As has been noted in previous articles, including Two For The Price Of One, part one, Francis: The Latest In A Long Line Of Ecclesiastical Tyrants and Defect of Form? No, Defection from the Holy Faith, Angelo Roncalli, the first in the line of the six false claimants to the Throne of Saint Peter since the death of Pope Pius XII on October 9, 1958, was a Modernist to the very substantial core of his being. Yet it will be that a man who was a Modernist and who threw open wide the “doors” of what he believed to be the Catholic Church to the world, which is the devil’s domain, and drove millions upon millions of Catholics out of the Faith into the waiting arms of false religious sects or into rank unbelief is going to be “canonized” by Jorge Mario Bergoglio in but thirty-five days.

Roncalli/John XXIII is going to be “canonized” despite the fact the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s saint factory, the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, could not even find a pseudo-miracle to attribute to his intercession. Thus it is that I have taken it upon myself to go in search of Angelo Roncalli’s “miracle” even though I have plenty else to do with my time.

Where to start such a search?

Well, let’s take a look at the statistics showing the quantitative difference between the time after the end of the “Second” Vatican Council and the present. That should give us a fairly good indication of any miraculous developments:

Priests: 1945 = 38,451  1950 = 42,970  1955 = 46,970  1960 = 53,796  1965 = 58,000

Priests: 2013 = 38,800  Diocesan Priests = 26,500 and  Religious = 12,300

Ordinations to the Priesthood: 1965  =  994

Ordinations: 2013  =  511

Seminarians: 1965  =  49,000  Graduate level: = 8325

Graduate level Seminarians: 2013  = 3694

Religious Sisters in the whole world 1973  = 1 million.  In 2013  =  721,935.

Parishes: 1965  =  17,637

Parishes: 2013  =  17,413

Mass Attendance in 1965: 65 % of Catholics attended Sunday Mass

2013, Only 24 % of Catholics attend Sunday Mass.

Students in 1965 at 8414 elementary schools = 2.6 million.

Students in 2013 at 5636 elementary schools = 1.5 million. (TThe Tale of the Tape: 1965-2013.)

This is truly extraordinary.

Could it count as a “miracle” for the “canonization” of Angelo Roncalli/John XIII?

Well, “miracle would be the wrong word. A more apt description of what Roncalli’s “opening to the world” hath wrought can be found in the Book of Exodus:

[6] And Moses and Aaron did as the Lord had commanded: so did they. [7] And Moses was eighty years old, and Aaron eighty-three, when they spoke to Pharao. [8] And the Lord said to Moses and Aaron: [9] When Pharao shall say to you, shew signs: thou shalt say to Aaron: Take thy rod, and cast it down before Pharao, and it shall be turned into a serpent. [10] So Moses and Aaron went in unto Pharao, and did as the Lord had commanded. And Aaron took the rod before Pharao, and his servants, and it was turned into a serpent.

[11]And Pharao called the wise men and the magicians: and they also by Egyptian enchantments and certain secrets did in like manner.[12] And they every one cast down their rods, and they were turned into serpents  (Exodus 7: 6-12.)

Those who are in league with the adversary can perform various marvels now and again. It is certainly a marvel that Angelo Roncalli, acting as “Pope John XXIII” started a process that has resulted in the the profanation of Sacred Worship, the emptying and closing of Catholic parishes, a massive loss of belief in the Real Presence of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour in the Most Blessed Sacrament (not that He is in the tabernacles of conciliar churches, of course),  and a headlong embrace of Catholics into the world, forgetting even the relaxed standards of modesty in attire that were approved by the American bishops in the 1930s.

Gone over the course of time was any real thought of condemning morally objectionable or blasphemous motion pictures, television programs, books, newspapers or magazines.

Gone over the course of time was any restraint of speech and personal conduct.

Gone over the course of time was any concept of the horror of personal sin.

Gone over the course of time was any belief in the miracles performed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Gone over the course of time was even a modicum of the sensus Catholicus to be found in the souls of those who had been born in the decades after the conclusion of the “Second” Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, as many of those born decades before Roncalli/John XXIII convoked the “Second” Vatican Council on January 25, 1959, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul, permitted their own sense of the Catholic Faith to be swept out of their souls.

Perhaps one of the greatest “miracles” for which Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII’s “opening to the world” is responsible is the fact that very few Catholics anywhere in the world, including, sad to say, some traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures who have made their own compromises with the world (women wearing masculine attire, permitting their children to listen to “rock” music and immoral videos, choosing not to seek the conversion of relatives immersed in sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance, etc.), think anything is scandalous in the “performance,” if you want to call it that, of an Italian Ursuline religious sister in the conciliar structures, Sister Cristina, on an Italian television “talent” show. (Whatever happened to the Ted Mack Amateur Hour or Arthur Godfrey’s Talent Scouts?)

