their guard against any contagion of the evil, to which we may apply the words Job used in other circumstances: “It is a fire that devoureth even to destruction, and rooteth up all things that spring” (Job xxxi. 12). Nor do We merely desire that Catholics should shrink from the errors of Modernism, but also from the tendencies or what is called the spirit of Modernism. Those who are infected by that spirit develop a keen dislike for all that savours of antiquity and become eager searchers after novelties in everything: in the way in which they carry out religious functions, in the ruling of Catholic institutions, and even in private exercises of piety.

Therefore it is Our will that the law of our forefathers should still be held sacred: “Let there be no innovation; keep to what has been handed down.” In matters of faith that must be inviolably adhered to as the law; it may however also serve as a guide even in matters subject to change, but even in such cases the rule would hold: “Old things, but in a new way.” (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)

11. Let the Princes and Rulers of peoples remember this truth, and let them consider whether it is a prudent and safe idea for governments or for states to separate themselves from the holy religion of Jesus Christ, from which their authority receives such strength and support. Let them consider again and again, whether it is a measure of political wisdom to seek to divorce the teaching of the Gospel and of the Church from the ruling of a country and from the public education of the young. Sad experience proves that human authority fails where religion is set aside. The fate of our first parent after the Fall is wont to come also upon nations. As in his case, no sooner had his will turned from God than his unchained passions rejected the sway of the will; so, too, when the rulers of nations despise divine authority, in their turn the people are wont to despise their human authority. There remains, of course, the expedient of using force to repress popular risings; but what is the result? Force can repress the body, but it cannot repress the souls of men. (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914.)

On every count, ladies and gentlemen, conciliarism and all efforts to “resist” it while remaining in “full communion” with those who profess it stand condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church, something that His Excellency Bishop Donald J. Sanborn made very clear in his methodical refutation of the emotionalism and lack of logic employed by His Excellency Bishop Richard Williamson to “prove” sedevacantism to be erroneous. Indeed, as Bishop Sanborn pointed out, the truth is that the “recognize while resist” is heretical of its every nature (see Bishop Donald Sanborn’s Refutation of Bishop Richard Williamson; there are other useful links on the Novus Ordo Watch Wire blog upon which Bishop Sanborn’s refutation is located).

Truth is what matters, not any kind of “strategy.”

Antichrist is not going to give us his “calling card” to announce himself. It will take reason and the sensus fidei recognize Antichrist and to reject him entirely. And is by the same use of reason and the sensus fidei that we can and must reject figures of Antichrist today, those figures of Antichrist who believe, speak and act in that which is opposed to Christ the King Himself. Remember, Antichrist is counting on the work of “useful idiots” who permit themselves to boiled alive like frogs to help prepare the way for his coming.

A true Successor of Saint Peter is not to be “pitied” as some kind of ignorant character whose words and actions must be kept from the view of the general public even though the current universal public face of apostasy makes sure that his narcissism is fed by every media outlet imaginable.

A true Successor of Saint Peter is not a buffoon who makes a mockery of the papacy as teaches every revolutionary shibboleth from the 1970s imaginable.

A true Successor of Saint Peter carries himself with dignity. He never disparages proper decorum or courtly manners, no less engages in the most crass, crude, vulgar and profane displays imaginable, each to demonstrate his own “humility” and “novel ways” in a display of ostentatious pretension to tickle the itching ears of the “people.”

A true Successor of Saint Peter is not to be hailed for speaking in terms that are “approximately Catholic” or contain “partial Catholicism” when he has denied outright–and for publication in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis–the fact that the Old Covenant has been superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ instituted at the Last Supper and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross.

A Catholic must hold to everything that is taught by Holy Mother Church as she has taught it without a shadow of change from time immemorial. To try to rationalize a supposed “pope’s” defections from the Catholic Faith is to engage in the same kind of reinvention of Catholic doctrine that the conciliar “popes” have used to justify one condemned proposition after another. To contend that one can “sift” through the words and actions of a true pope is to make a mockery of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility by have recourse, even if by inadvertence, to the false principles of Gallicanism that were condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, and mocked by Bishop Emil Bougaud, the Bishop of Laval, France, from 1887 to 1888:

6. The doctrine of the synod by which it professes that “it is convinced that a bishop has received from Christ all necessary rights for the good government of his diocese,” just as if for the good government of each diocese higher ordinances dealing either with faith and morals, or with general discipline, are not necessary, the right of which belongs to the supreme Pontiffs and the General Councils for the universal Church,schismatic, at least erroneous.

