Refusing to acknowledge the simple fact that the “Second” Vatican Council taught heresy, especially in Lumen Gentium and Unitatis Redintegratio, each of which was issued on November 21,1964, Nostra Aetate, October 28, 1965, and in Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes, December 7, 1965, or to admit that the conciliar “popes” have preached, written and acted in ways in complete contradiction of immutable teaching of Holy Mother Church, some within the Roman curia of the counterfeit church of conciliaism believe that the “line” into heresy will be “crossed” if Jorge Mario Bergoglio succeeds in his desire to make it possible for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics in the conciliar structures who lack the cover provided them by a diocesan tribunal’s decree of nullity to receive what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.
Particular alarm in this regard has been caused by the Argentine Apostate’s telephone call to Jakelina Lisbona in which he assured her that she could “safely” approach for Holy Communion at the Novus Ordo liturgical service even though she is civilly married to a man who is divorced and lacks of a conciliar decree of marital nullity. Some in the curia inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River and outside thereof in offices on the Via della Concilizione and in the Trastevere district a few miles to the south of the Vatican along the Tiber are saying that the now infamous phone call, which was the subject of Jorge Cooks the Books, on Easter Thursday, April 24, 2014, represents a slippery slope into heresy:
If the gist of the pope’s call was accurately relayed – that the woman could receive Communion – that’s seen by some Vatican conservatives as crossing the Rubicon.
In this case, the woman had been told by her pastor that she could not receive Communion unless her husband received an annulment and the two were married in the church. Didn’t the pope undercut the authority of priests everywhere with his phone call? How are priests to respond when divorced Catholics come to them and declare: “But Father, the pope said it’s OK?”
It’s clear that Pope Francis wants the church to find a better pastoral solution to the situation of divorced and remarried Catholics, and all indications are that this fall’s Synod of Bishops will propose some changes – perhaps, as outlined by Cardinal Walter Kasper, a penitential practice that would allow divorced Catholics to receive Communion, with the understanding the church could tolerate, though not accept, second unions.
That idea has generated much debate among bishops and cardinals, and enthusiasm among many Catholics. But it is not playing so well inside the Vatican. “If that happens, we’ve crossed the line into heresy,” one official told me. (Curial Rumblings About A Man Who Won’t Be Filtered.)
It would relatively pointless to demonstrate yet again the numerous ways in which the counterfeit church of conciliarism and its “popes” and “bishops” have defected from the Catholic Faith, ceasing not to profess and reiterate an endless barrage of heresy while committing grave sacrileges, uttering blasphemies aplenty and provide ample proof of the era of apostasy in which we find ourselves at this time in salvation history. (For a ready-guide to Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s “laundry list” of offenses against the Holy Faith, see Mister Asteroid Is Looking Pretty Good Right About Now.)
Just to provide a bit of perspective on the garment rending and teeth-gnashing taking place among some within the conciliar curia at this time, contrast the following infamous passage from Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964, with the clearly Catholic teaching provided by Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943:
This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12*) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as “the pillar and mainstay of the truth”.(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13*) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity. (Lumen Gentium, November 21, 1964.)
Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered – so the Lord commands – as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
The contrast could be clearer.
While individual Protestants may be validly baptized and can baptize others, each of whom falls away from the true Church thereafter, Protestant sects, which are not “churches,” have no valid means as “churches” sanctify anyone as they are nothing other than instruments of the devil himself.
Indeed, as has been noted before on this site, the devil has been bold enough to take complete authorship of the liturgical rites used by Protestants:
As the strange circumstances of Nicola’s possession became known everywhere, several Calvinist preachers came with their followers, to “expose this popish cheat,” as they said. On their entrance, the devil saluted them mockingly, called them by name, and told them that they had come in obedience to him. One of the preachers took his Protestant prayer book, and began to read it with a very solemn face. The devil laughed at him, and putting on a most comical look, he said: “Ho! Ho! My good friend; do you intend to expel me with your prayers and hymns? Do you think that they will cause me any pain? Don’t you know that they are mine? I helped to compose them!”
“I will expel thee in the name of God,” said the preacher, solemnly.
“You!” said the devil mockingly. “You will not expel me either in the name of God, or in the name of the devil. Did you ever hear of one devil driving out another?”
