Although work continues on my review of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s first year as the universal public face of apostasy, it is necessary now and again to keep up with the current assaults against the Holy Faith being waged by the Argentine Apostate’s surrogates. Three of these assaults will be highlighted in what should be a reasonably short article. Well, reasonably short might be used in a comparative sense when applied to these articles. (As it turned out, this article is shorter than One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part four. However, it is pretty substantial in its own right.)
Teilhard de Chardin, Call Your Office
First off for today is a little noticed talk that Senor Jorge’s Jesuit superior, “Father” Adolfo Nicolá, S.J., gave in Tokyo, Japan, on Friday, March 14, 2014, Ember Friday in the First Week of Lent. Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes exactly what his “Father General” does concerning the nature of what is purported to be the Catholic Faith:
Religion is less a code of doctrines and teachings than a sensitivity to the “dimensions of transcendence” that underlie the human experience, the head of Pope Francis’ Jesuit order said Friday.
Likening the religious experience to a person who can appreciate the intricacies and variations of classical music, Jesuit Fr. Adolfo Nicolás said “religion is first of all very much more like this musical sense than a rational system of teachings and explanations.”
“Religion involves first of all a sensitivity to, an openness to, the dimensions of transcendence, of depth, of gratuity, of beauty that underlie our human experiences,” Nicolás said. “But of course, this is a sensitivity that is threatened today by a purely economic or materialist mindset which deadens this sensitivity to deeper dimension of reality.”
Nicolás, who as the superior general of the Society of Jesus leads approximately 17,000 Jesuits worldwide, spoke during an event Friday through Saturday at the Pontifical Gregorian University to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Jesuit-run Sophia University in Tokyo.
A former student of Sophia in the 1960s and a former provincial of the Jesuits’ Japanese province, Nicolás opened the event, “Between Past and Future, the Mission of the Catholic Church in Asia: the contribution of Sophia University.” (Jesuit head: Religion isn’t doctrine, but sensitivity to human experience.)
This is a perfect description of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes. It is also a perfect description of what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believes. And, of course, it is what the proto-theological evolutionist of them all, Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., to the core of his pantheist being.
Permit me me to prove this to you.
It was in May of 2010 that then then universal public face of apostasy, Ratzinger/Benedict, authorized a musical concert to be held in the Paul VI Audience Hall. The musical concert was designed as a means to an overcome the alleged “difficulties” in forging “stronger ties of communion” with the Orthodox churches and the Protestant “ecclesial communities by emphasizing the language of “love.” Ratzinger/Benedict believed then and he believes now that music and art can be instruments to speak to our “hearts” to have the kind of “love” that is necessary to “purify memory” and to forge a path of “progress” in the future as a “shared witness” to defeat “dictatorship of relativism.” This ignores the inconvenient little fact that Ratzinger/Benedict has been and continues to be one of the chief adherents of the “dictatorship of relativism” by reducing Catholic Faith to the level of relativism through his dogmatically condemned and philosophically absurd “hermeneutic of continuity and discontinuity.”
Yes, it is simple just to deny tenets of the Catholic Faith in the name of a false concept of “love” and “shared witness.”
This is what united Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and the Russian Orthodox four years ago, as one can see by examining these comments of Archbishop Hilarion, the head of external (ecumenical) affairs for the Russian Orthodox Church, on May 19, 2010, the day before a musical concert featuring works of Russian composers in the Paul VI Audience in the Vatican on Thursday, May 20, 2010:
Meeting journalists May 19, Metropolitan Hilarion said, “It seems to me that there are things which cannot be transmitted either through theological discourse or diplomacy, but can be transmitted through the language of art.”
While theological dialogue is essential for resolving the 1,000-year-old split between the Christian East and West, “the dialogue of the heart” is also necessary, he said.
“Through music we can say something we cannot say through words or diplomatic means or even through theological terms,” he said. “The dialogue between cultures can bring many good results. It can liberate us from prejudices, from negative feelings toward each other, which we may have inherited from the past.” (Musical notes: Vatican, Russian Orthodox try new path toward harmony.)
This is saying essentially that the Holy Faith is irrational, that it cannot be communicated or understood by precise language contained in dogmatic pronouncements. We must thus surrender solely to the affections of the heart, which will be strong enough to forge bonds that cannot otherwise be forged in the midst of difficult differences, perhaps some made by “man-made” decisions that do not touch the “essence” of the “Christian faith.” This, of course, is blasphemy against God the Holy Ghost, Who has always infallibly guided Holy Mother Church to express the truths contained in Divine Revelation, inspiring our true popes and the fathers of our twenty legitimate councils to express the truths of the Faith in clear, precise terms that in such a consistent manner that it could be said that every pope and council spoke with but “one vice” (cum una voce) prior to the “election” of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII on October 28, 1958.