7. Likewise, in this, that it encourages a bishop “to pursue zealously a more perfect constitution of ecclesiastical discipline,” and this “against all contrary customs, exemptions, reservations which are opposed to the good order of the diocese, for the greater glory of God and for the greater edification of the faithful”; in that it supposes that a bishop has the right by his own judgment and will to decree and decide contrary to customs, exemptions, reservations, whether they prevail in the universal Church or even in each province, without the consent or the intervention of a higher hierarchic power, by which these customs, etc., have been introduced or approved and have the force of law,—leading to schism and subversion of hierarchic rule, erroneous.

8. Likewise, in that it says it is convinced that “the rights of a bishop received from Jesus Christ for the government of the Church cannot be altered nor hindered, and, when it has happened that the exercise of these rights has been interrupted for any reason whatsoever, a bishop can always and should return to his original rights, as often as the greater good of his church demands it”; in the fact that it intimates that the exercise of episcopal rights can be hindered and coerced by no higher power, whenever a bishop shall judge that it does not further the greater good of his church,—leading to schism, and to subversion of hierarchic government, erroneous. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)

The violent attacks of Protestantism against the Papacy, its calumnies and so manifest, the odious caricatures it scattered abroad, had undoubtedly inspired France with horror; nevertheless the sad impressions remained. In such accusations all, perhaps, was not false. Mistrust was excited., and instead of drawing closer to the insulted and outraged Papacy, France stood on her guard against it. In vain did Fenelon, who felt the danger, write in his treatise on the “Power of the Pope,” and, to remind France of her sublime mission and true role in the world, compose his “History of Charlemagne.” In vain did Bossuet majestically rise in the midst of that agitated assembly of 1682, convened to dictate laws to the Holy See, and there, in most touching accents, give vent to professions of fidelity and devotedness toward the Chair of St. Peter. We already notice in his discourse mention no longer made of the “Sovereign Pontiff.” The “Holy See,” the “Chair of St. Peter,” the “Roman Church,” were alone alluded to. First and alas! too manifest signs of coldness in the eyes of him who knew the nature and character of France! Others might obey through duty, might allow themselves to be governed by principle–France, never! She must be ruled by an individual, she must love him that governs her, else she can never obey.

These weaknesses should at least have been hidden in the shadow of the sanctuary, to await the time in which some sincere and honest solution of the misunderstanding could be given. But no! parliaments took hold of it, national vanity was identified with it. A strange spectacle was now seen. A people the most Catholic in the world; kings who called themselves the Eldest Sons of the Church and who were really such at heart; grave and profoundly Christian magistrates, bishops, and priests, though in the depths of their heart attached to Catholic unity,–all barricading themselves against the head of the Church; all digging trenches and building ramparts, that his words might not reach the Faithful before being handled and examined, and the laics convinced that they contained nothing false, hostile or dangerous. (Right Reverend Emile Bougaud, The Life of Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque. Published in 1890 by Benziger Brothers. Re-printed by TAN Books and Publishers, 1990, pp. 24-29.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis is a thoroughly deplorable human being, and those who who are in a position to speak out in defense of the holy integrity of the Catholic Faith and of the Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church while at the same time refusing to come to the defense of Our Lord, who was blasphemed yet again only yesterday by Bergoglio at the Casa Santa Marta, and the Blessed Virgin Mary as numerous articles contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith are denied outright or perverted beyond all recognition stand condemned by the following words of Pope Saint Leo the Great:

But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59 )

Those who want persist in their own delusional world in which it is contended that Jorge Mario is a member of the Catholic Church in good standing, no less a true Successor of Saint Peter, can do so. Their biggest enemy in this regard, however, are their favorite objects of scorn, sedevacantists. No, their biggest enemy in this regard is their “pope,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio, whose words and actions prove him to be a true revolutionary who is preparing the way for Antichrist.