“I am not a devil,” said the preacher, angrily, “I am a servant of Christ.”
“A servant of Christ, indeed!” said Satan, with a sneer. “What! I tell you, you are worse than I am. I believe, and you do not want to believe. Do you suppose that you can expel me from the body of this miserable wretch? Ha! Go first and expel all the devils that are in your own heart!”
The preacher took his leave, somewhat discomfited. On going away, he said, turning up the whites of his eyes, “O Lord, I pray thee, assist this poor creature!”
“And I pray Lucifer,” cried the evil spirit, “that he may never leave you, but may always keep you firmly in his power, as he does now. Go about your business, now. You are all mine, and I am your master.” (Father Michael Muller, C.SS.R., Exorcism of Nicola Aubrey.)
Unlike the conciliar “popes” and their “bishops,” Our Lady herself has sought the conversion of individual Protestants from time time, something that has been noted on this site numerous times concerning the example of the baptized Catholic, Pierre Port-Combet, who had converted to Calvinism and was later warned by Our Lady that he was going to Hell if he did not return to Catholic Church (see Do Not Permit Yourselves To Be Snookered.)
Obviously, this means nothing to Jorge Mario Bergoglio, whose impure mouth is a sewer of heresy and blasphemy, products of mind polluted by every Protestant, Judeo-Masonic and Modernist presupposition imaginable. It was only yesterday, Tuesday, May 6, 2014, the the Argentine Apostate went so far in his daily screed at the Casa Santa Marta as to state that the Catholic Faith is is not meant to be a “school of religion” that is concerned with enforcing “commandments:”
In his homily Pope Francis traced the path that led to the death of the first martyr of the Church, a death that was the exact replica of Christ’s. He, too, like Jesus , he said, had encountered “the jealousy of the leaders who were trying” to eliminate him. He too had “false witnesses” , a “rushed judgment”. Stephen warns them that are resisting the Holy Spirit, as Jesus had said , but “these people – said the Pope – were uneasy, were not at peace in their hearts”. These people , he added, had ” hatred ” in their heart . That is why, on hearing Stephen’s words, they were furious . “This hatred – said Pope Francis – was sown in their hearts by the devil”, “this is the devil’s hatred of Christ”.
The devil “who did what he wanted with Jesus Christ in his Passion now does the same” with Stephen. This “struggle between God and the devil” is clearly seen in martyrdom. “On the other hand, Jesus had told his disciples that they had to rejoice to be persecuted in his name: “To be persecuted, to be a martyr, to gives ones’ life for Jesus is one of the Beatitudes”. That is why, the Pope added , “the devil cannot stand seeing the sanctity of a church or the sanctity of a person, without trying to do something”. This is what he does with Stephen, but “he died like Jesus forgiving”.
“Martyrdom is the translation of a Greek word that also means witness. And so we can say that for a Christian the path follows in the footsteps of this witness, Christ’s footsteps, to bear witness to Him and, many times, this witness ends up in laying down one’s life . You cannot understand a Christian without witness. We are not a ‘ religion’ of ideas, of pure theology, beautiful things, of commandments. No, we are a people who follow Jesus Christ and bear witness – who want to bear witness to Jesus Christ – and sometimes this witness leads to laying down our lives”.
On Stephen’s death, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, “a severe persecution began against the Church in Jerusalem”. These people , the Pope observed , “felt strong and the devil provoked them to do this” and so “Christians scattered to the regions of Judea and Samaria”. This persecution, the Pope noted, means that “the people spread far and wide” and wherever they went they explained the Gospel , gave testimony of Jesus , and so “mission of the Church” began. “So many – he recalled – converted, on hearing these people”. One of the Fathers of the Church, explained this by saying : “The blood of martyrs is the seed of Christians”. With “their witness, they preach the faith” :
“Witness, be it in everyday life, in difficulties, and even in persecution and death, always bears fruit. The Church is fruitful and a mother when she witnesses to Jesus Christ. Instead , when the church closes in on itself , when it thinks of itself as a – so to speak – ‘school of religion’, with so many great ideas, with many beautiful temples, with many fine museums, with many beautiful things, but does not give witness, it becomes sterile. The Christian is the same. The Christian who does not bear witness, is sterile, without giving the life he has received from Jesus Christ”.