Although Sister Cristina’s by-now infamous “performance” has been well-chronicled at the Novus Ordo Watch Wire (see Suor Christina Scandal), the plain fact of the matter is that scandal of this type is endemic within the conciliar structures. Endemic. That is, it permeates the entirety of the conciliar ethos. Scandal of the sort given by Sister Cristina who performed to the absolute delight of her parents and a group of older Ursuline sisters as they took in the spectacle that was “judged” by creatures who looked like they came straight out of the devil’s makeup room, is given all the time in the conciliar world.

Most Catholics have become so accustomed to the “mainstreaming” of the horror of “rock and roll” “music that my late parents told me in 1955 was evil, something I accepted as true and spoke about in high school ten years later, not exactly endearing me to many of my peers; no, it’s never been about popularity), in the mainslime media that have thought nothing of its introduction and its institutionalization in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service. (For a review of how “rock music” was incorporated into the “warm-up” for Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s appearance at a “youth rally” at Saint Joseph’s Seminary in the Dunwoodie section of the City of Yonkers, New York, on Saturday, April 19, 2008, please see No Room for Mary Immaculate Queen at Saint Joseph’s Seminary. That article contains a reference to “Father” Stan Fortuna’s performance. There is also a lengthy passage from Mr. Michael Matt’s excellent critique of the horrors of “rock music,” Gods of Wasteland.)

After all, who wants to be more Catholic than the “pope,” who has presided over “rock” Masses as part of the “new evangelization”?

The man who will be “canonized” along with Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, specifically wanted “innovations” such as “rock music” inserted his extravaganza liturgies during his endless world travels. This is attested to by one of Annibale Bugnini’s most trusted deputies, “Archbishop” Piero Marini, who was the “Polish Pope’s” master of ceremonies between 1987 and the time he died on April 1 or 2, 2005 (depending upon whether the Vatican’s official line of the latter date is to believed), has written very specifically that Wojtyla/John Paul II wanted a “new liturgy” for every single of his trips:

Rodari reminds of the neo-Conservative theory, where the then Master of Ceremonies, Marini, is supposed to have incited a “spectacle coterminous with the Papal Liturgies” against the will of Pope John Paul II.

This justification is energetically contradicted by Archbishop Marini in his book.

The Conciliar Blessed had encouraged him to insert more cultic heather [heathen?] practices in the Papal Masses — wrote Msgr Marini.

John Paul II wanted to break through the “rigor” of Papal Masses.

Archbishop Marini reports that John Paul II wanted a “new Liturgy for every trip“.

The Conciliar Blessed is said to have turned to Msgr Marini saying with praise: “beautiful, beautiful.” (John Paul II the Not-So-Great Wanted Liturgical Innovation.)

Wojtyla/John Paul II presided over every kind of liturgical abomination imaginable, providing cover for all his “bishops” and priests/presbyters at the “retail level” to innovate all on their accord in perfect accord with the provisions found in Paragraphs 390-399 of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal.

Without taking anything away from the scandalous exhibition displayed by Suor Cristina or minimizing in any way the diabolical “hook em horns” salute to the devil, it must be remembered that Roncalli/John XXIII opened the windows to the world that made possible such travesties.

It must be remembered that Roncalli/John XXIII “simplified” the Immemorial Mass of Tradition in 1960 and broke the Roman Canon a year after by inserting the name of Saint Joseph therein. He suppressed the feasts of ten saints, changed the names of four other feast days and downgraded the feasts of ten other saints. (For more information, please see John XXIII Mass Changes.) It was Roncalli/John XXIII who made the praying of the Prayers after Low Mass optional, helping to further accustom priests and lay Catholics to the “options” that his anointed successor, Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, desired to be incorporated into the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.

Yes, the fact that Suor Cristina’s “act” can be accepted as nothing extraordinary among those who are attached to the “ordinary” form of the “one Roman Rite” in the counterfeit church of conciliarism can be laid at the doorsteps of the corpulent Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII’s “opening wide” the doors of what he thought was the Catholic Church to the world. Behold the results. (I had to sit through a so-called “Mass of Christian Burial” in September of 1982 that featured “hard rock,” heavy-metal noise, to which the presider, who was in my acquaintance at the time and, I found out a few nights ago, died in 2006, said, “Wow!” as he applauded. Suor Cristina? Certainly scandalous. Tragically scandalous. Scandal, though, is the name of the game in the world of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.)

Another possible “miracle” that could be attributed to Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII is his starting the process that led to the “reevaluation” of what is said to be the Catholic Church’s relationship to “the faith of Israel.” Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII first “absolved” the Jews of any the guilt of the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, before issuing an edict on March 21, 1959, that ordered the removal of the word “perfidious” from the Prayer for the Jews in the Good Friday liturgy, thus setting the stage for the “Second” Vatican Council’s Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965:

True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ;(13) still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ. (Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965.)

