Led By Thoroughly False Spirits, part one

The counterfeit church of conciliarism is falling victim to its own falsehoods as the Catholics who are as of yet attached to its structures in the belief that they are “fighting from within” the Catholic Church try to save that which is false from collapsing.

All of the efforts, no matter how noble and well-intentioned, to save various historic churches where God is offended by the staging of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service are doomed to failure. Even temporary reprieves, which are issued by conciliar authorities from time to time, do not last long. Moreover, to what avail is it to save historic church buildings when the true Catholic Faith is not to be found there and when the conciliar authorities are not interested in saving the parishes in whose boundaries they exist by seeking converts from the ranks of the non-Catholics who have displaced Catholics as the predominant part of these parishes’ population?

Well-meaning efforts to “save” the counterfeit church of conciliarism from the natural process of decadence that must occur within any false religion are very misguided as there is no such thing as “partial-credit” Catholicism.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that the meaning of dogmatic truth can change from time to time as it is said to be impossible for human language to convey with precision and stability the many-varied aspects of it. The Catholic Church has solemnly anathematized such a concept.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that the “Church of Christ” subsists in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church teaches that she is the only and only Church of Christ.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that “inter-religious prayer” is the path to “peace” between men and among nations. The Catholic Church forbids such prayer as offensive to God, Who has appointed her as the sole means for promoting His greater honor and glory and of the sanctification of the faithful.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that the Old Covenant has never been revoked. The Catholic Church teaches that it has.

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that adherents of false religions have a “right” from God Himself to propagate their false beliefs in society. The Catholic Church has condemned “religious liberty” as a “monstrous right” (Pope Pius VI, (Pope Pius VI, Brief Quod aliquantum, March 10, 1791; Religious Liberty, a “Monstrous Right) and as a heresy (Pope Pius VII, Post Tam Diurturnas, April 29, 1714) and as “insanity” (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832) and as “injurious babbling” that would result in the pursuit of material pleasures as the chief purpose of human existence (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

The counterfeit church of conciliarism teaches that “separation of church and state” is beneficial to men and their nations. The Catholic Church has condemned such an arrangement. Pope Saint Pius X said that the thesis of “separation of Church and State is a thesis absolutely false, reminding us that the Sovereign Pontiffs had never ceased to condemn it as circumstances required them to do so (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)

Well-meaning efforts to “save” the counterfeit church of conciliarism must always result in failure as this false church is only suffering from continuing to suffer the fate of its sister false church, the Anglican sect, from a fate of declining church attendance, loss of belief in the tenets of the Apostles Creed, agnosticism, popular support for every moral evil imaginable in the name of “compassion” and “mercy” and “tolerance” and “diversity.” That which it is false of its nature can never be “willed” into being good and pleasing to God. 

Holy Mother Church is in the catacombs again during this time of her Mystical Burial just as she was before the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. Most of her great churches and cathedrals were built after that edict, symbolizing Holy Mother Church’s ascent from the underground into the open. The situation is reversed today as the remnant Catholic Church has gone underground today while her structures are in the hands of apostates whose false beliefs have expelled them from her maternal bosom. And it may very well be the case that most of our formerly Catholic church buildings that do not get auctioned off or sold or torn down by the conciliar revolutionaries will be torn down by the caesars themselves. Anyone who does not realize that era of real, bloody persecutions sponsored by the state authorities in supposedly “civilized nations” is right around the corner is not thinking too clearly.

As has been noted on this site in the past,  that “progress” can be made to “save” the counterfeit church of concilairism from the natural fruit of its own decadence will be condemned to the fate of the mythical Sisyphus, who had to spend eternity perpetually trying to roll a huge boulder up a hill, only to have it roll down on him time and time again. Each new crisis engendered by the words and actions of the conciliar revolutionaries brings its own “burst of energy” from well-meaning Catholics, who believe that “Rome” is going to “listen” to the “people” sooner or later. The reality, however, is this: (a) most Catholics in the world support the conciliar revolution completely; and (b) “Rome” is the seat of apostasy at this time.

Remember, there were several celebrated cases of Japanese Imperial Army holdouts in The Philippines who holed up, principally on the Island of Mindanao, for over thirty yeas following the Japanese Empire’s surrender August 15, 1945 (the formal surrender was signed on September 2, 1945).

This is quite pertinent as one considers the efforts Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to “hold out” themselves in various outposts in order to do “battle” for the Faith against some conciliar revolutionary “priest” who has been installed as a pastor by a conciliar “bishop” to undo the work of a validly ordained priest who tried to hold back the floodgates of the revolution as best he could with the equipment that had been given to him. As a now retired–and battle scarred–combatant in these battles, both as an activist and as one engaged in advocacy journalism, I can report that these battles, although stemming from the highest of motives to help Holy Mother Church, are indeed the equivalent of taking pot shots at “enemy targets” from a jungle tree on Mindanao. The “enemy” has won. The war is over. The battles are useless.

To be sure, the process of decadence has accelerated in the past four hundred forty-six days since the “election” of layman Jorge Mario Bergoglio to be the head of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Bergoglio, however, is merely scraping away whatever remaining trappings of recognizable Catholicism remains in his false church, eagerly embracing almost everything that “conservative” and “traditionally-minded” Catholics in the conciliar structures have fought against or mocked time and time again.

Case-in-point: Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s consistent embrace of the so-called “Catholic Charismatic Movement,” capped by his appearance yesterday, Sunday, June 1, 2014, Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension and the Commemoration of Saint Angela Merici, at the public display of emotionalism and irrationality that passes for a gathering of such “spirit-filled” people at Rome’s Olympic Stadium.

Although a transcript of the false “pontiff’s” remarks is not available now, there is a report on the Vatican Insider website from which a few comments can be offered:

“At first I thought Renewal was a samba school,” the Pope joked and the whole stadium roared with laughter. Then he warned: “When someone thinks they are important, that’s when the plague hits.” Finally, he kneeled down as faithful prayed at the end of his speech, asking the Lord to bless him, just as Francis had asked of them to do straight after his election on 13 March 2013, from the central Loggia of St. Peter’s Basilica.

“Someone is missing here, possibly the most important people: grandparents. They are the guarantors of our faith.” Francis’ words totally threw the organisers of the Charismatic Renewal Convocation (Renewal in the Spirit – RNS), who only expected four people to speak at today’s meeting at the Olympic stadium: a priest, a young boy, a married couple and a disabled person.

“Like good wine, the elderly have freedom given to them by the Holy Spirit,” the Pope said, recalling the presentation of Jesus in the Temple, where he met two elderly people, Simeon and the prophetess Anna. “The elderly are the Church’s wisdom and yet we cast them aside,” the Pope said. That elderly lady, Anna, canonized “gossip” because instead of gossiping, she went around saying that the Saviour had come. Grandmothers and grandfathers are our wisdom and strength.” “May the Lord always give us elderly people who pass onto us the memory and wisdom of the Church and the sense of joy with which Simeon and Anna greeted promises from afar,” Francis said.

He asked the thousands of priests gathered to “be close to the people and to God.” “Lord, look at your people who await the Holy Spirit; look at the young; look at the families; look at children; look at the sick; look at priests; at the consecrated men and women; look at us bishops. Look at everyone and grant us that holy inebriation, the inebriation of the Spirit, which allows us to speak in all languages, the languages of charity, always standing by the side of those brothers and sisters who need us. Teach us not to fight over power, teach us to be humble, to love the Church more than our party, to receive the Spirit, Lord send your Spirit upon us.

After recalling the masses he celebrated in Buenos Aires with RNS, the Pope said: “Thank you. I feel at home with you.” “Married couples are sinners just like everyone else, but they want to continue with love, in all its fecundity. They continue in the faith, bearing children.” This was Francis’ response to the words pronounced by a young bride who greeted Francis on behalf of all families. “Let us pray to the Lord and ask him to protect the family in the crisis with which the devil wants to destroy it,” the Pope said. “Families are the domestic church where Jesus grows in the love of a married couple, in the lives of their children. This is why the devil attacks the family so much,” Francis explained. The devil doesn’t want it and tries to destroy it. The devil tries to make love disappear from there.”

Francis crossed a section of the stadium pitch on foot to get to the stage. He was accompanied by the president of RNS, Salvatore Martinez and the Regent of the Papal Household, Fr. Leonardo Sapienza. Some of the delegates who stood along the course which had been marked out for the Pope, shook his hand. In the meantime, the crowds cheered, sang and called out Francis’ name. In his brief greeting to the Pope, Martinez reminded faithful that Francis wanted them to call out Jesus’ name, not his.

Martinez started singing “Jesus is Lord” in Spanish and Francis joined in. “Holy Father,” RNS’ president continued, “clearly there are no football teams here today, no Roma, no Lazio; our coach is the Holy Spirit and you are our captain, you are the one proposing the team strategy: if we send Jesus onto the pitch, we’ll win. Everyone will win, above all the sick.” “You kept your word when we said that after thirty six years we wanted to move our Convocation from Rimini to Rome and you said to us: “I’ll come”,” Martinez said to Francis. But keeping our word meant asking for a miracle of love: 1300 volunteers worked to get the stadium ready last night.” The crowds exploded into joyful cheering at these words and Martinez continued: “The great gift is the unity which will be the sign of our credibility. We were born with Paul VI, we grew up and matured with John Paul II and now here we are with you. Pentecost is not some red number in the calendar. This is an open-air cenacle. Pray for us and over us.” (Babbling Jorge Appears With Those Who Babble.)

What does Jorge Mario Bergoglio mean by “love” in families?

He means “acceptance” of the “diversity” that exists within families today without any kind of judgmental attitudes.

Isn’t it great that Jorge says the devil is trying to destroy families?

The adversary is clever. He will use his own minions, of which Jorge, who hid his pectoral cross as week ago today when paying a “courtesy” call upon two Talmudic rabbis who hate the Cross of the Divine Redeemer, Christ the King (see On the Road to Gehenna with Jorge, Abe and Omar, part three), is one of the most useful, to denounce him even though they do his bidding for him constantly.

To wit, the conciliar authorities have helped to destroy the integrity of the family by their endorsement of “natural family planning” (see Forty-Three Years After Humanae Vitae, Always Trying To Find A Way and Planting Seeds of Revolutionary Change), “Saint John Paul II’s” “theology of the body,” explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, de facto endorsement of contraception by many conciliar priests and presbyters in the confessional and from the pulpit and in their writings and the upcoming de facto endorsement of the “internal forum” solution to dispense even with formalities of the conciliar nullity process to permit Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried without a conciliar decree of marital nullity receive what purports to be Holy Communion in the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service (see Jorge Cooks the Books).

Many of the lords of conciliarism, at least on the local levels without interference from “Rome,” have promoted the agenda of the Homosexual Collective up to and including baptizing the children of lesbian “couples,” promoting perverted works of art, reaffirming those steeped in lives of unrepentant sins against nature by means of “support” groups, using “gay speak” and designing churches to make those inclined to such sins feel “at home,” and corrupting the young with “educational” programs that have been designed to catechize them about the necessity of “diversity” and “tolerance.”

Yes, the devil is very much at work against the family, and he has had willing partners among the lords of conciliarism.

Then again, Pentecostalism is evil as the gift of tongues has nothing to do with uttering unintelligible sounds and waving one’s harms or falling prone on the ground. The gift of tongues is what Saint Peter exercised on the first Pentecost Sunday as he spoke in Aramaic but was able to be understand by his audience in each of their own native languages. That’s the gift of tongues, not the “Heebie-geebies, the spirits are about to speak” emotionalism of the so-called “Catholic Charismatic Renewal.”

Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s actual address, which become available today, Monday, June 2, 2014 (Monday within the Octave of the Ascension and the Commemoration of Saints Marcellianus, Peter and Erasmus), demonstrates his complete endorsement of a “spirit” who leads people as he wills without regard to the truths of the Catholic Faith, of which God the Holy Ghost in the infallible guarantor:

Vatican City, 2 June 2014 (VIS) – Yesterday afternoon fifty-two thousand people gathered for the National Convocation of “Renewal in the Spirit”, from 55 countries, applauded Pope Francis’ entry into the Olympic Stadium in Rome where he joined in with the chorus in Spanish of “Vive Jesus, el Senor”, a hymn that the bishop of Rome said he enjoyed greatly when he celebrated Mass in the cathedral of Buenos Aires with members of this movement. Two bodies for the coordination of Catholic Charismatic Renewal throughout the world: ICCRS (International Catholic Charismatic Renewal Services) and CFCCCF (Catholic Fraternity of Charismatic Covenant Communities and Fellowships).

The Pope answered the questions posed to him by priests, young people, families, the sick and the elderly, asking the first among them to remain close to Christ and to his faithful, and warning the second not to keep their youth “locked away in a safe” but rather to “bet on great things”. He reminded families of their roles as a domestic church, and commented that the sick imitate Jesus in the difficult moments of life, and that the elderly are the wisdom and memory of the Church. Finally, he prayed that God might grant to all the “holy intoxication of the Spirit, that enables us to speak many languages, the languages of charity, always close to those brothers and sisters who need us. Teach us not to fight between ourselves over a little more power, … teach us to increasingly love the Church that is our ‘team’, and to keep our hearts open to receive the Holy Spirit”.  

In his address, he affirmed that Renewal in the Spirit is “a great force in the service of the proclamation of the Gospel in the joy of the Holy Spirit. … In the early times, it was said that you always carried a Bible with you, a New Testament. … If not, return to this first love, always carry the Word of God with you, in your pocket, in your bag!” 

He urged them never to lose the freedom that the Holy Spirit gives us, warning them of the danger of “excessive organisation”. “Yes, you need organisation, but do not lose the grace of letting God be God!”. He also warned them of the danger of becoming “controllers” of God’s grace, administrators of race who decide who may receive the prayer of effusion or baptism in the Spirit, and who instead may not. “If any of you do this, I beg you, do not do this any more. You are dispensers of God’s grace, not controllers!”, he underlined. 

Evangelisation, spiritual ecumenism, attention to the poor and needy and welcome to the marginalised, and all on the basis of adoration; the foundation for renewal is adoring God”: thus Pope Francis defined the path of Renewal in the Spirit, to explain the future direction he hoped they would take

“First of all”, he said, “conversion to the love of Jesus, that changes life and makes a Christian a witness to God’s love. I hope that you will share with all in the Church the grace of Baptism in the Holy Spirit. I expect from you an evangelisation with the Word of God that proclaims that Jesus lives and loves all humankind. May you give witness of spiritual ecumenism with all those brothers and sisters of other Churches and Christian communities who believe in Jesus as the Lord and Saviour. May you remain united in the love that the Lord Jesus asks of all for all mankind, and in prayer to the Holy Spirit to reach this unity, necessary for evangelisation in the name of Jesus. Be close to the poor and needy to touch in their flesh the wounded flesh of Jesus. Seek unity in Renewal because unity comes from the Holy Spirit and is born of the unity of the Trinity. Where does division come from? The devil! Division comes from the devil. Flee from internal struggles, please!”.  

In conclusion, Francis called upon them to “Go forth onto the streets and evangelise, proclaim the Gospel. Remember that the Church was born to go forth, that morning of Pentecost. … Let yourselves be guided by the Holy Spirit, with that same freedom. And please, do not cage the Holy Spirit! With freedom!”. (Jorge: Do Not “Cage” My False Spirit.)

Blasphemous apostasy.

“Cage the ‘Holy Spirit'”?

Once again, nothing is new under Jorge’s sun, such as it is.

Here is what he said on June 13, 2013, the Feast of Saint Anthony of Padua:

Pope Francis addressed the two extremes that threaten the progress of the Church at mass Wednesday morning: Fear of any change to the status quo which stops the Church moving forward and a tendency to follow every change dictated by today’s culture, which he described as an ‘adolescent progressivism’ that risks ‘de-railing’ believers.

Instead, the way forward for the Church, as indicated by the Holy Spirit, is that of “freedom,” in continuously discerning God’s will and, he added, rules which kill charisms should not be imposed. The problem and temptation, said Pope Francis, is that we cannot control the Holy Spirit.. Emer McCarthy reports: RealAudioMP3

The Pope’s homily centered around Jesus’ words in the Gospel of the day, (MT 5:17) ” Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.” He said this Gospel passage which follows the Beatitudes is “an expression of the new law” which is more demanding than that of Moses. This law, the Pope added, is “the fruit of the Covenant” and cannot be understood without it. “This Alliance, this law is sacred because it brought the people to God.” Pope Francis likened the “maturity of this law” to a ” bursting bud that reveals a flower.” Jesus “is the expression of the maturity of the law”. The Pope noted that Paul speaks of two times “without breaking continuity” between the law of history and the law of the Spirit:

“The hour of the law’s fulfillment, is when the law reaches its maturity when it becomes the law of the Spirit. Moving forward on this road is somewhat risky, but it is the only road to maturity, to leave behind the times in which we are not mature. Part of the law’s journey to maturity, which comes with preaching Jesus, always involves fear; fear of the freedom that the Spirit gives us. The law of the Spirit makes us free! This freedom frightens us a little, because we are afraid we will confuse the freedom of the Spirit with human freedom. “

Pope Francis continued, the law of the Spirit, “takes us on a path of continuous discernment to do the will of God” and this can frighten us. The Pope warned that this fear “brings two temptations with it.” The first, is to “go backwards” to say that “it’s possible up to this point, but impossible beyond this point” which ends up becoming “let’s stay here”. This, he warned, “is the temptation of fear of freedom, fear of the Holy Spirit.” A fear that “it is better to play it safe.” Pope Francis then told a story about a superior general who, in the 1930’s, went around compiling a list of regulations for his religious, “a work that took years.” Then he travelled to Rome to meet a Benedictine abbot, who, upon hearing all he had done, replied that in doing so he “had killed his Congregation’s charism”, “he had killed its freedom” since “this charism bears fruit in freedom and he had stopped the charism”.

This is the temptation to go backwards, because we are ‘safer’ going back: but total security is in the Holy Spirit that brings you forward, which gives us this trust – as Paul says – which is more demanding because Jesus tells us: “Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law”. It is more demanding! But it does not give us that human security. We cannot control the Holy Spirit: that is the problem! This is a temptation.”

Pope Francis noted that there is another temptation: that of “adolescent progressivism”, that de-rails us. This temptation lies in seeing a culture and “not detaching ourselves from it”.

“We take the values of this culture a little bit from here, a little bit from there , … They want to make this law? Alright let’s go ahead and make this law. Let’s broaden the boundaries here a little. In the end, let me tell you, this is not true progress. It is adolescent progressivism: just like teenagers who in their enthusiasm want to have everything and in the end? You slip up … It’s like when the road is covered in ice and the car slips and go off track… This is the other temptation at the moment! We, at this moment in the history of the Church, we cannot go backwards or go off the track! “

Pope Francis concluded : the track “is that of freedom in the Holy Spirit that makes us free, in continuous discernment of God’s will to move forward on this path, without going back and without going off-track”. Let us ask the Lord for “the grace that the Holy Spirit gives us to go forward.”

Mass was concelebrated by Cardinal João Braz de Aviz, accompanied by priests, religious and lay staff of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life. (Universal Public Face of Apostasy At Abominable Liturgical Service That Pleases Only The Devil: True progress is in trusting the Spirit.)

It is not to “cage” God the Holy Ghost to remain faithful to everything that Our Lord has revealed to us exclusively through His Catholic Church “according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation(cf. Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907).

Bergoglio’s “freedom” is Protestant Pentecostalism. It is from the devil. It leads to Hell.

Thus it is that the entire so-called “Catholic Charismatic Renewal” is simply a manifestation of the diabolical phenomenon known as Protestant Pentecostalism, which is practiced with great fervor by the rabidly anti-Catholic Assemblies of God of which the disgraced “televangelist” Jimmy Swaggart was a “minister,” that does away with the Sacred Deposit of Faith and thus the very Divine Constitution of the Church that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope, to substituted alleged individual and collective “inspirations” from the “spirit” for the immutable truths contained in the Sacred Scripture and Sacred (Apostolic) Tradition.

Pentecostalism has, of course, influenced the counterfeit church of conciliarism very directly through its allegedly Catholic variation, the so-called “Catholic Charismatic Renewal,” sometimes referred to as the “Charismatic Movement,” stressing the relationship of the “individual” to the “Holy Spirit,” Who could guide believers in individual, personal ways by direct inspiration rather than through the direction of a bishop or a priest, no less by the Magisterium of the true Church that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope, the Catholic Church. Individuals can be “sanctified” directly by the “Holy Spirit” absent any reliance upon the Sacraments that Our Lord Himself instituted and entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church for their valid administration according to her approved rites.

Pentecostalism is thus a false spirituality founded in emotionalism and religious indifferentism. It has been so from its inception. It remains so today, making of religious faith and practice a purely experiential reality that can never be understood or expressed intelligibly.

Pope Leo XIII was quite aware that this spirit of American “individualism” was infecting how Catholics in this country viewed Holy Mother Church, understanding quite correctly how this infection would spread over the course of time if the American bishops did nothing to check it by condemning it in no uncertain terms. This is one of the reasons that Pope Leo wrote his Apostolical Letter, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899, to James Cardinal Gibbons, the Americanist Archbishop of Baltimore, Maryland, from October 3, 1877, to March 24, 1921. Pope Leo condemned the false spirit of Pentecostalism that he knew would undermine the integrity of the Catholic Faith over time:

Coming now to speak of the conclusions which have been deduced from the above opinions, and for them, we readily believe there was no thought of wrong or guile, yet the things themselves certainly merit some degree of suspicion. First, all external guidance is set aside for those souls who are striving after Christian perfection as being superfluous or indeed, not useful in any sense -the contention being that the Holy Spirit pours richer and more abundant graces than formerly upon the souls of the faithful, so that without human intervention He teaches and guides them by some hidden instinct of His own. Yet it is the sign of no small over-confidence to desire to measure and determine the mode of the Divine communication to mankind, since it wholly depends upon His own good pleasure, and He is a most generous dispenser ‘of his own gifts. “The Spirit breatheth whereso He listeth.” — John iii, 8.

“And to each one of us grace is given according to the measure of the giving of Christ.” — Eph. iv, 7.

And shall any one who recalls the history of the apostles, the faith of the nascent church, the trials and deaths of the martyrs and, above all, those olden times, so fruitful in saints-dare to measure our age with these, or affirm that they received less of the divine outpouring from the Spirit of Holiness? Not to dwell upon this point, there is no one who calls in question the truth that the Holy Spirit does work by a secret descent into the souls of the just and that He stirs them alike by warnings and impulses, since unless this were the case all outward defense and authority would be unavailing. “For if any persuades himself that he can give assent to saving, that is, to gospel truth when proclaimed, without any illumination of the Holy Spirit, who gives unto all sweetness both to assent and to hold, such an one is deceived by a heretical spirit.”-From the Second Council of Orange, Canon 7.

Moreover, as experience shows, these monitions and impulses of the Holy Spirit are for the most part felt through the medium of the aid and light of an external teaching authority. To quote St. Augustine. “He (the Holy Spirit) co-operates to the fruit gathered from the good trees, since He externally waters and cultivates them by the outward ministry of men, and yet of Himself bestows the inward increase.”-De Gratia Christi, Chapter xix. This, indeed, belongs to the ordinary law of God’s loving providence that as He has decreed that men for the most part shall be saved by the ministry also of men, so has He wished that those whom He calls to the higher planes of holiness should be led thereto by men; hence St. Chrysostom declares we are taught of God through the instrumentality of men.-Homily I in Inscrib. Altar. Of this a striking example is given us in the very first days of the Church.

For though Saul, intent upon blood and slaughter, had heard the voice of our Lord Himself and had asked, “What dost Thou wish me to do?” yet he was bidden to enter Damascus and search for Ananias. Acts ix: “Enter the city and it shall be there told to thee what thou must do.”

Nor can we leave out of consideration the truth that those who are striving after perfection, since by that fact they walk in no beaten or well-known path, are the most liable to stray, and hence have greater need than others of a teacher and guide. Such guidance has ever obtained in the Church; it has been the universal teaching of those who throughout the ages have been eminent for wisdom and sanctity-and hence to reject it would be to commit one’s self to a belief at once rash and dangerous.

A thorough consideration of this point, in the supposition that no exterior guide is granted such souls, will make us see the difficulty of locating or determining the direction and application of that more abundant influx of the Holy Spirit so greatly extolled by innovators. To practice virtue there is absolute need of the assistance of the Holy Spirit, yet we find those who are fond of novelty giving an unwarranted importance to the natural virtues, as though they better responded to the customs and necessities of the times and that having these as his outfit man becomes more ready to act and more strenuous in action. It is not easy to understand how persons possessed of Christian wisdom can either prefer natural to supernatural virtues or attribute to them a greater efficacy and fruitfulness. Can it be that nature conjoined with grace is weaker than when left to herself?

Can it be that those men illustrious for sanctity, whom the Church distinguishes and openly pays homage to, were deficient, came short in the order of nature and its endowments, because they excelled in Christian strength? And although it be allowed at times to wonder at acts worthy of admiration which are the outcome of natural virtue-is there anyone at all endowed simply with an outfit of natural virtue? Is there any one not tried by mental anxiety, and this in no light degree? Yet ever to master such, as also to preserve in its entirety the law of the natural order, requires an assistance from on high. These single notable acts to which we have alluded will frequently upon a closer investigation be found to exhibit the appearance rather than the reality of virtue. Grant that it is virtue, unless we would “run in vain” and be unmindful of that eternal bliss which a good God in his mercy has destined for us, of what avail are natural virtues unless seconded by the gift of divine grace? Hence St. Augustine well says: “Wonderful is the strength, and swift the course, but outside the true path.” For as the nature of man, owing to the primal fault, is inclined to evil and dishonor, yet by the help of grace is raised up, is borne along with a new greatness and strength, so, too, virtue, which is not the product of nature alone, but of grace also, is made fruitful unto everlasting life and takes on a more strong and abiding character. (Pope Leo XIII, Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae, January 22, 1899.) 

In other words, Pentecostalists  contend that one must open oneself up to the belief that there should be “liberty” within the Church to discuss “new” things in imitation of the falsehoods of the American founding itself. It is also to open oneself up to reject the hierarchical nature of the Church herself.

That is, a belief in American individualism and egalitarianism, each of which are false naturalistic principles having nothing to do with the Faith (the first individualist and egalitarian was Lucifer, after all), leads one down the path of the layman seeking equality in the sanctuary with the ordained priest, of the abolition of Communion rails, of standing for the reception of what purports to be Holy Communion, of the use of vulgar tongues, subject to all manner of change and misinterpretation and deconstruction and positivism, in the Sacred Liturgy, of the rejection of the magisterial authority of the Catholic Church as binding upon one’s conscience at all times and in all things. And the rejection of the magisterial authority of the Catholic Church leads one open to adopting Protestant Pentecostalism as the means by which one “knows” about God, deluding himself into thinking that God the Holy Ghost is leading him individually on a new path that deviates from the one prescribed by the Catholic Church. There is thus a direct path from Americanism to the “Catholic Charismatic Renewal” of conciliarism–in all of the other “movements” that have sprung up like weeds in the past forty-nine years since the close of the “Second” Vatican Council.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear that the “spirit” does not want to return to the “formality” of the “past.”

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear that the “spirit” likes his clown liturgies.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear that the “spirit” likes liturgies staged facing the people.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear that the “spirit” just loves religious liberty and separation of Church and State even though both are responsible, proximately speaking, for the rise of so many socially accepted and institutionalized evils, including child euthanasia laws in Belgium (see Hitler Prevails After All).

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear that the “spirit” has led him to seek the blessings of Protestant Penecostalists and to coauthor a book with  a pro-abortion, pro-perversity Talmudic rabbi.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio just loves to “move with the spirit,” who just kind of “blows with the times.”

Unfortunately for Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the “spirit by which he “moves” is diabolical, and it is thus a diabolical spirit that drives him to be obsessed about those who want to go back to a “past” where Catholics understood that God and His Holy Truths are immutable, an immutability that was reflected in the transcendent glory, permanence, beauty and universality of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ taught to the Apostles in all of its essential elements between his Resurrection on Easter Sunday and His Ascension to His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal Father’s right hand on Ascension Thursday.

Here is news for Jorge Mario Bergoglio: Only an evil spirit can inspire him to hide his pectoral cross in the presence of two Talmudic rabbis who hate the very instrument upon which the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, offered Himself up to His Co-Eternal and Co-Equal God the Father in atonement for our sins.

Part two of this commentary will take a look at some of the future plans that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s false “spirit” might have in store for a false church, the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

We must have recourse in this month of June to  the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus as His consecrated slaves through His Blessed Mother’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. One of the ways that we can do do this by reciting the Litany of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus every day in reparation for the blasphemies, outrages, sacrileges, apostasies and heresies of the conciliar revolutionaries.

The Most Sacred Heart of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is consoled each time we pray His Most Blessed Mother’s Most Holy Rosary with care and fervor.

Entrust yourselves, therefore, to Our Lord’s Most Sacred Heart through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. 

Remember that Our Lord won the graces for us to carry the crosses of the present moment with joy and gratitude, wanting us to beg Him for those graces as we intercede with the Mediatrix of All Graces, His own Most Blessed Mother.

What are we waiting for?

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.

Saints Marcellianus, Peter and Erasmus, pray for us.


On the Road to Gehenna With Jorge, Abe and Omar, part four

Believe it or not, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is still taking heat from some Zionist commentators for having spoken referred to the “State of Palestine” and touching his head against the Israeli version of the Berlin Wall that separates the Palestinian Authority from Jerusalem while in Bethlehem on Sunday, May 25, 2014, the Fifth Sunday after Easter and the Commemorations of Popes Saint Gregory VII and Saint Urban I, and, of course, for endorsing the “two-state” solution upon his arrival at the Ben Gurion International Airport later that same day (see Jorge Gave a Great Victory To Islamic Terrorism). Even though Jorge Mario Bergoglio tripped all over himself to show his great esteem for Zionism, symbolically spitting on Pope Saint Pius X’s rejection of it when Theodore Herzl sought his approval on January 25, 1904, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle, and by kissing the backs of the hands of those who survived Nazi concentration camps and, more insidious than anything else, tucking his pectoral cross under his fascia.

The Talmudists will never be entirely pleased with any conciliar “pontiff” until the day comes when one of their number will say this in their presence while visiting Jerusalem: “I can to say you now that Christianity is a myth. I recognize Judaism as the true religion that pleases God. I am your humble servant.”

Don’t think that that can ever happen?

Happen it will as the path for Antichrist is prepared by precursors such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Each of the conciliar “popes” have helped to prepare the way for Antichrist. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing yeoman’s work in this regard no matter what some Talmudist critics may think.

Before leaving this particular subject for now, it is important to note again that those who criticize Jorge Mario Bergoglio for his having “endorsed” Mohammedan terror by speaking of the plight of the Palestinians, who have suffered so very much at the monstrous hands of Zionist racialists since they were dispossessed from their homes in 1948 and then treated as so much refuse by the thieves who rounded them up and stole their property (see Moral Monsters), is that they are as clueless as Bergoglio is concerning the roots of violence in the Holy Land. There will never be peace between Mohammedans and Talmudists in the Middle East as their souls are enslaved to the devil by means of Original Sin, thus predisposing them to hate each other and to use violence as the means to exact vengeance for various offenses.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in the madness of “dialogue.” Mohammedans believe in the use of the sword, which is part of parcel of this diabolical religion, against infidels. Talmudists seethe with hatred for the Holy Name of Jesus, Christ the King, and the Zionists among them believe that violence is the only means to be employed to secure the nonexistent right of Jews to a land from they had been expelled by God Himself in 70 A.D. for their refusal to accept His Divine Son as their Redeemer and thus to abandon their superseded religion once and for all.

True peace, is the fruit of souls, having been cleansed of Original Sin in the Baptismal font and revivified in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance, thereafter, abiding in states of Sanctifying Grace as members of the Catholic Church. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ alone is the Prince of Peace, and He has shown us in His Most Blessed Mother’s Fatima Message that the path to this peace runs through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary and her Most Holy Rosary.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in his false religion’s path of “encounter” and “dialogue” as the means to build up the “civilization of love.”

Alas, a blaspheming heretic can only bring hatred, dissatisfaction and destruction in his wake of falsehoods.

By the way, see what happened at the Church of the Nativity two days ago?

God will not be mocked, and this is only a mild down payment on future chastisements for the sins of the conciliar revolutionaries, who are themselves chastisements send to us by God in punishment for our own sins and those of the whole world.
A “New Way” of Exercising the “Petrine Ministry”

There is a very direct connection between the answer that Jorge Mario Bergoglio gave while aboard his El Al flight from Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv, Israel, to Leonardo Da Vinci (Fiumicino) International Airport southwest of Rome, Italy, and his two appearances with Bartholomew I, the Greek Orthodox patriarch of Constantinople, a sort of “first among equals” in his heretical and schismatic church. (Please the appendix for yet another listing of the principal heresies and errors of Orthodoxy.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s entire pilgrimage to the Holy Land was conceived as a means of honoring the “historic” meeting that took place in Jerusalem on January 5, 1964, between the soon-to-be “Blessed” Paul the Sick and the then Greek Orthodox patriarch of Constantinople, Athenagoras. Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI even genuflected before this heretic. This symbolic gesture was one of many made by the second conciliar “pope” to start the process of changing the nature of what most people in the world then believed–and what most people in the world still believe at present–is the papacy.

Although Montini/Paul VI knew that it would take a long time for such change to take place, it was his goal all along to effect some kind of “communion of love” with the Orthodox in the name of “episcopal collegiality.” Montini could not say this explicitly. However, a joint declaration he issued with Athenagoras on October 28, 1967, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude, made it clear where the path of “dialogue” was to lead in the years ahead:

Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I give thanks in the Holy Spirit to God, the author and finisher of all good works, for enabling them to meet once again in the holy city of Rome in order to pray together with the Bishops of the Synod of the Roman Catholic Church and with the faithful people of this city, to greet one another with a kiss of peace, and to converse together in a spirit of charity and brotherly frankness.

While recognizing that there is still a long way to go on the road toward the unity of all Christians and that between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church there still remain points to clarify and obstacles to surmount before attaining that unity in the profession of faith necessary for re-establishing full communion, they rejoice in the fact that their meeting was able to contribute to their Churches rediscovering themselves still more as sister Churches.

In the prayers they offered, in their public statements and in their private conversation, the Pope and the Patriarch wished to emphasize their conviction that an essential element in the restoration of full communion between the Roman Catholic Church on the one side and the Orthodox Church on the other, is to be found within the framework of the renewal of the Church and of Christians in fidelity to the traditions of the Fathers and to the inspirations of the Holy Spirit Who remains always with the Church.

They recognize that the true dialogue of charity, which should be at the basis of all relations between themselves and between their Churches, must be rooted in total fidelity to the one Lord Jesus Christ and in mutual respect for each one’s traditions. Every element which can strengthen the bonds of charity, of communion, and of common action is a cause for spiritual rejoicing and should be promoted; anything which can harm this charity, communion and common action is to be eliminated with the grace of God and the creative strength of the Holy Spirit.

Pope Paul VI and the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I are convinced that the dialogue of charity between their Churches must bear fruits of a cooperation which would not be self-seeking, in the field of common action at the pastoral, social and intellectual levels, with mutual respect for each one’s fidelity to his own Church. They desire that regular and profound contacts may be maintained between Catholic and Orthodox pastors for the good of their faithful. The Roman Catholic Church and the Ecumenical Patriarchate are ready to study concrete ways of solving pastoral problems, especially those connected with marriages between Catholics and Orthodox. They hope for better cooperation in works of charity, in aid to refugees and those who are suffering and in the promotion of justice and peace in the world.

In order to prepare fruitful contacts between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, the Pope and the Patriarch give their blessing and pastoral support to all efforts for cooperation between Catholic and Orthodox scholars in the fields of historical studies, of studies in the traditions of the Churches, of patristics, of liturgy and of a presentation of the Gospel which corresponds at one and the same time with the authentic message of the Lord and with the needs and hopes of today’s world. The spirit which should inspire these efforts is one of loyalty to truth and of mutual understanding, with an effective desire to avoid the bitterness of the past and every kind of spiritual or intellectual domination.

Paul VI and Athenagoras I remind government authorities and all the world’s peoples of the thirst for peace and justice which lies in the hearts of all men. In the name of the Lord, they implore them to seek out every means to promote this peace and this justice in all countries of the world. (Common Declaration of Paul the Sick and the Ecumenical Heretic of Constantinople, Athenagoras I.)

In other words, forget about Council of Florence and the Council of Trent.

Forget about all of that business concerning Papal Primacy and Papal Infallibility at the [First] Vatican Council.

Just let the Holy Spirit guide us to overcome “obstacles” as He sees fit, doing so, of course, in perfectly “fidelity” to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

After all, there is no real reason for “sister churches” to remain separated if scholarly studies can return to the “true” traditions of the early Fathers of the Church in the First Millennium, when, of course, the “Petrine Ministry” was exercised in a different way.

We can see in retrospect what Paul the Sick and Athenagoras I wanted to do. It would be for others to reap the “harvest” of the evil seeds that they planted fifty years ago this year.

Pope Pius XII, writing in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950, explained what those who were promoting the “New Theology” that was then warping the mind of the Reverend Mister Joseph Ratzinger in Germany wanted to do in this regard:

13. These new opinions, whether they originate from a reprehensible desire of novelty or from a laudable motive, are not always advanced in the same degree, with equal clarity nor in the same terms, nor always with unanimous agreement of their authors. Theories that today are put forward rather covertly by some, not without cautions and distinctions, tomorrow are openly and without moderation proclaimed by others more audacious, causing scandal to many, especially among the young clergy and to the detriment of ecclesiastical authority. Though they are usually more cautious in their published works, they express themselves more openly in their writings intended for private circulation and in conferences and lectures. Moreover, these opinions are disseminated not only among members of the clergy and in seminaries and religious institutions, but also among the laity, and especially among those who are engaged in teaching youth.

14. In theology some want to reduce to a minimum the meaning of dogmas; and to free dogma itself from terminology long established in the Church and from philosophical concepts held by Catholic teachers, to bring about a return in the explanation of Catholic doctrine to the way of speaking used in Holy Scripture and by the Fathers of the Church. They cherish the hope that when dogma is stripped of the elements which they hold to be extrinsic to divine revelation, it will compare advantageously with the dogmatic opinions of those who are separated from the unity of the Church and that in this way they will gradually arrive at a mutual assimilation of Catholic dogma with the tenets of the dissidents.

15. Moreover they assert that when Catholic doctrine has been reduced to this condition, a way will be found to satisfy modern needs, that will permit of dogma being expressed also by the concepts of modern philosophy, whether of immanentism or idealism or existentialism or any other system. Some more audacious affirm that this can and must be done, because they hold that the mysteries of faith are never expressed by truly adequate concepts but only by approximate and ever changeable notions, in which the truth is to some extent expressed, but is necessarily distorted. Wherefore they do not consider it absurd, but altogether necessary, that theology should substitute new concepts in place of the old ones in keeping with the various philosophies which in the course of time it uses as its instruments, so that it should give human expression to divine truths in various ways which are even somewhat opposed, but still equivalent, as they say. They add that the history of dogmas consists in the reporting of the various forms in which revealed truth has been clothed, forms that have succeeded one another in accordance with the different teachings and opinions that have arisen over the course of the centuries.