The Pope continued, “Stephen was filled with the Holy Spirit”, and “we cannot bear witness without the presence of the Holy Spirit in us”. Pope Francis advised those present: “In difficult times, where we have to choose the right path, where we have to say ‘no’ to a lot of things that maybe try to seduce us, there is prayer to the Holy Spirit, and He makes us strong enough to take this path of witness”:
“Today thinking about these two icons – Stephen, who dies, and the people, the Christians, fleeing, scattering far and wide because of the violent persecution – let us ask: How is my witness? Am I a Christian who witnesses to Jesus or are a simple numerary in this sect ? Am I fruitful because I bear witness, or sterile because unable to let the Holy Spirit lead me forward in my Christian vocation?“. (Church is not just a school of religion.)
This is enough to make a man want to weep with profound sorrow over the fact that a man who is thought by even most traditional Catholics in the world to be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter can speak so blasphemously and in such a heretical manner while most people just “yawn” and dismiss the words of their “pope” as inconsequential because they are “unofficial” and not to be inserted in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Then again, heresy is inserted by the conciliar “popes” into the Acta Apostolicae Sedis on a regular basis while most Catholics today either ignore this fact or persist in the falsehood that a heretic can sit on the Throne of Saint Peter.
Leaving aside Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s continued airbrushing of Sacred Scripture, which in this case involved his choosing not to mention that Saint Stephen the Protomartyr was debating with Jews so as to seek their conversion and the fact that this transparently obsessed Modernist was once again attempting to assert that those who oppose him are subject him to a “martyrdom,” there are, among so many other citations that can be used, three passages, one from Pope Leo XIII’s Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, and another from Pope Leo’s A Review of His Pontificate, May 19, 1902, and the final taken from Pope Pius XI’s Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, to demonstrate the diabolical grip that has hold of the dark, dark mind and proud heart of the Argentine Apostate:
Wherefore, as appears from what has been said, Christ instituted in the Church a living, authoritative and permanent Magisterium, which by His own power He strengthened, by the Spirit of truth He taught, and by miracles confirmed. He willed and ordered, under the gravest penalties, that its teachings should be received as if they were His own. As often, therefore, as it is declared on the authority of this teaching that this or that is contained in the deposit of divine revelation, it must be believed by every one as true. If it could in any way be false, an evident contradiction follows; for then God Himself would be the author of error in man. “Lord, if we be in error, we are being deceived by Thee” (Richardus de S. Victore, De Trin., lib. i., cap. 2). In this wise, all cause for doubting being removed, can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by the very fact falling into heresy? without separating himself from the Church? – without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others. Faith, as the Church teaches, is “that supernatural virtue by which, through the help of God and through the assistance of His grace, we believe what he has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceived” (Conc. Vat., Sess. iii., cap. 3). If then it be certain that anything is revealed by God, and this is not believed, then nothing whatever is believed by divine Faith: for what the Apostle St. James judges to be the effect of a moral delinquency, the same is to be said of an erroneous opinion in the matter of faith. “Whosoever shall offend in one point, is become guilty of all” (Ep. James ii., 10). Nay, it applies with greater force to an erroneous opinion. For it can be said with less truth that every law is violated by one who commits a single sin, since it may be that he only virtually despises the majesty of God the Legislator. But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith. “In many things they are with me, in a few things not with me; but in those few things in which they are not with me the many things in which they are will not profit them” (S. Augustinus in Psal. liv., n. 19). And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not “bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. “You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel” (S. Augustinus, lib. xvii., Contra Faustum Manichaeum, cap. 3) . . . .
For God indeed even made the Church a society far more perfect than any other. For the end for which the Church exists is as much higher than the end of other societies as divine grace is above nature, as immortal blessings are above the transitory things on the earth. Therefore the Church is a society divine in its origin, supernatural in its end and in means proximately adapted to the attainment of that end; but it is a human community inasmuch as it is composed of men. For this reason we find it called in Holy Writ by names indicating a perfect society. It is spoken of as the House of God, the city placed upon the mountain to which all nations must come. But it is also the fold presided over by one Shepherd, and into which all Christ’s sheep must betake themselves. Yea, it is called the kingdom which God has raised up and which will stand for ever. Finally it is the body of Christ – that is, of course, His mystical body, but a body living and duly organized and composed of many members; members indeed which have not all the same functions, but which, united one to the other, are kept bound together by the guidance and authority of the head. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)
For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of conciliar apostates stand condemned as they do indeed take from the Gospel what they want while at the same time disparaging the beauty and perfections of Holy Mother Church, the spotless, mystical bride of her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in order to make it appear that she has any other mission than to keep entirely pure and intact the doctrines that has received from Him, a mission that she continues to fulfill in the Catholic underground today at a time when her buildings are occupied by interloping apostates.
