June 29-30, 2014, Article

Posted on by

June 29, 2014, Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul and the Commemoration of the Sunday within the Octave of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

June 30, 2014: Commemoration of Saint Paul:

A New Sense for a New Faith, part two, took four days to complete, including almost the entirety of Saturday, June 28, 2014, the Feast of Saint Irenaeus, and today, the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul. As I have other work that needs to be completed during the summer, articles about Jorge, including his most recent interview, will be spaced far between. The Argentine Apostate never knows when to shut up. I, for one, am not going to spend much time until he travels to the Republic of Korea in August.

The current article could have been broken up into three or four separate parts. I chose to continue work on the article without doing so as it is meant to be a comprehensive treatment on certain passages in Sensus fidei in the life of the Church and in the Instrumentum Laboris that has been issued in preparation for the revolutionary work of the forthcoming hootenanny that Jorge will be holding this October that goes by the name of the “extraordinary synod of bishops on the family.”

Let met state once again that I realize full well that these articles are “too long” for many people. So be it. I do not write in the “sound bite” or with “bullet points” as I am endeavoring to leave behind a body of work that provide readers with sustained points and primary documentation from papal teaching that transcend the immediacy of any given moment. It is simply my desire to offer up this work to the Throne of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slave of Christ the King through Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart as some small way to give Him honor and glory and to make some bit of reparation for my many sins. I can tell you this, however: work such as that required for this article is certainly penitential.

Also, I want to inform readers about a very fine post on the Novus Ordo Watch Wire concerning Jorge’s having joked about Eve’s creation by God out of a rib from Adam’s side, a prefiguring of Holy Mother Church being born from the wounded side of the New Adam, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The Novus Ordo Watch Wire post correctly points out how Catholics are required to believe the inerrant words of Sacred Scripture, written as they were under the Divine inspiration of God the Holy Ghost, noting the decision of the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1909 on this point and the teaching contained in Pope Pius XII’s Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.

There is only one thing that I would like to add to the excellent post at Novus Ordo Watch Wire.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, although a vulgar, visceral man of incomparable crudity, may have joked about God’s creation of Eve. The denial of Special Creation of Adam and Eve by God, however, is standard fare for the so-called” Biblical scholars of the conciliar revolution. Even some presbyters installed for Motu communities have called the Creation account in The Book of Genesis to be “allegorical.” I have heard this taught in a seminary. I have heard in classrooms as a undergraduate at Saint John’s University in Jamaica, New York, and I have heard from the lecterns of many formerly Catholic parishes in conciliar captivity.

The denial of Special Creation of Adam and Eve by God is no joke to the Modernists, who are deadly serious about propagating their heretical contention. To deny Special Creation is to get rid of a Catholic’s understanding of the dogma of Original Sin as taught by Holy Mother Church and to embrace the biological evolutionism of Charles Darwin in order to justify the theological evolutionism of the likes of the late Teilhard de Chardin, S.J. The entire conciliar revolution is premised upon acceptance of both forms of evolutionism.

Indeed, the then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger explained to us twenty-three years ago, that is, on June 27, 1990, that a way had be found to dismiss the binding nature of the decrees against Modernism and the decisions of the Pontifical Biblical Commission:

1990: The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms – perhaps for the first time with this clarity – that there are decisions of the magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are, in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times influenced, may need further correction.

In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all, the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism]. As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz said, for example, that the Church’s anti-Modernist decisions render the great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time. (Joseph Ratzinger, “Instruction on the Theologian’s Ecclesial Vocation,” published with the title “Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia,” in L’Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, cited at Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete)

Jorge may have told his blasphemous joke. Joseph Ratzinger, though, was completely serious about preparing the way for what labeled on December 22, 2005, as the “hermeneutic of continuity,” a subject that has been discussed on this site many, many times now. As  I have noted so many times, there is no space between Ratzinger and Bergoglio on matters of substance. Their differences are only on the margins of the conciliar revolution and in matters of style.

Finally, a little rejoinder to Jorge’s comment in his interview that Karl Marx “stole his ideas” from Christianity.”

Really?

Like what?

The dialectical principle came from Georg Wilhem Friedrich Hegel. Marx adapted this false principle, rejecting Hegel’s dialectical idealism in favor of his own dialectical materialism.

Atheism?

Marx’s beliefs that man is merely matter without a soul?

Marx’s belief that religion was the “opiate of the masses.”

Pope Pius XI provides a very good antidote to this in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937:

57. On this point We have already insisted in Our Allocution of May 12th of last year, but We believe it to be a duty of special urgency, Venerable Brethren, to call your attention to it once again. In the beginning Communism showed itself for what it was in all its perversity; but very soon it realized that it was thus alienating the people. It has therefore changed its tactics, and strives to entice the multitudes by trickery of various forms, hiding its real designs behind ideas that in themselves are good and attractive. Thus, aware of the universal desire for peace, the leaders of Communism pretend to be the most zealous promoters and propagandists in the movement for world amity. Yet at the same time they stir up a class-warfare which causes rivers of blood to flow, and, realizing that their system offers no internal guarantee of peace, they have recourse to unlimited armaments. Under various names which do not suggest Communism, they establish organizations and periodicals with the sole purpose of carrying their ideas into quarters otherwise inaccessible. They try perfidiously to worm their way even into professedly Catholic and religious organizations. Again, without receding an inch from their subversive principles, they invite Catholics to collaborate with them in the realm of so-called humanitarianism and charity; and at times even make proposals that are in perfect harmony with the Christian spirit and the doctrine of the Church. Elsewhere they carry their hypocrisy so far as to encourage the belief that Communism, in countries where faith and culture are more strongly entrenched, will assume another and much milder form. It will not interfere with the practice of religion. It will respect liberty of conscience. There are some even who refer to certain changes recently introduced into soviet legislation as a proof that Communism is about to abandon its program of war against God.

58. See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has gone so far as to say that he’s met Communists who are “good” people because their alleged “love” for the poor. He has called himself a servant of the poor, whose material plight has long been his driving force in life.

Yet it is that Pope Pius XI, while decrying the injustices caused by the liberal economic system of Modernity that helped to spawn Marxism, urged the poor to remain poor in spirit despite their material poverty:

45. But the poor too, in their turn, while engaged, according to the laws of charity and justice, in acquiring the necessities of life and also in bettering their condition, should always remain “poor in spirit,”[29] and hold spiritual goods in higher esteem than earthly property and pleasures. Let them remember that the world will never be able to rid itself of misery, sorrow and tribulation, which are the portion even of those who seem most prosperous. Patience, therefore, is the need of all, that Christian patience which comforts the heart with the divine assurance of eternal happiness. “Be patient, therefore, brethren,” we repeat with St. .lames, “until the coming of the Lord. Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, patiently bearing until he receive the early and the later rain. Be you therefore also patient and strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.”[30] Only thus will be fulfilled the consoling promise of the Lord: “Blessed are the poor!” These words are no vain consolation, a promise as empty as those of the Communists. They are the words of life, pregnant with a sovereign reality. They are fully verified here on earth, as well as in eternity. Indeed, how many of the poor, in anticipation of the Kingdom of Heaven already proclaimed their own: “for yours is the Kingdom of Heaven,”[31] find in these words a happiness which so many of the wealthy, uneasy with their riches and ever thirsting for more, look for in vain! (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)

Behold the contrast between a true pope and a false one.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

This entry was posted in About Today's New Article by Thomas Droleskey. Bookmark the permalink.

About Thomas Droleskey

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