Lent begins in but eight days. There is so much for which to make reparation. Contrary to what Jorge Mario Bergoglio keeps telling us, this is no time for a “party.” This is a time for prayer and fasting, offering up the sufferings of this moment as the consecrated slaves of Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

After Holy Mass, of course, the most powerful weapon that we have in this time of apostasy and betrayal is Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary. We must use this weapon well. We must use this spiritual weapon frequently in our battle against the principalities that have been unleashed at this time.

Although we know that the Immaculate Heart of Mary will triumph in the end, we must pray to Our Lady that we will persevere as members of the true Faith until the moment we are called to make an accounting of our lives at the Particular Judgment. There is no better way to do this than praying a Rosary right now, asking Our Lady to send us the graces that we need to cling to the true Faith in this life no matter what we may suffer for doing so in order to cling to her for all eternity in Heaven in the glory of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.



This entry was posted in The Bergoglio Files by Thomas Droleskey. Bookmark the permalink.

About Thomas Droleskey

Dr. Thomas A. Droleskey is a Catholic writer and speaker . He is the publisher-editor of Christ or, a site that has featured over 900 articles since the beginning of 2006, many dealing with his embrace of sedevacantism. Hundreds of his articles appeared in The Wanderer, the oldest weekly national Catholic newspaper, between 1992 and 2000. He was a contributor to The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture between 2001 and 2003. Droleskey's articles have appeared in the American Life League's Celebrate Life magazine. He also contributed articles to The Remnant and for Catholic Family News. His articles also appeared for two years in The Four Marks. Dr. Droleskey was an adjunct professor of political science at the C. W. Post Campus of Long Island University between January of 1991 and July of 2003, reprising his association there for a winter intersession course, which was taught between December 28, 2006, and January 11, 2007. He had taught political science around the nation since January of 1974, receiving numerous awards for excellence in teaching. Many of his students have converted to the Catholic Faith. Formerly a pro-life activist, Droleskey was the candidate for Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York on the Right to Life Party line in 1986. He was the party's candidate for Supervisor of the Town of Oyster Bay in 1997, and he challenged then Senator Alfonse M. D'Amato for the party's senatorial nomination in 1998, receiving over 37% of the primary vote. Droleskey has campaigned for pro-life candidates around the country. He is now retired from all involvement in partisan politics, concentrating instead on the promotion of the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Mary our Immaculate Queen. Dr. Droleskey has lectured extensively around the nation for the past twenty years, driving nearly 1,000,000 miles in the last twenty-five years of his lecturing around the nation. His thirty-six hour lecture program, Living in the Shadow of the Cross, has been given in twenty different venues across the United States. Another lecture program, "To be Catholic from the Womb to the Tomb," was given in eleven different places across the nation. His work is dedicated to the restoration of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition and of the Social Reign of Christ the King. Droleskey is devoted to the establishment of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ and the Queenship of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. His first book, Christ in the Voting Booth, was published by Hope of Saint Monica, Inc., 1998. His second book, There Is No Cure for this Condition, was published by Chartres Communications in 2001. G.I.R.M. Warfare (The Traditional Latin Mass versus the General Instruction to the Roman Missal) was published in 2004; Restoring Christ as the King of All Nations, Droleskey's compendium of fifty-three articles about the immutable doctrine of the Social Kingship of Jesus Christ, was published in June of 2005. Three e-books, There Is No Shortcut to Cure This Condition, Conversion in Reverse: How the Ethos of Americanism Converted Catholics and Contributed to the Rise of Conciliarism and Meeting the Mets: A Quirky History of a Quirky Team, have been published in the past four years. The latter book, for which this particular Word Press site was created initially in 2012, is also available in a paperback format. Droleskey served for some years on the Board of Advisers of the Society of Catholic Social Scientists. He has served on the boards of the National Association of Private and Independent Catholic Schools and on the board of 100% Pro-Life Pac. He is listed in the 2001-2002 edition of the Marquis Who's Who in America. Droleskey, who was born on November 24, 1951, is married to the former Sharon Collins. Their first child, Lucy Mary Norma, was born in Sioux City, Iowa, on March 27, 2002. A native of Long Island, Droleskey and his family now live in the United States of America.