Music and art are, of course, important means by which which we, who are sensible beings, can be inspired to the things of Heaven. They are important means by the which the immutable truths of the Catholic Faith can be communicated to demonstrate the order and perfection of the good God, Who has given man the creative powers to compose and perform works of music and to convey the Faith through glorious works of art and architecture. Most Catholics do not read the great encyclical letters of the Church and they are unfamiliar, at least for the most part, with every point contained in the Denziger compendium of doctrine or in the 1917 Code of Canon Law. This is why Holy Mother Church, in her infinite wisdom as she is guided by God the Holy Ghost, has been careful to protect the Sacred Liturgy as a means of elevating the soul to Heaven, not of being a means of accommodating itself to the transitory fads of the time.
Pope Pius XI made this precise point in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925, explaining why he was instituting the Feast of the Universal Kingship of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as a means to explicate a doctrine that needed to be enshrined liturgically in order to reach the hearts and souls of men:
That these blessings may be abundant and lasting in Christian society, it is necessary that the kingship of our Savior should be as widely as possible recognized and understood, and to the end nothing would serve better than the institution of a special feast in honor of the Kingship of Christ. For people are instructed in the truths of faith, and brought to appreciate the inner joys of religion far more effectually by the annual celebration of our sacred mysteries than by any official pronouncement of the teaching of the Church. Such pronouncements usually reach only a few and the more learned among the faithful; feasts reach them all; the former speak but once, the latter speak every year – in fact, forever. The church’s teaching affects the mind primarily; her feasts affect both mind and heart, and have a salutary effect upon the whole of man’s nature. Man is composed of body and soul, and he needs these external festivities so that the sacred rites, in all their beauty and variety, may stimulate him to drink more deeply of the fountain of God’s teaching, that he may make it a part of himself, and use it with profit for his spiritual life. (See also Pope Saint Pius X’s Tra Le Sollecitudini, November 22, 1903.)
Pope Pius XI saw music as a means to convey the truths of the Catholic Faith, which is always expressed in clear, precise terms, not as a means to “bridge” differences that really do not matter all that much as God sees the intention of the hearts. Symbols are, of course, essential in the communication of the truths of the Catholic Faith. They are never used to make ambiguous what is clear, to deny what has been defined, to seek to accommodate heretics and schismatics in the name of a false sense of “love” or “communion.” This is precisely, however, how art and music and architecture have been used in the counterfeit church of concilairism. Anyone up for a chorus or two “Glory and Praise to Our God” or “Let There Be Peace On Earth”?
Ratzinger/Benedict, whose own “new theology” is founded in large measure on the nebulous view of doctrine and theology possessed by the Orthodox, put in his two Euros’ worth after that aforementioned concert forty-six months ago now:
VATICAN CITY, 21 MAY 2010 (VIS) – Yesterday evening in the Vatican’s Paul VI Hall, Benedict XVI attended a concert in honour of his birthday and the anniversary of his election as Pope, offered by Kirill I, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia. The concert, which included pieces by nineteenth- and twentieth-century Russian composers, was played by the National Orchestra of Russia conducted by Carlo Ponti, with the Synodal Choir of Moscow and the Horn Capella of St. Petersburg.
At the end of the concert, which was part of the initiative “Days of Russian Culture and Spirituality in the Vatican”, the Holy Father listened to a message sent by Patriarch Kirill and was greeted by Archbishop Hilarion of Volokolamsk, president of the Department for External Church Affairs of the Patriarchate of Moscow and composer of one of the pieces played during the concert. The Pope then pronounced a brief address.
“Deep in these works”, he said, “is the soul of the Russian people, and therewith the Christian faith, both of which find extraordinary expression in divine liturgy and in the liturgical chants with which it is always accompanied. There is, in fact, a close and fundamental bond between Russian music and liturgical chant. It is in the liturgy and from the liturgy that a large part of the artistic creativity of Russian musicians is released and expressed, giving life to masterpieces which deserve to be better known in the West”.
Such nineteenth- and twentieth-century Russian composers as Mussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov “treasured the rich musical- liturgical heritage of Russian tradition, re-modelling it and harmonising it with musical themes and experiences of the West. …
Music, then, anticipates and in some way creates encounter, dialogue and synergy between East and West, between tradition and modernity.