16. It is evident from what We have already said, that such tentatives not only lead to what they call dogmatic relativism, but that they actually contain it. The contempt of doctrine commonly taught and of the terms in which it is expressed strongly favor it. Everyone is aware that the terminology employed in the schools and even that used by the Teaching Authority of the Church itself is capable of being perfected and polished; and we know also that the Church itself has not always used the same terms in the same way. It is also manifest that the Church cannot be bound to every system of philosophy that has existed for a short space of time. Nevertheless, the things that have been composed through common effort by Catholic teachers over the course of the centuries to bring about some understanding of dogma are certainly not based on any such weak foundation. These things are based on principles and notions deduced from a true knowledge of created things. In the process of deducing, this knowledge, like a star, gave enlightenment to the human mind through the Church. Hence it is not astonishing that some of these notions have not only been used by the Oecumenical Councils, but even sanctioned by them, so that it is wrong to depart from them.

17. Hence to neglect, or to reject, or to devalue so many and such great resources which have been conceived, expressed and perfected so often by the age-old work of men endowed with no common talent and holiness, working under the vigilant supervision of the holy magisterium and with the light and leadership of the Holy Ghost in order to state the truths of the faith ever more accurately, to do this so that these things may be replaced by conjectural notions and by some formless and unstable tenets of a new philosophy, tenets which, like the flowers of the field, are in existence today and die tomorrow; this is supreme imprudence and something that would make dogma itself a reed shaken by the wind. The contempt for terms and notions habitually used by scholastic theologians leads of itself to the weakening of what they call speculative theology, a discipline which these men consider devoid of true certitude because it is based on theological reasoning. (Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, August 12, 1950. Oh, by the way, this is one of the reasons that Jorge is not even “thinking” about “beatifying” Papa Pacelli.)

The “dialogue” between the lords of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and the Greek Orthodox church has been premised on a mutual hatred of the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas, which they believe “corrupted” the minds of the Fathers who met at the Church’s general councils in the Second Millennium up to and including the [First] Vatican Council. This is why Montini and Athenagoras wanted to “return” to what they claimed to be the “basics” without the supposedly corrupting “filter” of the Angelic Doctor.

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI noted this on numerous occasions in his writings before his “election” on April 19, 2005, most notably in Principles of Catholic Theology:

Nevertheless, a fact is emerging from these reflections that can guide us in our search for an answer. For we must admit, on the one hand, that, even for Catholic theology, the so-called Fathers of the Church have, for a long time, been “Fathers” only in an indirect sense, whereas the real “Father” of the form that ultimately dominated nineteenth century theology was Thomas Aquinas, with his classic systematization of the thirteenth century doctrina media, which, it must be added, was in its turn based on the “authority” of the Fathers. (Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI,Principles of Catholic Theology  p. 142).

Jorge Mario Bergolio is merely bringing to “maturation” a process of dogmatic evolution that began on January 5, 1965, when Antipapa Montini met with Athenagoras in Jerusalem.

Indeed, Bergoglio is intent on putting into concrete form the means to exercise the “Petrine Ministry” in a different manner was was proposed first, at least publicly by a conciliar “pope,” by “Saint Paul II” in Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995:

Whatever relates to the unity of all Christian communities clearly forms part of the concerns of the primacy. As Bishop of Rome I am fully aware, as I have reaffirmed in the present Encyclical Letter, that Christ ardently desires the full and visible communion of all those Communities in which, by virtue of God’s faithfulness, his Spirit dwells. I am convinced that I have a particular responsibility in this regard, above all in acknowledging the ecumenical aspirations of the majority of the Christian Communities and in heeding the request made of me to find a way of exercising the primacy which, while in no way renouncing what is essential to its mission, is nonetheless open to a new situation. For a whole millennium Christians were united in “a brotherly fraternal communion of faith and sacramental life … If disagreements in belief and discipline arose among them, the Roman See acted by common consent as moderator“.

In this way the primacy exercised its office of unity. When addressing the Ecumenical Patriarch His Holiness Dimitrios I, I acknowledged my awareness that “for a great variety of reasons, and against the will of all concerned, what should have been a service sometimes manifested itself in a very different light. But … it is out of a desire to obey the will of Christ truly that I recognize that as Bishop of Rome I am called to exercise that ministry … I insistently pray the Holy Spirit to shine his light upon us, enlightening all the Pastors and theologians of our Churches, that we may seek—together, of course—the forms in which this ministry may accomplish a service of love recognized by all concerned“.

This is an immense task, which we cannot refuse and which I cannot carry out by myself. Could not the real but imperfect communion existing between us persuade Church leaders and their theologians to engage with me in a patient and fraternal dialogue on this subject, a dialogue in which, leaving useless controversies behind, we could listen to one another, keeping before us only the will of Christ for his Church and allowing ourselves to be deeply moved by his plea “that they may all be one … so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (Jn 17:21)? (Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995.)

Leaving aside all of the references to “imperfect communion” that have been discussed on this site before and was assessed years ago by Bishop Donald Sanborn in Communion: Ratzingers’s Ecumenical One-World Church, one can see a close connection between Wojtyla/John Paul II’s revisionist history about how the papacy functioned in the First Millennium and that of the then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Cardinal” Ratzinger.

This revisionist history and heretical view of Papal Primary was also reiterated by the “unofficial” Ravenna Document on October 13, 2007, a document that was cited by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on numerous occasions between that time and the day his resignation became effective at 8:00 p.m., Rome time, on Thursday, February 28, 2013:

It remains for the question of the role of the bishop of Rome in the communion of all the Churches to be studied in greater depth. What is the specific function of the bishop of the “first see” in an ecclesiology of koinonia and in view of what we have said on conciliarity and authority in the present text? How should the teaching of the first and second Vatican councils on the universal primacy be understood and lived in the light of the ecclesial practice of the first millennium? These are crucial questions for our dialogue and for our hopes of restoring full communion between us.

We, the members of the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, are convinced that the above statement on ecclesial communion, conciliarity and authority represents positive and significant progress in our dialogue, and that it provides a firm basis for future discussion of the question of primacy at the universal level in the Church. We are conscious that many difficult questions remain to be clarified, but we hope that, sustained by the prayer of Jesus “That they may all be one … so that the world may believe” (Jn 17, 21), and in obedience to the Holy Spirit, we can build upon the agreement already reached. Reaffirming and confessing “one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph 4, 5), we give glory to God the Holy Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, who has gathered us together. (The Ravenna Document)

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI put his “papal” seal of approval on The Ravenna Document just forty-one days after its issuance on the ninetieth anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal:

This year we thank God in particular for the meeting of the Joint Commission which took place in Ravenna, a city whose monuments speak eloquently of the ancient Byzantine heritage handed down to us from the undivided Church of the first millennium. May the splendour of those mosaics inspire all the members of the Joint Commission to pursue their important task with renewed determination, in fidelity to the Gospel and to Tradition, ever alert to the promptings of the Holy Spirit in the Church today.

While the meeting in Ravenna was not without its difficulties, I pray earnestly that these may soon be clarified and resolved, so that there may be full participation in the Eleventh Plenary Session and in subsequent initiatives aimed at continuing the theological dialogue in mutual charity and understanding. Indeed, our work towards unity is according to the will of Christ our Lord. In these early years of the third millennium, our efforts are all the more urgent because of the many challenges facing all Christians, to which we need to respond with a united voice and with conviction. (Letter to His Holiness Bartholomaios I, Archbishop of Constantinople, Ecumenical Patriarch, on the occasion of the feast of St. Andrew, November 23, 2007.)

So much for the “unofficial” nature of The Ravenna Document.

Walter “Cardinal” Kasper, then the president of the “Pontifical” Council for Promoting Christian Unity, had mouthed the same Modernism when he addressed an assembly of the members of the schismatic and heretical Anglican sect in the United Kingdom on May 24, 2003:

It was Pope John Paul II who opened the door to future discussion on this subject. In his encyclical Ut Unum Sint (1995) he extended an invitation to a fraternal dialogue on how to exercise the Petrine ministry in a way that is more acceptable to non-Catholic Christians. It was a source of pleasure for us that among others the Anglican community officially responded to this invitation. The Pontifical Council for Christian Unity gathered the many responses, analyzed the data, and sent its conclusions to the churches that had responded. We hope in this way to have initiated a second phase of a dialogue that will be decisive for the future of the ecumenical approach.

Nobody could reasonably expect that we could from the outset reach a phase of consensus; but what we have reached is not negligible. It has become evident that a new atmosphere and a new climate exist. In our globalized world situation the biblical testimonies on Peter and the Petrine tradition of Rome are read with new eyes because in this new context the question of a ministry of universal unity, a common reference point and a common voice of the universal church, becomes urgent. Old polemical formulas stand at odds with this urgency; fraternal relations have become the norm. Extensive research has been undertaken that has highlighted the different traditions between East and West already in the first millennium, and has traced the development in understanding and in practice of the Petrine ministry throughout the centuries. As well, the historical conditionality of the dogma of the First Vatican Council (1869-70), which must be distinguished from its remaining obligatory content, has become clear. This historical development did not come to an end with the two Vatican Councils, but goes on, and so also in the future the Petrine ministry has to be exercised in line with the changing needs of the Church.

These insights have led to a re-interpretation of the dogma of the Roman primacy. This does not at all mean that there are still not enormous problems in terms of what such a ministry of unity should look like, how it should be administered, whether and to what degree it should have jurisdiction and whether under certain circumstances it could make infallible statements in order to guarantee the unity of the Church and at the same time the legitimate plurality of local churches. But there is at least a wide consensus about the common central problem, which all churches have to solve: how the three dimensions, highlighted already by the Lima documents on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry (1982), namely unity through primacy, collegiality through synodality, and communality of all the faithful and their spiritual gifts, can be brought into a convincing synthesis. (A Vision of Christian Unity for the Next Generation.)

One way to effect this “reinterpretation” is to “demythologize” what most people think is the papacy today by an act of “papal” resignation, which Jorge Mario Bergoglio said three days ago while flying back to Rome from Tel Aviv is now an “institution”:

My potential resignation

“I will do what the Lord tells me to do. Pray and try to follow God’s will. Benedict XVI no longer had the strength and honestly, as a man of faith, humble as he is, he took this decision. Seventy years ago, Popes Emeritus didn’t exist. What will happen with Popes Emeritus? We need to look at Benedict XVI as an institution, he opened a door, that of the Popes Emeritus. The door is open, whether there will be others, only God knows. I believe that if a bishop of Rome feels he is losing his strength, he must ask himself the same questions Pope Benedict XVI did.” (Interview Number I’ve Lost Count of the Number.)

I predicted that conciliar “papal” resignations would become institutionalized when I wrote the following fifteen months ago now:

Moreover, as noted two days ago in Mister Asteroid Is Looking Pretty Good Right About Now, Ratzinger/Benedict’s resignation sets what will be considered as a mandatory precedent for all future executive directors of the Occupy Vatican Movement. And if God does not intervene to put an end the chastisement represented by the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism, the “papal” resignation might even lead to calls for “papal” “term limits” and for “re-election” by the conciliar college of colleges over four or eight years. After all, wouldn’t this be in line with the “episcopal collegiality” that false “pontiff” praised yesterday as he termed this deviation from the Holy Faith to be an essential part of his new ecclesiology? (Living In Fantasyland To The Very End, part one.)

As has been noted on this site in the past, however, the Ratzinger-Wojtyla-Kasper-Bergoglio contention about how the papacy functioned in the First Millennium in false.

Pope Leo XIII explained this very succinctly in Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 29, 1894:

First of all, then, We cast an affectionate look upon the East, from whence in the beginning came forth the salvation of the world.  Yes, and the yearning desire of Our heart bids us conceive and hope that the day is not far distant when the Eastern Churches, so illustrious in their ancient faith and glorious past, will return to the fold they have abandoned.  We hope it all the more, that the distance separating them from Us is not so great: nay, with some few exceptions, we agree so entirely on other heads that, in defense of the Catholic Faith, we often have recourse to reasons and testimony borrowed from the teaching, the Rites, and Customs of the East.

The Principal subject of contention is the Primacy of the Roman Pontiff.  But let them look back to the early years of their existence, let them consider the sentiments entertained by their forefathers, and examine what the oldest Traditions testify, and it will, indeed, become evident to them that Christ’s Divine Utterance, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, has undoubtedly been realized in the Roman Pontiffs.  Many of these latter in the first gates of the Church were chosen from the East, and foremost among them Anacletus, Evaristus, Anicetus, Eleutherius, Zosimus, and Agatho; and of these a great number, after Governing the Church in Wisdom and Sanctity, Consecrated their Ministry with the shedding of their blood.  The time, the reasons, the promoters of the unfortunate division, are well known.  Before the day when man separated what God had joined together, the name of the Apostolic See was held in Reverence by all the nations of the Christian world: and the East, like the West, agreed without hesitation in its obedience to the Pontiff of Rome, as the Legitimate Successor of St. Peter, and, therefore, the Vicar of Christ here on earth.

And, accordingly, if we refer to the beginning of the dissension, we shall see that Photius himself was careful to send his advocates to Rome on the matters that concerned him; and Pope Nicholas I sent his Legates to Constantinople from the Eternal City, without the slightest opposition, “in order to examine the case of Ignatius the Patriarch with all diligence, and to bring back to the Apostolic See a full and accurate report”; so that the history of the whole negotiation is a manifest Confirmation of the Primacy of the Roman See with which the dissension then began.  Finally, in two great Councils, the second of Lyons and that of Florence, Latins and Greeks, as is notorious, easily agreed, and all unanimously proclaimed as Dogma the Supreme Power of the Roman Pontiffs.

We have recalled those things intentionally, for they constitute an invitation to peace and reconciliation; and with all the more reason that in Our own days it would seem as if there were a more conciliatory spirit towards Catholics on the part of the Eastern Churches, and even some degree of kindly feeling.  To mention an instance, those sentiments were lately made manifest when some of Our faithful travelled to the East on a Holy Enterprise, and received so many proofs of courtesy and good-will.

Therefore, Our mouth is open to you, to you all of Greek or other Oriental Rites who are separated from the Catholic Church, We earnestly desire that each and every one of you should meditate upon the words, so full of gravity and love, addressed by Bessarion to your forefathers: “What answer shall we give to God when He comes to ask why we have separated from our Brethren: to Him Who, to unite us and bring us into One Fold, came down from Heaven, was Incarnate, and was Crucified?  What will our defense be in the  eyes of posterity?  Oh, my Venerable Fathers, we must not suffer this to be, we must not entertain this thought, we must not thus so ill provide for ourselves and for our Brethren.”

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

Nor is there any reason for you to fear on that account that We or any of Our Successors will ever diminish your rights, the privileges of your Patriarchs, or the established Ritual of any one of your Churches.  It has been and always will be the intent and Tradition of the Apostolic See, to make a large allowance, in all that is right and good, for the primitive Traditions and special customs of every nation.  On the contrary, if you re-establish Union with Us, you will see how, by God’s bounty, the glory and dignity of your Churches will be remarkably increased.  May God, then, in His goodness, hear the Prayer that you yourselves address to Him: “Make the schisms of the Churches cease,” and “Assemble those who are dispersed, bring back those who err, and unite them to Thy Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.”  May you thus return to that one Holy Faith which has been handed down both to Us and to you from time immemorial; which your forefathers preserved untainted, and which was enhanced by the rival splendor of the Virtues, the great genius, and the sublime learning of St. Athanasius and St. Basil, St. Gregory of Nazianzum and St. John Chrysostom, the two Saints who bore the name of Cyril, and so many other great men whose glory belongs as a common inheritance to the East and to the West. (See also the excellent discussion of the the history of what led up to the Greek Schism that is contained in Fathers Francisco and Dominic Radecki’s Tumultuous Times.)

Hegelian revisionists must deny history and Catholic doctrine both at the same time in an effort to build yet another story to the One World Ecumenical Church.

Yes, the conciliar “popes” have been whittling away at the last great Catholic bastion that they have sought to raze, a supposedly “triumphalistic” notion of Papal Primacy that does not correspond to the conciliar “orientation” in the direction of collegiality and service as opposed to monarchy and rule.

Ratzinger and Bergoglio have distorted history to suit their perverted purposes of effecting a false “communion” with the Orthodox. Those in the Motu world, especially those who believe in “resignationism,” must suspend all pretense of rationality to contend that their man “Benedict” is more “orthodox” that the “bad” Bergoglio. Each man is more [Greek] Orthodox than Catholic. Indeed, neither man is a Catholic as they defect from numerous points of Catholic doctrine, placing them outside of the the Catholic Faith.

Ratzinger issued a joint statement with the Greek Orthodox Patriarch, Bartholomew I, on November 30, 2006, that referred to their “responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ” while Bergoglio referred to Bartholomew as my “brother” last year:

This fraternal encounter which brings us together, Pope Benedict XVI of Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, is God’s work, and in a certain sense his gift. We give thanks to the Author of all that is good, who allows us once again, in prayer and in dialogue, to express the joy we feel as brothers and to renew our commitment to move towards full communion. This commitment comes from the Lord’s will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ. May our meeting be a sign and an encouragement for us to share the same sentiments and the same attitudes of fraternity, cooperation and communion in charity and truth. The Holy Spirit will help us to prepare the great day of the re-establishment of full unity, whenever and however God wills it. Then we shall truly be able to rejoice and be glad. (Common declaration by Benedict XVI and Patriarch Bartholomew I, November 30, 2006.)

First of all I thank my Brother Andrew [Bartholomew I] very much for what he said. Thank you very much! Thank you!

It is a cause for particular joy to meet today with you, delegates of the Orthodox churches, the Oriental Orthodox churches and ecclesial communities of the West. Thank you for having wanted to take part in the celebration that has marked the beginning of my Ministry as Bishop of Rome and successor of Peter.

Yesterday morning, during Holy Mass, through your persons I recognized as spiritually present the communities that you represent. In this manifestation of faith, I seemed to experience in an even more urgent way the prayer for unity among believers in Christ and together to see somehow foreshadowed that full realization, which depends on the plan of God and on our loyal collaboration. (Address to Representative of the Schismatic and Heretical Orthodox Churches, Protesant sects, Talmudists, Mohammedans and Other Infidels, Masons and Pantheists.)

Tornielli: This coming January marks the 50th anniversary of Paul VI’s historic visit to the Holy Land. Will you go?

Bergoglio: “Christmas always makes us think of Bethlehem, and Bethlehem is a precise point in the Holy Land where Jesus lived. On Christmas night, I think above all with the Christians who live there, of those who are in difficulty, of the many people who have had to leave that land because of various problems. But Bethlehem is still Bethlehem. God arrived at a specific time in a specific land; that is where God’s tenderness and grace appeared. We cannot think of Christmas without thinking of the Holy land. Fifty years ago, Paul VI had the courage to go out and go there and this marked the beginning of the era of papal journeys. I would also like to go there, to meet my brother Bartholomew, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and commemorate this 50th anniversary with him, renewing that embrace which took place between Pope Montini and Athenagoras in Jerusalem, in 1964. We are preparing for this.” (Never Be Afraid of Tenderness)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio made it clear yet again four days ago now on the nineteenth anniversary of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II’s Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, that the heretical and schismatic Bartholomew I is his “brother.” The laugh of this is that Bartholomew is a true bishop, although one who is deprived of exercising episcopal authority, and Bergoglio is neither a bishop and a priest. Jorge and Bartholomew are only “brothers” in heresies and falsehoods.

Here is the “joint declaration” that Bergoglio and Bartholomew issued to commemorate the groundbreaking work of apostasy begun by the Sick One, Montini, and Athenagoroas I:

1. Like our venerable predecessors Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras who met here in Jerusalem fifty years ago, we too, Pope Francis and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, were determined to meet in the Holy Land “where our common Redeemer, Christ our Lord, lived, taught, died, rose again, and ascended into Heaven, whence he sent the Holy Spirit on the infant Church” (Common communiqué of Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, published after their meeting of 6 January 1964). Our meeting, another encounter of the Bishops of the Churches of Rome and Constantinople founded respectively by the two Brothers the Apostles Peter and Andrew, is a source of profound spiritual joy for us. It presents a providential occasion to reflect on the depth and the authenticity of our existing bonds, themselves the fruit of a grace-filled journey on which the Lord has guided us since that blessed day of fifty years ago.

2. Our fraternal encounter today is a new and necessary step on the journey towards the unity to which only the Holy Spirit can lead us, that of communion in legitimate diversity. We call to mind with profound gratitude the steps that the Lord has already enabled us to undertake. The embrace exchanged between Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras here in Jerusalem, after many centuries of silence, paved the way for a momentous gesture, the removal from the memory and from the midst of the Church of the acts of mutual excommunication in 1054. This was followed by an exchange of visits between the respective Sees of Rome and Constantinople, by regular correspondence and, later, by the decision announced by Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Dimitrios, of blessed memory both, to initiate a theological dialogue of truth between Catholics and Orthodox. Over these years, God, the source of all peace and love, has taught us to regard one another as members of the same Christian family, under one Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, and to love one another, so that we may confess our faith in the same Gospel of Christ, as received by the Apostles and expressed and transmitted to us by the Ecumenical Councils and the Church Fathers. While fully aware of not having reached the goal of full communion, today we confirm our commitment to continue walking together towards the unity for which Christ our Lord prayed to the Father so “that all may be one” (Jn 17:21).

3. Well aware that unity is manifested in love of God and love of neighbour, we look forward in eager anticipation to the day in which we will finally partake together in the Eucharistic banquet. As Christians, we are called to prepare to receive this gift of Eucharistic communion, according to the teaching of Saint Irenaeus of Lyon (Against Heresies, IV,18,5, PG 7,1028), through the confession of the one faith, persevering prayer, inner conversion, renewal of life and fraternal dialogue. By achieving this hoped for goal, we will manifest to the world the love of God by which we are recognized as true disciples of Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 13:35).

4. To this end, the theological dialogue undertaken by the Joint International Commission offers a fundamental contribution to the search for full communion among Catholics and Orthodox. Throughout the subsequent times of Popes John Paul II and Benedict the XVI, and Patriarch Dimitrios, the progress of our theological encounters has been substantial. Today we express heartfelt appreciation for the achievements to date, as well as for the current endeavours. This is no mere theoretical exercise, but an exercise in truth and love that demands an ever deeper knowledge of each other’s traditions in order to understand them and to learn from them. Thus we affirm once again that the theological dialogue does not seek a theological lowest common denominator on which to reach a compromise, but is rather about deepening one’s grasp of the whole truth that Christ has given to his Church, a truth that we never cease to understand better as we follow the Holy Spirit’s promptings. Hence, we affirm together that our faithfulness to the Lord demands fraternal encounter and true dialogue. Such a common pursuit does not lead us away from the truth; rather, through an exchange of gifts, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it will lead us into all truth (cf. Jn 16:13).

5. Yet even as we make this journey towards full communion we already have the duty to offer common witness to the love of God for all people by working together in the service of humanity, especially in defending the dignity of the human person at every stage of life and the sanctity of family based on marriage, in promoting peace and the common good, and in responding to the suffering that continues to afflict our world. We acknowledge that hunger, poverty, illiteracy, the inequitable distribution of resources must constantly be addressed. It is our duty to seek to build together a just and humane society in which no-one feels excluded or emarginated.

6. It is our profound conviction that the future of the human family depends also on how we safeguard – both prudently and compassionately, with justice and fairness – the gift of creation that our Creator has entrusted to us. Therefore, we acknowledge in repentance the wrongful mistreatment of our planet, which is tantamount to sin before the eyes of God. We reaffirm our responsibility and obligation to foster a sense of humility and moderation so that all may feel the need to respect creation and to safeguard it with care. Together, we pledge our commitment to raising awareness about the stewardship of creation; we appeal to all people of goodwill to consider ways of living less wastefully and more frugally, manifesting less greed and more generosity for the protection of God’s world and the benefit of His people.

7. There is likewise an urgent need for effective and committed cooperation of Christians in order to safeguard everywhere the right to express publicly one’s faith and to be treated fairly when promoting that which Christianity continues to offer to contemporary society and culture. In this regard, we invite all Christians to promote an authentic dialogue with Judaism, Islam and other religious traditions. Indifference and mutual ignorance can only lead to mistrust and unfortunately even conflict.

8. From this holy city of Jerusalem, we express our shared profound concern for the situation of Christians in the Middle East and for their right to remain full citizens of their homelands. In trust we turn to the almighty and merciful God in a prayer for peace in the Holy Land and in the Middle East in general. We especially pray for the Churches in Egypt, Syria, and Iraq, which have suffered most grievously due to recent events. We encourage all parties regardless of their religious convictions to continue to work for reconciliation and for the just recognition of peoples’ rights. We are persuaded that it is not arms, but dialogue, pardon and reconciliation that are the only possible means to achieve peace.

9. In an historical context marked by violence, indifference and egoism, many men and women today feel that they have lost their bearings. It is precisely through our common witness to the good news of the Gospel that we may be able to help the people of our time to rediscover the way that leads to truth, justice and peace. United in our intentions, and recalling the example, fifty years ago here in Jerusalem, of Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, we call upon all Christians, together with believers of every religious tradition and all people of good will, to recognize the urgency of the hour that compels us to seek the reconciliation and unity of the human family, while fully respecting legitimate differences, for the good of all humanity and of future generations.

10. In undertaking this shared pilgrimage to the site where our one same Lord Jesus Christ was crucified, buried and rose again, we humbly commend to the intercession of the Most Holy and Ever Virgin Mary our future steps on the path towards the fullness of unity, entrusting to God’s infinite love the entire human family. “ May the Lord let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you! The Lord look upon you kindly and give you peace!” (Num 6:25-26). (Jorge and Bartholomew‘s Common, 25 May 2014.)

Churches of Rome and Constantinople?

There is one true Church, the Catholic Church, none other.

Such language is an implicit rejection of the doctrine of Papal Primacy as exercised throughout the history of the Catholic Church and as defined by the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council on July 18, 1870.

1. And so, supported by the clear witness of Holy Scripture, and adhering to the manifest and explicit decrees both of our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs and of general councils, we promulgate anew the definition of the ecumenical Council of Florence [49], which must be believed by all faithful Christians, namely that the Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff hold a world-wide primacy, and that the Roman Pontiff is the successor of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles, true vicar of Christ, head of the whole Church and father and teacher of all Christian people.

To him, in blessed Peter, full power has been given by our lord Jesus Christ to tend, rule and govern the universal Church.

All this is to be found in the acts of the ecumenical councils and the sacred canons.

2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd [50].

4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.

5. This power of the Supreme Pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the Holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the Supreme and Universal Pastor; for St. Gregory the Great says: “My honor is the honor of the whole Church. My honor is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honor, when it is denied to none of those to whom honor is due.” [51]

6. Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman Pontiff has in governing the whole Church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire Church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation.

7. And therefore we condemn and reject the opinions of those who hold that this communication of the Supreme Head with pastors and flocks may be lawfully obstructed; or that it should be dependent on the civil power, which leads them to maintain that what is determined by the Apostolic See or by its authority concerning the government of the Church, has no force or effect unless it is confirmed by the agreement of the civil authority.

8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful [52], and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment [53]. The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon [54]. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.

9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman Pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole Church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the Churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful: let him be anathema. (Chapter 3, Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, Vatican Council, July 18, 1870.)

What does Jorge Mario Bergoglio think about this?

Not much.

Indeed, he told as much four days ago now, that is, on Sunday, May 25, 2014:

Here I reiterate the hope already expressed by my predecessors for a continued dialogue with all our brothers and sisters in Christ, aimed at finding a means of exercising the specific ministry of the Bishop of Rome which, in fidelity to his mission, can be open to a new situation and can be, in the present context, a service of love and of communion acknowledged by all (cf. JOHN PAUL II, Ut Unum Sint, 95-96). (Ecumaniacal Love-In Between Jorge and Bart at the “Everybody’s OK Corral”, May 25, 2014.)

There has been a steady path of “dogmatic evolution” in the direction of more obvious statements of heresy and bolder acts of apostasy from the time that Paul the Sick genuflected before Athenagoras I on January 5, 1964.

Part of this “evolution” may even involve fixing the date of Easter, something that Jorge explained in Interview Number I’ve Lost Count of the Number three days ago now, Monday, May 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Philip Neri and the Commemoration of Pope Saint Eleutherius:

Relationship with the Orthodox Church

“With Bartholomew we talked about unity, that comes along the path, during a journey, we could never create unity at a theological congress. He confirmed to me that Athenagoras did tell Paul VI; “Let’s put all theologians on an island and we’ll go on together.” We need to help one another, in terms of churches for example, even in Rome many Orthodox faithful use Catholic Churches. We spoke about the pan-Orthodox council so that something can be done about the date for Easter. It is a bit ridiculous: tell me, when does your Christ rise from the dead? Mine will next week. Well, mine was resurrected last week. Bartholomew and I speak as brothers, we love each other and we talk about the difficulties we face as leaders. We spoke a great deal about ecology and coming up with a joint initiative to deal with this problem.” (Interview Number I’ve Lost Count of the Number.)

The concern for “ecology” was expressed at length in Jorge and Bart’s joint declaration that defamed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jersualem where it was made public.

More to the point, however, discussion of fixing the date of Easter, which Pope Saint Pius X considered doing before he was talked out of it by theological advisers, who he did not banish to an island for sharing their judgment with him, was handled rather well by Saint Cuthbert in the First Millennium, something that was attested to by the Venerable Bede, whose feast day was Tuesday, May 27, 2014 (which was also the Commemoration of Pope Saint John I), in his life of Saint Cuthbert:

“With those who have wandered form the unity of the Catholic faith, either through not celebrating Easter at the proper time or through evil living, you are to have no dealings. Never forget that if you should ever be forced to make the choice of two evils I would prefer that you left the island, taking my bones with you, than you should be a party to wickedness on any pretext whatsoever, bending your necks to the yoke of schism. Strive most diligently to learn the catholic statutes of the fathers and put them into practice. Make it your special care to carry out those rules of the monastic life which God in His divine mercy has seen fit to give you through my ministry. I know that, though some may see that my teachings are not to be easily dismissed.” (Saint Cuthbert, as quoted by The Venerable Bede, The Life of Cuthbert. The Age of Bede, translated by J. F. Webb and edited with an introduction by D. H. Farmer, Penguin Books, published in 1965 and reprinted with revisions in 1988 and 1998, p. 95.)

Catholicism or apostasy?

No heretic/schismatic has any “pastoral ministry” to fulfill in the “Church of Christ” as the Church of Christ is the Catholic Church and none other.

Roncalli, Montini, Luciani, Wojtyla and Ratzinger did not have and Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not have such any “pastoral ministry” in the Catholic Church as each is an apostate who hads separated himself from the bosom of Holy Mother Church long before his supposed “election” to the conciliar papacy.

Yes, one must believe in everything taught by Holy Mother Church as it is been defined and understood from time immemorial or he is simply not a Catholic.

Who says so?

Well, perhaps it would be good to take a look at the following sources once again:

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

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

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

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.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is either a Catholic or he is not. The evidence is clear that he is not, thus disqualifying him from any office within the Catholic Church.

What is your choice, the Catholic Church or the apostate church of conciliarism?

Saint Cuthbert, you see, had the sensus Catholicus.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in a “communion of love” that can be effected if theologians, such as they are in his false church these days, can be sent to an island so that points of doctrine, which not being dismissed entirety, can be finessed for the sake of “fellowship” between two “sister churches.”

It was Our Lady who had prayed for our first pope while he was in chains. Her prayers secured the angel who rescued him miraculously from the clutches of Herod and the Jews. The event was so miraculous that the mother of Saint Mark the Evangelist, Saint Peter’s trusted disciple, saw that our first pope stood before her. Those with her refused to believe her. They refused to believe that the first pope had been miraculously rescued. Saint Peter had to continue to knock to gain entry!

The papacy is held in chains today. Our Lady will rescue the papacy just as miraculously as she rescued our first pope by means of her prayers. We must believe that she will do so as the Church Militant undergoes her Mystical Passion, Death and Burial in these our days. She is indeed our life, our sweetness and our hope. Saint Peter relied upon her. So must we!

We can plant the change for true change, that is, of a conversion of all men and their nations to the Catholic Faith, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order, by relying upon Our Lady just as Saint Peter did.

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 Mary Magdalene de Pazzi (whose feast is not commemorated today, the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), pray for us.


Various Ways in Which the Orthodox Defect From the Deposit of Faith Entrusted to the Catholic Church

1. Papal Primacy.

2. Papal Infallibility.

3. The doctrine of Original Sin as defined dogmatically by the Catholic Church. The ambiguous doctrine of the Orthodox was noted by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794, when discussing the Greek rejection of Limbo that is, of course, shared by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI:

Very few Greek Fathers dealt with the destiny of infants who die without Baptism because there was no controversy about this issue in the East. Furthermore, they had a different view of the present condition of humanity. For the Greek Fathers, as the consequence of Adam’s sin, human beings inherited corruption, possibility, and mortality, from which they could be restored by a process of deification made possible through the redemptive work of Christ. The idea of an inheritance of sin or guilt – common in Western tradition – was foreign to this perspective, since in their view sin could only be a free, personal act. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)

This is what the Orthodox still believe, which makes them fit “partners” for “ecumenical dialogue” with Ratzinger/Benedict, who has told us in his own murky way that he is of one mind with them on the matter of Original Sin, which he called in 1995 an “imprecise” term (!). Here is a statement on Original Sin from the Orthodox Church in America:

With regard to original sin, the difference between Orthodox Christianity and the West may be outlined as follows:

In the Orthodox Faith, the term “original sin” refers to the “first” sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the “consequences” of sin, the chief of which is death. Here the word “original” may be seen as synonymous with “first.” Hence, the “original sin” refers to the “first sin” in much the same way as “original chair” refers to the “first chair.”

In the West, humanity likewise bears the “consequences” of the “original sin” of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise “guilty” of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term “Original Sin” here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved.

In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, chief of which is death.

One might look at all of this in a completely different light. Imagine, if you will, that one of your close relatives was a mass murderer. He committed many serious crimes for which he was found guilty ­ and perhaps even admitted his guilt publicly. You, as his or her son or brother or cousin, may very well bear the consequences of his action -­ people may shy away from you or say, “Watch out for him -­ he comes from a family of mass murderers.” Your name may be tainted, or you may face some other forms of discrimination as a consequence of your relative’s sin. You, however, are not personally guilty of his or her sin.

There are some within Orthodoxy who approach a westernized view of sin, primarily after the 17th and 18th centuries due to a variety of westernizing influences particularly in Ukraine and Russia after the time of Peter Mohyla. These influences have from time to time colored explanations of the Orthodox Faith which are in many respects lacking. (Orthodox Church in America, Questions and Answers on Original Sin)

This is not Catholic doctrine. This matter cannot be “bridged” by concerts of music composed by Russians.

4. The Filioque, that God the Holy Ghost proceeds from both the Father and the Son.

5. The doctrine of Purgatory as defined by the authority of the Catholic Church.

6. The doctrine of Our Lady’s Immaculate Conception as defined by the authority of the Catholic Church.

7. The doctrine of Our Lady’s Assumption body and soul into Heaven as defined by the authority of the Catholic Church.

8. The doctrine of the indissolubility of a sacramentally valid, ratified and consummated marriage; the Orthodox hold that a person can marry up to three times following two divorces. Here is the Orthodox “consensus” (as there is no ultimate ecclesiastical authority within Orthodoxy to decide doctrinal matters) on the issue:

Marriage is one of the sacraments of the Orthodox Church. Orthodox Christians who marry must marry in the Church in order to be in sacramental communion with the Church. According to the Church canons, an Orthodox who marries outside the Church may not receive Holy Communion and may not serve as a sponsor, i.e. a Godparent at a Baptism, or as a sponsor at a Wedding. Certain marriages are prohibited by canon law, such as a marriage between first and second cousins, or between a Godparent and a Godchild. The first marriage of a man and a woman is honored by the Church with a richly symbolic service that eloquently speaks to everyone regarding the married state. The form of the service calls upon God to unite the couple through the prayer of the priest or bishop officiating.

The church will permit up to, but not more than, three marriages for any Orthodox Christian. If both partners are entering a second or third marriage, another form of the marriage ceremony is conducted, much more subdued and penitential in character. Marriages end either through the death of one of the partners or through ecclesiastical recognition of divorce. The Church grants “ecclesiastical divorces” on the basis of the exception given by Christ to his general prohibition of the practice. The Church has frequently deplored the rise of divorce and generally sees divorce as a tragic failure. Yet, the Orthodox Church also recognizes that sometimes the spiritual well-being of Christians caught in a broken and essentially nonexistent marriage justifies a divorce, with the right of one or both of the partners to remarry. Each parish priest is required to do all he can to help couples resolve their differences. If they cannot, and they obtain a civil divorce, they may apply for an ecclesiastical divorce in some jurisdictions of the Orthodox Church. In others, the judgment is left to the parish priest when and if a civilly divorced person seeks to remarry.

Those Orthodox jurisdictions which issue ecclesiastical divorces require a thorough evaluation of the situation, and the appearance of the civilly divorced couple before a local ecclesiastical court, where another investigation is made. Only after an ecclesiastical divorce is issued by the presiding bishop can they apply for an ecclesiastical license to remarry.

Though the Church would prefer that all Orthodox Christians would marry Orthodox Christians, it does not insist on it in practice. Out of its concern for the spiritual welfare of members who wish to marry a non-Orthodox Christian, the Church will conduct a “mixed marriage.” For this purpose, a “non-Orthodox Christian” is a member of the Roman Catholic Church, or one of the many Protestant Churches which believe in and baptize in the name of the Holy Trinity. This means that such mixed marriages may be performed in the Orthodox Church. However, the Orthodox Church does not perform marriages between Orthodox Christians and persons belonging to other religions, such as Islam , Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any sectarian and cult group, such as Christian Science, Mormonism, or the followers of Rev. Moon. (The Stand of the Orthodox Church on Controversial Issues.)

9. The absolute prohibition against the use of any form of contraception whatsoever. This is from the website of the Greek Orthodox Church in America:

General agreement exists among Orthodox writers on the following two points:

  1. since at least one of the purposes of marriage is the birth of children, a couple acts immorally when it consistently uses contraceptive methods to avoid the birth of any children, if there are not extenuating circumstances;
  2. contraception is also immoral when used to encourage the practice of fornication and adultery.

