March 23, 2014, Article

March 23, 2014, Third Sunday of Lent:

In Search of Roncalli’s “Miracle” reviews some of the “miracles” wrought by Angelo Roncalli and the false church that he founded. The by-now infamous “Suor Cristina,” as scandalous as her performance on Italian television last week was, is but a product of Roncalli’s having started the process by which most Catholics in the world would have their sensus Catholics taken away and replaced by the “joys” of Roncalli’s unabashed “opening to the world.” Behold the results!

We have much for which to make reparation! Much.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

March 23, 2014, Update

March 23, 2014, Second Sunday of Lent:

Work is almost completed on the next article. “In Search of Roncalli’s Miracle.” I am, however, going to let prudence dictate a cessation of work as I have yet to accept what I know: that four consecutive late-night/early morning postings are beyond my abilities now.

While thanking you for your patience, therefore, I ask you to check back later today, probably around 6:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Saving Time, for the next article. Thank you.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

March 20, 2014, Article

March 20, 2014, Thursday in the Second Week of Lent:

Defect of Form? No, Defection from the Holy Faith reviews some very revealing statements made within the past few days by Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s surrogates, including the Father General of the Society of Jesus in conciliar captivity, who said in Tokyo, Japan, last week that “religion is first of all very much more like this musical,” something with which Bergoglio concurs entirely.

Also included in the new article is a commentary by Bergoglio’s advisor on Judaism of the relationship of the counterfeit church of conciliarism with those who adhere to the Old Covenant and some very interesting comments on the infallibility of a canonizations offered by Angelo “Cardinal” Amato, the prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Causes of the Saints. It turns out that none other that the then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger declared in a “doctrinal note” in 1989 that canonizations belong to those doctrines “infallibly proposed” in a “definitive” manner by the Catholic Church. This means that those in the “recognize but resist” movement who want to reject the forthcoming “canonization” of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II must first deconstruct their “pope of Tradition’s” “doctrinal note.” Nice work if you get it, huh?

This is a very substantive article.

Yes, I will return to the tedious, miserable work of reviewing Bergoglio’s first year. However, there are two other articles, including one on Crimea and Ukraine (see, I did not use “The Ukraine” this time although it’s what we used to say regularly from the 1950s until the the 1990s” when “Ukraine” became the preferred name) and one on the nearly universal triumph of the lavender collective.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

(Here is a listing of recent articles in case you have missed them:

Rand Paul Channels Lee Atwater, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney et al.

Saint Joseph: Our Friend and Protector

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part four

Revised: Saint Patrick and the “C” Word

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part three

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part two

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part one

Revised: Our Friend and Protector: Saint Joseph

Today’s Feast of Saint Joseph, the Chaste Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, is a time for Catholics to recall the just and quiet man of the House of David who took Our Lady as his chaste spouse to fulfill God’s holy will. Saint Joseph voluntarily renounced his own biological fatherhood so as to safeguard Our Lady’s perpetual virginity. He denied himself the joy of his own offspring so as to devote himself entirely to his foster-Child, Our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. A man who lived his entire life in poverty enriched Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Our Lady by the love he gave them from his pure heart, a heart that was itself enriched by being in the presence of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Saint Joseph is the model for all husbands and fathers. He should be especially dear to men who are foster-fathers themselves, men who have voluntarily taken unto their own care children whom they did not beget. But dear Saint Joseph is the model for all husbands and fathers everywhere. He was obeyed as the head of that family by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Word made Flesh Himself, and Our Lady. Indeed, what a consummate sign of humility Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ gave us simply by condescending to live in the midst of the Holy Family, subjecting Himself to the authority of His own creatures. Saint Joseph, the Patron of the Universal Church, was first the visible head of the Holy Family of Nazareth.

Saint Joseph was asked in a dream by Saint Gabriel the Archangel to have no fear to take Mary as his wife, that the Child she was carrying had been conceived by the power of the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost. He did Saint Gabriel had instructed him. He was the first man, therefore, to be directly affected by the Annunciation of Our Lord to Our Lady. The Word was made Flesh at the Annunciation–and very soon thereafter was entrusted to Saint Joseph’s care. Even though he was not in the garden when Saint Gabriel appeared to the Blessed Mother, he was to be apprised of what took place there rather swiftly after it took place.

Saint Joseph led the family that had been entrusted to his good care on the seventy mile journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem. It was Saint Joseph who found the place for His foster-Son to be born, surrounding Him with every care and affection, adoring Him as his God and Redeemer at the moment of His birth. He was present as the aged Simeon prophesied that a sword of sorrow would pierce his most chaste spouse’s Immaculate Heart. Do not think for a moment that his own heart was not wounded by this prophecy. It was. There was a union of the three hearts in the Holy Family, which is why we pray, “Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, we love you. Save souls. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, pray for us now and in death’s agony.” The sorrows of Our Lady were the sorrows of Saint Joseph.