“It was of just such a unified and harmonious vision of Europe that the Venerable John Paul II was thinking when, referring to the image of the ‘two lungs’ suggested by Vjaceslav Ivanovic Ivanov, he expressed his hope in a renewed awareness of the continent’s profound and shared cultural and religious roots, without which today’s Europe would be deprived of a soul or, at least, victim of a reduced and partial vision”.
“Modern culture, particularly in Europe, runs the risk of amnesia, of forgetting and thus abandoning the extraordinary heritage aroused and inspired by Christian faith, which is the essential framework of the culture of Europe, and not only of Europe. The Christian roots of the continent are, in fact, made up not only of religious life and the witness of so many generation of believers, but also of the priceless cultural and artistic heritage which is the pride and precious resource of the peoples and countries in which Christian faith, in its various expressions, has entered into dialogue with culture and the arts”.
“Today too these roots are alive and fruitful in East and West, and can in fact inspire a new humanism, a new season of authentic human progress in order to respond effectively to the numerous and sometimes crucial challenges that our Christian communities and societies have to face: first among them that of secularism, which not only impels us to ignore God and His designs, but ends up by denying the very dignity of human beings, in view of a society regulated only by selfish interests”.
The Holy Father concluded: “Let us again let Europe breathe with both lungs, restore a soul not only to believers, but to all peoples of the continent, promote trust and hope, rooting them in the millennial experience of the Christian faith. The coherent, generous and courageous witness of believers must not now be lacking, so that together we may look to our shared future, a future in which the freedom and dignity of all men and women are recognised as a fundamental value, in which openness to the Transcendent, the experience of faith, is recognised as an essential element of the human being“. (MODERN CULTURE RISKS FORGETTING CHRISTIAN HERITAGE.)
In other words, the “heart” is what matters, not “doctrine,” as it is through the “witness of believers” that a “new humanism” can be created to provide “an openness to the Transcendent” and thus to realize that “faith” is an “essential element of the human being.
This is nothing other than Modernism’s doctrine that religious faith springs from within the human heart. It is what Ratzinger/Benedict still believes to the core of his own Modernist being in retirement, and it is what his successor, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, believes. All that Father” Adolfo Nicolá, S.J., did six days ago in Tokyo was to give a very exact summary of what his fellow lay Jesuit subordinate, Bergoglio, and his predecessor, Ratzinger/Benedict believe.
Although there are many ways by which to refute the patently false belief about “faith” as presented by Father” Adolfo Nicolá, S.J., and conciliar luminaries such as Ratzinge/Benedict and Bergoglio/Francis, perhaps a very pertinent means to do so is to draw from the life of Saint Cuthbert, whose feast, although not on the General Roman Calendar, is today, March 20, 2014, as recorded by the Venerable Bede:
“With those who have wandered form the unity of the Catholic faith, either through not celebrating Easter at the proper time or through evil living, you are to have no dealings. Never forget that if you should ever be forced to make the choice of two evils I would prefer that you left the island, taking my bones with you, than you should be a party to wickedness on any pretext whatsoever, bending your necks to the yoke of schism. Strive most diligently to learn the catholic statutes of the fathers and put them into practice. Make it your special care to carry out those rules of the monastic life which God in His divine mercy has seen fit to give you through my ministry. I know that, though some may see that my teachings are not to be easily dismissed.” (Saint Cuthbert, as quoted by The Venerable Bede, The Life of Cuthbert. The Age of Bede, translated by J. F. Webb and edited with an introduction by D. H. Farmer, Penguin Books, published in 1965 and reprinted with revisions in 1988 and 1998, p. 95.)
This can be put another way:
- For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward
- not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
- but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
- Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.
The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.
Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .
3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.
And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.
But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870, Session III.)
Those who do not see that Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes exactly as does his community’s superior and thus hath not the Catholic Faith and is thus incapable of being a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter is not being intellectually honest or, perhaps more to the point, is more concerned about human respect and “credibility” among his or her friends and associates.