Consider once again the following words taken from Pope Leo XIII’s Satis Cognitum:
And this indeed most deservedly; for they, who take from Christian doctrine what they please, lean on their own judgments, not on faith; and not “bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. x., 5), they more truly obey themselves than God. “You, who believe what you like, believe yourselves rather than the gospel.” (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
Behold the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and, among so many others, Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez, men who do indeed “take from Christian doctrine what they please,” thereby leaning on “their own judgments, not on faith.” To disparage the Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church the way that these men do almost without cease is sickening beyond words. These men crossed the “Rubicon” decades ago. Anyone who does not see this is willfully blind to the truth.
Quite unlike the conciliar revolutionaries, Pope Saint Pius V, whose feast we celebrated two days ago now, that is, on Monday, May 5, 2014, sought to protect the integrity of Catholic doctrine down to its last detail, and he was intent on punishing heretics when many of the crowned heads of the kingdoms of what remained of Catholic Europe believed that was more efficacious to give the murderous heretic, Queen Elizabeth I, “time” to convert rather than excommunicating her:
At first, Pius V, as his predecessor, Pius IV, had entertained some hope of Elizabeth’s conversion and encouraged certain projects in this regard. But once finding that she was not to be trusted, he took the view that she was “a delinquent wearing a crown” and made public reference to her as a “pretended queen.”
On the other hand, event in Mary’s [Queen of Scots] life, and her third marriage to the Earl of Bothwell had made Rome diffident to her cause. Pope Pius himself appears to have regained full confidence in her from reassurances reaching him through diplomatic channels, and from Mary’s sincerity and piety. Yet he still felt it necessary to encourage her, through her Paris envoy, to persevere and not weaken in her attachment to the Holy See. In a letter sent to Pius at the end of 1569, Mary told the Pope there was no truth in the report made to Philip of Spain that she was wavering; deprived of the means of Catholic worship, she had listened to the prayers of a Protestant minister–that was all. She humbly asked penance if she had erred in so doing. This removed all diffidence, and Pius now wrote unreservedly that he was certain no threat would ever be able to sever her from Communion and obedience to the Holy See. Still hoping in help from her from the kings of France and Spain, he declared himself convinced that her misfortunes had come upon her for having kept and defended the Catholic Faith, and consoled her with the words of Christ: “Happy are they that suffer persecution for justice’s sake.”
When Cardinal Inquistor, Pius had granted certain English priests faculties for re-admitting schismatics into the Catholic Church, the only condition then having been to refrain from reception of the Protestant eucharist. In 1567, as Pope, he made the further, more rigorous condition of non-attendance at Protestant services. The effects of this were positive, some of the priests in question reporting an end to considerable wavering. More and more Catholics, mostly of the older generation, refused to take part in Anglican worship, professing their faith courageously before magistrates and willingly accepting penalties and imprisonment; but they expressed their fears for their children and the younger ones listening to heretical preaching.
Writing in 1561 to the Cardinal Protector of England, Cardinal Morone, the Welsh priest and jurist Dr. Morus Clynnog (the one-time confidante of Cardinal Pole and future warden Rome’s English hospice) had told him it was quite untrue the English, as it was rumored, could not bear the thought of a foreign monarch, which restoration of Catholicism by force of arms would mean: many felt it were “better to go to Heaven under foreign leadership than be dragged to Hell by an enemy at home.” By the end of that decade, hopes in Mary Stuart had risen high and it was thought that, if help could come from Spain, she might in a short time be made queen. But Spain had enough on her hands dealing with the Moors and Marranos, as well as the revolt in the Netherlands; and English Catholics had scruples (a factor brought out by the historian Charles Edwards) about fighting an anointed prince until such time as she had been declared a heretic by Rome. Part of the mission of the Cambridge theologian, Dr. Nicholas Morton, penitentiary at St. Peter’s and warden of the English hospice, who travelled to England as Pius’ envoy in 1569, was therefore to sound the Catholics of the realm concerning the question of Elizabeth’s possible excommunication.