Saint Joseph responded promptly to the call of Saint Gabriel the Archangel, received in a dream, to take his virginal spouse and his foster-Son to Egypt to flee from the wicked schemes of Herod the Great. Saint Joseph had to make a living in a foreign land, waiting to be called out of Egypt so that his foster-Son, the new Moses, could retrace the steps of the one to whom He had entrusted the first Passover, which was to be superseded by the New and Eternal Passover for which He had came into the world to ratify with every single drop of His Most Precious Blood.

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ loved His foster-father, learning from him the intricate work of a skilled carpenter. While Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ knew all things as God, He still had to learn how to do those things as man that He had ordained as God to be done by men. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ therefore submitted Himself to the tutelage of Saint Joseph to learn the trade by which He would earn a living for Himself and His Blessed Mother after Saint Joseph died. Saint Joseph was in the sublime position of teaching God, Who subjected Himself in humility to the teaching authority of His foster-father.

Imagine the daily joy and peace and serenity that surrounded the Holy Family. Saint Joseph and Our Lady were always in the Presence of God Himself. Although there are various private revelations about the nature of the Holy Family’s life, Sacred Scripture is as silent about the events of the Hidden Years in Nazareth as Saint Joseph himself. There is a reason for this silence: Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was teaching us that each of us will grow up in a family. Those of us who get married and are blessed with children are to replicate in our own lives the joy and peace and serenity of the Holy Family of Nazareth day in and day out, fulfilling the duties of our state-in-life without complaint and without delay. Husbands and fathers must see in Saint Joseph the perfect model of what it is to be the head of one’s household, intent on developing the manly Catholic virtues of patience and charity and courage and perseverance exhibited to their highest degree in the person of Saint Joseph.

As the model of patience and joy, Saint Joseph did not complain about anything. Indeed, Sacred Scripture records not one word ever uttered by Saint Joseph. He was the just and silent man of the House of David as he faithfully carried out God’s will for him each and every day, doing ordinary things extraordinarily well for the love of the Father in the presence of the Son Himself. He is the model of artisans and laborers, a man who pursued excellence as befits a child of God. He wanted nothing more than to use the talents he had been given for God’s greater glory, knowing that he had been chosen from all eternity to participate in events that would lead to the Redemption. He, a man who worked with wood, had the privilege of serving the One Who would use the wood of the Cross as the instrument of redeeming mankind.

Saint Joseph suffered along with Our Lady when the Child Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem to answer questions being posed to him by the doctors of the law. The fright in his heart was palpable when he discovered that his foster-Son was not in their company. His relief was visible when his foster-Son was found. His acceptance of God’s will about this event was total. Not a word of complaint. He knew that his foster-Son had to be about His Heavenly Father’s business once he heard this from the mouth of the One to Whom he gave love, clothing, shelter and instruction.

How fitting it is that Saint Joseph, who was the head of the Holy Family of Nazareth, is the Patron of the Universal Church. We need to invoke his intercession more faithfully for the needs of Holy Mother Church. For just as Saint Joseph protected the Infant Jesus and Our Lady during their flight to Egypt, so, too, has Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ entrusted to His foster-father the protection of His Mystical Body, the Church, here on earth. So too does he watch over our priests, who called to imitate his virtue of chastity by denying themselves their biological fatherhood in order to be the spiritual father of others. Saint Joseph is very close to priests and wants them to keep their purity unstained by anything. He wants them to be lovers of Holy Poverty after his own holy heart. And he wants them to be steadfast in maintaining the Tradition that his foster-Son’s Apostles have handed down to them under the protection of the Holy Ghost.

Saint Joseph, among many other titles and privileges, is the Patron of the Dying. Rosalie Marie Levy discussed the glory of the death of Saint Joseph in Joseph the Just Man:

Glorious and happy as was the death of St. Joseph, the gates of Heaven remained closed to him. Angels conducted his soul to Limbo, where a multitude of just and holy spirits of the Old Law were patiently awaiting the arrival of their Redeemer after the completion of His work on Golgotha’s hill.

Faith teaches that the reward promised by God to those who serve Him faithfully is in proportion to the merits they acquired upon earth.

No one will imagine a grander, more sublime or meritorious position than that filled by St. Joseph. He cast protecting arms around Jesus, the God-Man, and his spouse, the Blessed Virgin Mary–the loveliest and holiest of creatures–when the life of the Child was endangered by the wicked King Herod and his soldiers. Thus he cooperated in the sublime work of our salvation. He endured sacrifices and privations of every kind. Many were the days of hard toil endured to provide for the needs of the Holy Family. As a carpenter St. Joseph glorified labor, since he was ever united with God and offered all in humble obedience to His Will.