No Missionary Activity to Convert Those of the Old Covenant; Goodbye to the even the watered-down Novus Ordo Good Friday Prayer for the Jews
Demonstrating the truth of what was written on the original Christ or Chaos site five years ago, Nothing New Under the Conciliar Sun, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s supposed theological advisor on Talmudism, Gregor Maria Hoff, has repeated what has become a conciliar doctrine (yes, Jorge, your false church does have doctrines, and you adhere to them with great rigidity and without any compromise or flexibility whatsoever), namely, that what is purported to be the Catholic Church has no mission to undertake the conversion of the Jews:
(Bonn / Rome) The German Fundamental Theologian Gregor Maria Hoff is the new advisor to Pope Francis on Judaism. Last 20 February he was appointed Advisor of the Pontifical Commission for Religiosu Relations with Jews founded in 1974 by Pope Paul VI.. Hoff is Professor of Fundamental Theology and Ecumenical Theology at the Catholic Theological Faculty of Paris-Lodron University in Salzburg. He already belongs to the Sub-Commission for Religious Relations with Judaism of the German Bishops’ Conference. This is followed by the appointment to Rome, where he takes the place of the Aachen theologians for Ecumenism, Hans Hermann Henrix. The preliminary discussions, said Hoff in an interview with the Deutsche Welle, had already begun in mid-2013, soon after the election of Pope Francis.Gregor Maria Hoff Papal Consultor to JudaismThe Commission, which was created in the aftermath of the Conciliar Constitution of Nostra Aetate in 1965, is concerned among other things, with the preparation of the Pope’s trip to the Holy Land. Otherwise the task belongs, says Hoff, to the Commission, especially that of drawing “significant documents” that bring “expression to the positions of the church, the pope and the Vatican to Judaism”.One of the topics with which Hoff is concerned as the Fundamental Theologian and now as Pope Consultor, is the question of “whether the evangelization of the Jews may be an issue for the Church.” Because, says Hoff apodictically : “The Catholic Church is operating no mission to the Jews.” Pope Francis is supposed to have said, says Hoff, in his Apostolic Letter Gospel Gaudium “emphasizes that God continues to act in the people of the Old Covenant, therefore that God in his covenant first chose the Jewish people of Israel.” Other issues facing the theologian and ecumenicist concerns, “Trinity and monotheism.”2015: 50th Anniversary of Nostra Atetate – Francis “Rethinks” Good Friday “Hopefully”The Roman Commission would have to deal with the “fifty year anniversary” of Nostra Aetate, which is celebrated in 2015. This conciliar Constitution had “meant a very large incision”. Because “since then the relations between the Catholic Church and Judaism have changed dramatically,” said Hoff. This applies “especially in Germany,” where the relations are “very good and intense”.During the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI. there were “even irritations”, due to the reformulation of the Good Friday prayer for the traditional rite.Hoff holds the new version as “problematic” and “hopes” himself “that he thinks this phrase will be revised again by Pope Francis.” It doesn’t mean it’s a “real burden” in places. The relationships were “so good” that one “such irritation can be settled between us.”The “importance of the State of Israel’s existence,” because of the “theological significance of the country” imposed “election of the Jewish people” and the “question of the existence of the State of Palestine as well as the human rights issues”… “is a very sensitive matter, which touches part of the theological issues,” said Hoff.Pope to Visit Israel, not the Holy LandHoff in his interview with Deutsche Wellenever spoke of a trip of Pope Francis to the “Holy Land”, but only about a “trip to Israel.” On this trip “to Israel” it will be shown, which accents the Pope “will set”. “Francis will certainly be good for the Catholic-Jewish relations,” assured the German Fundamental Theologian and pope consultant. This would have been previously shown in his “very strong personal relations with the Jewish community in Buenos Aires“.Hoff believes that the Pope would bring in “Israel” a “certain” climate in the talks and will make a “programmatic” statement with the contents: “God continues to act in the people of the Old Covenant.
“Otherwise would the Pope in the Middle East issue take any particular position. He would then only be “lost in the nettles” said Hoff.(German Advisor to Argentine Apostate Says: No Mission to the Jews.)
First, the “irritation” caused by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s 2008 “revision” of the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews in the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition was followed by conciliar “mea culpas” from the likes of Walter Kasper and Gianfranco Ravsi, both of whom said at the time what Herr Hoff has said more recently: that what they think is the Catholic Church has no “mission” to the Jews:
The reformulated text no longer speaks about the conversion of the Jews as some Jewish critics wrongly affirm. The text is a prayer inspired by Saint Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 11, which is the very text that speaks also of the unbroken covenant. It takes up Paul’s eschatological hope that in the end of time all Israel will be saved. As a prayer the text lays all in the hands of God and not in ours. It says nothing about the how and when. Therefore there is nothing about missionary activities by which we may take Israel’s salvation in our hands. (“Cardinal” Kasper’s Letter to Rabbi Rosen)
We repeat: this is the Christian vision, and it is the hope of the Church that prays. It is not a programmatic proposal of theoretical adherence, nor is it a missionary strategy of conversion. It is the attitude characteristic of the prayerful invocation according to which one hopes also for the persons considered near to oneself, those dear and important, a reality that one maintains is precious and salvific. An important exponent of French culture in the 20th century, Julien Green, wrote that “it is always beautiful and legitimate to wish for the other what is for you a good or a joy: if you think you are offering a true gift, do not hold back your hand.” Of course, this must always take place in respect for freedom and for the different paths that the other adopts. But it is an expression of affection to wish for your brother what you consider a horizon of light and life. (“Archbishop” Gianfranco Ravasi, A Bishop and a Rabbi Defend the Prayer for the Salvation of the Jews.)