Dr. Morton returned to Rome shortly before the rising organized by the Northern Earls who had written to the Pope for support in their endeavor to free Mary. Pius had replied, urging them to be constant and courageous in the event of their having to shed their blood for the Faith and the Pope’s authority.
On learning of the failure of the rising after the momentary triumph in Durham, and that Elizabeth had ruthlessly sentenced nearly a thousand persons to torture and death, Pius V was almost alone in raising his voice in protest and condemnation of the queen’s actions. Most European monarchs remained silent for reasons of political interest.
Pope Pius received the counsels of English refugees in Rome, almost all in favor of restoration by force of arms, but did not allow himself to be determined by them knowing that they had not been in direct contact with England for some time. But on Dr. Morton’s return toward the end of 1569 he had the English queen advised that proceedings according to the Church’s canons were to be instituted against her. The papal envoy’s evidence, anyway, along with that of other Englishmen proscribed for their religion, 12 in all, including a number of those resident in the English hopsice, served as basis in drawing up the Bull of excommunication Regnans in excelcsis. The 12 were formally questioned about something known to all; but legal proof was required by legal proceedings.
In February 1570, after spending days in prayer and fasting, Pius V finally put his signature to the Bull placing Elizabeth under the ban of the Church. The Bull was founded upon the Supreme Pontiff’s right to preserve the members of the one true Church from peril of corruption, and to punish apostates. By virtue of the powers conferred on him, the Pope declared the English queen guilty of heresy, and of upholding heresy, thereby incurring excommunication from the fold and forfeiting her pretended right to the crown of England. Her subjects were no longer bound by their oath of allegiance to her and under pain of excommunication might not themselves lend her obedience.
The Emperor Maximilian [II of Germany], influenced by the English ambassador, wrote urging the Pope even then not to have the Bull promulgated. The King of Spain, complaining that he had not been consulted, objected that zeal was not enough to guarantee success and that such an act would worsen the situation of English Catholics.
But Pius’ mind was made up. Rome had waited more than a decade, during which one appeal after another had reached Elizabeth in vain. Crowned according to Catholic rites, she had sworn to govern as a Catholic monarch. But almost immediately violating her coronation oath, and repudiating the Pope’s authority, she had begun to destroy the Catholic Faith and persecute the Church. The chief reason Pius V gave for having the Bull published was the prayers of English Catholics. His intention, he told the Spanish ambassador, was to give courage; and as the Catholics of England had requested justice against Elizabeth, he could not in conscience refuse. (Robin Anderson, St. Pius V: A Brief Account of His Life, Times, Virtues & Miracles, published originally by St. Michael’s Press in 1973 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers in 1978, pp. 44-49.)
As we know, Regnans in Exclesis, which was promulgated on March 5, 1570, is held in contempt by the conciiar authorities. Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his pal Walter “Cardinal” Kasper treat the Anglican sect as having a legitimate “tradition” alongside the heretical and schismatic Orthodox and what they think is the Catholic Church herself. And it must never be forgotten by anyone prone to getting lost in the trees of Bergoglio’s screeds against the Holy Faith that none other than Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI accepted the Anglican “liturgical books,” which were deemed heretical by Pope Saint Pius V in Regnans n Excelsis, as perfectly acceptable for use by Anglican converts to the conciliar church, which he decreed in Anglicanorum Coetibus, November 9, 2009. It is furthermore the case that Ratzinger/Benedict, following the example of the soon-to-be “Blessed” Paul The Sick, and “Saint John Paul the Great, saw fit to offend the honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity and to defame the English Martyrs by giving a “joint blessing” with Anglican layman Rowan Williams in Westminster Cathedral on Friday, September 17, 2010:
What was that I was saying about no space between Ratzinger and Bergoglio a few months ago now?