One of the late Joseph “Cardinal” Bernardin’s acolytes, “Archbishop” Joseph Fiorenza, the retired conciliar  “archbishop” of Galveston-Houston, Texas, wrote the following about this passage in Nostra Aetate:

Nostra Aetate implicitly acknowledged that Israel remains in a covenant with God, and later Pope John Paul II made it explicit that Jews are “the people of God of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God.” While Nostra Aetate did not mention Christian anti-Semitism or the Holocaust, Pope John Paul was explicit in saying that the horrors of the Shoah must lead Christians to repentance: “For Christians, the heavy burden of guilt for the murder of Jewish people in the Shoah must be an enduring call to repentance.“

Sometimes beneath the surface of interfaith dialogue, there is the fear that it will lead to a “watering down” of faith in order to achieve harmony, and the result is a form of syncretism which is unfaithful to authentic Judaism or authentic Christianity. True, interfaith dialogue must be based on fidelity to the different faith traditions, which will avoid any assimilation or melting the different traditions. True, faithful dialogue will lead to a greater understanding of each other’s faith beliefs and respectful acknowledgment of the differences.

Interfaith dialogue and cooperation has led to important collaboration on common societal problems such as homelessness, reform of the criminal justice, immigration reform and accessible health care for all. In the process of these joint efforts, we have come to a better understanding of our own traditions and to better insights into each other’s beliefs and manner of governance.  (See Joseph Fiorenza, “I can truly say there are no plans or desire to seek Jewish conversion,” says Joseph A. Fiorenza, Archbishop Emeritus, Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston at Museum dedication,” October 28, 2009, as found at Catholic Citizens.)

Following in the footsteps of Roncalli, Montini, Wojtyla and Ratzinger, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it abundantly clear that the Old Covenant has “never been revoked,” something that is a heretical proposition, implying that all efforts to convert the Jews has been based on a false interpretation of the Gospel of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who said:

[44]But Jesus cried, and said: He that believeth in me, doth not believe in me, but in him that sent me.[45] And he that seeth me, seeth him that sent me.

[46] I am come a light into the world; that whosoever believeth in me, may not remain in darkness. [47] And if any man hear my words, and keep them not, I do not judge him: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. [48] He that despiseth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him; the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. [49] For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father who sent me, he gave me commandment what I should say, and what I should speak. [50] And I know that his commandment is life everlasting. The things therefore that I speak, even as the Father said unto me, so do I speak. (John 12: 44-50.)

Just as aside to “Archbishop” Fiorenza, the crimes of the Third Reich were the responsibility of racialists who hated the Catholic Faith and arrested and killed hundreds of priests in Germany and in the countries its forces invaded and occupied during World War II (see Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two).

The mythology of the “greatest crimes ever committed” (the crimes committed by Josef Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung were far greater in number) has been used by the agents of Zionism to load down the likes of the conciliar revolutionaries with such “guilt” over the crimes of devil-worshiping perverts so that they would “change” what is immutable: the simple fact that the Old Covenant God made with Moses was superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ instituted at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday and consummated by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday.

Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII thus started the process that would lead to Nostra Aetate and to Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II’s November 17, 1980, declaration that the Old Covenant has never been revoked, a declaration that was ratified on numerous occasions by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and, of course, by Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, especially in Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013. Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII thus made the following reiteration by Pope Pius XII of Catholic teaching on the invalidity of the Old Covenant disappear down into what can be called the Roncallian memory hole:

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. [28] “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.” [29] 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 [30] -the Law and the Gospel were together in force; [31] but on the gibbet of his death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees, [32] fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, [33] establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. [34] “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.” [35]

30.On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, [36] in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers; [37] 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”; [38] 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 Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, cannot contradict Himself. One either sees this or he does not. There is no “hermeneutic of continuity” in the conciliar teaching on the Jews whatsoever.

Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII thus made it possible for a “purification of memory,” a phrase first invoked by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II in his infamous Day for pardon, March 12, 2000, “homily,” to erase even the institutional memory of the Sisters of Our Lady of Sion that were founded by the brother of Father Marie-Alphonse, Ratisbonne Father Theodore Ratisbonne, to minister to Jewish converts in France before expanding its mission to Palestine to pray in reparation for the sins of the Jews and to seek their conversion.

 Look at how far the contemporary Daughters of Sion have gone to sanitize the history of Father Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne’s rmiraculous vision of Our Lady as she appears on the Miraculous Medal that he, a Catholic-hating Jew, wore on a dare from a Catholic friend:

He received a discernment sign to do so, when on January 20, 1842, his youngest brother, Alphonse, had an experience of Mary which he simply called “light”. Within 12 days, Alphonse was baptised and he too became a priest. Both brothers shared a vision to journey by the light of the Word of God and Mary. (Sisters of Our Lady of Sion: Our Roots.  My thanks to Mr. Frank Rega, the author of many books, including Saint Francis of Assisi and the Conversion of the Muslims, for sending this link to me late last evening.)

Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII thus started the “miraculous” process by which truly miraculous events could be rendered devoid of their supernatural origins as they were deconstructed by Modernists into nothing other than “interior visions” or outright fantasies. (See The Sisters of Sion for one such exercise, written by a man who referred to the “seismic change” in the teaching about the “enduring validity” of the Old Covenant by the conciliar church. Mr. Rega sent me this link as well.)

For the record, however, here is Father Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne’s own account of his miraculous conversion at the hands of Our Lady as he saw her appear to him in the Church of San Andrea delle Fratte, January 20, 1842:

“When I traversed the church, I arrived at the spot where they were getting ready for the funeral. Suddenly I felt interiorly disturbed, and saw in front of me something like a veil. It seemed to me that the entire church had been swallowed up in shadow, except one chapel. It was as thought all the light was concentrated in that single place. I looked over towards this chapel whence so much light shone and above the altar I saw a living figure standing, tall, majestic, beautiful and full of mercy. It was the most Holy Virgin Mary, resembling her figure on the Miraculous Medal of the Immaculate. At this sight I fell on my knees right where I stood; several times I attempted to lift my eyes towards the Most Blessed Virgin, but respect and the blinding light forced me to lower my gaze; this, however, did not prevent me from seeing the luminosity of the apparition. I fixed my glance on her hands, and in them I could read the expression of mercy and pardon. In the presence of the most Blessed Virgin, even though she did not speak a word to me, I understood the frightful situation I was in, the heinousness of sin, the beauty of the Catholic religion . . . in a word, I understood everything.

“When he returned, M. de Bussieres found me kneeling, my head resting on the railing of the chapel where the most Blessed Virgin had appeared, and bathed in tears. I do not understand how I managed to get to the railing, because I had fallen to my knees on the other side of the nave, and the catafalque stood between me and the chapel. I must add that the feeling that accompanied my weeping was one of gratitude towards the Blessed Virgin and of pity for my family, buried in the darkness of Judaism, for heretics and for sinners. M. de Bussieres raised me up and, still weeping, I told him, ‘Oh, that person must have prayed very much for me,’ thinking of the deceased Count de Laferronays. [Father Kolbe note: “M. de Bussieres had in fact recommended Ratisbonne to the prayers of M. de Laferronays.”]

“He asked me several questions, but I could not answer, so deeply was I moved. So he took me by the hand, led me out of the church to the carriage and helped me to get in. Then he asked me where I wanted to go.

“Take me wherever you like,” I said, “after what I have seen, I will do anything you want.”

“‘But what did you see?’ he asked me.

“I cannot tell you; but please bring me to a confessor, and I will tell him everything on my knees.”

“He brought me to the church of the Gesu, to a Jesuit, Father Villefort, to whom in the presence of M. de Bussieres, I related all that had happened to me.”

(In his letter he continues.)

“All I can say of myself comes down to this: that in an instant a veil fell from my eyes; or rather not a single veil, but many of the veils which surrounded me were dissipated one after the other, like snow, mud and ice under the burning rays of the sun. I felt as though I were emerging from a tomb, from a dark grave; that I was beginning to be a living being, enjoying a real life. And yet I wept. I could see into the depths of my frightful misery, from which infinite mercy had liberated me. My whole being shivered at the sight of my transgressions; I was shaken, overcome by amazement and gratitude. I thought of my brother with indescribable joy; and to my tears of love there were joined tears of compassion. How many persons in this world, alas, are going down unknowingly into the abyss, their eyes shut by pride and indifference!They are being swallowed up alive by those horrifying shadows; and among them are my family, my fiancee, my poor sisters. What a bitter thought! My mind turned to you, whom I love so much; for you I offered my first prayers. Will you some day raise your eyes towards the Savior of the world, whose blood washed away original sin? How monstrous is the stain of that sin, because of which man no longer bears the resemblance to God!

“They asked me now I had come to know these truths, since they all knew that I had never so much as opened a book dealing with religion, head not even read a single page of the Bible, while the dogma of original sin, entirely forgotten or denied by modern Jews, had never occupied my mind for a single instant. I am no sure that I had even heard its name. So how had I come to know these truths? I cannot tell’ all I know is that when I entered the church, I was ignorant of all this, whereas when I left I could see it all with blinding clarity. I cannot explain this change except by comparing myself to a man who suddenly awakens from deep sleep or to someone born blind who suddenly acquires sight. He sees, even though he cannot describe his sensations or pinpoint what enlightens him and makes it possible for him to admire the things around him. If we cannot adequately explain natural light, how can we describe a light the substance of which is truth itself? I think I am expressing myself correctly when I say that I did not have any verbal knowledge, but had come to possess the meaning and spirit of the dogmas, to feel rather than see these things, to experience them with the help of the inexpressible power which was at work within me.