This means that the first pope, Saint Peter, was wrong to seek the conversion of the Jews as he preached on Pentecost Sunday following the descent of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, upon the Apostles and our dear Blessed Mother and others gathered in the same Upper Room in Jerusalem where Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ had instituted the Holy Priesthood and the Holy Eucharist fifty-three days before.
This means that Our Lord was wrong to have sought the conversion of Saul of Tarsus while he was on the road to Damascus to persecute more Christians there after presiding over the stoning of Saint Stephen the Protomartyr.
This means that Saint Vincent Ferrer was wrong to have sought the conversion of thousands upon thousands of Jews in the Iberian Peninsula and southern France in the early Fifteenth Century.
This means that Our Lady was wrong to have sought the conversion of the Catholic-hating Jew, Alphonse Ratisbonne, as she appeared to him as she does on the Miraculous Medal while Ratisbonne visited the Church of San Adrea delle Fratte on January 20, 1842.
This means that Pope Pius IX was wrong to have approved the plans of Father Maria-Alphonse Ratisbonne to leave the Society of Jesus to establish a mission in Palestine to seek the conversion of Jews.
This means that the conciliar revolutionaries hath not the Catholic Faith. As will be demonstrated later, there is no such thing as “partial-credit Catholicism.”
Walter “Cardinal” Cranmer, I mean, Kasper, has been on record since 2001 stating that the Catholic Church has “no mission” to the Jews. Here is the proof of this fact as found in The Great Facade:
The postconciliar Vatican has not been altogether straightforward regarding the Jews’ need for conversion. either. The fashionable doctrine these days–again, contrary to all prior papal teaching–is the claim that the Old Covenant that God established with the Jews, far from having been superseded by the New Covenant of Christ and the Church, is in fact still in effect. Thus we have John Paul II telling a Jewish audience: “The first dimension of this dialogue, that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God, and that of the New Covenant , is at the same time a dialogue within our Church, that is to say, between the first and second part of her Bible.” “Jews and Christians,” he went on to say, “as children of Abraham, are called to be a blessing to the world” by “committing themselves together for peace and justice among all men and peoples.” Such statements seem impossible to reconcile with the Church’s divine commandment to convert the Jews for the salvation of their souls. In fact, Cardinal Kasper, whom the Pope has also made the President of the Pontifical Council for Religious Relations with the Jews, has repudiated the conversion of Jews as explicitly as he has repudiated the return of the Protestant dissidents to the one true Church:
[T]he old theory of substitution is gone since the Second Vatican Council. for us Christians today the covenant with the Jewish people is a living heritage, a living reality…. Therefore, the Church believes that Judaism, i.e., the faithful response of the Jewish people to God’s irrevocable covenant, is salvific for them, because God is faithful to his promises…. Thus mission, in this strict sense, cannot be used with regard to Jews, who believe in the true and one God. Therefore–and this is characteristic–there does not exist any Catholic missionary organization for Jews. There is dialogue with Jews; no mission in this proper sense of the word towards them. (Address at 17th meeting of the International Catholic-Jewish Liaison Committee, New York, May 1, 2001, )
Once again, Kasper received no correction from the Pope or any Vatican dicastery On the contrary, he has received only a promotion to his current position of authority. What can one conclude but that the Vatican has de facto abandoned the conversion of the Jews, and the return of the Orthodox and Protestants to Catholic unity. (Christopher A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods, Jr., The Great Facade, The Remnant Press, 2002, pp. 203-204; see also Eight Challenges to the conservative Neo-Catholics.)
Obviously, Walter Kasper received no “correction” from the soon-to-be-canonized” “Saint John Paul the Great” as he stated only what the “Polish Pope” believed and had stated publicly in Mainz, Germany, on November 17, 1980, that the “old theory” of “substitution is gone since the Second Vatican Council. This is what Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believed, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been kind enough to tell us that he believes this as well, going so far as to put it in writing in an “apostolic exhortation,” Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013, that will find its way into the Acta Apostolicae Sedis:
247. We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for “the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word.