Less agreement exists among Eastern Orthodox authors on the issue of contraception within marriage for the spacing of children or for the limitation of the number of children. Some authors take a negative view and count any use of contraceptive methods within or outside of marriage as immoral (Papacostas, pp. 13-18; Gabriel Dionysiatou). These authors tend to emphasize as the primary and almost exclusive purpose of marriage the birth of children and their upbringing. They tend to consider any other exercise of the sexual function as the submission of this holy act to unworthy purposes, i.e., pleasure-seeking, passion, and bodily gratification, which are held to be inappropriate for the Christian growing in spiritual perfection. These teachers hold that the only alternative is sexual abstinence in marriage, which, though difficult, is both desirable and possible through the aid of the grace of God. It must be noted also that, for these writers, abortion and contraception are closely tied together, and often little or no distinction is made between the two. Further, it is hard to discern in their writings any difference in judgment between those who use contraceptive methods so as to have no children and those who use them to space and limit the number of children.

Other Orthodox writers have challenged this view by seriously questioning the Orthodoxy of the exclusive and all-controlling role of the procreative purpose of marriage (Zaphiris; Constantelos, 1975). Some note the inconsistency of the advocacy of sexual continence in marriage with the scriptural teaching that one of the purposes of marriage is to permit the ethical fulfillment of sexual drives, so as to avoid fornication and adultery (1 Cor. 7:1-7). Most authors, however, emphasize the sacramental nature of marriage and its place within the framework of Christian anthropology, seeing the sexual relationship of husband and wife as one aspect of the mutual growth of the couple in love and unity. This approach readily adapts itself to an ethical position that would not only permit but also enjoin sexual relationships of husband and wife for their own sake as expressions of mutual love. Such a view clearly would support the use of contraceptive practices for the purpose of spacing and limiting children so as to permit greater freedom of the couple in the expression of their mutual love. (For the Health of Body and Soul: An Eastern Orthodox Introduction to Bioethics.)

These are not minor matters. And this all going to be “bridged” by means of appeals to the “heart”? Preposterous.

The concliarists path to “dialogue” is not the foundation of any kind of true reconciliation between the Orthodox and the Catholic Church, admitting that the counterfeit church of conciliarism can indeed “live” with these differences in the name of a false notion of “unity” and “love.”

On The Road To Gehenna With Jorge, Abe and Omar, part three

Given the time difference between the United States and the Holy Land, I did not watch the http://meetingthemets.com/wp-admin/post-new.phpevents of the now-concluded “papal” pilgrimage live. Indeed, as there are only twenty-four hours in a day, the little time that I did spend watching the “video-on-demand” on the conciliar Vatican’s website of various events (the beginning of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo litrurgical service in Manger Square in Bethlehem, the entirety of the welcoming ceremony at the Ben Gurion International Airport and the laying of the wreath in front of the tomb of the founder of International Zionism, Theodore Herzl) delayed writing about those events until very late at night. None of the past three articles, On the Road to Gehenna With Jorge, Abe and Omar, part one, Inspired by the Same Scriptwriter and On the Road to Gehenna with Jorge, Abe and Omar, part two, could have been written if I had watched everything via video-on-demand. Relying almost exclusively on the written texts and news coverage, however, does have its drawbacks as one might miss important visual images that the mainslime media might not deem important to include in news stories.

Thou Shalt Not Preach Christ and Him Crucified to the Jews

Such was the case with respect to Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s hiding his pectoral cross (which is not his to wear as he is not a true bishop) beneath his fascia (the white sash) when addressing the two chief rabbis of Jerusalem as follows yesterday, Monday, May 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Phlip Neri and the Commemoration of Pope Saint Eleutherius:

I am particularly pleased to be here with you today. I am grateful for your warm reception and your kind words of welcome.

As you know, from the time I was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, I have counted many Jews among my friends. Today two friends who are rabbis are here with us. Together we organized rewarding occasions of encounter and dialogue; with them I also experienced significant moments of sharing on a spiritual level. In the first months of my pontificate, I was able to receive various organizations and representatives from the Jewish community worldwide. As was the case with my predecessors, there have been many requests for such meetings. Together with the numerous initiatives taking place on national and local levels, these testify to our mutual desire to know one another better, to listen to each other and to build bonds of true fraternity.

This journey of friendship represents one of the fruits of the Second Vatican Council, and particularly of the Declaration Nostra Aetate, which proved so influential and whose fiftieth anniversary we will celebrate next year. I am convinced that the progress which has been made in recent decades in the relationship between Jews and Catholics has been a genuine gift of God, one of those great works for which we are called to bless his holy name: “Give thanks to the Lord of lords, for his love endures forever; who alone has wrought marvellous works, for his love endures forever” (Ps 135/136:3-4). 

A gift of God, yes, but one which would not have come about without the efforts of so many courageous and generous people, Jews and Christians alike. Here I would like to mention in particular the growing importance of the dialogue between the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and the Holy See’s Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. Inspired by the visit of Pope John Paul II to the Holy Land, this dialogue was inaugurated in 2002 and is already in its twelfth year. I would like to think that, in terms of the Jewish tradition of the Bar Mitzvah, it is just coming of age. I am confident that it will continue and have a bright future in years to come. 

We need to do more than simply establish reciprocal and respectful relations on a human level: we are also called, as Christians and Jews, to reflect deeply on the spiritual significance of the bond existing between us. It is a bond whose origins are from on high, one which transcends our own plans and projects, and one which remains intact despite all the difficulties which, sadly, have marked our relationship in the past. 

On the part of Catholics, there is a clear intention to reflect deeply on the significance of the Jewish roots of our own faith. I trust that, with your help, on the part of Jews too, there will be a continued and even growing interest in knowledge of Christianity, also in this holy land to which Christians trace their origins. This is especially to be hoped for among young people.

Mutual understanding of our spiritual heritage, appreciation for what we have in common and respect in matters on which we disagree: all these can help to guide us to a closer relationship, an intention which we put in God’s hands. Together, we can make a great contribution to the cause of peace; together, we can bear witness, in this rapidly changing world, to the perennial importance of the divine plan of creation; together, we can firmly oppose every form of anti-Semitism and all other forms of discrimination. May the Lord help us to walk with confidence and strength in his ways. Shalom! (Courtesy Visit to Caiphas and Annas at Heichal Shlomo Center in Jerusalem.)

Although there are some rumblings to be found among a few professional Talmuic victimologists about the symbolism of Bergoglio’s touching his head against the Israeli version of the Berlin Wall while he was in the Palestinian Authority on Sunday, May 25, 2014, the Fifth Sunday after Easter and the Commemoration of Popes Saint Gregory VII and Saint Urban I (see A slap in the face), Jorge Mario Bergoglio made all manner of symbolic gestures to show his love and appreciation for “the people of the Covenant,” including, as noted just above, removing his pectoral cross:

(As found at Novus Ordo Watch Wire. There is also excellent information and commentary at Call Me Jorge)
Gestures such as these are not lost on the rabbis, who will let the politicians vent their spleens over the “incident” at the Israeli version of the Berlin Wall. The rabbis are very pleased to see a putative Catholic “pope” hide the very instrument of human salvation that they hate with an indescribable ferocity of passion. This is why some Talmudic rabbis recognize that they have never had a better friend than Jorge Mario Bergoglio (see Jorge most open Modernist to Jews in history, rabbi says), who has lit menorahs in Argentina, “prayed” from the blasphemous Talmud and has hidden his pectoral cross before, doing so just four months ago as he hosted some Talmudic pals from Argentina for a “Kosher” lunch at the Casa Santa Marta whose “purity” was supervised by a local rabbi in Rome.
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not the first of the conciliar “pontiffs” to hide his pectoral cross when in the presence of Talmudists. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, excuse me, “Saint John Paul II,” did this several times.

Yes, “Saint John Paul II,” who ran afoul of the Talmdists several times, including when he received then Austrian President Kurt Waldheim in the Apostolic Palace on June 26, 1987 (see JOHN PAUL HOLDS WALDHEIM MEETING), was as a great appeaser of the contemporary enemies of the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Social Kingship over men and their nations in his own right.

Wojtyla/John Paul II went so far as to remove the very Sign of our salvation, the Sign of the Cross, at various times and in various places where adherents of the Talmud might have or were in fact offended.

The false “pontiff” removed his pectoral cross (remember, he was a true bishop appointed by our last true pope thus far, Pope Pius XII on July 4, 1958, and consecrated on the Feast of Saint Wenceslaus, September 28, 1958, just eleven days before Pope Pius XII’s death) on April 7, 1994, at the Paul VI Audience Hall as he hosted a concert in honor of the Talmudic victims of the Nazi regime.

He did more than that, however: he removed a crucifix from the Paul VI Audience Hall. This has nothing to do with fidelity to the Christ King, who won our salvation for us on the wood of the Holy Cross. That concert was “the first time the Chief Rabbi of Rome was invited to co-officiate at a public function in the Vatican, the first time a Jewish cantor sang at the Vatican, and the first time the Vatican choir sang a Hebrew text in performance” (The Vatican, the Holocaust, and the Jews: 1945-2000, a Talmudic source for this; see also: CHRONICLE – The New York Times and YOM HASHOAH, another Talmudic source for the “concert”).

Wojtyla/John Paul II also intervened personally in 1998 when Talmudists expressed their opposition to a large cross that had been erected by Carmelite sisters in Poland near the Auschwitz concentration camp and death center where Father Maximilian Kolbe, the great apostle of the City of Mary Immaculate, was put to death. The Polish “pope” requested that the Carmelite nuns remove the large cross because the Talmudists were “offended” by it. So what? Catholics are never afraid to lift high the standard of the Holy Cross. Then again, the conciliar “popes” had expelled themselves from the Catholic Faith long before their apparent “elections.”

Not to be outdone by the man he called his “boss,” the late John “Cardinal” O’Connor, the conciliar “archbishop” of New York from March 19, 1984, to May 3, 2000, never offended the Talmudists. Not once, Ever.

O’Connor even spoke approvingly of the decision of a Catholic man, Stephen Dubner, to convert to Talmudism: 

But like many a Jewish son before him, he couldn’t separate from his mother. He wanted her approval. He presented his problem to Cardinal O’Connor, who artfully contrived a theological olive branch: ”Tell your mother that you have tried to study this, that you have prayed about it, this is not just a revolt or a rejection, this is not a dismissal of what you don’t understand — that this is where you think God wants you to be, an informed Jew.” (BOOKS OF THE TIMES; Words Upon the Heart, Heard at Last)

“Cardinal” O’Connor told an interviewer for the American Broadcasting Company’s Nightline television program that “God is smiling on all of this” when recalling his conversation with Stephen Dubner. Oh, by the way, the wonderful people at the Nightline televised the interview on the evening of December 25, 1997.

O’Connor also told a B’Nai Brith meeting in early-1998 that Judaism and Catholicism were meant to “coexist side by side” until the end of time. “This is what my boss (John Paul II) teaches, and I work for my boss.” The original citation for this came from a newspaper article that I cited in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos. There is also an allusion to this address in a reminiscence of O’Connor provided by the late pro-abortion “papal” “knight,” Rabbi Leon Klenicki, in Full of Grace: An Oral Biography of John Cardinal O’Connor, edited by Terry Golway:

Once we invited him to talk at one of the Anti-Defamation League dinners. He was there to help present a booklet we had put out. During his speech, he told a story about how he once went to a Reform synagogue and he was the only one there with a yarmulke. Several Reform rabbis who were there looked at each others–I think they couldn’t believe it–but everybody was laughing. The Cardinal had a serious point, too. Later that night, he said that he was in pain because there are Jews who do not want to exercise their Judaism because of assimilation or other reasons. It is their duty to practice their faith, he said, to prove that God exists and to refute the Holocaust. He sounded very much like a rabbi when he spoke. The crowd was all around him afterwards, shaking his hand and embracing him. I told him if he ever needed a job I knew a congregation that could use him. (Page 148 of Full of Grace: An Oral Biography of John Cardinal O’Connor.)

In our own time, of course, even Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been outdone by the man whose star has faded in conciliar circles in the last fourteen months (see Dolan Faces New Reality in the Era of Jorge), Timothy Michael Dolan, the former “cheesehead” conciliar “archbishop” of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, who has been the conciliar “archbishop” of New York since April 15, 2009. Dolan said the following on February 23, 2013, when addressing the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Lincoln Square Synagogue in the Borough of Manhattan of the City of New York, New York, that played an instrumental role in the “formation” of a certain Elena Kagan, who has been an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America since August 7, 2010:

Shabbat Shalom!

Thank you so much for your generous invitation and warm welcome. What an honor and a joy to be with you here at the historic and renowned Lincoln Square Synagogue.

Long have I been aware of the prominence of this community, as, during my graduate studies at the Catholic University of America, our course in American Religious History featured attention to Modern Orthodox Judaism, its flagship synagogue here, and the foundational efforts of Rabbi Shlomo Riskin.

Now what a privilege it is to be a part of the celebration of welcome as we thank God for this splendid new sanctuary! As your psalms pray, “Unless the Lord builds the house, they labor in vain who toil!” So, praise God:

I’d say “Alleluia” but I can’t because for us Catholics it’s our penitential season of Lent, and we can’t say that “A-word” until Easter!

Can I get a little personal here? Today is the fourth anniversary of my appointment by Pope Benedict XVI as archbishop of New York.

Four happy years…and the Jewish community of New York is one of the big reasons why. From the start you have welcomed and embraced me. I love you; I respect you; I need you; I thank you.

Tomorrow, the second Sunday of Lent, we always have the Gospel account of what we call the Transfiguration of Jesus on Mount Tabor. There, the Jewish fisherman, the Jewish first pope, St. Peter, said to Jesus, “It is good for us to be here.”

Those words I make my own this morning.

I also appreciate the encouragement this visit gives me in my efforts to repair and restore another historic house of prayer and worship, Saint Patrick’s Cathedral. Don’t worry: I’m not going to ask for money—while recognizing what a tradition that is in both of our religions—although I do happen to have some pledge cards on me!

This beautiful occasion this morning might be a providential occasion to celebrate as well the common values we as Jews and Catholics deeply cherish. Can I mention just two?

One would be the high importance of the Sabbath: you begin with sundown on Friday and go through Saturday; we start with sundown on Saturday and go through Sunday.

We both do it with humble obedience to the Lord’s command, following His own example of rest after the labor of creation, don’t we?

I propose that our fidelity to the Sabbath is good for us, and good for the world.

It’s good for us as we individually, and as a religious community, need worship, prayer, and fellowship to keep our spirits focused and our faith fervent.

A wise mentor once told me, “Science teaches us that the earth is not the center of the universe. Faith teaches me that neither am I.”

God and others come first. The weekly reminder of the Sabbath.

I suppose that’s the message to be found in the startling decision of Pope Benedict XVI to leave the Chair of St. Peter. It’s not about an office, the pomp, the prominence, the prestige, the Holy Father hints, but about Jesus and His Church. It’s really all about God.

That’s what you and I profess every Sabbath! That’s good for us; that’s good for our culture.

Two, we both value love and service. Just ten days ago, on Ash Wednesday, as we began our forty days of fervent prayer, penance, and acts of charity in preparation for our high holy days, the fifty thousand folks who came through Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, heard the words of your prophet, Isaiah.

“This is the worship and fasting that I wish: releasing those bound unjustly, untying the thongs of the yoke; setting free the oppressed, breaking every yoke; sharing your bread with the hungry, sheltering the oppressed and the homeless; clothing the naked when you see them, and not turning your back on your own.”

Jesus won’t let me brag about such work that we as Catholics do, since, on that same day, Ash Wednesday, He told us in the Gospel that our good works should be done in secret.

But, I sure can congratulate you for the radiant love, service, and works of charity and justice you do! We’re all impressed by your effective food and clothing drives, your Red Cross blood drives, your community outreach and weekly bags of bread to the West Side Campaign Against Hunger. And we sure appreciated the partnership of the UJA with Catholic Charities in the Feeding Our Neighbors Campaign three weeks ago.

Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta observed, “There’s a word for faith without love, and that word is a sham.”

And Bl. John Paul II, who so loved you, remarked, “Men and women today learn much more from witness than from words.”

God bless you, Lincoln Square Synagogue, for the radiant witness of your love which make genuine the words of praise we express on the sabbath! (The Gospel in the Digital Age. For the dissection of this, see You’re Not Supposed To Do This”).

What Jorge did in Jerusalem in front of Caiphas and Annas two days ago now is just standard issue conciliarism: never preach Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Him Crucified to the Jews. Never.

To use a term coined by none other than Vladimir I. Lenin, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a “useful idiot” to the Talmudists and Zionists as they know that they can count on him to denounce any Catholic who dares to speak in traditionally Catholic terms about their false religion. And it is indeed a telling commentary on the state of apostasy and betrayal in which we find ourselves at this time that the Talmudists know orthodox Catholic doctrine better than perhaps ninety-five cent of Catholics alive today, and they want to make sure that it stays that way. Jorge has done them great favors by bashing fully believing Catholics time and time again at the Casa Santa Marta.

Jorge and the Mohammedans

Although less heralded than his groveling before the Talmudists in Jerusalem, Jorge Mario Bergoglio did make a stop on Monday, May 26, 2014, to the “grand mufti” of the false religion known as Mohammedanism, where, of course, he did not preach Our Lord and Him Crucified to these merchants of lies:

I am grateful for the opportunity to meet with you in this sacred place. I thank you for the courteous invitation you have extended to me and, in particular, I wish to thank the Grand Mufti and the President of the Supreme Muslim Council.

Following in the footsteps of my predecessors, and in particular the historic visit of Pope Paul VI fifty years ago, the first visit of a Pope to the Holy Land, I have greatly desired to come as a pilgrim to the places which witnessed the earthly presence of Jesus Christ. But my pilgrimage would not be complete if it did not also include a meeting with the people and the communities who live in this Land. I am particularly happy, therefore, to be with you, dear Muslim faithful, brothers.

At this moment I think of Abraham, who lived as a pilgrim in these lands. Muslims, Christians and Jews see in him, albeit in different ways, a father in faith and a great example to be imitated. He became a pilgrim, leaving his own people and his own house in order to embark on that spiritual adventure to which God called him.

A pilgrim is a person who makes himself poor and sets forth on a journey. Pilgrims set out intently toward a great and longed-for destination, and they live in the hope of a promise received (cf. Heb 11:8-19). This was how Abraham lived, and this should be our spiritual attitude. We can never think ourselves self-sufficient, masters of our own lives. We cannot be content with remaining withdrawn, secure in our convictions. Before the mystery of God we are all poor. We realize that we must constantly be prepared to go out from ourselves, docile to God’s call and open to the future that he wishes to create for us.

In our earthly pilgrimage we are not alone. We cross paths with other faithful; at times we share with them a stretch of the road and at other times we experience with them a moment of rest which refreshes us. Such is our meeting today, for which I am particularly grateful. It is a welcome and shared moment of rest, made possible by your hospitality, on the pilgrimage of our life and that of our communities. We are experiencing a fraternal dialogue and exchange which are able to restore us and offer us new strength to confront the common challenges before us.

Nor can we forget that the pilgrimage of Abraham was also a summons to righteousness: God wanted him to witness his way of acting and to imitate him. We too wish to witness to God’s working in the world, and so, precisely in this meeting, we hear deep within us his summons to work for peace and justice, to implore these gifts in prayer and to learn from on high mercy, magnanimity and compassion.

Dear brothers, dear friends, from this holy place I make a heartfelt plea to all people and to all communities who look to Abraham: may we respect and love one another as brothers and sisters! May we learn to understand the sufferings of others!  May no one abuse the name of God through violence! May we work together for justice and peace! Salaam! (Visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem in the building of the Great Council on the Esplanade of the Mosques, Jerusalem, 26 May 2014.)

Sacred place?

A den where the devil is worshiped is “sacred”?

Not to the true God of Divine Revelation Whom the Mohammedans revile, the Most Holy Trinity.

Then again, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI actually did Jorge one better five years ago, that is, on Wednesday, May 12, 2009, the Feast of Saints Nereus, Achilleus, Pancras and Domitilla, as he entered into the Dome of the Rock itself and took off his shoes as he had done at the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey, on November 30, 2005, starting his address in exactly the same manner as his successor did two days ago:

I cordially thank the Grand Mufti, Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, together with the Director of the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, Sheikh Mohammed Azzam al-Khatib al-Tamimi, and the Head of the Awquaf Council, Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab, for the welcome they have extended to me on your behalf. I am deeply grateful for the invitation to visit this sacred place, and I willingly pay my respects to you and the leaders of the Islamic community in Jerusalem. (Courtesy visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the Mount of the Temple,)

As I keep trying to explain to the readership of this site, the conciliar apostates hath not the Catholic Faith. They are apostates, and apostates do apostate things, which means that they spread heresies, commit sacrileges, utter blasphemies and fail to preach Our Lord and Him Crucified to those who deny His Sacred Divinity.

Jorge has gone to great lengths to show his respect for the blasphemous Mohammedan religion, going so far as to issue the “end of Ramadan” greetings himself last year rather than let the conciliar Vatican’s full-time syncretist, Jean-Louis “Cardinal” Tauran, do so:

To Muslims throughout the World

It gives me great pleasure to greet you as you celebrate ‘Id al-Fitr, so concluding the month of Ramadan, dedicated mainly to fasting, prayer and almsgiving.

It is a tradition by now that, on this occasion, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue sends you a message of good wishes, together with a proposed theme for common reflection. This year, the first of my Pontificate, I have decided to sign this traditional message myself and to send it to you, dear friends, as an expression of esteem and friendship for all Muslims, especially those who are religious leaders.

As you all know, when the Cardinals elected me as Bishop of Rome and Universal Pastor of the Catholic Church, I chose the name of “Francis”, a very famous saint who loved God and every human being deeply, to the point of being called “universal brother”. He loved, helped and served the needy, the sick and the poor; he also cared greatly for creation.

I am aware that family and social dimensions enjoy a particular prominence for Muslims during this period, and it is worth noting that there are certain parallels in each of these areas with Christian faith and practice.

This year, the theme on which I would like to reflect with you and with all who will read this message is one that concerns both Muslims and Christians: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.

This year’s theme is intended to underline the importance of education in the way we understand each other, built upon the foundation of mutual respect. “Respect” means an attitude of kindness towards people for whom we have consideration and esteem. “Mutual” means that this is not a one-way process, but something shared by both sides.

What we are called to respect in each person is first of all his life, his physical integrity, his dignity and the rights deriving from that dignity, his reputation, his property, his ethnic and cultural identity, his ideas and his political choices. We are therefore called to think, speak and write respectfully of the other, not only in his presence, but always and everywhere, avoiding unfair criticism or defamation. Families, schools, religious teaching and all forms of media have a role to play in achieving this goal.

Turning to mutual respect in interreligious relations, especially between Christians and Muslims, we are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these!

It is clear that, when we show respect for the religion of our neighbours or when we offer them our good wishes on the occasion of a religious celebration, we simply seek to share their joy, without making reference to the content of their religious convictions.

Regarding the education of Muslim and Christian youth, we have to bring up our young people to think and speak respectfully of other religions and their followers, and to avoid ridiculing or denigrating their convictions and practices.

We all know that mutual respect is fundamental in any human relationship, especially among people who profess religious belief. In this way, sincere and lasting friendship can grow.

When I received the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See on 22 March 2013, I said: “It is not possible to establish true links with God, while ignoring other people. Hence it is important to intensify dialogue among the various religions, and I am thinking particularly of dialogue with Islam. At the Mass marking the beginning of my ministry, I greatly appreciated the presence of so many civil and religious leaders from the Islamic world.” With these words, I wished to emphasize once more the great importance of dialogue and cooperation among believers, in particular Christians and Muslims, and the need for it to be enhanced.

With these sentiments, I reiterate my hope that all Christians and Muslims may be true promoters of mutual respect and friendship, in particular through education.

Finally, I send you my prayerful good wishes, that your lives may glorify the Almighty and give joy to those around you. Happy Feast to you all! (Jorge Blows Hugs and Kisses to Muslims for end of Ramadan: Promoting Mutual Respect through Education.)

So much for the First Commandment.

“We are called to respect the religion of the other, its teachings, its symbols, its values. Particular respect is due to religious leaders and to places of worship. How painful are attacks on one or other of these!”


Utter and complete blasphemy.

Catholic writer Raymond Taouck’s excellent treatise explaining that Catholics and Mohammedans do not worship the same God are not “brothers” in faith contains some important quotations that show forth the manifest apostasy of the conciliar revolutionaries, including Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself:

Catholics often forget that those faithful living on earth come under the title of “Church Militant”. What is a Catholic who does not confess his faith or worse yet a Catholic who does not believe his faith?

St. Peter Canisius puts it this way: “Who is to be called a Christian? He who confesses the doctrine of Christ and His Church. Hence, he is truly a Christian thoroughly condemns and detests, the Jewish, Mohammedan, and the heretical cults and sects.” [20]

What did St. Peter Mavimenus tell the Mohammedans? Did he say, “We worship the same God, all is well” No! He told them the truth, he put it this way to them “Whoever does not embrace the Catholic Christian religion will be damned, as was your false prophet Mohammed.” [21]

Again we read that Blessed Nicholas Tavilich was just as stern as he openly states, “You Mohammedans are in a state of everlasting damnation. Your Koran is not God’s law nor is it revealed by Him. Far from being a good thing, your law is utterly evil. It is founded neither in the Old Testament nor in the New. In it are lies, foolish things, buffooneries, contradictions, and much that leads not to virtue and goodness but to evil and to all manner of vice.” [22]

St. Alphonsus attests to the fact how the Holy Monk St. Goerge of San Saba openly confessed to the Mohammedans: “But the holy monk (St. George of San Saba) having declared that Mahomet was a disciple of the devil, and that his followers were in a state of perdition, he also was condemned (to martyrdom) with his companions.” [23]

The same we read in the testimony of the five disciples of St. Francis of Assisi, who when reproached by the followers of Koran for preaching against Mohammed, simply responded by saying “We have come to preach faith in Jesus Christ to you, that you will renounce Mohammad, that wicked slave of the devil, and obtain everlasting life like us” [23a]

Further we read in the life of St. John Vianney how he stated openly to a Protestant who believed that his worship rendered to God should do him just as well in his Protestant Sect as it would have in the Catholic faith, The Saint responded to him with the contrary advice saying “My friend, there are not two ways of serving Our Lord; there is only one good way, and it is to serve Him as He wishes to be served”.[24]

This is the truth we must speak in charity and honesty to these lost souls who without the grace and redemption of Christ can’t be saved for By nature, men are “children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3); by Him, we have been reconciled with the Father (Col. 1:20), and it is only by faith in Him that we can have the boldness to approach God with entire confidence (Eph. 3:12). To Him was given all power in heaven and on earth (Mt. 28:18), and at His name every knee must bend, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (Phil. 2:10,11). No one goes to the Father save by Him (Jn. 14:6), and there is no other name under heaven given to man by which he must be saved (Acts 4:12). He is the Light that enlightens every man who comes into the world (Jn.1:9), and whoever does not follow Him wanders in darkness (Jn. 8:12). Who is not with Him is against Him (Mt. 13:30), and who does not honor Him also dishonors His Father who sent Him (as the Jews do) (Jn. 5:23).

Christ says, ” Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No I tell you but division?” With the truth, division must come. This should not dishearten the man of God for “If God is for us, who is against us” – Rom 8:31 (Do Catholics and Muslims worship the same God, by Raymond Taouck.)

Remember this and remember it well: Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not hold to the Catholic Faith. Neither have his predecessors in his false church. Each rejected the following words, whose formulation was guided by the infallible assistance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the Council of Florence on February 4, 1442:

It [the Holy Roman Church] firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation. Regarding children, indeed, because of danger of death, which can often take place, when no help can be brought to them by another remedy than through the sacrament of baptism, through which they are snatched from the domination of the Devil and adopted among the sons of God, it advises that holy baptism ought not to be deferred for forty or eighty days, or any time according to the observance of certain people, but it should be conferred as soon as it can be done conveniently, but so ,that, when danger of death is imminent, they be baptized in the form of the Church, early without delay, even by a layman or woman, if a priest should be lacking, just as is contained more fully in the decree of the Armenians. . . .

It firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church. (Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence, February 4, 1442.)

Today is the Feast of Saint Augustine of Canterbury, who was sent to bring England into the Faith once and for all by Pope Saint Gregory the Great, his fellow Benedictine. Jorge would have told Saint Augustine of Canterbury to “dialogue” with the pagans in England, not seek their conversion to the true Faith.

The brief account of the life of Saint Augustine of Canterbury found in Matins in today’s Divine Office demonstrates a vast contrast between his work of converting souls to the true Faith and the false ecumenism practiced by Jorge in the Holy Land between Saturday, May 24, 2014, and Monday, May 26, 2014:

Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Apostle of the English, was sent into England by blessed Gregory, and came thither in the year 597. At that time there was in Kent a most mighty king named Ethelbert, whose power reached even to the Humber. When this King had heard wherefore the holy man was come, he received him kindly, and bade him and his companions, who were all monks, to come to his own capital city of Canterbury being struck with astonishment at the perfect blamelessness of their lives, and the power of the heavenly doctrine which they preached, and which God confirmed with signs following.

They drew nigh to the city in solemn procession, singing the Litany, and bearing before them for their standard a silver cross and a picture of the Lord our Saviour painted on a panel. Hard by the city, upon the east side, there was a Church builded of old time in honour of St Martin, and wherein the Queen, who was a Christian, was used to pray. There they first began to meet together, to sing, to pray, to celebrate Masses, to preach, and to baptize, until the King was turned to the faith, and the most part of his people were led by his example, (but not his authority,) to take the name of Christian, for he had learnt from his teachers and his own soul’s physicians, that men are to be drawn, and not driven to heaven. And now Augustine, being ordained Archbishop of the English and of Britain, lest he should leave untravailed any part of the Lord’s vineyard, asked from the Apostolic See a new band of labourers, Mellitus,” Justus, Paulinus, and Rufinian.

Having arranged the affairs of his church, Augustine held a synod with the bishops and doctors of the ancient Britons, who had long been at variance with the Roman Church in the celebration of Easter and other rites. But since he could not move them, either by the authority of the apostolic see or by miracles, to put an end to these variations, in a prophetic spirit he foretold their ruin. At length, after having endured many difficulties for Christ, and having become noted for miracles, when he had placed Mellitus in charge of the church of London, Justus of that of Rochester, and Laurence in charge of his own church, he passed to heaven on the 26th day of May, in the reign of Ethelbert, and was buried in the monastery of St. Peter, which thereafter became the burying-place of the bishops of Canterbury and of some kings. The English people honoured his memory with fervent zeal; and the Supreme Pontiff Leo XIII extended his Office and Mass to the universal Church. (Matins, The Divine Office, May 28, the Feast of Saint Augustine of Canterbury.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s prayer to Saint Augustine of Canterbury shows us how far the lords of conciliarism are from the spirit of Catholicism, which seeks with urgency the conversion of all non-Catholics to the maternal bosom of Holy Mother Church:

Throned on the apostolic See, our saint proved himself to be a rightful heir of the apostles, not only as the representative and depositary of their authority, but as a follow-sharer in their missio of calling nations to th true faith. To whom does England owe her having been, for so many ages, the ‘island of saints’? To Gregory, who, touched with compassion for those Angli, of whom, as he playfully said, he would fain Angeli,sent to their island the monk Augustine with forty companions, all of them, as was Gregory himself, children of St. Benedict. The faith had been sown in this land as early as the second century, but it had been trodden down by the invasion of an infidel race. This time the seed fructified, and so rapidly that Gregory lived to see a plentiful harvest. It is beautiful to hear the aged Pontiff speaking with enthusiasm about the results of his English mission. He thus speaks in the twenty-seventh Book of his Morals: ‘Lo! the language of Britain, which could once mutter naught save barbarous sounds, has long since begun to sing, in the divine praises, the Hebrew Alleluia! Lo! that swelling sea is now calm, and saints walk on its waves. The tide of barbarians, which the sword of earthly princes could not keep back, is now hemmed in at the simple bidding of God’s priests.‘ (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year.)

With very few true priests in the world, the tide of barbarism has swept over the world.

God is blasphemed every day, both in the counterfeit church conciliarism and in the world.

Human beings, rootless because they do not know anything about the true Faith, waste their time on trivial pursuits as so many men today resort to barbarous acts, such as happened in Isla Vista, California, four days ago now, to “settle scores” and to make their “mark” in the world before they take their own lives in an ultimate act of self-hatred and rebellion against the God Who had made them to know, love and serve Him as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His Catholic Church.

What does Jorge Mario Bergoglio do?

Smile, smile, smile at every false religion under the sun.

These are days of reparation.

May we turn to Our Lady, the Queen of Apostles, as we approach the celebration of Pentecost Sunday in eleven days, begging her through her Most Holy Rosary to help us to ascend in our thoughts to Heaven every day so that our lives on earth, lived as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Christ the King, through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, will brings to Heaven after death.

Part four tomorrow.

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 Augustine of Canterbury, pray for us.




On the Road to Gehenna with Jorge, Abe and Omar, part two

So much apostasy. So much indifferentism. So many words and deeds offensive to the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity. So much harm done to souls in the name of “peace” and “understanding” and “religious freedom.” So much repetition of all that has been done before by the conciliar “popes.” So little time to deal with this all adequately.

An article reviewing the three days that Jorge Mario Bergoglio spent in Jordan and Israel between Saturday, May 24, 2014, the Feast of Our Lady Help of Christians, and yesterday, Monday, May 26, 2014, the Feast of Saint Philip Neri and the Commemoration of Pope Saint Eleutherius (and a Rogation Day prior to the Feast of the Ascension of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), could consist only of the following words: “In perfect consistency with the precedents set by the soon-to-be “Blessed” Paul the Sick during the latter’s journey to Jordan and Israel (which was not a state visit to either country)  from January 3, 1964, to January 6, 1964, the Feast of the Epiphany of Our Lord, Jorge Mario Bergoglio did not seek the urgency the unconditional conversion of the Mohammedans and Jews that that he addressed in Jordan and Israel.

Here is the precedent set in this regard by Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI on January 4, 1964, when he addressed King Hussein of Jordan:


We are most appreciative of your kindness in coming to welcome Us personally on Our arrival in your Kingdom. 

Our visit is a spiritual one, a humble pilgrimage to the sacred places made holy by the Birth, the Life, the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ, and by His glorious Resurrection and Ascension. At each of these venerable shrines, We shall pray for that peace which Jesus left to His disciples, that peace which the world cannot give, but which comes from the fulfilment of His commandment: to love one another as He loved us (cfr. Io. 14, 27; 15, 12). 

Your Majesty, We know, ardently desires peace and prosperity for your people, and for all the nations of the world; and We, Peter’s Successor, remember his reference to the Psalms in his first Epistle: «He who would love life, and see good days,… let him turn away from evil and do good, let him seek after peace and pursue it )» (Ps. 23, 13-15). Saint Peter also wrote: “(Honour all men; love the brotherhood; fear God; honour the king” (1 Petr. 11, 17). 

May God grant Our prayer, and that of all men of good will, that, living together in harmony and accord, they may help one another in love and justice, and attain to universal peace in true brotherhood. (Address to the King of Jordan, January 4, 1964.)

The second of the conciliar “popes” established the precedent for his successors when visiting the Holy Land: never seek the conversion of any non-Catholic to the Catholic Faith. Always speak in Judeo-Masonic terms. The conciliar motto can be summarized s follows: “Thou shalt never offend a non-Catholic.”

Another way of phrasing this is as follows: “Thou shalt obey the commands of the Sanhedrin that the Apostles dared to defy:

Saying: What shall we do to these men? for indeed a known miracle hath been done by them, to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: it is manifest, and we cannot deny it. But that it may be no farther spread among the people, let us threaten them that they speak no more in this name to any man. And calling them, they charged them not to speak at all, nor teach in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answering, said to them: If it be just in the sight of God, to hear you rather than God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. (Acts 4: 16-20.)

When one speaks and acts in Judeo-Masonic terms, however, especially in the Holy Land, which is in a state of conflict because of the unbelief of Talmudists and the Mohammedans, whom the conciliar “popes” have reaffirmed in their false religions time and time and time again, one winds up pleasing no one, most especially Christ the King Himself.

It’s All or Nothing for the Zionists 

Indeed, although Jorge Mario Bergoglio did indeed say a prayer as a wreath was laid by two Israeli children at the tomb of the founder of International Zionism, Theodore Herzl, atop Mount Hezl as a symbolic gesture to “undo” the “injustice” of Pope Saint Pius X’s rejecting Zionism when Herzl asked him to do so in a private audience on January 25, 1904, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle, before proceeding to the Yad Vashem memorial to those Jews killed by the regime of Adolf Hitler, where Bergoglio quoted the book of the Prophet Baruch to refer a crime “such as never happened under the heavens” (see Visit to the Yad Vashem Memorial, May 2014), Israeli authorities were livid with the Argentine Apostate for having touched his head against their Berlin Wall that prohibits free access for the people living within the Palestinian Authority into Jerusalem and for his support for the two-state solution that is anathema to the Israelis.

Indeed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu went to great lengths yesterday to speak of the Zionists’ official displeasure with these gestures, which they sought to counteract by more or less forcing Jorge to stop at a monument to Israeli victims of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Mohammedan Palestinians that was not on the planned “papal” itinerary:

JERUSALEM — A conflict largely defined by dueling narratives became a battle of competing imagery during Pope Francis’ sojourn through the Holy Land, with Palestinians and Israelis both seizing on the pontiff’s strong symbolic gestures to promote their perspectives.

That was just one of the poignant photo opportunities of the pope at some of Judaism’s most sacred sites. He placed a note with the “Our Father” prayer handwritten in Spanish between the ancient stones of the Western Wall. He kissed the hands of six survivors — one saved as a baby by a Catholic family — at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial. He became the first Vatican leader to lay a wreath of signature yellow and white flowers on the tomb of Theodor Herzl, the founder of modern Zionism.

This montage was, according to the chief Vatican spokesman, intended to provide counterbalance to Sunday’s silent prayer at the barrier, which had incensed some Israelis, particularly because it was at a section where the spray-painted slogans included “apartheid wall” and “Bethlehem is like the Warsaw Ghetto.”

But it may yet be upstaged: A Catholic cardinal who was in Jerusalem during the visit told The Boston Globe that the Palestinian president had informed Francis he planned to make a postage stamp out of the image — as Israel did after John Paul II became the first pontiff to place a note in the Western Wall in 2000.

Diana Buttu, a Palestinian analyst, pointed out that the Israeli sites visited by Francis on Monday were monuments to the past that heads of state routinely visit per protocol, while the barrier “is ongoing, something that Palestinians live with every day.” It remains unclear whether the Palestinians had planned the stop or even pressured the pope to make it, as one Catholic leader told an Israeli news outlet, but Ms. Buttu said the seeming spontaneity lent it strength.

“There isn’t a single leader who comes to the country who doesn’t have to see Yad Vashem or Herzl or both — this was powerful because it wasn’t forced, you could see that he was genuinely shocked by it,” Ms. Buttu said. “I think he really displayed compassion in visiting the wall and really understanding what people are living under.”