“The love of God had taken the place of all other loves, to such an extent that I loved even my fiancee, but in a different way. I loved her like someone whom God held in his hands, like a precious gift which inspires an even greater love for the giver.”

(As they wanted to delay his Baptism, Ratisbonne pleaded.)

“What? The Jews who heard the preaching of the apostles were baptized at once; and you wish to delay Baptism for me who have heard the Queen of the apostles?“

“My emotion, my ardent desires and my prayers finally induced these good men to fix a date for my Baptism. I awaited the appointed day with impatience, because I realized how displeasing I was in the eyes of God.

(Finally the 31st of January came. He described his Baptism.)

“Immediately after Baptism I felt myself filled with sentiments of veneration and filial love for the Holy Father; I considered myself fortunate when I was told that I would be granted an audience with the Pontiff, accompanied by the General of the Jesuits. In spite of all this I was quite nervous, because I had never frequented the important people of this world; although these important people seemed to me too insignificant when compared to true grandeur. I must confess that I included among these great ones of the world the one who on this earth holds God’s highest power, i.e., the pope, the successor of Jesus Christ himself, whose indestructible chair he occupies.

“Never will I forget my trepidation and the beatings of my heart when I entered the Vatican and traversed the spacious courtyards and majestic halls leading to the sacred premises where the pope resides. When I beheld him, though, my nervousness suddenly gave way to amazement. He was so simple, humble and paternal. This was no monarch, but a father who with unrestrained love treated me like a cherished son.

\

“O good God! Will it be thus when I appear before you to give you an account of the graces I hare received? Awe fills me at the mere thought of God’s greatness, and I tremble before his justice; but at the sight of his mercy my confidence revives, and with confidence so will my love and unbounded gratitude.

“Yes, gratitude will from now on be my law and my life . I cannot express it in words; so I shall strive to do so in deeds. The letters received from my family give me full liberty; I wish to consecrate this liberty to God, and I offer it to him from this very moment, along with my whole life, to serve the Church and my brothers under the protection of the most Blessed Virgin Mary.” (An account of the miraculous conversion of Alphonse Ratisbonne by Our Lady in the Church of San Andrea delle Fratte on January 20, 1842, as found in: Father Anselm W. Romb, OFM Conv., Commentator and Editor, The Writings of St. Maximilian M. Kolbe, OFM Conv.: The Kolbe Reader, pp. 22-31.)

I do hope that one of you good readers out there in cyberspace will send this to the Sisters of Our Lady of Sion and to give them this message from me: your misrepresentation of the true history of the conversion of Father Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne is reprehensible and beneath contempt. It is shameful. Are you saying that Father Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne was deluded? Are you saying that Pope Pius IX was wrong to give him permission to establish a mission in Palestine to seek the conversion of the Jews? Are you saying that Saint Peter, the first pope, was wrong to have sought the conversion of the Jews? Are you saying that Our Lord Himself was wrong to seek the conversion of Saul of Tarsus?

Alas, such are the ways in the false church founded the devil’s apostle, Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII that even the facts of history must be distorted, misrepresented and made to disappear from all human consciousness. This is not what Catholics do. This is what revolutionaries do. Another “miracle” from the “incorrupt” Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII.

Well, even the myth of the “incorrupt” body of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII, which was mummified at his own specific request, has been exploded by the conciliar Vatican after years of letting Catholics attached to their false structures believe, at least by omission of the telling the truth, in the myth. Although I had intended last evening to use other sources to prove the fact of the mummifying of Roncalli/John XXIII’s body, a story I found on the New York Post website I found this afternoon provides all of the facts one needs to have.

Here is an excerpt from that New York Post story:

The team’s most important task was Pope John XXIII. The pope, popular for his jovial nature, was considered pivotal because of his convening of the Second Vatican Council in 1962, which modernized the mass, bringing in contemporary music and local languages instead of Latin.

After his death, he was credited for curing an Italian nun, who prayed to him when she developed a stomach tumor. Her healing, with no medical explanation, was his first miracle.

In 2000, Pope John Paul II had him exhumed to be declared “blessed,” part of the progression to sainthood. The airtight coffin had left him virtually undisturbed, and the embalming team wanted to keep it that way.

After the pope’s internal organs were removed and analyzed, the body was placed in a stainless-steel tub for several weeks in a solution of formalin and alcohol, then neutralized for several weeks.

His body then undertook a series of baths in assorted solutions for months at a time, including various mixtures of ethanol, methanol, phenol, camphor, nitrobenzene, turpentine and benzoic acid.

Finally the body was bandaged in linen cloths saturated with a solution of mercury bichloride and ethanol. Then a second team ensconced him with wax on his face and hands. The entire process took about a year.