248. Dialogue and friendship with the children of Israel are part of the life of Jesus’ disciples. The friendship which has grown between us makes us bitterly and sincerely regret the terrible persecutions which they have endured, and continue to endure, especially those that have involved Christians.
249. God continues to work among the people of the Old Covenant and to bring forth treasures of wisdom which flow from their encounter with his word. For this reason, the Church also is enriched when she receives the values of Judaism. While it is true that certain Christian beliefs are unacceptable to Judaism, and that the Church cannot refrain from proclaiming Jesus as Lord and Messiah, there exists as well a rich complementarity which allows us to read the texts of the Hebrew Scriptures together and to help one another to mine the riches of God’s word. We can also share many ethical convictions and a common concern for justice and the development of peoples. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
The Old Covenant has never been revoked?
28.That He completed His work on the gibbet of the Cross is the unanimous teaching of the holy Fathers who assert that the Church was born from the side of our Savior on the Cross like a new Eve, mother of all the living.  “And it is now,” says the great St. Ambrose, speaking of the pierced side of Christ, “that it is built, it is now that it is formed, it is now that is …. molded, it is now that it is created . . . Now it is that arises a spiritual house, a holy priesthood.”  One who reverently examines this venerable teaching will easily discover the reasons on which it is based.
29.And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ. For, while our Divine Savior was preaching in a restricted area — He was not sent but to the sheep that were lost of the house of Israel  -the Law and the Gospel were together in force;  but on the gibbet of his death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees,  fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross,  establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race.  “To such an extent, then,” says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.” 
30. On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death,  in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers;  and although He had been constituted the Head of the whole human family in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, it is by the power of the Cross that our Savior exercises fully the office itself of Head in His Church. “For it was through His triumph on the Cross,” according to the teaching of the Angelic and Common Doctor, “that He won power and dominion over the gentiles”;  by that same victory He increased the immense treasure of graces, which, as He reigns in glory in heaven, He lavishes continually on His mortal members it was by His blood shed on the Cross that God’s anger was averted and that all the heavenly gifts, especially the spiritual graces of the New and Eternal Testament, could then flow from the fountains of our Savior for the salvation of men, of the faithful above all; it was on the tree of the Cross, finally, that He entered into possession of His Church, that is, of all the members of His Mystical Body; for they would not have been united to this Mystical Body. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
The conciliarists reject this as they defect from the Catholic Faith. Why, please, someone, tell me why that this is not simple to see and accept? There is no such thing as “partial Catholicism.” It is all or nothing.
You doubt my word?
Look it up:
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.)
How is this not clear
Indeed, Herr Hoff would have us believe that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is preparing to jettison even the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service’s Good Friday Prayer for the Jews that bears no resemblance to the Prayer for the Jews as found in the unreformed Immemorial Mass of Tradition. It is evidently the case that the Argentine Apostate is considering doing this in order as yet another gesture of “good will” towards adherents of the Talmud in anticipation of the fiftieth anniversary of the “Second” Vatican Council’s Nostra Aetate (October 28, 1965) next year, 2015.
Here is the text of the Annibale Bugnini-authored prayer that was approved by Giovanni Montini/Paul the Sick:
Let us pray for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to his covenant. (Prayer in silence. Then the priest says:)Almighty and eternal God, long ago you gave your promise to Abraham and his posterity. Listen to your Church as we pray that the people you first made your own may arrive at the fullness of redemption. We ask this through Christ our Lord. Amen.
POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?
POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.
HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].
POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.
HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]
POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.
HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.
POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?
HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.
POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.
[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.
HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?
POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you. (Marvin Lowenthal, The Diaries of Theodore Herzl.)
The Catholic and the true pope in this picture is Pope Saint Pius X, not Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
How can any sensible, right-thinking Catholic believe otherwise?
Canonizations Are Infallible and Must be Accepted, Say the Conciliar Authorities
The Catholic Church has taught that the canonization of a beatus by a true pope is an infallible act from which no Catholic may dissent or have reservations. This is one of few teachings to which the “partial-credit” Modernists in the counterfeit church of conciliarism still hold, although they do so to suit their own purposes in order to “canonize” the conciliar revolution by the “canonization” of conciliar “popes” much in the same manner as the Soviets “canonized” Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir I. Lenin (and much in the same manner as Americans have made plaster saints out of the likes of the men who founding hatred for Christ the King and another, Abraham Lincoln, who was an atheist). (For documentation of Abraham Lincoln’s atheism, please see the material in the body and the appendix of Not A Mention of Christ the King. For an excellent article on the cruelty of Mr. Lincoln’s Union Army, see Mr. Michael Reardon’s superb Cold Harbor: ‘The Golgotha of American history’.)