I explained to the pope that building the security fence prevented many more victims that Palestinian terror — which continues today — planned to harm,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said afterward. Later, he added, “I long for the day in which Pope Francis’ call to recognize the state of Israel, the right of Jews to a state of their own, to live in security and peace, will be accepted by our neighbors.”

(There was, however, some Israeli griping that Francis did not say those things at Yad Vashem — his spokesman said that was because he thought a “meditation” was more appropriate for the memorial — and did not use the word “Nazi.”)

The pope also laid the groundwork during his visit for another enduring image intended to change perceptions of the conflict, inviting Presidents Shimon Peres of Israel and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority to his apartment in the Vatican to pray together for peace. Both men accepted: The meeting is expected within the next two weeks, though the pope’s spokesman said a date had not yet been set.

Asked why Francis had chosen Mr. Peres — who leaves his largely ceremonial post in July — rather than Mr. Netanyahu, who is Mr. Abbas’s counterpart in peace negotiations, the spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the pope and the Israeli president shared a warm relationship of “great esteem.”

“This is not an exclusion of the other,” Father Lombardi said Sunday. “The pope has with President Peres a good feeling, this is clear.”

At Mr. Peres’s official residence on Monday, Francis wrote in the guest book, “It is always the grace of God to come in the house of a man who is wise and good.” Then the two leaders had what Father Lombardi described as a “very, very lengthy” one-on-one.

“The president said many things about the peace process, the problem of building peace, the collaboration of the religious leaders and the pope in building peace,” he said. “It was said in a very sincere, very friendly and profound way.”

From there Francis received Mr. Netanyahu at the Vatican-owned Notre Dame center. (Visits Tomb of Zionism’s Founder.)

In other words, the bloodstained murderer named Benjamin Netanayhu lectured the genocidal butcher of souls, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, but good as any self-respecting Zionist believes is his responsibility to do when anyone, including a putative Successor of Saint Peter, dares to mention what is unmentionable in Israel: the injustices that the Palestinians have suffered for so long at the hands of their occupiers and jailers, the Israelis. Jorge smiled and nodded his head as he engaged his lecturer in the Zionist version of “dialogue”: “Agree with us you cannot not be considered our ‘friend’ no matter how many times you say nice things or make friendly gestures to us.”

Remember, the conciliar “popes” have enabled Talmudists by giving them access to them whenever they have felt aggrieved. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI did so in 2007 when Talmudic representatives complained about the presence of the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews in the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition after the retired universal public face of apostasy had issued Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007, and they complained loud and long in early-2008 after Ratzinger’s own revision had been issued, whereupon a host of conciliar characters, starting with the notorious Walter Kasper himself, twisted themselves into pretzels to claim that what thy think is the Catholic Church has no “organized mission to convert the Jews.” No, she only has the Divine mandate from Our Lord Himself to convert everyone in the world. See any of that going on the past three days in Jordan and Israel?

Talmudic rabbis complained later in 2008 when it appeared as though the cause of Pope Pius XII was going to reach the point of a conciliar “beatification”:

Image: Pope with Jewish leaders

VATICAN CITY – Pope Benedict on Thursday told Jewish leaders he was seriously considering freezing the sainthood process of his Nazi-era predecessor Pius XII until historical archives can be opened, a Jewish leader said.

Some Jews have accused Pius, who reigned from 1939 to 1958, of turning a blind eye to the Holocaust. The Vatican says he worked behind the scenes and helped save many Jews from certain death during World War Two.

Rabbi David Rosen, a leader of a Jewish delegation that met the pope on Thursday, said the subject came up in conversations after formal speeches were delivered.

One member of our delegation told the pope ‘please do not move ahead with beatification of Pius XII before the Vatican archives can be made accessible for objective historical analysis’ and the pope said ‘I am looking into it, I am considering it seriously’,” Rosen told reporters.

Beatification is the last step before sainthood in the Roman Catholic Church. Some Jews have asked the pope to hold off on beatifying Pius until more information on his papacy can be studied.

Pius did not come up in the formal speeches between the pope and Rosen, but the Jewish leader did repeat a request for the Vatican archives to be open for study.

“We reiterate our respectful call for full and transparent access of scholars to all archival material from the period, so that assessments regarding actions and policies during this tragic period may have the credibility they deserve both within our respective communities and beyond,” Rosen told the pope.

Six to seven years

A Vatican statement said another six or seven years of preparatory work would be needed before the archives on Pius’ period could be opened to scholars and the pope would have the final decision.

At issue is whether Benedict should let Pius proceed on the road to sainthood — which Catholic supporters want — by signing a decree recognizing his “heroic virtues.” This would clear the way for beatification, the last step before sainthood.

Benedict has so far not signed the decree — approved last year by the Vatican’s saint-making department, opting instead for what the Vatican has called a period of reflection.

The Vatican says while Pius did not speak out against the Holocaust, he worked behind the scenes to help Jews because direct intervention would have worsened the situation by prompting retaliations by Hitler.

Benedict has repeatedly defended Pius, saying he worked “secretly and silently” during World War Two to “avoid the worst and save the greatest number of Jews possible.”

The Vatican says he saved several hundred thousand Jewish lives by ordering churches and convents throughout Italy to hide Jews and instructing Vatican diplomats in Europe to give many Jews false passports.

This month, Amos Luzzatto, president emeritus of Italy’s Jewish communities, said making Pius XII a saint could open a “wound difficult to heal” between Jews and Catholics.

“I ask myself why Pius didn’t do the same thing to call European Catholics to action. These are questions that haunt us Jews,” he said. (NewsDaily: Ratzinger may freeze Pius XII sainthood process: rabbi.)

VATICAN CITYPope Benedict XVI told Jewish leaders on Thursday that he was “seriously considering” delaying the beatification of Pius XII, the pope during World War II, until the archives of his papacy had been opened, a participant at the meeting said.

But the pope’s spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said Benedict’s response was not a “public commitment,” according to The Associated Press.

“You shouldn’t read this response for beyond what it is,” Father Lombardi said. “It is a polite, serious response. He always takes seriously what he is told.”

The meeting followed weeks of controversy over efforts to beatify Pius, who was pope from 1939 to 1958. Jewish leaders have said Pius did not do enough to stop the deportation of Jews during the Holocaust, and have asked the Vatican to open the sealed archives of Pius’s papacy to scholars.

Although a Vatican committee passed a decree last year recognizing Pius’s “heroic virtues,” an important step toward sainthood, Benedict has not yet approved it. The Vatican has said the pope needs time to reflect. Benedict has said Pius worked “secretly and silently” to save Jews.

Rabbi David Rosen, the president of the organization at the meeting, an umbrella group called the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations, told reporters that when asked by an American member, Seymour Reich, to delay the beatification until the archives had been examined, the pope said he was “seriously considering it.”

“He didn’t clarify what matter he was giving serious consideration and what that means,” Rabbi Rosen said in a later telephone conversation. Other leaders at the meeting confirmed Rabbi Rosen’s account.

In their papal meeting, Jewish leaders called on the Vatican to open the archives so scholars could create historic assessments “with the credibility they deserve, both within our respective communities and beyond.”

Rabbi Rosen said a Vatican official had explained that “technical challenges” would prevent the cataloging of materials from Pius’s papacy “for at least another five years.”

Many consider Benedict’s delay in signing the decree indicative of internal and external diplomatic considerations.

This month, a leading proponent of sainthood said the pope had halted the beatification process to avoid repercussions from Jewish groups.

Father Lombardi later denied that assertion and made a rare, forceful statement saying it was not right to submit the pope “to pressures” for or against beatification. (Group Says Pope Will Weigh Delay of Pius’s Beatification.)

Golly gee willickers, Mister Peabody, where did the Talmudic rabbis get the idea that they could lobby a putative Successor of Saint Peter? From no one else other than Ratzinger/Benedict himself.

Indeed, Jorge Mario Bergoglio made it eminently clear in Interview Number I’ve Lost Count Now on the flight back from Tel Aviv to Rome that he is not even thinking about “beatifying” Pope Pius XII:

“The cause is open, I looked into it and no miracle has been found yet. So the process has stalled. We have to respect the reality of this cause. But there’s no miracle and at least one is required for beatification. I can’t think of whether I will beatify him or not.” (Interview Number I’ve Lost Count)

What, Jorge?

You can’t invent a miracle for Papa Pacelli the way that “miracles” have been invented for “Saint John XXIII” for his “beatification” on September 3, 2000, before you waived the required for a second invented miracle, or the way that “miracles” have been invented for “Saint John Paul” and the soon-to-be “Blessed” Paul VI?


There is a report of a miracle attributed to Pope Pius XII. Well, this one comes with a bit of a catch as it includes Karol Wojtyla telling a man on a dream that he could not help him as he urged to “pray to this other priest:”

Rome, Italy, Jan 19, 2010 / 12:21 pm (CNA).- Some details of the case under investigation regarding a possible miracle attributed to Venerable Pope Pius XII have been made public.  The story features not just one former Pontiff, but two.

On Tuesday morning, Vatican journalist Andrea Tornielli published an article in Il Giornale describing at length the situation which “mysteriously involves” John Paul II.

Tornielli reported that this case was brought to the attention of Benedict XVI shortly before he approved a measure on Dec. 19, 2009 venerating Pope Pius XII’s life of “heroic virtue,” whose cause had been on-hold for the previous two years.

In 2005, a teacher of 31 years of age was expecting her third child in the city of Castellammare di Stabia.  She began to have strong pains, which after many tests and a biopsy, signaled the presence of Burkitt’s lymphoma.  The condition is typified by swollen lymph nodes, often starting in the abdominal region, and the cancer can spread to bone marrow and spinal fluid.  Not only was her health in danger, but that of her unborn child was also threatened.

The woman’s husband first prayed for the intercession Pope John Paul II, who was then only recently buried in the crypt of St. Peter’s.  It wasn’t long before the Holy Father appeared to the woman’s husband in a dream.  The spouse described to Tornielli what he saw that night, “He had a serious face.  He said to me, ‘I can’t do anything, you must pray to this other priest…’  He showed me the image of a thin, tall, lean priest.  I didn’t recognize him; I didn’t know who he might be.”

Several days passed before he, “by chance,” came across a picture of Pope Pius XII in a magazine and recognized him as the man John Paul II had shown him in the dream.

The man wasted no time in bombarding Pius XII with prayers for his wife’s healing and following her very first treatments she was declared free of the cancer, the tumor had disappeared.  In fact, she was cured so quickly that her doctors pondered the notion that they may have originally misdiagnosed the pathology.

The tests and charts were reconsulted and the initial diagnosis was confirmed.

In the absence of the tumor, she had her baby and returned to work.  After some time had gone by, she decided to contact the Vatican regarding her experience.

A local news source, the Sorrento & Dintorni, ran an article on Sunday offering a basic story of the possible miracle and the diocesan response to it.  According to their report, a Tribunal has been organized by Archbishop Felice Cece of Sorrento-Castellammare to determine the nature of the occurrence and whether it will move on to the Vatican.

According to Tornielli, if they decide positively, the case will be sent on to Congregation for the Causes of Saints for investigation by a team of doctors to declare whether the event was explicable by natural means.  If there is no explanation found for the healing, theologians from the Congregation will debate the issue.  Only with their “go-ahead” can a dossier subsequently reach the hands of Pope Benedict XVI for official recognition.

Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, told CNA on Monday that there is no telling how much time the entire process might take.

He also mentioned that if a case arrives to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints it is examined in chronological order based on the date of arrival and there are thousands of cases pending review.

However, he added, “exceptions might be made for Popes, etc.”

There was no mention in Tornielli’s report of where the lymphoma had manifested itself in the woman’s body.  According to the National Institute of Health, Burkitt’s lymphoma is treatable and more than half of those diagnosed with the cancer are cured with intensive chemotherapy. (Details of possible Pius XII miracle emerge)

Maybe this wasn’t a miracle. However, the conciliar authorities would have made it into one if they had wanted to do so, which they do not. This is not only for For Fear of the Jews, but because the narrative in this story contained the embarrassing detail that “Saint John Paul II” was incapable of helping the man:

The woman’s husband first prayed for the intercession Pope John Paul II, who was then only recently buried in the crypt of St. Peter’s.  It wasn’t long before the Holy Father appeared to the woman’s husband in a dream.  The spouse described to Tornielli what he saw that night, “He had a serious face.  He said to me, ‘I can’t do anything, you must pray to this other priest…’  He showed me the image of a thin, tall, lean priest.  I didn’t recognize him; I didn’t know who he might be.”

Several days passed before he, “by chance,” came across a picture of Pope Pius XII in a magazine and recognized him as the man John Paul II had shown him in the dream.

The man wasted no time in bombarding Pius XII with prayers for his wife’s healing and following her very first treatments she was declared free of the cancer, the tumor had disappeared.  In fact, she was cured so quickly that her doctors pondered the notion that they may have originally misdiagnosed the pathology. (Details of possible Pius XII miracle emerge)

Not a very good narrative for the conciliarists to have to admit as being true.

Ratzinger/Benedict also gave the Talmudists an audience when they wanted to protest the lifting of the excommunications imposed by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II on the four bishops consecrated by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on June 30, 1988, as one of those four was the notorious “Holocaust denier,” Bishop Richard Williamson.

Although the concilairists believe that almost everything about the Holy Faith is negotiable, there is one thing that is non-negotiable: Acceptance of the “six million” Jews who are said to have been killed by the Nazis in what Bergoglio said yesterday was a crime “such as never happened under the heavens” and what Ratzinger/Benedict said in his infamous Christmas address to the conciliar curia on December 22, 2005, required a new way of thinking about the “Church’s relationship to the faith of Israel.” 

By the way, Jorge, the greatest crime in human history was Deicide, and in terms of numbers, fella, over eleven million Catholics were killed by the authorities of ancient Rome between 67 A.D. and the Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. This is to say nothing about the worldwide genocide of the preborn in the past five decades that Jorge never calls by its proper name as any comparison between this slaughter, both by chemical and surgical means, and the “greatest crime in humanity,” is considered to be “pornographic” by those who have sought to use crimes, no matter their number or extent, for which Adolf Hitler and those who carried out his orders alone bear guilt, not the Catholic Church (see Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two), to silence anyone, most especially Catholics, who seeks to discuss, no less oppose, Judeo-Masonic plans in the world, including the support of “liberal” and “reform” Talmudists for every moral evil that now has the sanction of the civil law thanks to their gargantuan efforts.

Yet it that despite all of his words and gestures over the course of the last two days in Israel including kissing the backs of the hands of survivors of Nazi concentration camps as though they were bishops or priests, Jorge Mario Bergolio had the audacity to mention the two-state solution upon his arrival in Tel Aviv, Israel, on Sunday, May 25, 2014, the Fifth Sunday after Easter and the Commemorations of Pope Saint Gregory VII and Pope Saint Urban I, and also mentioned the suffering of the Palestinians while in Bethlehem earlier that same time. Israeli Prime Minister Benjanim Netanahyu echoed the view of many Israelis yesterday when he inferred that the suffering of the Palestinians was the result of the terrorist attacks launched upon some of them and thus has nothing to do with how the likes of the late Ariel Sharon treated the Palestinians as he thought them to be: sub-humans. No, the suffering is always just “one way” for Zionists, and if you don’t agree with them, obviously, theny you are anti-Semitic and “insensitive” to the only suffering that matters, theirs.

Lest we forget, what did those peace-loving promoters of “religious freedom” do to the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, Palestinian Authority, twelve years ago now when some Mohammedan Palestinian gunmen took refuge there an desecrated this holy shrine before the Israelis laid siege to it?

Western indifference to Christian suffering, documented by Antonio Socci, is well illustrated by the recent standoff at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, one of the holiest Christian sites in the Holy Land, which was re-consecrated last month after being occupied by Arab gunmen and besieged by the Israeli army for 38 days. While extensively covered because of its photogenic value and its potential for further bloodshed, the stand-off has caused hardly a ripple in the Western world on what should be the obvious grounds for media scrutiny and public concern: the misuse and abuse of a Christian shrine by warring non-Christians in pursuit of their political objectives. The Bethlehem episode is thus illustrative of two parallel processes overlooked in the current Middle Eastern crisis: the apparently terminal decline of the Christian remnant in the Middle East after two millennia of precarious and mostly painful existence, and the remarkable indifference of the post-Christian Western world to its impending demise.

Already by their choice of the stage for what soon became a propaganda exercise the Muslim gunmen who occupied the church desecrated the basilica built on the site of the grotto where Jesus Christ is believed to have been born. They ate the food they found on the premises until it ran out, while more than 150 civilians went hungry. They consumed alcoholic drinks that they found in priests’ quarters, undeterred by the Islamic ban on drinking alcohol. They tore up Bibles up for toilet paper. They turned one corner of the ancient church into an impromptu mosque. They even attempted to bury seven of their comrades, who were subsequently killed by Israeli snipers, inside the church or on its grounds — obviously intending to turn one of the holiest Christian shrines into a place of Islamic pilgrimage to the fallen “martyrs.”

Two weeks before the siege of the Church of the Nativity, as Israeli forces stormed into Bethlehem, an Israeli tank shell hit the facade of the nearby Holy Family Church, in a complex with an orphanage, hospital and hostel. The soldiers then fired, from fifty yards’ distance, at the statue of the Virgin atop the Holy Family Church. The statue lost its left arm and its face was disfigured. The Israeli army expressed regret and promised investigation, but this did not look like an accidental shot: no terrorist could possibly hide behind the figure on the pinnacle of the hospital church. The story was reported by Reuters, and a picture taken by an AP photographer. It was available to the world media but ignored. These two incidents illustrate the predicament of the dwindling Christian remnant in the Middle East. Once thriving Christian communities are now minorities squeezed between the warring Jews and Muslims who may hate each other but all too often share their aversion to Christianity. Institutionalized or covert discrimination to which Christians are subjected in Syria, Israel, Egypt, and Lebanon, accompanied by occasional eruptions of anti-Christian violence by the Muslim majority in the last two countries, have contributed to an exodus that threatens to eradicate the believers in Christ in the lands of his birth and life. (Excerpted from Chronicles Magazine. As found at (Islamic Persecution of Christians.)

Even Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II felt it necessary to condemn the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity, something that must have been overlooked by the “cardinals” on the conciliar Congregation of the Saints in favor the fact that he had said twenty-two years before in  Mainz, Germany, that the Old Covenant had never been revoked:

The Pope has been outspoken in his criticism of the Israeli siege of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem – one of Christianity’s most hallowed shrines.

He has made clear his distaste for the violence perpetrated by Palestinian militants but has also issued a stern warning to Israel that its “respect for the status quo of the Holy Places”, agreed in a 1993 accord, was an “absolute priority”. (Survivorr’s tale of the siege of Bethlehem.)

It’s always a one-way street with the Zionists, and those who don’t accept it are the problem, not them.

Who cares for their immortal souls, which are headed to eternal perdition if they do not convert to the true Faith before they die.

Not Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who spoke as a complete member of the Judeo-Masonic fraternity when he spoke yesterday at the Yad Vashem Memorial and when addressing the two chief rabbis of Israel at Heichal Shlomo Center in Jerusalem and when paying a courtesy call to the ninety-year old Shimon Peres, who is the  symbolic President of the State of Israel at his Presidential Residence.

Indeed, a subject for part three of this series tomorrow, Jorge Mario Bergolio did not care for the immortal souls of the Mohammedan “grand mufti” when he addressed him yesterday in the building of the Great Council on the Esplanade of the Mosques.

Everyone just kind of gets saved, everyone except traditional Catholics, that is.

How About the One-State Solution?

Despite the fact that he admitted during Interview Number I’ve Count of the Number that what appeared to many observers to be an “unplanned” invitation to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres to join him in a day of prayer at “my house,” the Casa Santa Marta inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River, it was evident to anyone reading his prepared text that the invitation had been planned all along. Bergoglio loves to spring surprises. And this one is merely for show as this travesty of “prayer” with a Mohammedan, an apostate lay Catholic and a Zionist first-generation Israeli revolutionary will do nothing to ease tensions in the Holy Land caused by the infidelity of the both the Mohammedans and the Jews. Indeed, Peres leaves office in a few weeks, and Benjamin Netanayhu has no intention letting such a stunt interfere with his insistence that “peace” with the Palestinians must be done the Israeli way, no other.

Actually, of course, there can be no peace absent a recognition of Christ the King as He is taught by His true Church, the Catholic Church, which is not the counterfeit church of conciliarism. True peace, that of the Divine Redeemer, in the Holy Land will be the fruit of a true pope’s consecrating Russia to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary with all of the world’s bishops.

Not believing this, the conciliar “popes” have attempted uphold the rights of Palestinians in the belief that Israeli leaders would agree to an independent Palestinian state that is not subject to Isaeli security supervision and control whenever it is they feel like exercise it.

Although Bergoglio referred to the State of Palestine as an accomplished fact when addressing Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas two days ago before referring to the two-state solution at Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv, Israel, several hours later, this, contrary to what an writer in the United Kingdom, Damian Thompson (see Please don’t turn into the Dalai Lama), is really nothing substantively new at all as both Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict had done so in tantamount terms fourteen years ago and five years ago, respectively.Here is what Bergoglio said on Sunday, May 25, 2014, when meeting with Mahmound Abbas, followed by Wojtyla’s address in 2000 and Ratzinger’s in 2009:

I thank President Mahmoud Abbas for his kind welcome and I offer cordial greetings to the representatives of the government and the entire Palestinian people. I thank the Lord for the opportunity to be here with you today in the birthplace of Jesus, the Prince of Peace. I thank all of you for your warm reception.

For decades the Middle East has known the tragic consequences of a protracted conflict which has inflicted many wounds so difficult to heal. Even in the absence of violence, the climate of instability and a lack of mutual understanding have produced insecurity, the violation of rights, isolation and the flight of entire communities, conflicts, shortages and sufferings of every sort.

In expressing my closeness to those who suffer most from this conflict, I wish to state my heartfelt conviction that the time has come to put an end to this situation which has become increasingly unacceptable. For the good of all, there is a need to intensify efforts and initiatives aimed at creating the conditions for a stable peace based on justice, on the recognition of the rights of every individual, and on mutual security. The time has come for everyone to find the courage to be generous and creative in the service of the common good, the courage to forge a peace which rests on the acknowledgment by all of the right of two States to exist and to live in peace and security within internationally recognized borders.

To this end, I can only express my profound hope that all will refrain from initiatives and actions which contradict the stated desire to reach a true agreement, and that peace will be pursued with tireless determination and tenacity. Peace will bring countless benefits for the peoples of this region and for the world as a whole. And so it must resolutely be pursued, even if each side has to make certain sacrifices.

I pray that the Palestinian and Israeli peoples and their respective leaders will undertake this promising journey of peace with the same courage and steadfastness needed for every journey. Peace in security and mutual trust will become the stable frame of reference for confronting and resolving every other problem, and thus provide an opportunity for a balanced development, one which can serve as a model for other crisis areas.

Here I would like to say a word about the active Christian community which contributes significantly to the common good of society, sharing in the joys and sufferings of the whole people. Christians desire to continue in this role as full citizens, along with their fellow citizens, whom they regard as their brothers and sisters.

Mr President, you are known as a man of peace and a peacemaker. Our recent meeting in the Vatican and my presence today in Palestine attest to the good relations existing between the Holy See and the State of Palestine. I trust that these relations can further develop for the good of all. In this regard, I express my appreciation for the efforts being made to draft an agreement between the parties regarding various aspects of the life of the Catholic community in this country, with particular attention to religious freedom. Respect for this fundamental human right is, in fact, one of the essential conditions for peace, fraternity and harmony. It tells the world that it is possible and necessary to build harmony and understanding between different cultures and religions. It also testifies to the fact that, since the important things we share are so many, it is possible to find a means of serene, ordered and peaceful coexistence, accepting our differences and rejoicing that, as children of the one God, we are all brothers and sisters.

Mr President, dear brothers and sisters gathered here in Bethlehem: may Almighty God bless you, protect you and grant you the wisdom and strength needed to continue courageously along the path to peace, so that swords will be turned into ploughshares and this land will once more flourish in prosperity and concord. Salaam! (Meeting with Palestinian Authorities, Bethlehem, 25 May 2014.)

1. “Here Christ was born of the Virgin Mary”: these words, inscribed over the place where, according to tradition, Jesus was born, are the reason for the Great Jubilee of the Year 2000. They are the reason for my coming to Bethlehem today. They are the source of the joy, the hope, the goodwill, which, for two millennia, have filled countless human hearts at the very sound of the name “Bethlehem”.

People everywhere turn to this unique corner of the earth with a hope that transcends all conflicts and difficulties. Bethlehem – where the choir of Angels sang: “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men” (Lk 2:14) – stands out, in every place and in every age, as the promise of God’s gift of peace. The message of Bethlehem is the Good News of reconciliation among men, of peace at every level of relations between individuals and nations. Bethlehem is a universal crossroads where all peoples can meet to build together a world worthy of our human dignity and destiny. The recently inaugurated Museum of the Nativity shows how the celebration of Christ’s Birth has become a part of the culture and art of peoples in all parts of the world.

2. Mr Arafat, as I thank you for the warm welcome you have given me in the name of the Palestinian Authority and People, I express all my happiness at being here today. How can I fail to pray that the divine gift of peace will become more and more a reality for all who live in this land, uniquely marked by God’s interventions? Peace for the Palestinian people! Peace for all the peoples of the region! No one can ignore how much the Palestinian people have had to suffer in recent decades. Your torment is before the eyes of the world. And it has gone on too long.

The Holy See has always recognized that the Palestinian people have the natural right to a homeland, and the right to be able to live in peace and tranquillity with the other peoples of this area (cf. Apostolic Letter Redemptionis Anno, 20 April 1984). In the international forum, my predecessors and I have repeatedly proclaimed that there would be no end to the sad conflict in the Holy Land without stable guarantees for the rights of all the peoples involved, on the basis of international law and the relevant United Nations resolutions and declarations.

We must all continue to work and pray for the success of every genuine effort to bring peace to this Land. Only with a just and lasting peace – not imposed but secured through negotiation – will legitimate Palestinian aspirations be fulfilled. Only then will the Holy Land see the possibility of a bright new future, no longer dissipated by rivalry and conflict, but firmly based on understanding and cooperation for the good of all. The outcome depends greatly on the courageous readiness of those responsible for the destiny of this part of the world to move to new attitudes of compromise and compliance with the demands of justice.

3. Dear Friends, I am fully aware of the great challenges facing the Palestinian Authority and People in every field of economic and cultural development. In a particular way my prayers are with those Palestinians – Muslim and Christian – who are still without a home of their own, their proper place in society and the possibility of a normal working life. My hope is that my visit today to the Dheisheh Refugee Camp will serve to remind the international community that decisive action is needed to improve the situation of the Palestinian people. I was particularly pleased at the unanimous acceptance by the United Nations of the Resolution on Bethlehem 2000, which commits the international community to help in developing this area and in improving conditions of peace and reconciliation in one of the most cherished and significant places on earth.

The promise of peace made at Bethlehem will become a reality for the world only when the dignity and rights of all human beings made in the image of God (cf. Gen 1:26) are acknowledged and respected.

Today and always the Palestinian people are in my prayers to the One who holds the destiny of the world in his hands. May the Most High God enlighten, sustain and guide in the path of peace the whole Palestinian people! (Welcome Ceremony in the Palestinian Autonomous Territories, Bethlehem Airport (March 22, 2000.)

I greet each of you from my heart, and I warmly thank the President, Mr Mahmoud Abbas, for his words of welcome. My pilgrimage to the lands of the Bible would not be complete without a visit to Bethlehem, the City of David and the birthplace of Jesus Christ. Nor could I come to the Holy Land without accepting the kind invitation of President Abbas to visit these Territories and to greet the Palestinian people. I know how much you have suffered and continue to suffer as a result of the turmoil that has afflicted this land for decades. My heart goes out to all the families who have been left homeless. This afternoon I will pay a visit to the Aida Refugee Camp, in order to express my solidarity with the people who have lost so much. To those among you who mourn the loss of family members and loved ones in the hostilities, particularly the recent conflict in Gaza, I offer an assurance of deep compassion and frequent remembrance in prayer. Indeed, I keep all of you in my daily prayers, and I earnestly beg the Almighty for peace, a just and lasting peace, in the Palestinian Territories and throughout the region.

Mr President, the Holy See supports the right of your people to a sovereign Palestinian homeland in the land of your forefathers, secure and at peace with its neighbors, within internationally recognized borders. Even if at present that goal seems far from being realized, I urge you and all your people to keep alive the flame of hope, hope that a way can be found of meeting the legitimate aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians for peace and stability. In the words of the late Pope John Paul II, there can be “no peace without justice, no justice without forgiveness” (Message for the 2002 World Day of Peace). I plead with all the parties to this long-standing conflict to put aside whatever grievances and divisions still stand in the way of reconciliation, and to reach out with generosity and compassion to all alike, without discrimination. Just and peaceful coexistence among the peoples of the Middle East can only be achieved through a spirit of cooperation and mutual respect, in which the rights and dignity of all are acknowledged and upheld. I ask all of you, I ask your leaders, to make a renewed commitment to work towards these goals. In particular I call on the international community to bring its influence to bear in favor of a solution. Believe and trust that through honest and persevering dialogue, with full respect for the demands of justice, lasting peace really can be attained in these lands.

It is my earnest hope that the serious concerns involving security in Israel and the Palestinian Territories will soon be allayed sufficiently to allow greater freedom of movement, especially with regard to contact between family members and access to the holy places. Palestinians, like any other people, have a natural right to marry, to raise families, and to have access to work, education and health care. I pray too that, with the assistance of the international community, reconstruction work can proceed swiftly wherever homes, schools or hospitals have been damaged or destroyed, especially during the recent fighting in Gaza. This is essential if the people of this land are to live in conditions conducive to lasting peace and prosperity. A stable infrastructure will provide your young people with better opportunities to acquire valuable skills and to seek gainful employment, enabling them to play their part in building up the life of your communities. I make this appeal to the many young people throughout the Palestinian Territories today: do not allow the loss of life and the destruction that you have witnessed to arouse bitterness or resentment in your hearts. Have the courage to resist any temptation you may feel to resort to acts of violence or terrorism. Instead, let what you have experienced renew your determination to build peace. Let it fill you with a deep desire to make a lasting contribution to the future of Palestine, so that it can take its rightful place on the world stage. Let it inspire in you sentiments of compassion for all who suffer, zeal for reconciliation, and a firm belief in the possibility of a brighter future.

Mr President, dear friends gathered here in Bethlehem, I invoke upon all the Palestinian people the blessings and the protection of our heavenly Father, and I pray fervently that the song which the angels sang here in this place will be fulfilled: peace on earth, good will among men. Thank you. And may God be with you. (Welcoming ceremony in the square in front of the presidential palace, in Bethlehem, May 13, 2009.)

There is really nothing ever that is truly substantively new under the conciliar sun.

By the way, what has come from those words which, although they noted with firmness the suffering that the Palestinians have suffered at the hands of the Israelis, something that is understood without having to be stated explicitly (consider the fact that Netanayhu was outrage at Bergoglio’s talk of Palestinian suffering as everyone knows that the Israelis are the source of it)?


This is the because the conciliar “popes” have not exhorted the Mohammedans, who have become the predominant majority of the population in Bethlehem and its surrounding areas in recent decades, or the Talmudists, to convert to the true Faith. Then again, this would have required them, the conciliar “popes,” to convert.

You see, there needs to be a “one state” solution in the Holy Land, the Kingdom of the Prince of Peace Himself.

No amount of religious indifferentism and carefully orchestrated displays of symbolic gestures can make pleasing to God sins of omission that reaffirm people in their false beliefs and sins of commission that actually praise the inherent “goodness” of false religions as instruments in the “path to peace.”

The Apostles were willing to suffer everything for the sake of the Holy Name of Jesus, and they did not speak as His followers only before Catholics. They gave witness to the Jews and the Gentiles alike, willing to pay with their very lives for doing so.

The conciliar “popes” have been unwilling to speak to the Jews in the manner that the Apostles spoke to the Sanhedrin:

We ought to obey God, rather than men. The God of our fathers hath raised up Jesus, whom you put to death, hanging him upon a tree.

Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be Prince and Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins. And we are witnesses of these things and the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to all that obey him. (Acts 5: 29-32.)

Continue keeping close to Our Lady during this month of May, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, which was not mentioned once by Bergoglio in any of his five addresses to Catholic groups. Not once.

Say goodnight, Jorge.

Diga buenas noches, doctor Droleskey.

Part three tomorrow. It will focus on the meeting between Bergoglio and the Greek Orthodox patriarch Bartholomew I as “brothers” and upon Bergoglio’s brief address to the Mohammedans.

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 Bede the Venerable, pray for us.

Pope Saint John I, pray for us.

Inspired by the Same Scriptwriter

Although part two of “The Road to Gehenna With Jorge, Abe and Omar” series should be poster later today or tomorrow, work on it is being interrupted as much more time and care is needed to comment coherently on all that transpired yesterday. Let me offer some provisional remarks in the meantime.

As was the case on Saturday, May 24, 2014, the Feast of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, yesterday’s events in Jordan, the Palestinian Authority and Israel contained “papal” remarks almost identical to those delivered in 2000 by “Saint John Paul II” and in 2009 by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. After all, the script writer of the conciliar “popes” lacks any originality at all. He has nothing really new to say since he deceived Eve into disobeying God by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and having her convince Adam to do the same.

Let me, however, for the sake of simplification explain that all of the “papal” verbiage this time, as was the case in 2000 and in 2009, is proof of their apostasy.

Although I was an indulterer in 2000, which meant that I accepted the absurdity that a true Successor of Saint Peter could be confused or misled on matters of the Holy Faith, I wrote the following for the printed pages of Christ or Chaos after Wojtyla/John Paul II’s pilgrimage to the Holy Land in 2000. The text is unedited, thus reflecting my “resist while recognize and go to the ‘indult'” mentality at the time:

The sight of the Vicar of Christ sitting with the Grand Rabbi of Jerusalem and a Moslem sheik implied that Judaism and Mohammedism were true religions in which human beings can attain eternal life. Nothing to the contrary was said, was it? Indeed, the Holy Father went to great lengths to speak about the sense of “brotherhood” that had to exist among the three religions, implying that it would be opposed to the spirit of that brotherhood for Catholics to seek converts to the true faith from the ranks of practicing Jews and Mohammedans. He offered a prayer at the Wailing Wall, again implying that a dead religion which was superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant instituted by Our Lord at the Last Supper on Good Friday is still a valid way for people to serve God. The Holy Father even visited the Dome of the Rock, where Mohammedans believe that their charlatan tent maker of a founder, who was committed to the destruction of Christianity by the slaughtering of Christians, ascended into Heaven. Whatever the Holy Father intends to communicate with these gestures, the average person comes away reaffirmed in his spirit of indifferentism, the belief that it does not make any difference what religion one professes as long as one is a “good” person.

Contrast the Holy Father’s refusal to preach the Gospel of Christ to unbelievers with the words of the first Pope, Saint Peter, uttered during what we can call the first Urbi et Orbi address, delivered on Pentecost Sunday in Jerusalem shortly after the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles and our Blessed Mother in the same Upper Room in Jerusalem where Our Lord had instituted the priesthood and Eucharist prior to undergoing his fearful agony in the Garden of Gethsemane:

“In those days, Peter opening his mouth, said, ‘Ye men of Israel, and ye that fear God, hear. The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers hath glorified His Son Jesus, Whom you indeed delivered up and denied before the face of Pilate, when he judged he should be released. But you denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you. But the Author of life you killed, Whom God hath raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses. And now, brethren, I know that you did it through ignorance, as did also your rulers. But those things which God before had showed by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He hath so fulfilled. Repent therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out'” (Acts 3: 13-15, 17-19).

Not convinced? Consider the case of a Pharisee who converted from Judaism to the true faith whilst on the road to Damascus to preside over the persecution of more Christians, something that he–as well as other believing Jews of his day–believed was his obligation before God. The Jews of the Apostolic era knew that Our Lord was either Who He said He was, the God-Man, or He was a liar and a blasphemer. They believed the latter, as do believing Jews to this day. Indeed, some orthodox Jews in Israel were so opposed to the Pope’s visit that they sought to strike out at any Crucifix they could find. (The Pope himself removed the Crucifix from the Pope Paul VI Audience Hall in 1994 so as not to offend the Chief Rabbi of Rome when he attended a concert to remember the victims of the Holocaust.) Saint Paul shocked his Jewish hearers when he said:

” ‘Men, brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you fear God, to you the word of this salvation is sent. For they that inhabited Jerusalem, and the rulers thereof, not knowing Him, nor the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath, judging Him have fulfilled them; and finding no cause of death in Him, they desired of Pilate that they might kill Him. And when they had fulfilled all things that were written of Him, taking Him down from the tree, they laid Him in a sepulcher. But God raised Him up from the dead on the third day: Who was seen for many days by them who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who to this present time are His witnesses to the people. And we declare unto you that the promise which was made to our fathers, the same God hath fulfilled to our children, raising up Our Lord Jesus Christ'” (Acts 13: 16, 26-33).

The Apostles did not shrink from preaching the Holy Name of Our Lord as the only Name under Heaven and on earth by which men could be saved. They risked everything in order to remain faithful to the Gospel of the Crucified and Resurrected Savior. Indeed, they rejoiced because they were deemed worthy of ill treatment for the sake of the Name. All of them save for Saint John the Evangelist died a martyr’s death. They took seriously the Great Commissioning of Our Lord: AGo, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the world” (Mt. 28: 18-20). The Great Commissioning is not a suggestion offered by Our Lord. It is an imperative uttered from the Holy Lips of the One Who said that “No one can go to the Father except through Me,” the One Who said, “Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall have no life in you.” (Jn. 6:54). Every baptized member of the true Church has the obligation to bring souls into the true Church, no matter what loss (human respect, property, career security, life itself) might be entailed in the process.

Sure, there are different methods by which people are invited into the true Church. Conversion may take time. Look, our own daily conversion has plenty of ups and downs, doesn’t it? We can fall into sin so easily. Our growth in personal sanctity is never a “once and for all” proposition. Our conversion is a continuous process. But we know we must work hard to cooperate with the graces won for us on Calvary to achieve that conversion of heart and soul, mind and body. We know we have to spend plenty of time on our knees to make reparation for our sins, and to offer the same forgiveness to others that Our Lord extends to us so freely in the Sacrament of Penance, the hospital of Divine Mercy. Despite our sins and our failings, however, we know that we have to be about the business of metanoia, of dying to self and living more fully for Our Lord through His true Church. True charity for souls must impel us, imperfect vessels though we are, to help others on the road to sanctity, which begins with inviting them into the true Church. The Apostles did not do any “pre-evangelization” before they went out on Pentecost Sunday. They simply preached the Word made Flesh, trusting that the Holy Spirit would enlighten the minds and open the hearts of their hearers. Thousands were converted when Saint Peter delivered his sermon in Jerusalem on Pentecost Sunday. Why do we shrink from imitating the first Pope today? Why do we think that we are going to have “credibility” with unbelievers by not exhorting them to at least consider the fact that Our Lord is exactly what He proclaimed Himself to be, namely, the Way, the Truth, and the Life?