The Church decided not to rebury Pope John XXIII, instead putting him on display for pilgrims. More than 25,000 people visit St. Peter’s Basilica every day, and many faithful still believe the incorrupt state of his body is a miracle.

The Congregation for the Causes of Saints, a legal body inside the Vatican that analyzes witness accounts and oversees the legal measures required for sainthood, failed to recognize the pope’s bodily condition as a miracle — perhaps because the airtight container does not count as an act of God.

But Pope Francis waived the second miracle requirement, believing that John’s good works were reason enough. (Making of a Saint: the Vatican’s Deadly Quest to Preserve John XXIII.)

Good works?

Among those “good works” is that all but one person on the original team who worked on preserving Roncalli’s remains–and the relics of genuine saints–is still alive, the rest having died of cancer after being exposed to the chemicals they used to “bathe” his body nearly forty years after his death:

The embalming team risked their own lives to treat the dead.

Shockingly, there is only one survivor from the original team, the others having died of various tumors and cancers, likely side effects of the toxic chemicals expended during their work. Nobody is currently willing to assume their task due to the peril.

The team’s last job was performed in 2008, preparing the body of Pier Giorgio Frassati, an Italian senator and benefactor for various charities. There are a number of boys’ homes named after him in Australia, so Pope Benedict XVI wanted the body transported to Sydney during his visit there for World Youth Day.

But no other pope besides Pope John XXIII has been mummified. Before his death in 2005, Pope John Paul II made the decision not to have his body chemically treated and was buried as popes have been since the 1960s — left with all his organs and placed inside a vacuumed casket and rubbed with formalin. (Making of a Saint: the Vatican’s Deadly Quest to Preserve John XXIII.)

That’s a high price to pay for keeping an utter apostate’s dead body appear incorrupt so that it could be venerated by the duped faithful in the very spot in the Basilica of Saint Peter where the authentically incorrupt body of Saint Josaphat, who was martyred, for his efforts to convert the Orthodox on September 12, 1623, had lain prior to be move to make way for the artificially preserved body of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII.

Missing from the New York Post story was the more thorough documentation of how Roncalli instructed his personal physician to preserve his remains as found in an article by Dr. Martin Therese Horvat:

John XXIII had chosen Professor Valdoni as his personal doctor, and the latter was assisted by Professor Mazzoni. These two doctors had heard about the discovery of a young colleague, Dr. Gennaro Goglia, assistant Professor at the Institute of Anatomy of the Faculty of Medicine at the University of the Sacred Heart in Rome. Goglia had discovered a system to keep cadavers incorrupt. The two doctors of the Pope contacted the young scientist, and when the cancer of the stomach reduced John XXIII to his final stage, they asked Goglia to be ready to apply his invention on the Pope after his death. The two doctors had already spoken with John XXIII on the matter, and the latter had given them a written document leaving them in charge of preserving his mortal remains.

Therefore, as soon as he died on the evening of June 3, 1963, Goglia was contacted and brought to the Vatican. In the Papal quarters, he set up next to the cadaver a tripod that held a plastic bottle containing ten liters of his liquid preservative. He then began the process of injecting this liquid with a tube and needle into the body of John XXIII. It was a long procedure, crowned with success. Those present during the proceedings in addition to Goglia were Prof. Mazzoni and two valets of John XXIII, the Gusso brothers. Dr. Goglia provided these details to Famiglia Cristiana in the interview. Until then, the whole operation had been kept rigorously secret.

I would like to let the reader read for himself the end of the testimony of the doctor, who today is age 78. Here are his words:

“We put the bottle containing the liquid on the tripod. We made a small cut in the right wrist and inserted the needle there. I was afraid that the blood would exit through the tube or that the liquid could cause the skin to rupture …. At 5 a.m. on June 4 the operation ended. The liquid had reached all the capillaries, blocking the process of decomposition. We then injected some liters of the liquid into the Pope’s stomach, destroyed by cancer, in order to kill the bacteria there.”

Here is the explanation. The incorrupt body of John XXIII is due to a scientific achievement, not to a miracle that would confirm the sanctity of Angelo Roncalli. If the fact of a body remaining incorrupt would itself reveal sanctity, then the Pharaohs of Egypt that were mummified should be considered saints. (An Incorrupt Pope and the Pharaohs.)

Obviously, Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII was no “pope” at all. His “miracles” and “good work” are nothing other than proofs of his apostasy, thus attesting to the fact that he could not be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter.

Yet it is that he is being “canonized” by Jorge Mario Bergoglio in but five weeks from this very day, March 23, 2014, the Third Sunday of Lent, precisely because he was a follower of such Modernists as Ernesto Buonaiuti, with whom Father Roncalli corresponded after his excommunication for Modernism:

he appointment of professor Roncalli to the chair of Ecclesiastical History at the Roman Seminary was vetoed in 1912, having been indicated of “dubious orthodoxy.”