Bernardo Alvarez Afonso, who is the conciliar “Bishop” of San Cristobal de la Laguna in Tenerife, in the Canary Islands, has revealed that “Pope Francis” is going to exercise a power that belongs to a true pope, that is, to “canonize” the Apostle of Brazil, Father Jose de Anchieta, S.J., as he had done with another Jesuit, Father Peter Faber, S.J., three months ago (see Partners in Lies and Lawlessness, part two), by a “papal” fiat. This is known as an “equivalent canonization,” a power that Pope Leo XIII used to canonize nine saints between 1880 and 1899.
A very interesting article in Chiesa‘s Vatican Diary discusses the history of equivalent canonizations in light of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s conscious decision to use this power of a true pope to declare various people as “canonized” by following several conditions as outlined by Pope Benedict XIV in the Eighteenth Century.
The “pope” declares a person “canonized.” Guess what? The person is “canonized.” There does need to be, of course, a true pope, which Bergoglio is not.
Ah, but those who accept Bergoglio as a true “pope” must accept his “canonizations” as, despite opinions from various theologians to the contrary, the doctrine of the Catholic Church is that canonizations are infallible acts of the Roman Pontiff. Angelo “Cardinal” Amato, the prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, makes this clear, something that one can see below in the article found in Vatican Diary:
VATICAN CITY, March 19, 2014 – Receiving in audience Bernardo Álvarez Afonso, bishop of San Cristóbal de la Laguna in Tenerife, in the Canary Islands, Pope Francis announced to him that next April 2 he will proclaim as a saint an illustrious son of those islands, the Jesuit José de Anchieta (1534-1597), called the Apostle of Brazil (in the illustration).
The news had already been anticipated at the end of February by Cardinal Raymundo Damasceno Assis, archbishop of Aparecida and president of the Brazilian episcopal conference.
But Bishop Álvarez released the news on the website of his diocese on the same day as the audience, March 8, providing further details on the event.
He explained, in fact, that Anchieta will be inscribed in the list of saints together with two blesseds born in France who played a leading role in the evangelization of Canada: the missionary mystic Marie of the Incarnation (née Marie Guyart, 1599-1672), and Bishop François de Montmorency-Laval (1623-1708).
The three were beatified by John Paul II on June 22, 1980, together with two other venerables who had lived in the Americas, who in the meantime had already been canonized according to the ordinary procedure: Peter of Saint Joseph Betancur (1626-1667) and the young Native American virgin Kateri Tekakwitha (1656-1980), proclaimed saints, respectively, by John Paul II on July 30, 2002 and by Benedict XVI on October 21, 2012.
Everything by the book? No. The bishop of Tenerife has revealed that the three blesseds will be proclaimed saints not according to the ordinary procedure, which demands the canonical recognition of a miracle attributed to their intercession, but through a historically extraordinary channel called the “canonization equivalent.”
The nature of this special procedure, which “has always been present in the Church and has been employed regularly, if not frequently,” was illustrated in “L’Osservatore Romano” on October 12, 2013 by Cardinal Angelo Amato, prefect of the congregation for the causes of saints.
The cardinal explains:
“For such a canonization, according to the teaching of Benedict XIV, three elements are required: an ancient tradition of devotion, the constant and common attestation of trustworthy historians on the virtues or martyrdom, and the uninterrupted fame of miracles.”
Cardinal Amato continues:
“If these conditions are satisfied – again according to the teaching of pope Prospero Lambertini – the supreme pontiff, by his authority, can proceed with the ‘canonization equivalent,’ meaning the extension to the universal Church of the recitation of the divine office and the celebration of the Mass [in honor of the new saint], ‘without any definitive formal sentence, without any preliminary juridical process, without having carried out the usual ceremonies.‘”
In effect, pope Lambertini himself – in one tome of his monumental work “De servorum Dei beatificatione et beatorum canonizatione” now available in Italian from Libreria Editrice Vaticana – enumerates twelve cases of saints canonized in this way before his pontificate (1740-1758).
They are: Romuald (canonized in 1595), Norbert (1621), Bruno (1623), Peter Nolasco (1655), Raymond Nonnatus (1681), Stephen of Hungary (1686), Margaret of Scotland (1691), John of Matha and Felix of Valois (1694), Gregory VII (1728), Wenceslaus of Bohemia (1729), Gertrude of Helfta (1738).