Yes, I understand that it is possibly the Holy Father’s intention to soften the hearts of Jews and Mohammedans by offering them his respect and his solicitude. But the Mohammedans, to their credit, will have none of it. They believe in Mohammed, not Christ. They are not religious indifferentists. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem also took issue with the Holy Father’s approach, warning him publicly that he was shirking his responsibility to bear witness to Christ to the people from whose stock Our Lord took His Sacred Humanity. While individual Catholics have indeed been hostile to Jews on occasion through the centuries (not offering them the same forgiveness that Our Lord extended to us, His executioners, from the Cross on Good Friday), the schi and schismatic and heretical Orthodox leader had a better grasp of the truth than did the pope.

The Acts of the Apostles, which we believe to have been written by Saint Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, recounts the many ways Jewish authorities sought to crush the infant Church. While it is all well and good to express sorrow for the actions and attitudes of some Catholics over the centuries, who is going to offer an apology for the hatred many believing Jews have for Christ and His Church? Who is going to say that there are ongoing efforts on the part of Jews in Israel and the United States to eradicate all mention of the Holy Name and all symbols of Christianity from public view?

Indeed, as I pointed out in an article in The Wanderer six years ago, it was precisely the de-Catholicization of Europe–which was advanced by Freemasonry and Zionists, as Father Maximilian Kolbe discussed with such courage in his writings–that produced the atmosphere in which Adolf Hitler rose to prominence. Hitler’s brand of racialism was the antithesis of Christianity, which teaches that all human beings have immortal souls, made in the image and likeness of the Triune God, and they are not defined by skin color or ethnicity. The Jewish people rounded up during Hitler’s Third Reich were the victims of a political ideology which saw itself as the means of saving the German people. For if Our Lord is not seen as the Redeemer of Man, men will invent their savior. They will invent their own “churches,” namely, political parties and/or statist, fascistic regimes dedicated to the proposition that evil in the world must be blamed on groups of people, who then become the legitimate objects for persecution and destruction. This is happening in our own nation today. The descent into barbarism which is all around us is the direct result of efforts on the part of many, including Freemasons and Jews, to make war against Christ and His true Church in politics, in government, in education, in law, in medicine, and in all aspects of popular culture, including motion pictures and television.

Some might protest that it is not “ecumenical” to point any of this out, that these things are better left unsaid. One must, however, speak the truth about those those who are responsible for making war against Christ and His Mystical Bride, the Church, to seek their unconditional conversion to the true Church. True love wills the good of others. We love no one authentically if we do not wish them to become incorporated as members of the Mystical Body of Christ in the baptismal font, and then to try to cooperate with the graces won for us on Calvary to walk along the rocky road that leads to the narrow gate of Life Himself. The Truth is Who He is, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. There can be no true peace in this world without Him. And the more that we permit His sworn enemies to silence us into submission for whatever reason (human respect, good press, sentimentality), the more we doom the world in which we live into a even greater degree of darkness than exists at present.

With all due respect to our Holy Father, this is what I would have said to the Jews and Mohammedans if I had been in the Shoes of the Fisherman recently in the Holy Land:

“My dear friends:

“I come to you as the Vicar of Christ, the visible head of the Church established by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made Man upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. I am the Successor of Saint Peter, who stood right here in Jerusalem on Pentecost Sunday to exhort the inhabitants of this holy city to see in Jesus of Nazareth the long promised Messiah Who had paid back in His own Sacred Humanity the blood debt owed by Adam’s sin of disobedience to God in the Garden of Eden. I cannot speak to you in any other terms than a disciple of Christ. He professed Himself to be the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He told the crowd in the synagogue at Capernaum, that they would have no life within them unless they ate of His flesh and drank of His blood. He spoke in clear terms, making simple declarative statements which are either true or false. I know them to be true because He is the Truth. As His vicar on earth, I have the obligation to do here in this holy city what the first Pope did: to invite you into the true Church, to see in Jesus Christ your only hope, your only path to true peace and liberation from that which causes all of the problems of the world, the horror that goes by the name of sin.

“This land has been wracked by war and violence ever since Our Lord was crucified here nearly two millennia ago. While it is true that the sins of all people from all epochs of history motivated the crowd on Good Friday to cry out for the Crucifixion of the God-Man, it is nevertheless true that there are consequences for the choices we make. This land will never know peace unless those who belong to the religion which was superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant instituted by Our Lord in the Upper Room right in this very city on Holy Thursday convert their hearts to the Word who was made Flesh and dwelt amongst us. This land will never know peace unless those who belong to a false religion, Mohammedism, come to recognize that the one they honor as a prophet sent by God, Mohammed, was a liar and a deceiver who did the work of the Devil in seeking to destroy by force the Christian face of the Middle East and North Africa, and whose disciples tried to take Europe by that same show of force. There can be no peace without Jesus Christ.

“The peace of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with sentimentality. The peace of Jesus Christ is not merely an absence of armed conflict. The peace of Jesus Christ is not a sense of universal brotherhood, wherein we all agree to disagree in order to avoid conflict. No. The peace offered by Jesus Christ is the peace which accrues in the souls of those who are in states of sanctifying grace, souls who have the very inner life of the Blessed Trinity living and pulsating within them. This peace is never achieved once and for all. Human beings can lose the peace of Christ by committing a mortal sin, thereby expelling God from within them. Serious sin and the life of grace cannot coexist in the same soul. No, the peace of Christ must be treasured with every beat of a human heart, consecrated as that heart must be to His own Sacred Heart and to the Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother, Mary of Nazareth.

“The state of societies and the world depends upon the state of individual souls. Even many of the pagan philosophers of antiquity–such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero–understood that those who defy the natural law (which was referred to by Moses when he told the people of the Old Covenant that the commandments inscribed by the very finger of God on the stone tablets on Mount Sinai had been written first by Him on the flesh of human hearts) introduce disorder into their own souls, and hence the world. They did not know why human beings had the propensity to transgress the natural law. But they saw the results of what happened when people did so. The Old Testament presents us with vivid descriptions of what happened to the Chosen People whenever they and/or their leaders defied God, choosing to relish in their own political power and material wealth. They were chastised by God severely for their infidelity.

“Sin is not only a rebellion against God. It is also a rebellion against our own human nature, which is made to know, to love, and to serve God. That is why so many people today are so hostile and angry. Although they do not realize it, they are at war with themselves because they are at war with God. Thus, they seek “salvation” in all of the wrong places, plunging themselves–and the world in which they live–more and more into the darkness. This need not be the case, my friends. This need not be the case.

“The events which took place in this Holy Land two thousand years ago were meant to transform the lives of every human being who would live from that point until the end of time. By His Incarnation as a helpless embryo in His Blessed Mother’s virginal and immaculate womb, by His Nativity in poverty in Bethlehem, by his flight from the jealous Herod the Great into Egypt, by His Hidden Years in Nazareth working at hard manual labor, by His forty days’ fast in the desert, by His Public Ministry, Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension to the Father’s right hand, Jesus Christ showed Himself to be the Suffering Servant prophesied by Isaiah. He is the only path to peace for individual souls, and hence the world.

“The peace produced in souls by the shedding of Our Lord’s Most Precious Blood is meant to soothe the savage within us, to place us in a state of friendship with God. It is meant to help us see the world through the eyes of the true faith, and to see in each human soul the Divine impress. The peace produced in souls by the graces won for us on the Holy Cross in this holy city is meant to help us realize that there is nothing we can endure in this life (no pain, no rejection, no misunderstanding, no injustice, no act of violence, no calumny or slander) which is the equal of what one of our venial sins did to the God-Man on Golgotha? Who are we then to hold grudges against others when we, the executioners of Christ, have been forgiven by Him so freely? We must offer forgiveness to all others in the same manner that Christ, Whose blessed hands and feet were nailed to the Cross by us by means of our sins, forgave (and forgives) us.

“Thus, my friends, the path to peace in the Middle East is the same path to peace everywhere else in the world: the daily path of taking up our crosses and following Christ unreservedly. To my Jewish hosts, I say to you: Be converted to Christ through His true Church. Be fed by the Eucharist, the true Manna which has come down from Heaven. Be liberated by the New Passover instituted to liberate you from sins. Make the New and Eternal Covenant instituted by Jesus Christ as your own. See in your Arab neighbors, whose land you took so unjustly in 1948, your brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ. Treat them as you would Jesus Christ. Forgive them for the acts of violence which have taken innocent lives. Make restitution to them for the land you took, as simple justice requires.

“To my Christian Arab hosts, I say: Forgive the Israelis their crimes against you. Forgive as you know Christ has forgiven you. Work to build a land based on true unity, which comes only from Our Lord through the Church He created upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. Be ceaseless in your efforts to convert your Mohammedan Arabs to the Cross of Christ.

“To my Mohammedan hosts, I say: Renounce a false religion. It was the swath of destruction inspired by Mohammed which led Catholic Europe to try to re-conquer this Holy Land, taken as it was by the force of the sword. You venerate Our Lady. But you must understand that Mary of Nazareth was responsible through he Most Holy Rosary for the victory of the Christian forces over the Turks in the Battle of Lepanto. It was her Most Holy Rosary that helped to turn back Mohammedan forces during the Battle of Vienna in 1683. Let her, Our Lady of Victory, lead you to the One she enfleshed in her virginal and immaculate womb for your salvation. Believe in His victory over sin and death on the Holy Cross. Put down the sword. Put away your hatred. Be reconciled in Christ, and see in your Jewish adversaries your brothers and sisters in the Lord.

“Yes, my friends, there will never be any peace in this blessed region unless each of you, including the Orthodox here present, embraces the Faith of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Catholicism, and begin to build a society wherein the instrument of your salvation, the Holy Cross, is displayed everywhere. For the Cross is our hope. The Cross is the means by which we can hope to pass from this vale of tears to know an unending Easter Sunday of glory in the New and Eternal Jerusalem, Heaven itself.

“I make my own the words of the first Pope, spoken to the Sanhedrin nearly two thousand years ago: ‘Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, Whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets from of old. . . . Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, Whom you crucified, Whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man is standing before you well. This is the stone which was rejected by you builders, but which has become the head of the corner. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other Name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved'” (Acts 3: 19-21; 4: 8-12).

Such words are decidedly opposed to the spirit of sappy sentimentality and false ecumenism. However, when spoken in love and watered by fervent prayer before the Blessed Sacrament and to the Mother of God, such words might be the means of doing in this, the Third Millennium, what the Apostles did at the beginning of the First Millennium: to seek to bring all people into the One Sheepfold of Christ, the true Church founded by Our Lord upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope.

Although it took me another six years to come to accept what I had thought for several years beforehand might be the case, namely, the conciliar “popes” were imposters who did not hold their offices legitimately and whose entire religion was itself but a counterfeit ape of the Catholic Church, I knew that the message conveyed by “Pope John Paul II’ in 2000 was not reconcilable to the teaching of the Catholic Church or to the courageous witness of the martyrs themselves, starting with Saint Stephen the Promotmartyr

Indeed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu made a specific point yesterday in his welcoming address upon Jorge’s arrival in Tel Aviv to than him for laying a wreath at the tomb of Theodore Herzl, the founder of International Zionism. Everyone at the David Ben Gurion International Airport, including Bergoglio himself, knew that Netanyahu was pointing out that the Argentine Apostate today, Monday, May 26, 2014, is going to symbolically undo and making “reparation” for the following words spoken to Herzl by Pope Saint Pius X on January 25, 1904, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle:

POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.

HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?

POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.

HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].

POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.

HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]

POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.

HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.

POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?

HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.

POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.

[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.

HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?

POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you. (Marvin Lowenthal, The Diaries of Theodore Herzl.)

The Zionists know what Bergoglio will be doing later today, and he is doing it all at the behest of his scriptwriter to mock the Holy Faith and the very person of one of Its most shining defenders, Pope Saint Pius X.

With a little editing, you see those remarks from fourteen years ago are as relevant now during the visit of “Pope” Francis as they were then. The script is always the same because the inspiration for its text is preternautral.

Continue to pray your Rosaries of reparation. Antichrist cannot be far behind.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady, Help of Christians, 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.

Saint Philip Neri, pray for us.

Pope Saint Eleutherius, pray for us.

On The Road to Gehenna With Jorge, Abe and Omar, part one

Hey, did you hear the news?

Sure you did. You must have by now.


You got it.

The “pope” arrived in Amman, Jordan, and this what he said:

1. In a spirit of profound respect and friendship, I offer greetings to all who live in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan: the members of the Catholic Church and the other Christian Churches, the Muslim people whom we followers of Jesus Christ hold in high esteem, and all men and women of good will.

My visit to your country and the entire journey which I am beginning today is part of the religious Jubilee Pilgrimage which I am making to commemorate the Two Thousandth Anniversary of the Birth of Jesus Christ. From the beginning of my ministry as Bishop of Rome, I have had a great desire to mark this event by praying in some of the places linked to salvation history – places that speak to us of that moment’s long preparation through biblical times, places where our Lord Jesus Christ actually lived, or which are connected with his work of redemption. I have already been to Egypt and Mount Sinai, where God revealed his name to Moses and entrusted to him the tablets of the Law of the Covenant.

2. Today I am in Jordan, a land familiar to me from the Holy Scriptures: a land sanctified by the presence of Jesus himself, by the presence of Moses, Elijah and John the Baptist, and of saints and martyrs of the early Church. Yours is a land noted for its hospitality and openness to all. These are qualities of the Jordanian people which I have experienced many times in conversations with the late King Hussein, and which were confirmed anew in my meeting with Your Majesty at the Vatican in September last year.

Your Majesty, I know how deeply concerned you are for peace in your own land and in the entire region, and how important it is to you that all Jordanians – Muslims and Christians – should consider themselves as one people and one family. In this area of the world there are grave and urgent issues of justice, of the rights of peoples and nations, which have to be resolved for the good of all concerned and as a condition for lasting peace. No matter how difficult, no matter how long, the process of seeking peace must continue. Without peace, there can be no authentic development for this region, no better life for its peoples, no brighter future for its children. That is why Jordan’s proven commitment to securing the conditions necessary for peace is so important and praiseworthy.

Building a future of peace requires an ever more mature understanding and ever more practical cooperation among the peoples who acknowledge the one true, indivisible God, the Creator of all that exists. The three historical monotheistic religions count peace, goodness and respect for the human person among their highest values. I earnestly hope that my visit will strengthen the already fruitful Christian-Muslim dialogue which is being conducted in Jordan, particularly through the Royal Interfaith Institute.

3. The Catholic Church, without forgetting that her primary mission is a spiritual one, is always eager to cooperate with individual nations and people of goodwill in promoting and advancing the dignity of the human person. She does this particularly in her schools and education programmes, and through her charitable and social institutions. Your noble tradition of respect for all religions guarantees the religious freedom which makes this possible, and which is in fact a fundamental human right. When this is so, all citizens feel themselves equal, and each one, inspired by his own spiritual convictions, can contribute to the building up of society as the shared home of all.

4. The warm invitation which Your Majesties, the Government and the people of Jordan have extended to me is an expression of our common hope for a new era of peace and development in this region. I am truly grateful, and with deep appreciation of your kindness I assure you of my prayers for you, for all the Jordanian people, for the displaced people in your midst, and for the young people who make up such a large part of the population.

May Almighty God grant Your Majesties happiness and long life!

May he bless Jordan with prosperity and peace! (Welcome Ceremony in Jordan.)

What was that I wrote about on Thursday and Friday in To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part one, and To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever, part two?

The text above, delivered by a man considered by most people in the world as a true “pope,” reeks of Judeo-Masonry, including, of course, the elegy of praise in behalf of  the heresy of “religious freedom.”

Oh, wait a minute. I think I made a mistake here, although one more grievous substantively than the incomplete sentence contained in the first paragraph of the original posting of part two of To Blot Out the Holy Name Forever on Friday.

Although the remarks contained above were made a man believed by most people in the world to be the “pope,” they were made by a man who is thought by most people in the world to be a “saint,” Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who uttered those words on March 20, 2000, upon his arrival at Queen Alia International Airport in Amman, Jordan.

My mistake.

A thousand pardons

Let me try it again.

All right?

Here is what the “pope” said yesterday upon his arrival in Amman, Jordan:

It is with joy that I greet all of you here present, as I begin my first visit to the Middle East since my election to the Apostolic See, and I am pleased to set foot upon the soil of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, a land so rich in history, home to so many ancient civilizations, and deeply imbued with religious significance for Jews, Christians and Muslims. I thank His Majesty King Abdullah II for his kind words of welcome, and I offer my particular congratulations in this year that marks the tenth anniversary of his accession to the throne. In greeting His Majesty, I extend heartfelt good wishes to all members of the Royal Family and the Government, and to all the people of the Kingdom. I greet His Beatitude Fouad Twal and His Beatitude Theophilus III and also other Patriarchs and Bishops here present, especially those with pastoral responsibilities in Jordan. I look forward to celebrating the liturgy at Saint George’s Cathedral tomorrow evening and at the International Stadium on Sunday together with you, dear Bishops, and so many of the faithful entrusted to your care.

I come to Jordan as a pilgrim, to venerate holy places that have played such an important part in some of the key events of Biblical history. At Mount Nebo, Moses led his people to within sight of the land that would become their home, and here he died and was laid to rest. At Bethany beyond the Jordan, John the Baptist preached and bore witness to Jesus, whom he baptized in the waters of the river that gives this land its name. In the coming days I shall visit both these holy places, and I shall have the joy of blessing the foundation stones of churches that are to be built at the traditional site of the Lord’s Baptism. The opportunity that Jordan’s Catholic community enjoys to build public places of worship is a sign of this country’s respect for religion, and on their behalf I want to say how much this openness is appreciated. Religious freedom is, of course, a fundamental human right, and it is my fervent hope and prayer that respect for all the inalienable rights and the dignity of every man and woman will come to be increasingly affirmed and defended, not only throughout the Middle East, but in every part of the world.

My visit to Jordan gives me a welcome opportunity to speak of my deep respect for the Muslim community, and to pay tribute to the leadership shown by His Majesty the King in promoting a better understanding of the virtues proclaimed by Islam. Now that some years have passed since the publication of the Amman Message and the Amman Interfaith Message, we can say that these worthy initiatives have achieved much good in furthering an alliance of civilizations between the West and the Muslim world, confounding the predictions of those who consider violence and conflict inevitable. Indeed the Kingdom of Jordan has long been at the forefront of initiatives to promote peace in the Middle East and throughout the world, encouraging inter-religious dialogue, supporting efforts to find a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, welcoming refugees from neighboring Iraq, and seeking to curb extremism. I cannot let this opportunity pass without calling to mind the pioneering efforts for peace in the region made by the late King Hussein. How fitting that my meeting tomorrow with Muslim religious leaders, the diplomatic corps and University rectors should take place in the mosque that bears his name. May his commitment to the resolution of the region’s conflicts continue to bear fruit in efforts to promote lasting peace and true justice for all who live in the Middle East.

Dear Friends, at the Seminar held in Rome last autumn by the Catholic-Muslim Forum, the participants examined the central role played in our respective religious traditions by the commandment of love. I hope very much that this visit, and indeed all the initiatives designed to foster good relations between Christians and Muslims, will help us to grow in love for the Almighty and Merciful God, and in fraternal love for one another. Thank you for your welcome. Thank you for your attention. May God grant Your Majesties happiness and long life! May he bless Jordan with prosperity and peace! (Welcoming ceremony at Amman, Jordan.)

Look at this, will you?

Just look at this.

“Virtues of Islam”?

Religious freedom is, of course, a fundamental human right, and it is my fervent hope and prayer that respect for all the inalienable rights and the dignity of every man and woman will come to be increasingly affirmed and defended, not only throughout the Middle East, but in every part of the world“?

It’s broken record with these guys as they propagate that which is repugnant to the true God of Divine Revelation, namely, the belief that adherents of false religions have a “human right” to publicly propagate their false beliefs. Our true popes have taught us that no such “right” exists.

Here is what Pope Saint Pius X wrote in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, about the religious indifferentism of the Modernists:

How far this position is removed from that of Catholic teaching! We have already seen how its fallacies have been condemned by the Vatican Council. Later on, we shall see how these errors, combined with those which we have already mentioned, open wide the way to Atheism. Here it is well to note at once that, given this doctrine of experience united with that of symbolism, every religion, even that of paganism, must be held to be true. What is to prevent such experiences from being found in any religion? In fact, that they are so is maintained by not a few. On what grounds can Modernists deny the truth of an experience affirmed by a follower of Islam? Will they claim a monopoly of true experiences for Catholics alone? Indeed, Modernists do not deny, but actually maintain, some confusedly, others frankly, that all religions are true. That they cannot feel otherwise is obvious. For on what ground, according to their theories, could falsity be predicated of any religion whatsoever? Certainly it would be either on account of the falsity of the religious .sense or on account of the falsity of the formula pronounced by the mind. Now the religious sense, although it maybe more perfect or less perfect, is always one and the same; and the intellectual formula, in order to be true, has but to respond to the religious sense and to the believer, whatever be the intellectual capacity of the latter. In the conflict between different religions, the most that Modernists can maintain is that the Catholic has more truth because it is more vivid, and that it deserves with more reason the name of Christian because it corresponds more fully with the origins of Christianity. No one will find it unreasonable that these consequences flow from the premises. But what is most amazing is that there are Catholics and priests, who, We would fain believe, abhor such enormities, and yet act as if they fully approved of them. For they lavish such praise and bestow such public honor on the teachers of these errors as to convey the belief that their admiration is not meant merely for the persons, who are perhaps not devoid of a certain merit, but rather for the sake of the errors which these persons openly profess and which they do all in their power to propagate. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

Any “pope” who praises the “values of Islam” and speaks of “religious freedom” as a “human right” is no true pope at all.


Not again!

Would you believe it?

Yes, although you probably have seen my intent in this commentary by now, I did it again.

The second “papal” text above was read by His Apostasteness, the now retired “Benedict XVI,” upon his arrival in Amman, Jordan, on May 8, 2009.

Terribly, terribly sorry about that, old chaps.

Terribly sorry.

All right, the gig is up.

You can see right through what I am leading to here, and that is that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s remarks in Amman, Jordan, yesterday, May 24, 2014, were practically identical to those delivered by “Saint John Paul II” on March 20, 2000, and by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI on May 8, 2009.

As the mask has been taken off of my not-so-clever effort to make a point about the lack of originality of the conciliar “popes,” here is what Jorge said yesterday at the beginning of his “Road to Gehenna Road Show” with Abraham Skorka and Omar Abboud yesterday, May 24, 2014, the Feast of Our Lady of Perpetual Help:

I thank God for granting me this opportunity to visit the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in the footsteps of my predecessors Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI. I am grateful to His Majesty King Abdullah II for his warm words of welcome, as I recall with pleasure our recent meeting in the Vatican. I also greet the members of the Royal Family, the government and the people of Jordan, this land so rich in history and with such great religious significance for Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Jordan has offered a generous welcome to great numbers of Palestinian and Iraqi refugees, as well as to other refugees from troubled areas, particularly neighboring Syria, ravaged by a conflict which has lasted all too long. Such generosity merits, Your Majesty, the appreciation and support of the international community. The Catholic Church, to the extent of its abilities, has sought to provide assistance to refugees and those in need, especially through Caritas Jordan.

While acknowledging with deep regret the continuing grave tensions in the Middle East, I thank the authorities of the Kingdom for all that they are doing and I encourage them to persevere in their efforts to seek lasting peace for the entire region. This great goal urgently requires that a peaceful solution be found to the crisis in Syria, as well as a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I take this opportunity to reiterate my profound respect and esteem for the Muslim community and my appreciation for the leadership of His Majesty the King in promoting a better understanding of the virtues taught by Islam and a climate of serene coexistence between the faithful of the different religions. You are known as a man of peace and a peacemaker: thank you! I am grateful that Jordan has supported a number of important initiatives aimed at advancing interreligious dialogue and understanding between Jews, Christians and Muslims. I think in particular of the Amman Message and the support given within the United Nations Organization to the annual celebration of World Interfaith Harmony Week.

I would also like to offer an affectionate greeting to the Christian communities welcomed by this Kingdom, communities present in this country since apostolic times, contributing to the common good of the society of which they are fully a part. Although Christians today are numerically a minority, theirs is a significant and valued presence in the fields of education and health care, thanks to their schools and hospitals. They are able to profess their faith peaceably, in a climate of respect for religious freedom. Religious freedom is in fact a fundamental human right and I cannot fail to express my hope that it will be upheld throughout the Middle East and the entire world. The right to religious freedom “includes on the individual and collective levels the freedom to follow one’s conscience in religious matters and, at the same time, freedom of worship… [it also includes] the freedom to choose the religion which one judges to be true and to manifest one’s beliefs in public” (Ecclesia in Medio Oriente, 26). Christians consider themselves, and indeed are, full citizens, and as such they seek, together with their Muslim fellow citizens, to make their own particular contribution to the society in which they live.

Finally, I cordially invoke peace and prosperity upon the Kingdom of Jordan and its people. I pray that my visit will help to advance and strengthen good and cordial relations between Christians and Muslims. And may the Lord God preserve us from the fear of change which Your Majesty referred to.

I thank you for your courteous and warm welcome. May the Almighty and Merciful God grant happiness and long life to Your Majesties, and may he bless Jordan abundantly. Salaam! (Meeting with the Authorities of the Kingdom of Jordan (Amman, 24 May 2014.)

I had to double-check this text to make sure that I had not pasted Wojtyla’s or Ratzinger’s remarks again by accident.

No repeat pasting was made.

The text above was delivered yesterday by the Argentine Apostate, although the point of this up until now has been to demonstrate how there is a perfect “unity of voice,” if you will, found among the conciliar “revolutionaries in the propagation of the tenets of their false religion, conciliarism, which is nothing other than the counterfeit ape of Catholicism.

It’s the same old, same old, replete with an elegy of praise for the “virtues of Islam” and yet another effort to claim that “religious freedom” is the foundation of peace.

There was even yet another reference to “the Almighty and Merciful God,” which was designed to refer to God in a way pleasing to the ears of Mohammedans, who associate it with their own false god, Allah.

Well, our true popes also taught with in a unity of voice as they condemned “religious liberty” as nothing other than a heresy that is offensive to God and injurious to the good of men and their nations.

Here is a reminder of this unity of voice, which was the result of their believing the Catholic Faith in Its Holy Integrity:

“Man should use his reason first of all to recognize his Sovereign Maker, honoring Him and admiring Him, and submitting his entire person to Him. For, from his childhood, he should be submissive to those who are superior to him in age; he should be governed and instructed by their lessons, order his life according to their laws of reason, society and religion. This inflated equality and liberty, therefore, are for him, from the moment he is born, no more than imaginary dreams and senseless words.” (Pope Pius VI, Brief Quod aliquantum, March 10, 1791; Religious Liberty, a “Monstrous Right).

The Catholic Church: For how can We tolerate with equanimity that the Catholic religion, which France received in the first ages of the Church, which was confirmed in that very kingdom by the blood of so many most valiant martyrs, which by far the greatest part of the French race professes, and indeed bravely and constantly defended even among the most grave adversities and persecutions and dangers of recent years, and which, finally, that very dynasty to which the designated king belongs both professes and has defended with much zeal – that this Catholic, this most holy religion, We say, should not only not be declared to be the only one in the whole of France supported by the bulwark of the laws and by the authority of the Government, but should even, in the very restoration of the monarchy, be entirely passed over? But a much more grave, and indeed very bitter, sorrow increased in Our heart – a sorrow by which We confess that We were crushed, overwhelmed and torn in two – from the twenty-second article of the constitution in which We saw, not only that “liberty of religion and of conscience” (to use the same words found in the article) were permitted by the force of the constitution, but also that assistance and patronage were promised both to this liberty and also to the ministers of these different forms of “religion”. There is certainly no need of many words, in addressing you, to make you fully recognize by how lethal a wound the Catholic religion in France is struck by this article. For when the liberty of all “religions” is indiscriminately asserted, by this very fact truth is confounded with error and the holy and immaculate Spouse of Christ, the Church, outside of which there can be no salvation, is set on a par with the sects of heretics and with Judaic perfidy itself. For when favour and patronage is promised even to the sects of heretics and their ministers, not only their persons, but also their very errors, are tolerated and fostered: a system of errors in which is contained that fatal and never sufficiently to be deplored HERESY which, as St. Augustine says (de Haeresibus, no.72), “asserts that all heretics proceed correctly and tell the truth: which is so absurd that it seems incredible to me.” (Pope Pius VII, Post Tam Diuturnas, April 29, 1814, POST TAM DIUTURNAS)

“This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of “naturalism,” as they call it, dare to teach that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,” viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching “liberty of perdition;” and that “if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.” (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

Our true popes have been faithful Vicars of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The conciliar “popes” have been and continue to be faithful mouthpieces of Antichrist.

This should be rather simple to see and to accept at this late date.

Moreover, Bergoglio’s “homily” yesterday afternoon at the International Stadium in Amman, Jordan, included an exhortation for those assembled to overcome all “obstacles” to peace, including “differences” over such things as “religion:”

The world needs this. The world asks us to bring peace and to be a sign of peace!

Peace is not something which can be bought or sold; peace is a gift to be sought patiently and to be “crafted” through the actions, great and small, of our everyday lives. The way of peace is strengthened if we realize that we are all of the same stock and members of the one human family; if we never forget that we have the same Father in heaven and that we are all his children, made in his image and likeness.

It is in this spirit that I embrace all of you: the Patriarch, my brother bishops and priests, the consecrated men and women, the lay faithful, and the many children who today make their First Holy Communion, together with their families. I also embrace with affection the many Christian refugees; let us all earnestly turn our attention to them, to the many Christian refugees from Palestine, Syria and Iraq: please bring my greeting to your families and communities, and assure them of my closeness.

Dear friends! Dear brothers and sisters! The Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus in the Jordan and thus inaugurated his work of redemption to free the world from sin and death. Let us ask the Spirit to prepare our hearts to encounter our brothers and sisters, so that we may overcome our differences rooted in political thinking, language, culture and religion. Let us ask him to anoint our whole being with the oil of his mercy, which heals the injuries caused by mistakes, misunderstandings and disputes. And let us ask him for the grace to send us forth, in humility and meekness, along the demanding but enriching path of seeking peace. (Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo Liturgical Service, Amman International Stadium, 24 May 2014.)

This calls to mind something I used last in 2007 when commenting upon Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s praise of the “sacred” Mount Hiei in Japan (see Enemies of Souls Universally):

I’d like to build the world a home And furnish it with love Grow apple trees and honey bees And snow white turtle doves I’d like to teach the world to sing In perfect harmony I’d like to hold it in my arms And keep it company.

I’d like to see the world for once All standing hand in hand And hear them echo through the hills For peace throughout the land (I’d like to teach the world to sing) Like the world to sing today (In perfect harmony) A song of peace that echoes on And never goes away. I’d Like To Teach The World To Sing  (For the Coca-Cola lyrics, see Coca-Cola Television Advertisements: Hilltop)

For an antidote to this madness of yet another figure of Antichrist posing as a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, let us turn to Pope Leo XIII’s Custodi di Quella Fede once again:

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

Pay attention to that man all dressed up in white who travels from Jordan to Bethlehem in the Palestinian Authority today. He is an apostate. He is a figure of Antichrist. He is merely repeating what his predecessors have said before him, including what the soon-to-be “Blessed” Paul the Sick said on January 4, 1964, when he arrived n Amman, Jordan:

May God grant Our prayer, and that of all men of good will, that, living together in harmony and accord, they may help one another in love and justice, and attain to universal peace in true brotherhood. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Address to the King of Jordan, January 4, 1964.)

The path to true peace runs through Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary and that of her  Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

The path to true peace is Heaven’s Peace Plan, Our Lady’s Fatima Message.

Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order, and Our Lady has appeared to souls from time to time to effect their conversion to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation without which there can be no true order within nations or peace among them.

Pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady, Help of Christians, 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.

Pope Saint Gregory VII, pray for us.

Pope Saint Urban I, pray for us.

Jorge Defines A “Healthy Christian”

This will be the shortest article that I have ever written.

Yes, at any time in my sixty-two and one-half years of life as of this very day.


To the point.

No digressions.

No lengthy historical backgrounds.

No references to the popular culture of th 1950s an early 1960s.

Are you ready?


Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s Ding Dong School Of Apostasy lesson at the Casa Santa Marta on Thursday, May 22, 2014, a Paschaltide ferial day and the Feast of Saint Rita of Cascia, who led a very joyful life precisely because the mortifications she undertook as an religious sister of the Order of Saint Augustine, included the following passage:

“Joy, which is like the sign of a Christian. A Christian without joy is either not a Christian or he is sick. There’s no other type! He is not doing well health-wise! A healthy Christian is a joyful Christian. I once said that there are Christians with faces like pickled peppers [sour faces – ed] … Always with these [long] faces! Some souls are also like this, this is bad! These are not Christians. A Christian without joy is not Christian. Joy is like the seal of a Christian. Even in pain, tribulations, even in persecutions. (Healthy are the Joyful–or is that Joyful are the healthy?)

Ignoring entirely Jorge’s attack on those whose “sad” countenances disturb as just another manifestation of his own compulsive need to belittle and, if necessary, to persecute those who can be considered “too traditional” in their beliefs and practices, here is my own definition of a healthful and joyful Christian:




This very joyful Catholic, who is very tired of having to deal with the unhealthy Argentine Apostate, is going to get some sleep before becoming unhealthy by having to read and then comment upon The Road to Gehenna Road Show with Jorge, Abe and Omar.

Pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady, Help of Christians, 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.

To Blot Out His Name Forever, part two

It was a little over seven years ago that a fully traditional priest, one who has great zeal for souls, said the following to me before I gave a lecture in his parish, “You have used the phrase Judeo-Masonry in your writing. You will not do so here.”

This admonition came just three months after the Christophobic Southern Poverty Law Center had issued its so-called “Dirty Dozen” list of “radical” traditional Catholic organizations that were said to be guilty of propagating “hate” (see Hating Without Distinction, Chopped Liver No More, To Advocate Christ The King, Nothing Else and Chopped Liver No More Update). The issuance of the list had a chilling effect in some fully traditional circles as any discussion of Talmudic influence in the twin, interrelated anti-Incarnational currents of Modernity in the world and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism was deemed as “unacceptable” or “inflammatory.” Pure honesty, however, requires one to speak the truth, yes, even when doing so will “offend” those who are hellbent on making war upon Christ the King and upon those who dare to criticize them publicly for doing so.

While it is true, as Father Edward Cahill, S.J., pointed out in his series on Freemasonry in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record eighty-five years ago now, that not all those who adhere to Judaism are responsible for this warfare against the true teachings of the Catholic Church or support the prevailing evils of the day, we must remember that unbelief in the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is a sin. Those who persist in unbelief in the Catholic Faith must be reminded that their own false beliefs, whether they be religious or philosophical or both, cannot save their souls or serve as any kind of foundation for true social order within countries or peace among them.

Saint Thomas Aquinas taught us in his Summa Theologica that unbelievers do not merit anything before God for their good works and thus cannot please Him:

Objection 1. It would seem that each act of an unbeliever is a sin. Because a gloss on Romans 14:23, “All that is not of faith is sin,” says: “The whole life of unbelievers is a sin.” Now the life of unbelievers consists of their actions. Therefore every action of an unbeliever is a sin.

Objection 2. Further, faith directs the intention. Now there can be no good save what comes from a right intention. Therefore, among unbelievers, no action can be good.

Objection 3. Further, when that which precedes is corrupted, that which follows is corrupted also. Now an act of faith precedes the acts of all the virtues. Therefore, since there is no act of faith in unbelievers, they can do no good work, but sin in every action of theirs.

On the contrary, It is said of Cornelius, while yet an unbeliever (Acts 10:4-31), that his alms were acceptable to God. Therefore not every action of an unbeliever is a sin, but some of his actions are good.

I answer that, As stated above (I-II, 85, 2,4) mortal sin takes away sanctifying grace, but does not wholly corrupt the good of nature. Since therefore, unbelief is a mortal sin, unbelievers are without grace indeed, yet some good of nature remains in them. Consequently it is evident that unbelievers cannot do those good works which proceed from grace, viz. meritorious works; yet they can, to a certain extent, do those good works for which the good of nature suffices.

Hence it does not follow that they sin in everything they do; but whenever they do anything out of their unbelief, then they sin. For even as one who has the faith, can commit an actual sin, venial or even mortal, which he does not refer to the end of faith, so too, an unbeliever can do a good deed in a matter which he does not refer to the end of his unbelief.

Reply to Objection 1. The words quoted must be taken to mean either that the life of unbelievers cannot be sinless, since without faith no sin is taken away, or that whatever they do out of unbelief, is a sin. Hence the same authority adds: “Because every one that lives or acts according to his unbelief, sins grievously.”

Reply to Objection 2. Faith directs the intention with regard to the supernatural last end: but even the light of natural reason can direct the intention in respect of a connatural good.

Reply to Objection 3. Unbelief does not so wholly destroy natural reason in unbelievers, but that some knowledge of the truth remains in them, whereby they are able to do deeds that are generically good. With regard, however, to Cornelius, it is to be observed that he was not an unbeliever, else his works would not have been acceptable to God, whom none can please without faith. Now he had implicit faith, as the truth of the Gospel was not yet made manifest: hence Peter was sent to him to give him fuller instruction in the faith.  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Question 10, Article 4.)

Judeo-Masonry is the celebration of agnosticism and religious indifferentism as the foundation for personal happiness and social order, something that Pope Leo XIII noted very clearly in Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884:

But the naturalists go much further; for, having, in the highest things, entered upon a wholly erroneous course, they are carried headlong to extremes, either by reason of the weakness of human nature, or because God inflicts upon them the just punishment of their pride. Hence it happens that they no longer consider as certain and permanent those things which are fully understood by the natural light of reason, such as certainly are — the existence of God, the immaterial nature of the human soul, and its immortality. The sect of the Freemasons, by a similar course of error, is exposed to these same dangers; for, although in a general way they may profess the existence of God, they themselves are witnesses that they do not all maintain this truth with the full assent of the mind or with a firm conviction. Neither do they conceal that this question about God is the greatest source and cause of discords among them; in fact, it is certain that a considerable contention about this same subject has existed among them very lately. But, indeed, the sect allows great liberty to its votaries, so that to each side is given the right to defend its own opinion, either that there is a God, or that there is none; and those who obstinately contend that there is no God are as easily initiated as those who contend that God exists, though, like the pantheists, they have false notions concerning Him: all which is nothing else than taking away the reality, while retaining some absurd representation of the divine nature.