It must be remembered, at this juncture, the clamorous and forgotten episode of an intervention of the Holy Office against professor Don Roncalli that put an abrupt end to the teaching by the future John XXIII even at the Bergamo Seminary. It had been discovered that Roncalli, in defiance of the Encyclical “Pascendi” by his co-regional Pope Sarto, Pius X, not only acted as a modernist, but corresponded with the excommunicated priest Ernesto Buonaiuti. This priest and historian of the religions was amongst the major exponents of Modernism in Italy, and was excommunicated in 1926 for his progressive activity and his open insubordination to the ecclesiastical hierarchy. To get a precise idea of Buonaiuti, and of the ideas that he professed and advertised, it would suffice to go through the following letter written by the modernist priest, in October 1906, to the historian and French sociologist Albert Houtin, also a priest, who ended up abandoning the priesthood and the Church.

A known representative of Italian Modernism, just expelled by a decision of Pius X from the Collegio Apollinare, thus wrote to his French friend: “… Here, at the very center of Medieval theocracy, I wish to fulfill a work of tenacious corrosion… There are many of us friends, here in Rome, now, determined to operate in the critical field, to prepare the ultimate fall of the whole old carcass of Medieval orthodoxy. The trouble is that the laity does not favor us for now, as it ignores, nay, it tends to shift once again toward the Vatican in order to sustain the Monarchy. But I do hope that the example set by France, the very fatality of the historical evolution will soon also give to us an anti-clerical parliament and, with it, a radical ministry. Then our hour will have come.” The letter is self explanatory, and it is the most enlightened presentation of its author. Around such a rebel gathered a group of modernist priests that put so much effort into the propagation of their theories that Pius X believed it appropriate to condemn the movement with the Encyclical “Pascendi,” promulgated in 1907, which severely condemned Modernism. The same Pope set up in the Vatican a special section, the “Sodalitium Pianum,” into whose chair he placed monsignor Benigni, in order to single out and hit, one after the other, the suspects with severe sanctions. The group of the modernists was disrupted and dispersed. Buonaiuti, with his collaborator, Turchi, left for Ireland; the other priest followers, among whom Pioli, who left the habit, Rossi, who became an Evangelical pastor, Hagan, who retired in hermitic solitude, De Stefano, who also dropped the habit, Balducci and Perella who, shifted to the secular state, went underground.

It comes as no surprise that Roncalli would come into contact with such a champion of modernism. Evidently, the “Sodalitium Pianum” had been informed and had conveyed to the Holy Office a detailed denunciation. The conviction and immediate suspension fell on the large head of the teacher from Sotto il Monte, despite the cautious defense by the bishop. That denunciation, and the consequent intervention by the Holy Office, as was the custom, were archived in a special section of the Secret Vatican Archive. In the dusty shadow of that gigantic archive, among mountains of papers perfectly recorded and organized, they lay forgotten for nearly half a century. Until one afternoon, after office hours, a heavy, slightly shuffled footstep paced those arcades and those rooms in the half-light, and stood before a metal cabinet inside of which, so many years earlier, they had been locked up. The key turned in the lock and the doors were opened. Two large hands rummaged for some time through the numbered files, full of yellowed documents. The competence of the researcher in the matter of archives soon prevailed in that ocean of documents rigorously organized.

In his large right hand ornate with the “Anello Piscatorio” (Fisherman’s ring) stopped some old rustling papers. In the high stillness of the deserted archive John XXIII examined, for a time, smiling to himself, that ancient condemnation. He then shut the doors again and, with those papers in his hand, he returned to his apartment with the ermine trimmed Camauro (white fur-trimmed red bonnet associated with Medieval popes) lowered onto his eyes, while the shadows of the night descended upon the eleven-thousand deserted rooms of the Vatican, watched by the unhurried, equal pacing of the Swiss Guards.

That night, unconsciously, John XXIII inaugurated, with that, his secret tampering in the Vatican Archives, that which would later become, with Paul VI, a pattern to the detriment of History: that of making compromising documents regarding the person of the Pontiff and his closest entourage vanish.

Having become Pope, Roncalli did not refrain from commenting, as was his style, on that misadventure of youth and would say, one day, in the course of an audience, “…For, as you can see, even a priest placed under “observation” by the Holy Office can, on occasion, become Pope!” Revealing, in the joke, his deep-rooted scorn toward the institutions of the traditional Church. (Nikita Roncalli.)

There is no room for anyone who adheres to the false ecclesiology of the “recognize while resist” movement to reject Roncalli’s upcoming “canonization” as even the conciliar authorities themselves admit that a pope’s canonization of a saint belongs to the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff in a “definitive way:”

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. ((Vatican Diary: In a few months, six new saints canonized outside the rules.)