I am unaware of anyone in the Motu or even in the “resist while recognize” camps who said word one, at least publicly, as to how their beloved “pope” of Summorum Pontificum, Judely 7, 2007, offended God and defamed the English Martyrs by entering into the seized property of the Catholic Church and attempting to give a “blessing” with an Anglican layman. No, to do this would have been to “offend” the beloved “pontiff, who issued Summorum Pontificum precisely to “pacify the spirits” of traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciiiar structures in order that they might accept, even if by silence, apostate acts such as the one pictured just above.
Although they differ in style, rhetoric and areas of emphasis, the the former and the current universal faces of public apostasy are as one in showing themselves to have no regard the immutability of the Sacred Deposit of Faith while treating as entirely nonbinding any papal decrees and statements that they do not “like,” thus making of the Holy Faith their personal plaything.
The future of such men is, of course, very bright in the conciliar church as they can look forward to eventual “beatification” and “canonization” by their successors. We have just seen this with “Saint John the Rosicrucian” and “Saint John Paul the Showman.” The brave new world of conciliar “beatifications” is about to feature a new beatus, none of than the aforementioned “Blessed” Paul The Sick:
Giovanni Battista Montini’s beatification is near: this morning cardinals and bishops of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints unanimously approved the miracle attributed to the intercession of the Italian Pope from Brescia, who died in August 1978. The year which marked the canonization of two Popes – John XXIII and John Paul II – will also be the year of Paul VI’s beatification. In the next few days Pope Francis will be promulgating the decree on the miracle attributed to the late Pope and the date suggested for the actual beatification is 19 October. The beatification is expected to take place in Rome on the occasion of the concluding ceremony of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops on the Family: it was Paul VI himself who established the Synod in September 1965 in response to a request made by the Council fathers. It should be noted that next August will mark the 50th anniversary of the publication of Paul VI’s first big encyclical, the “Ecclesiam Suam”, which he wrote and edited entirely by himself.
The miracle attributed to the intercession of Paul VI was witnessed in the United States in 2001. It involved the healing of an unborn child, which was found to have serious problems and a high risk of brain damage: the foetus’ bladder was damaged and doctors reported ascites (presence of liquid in the abdomen) and anhydramnios (absence of fluid in the amniotic sac). All attempts to correct the problem proved futile and in the end the doctors said the child would either die in the womb or it would be born with severe renal impairment. Abortion was offered as an option but the mother refused. Instead, she took the advice given to her by a nun who was a friend of the family and had met Montini: she decided to pray for Paul VI’s intercession using a fragment of the Pope’s vestments which the nun had given her.
Ten weeks later the results of the medical tests showed a substantial improvement in the child’s health and it was born by Caesarean section in the 39th week of pregnancy. The case was presented to the former Postulator of the Cause, the Jesuit Paolo Molinari – who passed away last week – in Rome. Faith weekly Credere revealed that the diocesan inquiry was launched in 2003 and all witnesses agree that the case in question cannot be explained scientifically.
The child has made it to thirteen and his health is constantly monitored to ensure that his psychophysical state is normal. Doctors are especially keeping an eye on the child’s renal function. On 12 December last year the medical consultation of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints headed by Professor Patrizio Polisca, confirmed the impossibility of explaining the healing and the dicastery’s theologians gave their approval last 18 February.G Benedict XVI promulgated Paul VI’s heroic virtues on 20 December 2012. (Montini to Join the Ranks of the Patheon of False Idols’ Triple A Affiliate.)
Lest anyone attempt to say that this “Paul the VI” was faithful to the Catholic Church or that, to paraphrase what a pastor in the conciliar structures wrote in online musings about the “canonizations” of “John XXIII” and “John Paul II” that were brought to my attention, “loved God with all his heart,” it must be remembered that it was Monsignor Giovanni Martini who betrayed Catholic priests behind the Iron Curtain to Soviet agents who had the “goods” on his depraved moral behavior. The stuff of the “love of God”? Not so. Not so.
Yes, yes, of course, that can be “overlooked” in the conciliar process of “beatification” and “canonization,” especially in light of all the “good” that Montini did as “Pope Paul VI:” The new ecclesiology, false ecumenism, inter-religious dialogue, whose precepts were outlined in his first encyclical letter, Ecclesiam Suam, August 6, 1964, religious liberty, separation of Church and State, new rules for Scriptural exegesis, episcopal collegiality, the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service, the appointment of homosexual men as “bishops,” the destruction of the rites of episcopal consecration and priestly ordination, the revival of the permanent diaconate, endless praise for the United Nations as the last “hope” of man for “concord” on earth, etc. As a conciliar presbyter, himself a “monsignor” now, told me on Palm Sunday in 1986 just a few months before Assisi I occurred, “Tom, the Saracens themselves could not have done of better job of destruction” than the conciliarists themselves.