When this greatest fundamental truth has been overturned or weakened, it follows that those truths, also, which are known by the teaching of nature must begin to fall — namely, that all things were made by the free will of God the Creator; that the world is governed by Providence; that souls do not die; that to this life of men upon the earth there will succeed another and an everlasting life.

When these truths are done away with, which are as the principles of nature and important for knowledge and for practical use, it is easy to see what will become of both public and private morality. We say nothing of those more heavenly virtues, which no one can exercise or even acquire without a special gift and grace of God; of which necessarily no trace can be found in those who reject as unknown the redemption of mankind, the grace of God, the sacraments, and the happiness to be obtained in heaven. We speak now of the duties which have their origin in natural probity. That God is the Creator of the world and its provident Ruler; that the eternal law commands the natural order to be maintained, and forbids that it be disturbed; that the last end of men is a destiny far above human things and beyond this sojourning upon the earth: these are the sources and these the principles of all justice and morality.

If these be taken away, as the naturalists and Freemasons desire, there will immediately be no knowledge as to what constitutes justice and injustice, or upon what principle morality is founded. And, in truth, the teaching of morality which alone finds favor with the sect of Freemasons, and in which they contend that youth should be instructed, is that which they call “civil,” and “independent,” and “free,” namely, that which does not contain any religious belief. But, how insufficient such teaching is, how wanting in soundness, and how easily moved by every impulse of passion, is sufficiently proved by its sad fruits, which have already begun to appear. For, wherever, by removing Christian education, this teaching has begun more completely to rule, there goodness and integrity of morals have begun quickly to perish, monstrous and shameful opinions have grown up, and the audacity of evil deeds has risen to a high degree. All this is commonly complained of and deplored; and not a few of those who by no means wish to do so are compelled by abundant evidence to give not infrequently the same testimony. (Pope Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884.)

Father Edward Cahill made the same point in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record in those series of articles that was published later as Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement:

We have already referred to Rationalism and Hermeticism (including Theosophy, Christian Scientism, Spiritism, etc.) as characteristic of the Masonic religion and philosophy, These, which are put forward as a substitute for real religion, are fast becoming more and more widespread in England and throughout the English-speaking world. They are the most powerful dissolvents of whatever elements of true Christianity are being attempted. This element is perhaps the most deadly and dangerous aspect of the whole Masonic movement; for it cuts deeper than anything into Christian life, whose very foundation it attacks.

The immediate aim of the practical policy of Freemasonry is to make its naturalistic principles effective in the lives of the people; and first of all to enforce them in every detail of public life. Hence its political and social programme includes:

(1) The banishment of religion from all departments of government, and from all public institutions; and as a mark of the triumph of this policy, the removal of the Crucifix and all religious emblems from the legislative assemblies, the courts of justice, the public hospitals, the schools and university colleges, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 156-157.)

It is very telling that the conciliar revolutionaries have applauded these “developments” as most of their own colleges and universities have divested themselves of official control of what is purported to be the Catholic Church and have removed the Crucifix and other religious emblems from most of their classrooms. Formerly Catholic hospitals have done the same. Indeed, many of them, participating fully in the medical industry’s manufactured, money-making myth of “brain death” (see ObamaDeathCare), have merged with secular corporations. And most Catholics in public life are fully supportive of various evils under cover of the civil law, and none of them is reprobated by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who, quite instead, praises those of them that he meets as “servants of the poor.”

To return to Father Cahill’s enumeration of the Judeo-Masonic program:

(2) The secularization of marriage.

(3) The establishment of a State system of so-called education which, at least in its primary stages, will be obligatory and conducted by the laity.

(4) Complete freedom of worship (at least for all except the true one.) (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 157.)

Absent the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His Catholic Church, men and their nations must fall into the abyss. Those who think that the perversity represented by so-called “gay marriage” has brought us to rock bottom are quite mistaken. Polygamy and “marriage” to children are the next frontiers in the path of “civil freedom” according to the logic of Judeo-Masonry. Total debauchery thus must be enshrined under cover of the civil law and promoted and celebrated throughout what passes for “popular culture.” (See Irreversible By Means Merely Human and Common Core: From Luther To Mann To Bismarck To Obama.)

As has been noted so many times on this site, public schooling has been in the control of Freemasonry from its very inception, and it is designed to eradicate all adherence to the true Faith. (See Inside the Prison Walls.)

What more can be said about “freedom of worship” that has not been said many times before on this site other than to note that Jorge and Pals, including his retired predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI believe this heresy to be the “foundation of peace”?

To the final two points of the Judeo-Masonic program as outlined by Father Edward Cahill:

(5) Unrestrained liberty of the Press even in the propagation of irreligious doctrines and of principles subversive of morality; similar freedom for the stage, the cinema, and all manner of public activities, even when injurious to the public interest, such as the operation of the betting and gambling agencies, the drink traffic, etc.

(6) The elimination of all distinction between the sexes in education and in all departments of public life and the promotion or encouragement of radical feminism.

The same programme usually includes or favours a (so-called) Democratic or Republican form of government, indiscriminate universal suffrage, and the centralization of political and administrative authority in the hands of a bureaucracy. It is opposed on the other hand to all to the national distinctions which are associated with the Christian virtue of patriotism, to the ideal of strongly organized rural communities settled permanently on the land; and finally to the organization of society in classes bound together by ties of common interest and mutual service. Hence its policy tends towards commercialism, a false internationalism and extreme individualism.

It is clear that in a social system organized according to these Masonic ideals, the masses of the people, while nominally free, and in theory the source of all authority in the State, would inevitably become degraded and enslaved. Demoralized by indulgence, deprived of the guidance and help which Christian principles give, isolated and unorganized, mostly bereft of permanent property, having a smattering of literacy, but without real education, they would have little or no power of resistance against the tyranny of bureaucracies or financial combines controlling the Press and the economic life of the country. The substantial freedom, prosperity, and true civilization which accompany or result from the Christian regime would give way to social conditions akin to those of pre-Christian Rome. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 157-159.)

Nothing that I said in college classrooms between 1974 an 2007 or in campaigns for public office or in lectures around the nation or wrote in various publications or have written on this site contains an ounce of originality concerning the state of Western civilization as it spirals into the lowest reaches of the abyss possible, making ancient Rome seem truly tame by way of comparison. We have been given the prescient insights of such giants of Catholic scholarship as Fathers Edward Cahill and Denis Fahey in Ireland and defenders of the immutable Catholic doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King as Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, Monsignor Henri Delassus and Father Theotime de Just in France.

Also, of course, we have been given the prophetic warnings of our true popes, including those of Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX:

This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. “But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,” as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly “the bottomless pit” is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws — in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty.

Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)

And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that “the people’s will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right.” But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in none of this. He is just the latest of the conciliar “popes” to express his love of Modernity that is but an expression of the wreckage wrought by Protestantism, whose overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King made possible the rise of Judeo-Masonry.

Father Edward Cahill, quoting a French Jewish apologist, noted that “Progress is the true Mesiah” for Talmudists. The same, of course is true for the entirety of the conciiar revolution and its current grand master, Jorge Mario Bergoglio:

Leroy-Beulieu, a French Jewish apologist, describes thus the social ideals of modern Judaism:

Progress is the true Messiah, whose near advent she [Judaism] proclaims with all her hosannahs. . . . The [French] Revolution was its introduction, our doctrine of human rights its manifesto, and its signal was given to the world, when, at the approach of our Tricolour, the barriers of caste and the walls of the Ghetto fell to the ground. . . . The emancipated Jew takes pride in working for its realization . . . assailing superannuated hierarchies, battling with prejudices . . . struggling to pave the way for future revolution. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, p. 91.)

Yes, “progress” is the true messias of the lords of conciliarism, including, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio. Bergoglio and his minions are constantly extolling the “progress” that has been made in the “liturgical reform and renewal,” the “progress” that has made made in effecting “Christian unity,” the “progress” that has been made in “human rights” in the world, the “progress” that has been made in “understanding” the Jews and the “necessity” of the State of Israel, the “progress” that has been made in Scriptural exegesis, the “progress” that has been made in “pastoral outreach” to “gays” and the “transgendered,” the “progress” that has been made in “education” and in the provision of “universal health care” by the civil state, the “progress” that has been made by the “empowerment” of women in the word and the conciliar church, etc.

Pope Pius IX condemned the belief that the Roman Pontiff had to “reconciled” to “progress” in the world:


77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. — Allocution “Nemo vestrum,” July 26, 1855.

78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. — Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. — Allocution “Nunquam fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution “Jamdudum cernimus,” March 18, 1861.

The faith teaches us and human reason demonstrates that a double order of things exists, and that we must therefore distinguish between the two earthly powers, the one of natural origin which provides for secular affairs and the tranquillity of human society, the other of supernatural origin, which presides over the City of God, that is to say the Church of Christ, which has been divinely instituted for the sake of souls and of eternal salvation…. The duties of this twofold power are most wisely ordered in such a way that to God is given what is God’s (Matt. 22:21), and because of God to Caesar what is Caesar’s, who is great because he is smaller than heaven. Certainly the Church has never disobeyed this divine command, the Church which always and everywhere instructs the faithful to show the respect which they should inviolably have for the supreme authority and its secular rights….

. . . Venerable Brethren, you see clearly enough how sad and full of perils is the condition of Catholics in the regions of Europe which We have mentioned. Nor are things any better or circumstances calmer in America, where some regions are so hostile to Catholics that their governments seem to deny by their actions the Catholic faith they claim to profess. In fact, there, for the last few years, a ferocious war on the Church, its institutions and the rights of the Apostolic See has been raging…. Venerable Brothers, it is surprising that in our time such a great war is being waged against the Catholic Church. But anyone who knows the nature, desires and intentions of the sects, whether they be called masonic or bear another name, and compares them with the nature the systems and the vastness of the obstacles by which the Church has been assailed almost everywhere, cannot doubt that the present misfortune must mainly be imputed to the frauds and machinations of these sects. It is from them that the synagogue of Satan, which gathers its troops against the Church of Christ, takes its strength. In the past Our predecessors, vigilant even from the beginning in Israel, had already denounced them to the kings and the nations, and had condemned them time and time again, and even We have not failed in this duty. If those who would have been able to avert such a deadly scourge had only had more faith in the supreme Pastors of the Church! But this scourge, winding through sinuous caverns, . . . deceiving many with astute frauds, finally has arrived at the point where it comes forth impetuously from its hiding places and triumphs as a powerful master. Since the throng of its propagandists has grown enormously, these wicked groups think that they have already become masters of the world and that they have almost reached their pre-established goal. Having sometimes obtained what they desired, and that is power, in several countries, they boldly turn the help of powers and authorities which they have secured to trying to submit the Church of God to the most cruel servitude, to undermine the foundations on which it rests, to contaminate its splendid qualities; and, moreover, to strike it with frequent blows, to shake it, to overthrow it, and, if possible, to make it disappear completely from the earth. Things being thus, Venerable Brothers, make every effort to defend the faithful which are entrusted to you against the insidious contagion of these sects and to save from perdition those who unfortunately have inscribed themselves in such sects. Make known and attack those who, whether suffering from, or planning, deception, are not afraid to affirm that these shady congregations aim only at the profit of society, at progress and mutual benefit. Explain to them often and impress deeply on their souls the Papal constitutions on this subject and teach, them that the masonic associations are anathematized by them not only in Europe but also in America and wherever they may be in the whole world. (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)

Pope Pius IX understood who was behind the conceits of Freemasonry to substitute the false god of “progress,” praised by none other but the soon-to-be “Blessed Paul the Sick” in Populorum Progessio, March 26, 1967:

42. What must be aimed at is complete humanism.[44] And what is that if not the fully-rounded development of the whole man and of all men? A humanism closed in on itself, and not open to the values of the spirit and to God Who is their source, could achieve apparent success. True, man can organize the world apart from God, but “without God man can organize it in the end only to man’s detriment. An isolated humanism is an inhuman humanism”.[45] There is no true humanism but that which is open to the Absolute and is conscious of a vocation which gives human life its true meaning. Far from being the ultimate measure of all things, man can only realize himself by reaching beyond himself. As Pascal has said so well: “Man infinitely surpasses man“.[46]

43. There can be no progress towards the complete development of man without the simultaneous development of all humanity in the spirit of solidarity. As We said at Bombay: ” Man must meet man, nation meet nation, as brothers and sisters, as children of God. In this mutual understanding and friendship, in this sacred communion, we must also begin to work together to build the common future of the human race“.[47] We also suggested a search for concrete and practical ways of organization and cooperation, so that all available resources be pooled and thus a true communion among all nations be achieved. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, Populorum Progressio, March 26, 1967.)

This is completely Judeo-Masonic as it celebrates “man” and his “humanism,” albeit with some generic reference to God without an insistence that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Giovanni Eugenio Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI’s false “pontificate” was dedicated to the celebration of “man” and his “progress.” Jorge Mario Bergoglio is also one who celebrates the “joy” of the “progress” that has been made in the world and his false church since the “Second” Vatican Council.

In sum and substance, therefore, the goals of Universal Israelite Alliance, proclaimed n 1869, are identical to those adopted by the “popes” of the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Father Cahill provided of how this is so:

The national aims and ideals here attributed to-—although they belong, probably, only to a comparatively small section of — the Jewish nation, are practically identical with those of Freemasonry. Hence, an international Jewish synod held at Leipsic, 1869, passed the following resolution:

This Synod recognizes that the development and realization of modern ideas are the surest guarantee in favour of the Jewish race for the present and future.

It seems clear that the ‘modern ideas’ here referred to are those of un-Christian Liberalism, of which Freemasonry has been the protagonist for the past two centuries.

The professed objects of the Universal Israelite Alliance founded in 1860 (whose headquarters are in Paris, and which is probably the most influential and most representative body of the Jewish nation), are similar to the professed aims of Freemasonry. These objects are thus summarized by its founder, the Jew, Adolphe Cremieux, who for many years held the position of Grand Master of the Supreme Council of the Ancient Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: — –

The Universal Israelite Alliance . . . addresses itself to every type of worship. It wishes to interpenetrate all religions, as it has found access to all countries. . . . Let all men of enlightenment, without distinction of sect, find a means of union in the Universal Israelite Association, whose aims are so noble, so broad, and so highly civilizing. . . . To reach out a friendly hand to all who, although born in a different worship from ours, offer us the hand of fellowship, acknowledging that all religions which are based on morality and acknowledge God ought to be friendly towards one another: thus to destroy the barriers separating what is destined one day to be united— that is the grand and supreme object of our Alliance. … I summon to our Association our brethren of every form of worship. Let them come to us . . . Our grand mission is to put the Jewish population in touch with the authorities in every country … to make our voices heard in the cabinets of ministers and in the ears of princes, whatever be the religion that is despised, persecuted, or attacked.

The striking similarity between this programme and the religious ideals of Freemasonry (humanitarianism, cosmopolitanism, and non-sectarianism, or religious indifference) needs no elaboration. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 90-91,)

In like manner, of course, it is the case that the striking similarity of the program of the Universal Israelite Alliance and the program of the “Second” Vatican Council, both as adopted thereat and as implemented by the postconciliar “popes,” needs not much in the way of further elaboration.

Just consider, however, the words of the conciliar Vatican’s Secretary of State, Pietro Parolin, who spoke of “Pope Francis’s” upcoming trip to Jordan and Israel, which begins tomorrow, the Feast of Our Lady Help of Christians, in terms that would have warmed the hearts of the Talmudists of the Universal Israelite Alliance in 1869 just as the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council were convening to condemn the very errors that the conciliar revolutionaries have endorsed and propagated for over five decades now:

The Vatican Secretary of State said that in its dialogue with Israelis and Palestinians, the Holy See wishes to see “the right of Israel to exist and to enjoy peace and security within internationally recognized borders; the right of the Palestinian people to have a sovereign and independent homeland,  the right to move freely, the right to live in dignity.”

Cardinal Parolin said that during the visit, Pope Francis will insist on these issues in line with Holy See policy regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and urge that “the sacred and universal character of the city of Jerusalem , its cultural and religious heritage” be recognized  so that it may be “a place of pilgrimage for the followers of the three monotheistic religions .” (Vatican Secretary of State expresses hopes for Jorge’s visit to Holy Land.)

Just a little something for everyone, a veritable Rodney King “Why can’t we all just get along” message that equates the one and only true religion, Catholicism, with Judaism and Mohammedanism, and that that verifies once again the nonexistent “right” of the Zionists to the territory of the Holy Land, which brave Catholic crusaders sought to rescue from the Mohammedans and their desecration of the sites made holy by the Incarnation, Nativity, Hidden Life, Public Ministry and Passion, Death, Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

While Jorge Mario Bergoglio will doubtlessly defend the rights of Palestinians to their own homeland, he will do so in the context of praising the existence of the State of Israel as a manifestation of God’s will so that the three “great monotheistic religions” can live together in peace, thus providing a model of “peace” and “tolerance” for the whole world. It will be pure Judeo-Masonry from start to finish.

Father Cahill explained that no less a figure than the adversary himself uses the Talmudic synagogue as the means to destroy that which is indestructible, the Catholic Church:

Hence Pere Deschamps writes, apropos of the present question: —

Judaism itself is a kind of Freemasonry, owing to the national solidarity of the Jews, their cosmopolitanism, which sets the Jews free from all local and patriotic ties, and finally, the opposition of the Jews to Christianity.

On the same subject M. Doinel, at one time member of the Council of the Grand Orient, who in recent years has become a Catholic, writes: —

How often have I heard the Freemasons lament the dominance of the Jews. . . . Ever since the Revolution the Jews have taken possession of the Masonic lodges more and more completely : and their dominance is now unquestioned. The Cabala rules as mistress in the inner lodges : and the Jewish spirit dominates the lower grades. . . . In the mind of Satan the synagogue has an all important part to play. . . . The great enemy counts on the Jews to govern Masonry as he counts on Masonry to destroy the Church of Jesus Christ.

It is in fact only the Cabahstic elements in Freemasonry that can account adequately for its envenomed and aggressive opposition to the true Church, and its never-flagging efforts for the undermining and destruction of the Christian organization of society.’

This intimate connexion between the two powers [Freemasonry and Cabalistic Judaism] [writes R. Lambelin] is becoming so evident that there is no longer any attempt made to deny it. The Jewish lodges of B’ne Berith, which originated in the English-speaking countries, have swarmed all over Europe, and even into Asia; and they assume the leadership of control in the whole Masonic organization. Under cover of Theosophy a new religion, which is specifically Jewish, though enveloped in a nebulous mist that obscures its character, is bidding fair to take the place of the traditional Christian belief which it flatters, and insensibly destroys.

Finally, the history of the Jews of Europe during the past three or four centuries is suggestive in this connection. The emancipation of the Jews and the unprecedented growth of the influence and power of the great Jewish financiers have synchronized with the rise and growth of the Masonic movement of the past two centuries.

Up to the sixteenth century the Jews were excluded from practically all the Christian States of Europe. With the rise of Humanism, however, in the fifteenth century, and the accentuation of the other causes that finally led to the break up of Christendom, the Jews managed to improve their position. They gradually gained readmittance, sometimes covert, sometimes openly avowed, into most of the countries from which they had been excluded. But although they were allowed to live under the protection of the laws, they were not accorded full civic rights in any of the Christian States. They engaged in trade and carried on usury, by means of which they frequently acquired immense wealth. But they were not permitted to hold public offices, and were treated as aliens. They lived usually in ghettos, apart from the Christian community.

After the Protestant revolt, and especially under the influence of the Calvinistic sections of Protestantism, such as the Huguenots in France, the Puritans in Britain, and the Dutch and Swiss Calvinists, the position of the Jews gradually improved more and more. Finally, with the rise of the Liberalism of the eighteenth century, which was fostered and promoted by Masonic influence, the Jews were accorded full rights of citizenship, first in France and then, owing to the expansion of the French Napoleonic Empire, in nearly every country of Europe and America. In France the Jews were enfranchised in 1791 at the instance of the Jacobins, the most aggressive and militant of the anti-Christian Masonic organizations of that time. Ever since that time, with the exception, perhaps, of the early Napoleonic period, the Masonic Jews and the Masonic societies have dominated the public life of France, whose anti-clericalism, secularism, and divorce-laws have mostly been inspired from that source. Roumania, where the Jews did not possess the full rights of citizenship, and were precluded from acquiring property in land was forced by Bismarck (author of the Kulturcamp, and closely identified with Freemasonry of the most extreme type) at the Congress of Berlin (1878) to grant them full civic rights. At the Peace of Paris (1918-1919) Poland was forced, in the same way, to grant such privileges to the Jews living within her borders as almost to constitute the Jewish colony a kind of State within the State. At the same Congress the Jewish leaders were accorded practical control of Palestine as a quasi-independent or incipient Jewish State under the protection of Britain. Today Jewish financial and political power is especially felt in the countries which have fallen most completely under the influence of Freemasonry and un-Christian Liberalism, such as the United States of America, England, France, Germany, Russia, Roumania, etc. (Father Edward Cahill, S.J., Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement, Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, published originally by M. H. Gill and Son, Ltd., in Dublin, Ireland, 1930, and republished by Kessinger Legacy Reprints, pp. 91-95.)

This is why there has long been a kinship between Protestants, especially those who belong to evangelical or fundamentalist sects, and Zionism as Talmudism welcomed the Protestant Revolutions in the Sixteenth Century as the means to work assiduously against their mutual enemy: the Catholic Church. And this is why one of the most important litmus tests amongst the naturalists in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right” is support for “America’s only friend” in the Middle East, Israel.

Who cares about the ransacking of the homes of the Palestinians in 1948 and thereafter?

Who cares about the atrocities that the Israeli Defense Force have committed against Palestinians, both Mohammedan and Christian, Syrians, the Lebanese?

Perhaps more to the point is that God Himself used the Romans to expel the Jews from the Holy Land in 70 A.D. as a punishment for their infidelity by refusing to convert to the true Faith, and they were not mean to return there to establish a “homeland.”

Who cares about this little fact?

Yes, the State of Israel exists. Its existence is an accomplished fact. However, the well-financed and heavily armed State of Israel has more than enough means to protect its own citizens from all manner of attacks, There can never be true peace in the Middle East–or anywhere else in the world for that matter–unless all there say together, “Blessed is He Who comes in the Name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.”

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not bringing that message to the Holy Land, of course. He is bringing a false peace of “peace” founded on “mutual respect,” “tolerance” and “religious liberty.” His is a message of Judeo-Masonry, and anyone who doubts this or who says that it is “impolitic” to even state this publicly is stuck in a fantasy world that things are somehow going to get “better” when the very signs of the times point to the coming of Antichrist himself. He is content to help the Talmudists in their goal to blot out the Holy Name from everyday public life, content to do the bidding of his fellow enemies of Christ the King and His Most Blessed Mother’s Fatima Mesage, Heaven’s own Peace Plan.

Antichrist certainly will be pleased with what will transpire in Jordan and Israel in the next three days, which is why we must pray Rosaries of reparation at this time. So many people will be deceived.

So many people, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, will come to believe that some kind of “inter-religious” peace is possible.

So many people, Catholics non-Catholics alike, will be reaffirmed in the very anti-Incarnational premises of Modernity, which are so celebrated by the lords of conciliarism, that have enslaved them to the civil state and to the wiles of those in the synagogue and the lodges who have converted them to being, no matter their particular religious creed, if any, utter naturalists who shudder at any and all talk of the true Faith, the one and only foundation of personal and social order.

Modernism’s “god of progress” must be opposed as it is the exact same “god” as Judeo-Masonry, something that can be seen very clearly by the following passage from Pope Saint Pius X’s Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907:

It is thus, Venerable Brethren, that for the Modernists, whether as authors or propagandists, there is to be nothing stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor, indeed, are they without forerunners in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our predecessor Pius IX wrote: ‘These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery susceptible of perfection by human efforts.’ On the subject of revelation and dogma in particular, the doctrine of the Modernists offers nothing new. We find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX, where it is enunciated in these terms: ”Divine revelation is imperfect, and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress, corresponding with the progress of human reason’; and condemned still more solemnly in the Vatican Council: ”The doctrine of the faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence also that sense of the sacred dogmas is to be perpetually retained which our Holy Mother the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth.’ Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith, barred by this pronouncement; on the contrary, it is supported and maintained. For the same Council continues: ‘Let intelligence and science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and vigorously in individuals, and in the mass, in the believer and in the whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries — but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation.’ (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

Our Lady is the great foe of all heresies, including Modernism, whose rise was made possible by Protestantism and its alliance with Judeo-Masonry.

May we ever have recourse to her, especially during the next few days under her title as Our Lady Help of Christian and through her Most Holy Rosary, to pray for he conversion of all of those who are attacking the true Faith, including Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself, and as we continue to pray each day for our own conversion away from our sins as we seek to offer up reparation for them to the throne of the Most Blessed Trinity as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Christ the King, through her own most Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Alleluia! He is Risen!

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 John Baptist de Rossi, pray for us.


To Blot Out The Holy Name Forever, part one

One of the many ways in which the adversary has used the events of World War II to seek to intimidate Catholics from writing or speaking about the organized efforts of Judeo-Masonry to blot out the Holy Name of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is to have purported officials of the Catholic Church to teach them that the events of what is called “The Shoah” has caused a “reevaluation” of the Church’s relationship to the “faith of Israel.” 

The now retired “Benedict XVI” said precisely this in his infamous Christmas address to the conciliar curia on December 22, 2005:

It is clear that this commitment to expressing a specific truth in a new way demands new thinking on this truth and a new and vital relationship with it; it is also clear that new words can only develop if they come from an informed understanding of the truth expressed, and on the other hand, that a reflection on faith also requires that this faith be lived. In this regard, the programme that Pope John XXIII proposed was extremely demanding, indeed, just as the synthesis of fidelity and dynamic is demanding.. . .

Thirdly, linked more generally to this was the problem of religious tolerance – a question that required a new definition of the relationship between the Christian faith and the world religions. In particular, before the recent crimes of the Nazi regime and, in general, with a retrospective look at a long and difficult history, it was necessary to evaluate and define in a new way the relationship between the Church and the faith of Israel. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005. See also Rabbis, Rabbis, Get a Grip.)

In other words, what is claimed to be, albeit falsely, the Catholic Church is said to teach that any criticism of Judaism as a false religion is (a) factually erroneous and (b) an exercise in “anti-Semitism” of the sort that led up to the crimes of Adolph Hitler against the Jews in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. Those Catholics who continue to insist that New and Eternal Covenant instituted by Our Lord at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday and thus believe, no less proclaim publicly, that Jews must convert to the Faith unconditionally before they did to save souls are said to be “insensitive” to the Jews, who are said to have suffered so much.

As has been noted on this site in the past, however, the crimes of the Third Reich were exploited by Talmudic propagandists in order to advance the efforts of Judeo-Masonry to de-Christianize the remnants of Christendom so that the Holy Name of Jesus could be blotted out from public view once and for all as every aspect of social life, including that of what passes for the Catholic Church but is really the counterfeit church of conciliarism, could be thoroughly Judaized. What belonged to Christ the King is now the provenance of the devil and his minions.

The devil thus reigns as king of this world, which is only the logical consequence of the Protestant Revolution’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King in the Sixteenth Century. Talmudic Jews exploited this overthrow to advance their own position in the regions under “evangelical” control, thus losing their own true protectors, our true popes, and paving the way for a world that spat on Christ the King as one sterile “philosophical” or ideological substitute after another became the means to organize social life.

As noted in many articles on this site, including Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two,  Adolph Hitler rose to power in Germany of the Weimar Republic precisely as a result of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic efforts to eliminate the influence of the Catholic Church on public life. The Nazis were racialists who hated the Catholic Church, gripped as many of them were by the devil’s occult practices and all manner of unspeakably morbid perversity. The Catholic Church was not responsible for the crimes, no matter their extent and nature, against the Jews committed by agents of the Third Reich, and the devil has used the professional propagandizing about these crimes to prevent the souls of Jews from being converted to the true Faith. The conciliarists are thus responsible for a genocide against souls that far exceeds the carnage wrought by the Nazi regime.

The lords of conciliarism have celebrated what they call “healthy secularity” and the “diversity” brought about by the heresy of “freedom of religion,” which is said to be the “path to peace, cowing down to the professional Talmudic lobbyists at almost every turn.

Each of the conciliar “popes” have been Judaizers.

“Saint John XXIII” paved the way for Nostra Aetate that was promulgated at the “Second” Vatican Council on October 28, 1965, by the soon-to-be “Blessed Paul the Sick,” who included Talmudic table prayers in the place of the traditional Offertory in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.

“Saint John Paul II” declared the Old Testament was never revoked and “knighted” several pro-abortion, pro-perversity Talmudic rabbis.

Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI personally visited four Talmudic synagogues and had said as “Cardinal” Ratzinger that “It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ,” thus blaspheming God the Holy Ghost, Who inspired each of the pages of Sacred Scripture.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, however, is the first fully Judaized conciliar “pope.” As noted six days ago now, his pro-abortion, pro-perversity Talmudic pal, Rabbi Abraham Skorka, who is about to accompany him to Jordan and Israel (some four hundred American Talmudic rabbis are going to Israel to see the Jorge, Abe and Omar Show come to town), speculated that Jorge reads rabbinical writings. Well, we know for sure that he reads prayers from the blasphemous Talmud, and has been noted many times on this site in the past six months now, he wrote in an official document of what those in the “resist while recognize” movement believe is the Catholic Church that the Old Covenant has never been revoked.

Also known is the fact that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s favorite painting is the late Marc Chagall’s blasphemous “White Crucifixion” that is a mockery of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Christ, His Sacred Divinity, His Redemptive Act on the wood of the Holy Cross and the entirety of Christianity What kind of believing “Catholic” finds anything in a grotesque painting whose principal message that the Jewish suffering during World War II was the greatest crime in human history, surpassing that of Deicide itself?

Call Me Jorge posted a story on Bergoglio’s admiration of Chagall’s “White Crucifixion” that is most telling in its details, some of which are drawn from a National Catholic Reporter story that is referenced therein:

The best source on Francis’ favorite piece of art, the White Crucifixion, is the excellent Maurice Pinay Blog.  Some of his most interesting posts on this topic are linked to at the bottom of this entry.

Now onto the reveals from the National Catholic Reporter article by Menachem Wecker. (Click here to read full article)  As usual, the underlines and bold are ours.

…Under newly consistent light and amid the slick renovation, Chagall’s Jesus wears a sort of turban on his head, and instead of a loincloth he dons a Jewish prayer shawl, or a tallit. Surrounding the central crucifixion scene, a synagogue burns to the right, rabbis fly in the air above (where one might expect angels), and a pogrom ensues to the left. Above Jesus’ head, on the titulus, Chagall writes the Latin acronym “INRI” and, in jumbled Hebrew and Aramaic, “Jesus the Nazarene, king of the Jews.”

Whether Chagall, who grew up with extensive Jewish instruction despite the multitude of errors in many of his Hebrew inscriptions, knew that the way he spelled Jesus’ name in Hebrew also doubled as the rabbinic acronym “May his name and his memory be wiped out” is debatable. But it’s certainly clear that the work “owns” Jesus as a Jew. And as the Art Institute website observes, it aims to “dramatically call attention to the persecution and suffering of the Jews in 1930s Germany.”

…”In this painting, Jesus is at the center of some of the most horrific suffering Chagall can imagine,” she said. “And he is not just among the suffering, but truly identified as one of the suffering.

…”The appropriation of Jesus as a Jew is an implicit criticism of Catholicism for viewing the Jew as other, for not recognizing one’s own suffering in that of the Jews. Taking over Christian iconography is a critical move,” she said. “For the pope, the Jewish Christ may be enough to make the point about the failure of the church, and this might well speak to him.”

…”The painting comes out of the movement, particularly among Yiddish-speaking, nonreligious Jews, to see Jesus as sharing in the sufferings of Jews at the hands of Christians. However, few, if any, Christians are really aware of this movement,” he said.

Most Christians will interpret the painting as displaying a direct link between Jesus’ suffering and Jewish persecution during the Holocaust, according to Pawlikowski. But that can lead Christians to identify “themselves as victims, especially of the Nazis, rather than as a community of faith that contributed to Jewish suffering over the centuries,” he said. “The painting, as moving as it is, can send an inaccurate message.”

Dear reader, did you catch all that?

Marc Chagall grew up in the Hasidic community of Liozna near Vitebsk.  His family was ultra religious and Vitebsk was a Hasidic center which derived its culture from the esoteric Kabbalah.  Throughout his life, Chagall sought out the advice of Lubutavicher rabbis.  Here in this work, Chagall writes the rabbinic acronym found in the Talmud for Christ which means,

May his name and his memory be wiped out”

It is fitting Francis has said this is his favorite painting as everything Francis says he is doing for Christ turns in the end to result in the denigration of Christ.  It is just like the White Crucifixion.

The rabbis that visited Francis on 13 February 2014 as part of the American Jewish Committee are in on this.  As Rabbi Noam E. Marans recollects,

“When representatives of the American Jewish Committee met recently with Pope Francis at the Vatican, we presented him a copy of the Jewish Museum exhibit book inside an artistic and inscribed box. We showed him page 105, where a print of “White Crucifixion” is included because of its relevance to the exhibit.The pope was moved by our recognition of his emotional connection to the painting, and responded with a joyous smile.”

Chagall through the White Crucifixion is performing alchemy.  Swapping Christ for the counterfeit jewish people and the counterfeit jewish people for Christ.  Not only does Chagall do this but he also substitutes the degenerate hasidic values for catholic values.  A feat any Renaissance era alchemist would have been proud to have performed.  This is the same level of alchemy practiced by Freud and his fellow compatriots with the then new field of psychotherapy.

Don’t think the Novus Ordo church is ignorant of this.  It has adopted the rabbinical sorcery and the saintings of John Paul II and John XXIII are the most recent practice of this magic.  With a sleight of hand and an assist from the rabbis, the Vatican hierarchy has made the Novus Ordo church’s faith start with the poisonous Second Vatican Council.  Now through this infallible act catholics throughout the world are commanded to pray to two heretical saints.

By the time Francis gets finished with his reign in the Vatican, the Novus Ordo church will resemble a synagogue and the Vatican a shtetl. (Call Me Jorge.)

Obviously, the path to the Judaization of formerly Catholic Europe and the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic United States of America did not begin at the “Second” Vatican Council, which was only the culmination of close to six hundred years’ worth of revolutionary planning and activity that was designed to do one thing: to prepare the world for the acceptance of Antichrist and the reign of a fully mature, fully formed and fully brutal One World Ecumenical Church.

Writing in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record eighty-five years ago now, that is, in 1929, the late Father Edward Cahill, S.J., the great champion of the Social Reign of Christ the King who wrote The Framework of the Christian State and was a contemporary of Father Denis Fahey, C.S.Sp., provided a good history of the influence of Talmudic influence in Freemasonry. Father Cahill’s series of articles in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record were subsequently published as a book under the title of Freemasonry and the anti-Christian Movement. (I am indebted to Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta for providing me a photocopy of the article on the Talmudic influence in Freemasonry, which led me, after transcribing several pages on Tuesday night, May 20, 2013, to a online source for it. As my own copy of the book with the collected articles has not surface lately, Mr. Araneta has done me a great service to provide me with this material of great educational interest.)

What I want to do, therefore, is to provide some selected passages from Father Cahill’s article in order to provide commentary on each by way of demonstrating that conciliarism’s reconciliation with the “world” is but the triumph of the anti-Catholic spirit of Judaizing that was noticeable during some aspects of the Renaissance but was able to come to full flower over the course of time as a result of Martin Luther’s revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man’s return to Him through the Catholic Church:

On March 28, 1928, the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office issued an important decision of the Holy See on ‘the nature and purpose of the Association called Friends of Irsael and on the pamphlet entitled Pax super Israel, edited by the directors of the Association. Although ‘many priests, bishops and even cardinal gave their adhesion to this association,’ the Sacred Congregation condemns and completely suppresses it, by reason of ‘its mode of acting and speaking which is out of harmony with the traditional sense of the Church, the mind of the Fathers and even the Sacred liturgy itself.

The secularist Press, which is mostly controlled by the great Jewish financiers, immediately showed its appreciation for the importance of the decree by striving in the decree by striving to misrepresent it as a gesture of disapproval on the part of the Holy See of Catholic anti-masonic writes, whereas the contrary is the case. The decree is an authoritative reassertion of the traditional attitude of the Church towards the Jewish people. The Church desires sincerely the conversion of the Jews to the true Faith. But she cannot compromise with them any more than she can with the Modernists or even with the so-called Anglo-Catholics. Hence, in the present decree, the Holy See takes measures against the Masonic and Jewish infiltrations into the Church, which were being attempted through the medium of the condemned association and pamphlet. On the other hand she also reprobates as contrary to the Christian spirit and teaching Anti-Semitism, properly so-called, just as she reprobates anti-Germanism or any other similar anti-ism that would imply ‘racial or national hatred.’ But to follow the direction of Leo XIII and ‘tear away the mask from Freemasonry and let it be seen as it really is,’ is not anti-Semitism even when Freemasons in question are Jews; and needless to say, the Holy See does not follow the example of the Masonic sectaries in misapplying the term. (Father E. Cahill, S.J., “Freemasonry: VI: The Jewish Element in Freemasonry, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 1929.)

These first two passages have direct relevance to Jorge  Mario Bergoglio’s forthcoming visit to Jordan and Israel.

First, Father Cahill pointed out Holy Office had suppressed the “Friends of Israel” association because it had a “mode of acting and speaking which is out of harmony with the traditional sense of the Church, the mind of the Fathers and even the Sacred liturgy itself.” Yet it is that the counterfeit church of conciliarism has adopted this very mode of “acting and speaking” in a manner that is “out of harmony with the traditional sense of the Church, the mind of the Fathers and even the Sacred liturgy.” Father Cahill defended Catholic doctrine. The conciliarists promote that which is anti-Christ, placing them in league with the Talmudists, who have long sought to eradicate all mention of the Holy Name of Jesus from public life.

Second, Father Cahill pointed out that the decree of the Holy Office against the Friends of Israel association defended Catholic doctrine concerning the Jews that has been abandoned by the conciliarists, who have termed it “anti-Semitic” even to speak about any necessity of seeking the conversion of the Jews to the true Faith before they die or to oppose their schemes for the further de-Christianization.

Consider the following words once again:

The decree is an authoritative reassertion of the traditional attitude of the Church towards the Jewish people. The Church desires sincerely the conversion of the Jews to the true Faith. But she cannot compromise with them any more than she can with the Modernists or even with the so-called Anglo-Catholics. Hence, in the present decree, the Holy See takes measures against the Masonic and Jewish infiltrations into the Church, which were being attempted through the medium of the condemned association and pamphlet.  (Father E. Cahill, S.J., “Freemasonry: VI: The Jewish Element in Freemasonry, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 1929.)

Have the conciliar “popes” sought the conversion of the Jews?