This is what instance in which the retired antipope, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, actually agreed with the plain teaching of the Catholic Church, which was summarized on the Novus Ordo Watch site in July of last year as the late theologian, Monsignor Gerardus von Noort was quoted:

PROPOSITION: When the teaching office of the Church hands down decisions on matters of faith and morals in such a way as to require of everyone full and absolute assent, it is infallible.

This is a dogma of faith.

[…]

In the definition given above the object of infallibility was expressed in these words borrowed from the Vatican Council: “when it defines a doctrine of faith or morals.” It remains now to fix more accurately the meaning and the scope of this formula. This will be done on the basis of the words of Christ and of the apostles cited in the course of the proof; and on the basis, too, of the purpose for which the privilege of infallibility was granted.

It is important to pay attention above all to the word doctrine; for infallibility concerns the teaching office and so has as its special object doctrines, or at least doctrinal decisions by which some truth is presented to be believed or maintained by everyone.

The formula, “a doctrine of faith or morals,” comprises all doctrines the knowledge of which is of vital concern to people if they are to believe aright and to live uprightly in accordance with the religion of Christ. Now doctrines of this sort have either been revealed themselves or are so closely allied with revelation that they cannot be neglected without doing harm to the latter. Consequently the object of infallibility is twofold: there is a primary and a secondary object.

[…]

PROPOSITION 2: The secondary object of infallibility comprises all those matters which are so closely connected with the revealed deposit that revelation itself would be imperilled unless an absolutely certain decision could he made about them.

The charism of infallibility was bestowed upon the Church so that the latter could piously safeguard and confidently explain the deposit of Christian revelation, and thus could be in all ages the teacher of Christian truth and of the Christian way of life. But if the Church is to fulfill this purpose, it must be infallible in its judgment of doctrines and facts which, even though not revealed, are so intimately connected with revelation that any error or doubt about them would constitute a peril to the faith. Furthermore, the Church must be infallible not only when it issues a formal decree, but also when it performs some action which, for all practical purposes, is the equivalent of a doctrinal definition.

One can easily see why matters connected with revelation are called the secondary object of infallibility. Doctrinal authority and infallibility were given to the Church’s rulers that they might safeguard and confidently explain the deposit of Christian revelation. That is why the chief object of infallibility, that, namely, which by its very nature falls within the scope of infallibility, includes only the truths contained in the actual deposit of revelation. Allied matters, on the other hand, which are not in the actual deposit, but contribute to its safeguarding and security, come within the purview of infallibility not by their very nature, but rather by reason of the revealed truth to which they are annexed. As a result, infallibility embraces them only secondarily. It follows that when the Church passes judgment on matters of this sort, it is infallible only insofar as they are connected with revelation.

When theologians go on to break up the general statement of this thesis into its component parts, they teach that the following individual matters belong to the secondary object of infallibility: 1. theological conclusions; 2. dogmatic facts; 3. the general discipline of the Church; 4. approval of religious orders; 5. canonization of saints.

[…]

Assertion 5: The Church’s infallibility extends to the canonization of saints. This is the common opinion today.

Canonization (formal) is the final and definitive decree by which the sovereign pontiff declares that someone has been admitted to heaven and is to be venerated by everyone, at least in the sense that all the faithful are held to consider the person a saint worthy of public veneration. It differs from beatification, which is a provisional rather than a definitive decree, by which veneration is only permitted, or at least is not universally prescribed. Infallibility is claimed for canonization only; a decree of beatification, which in the eyes of the Church is not definitive but may still be rescinded, is to be considered morally certain indeed, but not infallible. Still, there are some theologians who take a different view of the matter.

Proof:

1. From the solid conviction of the Church. When the popes canonize, they use terminology which makes it quite evident that they consider decrees of canonization infallible. Here is, in sum, the formula they use: “By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the apostles Peter and Paul and by our own authority, we declare that N. has been admitted to heaven, and we decree and define that he is to be venerated in public and in private as a saint.”

2. From the purpose of infallibility. The Church is infallible so that it may be a trustworthy teacher of the Christian religion and of the Christian way of life. But it would not be such if it could err in the canonization of saints. Would not religion be sullied if a person in hell were, by a definitive decree, offered to everyone as an object of religious veneration? Would not the moral law be at least weakened to some extent, if a protégé of the devil could be irrevocably set up as a model of virtue for all to imitate and for all to invoke? But it cannot be inferred: therefore the Church must also be infallible in authenticating the relics of the saints; for (a) the Church never issues so solemn a decree about relics; and (b) the cases are not parallel, for in the case of relics, it is a question of relative cult, while in that of the saints it is one of absolute cult.  (Mgr. G. Van Noort, Dogmatic Theology 2: Christ’s Church [Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1957], pp. 104, 108-110, 117-118.) (As found at Roncalli/Wojtyla “Canonization”.)