“Blessed Paul the VI”?
As the late Father Luigi Villa documented so thoroughly, Paul VI Beatfied? Never! This book should be read by anyone who wants to have ready ammunition unless they know a putative “monsignor” in the conciliar structures who wants to claim publicly that Giovanni Montini “loved God with all his heart.” Passages from this book will be included in various articles once Jorge Mario Bergoglio signs the decree for “beatification” and sets the date for the travesty to take place.
Remember, the actions of the counterfeit church of conciliarism are not those of the Catholic Church.
Although the conciliarists have to hunt around for alleged “miracles” to induct their Modernist forebears into the Patheon of False Idols, this was not the case with Pope Saint Pius V, who was not canonized until 1712, fully one hundred forty years after his death on May 1, 1572:
Clement XI canonized Pius V in 1712, in St. Mary Major’s Basilica. Miracles attributed to his intercession were by this time so numerous and proven as only to need selection for the two required by the canonization process. Among them were cures of sick persons, deliverance of the possessed, punishment of criminals and innumerable spiritual and physical graces especially through Agnus Dei images blessed by him. Robin Anderson, St. Pius V: A Brief Account of His Life, Times, Virtues & Miracles, published originally by St. Michael’s Press in 1973 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers in 1978, p. 97.)
Yes, In Death As In Life: The Antithesis Of Christ The King, Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, stands as a contrast to the truly holy Dominican wonder worker, Pope Saint Pius V, whose Missale Romanum Montini dared to replace in order to facilitate his “dialogue” with Protestants and the “world.”
Behold the wretched results.
Today is the Solemnity of Saint Joseph in Paschaltide and the Commemoration of the Bishop-Martyr, Saint Stanislaus.
We need to intensify our devotions to Our Lady’s Most Chaste Spouse, Saint Joseph, who is the Patron of the Universal Church and the Protector of the faithful, that his prayers will help us to be steadfast in this time of apostasy and betrayal we suffer through the Mystical Passion, Death and Burial of His foster-Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, with the spirit of perfect resignation as characterized the founder of the Congregation of the Passion, Saint Paul of the Cross, and Saint Louis Grignion de Montfort, who saw many of his plans, including his magnificent Calvary scene, come to nothing in this life so that they could bear fruit in eternity. Saint Joseph, who did God’s Holy Will with promptness, will help us to be as patient in the carrying the crosses that we must bear in this era of apostasy and betrayal as was he and as were Saints Paul of the Cross and Louis de Montfort.
The very saint whose martyrdom in 1079 we commemorate today, Saint Stanislaus, stood up to the immorality of his own brother, Boleslaus, who governed in a wicked manner. We must stand up to evil in our own lives, rooting it out from our souls in cooperation with the graces sent to us by Our Lord through Our Lady’s loving hands as the Mediatrix of All Graces, and fear never to call it by its proper name in the world or in the counterfeit church of conciliarism that has made its reconciliation with its false, anti-Incarnational and religiously indifferentist premises.
The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Our daily praying of as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit will help to plant a few seeds for this great victory as we endeavor to make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through that same Immaculate Heart for our sins and those of the whole world, keeping in mind once again these words of Pope Pius XI, contained in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925:
We may well admire in this the admirable wisdom of the Providence of God, who, ever bringing good out of evil, has from time to time suffered the faith and piety of men to grow weak, and allowed Catholic truth to be attacked by false doctrines, but always with the result that truth has afterwards shone out with greater splendor, and that men’s faith, aroused from its lethargy, has shown itself more vigorous than before. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)
Although we pray most fervently for Catholics still attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and recognize the simple truth that most of us who, solely by means of the graces of Our Lady and through no merits of our own, cling to the Catholic Church are not better than–and probably, at least in my case, far worse than–they, we must nevertheless be about the serious business of refusing communion with apostasy no matter how many names we are called
Vivat Chistus 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.
Saint Stanislaus, pray for us.