Also in “L’Osservatore Romano” of last October 12, Cardinal Amato then enumerates the “canonization equivalents” after Benedict XIV: Peter Damian and the martyr Boniface (canonized in 1828); Cyril and Methodius of Thessalonica (1880); Cyril of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Justin Martyr and Augustine of Canterbury (1882); John Damascene and the abbot Sylvester (1890); Bede the venerable (1899); Ephrem the Syrian (1920); Albert the Great (1931); Margaret of Hungary (1943); Gregorio Barbarigo (1960); John of Avila and Nicola Taveli? and three companion martyrs (1970); Marko Krizin, István Pongrácz, and Melchior Grodziecki (1995).
As can be noted, John Paul II, although he proclaimed more saints and blesseds than all his predecessors put together – since the popes have reserved this power to themselves – used only once the procedure of the “canonization equivalent.”
Benedict XVI also used it only once, with Hildegard of Bingen, whom he proclaimed a saint on May 10, 2012.
Pope Francis, however, has already used this exceptional procedure twice. On October 9, 2013 with Angela da Foligno (1248-1309) and the following December 17 with the Jesuit Peter Faber (1506-1546).
And he will use it a third time, proclaiming three new saints, next April 2, with the Jesuit Anchieta, Sister Marie Guyart, and Bishop François de Montmorency-Laval.
In practice the current pontiff, in just one year of pontificate, has had recourse to this special means more times than anyone other than Leo XIII, who used it a bit more, although this was over a span of twenty years (between 1880 and 1899) and was applied to persons of the first millennium of the Christian era, with the sole exception of the abbot Sylvester, who however lived in the remote 14th century.
In short, although Pope Francis loves the simple title of bishop of Rome he is fully exercising even in canonization policy the prerogatives that are his as supreme pontiff of the universal Church. A policy that is particularly delicate because, in spite of the contrary opinions found among theologians, according to the doctrine in effect canonizations – unlike beatifications – engage the infallible magisterium of the Church.
In 1989, in fact, when the motu proprio “Ad tuendam fidem” of John Paul II was promulgated, in a subsequent “doctrinal note” connected to it and signed by then-cardinal Joseph Ratzinger “the canonizations of saints” were explicitly cited among “the doctrines infallibly proposed” by the Church “in a definitive way,” together with other doctrines like the reservation of priestly ordination for men only, the illicit nature of euthanasia, the illicit nature of prostitution and fornication, the legitimacy of the election of a pope or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, the declaration of Leo XIII on the invalidity of Anglican orders.
In this area, therefore, it is also striking that Pope Francis has decided to proceed with the canonization of John XXIII – which will be celebrated next April 27 – according to the ordinary procedure but without the canonical certification of a miracle attributed to his intercession and having taken place after his beatification.
This is a particularly glaring departure. Precisely by exercising his power as supreme pontiff Francis has determined that in order to canonize Angelo Roncalli, in a completely exceptional manner, there is no need for a miracle and it is enough that he has the enduring reputation of holiness that surrounds his person and the “fama signorum,” or the graces that are attributed to him, which continue to be testified to although none of them has been canonically certified as a genuine miracle.
In practice, here as well Francis has exploited to the highest degree the pontifical power at his disposal as head of the universal Church, in order to take upon himself a decision that seems to have no precedent when it comes to cases not concerning martyrs. (Vatican Diary: In a few months, six new saints canonized outside the rules.)
The “recognize but resist” crowd have to reckon with the fact that their own beloved “pope of Tradition,” Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, had declared that the canonization of saints is one of the doctrines infallibly proposed by the Catholic Church in a definitive way. It is not possible for one to reject the forthcoming “canonization” of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II without “taking down” the then “Cardinal” Ratzinger’s 1989 doctrinal note. Nice work if you can get it, huh? You even get paid money for doing such work. Praise a “pope” for years and then “eat” him when it suits your purposes.
All right. You get the point.
The conciliar revolutionaries do not merely defect from the form of the law. They defect from the Holy Faith. It is that simple. Those who do not see this as such really have no excuse for their refusal to accept reality for what it is.
We continue our Lenten journey in this month of March, the month of Saint Joseph, praying for our own conversion on a daily basis as we pray for the conversion of the conciliar robber barons. We have recourse as always to Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, who always submitted herself to the authority of her Chaste Spouse, he who is the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the Faithful.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Saint Joseph, Terror of Demons, pray for us to keep far, far away from the demons of conciliarism and to accord them no recognition whatsoever as any kind of Catholics, no less officials of Holy Mother Church.
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.