Indeed, we have been by the likes of conciliar revolutionaries that the Catholic Church has no “organized mission” to convert the Jews, who somehow get “saved” all on their own. Putative “popes” have gone into Talmudic synagogues content to be treated as inferiors as they have treated this false religion with respect and esteemed its symbols that belong to the devil himself (see Saint Peter and Anti-Peter.)

Moreover, the conciliar “popes” have indeed compromised with Talmudism and Anglicanism as they have promoted one Modernist precept after another, something that Father Cahill notes is impossible for the Catholic Church to do of her very Divine Constitution.

Why is it so difficult for those in the “resist while recognize” movement to understand and accept these truths.

Third, Father Cahill’s reminder that it is not anti-Semitic to seek the conversion of the Jews or to oppose the schemes of some of their number to blot out the Holy Name of our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and spit on His Sacred Deposit Faith and His Holy Church herself is very similar to one provided by Father Denis Fahey in 1949, eight years after his, Father Cahill’s, death:

As I was not able to bring out this book when it was originally written, it has been laid aside for years. In the meantime, the need for setting forth the full doctrine of the Kingship of Christ has been forcibly brought home to me by the confusion created in minds owing to the use of the term “Anti-Semitism.” The Hitlerite naturalistic or anti-supernatural régime in Germany gave to the world the odious spectacle of a display of Anti-Semitism, that is, of hatred of the Jewish Nation. Yet all the propaganda about that display of Anti-Semitism should not have made Catholics forget the existence of age-long Jewish Naturalism or Anti-Supernaturalism. Forgetfulness of the disorder of Jewish Naturalistic opposition to Christ the King is keeping Catholics blind to the danger that is arising from the clever extension of the term “Anti-Semitism,” with all its war-connotation in the minds of the unthinking, to include any form of opposition to the Jewish Nation’s naturalistic aims. For the leaders of the Jewish Nation, to stand for the rights of Christ the King is logically to be “anti-Semitic.”

In March, 1917, Pope Benedict XV wrote to the Archbishop of Tours: “In the midst of the present upheavals, it is important to repeat to men that by her divine institution the Catholic Church is the only ark of salvation for the human race . . . . Accordingly, it is more seasonable than ever to teach . . . that the truth which liberates, not only individuals, but societies, is supernatural truth in all its fulness and in all its purity, without attenuation, diminution or compromise: in a word, exactly as Our Lord Jesus Christ delivered it to the world.” These sublime words of the Vicar of Christ have nerved me to do all in my power to set forth the opposition of every form of Naturalism, including Jewish Naturalism, to the supernatural Reign of Christ the King. In addition, for over twenty years I have been offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass every year, on the Feasts of the Resurrection, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul and the Assumption of Our Blessed Mother, for the acceptance by the Jewish Nation of the Divine Plan for order. Thus I have been striving to follow the example of our Divine Master. Blessed Pius X insists that “though Jesus was kind to those who had gone astray, and to sinners, He did not respect their erroneous convictions, however sincere they appeared to be.”the need of combining firmness in the proclamation of the integral truth with loving charity towards those in error is insisted on, even more emphatically, by Pope Pius XI: “Comprehending and merciful charity towards the erring,” he writes, “and even towards the contemptuous, does not mean and can not mean that you renounce in any way the proclaiming of, the insisting on, and the courageous defence of the truth and its free and unhindered application to the realities about you. The first and obvious duty the priest owes to the world about him is service to the truth, the whole truth, the unmasking and refutation of error in whatever form or disguise it conceals itself.”

A day will come when the Jewish Nation will cease to oppose order and will turn in sorrow and repentance to Him Whom they rejected before Pilate. That will be a glorious triumph for the Immaculate Heart of Our Blessed Mother. Until that day dawns, however, their naturalistic opposition to the True Supernatural Order of the world must be exposed and combated. (Father Denis Fahey, Foreword, The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation.)

It is not to “hate” anyone to seek their unconditional conversion to the true Faith or to oppose their schemes to undermine It and to persecute those who defend It despite their own sins and failings. Indeed, it is a Spiritual Work of Mercy to seek with urgency the unconditional of non-Catholics to the true Faith (see (see Chopped Liver No More, To Advocate Christ The King, Nothing Else and Chopped Liver No More Update).

The next passage from Father Cahill’s article in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record provided a history of the Jewish role in Freemasonry in summary form. Although there are contemporary writers who have specialized in matters pertaining to the Talmud and have  more expertise in the field than did Father Cahill, it is nevertheless the case that the late Jesuit’s historical summary is very good, providing as it does a readable means to put our current situation in its proper historical frame of reference:

Although the Jewish role in Freemasonry is for many reasons difficult to deal with, some acquaintance with that aspect of the subject is essential for an intelligent grasp of the whole. Hence, anyone that undertakes to convey even a summary idea of Freemasonry cannot afford to omit it. The present writer has made no study of the Jewish colony in Dublin or in Ireland. He knows, however, that the Jews in Ireland are a comparatively small body, although increasing considerably in recent years; and that the old resident Jews have the reputation of being, on the whole, industrious, law-abiding and charitable. He has not had them in mind when writing the present sketch.

It is, however, a common belief among Catholics and others that Freemasonry is somehow associated with modern Judaism. Our present purpose is to discuss how far such a belief is well-founded, an what is the nature between the two. We may say at once that the available evidence points to the following general conclusions:–

(1) That much of the external trappings of Freemasonry, such as its ritual, its terminology, its legends, etc., are of Jewish origin;

(2) that the philosophy or religion of esoteric Freemasonry (that is, of the inner circle and controlling power) is practically identical with the doctrines of the Jewish Cabala, which is the religion or the philosophy of a certain section of the Jews;

(3) that a certain group of Jews, probably very few in number, but of immense influence and power, are leading Freemasons; and

(4) that a somewhat larger group of very influential Jews pursue the same ends as Freemasons, and use similar means, and are at least in close alliance with them.

Hence, although the Jewish element in Freemasonry is of predominant influence, and although it is true that the Masonic Jewish leaders do often exploit for their own evil purposes Jewish solidarity an internationalism, and the age-long antipathy between Judaism and Christianity one cannot on that account justly accuse or condemn the Jewish people as a whole. Indeed, the facts of the case point to the conclusion that the rank and file of the Jews suffer no less, possibly even more, than the Christians from the unscrupulous and altogether wicked activities of its ruling Masonic junta.

A few words on modern Judaism by way of preliminary explanation will be acceptable to those of our readers who are not familiar with the subject. The two main sources of the religious system of modern Judaism are the Talmud and the Cabala (Kabalah). The former, which is founded upon the religious and moral teaching of the Pharisees of Our Lord’s time, is made up principally of the rabbinical interpretations of the law of Moses, and the traditions that have gathered round it. With the vast majority of modern orthodox Jews the Talmud has almost entirely supplanted the Old Testament. B. Lazare, the Jewish apologist, refers to the Talmud as the creator of the Jewish nation, and the mould of the Jewish soul. The Talmud has, in fact, been the principal factor in forming the national character of the modern Jewish nation, an of holding the Jews together as one people.

The Talmudic compilation is deeply impregnated with opposition to Christianity. In medieval times not only was the Talmud forbidden to all Catholics, but the possession of Talmudic books was regarded, before the Protestant revolt, as a criminal offense in most of the States of Europe. The most offending and anti-Christian passages passages of the Talmud are, however, apparently omitted in the ordinary English translations and hand-books; and, probably, are unknown to most Jews brought up and educated in these countries, just as the esoteric teachings and real objects of Freemasonry are unknown to the vast majority of those that adhere to the Masonic sect or lend it their support. (Father E. Cahill, S.J., “Freemasonry: VI: The Jewish Element in Freemasonry, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 1929.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio reads prayers from the Talmud. He has participated in Talmudic liturgical rites in Jewish synagogues, thus giving his endorsement of a book that his blasphemous of its nature and opposed to the Faith and thus to eternal good of souls and to the right ordering of men in their nations, whose civil leaders are supposed to pursue the common temporal good in light of man’s Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven.

Even the words of the Old Testament, written in the Divine inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, matter less than those of he blasphemous Talmud to those who adhere to this false religion that is admired and endorsed by none other than “Pope” Francis” himself.

The following passage is length as it provides a summary of the Cabala influences on modern Judaism and the association of it with Freemasonry. The passage concludes with a paragraph that will serve as the basis of the final commentary for part one of this two-part series as the hour is approaching 3:00 a.m., Eastern Daylight Saving Time:

The second main source of the religion of modern Judaism, or at least of a certain section of modern Jews, is the Cabala. The term Cabala (Kabalah) was originally used to indicate that portion of the Mosaic Law which was handed down by tradition, and consigned to writing b the Jewish prophets and others. Since the thirteenth century, however, this ancient use of the term has fallen into desuetude, so that in modern times the Cabala means the colonization of the esoteric or occult doctrines of Judaism. These latter are mainly founded on the Neo-Platonic philosophy and the doctrines of the early Gnostics, and are closely connected with the occult worship of the Eastern sectaries of both ancient and modern times, which have continued since the the early ages of the Christian era and even before that period, to infiltrate through the medium of the rabbinical writings of the Jewish religious system. The philosophic and religious teachings of the Cabala illustrate and explain the strong tendency to occultism and false mysticism, which a section of the Jews have always manifested, and which they and the Freemasons have helped so much to propagate in the modern world.

The whole system of occultism, which is so elusive and difficult to define, is sometimes called Hermeticism, from Hermes, the Greek name of the go of wisdom–partially corresponding to the Latin god Mercury–to whom was ascribed the authorship of the sacred books of Eastern occultism. Hermeticism is commonly taken to include Theosophism, Christian Scientism, Neo-Platonism, Philonic Judaism and Jewish and pagan Cabalism. It is in a large part a revival of the heresies of of the Gnostics, Maniceans, Albigenses, Waldenses, etc., and aims at providing the modern European race with some acceptable substitute for Christianity.

The evidence of a connexion between Freemasonry and certain aspects of Judaism, refer principally to the Calabla and the Cabalistic section of the Jews. That there exists a close affinity between the Cabala and the doctrines and practices of esoteric Freemasonry is clear form what we have written in a previous article of the nature of the latter. One school of writers indeed maintains that Freemasonry is an instrument invented and utilized by the Jewish leaders for the destruction of Christianity. This view of anti-Jewish writers, and many Catholic apologists, hardly accords with well-known facts, and is almost certainly false as regards the origin of Freemasonry. For a long time the Jews were excluded from most of the German, English, and French lodges; and up to the end of the eighteenth century the total number of Jewish Freemasons was quite inconsiderable. Again, the assertion that the real founders of German Illuminism and French Martinism, which are the sources of the worst and most destructive elements in Freemasonry, has not been and, probably, cannot be proved. Elias Ashmole (1617-1646), the celebrated English antiquarian, and the founder of the Oxford Museum to whom is probably due the first introduction of Hermeticism into the English lodges in the seventeenth century, long before the formal inauguration of speculative Freemasonry was not a Jew. Again, it cannot be proved that Weishaupt, or Martinez, Pasqualis, or Joseph Balsamo, commonly known as Cagilostro, were Jews, although to these were large due the Illuminist and Martinist influences in the Freemasonry of the eighteenth century. Even at the present day it is well-known (although the fact does not prove much) that many Masonic lodges refuse to admit Jews, as they fear their dominating influence, and find by experience that Jews, once admitted, soon acquire the mastery of the lodge.

On the other hand, it is certain that the Jewish Cabalistic tradition was one of the principal mediums through which Eastern occultism (which has so many times come to the surface in European history) has been transmitted to modern Europe; and that many, if not all, of the recognized founders of the eighteenth-century Illuminism (including Weishaupt, Pasqualis, and Cagliostro) were initiated into its secrets by Jewish Cabalists or drew their inspiration and their methods from the Jewish esoteric writings. The Jewish apologist, Bernard Lazare, states that ‘there were Cabalistic Jews around the cradle of Freemasonry, as certain rites still in existence conclusively show.’

From Pike’s Morals and Dogma of Freemasonry, which we have already referred to as one of the most authoritative works on Masonic teaching, it is clear that the doctrines of esoteric Freemasonry, on such subjects as the nature of God, and his supposed identity with the universe, the nature of the human soul, the true interpretation of the these subjects contained in the Jewish Cabala. The authoritative works of Ragon, ‘the sacred author’ of Masonry, who was himself a Jew, illustrate the same theme. So do many other Jewish writings.

Are Ave to wonder [writes the pious Jewish rabbin, Benamozegh] that Judaism has been accused of forming a branch of Freemasonry? It is quite certain that Masonic theology is at root nothing else than Theosophy, and that it corresponds to the theology of the Cabala. Besides, a deep study of the rabbinical movements of the early ages of the Christian era supply numerous proofs that the aggada was the popular form of an esoteric science, which presents, in its methods of initiation, the most striking resemblance to the Masonic system. Those willing to go to the trouble of carefully examining the question of the relations between Judaism and philosophic Freemasonry, Theosophy, and occultism in general, will, we are convinced, lose their superb disdain for the Cabala. They will no longer smile in pity at the suggestion that the Cabalistic theology may have a role to play in the religious transformation of the future.

Besides the existence of the Cabalistic element in Masonic morals and dogma there are numerous other indications which point to the important influence of Judaism on the early formation and development of Freemasonry. We mention a few. The Masonic coat-of-arms still used by the Grand Lodge of England is of Jewish design. Some of the more important legends of Freemasonry, especially the Legend of Hiram, on which much of Masonic rite is founded, are Jewish.’ The technical language, symbolism, and rites of Masonry are full of Jewish ideas and terms. . . . In the Scottish rite, the dates of all the official documents are given according to the Hebrew month and the Jewish era ; and use is made of the older forms of the Jewish alphabet.’ Hence, approved Jewish writers generally recognize that the Masonic ritual is of Jewish origin.

Although during the eighteenth century the number of Jews in the Masonic lodges were few, the prejudice against them was lessened or eliminated as a result of the movement towards Jewish emancipation, which was itself largely due to Liberal and Masonic influence; and since the middle of the nineteenth century the Cabalistic Jewish element has become predominant at least in Continental Freemasonry. Thus, while Jews are still excluded from the so-called ‘Christian’ lodges of Germany, the influence of the latter is now overshadowed by those lodges which admit Jews, and in which the Jewish element more or less prevails. Even in 1900 there were at least 800 such lodges in the German Empire exclusive of the B’ne Berith lodges, which are entirely Jewish. So marked, indeed, is the dominance of the Jewish element in German Freemasonry that the Masonic Journal Latomia (February, 1928) quotes a saying of Ludendorf: ‘The Freemasons are the henchmen of the Jews.’

It was Jews that introduced Freemasonry into the United States of America; and Jews have always been a powerful influence in the American Masonic organizations. Again, the Masonic rite of Mizraim which includes no less than ninety degrees and is, perhaps, the most esoteric and highly elaborated of all the Masonic rites, has been founded by Jews. So also has been the order of B’ne Berith (‘Sons of the Alliance ‘), and several other organizations of a similar type. The Masonic rite of Mizraim belongs mainly to Europe, and some of its lodges are exclusively Jewish. The order of B’ne Berith, which is altogether Jewish, is (or rather was up to some twenty years ago) mainly American, and if not formally and professedly Masonic, bears a striking resemblance to Freemasonry, in its organization and avowed objects, and is in intimate alliance with Masonry.

The indications of a close connexion or working alliance between Freemasonry and important sections of the Jews are innumerable.

Masonry [writes the Jewish Chronicle (October 29, 1889) ] tolerates everything except a narrow clericalism [viz. Catholicisim] and it possesses a special attraction for the Jews. . . . Clericalism has always persecuted Masonry everywhere it can . . . and the spirit of persecution has attracted the Jews towards Masonry by an invisible but potent bond of sympathy. There exists between them a natural alliance against a common enemy, . . . Together they fight, oftentimes with success, against religious fanaticism and racial antipathies. In London there are no less than five Jewish lodges. There are some also at Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester.

It is nearly half a century ago since a well-known British review called attention to the dominant influence of the Jews, not only in politics, the press, and international finance, but also in the revolutionary outbreaks of the century.

The influence of the Jews at the present time is more noticeable than ever. That they are at the head of European capitalism, we are all aware. … In politics many of the Jews are in the front rank. . . . That their excessive wealth, used as it has been, acts as a solvent influence in modern society cannot be questioned. . . . But while on the one hand the Jews are thus beyond dispute the leaders of the autocracy of Europe . . . another section of the same race form the leaders of that revolutionary propaganda which is making way against that very capitalist class, representing their own fellow Jews. Jews, more than any other men . . . are acting as the leaders in the revolutionary movement which I have endeavoured to trace. (Father E. Cahill, S.J., “Freemasonry: VI: The Jewish Element in Freemasonry, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 1929.)

Father Cahill was merely echoing in the highlighted material at the end of this lengthy passage what others had said before him. Among those who were astute enough and courageous enough to point out the role of the Universal Israelite Alliance to shape electoral politics, public policy, civil law, education and culture in the United States of America were two French clerics, Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, who was the Bishop of Poitiers, France from from May 23, 1849, to the time of his death on May 18, 1880, and Monsignor Henri Delassus.

To Cardinal Pie first as quoted in Father Théotimede Saint Just’s book that was translated from French into English by Mr. Daniel Leonardi and published by the Catholic Action Center:

Accordingly, the Bishop of Poitiers had always fought against THE SEPARATION OF Church and State. Moreover, he opposed all separations, that of reason and faith, of nature and grace, of natural religion and revealed religion, the separation of the philosopher and the Christian, of private man and public man. He saw in all these [separations] a resurgence of Manichean dualism and he had fought all these with, the supreme argument, the law formed by Christ. Therefore, it is in all truth, writing to [Minister of the Interior] the Count of Presigny, that he could render this testimony:

‘We have nothing in common with the theorists of disunion and opposition of two orders, temporal and spiritual, natural and supernatural. We struggle, on the contrary, with all our strength against these doctrines of separation which is leading to the denial of religion itself and of revealed religion.'”

Fr. de St. Just returns at this point and introduces us to what is perhaps Msgr. Pie’s strongest language, with regard to this entire subject:

“To this doctrine of the Church, which Msgr. Pie brought to the mind of the rulers of nations, the liberals would oppose acts favoring separation.

Certain countries, Belgium and America, for example, haven’t they proclaimed the separation of Church and State, and doesn’t the Church enjoy a more complete liberty under such a system?”

Cardinal Pie responded firmly to this question:

‘THE AMERICAN AND BELGIUM SYSTEM, this system of philosophical-political indifference, shall eternally be a bastard system” (pp. 122-124 in Fr. de St. Just’s book) (Selected Writings of Selected Writings of Cardinal Pie of Poitiers, Catholic Action Resource Center, Orlando, Florida, October, 2007, pp. 21-23.)

As I have note so many times before, Barack Hussein Obama is but the ultimate end product of Americanism, which is itself an expression of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry.

Echoing Cardinal Pie and anticipating the work of Fathers Cahill and Fahey in Ireland, Monsignor Henri Delassus saw the direction connection between Talmudism and the rot the modern religiously indifferentist civil state of Modernity that has been embraced with such zeal by the conciliar “popes,” including Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

As Monsignor Delassus demonstrated, the spirit of Father Isaac Thomas Hecker, the founder of the Society of Saint Paul, and other Americanists fit very well into the goals of Talmudic Judaism to undermine the Faith of individual Catholics so that their first loyalties would be to the false concepts of Modernity, including Americanism, and then to their Church, which, if all went according to the plan, would itself one day “adopt” the false concepts of Modernity and make its “peace” with the revolutions of 1776 and 1789:

How so? Fr. Hecker tells us: “A call is made to men who possess this new synthesis of truth who are able to solve the problems of eliminating antagonisms, of being reconciled with the need of our era; of men who will take hold of all the aspirations of modern genius effected by science, of social activity, of politics, of spirituality (accordingly, spirituality itself would be called upon to defend the Church and to procure her universal triumph), of religion, and of the transformation of everything by means of the defense and universal triumph for the Church” (The Life of Fr. Hecker.)

Those who are not made aware of the world’s current direction by the information that they derive from the newspaper–and this is the vast majority–will undoubtedly be surprised, in speaking to them of “Americanism” and of an “American Catholicism,” we begin by calling their attention to the “Universal Israelite Alliance,” entering through there upon a question, the Jewish Question, that presently fascinates the world and that is studied under every point of view, but which does not take into account, appears to be removed from, American Catholicism. This is nevertheless not imaginary on our part. The Universal Israelite Alliance is the center, the home, the bond of the antichristian conspiracy, by which Americanism seems to us to provide a support that it is not aware of which would not be given if it were understood and upon which this book is determined to direct its attention

One of the most malicious men of this [19th] century, the Jew [Jules Isaac] Cremieux, who was made grand Master of the French Grand Orient, who profited by the Revolution of 1848 [in France] by being raised to the Ministry of Justice, and by the disasters of 1870 which gave French citizenship to all the Jews of Algeria, founded in 1860 a cosmopolitan society which he endowed with the name of Universal Israelite Alliance. This association is not, as its name would have one believe, one of international Jewry, a bond to better facilitate links between Jews scattered around the surface of the globe; its aims bear upon something much more higher. It is an association open to all men without distinction of nationality nor of religion, under the high direction of Israel.

In order to be convinced of this, it is sufficient to open the publication that represents it, The Israelite Archives. “The Universal Israelite Alliance,” it says there (xxx, pp. 514-515, for the year 1861), “must enter into all religions as it has penetrated all countries. I call to our association the brothers of every religion, that they would come to us! … That enlightened men of all cults will unite themselves with this Universal Israelite Alliance” (ibid.) And why? “To break down the barriers which separate that which ONE DAY MUST BE UNITED. See there, Messieurs, the beauty, the great mission of Our Universal Israelite Alliance (ibid.)

Profiting from their dispersion over every point of the globe, the Jews wish to be in humanity as a sort of leaven, in order to make of human society, presently divided into nations and various religions, “one sole and solid fraternity,”–the Israelite Archives say it less hypocritically: “A Jerusalem of new order, a holy extension from the East to the West, that must EXIT IN ITSELF in the double city of the Caesars and the Popes” (XXV, PP. 600-651, 1861) …

The Jewish race “Jerusalem” intends to establish its reign over the entire world. “East and West,” by establishing its authority upon the ruins of all existing powers. “Caesars and Popes.” All authority must disappear in order to make way for the domination of Juda, which “will take the place” of all the existing powers in the spiritual order as well as in the temporal order  …

We see here that other idea advanced, the idea of the United States of Europe, parallel to the United States of America 

Here again, one could compare a strange accord between the ideas of the Americanists and the tendencies of those who obey the promptings given by the Universal Israelite Alliance. A most ardent promoter of Americanism, in a discourse given in 1894 to the International Scientific Congress of Catholics at Brussels, had this to say:

“We have thought that the opportunity has been provided us of giving to the ENTIRE WORLD a great lesson. When we study the map of Europe, we see there, marks of small divisions. Lines traversing these maps in every sense. They do not indicate only territorial divisions, they signify also: jealousy, hatred, hostility, divisions of hearts, that commits God knows how many millions of armed men for the destruction of the world. Thus, from all these nations, Providence has allowed immigration among us. All nations find themselves at home here [in the USA]; they have been living among themselves, fraternally, without any hostility. This is the privilege that God has granted to America, that of destroying the traditions of national jealousies that of that you have perpetuated in Europe, by melting them down in America unity.”

Read on: “Americanism” [this pompous Americanist continues] “has received from God the mission of giving to the entire world this lesson: the time has come to put an end to the past: abolish frontiers, place all the people in the melting pot of the rights of man by the molding of united humanity, as we [in America] have been founded, we emigrants from all countries, in American unity. And peace shall reign in the world.”

Yes, the peace of the slave under the tyranny of one man or of one race.

As of all the other ideas of the Americanists, that of he abolition of frontiers seems to appeal to our Christian democrats. . . .

So then, if the Talmudists [Orthodox Jews] differ from the liberals [Reform Jews], it is only upon knowing which is the better means to employ in order to accomplish the mission that Israel claims to have received … The Talmudists continue to await a messiah of flesh and bone, who will make them masters of the universe; the liberals say that they do not have any other messiah to expect than the Revolution, “the principles” of which are dissolving of all society and preparing it for their rule. In order to spread these modern “principles,” in order to have them bring about the fruits that they are awaiting, they deem it necessary to separate themselves from those observances to which their fathers had been attached, when they believed that their fidelity would hasten the coming of the personal messiah. This is a cumbersome burden, and what’s more the Jew of this old way could not “make himself acceptable.” He would nevertheless make himself acceptable in the eyes of the people among whom he wished to exercise a “proselytization.”

And in what does this conversion consist? Is it to encourage the faithful of various religions to enter into Judaism? The Jews have never had the thought of making a conversion of this sort; they are a people a race apart, “the premier aristocracy of the world,” the only ones who are truly men; they would never hear of elevating beings such as those who are human only in appearance …

In the first place [The Universal Israelite Alliance] acts upon kings and parliaments in order to apply pressure on them, “this singular, indefatigable influence” that [Gourgenot] des Mousseaux already noted in 1869 [see, The Jew, Judaism and The Judaization of the Christian People, by Mousseaux].

What over and above does it demand? LAICIZATION.

There is no person, who is not blind, who cannot fail to see the prodigious efforts that are being made over the last century towards secularization, that is to say, efforts to remove all religious character from everywhere and everyone. Already, on the very origin of the Revolution, [Count Joseph] de Maistre, had remarked that his had been its essential character. “Examine,” he said, “all the enterprises of this century, you have to see (these men of the Revolution) constantly occupied in the separation from divinity.” It would take too long to show here the many aspects under which the question of laicization or secularization is presented: it spreads itself among all, and in every governmental organ, accordingly, all the forces of society are employed in the success of this work …

Could Americanism, itself also, have come to lend itself to this work that is certainly not intentional? This is what we have already said is to be feared. It is well to examine this thing more closely.

What is certain, what is incontestable, is that between the Jewish spirit and the Americanist spirit there is a point of contact with the principles of ’89 [i.e., the principles of the French Revolution].

We have heard the Jews proclaim and declare the course they are drawing. For the Americans their social and even religious state rests entirely upon these principles; they highly praise them, and the Americanists themselves would have us that “American ideas are those in which GOD wants all the civilized people of our time to be at home.” So they conscientiously make of themselves evangelists.” ( Monsignor Henri Delassus, Americanism and the Anti-Christian Conspiracy, translated by Mr. Daniel Leonardi and published by Mr. Hugh Akins of Catholic Action Resources Center, Orlando, Florida, October, 2007–first printing in France, 1899, pp. 2-8.)

No, the path to the travesties that will take place in the Holy Land did not just kind of “happen” at the “Second” Vatican Council. Anyone who believes that this is so is utterly blind to history as there were numerous, interrelated factors, each born of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry, that made possible the infiltration of the Catholic hierarchy under our true popes with scores of “sleeper agents,” if you will, whose agenda of spiritual destruction was to make itself manifest over the course of time.

Moreover, those who deny the role of the “American experience” in serving as an essential building block of conciliarism’s “reconciliation” with a “new world order” is choosing to believe in nationalistic myths rather than the cold, hard facts as brought out by the likes of Fathers Edward Cahill and Denis Fahey in Ireland and Louis Edouard “Cardinal” Pie, Monsignor Henri Delassus and Father Theotime de Just in France. Anyone who does this is also turning a blind eye to the fact that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is as much as an end product of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic spirit of Americanism that he will be celebrating in just two days in Jordan and Israel.

Part two of this commentary will appear tomorrow, Friday, May 23, 2014, which is the Feast of Saint John Baptist de Rossi in some places (otherwise a Paschaltide ferial day).

Continue to offer up the sufferings of the moment to the throne of the Most Blessed Trinity through as the consecrated slaves of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, also begging Saint Rita, the Patron of Impossible Cases, to pray for what seems in human terms to be “impossible,” the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in fulfillment of her Fatima Message.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Rita, pray for us.

How Can Any Believing Catholic Accept Apostates as Catholics?, part two

The sacrilege that took place in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela in Spain one week ago today, that is, on Tuesday, May 13, 2014, the Feast of Saint Robert Bellarmine and the ninety-seventh anniversary of the first apparition of Our Lady to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and their cousin Lucia dos Santos in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, involved Buddhist “monks,” as well as Shinto “priests.” Indeed, the Buddhists and the Shintoists did a little dance together.

In truth, of course, the conciliar revolutionaries have been doing a little dance with the clergy of false religions for the past fifty years now, a fact that was celebrated yesterday by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the future “Pope Saint Francis the Merciful,” as he addressed a message to the “Pontifical” Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue” (which was named the “Secretariat for Non-Christians” until “Saint John Paul II” changed it to its present name on June 28, 1988, two days before Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre consecrated four priests of the Society of Saint Pius X as bishops) on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary of denying the Catholic Faith while affirming the “goodness” of false religions, other than Talmudism, which has been given a special “commission” on the authority of “Pontifical” Council for Promoting Christian Unity and its prefect, currently Kurt “Cardinal” Koch (who has been in office since July 1, 2010, following the retirement of Walter “Cardinal” Kasper), that deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Here is a brief report about the congratulatory message that Bergoglio to his fellow apostate, Jean-Louis “Cardinal” Tauran:

The institution of the [Dialogue Council’s predecessor department], the Secretariat for non-Christians,” writes Pope Francis in the Message, “represented one of the important decisions, which, with ponderous reflection, the Servant of God Paul VI put into action during the II Vatican Ecumenical Council,” in order to begin to translate the Council’s orientations into concrete terms, “and direct the universal Church on the path of the hoped-for renewal.”

The Holy Father goes on to say, “In joining myself to the giving of thanks to God for the work accomplished in these 50 years, it is my hope that the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue might continue its mission with renewed vigor, which might greatly help the cause of peace and of the authentic progress of peoples.” (50th anniversary Message to Dialogue Council.)

Given the sacrilege that took place a week ago today, which involved Buddhists and Shintoists, perhaps the best way to review Jean-Louis “Cardinal” Tauran’s own tenure as the “president” of the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue, which began on June 25, 2007, when he succeeded another Frenchman, “Paul “Cardinal Poupard, who had helped to reaffirm false religions between 1980 an 2007, is to review of few of this apostate’s “Happy Vesakh” messages to the Buddhists:

Dear Buddhist friends,

1. The forthcoming feast of Vesakh/Hanamatsuri offers a welcome occasion to send you, on behalf of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, our sincere congratulations and cordial best wishes: may this feast once again bring joy and serenity to the hearts of all Buddhists throughout the world. This annual celebration offers Catholics an opportunity to exchange greetings with our Buddhist friends and neighbours, and in this way to strengthen the existing bonds of friendship and to create new ones. These ties of cordiality allow us to share with each other our joys, hopes and spiritual treasures.

2. While renewing our sense of closeness to you, Buddhists, in this period, it becomes clearer and clearer that together we are able not only to contribute, in fidelity to our respective spiritual traditions, to the well-being of our own communities, but also to the human community of the world. We keenly feel the challenge before us all represented, on the one hand, by the ever more extensive phenomenon of poverty in its various forms and, on the other hand, by the unbridled pursuit of material possessions and the pervasive shadow of consumerism.

3. As recently stated by His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, poverty can be of two very different types, namely, a poverty “to be chosen” and a poverty “to be fought” (Homily, 1st January 2009). For a Christian, the poverty to be chosen is that which allows one to tread in the footsteps of Jesus Christ. By doing so a Christian becomes disposed to receive the graces of Christ, who for our sake became poor although he was rich, so that by his poverty we might become rich (Cf. 2 Corinthians 8, 9). We understand this poverty to mean above all an emptying of self, but we also see it as an acceptance of ourselves as we are, with our talents and our limitations. Such poverty creates in us a willingness to listen to God and to our brothers and sisters, being open to them, and respecting them as individuals. We value all creation, including the accomplishments of human work, but we are directed to do so in freedom and with gratitude, care and respect, enjoining a spirit of detachment which allows us to use the goods of this world as though we had nothing and yet possessed all things (Cf. 2 Corinthians 6, 10).

4. At the same time, as Pope Benedict noted, “there is a poverty, a deprivation, which God does not desire and which should be fought; a poverty that prevents people and families from living as befits their dignity; a poverty that offends justice and equality and that, as such, threatens peaceful co-existence (l.c.).” Furthermore, “in advanced wealthy societies, there is evidence of marginalization, as well as affective, moral, and spiritual poverty, seen in people whose interior lives are disoriented and who experience various forms of malaise despite their economic prosperity” (Message for World Day of Peace 2009, n. 2).

5. Whereas we as Catholics reflect in this way on the meaning of poverty, we are also attentive to your spiritual experience, dear Buddhist friends. We wish to thank you for your inspiring witness of non-attachment and contentment. Monks, nuns, and many lay devotees among you embrace a poverty “to be chosen” that spiritually nourishes the human heart, substantially enriching life with a deeper insight into the meaning of existence, and sustaining commitment to promoting the goodwill of the whole human community. Once again allow us to express our heartfelt greetings and to wish all of you a Happy Feast of Vesakh/Hanamatsuri. (Message to Buddhists for the Feast of Vesakh/Hanamatsuri 2009, April 3, 2009.)

The life of a Buddhist monk “spiritually enriching life with a deeper insight into the meaning of existence, and substantially enriching life with a deeper insight into the meaning of existence, and sustaining commitment to promoting the goodwill of the whole human community”?

Isn’t the the true God of Divine Revelation offended by this just a little bit?

Where is the concern for Divine Truth, for the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity?

This was all suborned during the “pontificate” of the now-retired “Pope” Benedict XVI, the man never uttered one word of public correction about “Archbishop” Robert Zollitsch’s denial that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins. Perhaps more to the point now, of course, is that the message of syncretism that was conveyed on May 13, 2014, in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Spain, was suborned by the future “Saint Benedict XVI’s” succecessor, the future “Saint Francis the Merciful,” who would not dare to raise any objection to such a sacrilege as he is a grand champion of religious syncretism, which he will display with great zeal and sanctimony during his visit to Jordan and Israel that starts in four days, that is, on Saturday, May 23, 2014.

For his own part, the future “Saint Benedict XVI” praised a Japanese mountain upon which the Tendei sect of Buddhism took root in the Land of the Rising Sun, Mount Hiei, as “sacred” in a letter that was read in his behalf by Jean-Louis “Cardinal” Tauran, who is still now what he was then, namely, the president of the “Pontifical” Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue”:

I am glad to greet you and all the religious leaders gathered on the occasion of the Twentieth Anniversary of the Religious Summit Meeting on Mount Hiei. I wish also to convey my best wishes to Venerable Eshin Watanabe, and to recall your distinguished predecessor as Supreme Head of the Tendai Buddhist Denomination, Venerable Etai Yamada. It was he who, having participated in the Day of Prayer for Peace in Assisi on that memorable day of 27 October 1986, initiated the “Religious Summit Meeting” on Mount Hiei in Kyoto in order to keep the flame of the spirit of Assisi burning. I am also happy that Cardinal Paul Poupard, President of the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, is able to take part in this meeting.

From the supernatural perspective we come to understand that peace is both a gift from God and an obligation for every individual. Indeed the world’s cry for peace, echoed by families and communities throughout the globe, is at once both a prayer to God and an appeal to every brother and sister of our human family. As you assemble on the sacred Mount Hiei, representing different religions, I assure you of my spiritual closeness. May your prayers and cooperation fill you with God’s peace and strengthen your resolve to witness to the reason of peace which overcomes the irrationality of violence!

Upon you all I invoke an abundance of divine blessings of inspiration, harmony and joy. (This used to be found on the DICI site of the Society of Saint Pius X; it is no longer there.)

To whom is Mount Hiei “sacred”? Not to the true God of Divine Revelation. To the devil, that’s who.

Ratzinger/Benedict’s warm words of praise for the “sacred” Mount Hiei came two years, three months after he made a special effort to recognize a group of Buddhists who attended his general audience address of Wednesday, May 18, 2005, the Feast of Saint Venantius. We were there, way, way in the rear of the Piazza di San Pietro:

In a special way I greet the Risho Kosei-kai Buddhist group from Gunmaota, Japan. (18 May 2005, Psalm 113[112] – Praise the name of the Lord!.)

Appointed and empowered by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Jean-Louis Tauran’s 2010 message to the devil-worshipers of Buddhism was an exercise in complete pantheism:

Dear Buddhist friends,

1. On the occasion of your feast of Vesakh, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue extends congratulations and heartfelt best wishes for peace and joy to all of you around the world. May this message help strengthen our existing bonds of friendship and collaboration in service to humanity.

2. Let us take this opportunity to reflect together on a theme of particular relevance today, namely, the environmental crisis that has already caused notable hardship and suffering throughout the world. The efforts of both of our communities to engage in interreligious dialogue have brought about a new awareness of the social and spiritual importance of our respective religious traditions in this area. We recognize that we hold in common a regard for values like respect for the nature of all things, contemplation, humility, simplicity, compassion, and generosity. These values contribute to a life of nonviolence, equilibrium, and contentment with sufficiency.

3. Pope Benedict XVI, has noted that “the various phenomena of environmental degradation and natural disasters… remind us of the urgent need to respect nature as we should, and to recover and value a correct relationship with the environment in everyday life” (General Audience, 26 August 2009). The Catholic Church considers the protection of the environment as intimately linked to the theme of integral human development; and for her part, she is committed not only to promoting the protection of land, water and air as gifts destined for everyone, but also to encouraging others to join the efforts to protect mankind from self-destruction. Our responsibility to protect nature springs, in fact, from our respect for one another; it comes from the law inscribed in the hearts of all men and women. Consequently, when human ecology is respected within society, environmental ecology also benefits (cf. Encyclical, Caritas in Veritate, n. 51).

4. Both Christians and Buddhists have a profound respect for human life. It is crucial therefore that we encourage efforts to create a sense of ecological responsibility, while at the same time reaffirming our shared convictions about the inviolability of human life at every stage and in every condition, the dignity of the person and the unique mission of the family, where one learns to love one’s neighbour and to respect nature.

5. May we together promote a healthy relationship between human beings and the environment. By enhancing our efforts to promote ecological consciousness for serenity and peaceful coexistence, we can give witness to a respectful way of life that finds meaning not in having more, but in being more. By sharing the insights and commitments of our respective religious traditions, we can contribute to the well- being of our world.

Dear Buddhist friends, once again allow us to express our sincere greetings and to wish all of you a Happy Feast of Vesakh. Jean-Louis Cardinal Tauran. (Message to Buddhists for the Feast of Vesakh/Hanamatsuri 2010.)

Pantheists of the world unite! We are eyewitnesses to natural disasters that should serve as a clear sign to Catholics that God is chastising us at the present moment, and the conciliarists pat the Buddhists on the back for sharing their concern for “improving” the environment? How are the Buddhists going to “improve” the physical environment of the earth?

Moreover, it is a lie to contend that “Christians and Buddhists have a profound respect for human life.” Most sects of Buddhism support baby-killing in at least some circumstances. No less than a Buddhist authority than the Dalai Lama himself believes that each individual circumstance is different, providing women with an opportunity to use their “conscience” to determine how to act:

The current Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism, Tenzin Gyatso, has referred to abortion as a sin against “non-violence to all sentient beings”. However, he has also stated that abortion might be permissible in specific, limited circumstances, “Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance.” (Dalai Lama and Abortion.)

Other sects are almost openly permissive of abortion. “Christians and Buddhists” have a profound respect for human life”? This is a lie from the liars in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Buddhists have a profound respect for human life?

Go tell that to the Catholic Martyrs of Thailand, who were killed by those “peace loving” friends of the environment, the Buddhists:

Our thrilling story begins in Songkhon, a Catholic village on the Thai side of the mighty Maekhong River as it flows along the North Eastern border. The people of Songkhon were all Catholics and since the beginning they have always been in the Archdiocese of Thare-Nongseng.

The year 1940 was a time of fear and uncertainty in many areas of the world. Nazism was on the march in Europe and in Asia, imperialism was spreading rapidly. In Thailand, people felt fearful and threatened and a foreign faith was an obvious scapegoat, although Catholicism had already been in Thailand over three hundred and fifty years. In this tense atmosphere the usually tolerant Thais forsook their normal friendliness and began a religious persecution.

So it happened that in the winter of 1940, the police moved into Songkhon. Their first hostile act was to banish and then deport the parish priest. With guns in their hands, they then went from door to door intimidating the good simple people of the village and ordering them to abandon their faith in Christ. Naturally the people were nervous and frightened by they remained quiet and steadfast.

Living in Songkhon were two Sisters of the Congregation of the Lovers of the Holy Cross: Sister Agnes and Sister Lucia. There was also an excellent catechist, Mr. Philip Siphong. Since their pastor had been deported, these three good people felt responsible for the Catholic community and were in charge of the village school.

Mr. Siphong gave both moral and physical support to the worried people by visiting each house, praying with each family and speaking words of encouragement and strengthening their faith. The police were naturally furious at this act of rebelliousness and decided to get rid of Mr. Philip Siphong.

So in early December 1940 the police sent a letter to Philip supposedly from the Sheriff of Mukdahan requesting him to go to Mukdahan to meet the Sheriff. The people were suspicious and they warned Philip about the false letter and not to trust the police. They also told Philip that the police had every intention of killing him. However this good man told the people that if that was the case, then he, Philip Siphong was prepared to die for his Faith. Eventually he set out with the police for Mukdahan. Actually when they got the poor man into the forest the police shot him dead. So on December the 16th 1940 Mr. Philip Siphong died for his Faith and became the first of the Seven Holy martyrs of Thailand.

When the two Sisters Agnes and Lucia heard the news of the death of their faithful catechist, they were both saddened and very frightened. Nevertheless they continued their care of the school and their guidance of the community. Each day the children of the village came to the convent to be taught and catechised.

The police on their part kept up their pressure on the Sister and the local community. They tried to frighten everyone by firing their rifles in the air and by shouting at the people. They kept reminding the villagers of the murder of Philip by warning the people. “We’ll get rid of all of you.”

The children like everyone else were terrified of the police but the Sisters encouraged the children and themselves by saying that if the police killed them, they would be martyrs for Jesus.

On the Christmas Day. Mr. Lue, the police officer in charge of Songkhon, came to the Sister’ house. On arrival he discovered the Sisters were instructing the children in their Catholic Faith. The officer was furious and berated the Sisters: “I’ve told you many times not to speak about Jesus. You must not mention god in Thailand, otherwise I’ll kill you all.” Sister Agnes who was the elder Sister, conscious of her role, in turn became indignant. She confronted the police officer saying: “Mr. Policeman, do you mean to say that you will kill us all because we are Catholics and loyal to our Catholic Faith. Do you really mean that, Mr. Policeman?”

Mr. Lue replied: “Yes I do, I will kill all of you if you continue to talk about God like this.”

Sister Agnes with rising indignation and raised her voice saying to the officer: “Be sure you have sufficient guns and bullets.” “Oh yes, we have enough guns and bullets to kill all of you.” Mr. Lue retorted.

“Then be sure you polish the barrels of your guns lest the bullets get stuck.” Countered the brave Sister Agnes. “Yes, we will.” concluded the policeman.

On the evening of that same Christmas Day, the Sister prepared some coconut oil and sent a small bottle of it to the police so that they could clean and polish their gun barrels. Then the brave Sisters began preparing themselves and their companions for their coming martyrdom, by prayers and hymns’ singing throughout the night.

Late that same night, our inspired Sister Agnes sat down and wrote a letter to the police. It is a document of utter simplicity and of a lively faith.

“To the Chief Police in Songkhon

“Yesterday evening you received your order to wipe out, definitely, the Name of God, the Only Lord of our lives and minds. We adore Him only, Sir. A few days earlier, you had mentioned to us that you would not wipe out the Name of God and we were rather pleased with that in such a way that we put away our religious habits which showed that we were His handmaids. But it not so today. We do profess that the religion of Christ is the only true religion. Therefore, we would like to give our answer to your question, asked yesterday evening which we did not have a chance to respond because we were unprepared for it. Now we would like to give you our answer. We are asking you to carry out your order with us. Please do not delay any longer. Please carry out your order. Please open the door of heaven to us so that we can confirm that outside the Religion of Christ no none can go to heaven. Please do it. We are well prepared. When we will be gone we will remember you. Please take pity on our souls. We will be thankful to you and will be grateful to you for it. And on the last day we will see each other face to face.

“Do wait and see, please. We keep your commands, oh God, we wish to be witnesses to You, dear God. We are: Agnes, Lucia, Phuttha, Budsi, Buakhai, Suwan. We would like to bring little Phuma along with us because we love her so much. We have already made up our minds, dear Sir.”

This letter is such a simple yet moving and powerful Gospel of faith that reminds us that the faith witnessed in the early church in roman times is still alive and potent in Thailand in our own time. The diocesan archives now have Sister Agnes’s wonderful profession of faith statement.

The police reacted quickly. On the following afternoon of the 26th of December 1940 on the feast of St. Stephen the first martyr, they arrived at the convent and shouted: “Are you ready, Sisters? If you are, go straight to the bank of the Maekhong.” But Sister Agnes objected, “No, that is not the place for us to die for Christ. We must go the cemetery, the holy place.”

In line they walked to the cemetery singing hymns and calling to the people.

“Good-bye, we are going to Heaven, we are going to become martyrs for Christ.” How these brave and noble women remind us once again of the martyrs of ancient Rome, joyfully entering the arena for the love of Jesus Christ.

Seeing the police marching the children and Sisters to the cemetery, the people of the village realized that the police were going to kill them there. They too followed the Sisters and their companions wishing to die with them. However the policed brushed the people aside with their rifles saying angrily: “We only intend to kill those in the line.”

A young girl named Suwan was one of those in the line. She was willing to become one of Christ’s Martyrs but her father upon hearing what was happening rushed to the scent to rescue his little daughter. Suwan on her part clung to Sister Agnes begging him: “Mother Agnes, help me please, I want to die with you and go to Heaven.” “But you are too young to die” said her father and he snatched her away and carried her back home where he locked her in a room.

On arrival at the cemetery the brave women knelt down beside a fallen tree trunk. They continued praying and hymn-singing fervently in that crucial atmosphere.

Sister Agnes turned and addressed the police: “You may kill us but you cannot kill the Church and you cannot kill God. One day the Church will return to Thailand and will flourish more than ever. You will see with your own eyes that what I am now saying, will come true. So we thank you from our hearts for killing us and sending us to Heaven. From there we will pray for you.” Once again her words echoed those of many great martyrs before her.

Then turning to her companions, Sister Agnes said, “My dear friends, we will soon be in Heaven.”

On the cross, Jesus said to the thief, “This day you will e with me in Paradise,” (Lk.23:43) When all were ready, Sister once more addressed the police saying: “Mr. Policeman, we are ready, please do your duty.”

Immediately the police opened fire and left the cemetery shouting to the people, “Bury them like dogs, for they are bad people.” The poor villagers who were watching the scene from behind nearby bushes, rushed forward and began to shake the bodies to see who was alive or dead. They found that both Sister Agnes and Phorn were still alive but badly wounded.

Looking around, Phorn asked: “Where is heaven?” She understood from the Sisters’ teaching that if one died a martyr one went straight to Heaven, but looking around Phorn saw not Heaven but a crowd of villagers. Sister Agnes on her part enquired: “where are the police?” They’ve left already.” someone spoke out. “Then you better call them back I’m not dead yet:’ said the brave sister Agnes. So one of the villagers returned to the village to inform the police that Sister Agnes and Phorn although badly wounded were still alive.

In the meantime another girl called Sorn who hand knelt at the end of the line stood up and looking around exclaimed: “Where is heaven?” Seeing that her clothes were spattered with blood the people enquired if she was hurt. “I’m afraid not, I don’t feel any pain,” Sorn replied. She then examined herself more closely but found no bullet wounds. “You’d better run home,” she was advised: “as the police will soon be back here.” So the little girl ran home. (She is still alive, healthy and living in Songkhon. She is also an excellent catechist.) In a short time the police returned to the cemetery and killed the wounded Sister Agnes and Phorn.

In all, six good and holy women were dead and the villagers buried them hurriedly, placing two bodies in each grave for they had not the time to make coffins. Thus were these brave and noble women of Songkhon laid to rest.

Many eye witnesses including those who took part in the burial of our brave martyrs are still alive. They are proud and grateful to recall, the bravery, the loyalty to Christ and the wonderful faith displayed on that momentous day, the 26th December 1940 by the Holy martyrs of Songkhon  (The Martyrs of Thailand)

The year 1940 was just sevent-three years ago.

The Buddhists have changed in the past seventy years?

Go tell that to the Catholics in parts of India and Sri Lanka today who are suffering at their hands .

Buddhists have a profound “respect” for human life? Go tell that to the Catholic Martyrs of Kyoto, Japan, among whom is counted a married woman, Tecla Hashimoto, who was martyred while carrying her preborn child:

The location, about three hundred meters from Hokoji Temple, was the busiest place in the city. The temple, affectionately called the “Big Kyoto Buddha,” was modeled after the “Big Buddha” temple in Nara. Years later, in 1798, the “Big Kyoto Buddha” was struck by lightning and completely destroyed. All that remains today is a huge temple bell, bearing silent witness to the events narrated below.

On the river bank was a plot of land 50 meters long and 25 meters wide where a huge pile of kindling, wood beams and trash taken from the condemned Christians’ homes, was piled high around 27 large cross-like stakes.

The official in charge, Katsushige Itakura, was the governor of Kyoto. As a young man, he had been a Buddhist priest. Itakura knew that in executions by fire, the kindling was set away from the victims, allowing the flames to prolong the suffering. This special torture could cause some to give up their faith and recant. But Itakura also realized that with these faithful Christians, there was little hope of recanting. For this reason he had pity on the victims, and ordered the kindling placed as close as possible to them, so their sufferings would be brief.

The victims were bound two to each cross, back-to-back. The leader of the martyrs was John Hashimoto, who, with his wife Tecla and their five children, drew sympathetic glances from the bystanders. Tecla was expecting her seventh child.

To celebrate her martyrdom, she wore a stately, white silk veil that reached to her feet. The sight of this young mother and her five children as they walked to their crosses brought tears to the eyes of many. She clutched her three-year-old daughter Luisa, as her 12-year-old son Toma was tied to her cross at her right side. Eight-year-old Francisco was tied to her left. Her six-year-old Pedro and 13-year-old Katarina were tied together to another cross close by.

When the fires were lit, the night sky shone brilliantly with flames leaping from the ghastly funeral pyre. All of the martyrs began praying and singing hymns. When Katarina cried that she could no longer see because of the smoke, her mother shouted, “Sing out the names of Jesus and Mary.”

The raging flames soon brought an early end, leaving onlookers stunned by the sublime sacrifice of the parents and the heroic bravery of the children. That evening, the Catholics secretly buried about 30 bodies found in the ashes. The location of this mass grave, somewhere in Kyoto, remains unknown to the present day.

The eldest child of the Hashimoto family, Miguel, was not home when the rest of the family was arrested. Later he appeared at the prison declaring his intention to join his family as a martyr too, but he was turned away, since his name was not on the list of the condemned. Instead, he was admonished by the prison officials to return home and think about carrying on the family name.

The pastor, Father Diego Ryosetsu Yuki, had been hearing confessions when the Christians were arrested. He and a foreign priest witnessed the martyrdoms, and provided what remains one of the most detailed accounts in the history of martyrdoms in Japan. Several years later, Father Yuki himself was martyred and is among the 188 beatified.

Those early Christians, all spiritual children of Saint Francis Xavier, died in the early years of the 17th century. They will join 42 canonized saints and 205 other “blesseds” who adorn the pages of Japan’s 400 years of Christian history. (The Great Kyoto Martyrdom. This article is written by a priest in the conciliar structures; thus the reference to “canonization” of these martyrs. There are, however, other excellent articles maintained on the site where this article was found. The site is Tecla Hashimoto..)

Ah, yes, those “peace loving,” planet-caring Buddhists. Happy Vesakh? I don’t think so. For to do wish a “Happy Vesakh” to those steeped in the false religion of Buddhism would be to violate the First Commandment.

The paradoxes of conciliarism are such that the Thai martyrs, whose story was recounted earlier in this article, who professed the true Faith and would give the idolatry of Buddhism no quarter whatsoever, were “beatified” by “Saint John Paul II” in 1989 while the conciliar authorities in the Vatican continue to wish the devil-worshiping Buddhists a happy “feast of Vesakh” each and every year without fail. The Buddhists worship devils. Devils.

How can any right-thinking Catholic express “best wishes” to devil worshiping pantheists on their diabolical “feasts”?

The three phases of Buddha indeed. The three phases of Buddha’s life were fat, fatter and fattest.

Yet it is that the world will be subjected to more and more syncretism starting in four days as the future “Pope Saint Francis the Merciful” travels to the Kingdom of Jordan and to the Zionist State of Israel along with his favorite pro-abortion, pro-perversity Talmudic rabbi, Abraham Skorka, and another pal from Argentina, Omar Abboud, a Mohammedan imam there. Also accompanying Jorge Mario Bergogio on the flight to Jordan in four days is oneo of his “brother” bishops, the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I. Just a little something for everyone:

(Buenos Aires / Jerusalem) Will Pope Francis meet the “mother of his personal faith” in Judaism?  That, at least is what   his Argentine friend Rabbi Abraham Skorka in an interview with the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica. Pope Francis arrives in a few days with a colorful entourage to the Holy Land.
The Catholic Church leader is not only accompanied, as usual, by cardinals and bishops of the Catholic Church, but this time also the honorary chairman of the Orthodox Churches, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople,   Bartholomew I. However, the most importantly will be  a personal friend of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the Argentine Rabbi Abraham Skorka. The Vatican soon made ​​aware of a risk. The very obvious presence of a Jewish representative in the entourage of the Pope, who has   direct access to the Pope, boasting numerous interviews, could trigger irritation in the Muslim world in the Middle East.   Above all, the Muslim Palestinians could feel resentment . So there was a search  for an additional, Muslim travel companion. It is Omar Abboud, who will be the representative of the Islamic community in Argentina. Abboud is a former Secretary General of the Islamic Center of Argentina .
Vatican spokesman Father Lombardi said the Pope was accompanied by a Jewish and a Muslim agent with whom he is already in “a friendly dialogue” in Argentina .  In fact, Archbishop Bergoglio, Rabbi Skorka and Abboud took part as head of the Islamic Centre in the last ten years prior, as  the Pope’s choice in numerous joint events part that stood as a  sign of inter-religious dialogue and were largely initiated by Cardinal Bergoglio.
While Abboud was invited in April to come along on the trip has so far refrained from publicity, Rabbi Skorka has engaged in intense media activism since the election of Pope Francis.  In his recent interview for the Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica (Volume 3934 v. May 17, 2914: the Pope, the Rabbi and the Holy Land ), he said: “Since the election of Francis we have met three times in Rome.”  In one of these meetings, “we began to dream of standing together in front of the Wailing Wall, embracing, to give you a sign despite the two thousand years of disagreements between Jews and Christians, and that I accompany him to Bethlehem to be close to  his mind in such an important moment,  as a gesture of friendship and respect, to give all peoples and nations of this region an indelible sign of peace.”
The interview with Rabbi Skorka led chief editor Father Antonio Spadaro, who led a now famous, but also controversial interview with Pope Francis last fall. Skorka also spoke of how Pope Francis see Judaism: “At the first meeting he said, pointing to me and pointed with his hand up: ‘Our friendship and dialogue is the sign that it is’. And I added: ‘You can create the path that leads to peace and the Rome and Jerusalem brings together more closely.’ “
In a conversation between Father Spadaro and the rabbi several names are called as witnesses for the Jewish-Christian dialogue, including the retired Archbishop of Paris, Cardinal Lustiger. There are also  publications mentioned considered  by the Pope as  fundamental to the Jewish-Christian dialogue.  According Skorka prevails in Pope Francis especially “an expectation of the church to a Jewish response to the document Nostra Aetate of the Second Vatican Council, an adopted by the majority of the Jewish people manifesto, which answers the question: What does a Christian for a Jew ? “
When asked Spadaros, as Pope Francis see the Jewish religion, Skorka replied: “The many things that I have seen and experienced around Bergolio additionally prompted me to say that he sees Judaism as a mother of his faith. This is not merely an intellectual exercise, but a feeling, which is an important component in his personal faith.”   This statement is in need of explanation. according to the Catholic understanding of  pre-Christian Judaism (Israel) has risen in Christianity and found its completion. Post-Christian Judaism, however, is that Pharisaic cleavage of the original Judaism that rejects Christ as the Messiah. But what Judaism did  Skorka mean?
The Rabbi pointed at the same time then that “some viewpoints and findings of Bergoglio” obviously agree with rabbinical writings, which he wants to suggest that Pope Francis has read rabbinic or is reading and was influenced by them.
Other parts of the conversation related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Of this Skorka said: “I do not expect that Pope Francis will solve all problems between Palestinians and Israelis, nor all the conflicts of the Middle East and the world.” The “true power of the Pope is the credibility that he  has in  his family and the understanding of this awakened in others.” (Skorka: My Pal Jorge and Judaism.)
Which type of Judaism is acceptable to Jorge Mario Bergolio?
The answer is quite obvious: Abraham Skorka’s “reform” Judaism, which has nothing at all to do with Abraham Judaism, which 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 ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Holy Cross on Good Friday as the earth shook and the curtain in the Temple in Jerusalem was torn in two from top to bottom, thus signifying the end of the Old Covenant.
Bergoglio has told us very specifically in Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013, that he does not believe that the Old Covenant has been revoked, thus proving to the world that he is a blaspheming heretic, a man who is certainly capable of reading “rabbinical” literature in order to “learn” something “new” that is not contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith that Our Lord has entrusted solely to His Catholic Church for its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. Well, I suppose that rabbinical writing is more to his liking than say, the Sunday sermons of Saint Alphonsus de Liguori.
Bergoglio will also lay a wreath at the Israeli national cemetery, Mount Herzl, signifying that the souls of the bodies, buried in a cemetery named in honor of the founder of International Zionism, Theodore Hezl, there are at “rest” with God in Heaven. Blasphemer. Heretic. Apostate.
Once again, good readers, is how a Catholic pope, Pope Saint Pius X, the last non-diplomat to serve in the papacy prior to the death of Pope Pius XII, on October 9, 1958, spoke to Theodore Herzl personally on January 25, 1904, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle:

POPE: We are unable to favor this movement [of Zionism]. We cannot prevent the Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.

HERZL: [The conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the one and the other of us, was once again under way. At the outset I tried to be conciliatory. I said my little piece. . . . It didn’t greatly impress him. Jerusalem was not to be placed in Jewish hands.] And its present status, Holy Father?

POPE: I know, it is disagreeable to see the Turks in possession of our Holy Places. We simply have to put up with it. But to sanction the Jewish wish to occupy these sites, that we cannot do.

HERZL: [I said that we based our movement solely on the sufferings of the Jews, and wished to put aside all religious issues].

POPE: Yes, but we, but I as the head of the Catholic Church, cannot do this. One of two things will likely happen. Either the Jews will retain their ancient faith and continue to await the Messiah whom we believe has already appeared—in which case they are denying the divinity of Jesus and we cannot assist them. Or else they will go there with no religion whatever, and then we can have nothing at all to do with them. The Jewish faith was the foundation of our own, but it has been superceded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot admit that it still enjoys any validity. The Jews who should have been the first to acknowledge Jesus Christ have not done so to this day.

HERZL: [It was on the tip of my tongue to remark, “It happens in every family: no one believes in his own relative.” But, instead, I said:] Terror and persecution were not precisely the best means for converting the Jews. [His reply had an element of grandeur in its simplicity:]

POPE: Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He persecuted no one. He was abandoned even by his apostles. It was only later that he attained stature. It took three centuries for the Church to evolve. The Jews therefore had plenty of time in which to accept his divinity without duress or pressure. But they chose not to do so, and they have not done it yet.

HERZL: But, Holy Father, the Jews are in a terrible plight. I do not know if Your Holiness is aware of the full extent of their tragedy. We need a land for these harried people.

POPE: Must it be Jerusalem?

HERZL: We are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—for only the secular land.

POPE: We cannot be in favor of it.

[Editor Lowenthal interjects here] Here unrelenting replacement theology is plainly upheld as the norm of the Roman Catholic Church. Further, this confession, along with the whole tone of the Pope in his meeting with Herzl, indicates the perpetuation of a doctrinal emphasis that has resulted in centuries of degrading behavior toward the Jews. However, this response has the “grandeur” of total avoidance of that which Herzl had intimated, namely that the abusive reputation of Roman Catholicism toward the Jews was unlikely to foster conversion. Further, if, “It took three centuries for the Church to evolve,” it was that very same period of time that it took for the Church to consolidate and launch its thrust of anti-Semitism through the following centuries.

HERZL: Does Your Holiness know the situation of the Jews?

POPE: Yes, from my days in Mantua, where there are Jews. I have always been in friendly relations with Jews. Only the other evening two Jews were here to see me. There are other bonds than those of religion: social intercourse, for example, and philanthropy. Such bonds we do not refuse to maintain with the Jews. Indeed we also pray for them, that their spirit see the light. This very day the Church is celebrating the feast of an unbeliever who became converted in a miraculous manner—on the road to Damascus. And so if you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with churches and priests to baptize all of you. (Marvin Lowenthal, The Diaries of Theodore Herzl.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not traveling with Abraham Skorka and Omar Abboud to convert anyone to anything, no less the true religion. He is going to the Holy Land to further the sycretist goals of the One World Ecumenical Church, which he believes is the “path to peace” when it is a means of chaos in the world and that of eternal ruin to the souls of men.

The very words of Holy Writ, inspired by the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, teaches how the Prophet Elias dealt with the false gods of Baal atop Mount Carmel:

“‘Nevertheless send now, and gather unto me all Israel, unto Mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the groves four hundred, who eat at Jezebel’s table.’

“Achab sent to all the children of Israel, and gathered together the prophets unto Mount Carmel.

“And Elias coming to all the people, said: ‘How long do you halt between two sides? If the Lord be God, follow Him: but if Baal, follow him.’ And the people did not answer him a word.

“And Elias said again to the people: ‘I only remain a prophet of the Lord: but the prophets of Baal are four hundred and fifty men. Let two bullocks be given us, and let them choose one bullock and cut it in pieces and lay it upon wood, but put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under it. Call ye the names of your gods, and I will call on the name of my Lord; and the God that shall answer by fire, let him be God.’ And all of the people answering said: ‘A very good proposal.’

“Then Elias said to the prophets of Baal: ‘Choose you one bullock and dress it first, because you are many; and call on the names of your gods, but put no fire under.’

“And they took the bullock which he gave them, and dressed it; and they called on the name of Baal from morning even till noon, saying: ‘O Baal, hear us.’ But there was no voice, nor any that answered: and they leaped over the altar that they had made.

“And when it was now noon, Elias jested at them, saying: ‘Cry with a louder voice: for he is a God, and perhaps he is talking, or he is in an inn, or on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep, and must be awaked.’

“So they cried with a loud voice, and cut themselves after their manner with knives and lancets, till they were covered with blood. And after midday was past, and while they were prophesying, the time was come of offering sacrifice, and there was no voice heard, nor did any one answer, nor regard them as they prayed: Elias said to the people: ‘Come ye unto me.’ And the people coming near unto him, he repaired the altar of the Lord, that was broken down:

“And he took twelve stones according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, to whom the word of the Lord came, saying: ‘Israel shall be thy name.’ And he built with the stones an altar to the name of the Lord: and he made a trench for water, of the breadth of two furrows round about the altar. And he laid the wood in order, and cut the bullock in pieces, and laid it upon the wood.

“And he said: “Fill four buckets with water, and pour it upon the burnt offering, and upon the wood.’ And again he said: ‘Do the same the second time.’ And when they had done it the second time, he said: ‘Do the same also the third time.’ And they did so the third time. And the water run about the altar, and the trench was filled with water.

“And when it was now time to offer the holocaust, Elias the prophet came near and said: ‘O Lord God of Abraham and Isaac, and Israel, show this day that thou art the God of Israel, and I thy servant, and that according to they commandment I have done all these things. Hear me, O Lord, hear me: that this people may learn, that thou art the Lord God, and that thou hast turned their heart again.’

“Then the fire of the Lord fell, and consumed the holocaust, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw this, they fell on their faces, and they said: ‘The Lord he is God, the Lord he is God.’ And Elias said to them: ‘Take the prophets of Baal, and let not one of them escape.’ And when they had taken them, Elias brought them down to the torrent Cison, and killed them there” (3 Kings 18:19-40)

Catholics seek to convert those steeped in the worship of false gods. The concilarists seek to show these false gods “respect” for the sake of bringing their adherents into the path of a false “peace” that is premised upon bold and direct violations of the First and Second Commandment.

The Catholic Church has condemned actions such as those that took place in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela one week ago today and those that the conciliar revolutionaries, including the conciliar “popes,” have undertaken with representatives of one false religion after another, even daring to enter temples of false worship to permit themselves, putative Successors of Saint Peter, as inferiors who have shown marks of great respect to the devil and his idols:

St. Paul also exhorts us to “give thanks to God the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His beloved Son.” (Col. 1:12) Where it is manifest that as the true Faith of Jesus Christ is the only light that conducts to salvation, and that it is only in His Kingdom — that is, in His Church — where that heavenly light is to be found, so all false religions are darkness; and that to be separated from the Kingdom of Christ is to be in darkness as to the great affair of eternity. And indeed what greater or more miserable darkness can a soul be in than to be led away by seducing spirits, and “departing from the faith of Christ, give heed to the doctrine of devils”. (1 Tim. 4:1) St. Paul, deploring the state of such souls, says that they “have their understandings darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance: that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts”. (Eph. 4:18)

On this account the same holy apostle exhorts us in the most pressing manner to take care not to be seduced from the light of our holy Faith by the vain words and seducing speeches of false teachers, by which we would certainly incur the anger of God; and, to prevent so great a misery, He not only exhorts us to walk as children of the light in the practice of all holy virtues, but expressly commands us to avoid all communication in religion with those who walk in the darkness of error. “Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief; be ye not, therefore, partakers with them. For ye were theretofore darkness; but now light in the Lord; walk ye as the children of the light,

. . . and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness“. (Eph. 5:6)

Here, then, we have an express command, not only not to partake with the unfruitful works of darkness — that is, not to join in any false religion, or partake of its rites or sacraments — but also, not to have any fellowship with its professors, not to be present at their meetings or sermons, or any other of their religious offices, lest we be deceived by them, and incur the anger of the Almighty, provoke Him to withdraw His assistance from us, and leave us to ourselves, in punishment of our disobedience.

(3) St. Paul, full of zeal for the good of souls, and solicitous to preserve us from all danger of losing our holy Faith, the groundwork of our salvation, renews the same command in his Epistle to the Romans, by way of entreaty, beseeching us to avoid all such communication with those of a false religion. He also shows us by what sign we should discover them, and points out the source of our danger from them: “Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who cause dissensions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and to avoid them; for they that are such serve not Our Lord Christ, but their own belly, and by pleasing speeches and good words seduce the hearts of the innocent”. (Rom. 16:17)

See here whom we are to avoid — “those that cause dissensions contrary to the ancient doctrine“; all those who, hating, left the true Faith and doctrine which they had learned, and which has been handed down to us from the beginning by the Church of Christ, follow strange doctrines, and make divisions and dissensions in the Christian world. And why are we to avoid them? Because they are not servants of Christ, but slaves to their own belly, whose hearts are placed upon the enjoyments of this world, and who, by “pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent” — that is, do not bring good reasons or solid arguments to seduce people to their evil ways, so as to convince the understanding, for that is impossible; but practice upon their hearts and passions, relaxing the laws of the gospel, granting liberties to the inclinations of flesh and blood, laying aside the sacred rules of mortification of the passions and of self-denial, promising worldly wealth, and ease, and honors, and, by pleasing speeches of this kind, seducing the heart, and engaging people to their ways.

(4) The same argument and command the apostle repeats in his epistle to his beloved disciple Timothy, where he gives a sad picture, indeed, of all false teachers, telling us that they put on an outward show of piety the better to deceive, “having an appearance, indeed, of godliness, but denying the power thereof;” then he immediately gives this command: “Now these avoid: for of this sort are they that creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires”; and adds this sign by which they may be known, that, not having the true Faith of Christ, and being out of His holy Church — the only sure rule for knowing the truth — they are never settled, but are always altering and changing their opinions, “ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth“; because, as he adds, “they resist the truth, being corrupted in their mind, and reprobate concerning the Faith”. (2 Tim. 3:5)

 Here it is to be observed that, though the apostle says that silly weak people, and especially women, are most apt to be deceived by such false teachers, yet he gives the command of avoiding all communication with them in their evil ways, to all without exception, even to Timothy himself; for the epistle is directed particularly to him, and to him he says, as well as to all others, “Now these avoid”, though he was a pastor of the church, and fully instructed by the apostle himself in all the truths of religion; because, besides the danger of seduction, which none can escape who voluntarily expose themselves to it, all such communication is evil in itself, and therefore to be avoided by all, and especially by pastors, whose example would be more prejudicial to others. (Bishop George Hay, The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)

Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)

But Catholic doctrine tells us that the primary duty of charity does not lie in the toleration of false ideas, however sincere they may be, nor in the theoretical or practical indifference towards the errors and vices in which we see our brethren plunged, but in the zeal for their intellectual and moral improvement as well as for their material well-being. Catholic doctrine further tells us that love for our neighbor flows from our love for God, Who is Father to all, and goal of the whole human family; and in Jesus Christ whose members we are, to the point that in doing good to others we are doing good to Jesus Christ Himself. Any other kind of love is sheer illusion, sterile and fleeting.

Indeed, we have the human experience of pagan and secular societies of ages past to show that concern for common interests or affinities of nature weigh very little against the passions and wild desires of the heart. No, Venerable Brethren, there is no genuine fraternity outside Christian charity. Through the love of God and His Son Jesus Christ Our Saviour, Christian charity embraces all men, comforts all, and leads all to the same faith and same heavenly happiness. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

The conciliar revolutionaries believe, speak and act in ways that prove themselves to be servants of Antichrist, not Christ the King. Why is this so very difficult for so many Catholics to understand and to accept? Saint Paul’s admonition to bear no fellowship with unbelievers applies just as much to the conciliar revolutionaries as it did to those who are openly outside of the Catholic Church. What more and more Catholics need to do is to recognize that the conciliar officials are just as much outside of the Catholic Faith as were the Buddhists and Shintoists in Santiago de Compostela, Spain, a week to day, and as are the likes of Abraham Skorka and Omar Abboud.

Indeed, Pope Pius XI, writing in Ad Salutem, August 30, 1930, noted the views of the son of Saint Monica, on false religions:

Let us add a word further. Augustine set the mark, or more truly, the fiery brand of his condemnation on the moral infamy of Greek and Roman paganism. And yet yearning for such a religion has been seen to infatuate, even in our day, certain writers, shallow and even licentious, who extol such a cult for its beauty and fitness and attractiveness. Again, knowing thoroughly his contemporaries and their unhappy forgetfulness of God, with a pen at one time caustic, at another indignant, he scored in his pages all the compulsion and folly, all the outrages and lust, introduced into man’s life by the demons through the worship of false gods. There can be no salvation in the ideal of the earthly City, as it sets before its eyes a vain picture- of completeness and perfection. For scarcely anyone will take such an ideal seriously or, if he does, the prize he wins will be only the satisfaction of empty and fleeting glory. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Salutem, August 30 1930.)

Thi is a perfect–and I mean absolutely perfectly–description of our times today and o the counterfeit church of conciliarism celebration of contemporary paganism, especially by means of honoring the demons through their esteems of the false gods and false religions.

Today is the feast of Saint Bernardine of Siena, the great apostle of the Holy Name of Jesus. It is, of course, the Holy Name of Jesus that we proclaim one hundred fifty-three times every day when we pray all fifteen mysteries of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary.

Saint Bernardine of Siena (1380-1444) spent his life promoting devotion to the Most Holy Name of Jesus to make reparation for blasphemies against the Holy Name. It was raised to a Feast of the Universal Church in 1721 by Pope Innocent XIII. Saint Bernardine of Siena took seriously the words of the first Pope to the Jews as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles:

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people, and ancients, hear: If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him this man standeth here before you whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts 4: 8-12)

If the proclamation of the Holy Name was good enough for Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s parents and for the Apostles, then it is good enough for us. We must never fear the consequences of proclaiming His Holy Name, especially in “mixed company.” Remember Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s own words:

For he that shall be ashamed of me, and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation: the Son of man also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mk. 8: 38)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ used the occasion of the discourse at the Last Supper to remind the Apostles that the world would hate them on account of His Name, but that they had to rely upon the help of the Holy Ghost to remain steadfast in loyalty to Him:

If the world hate you, know ye, that it hath hated me before you. If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember my word that I said to you: The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you: if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also.

But all these things they will do to you for my name’s sake: because they know not him who sent me. If I had not come, and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. He that hateth me, hateth my Father also. If I had not done among them the works that no other man hath done, they would not have sin; but now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father. But that the word may be fulfilled which is written in their law: They hated me without cause.

But when the Paraclete cometh, whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the Father, he shall give testimony of me.And you shall give testimony, because you are with me from the beginning. (Jn. 15: 18-27)

Do not be surprised, therefore, that the world will hate us as much as it hated Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who told us in the Sermon of the Mount that those who were persecuted for His Name’s sake would have a blessed reward:

Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you. (Mt. 5: 11-12)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ repeated this in the Sermon on the Plain as recorded in the Gospel of Saint Luke:

Blessed shall you be when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake. Be glad in that day and rejoice; for behold, your reward is great in heaven. For according to these things did their fathers to the prophets. (Lk. 6: 22-23)

The first Pope wrote the following in his first Epistle to instruct us to be ready to suffer for the sake of the Holy Name of Jesus:

If you be reproached for the name of Christ, you shall be blessed: for that which is of the honour, glory, and power of God, and that which is his Spirit, resteth upon you. (1 Pt. 4: 14)

The readings for Matins in today’s Divine Office provide us with rich food for meditation on the holy life of Saint Bernardine of Siena, a life dedicated to what the world, steeped in the anti-Incarnational errors of Judeo-Masonry, is so dedicated to blot out: the Holy Name of Jesus:

This Bernardine was born of the noble family of the Albizeschi, in the Republic of Sienna, on the 8th of September, in the year 1380. His saintliness began to manifest itself from his earliest years. He was well brought up by a godly father and mother, and even when he was being taught the first rudiments of worldly learning, he used to give up his play-time to occupy himself with devout works, being much drawn to fasting, prayer, and the devotion to the most Blessed Virgin. He abounded likewise in tenderness for the poor. As time went on, that he might the more entirely do these things, it was his will to enroll himself among those who work in the Hospital of Blessed Mary, called “of the Ladder,” at Sienna. There, during the raging of an horrible distemper, he laboured with marvellous charity and great bodily suffering, in serving the sick. In bodily presence he was a very goodly person, but, with all his other virtues, he kept ever so holy a guard over his purity, that it soon came to pass that no one, however shameless, dared to say an unseemly word in his presence.

He suffered a severe sickness, and when, after bearing it with the utmost patience, he recovered his health, he began to think of embracing some institute of the religious life. To make his way sure, he built a little hut in the outskirts of the city, where he hid himself and led a life of hardships of all kinds, continuing instant in prayer to God that He would be pleased to make clear to him what path he should follow. And so it came to pass by God’s will that he chose the Order of Blessed Francis. In that Order he shone a bright instance of lowliness, long-suffering, and every other grace of a religious man. When the superior of his convent saw this, and had already considered what his teaching and knowledge of sacred learning were, he laid on Bernardine the duty of preaching. This the Saint humbly accepted, and finding that his usefulness was much impaired by his having a shrill, harsh voice, he betook him to implore the help of God, Who was pleased, not without a miracle, to free him from this drawback.

Those were times fruitful in vices and crimes and the bloody civil wars which raged in Italy confounded all things Divine and human. Bernardine went through the cities and towns, and, in the Name of Jesus, that Name which he ever bore upon his lips and in his heart, he prevailed in great measure by his word and example, in setting up falling godliness and morality. Illustrious cities demanded him from the Pope as their Bishop, but this was an honour which his unconquerable humility caused him always steadily to refuse. At last the man of God, after untold labours, the working of many and great miracles, and the writing of godly and learned books, in the 67th year of his age, at Aquila in the Abruzzi, rested in a blessed death, upon the 20th day of May 1444. As the fame of new signs and wonders increased day by day, Pope Nicholas V., in the sixth year after his death, added his name to the roll of the Saints. (Matins, The Divine Office, May 20, Feast of Saint Bernardine of Siena.)

No one has suffered  for the Holy Name of Jesus the way that Our Lady did in her Seven Sorrows during the life of the Son to Whom she gave birth eight days before His Circumcision, eight days before the world heard for the first time the Holy Name that forces men to choose whether they are for Him or for the devil He came to vanquish by His redemptive act on the wood of the Holy Cross, extended to us in an unbloody manner in each and every offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Our Lady stood with her Divine Son as His Blood was shed for the first time. She would stand beneath the foot of the Holy Cross as He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood for our redemption. May we give her our thanks and love on during this Paschaltidem especially through her Most Holy Rosary, by having nothing to do with those who blaspheme he Divine Son and make a mockery of His Sacred Deposit of Faith and of the witness given by countless millions of martyrs who preferred death by the most cruel means imaginable than to given even a hit of esteeming the symbols of false religions, no less entering peaceably into temples of false worship as though these were dens of anything other than the devil himself.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Alleluia! He is Risen!

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 Bernardine of Siena, pray for us.