Silently and humbly, patiently and lovingly he went about his daily tasks, never complaining; though his life could easily have been a monotonous and difficult one in the small workshop at Nazareth. As the foster-father of Jesus, it was his duty to teach the Child Jesus.

In the revelations of St. Bridget we have the Blessed Virgin saying: “My Son was so obedient that when Joseph said, ‘Do this or do that’, immediately He did it”.

Ven. Mary of Jesus of Agreda relates that when the Blessed Virgin understood that the final hour on earth of her faithful spouse was drawing near, she implored her Divine Son to assist him in the journey from life to eternity; and that she received more than she asked, namely a promise that He would not only assist St. Joseph but “would raise him to a rank so exalted that he would be the admiration of all the celestial hierarchy.”

In truth there must been great rejoicing in Heaven when Jesus forty days after His Resurrection ascended triumphantly into Heaven accompanied by all the just who had lived from the beginning of creation and had been redeemed through the promise of Mankind’s Savior. Foremost among these was His beloved foster-father St. Joseph, who, standing at the right hand of Jesus, was led by Him to occupy a place which, with the sole exception of that destined for Mary his holy spouse, was the highest in Heaven. He was enveloped in celestial joy at the vision of the Divine Essence, which no man can describe, as St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 2: 9): “Eye hath no seen, nor ear heard, neither hat it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love him.”

In conclusion, Ven. Mary of Jesus of Agreda recounts extraordinary privileges granted by God to devout clients of St. Joseph:

“First, those who invoke him, shall obtain from God, by his intercession, the gift of chastity, and shall not be conquered by the temptations of the senses; second, these shall receive particular graces to deliver them from sin; third, they shall obtain a true devotion to the Blessed Virgin; fourth, they shall have a happy death, and in that all-decisive moment  be defended against the assaults of Satan; fifth, they shall be delivered, if conducive to their salvation, from bodily sufferings, and shall find help in their afflictions; sixth, if married, they shall be blessed with off-spring; seventh, the demons shall have mortal dread of the invocation of the glorious name of St. Joseph.”

St. Bernard sums up the life of St. Joseph with the words: “He was a faithful and prudent servant, I say, whom the Lord gave as a consolation to His Mother, as the guardian of His own Body, and finally as the only and most faithful helper upon earth in the great plan of His Incarnation”. (Rosalie Mary Levy, Joseph the Just Man, St. Paul Editions, 1955, pp. 82-85.)

Rosalie Mary Levy provides the account of Our Lady’s apparition to Venerable Mary of Jesus of Agreda to explain the incomparable glory of her Most Chaste Spouse, the Just and Silent Man of the House of David:

“My daughter, although you have written that my spouse Joseph was one of the greatest saints and most noble princes of the celestial Jerusalem, you cannot now declare his eminent sanctity. Mortals can never know it until they enjoy the vision of God, in which they will with admiration discover the mystery, and they will praise the Lord for it. In the last day when all men will be judged, the unhappy damned will weep bitterly for not having known, because of their sins, this powerful and efficacious means for their salvation, and for not having availed themselves of it, as they could have done, to recover the grace of the just Judge. The world has been greatly ignorant of the magnitude of the prerogatives which the supreme Lord has accorded to my holy spouse, and how powerful is his intercession with His Divine Majesty; for be assured that he is one of the greatest favorites of God, and one of the most capable of appeasing His justice against sinners. I desire you to be most grateful to the goodness of the Lord for the favor which I have granted to you on this occasion, and that you will render Him continual thanks for the illumination that you have received touching this mystery. Endeavor also, in the future, to augment your devotion for my holy spouse, and bless the Lord for that He has favored him with so much liberality, and also for the consolation that I enjoyed in bearing him company and knowing his perfections.

“You must avail yourself of his intercession in all your necessities and so act as to multiply the numbers of his votaries. Recommend to your daughters to distinguish themselves in this devotion, since the Most High grants on earth that which my spouse requests in Heaven, and He will unite to these requests extraordinary favors for men, provided they do not render themselves unworthy to receive them.

“All these privileges respond to the perfection, the innocence, and to the eminent virtues of this admirable saint, because they have attracted the complaisance of the Lord, Who destines for him inconceivable largesse, and Who desires to show great mercy to those who will have recourse to his intercession.” (Rosalie Mary Levy, Joseph the Just Man, St. Paul Editions, 1955, pp. 150-152.)

Joseph the Just Man recounts Our Lady’s message to Saint Bridget of Sweden concerning the Patron of the Universal Church:

“St. Joseph was so reserved and careful in his speech, that not one word ever issued from his mouth that was not good and holy, nor did he ever indulge in unnecessary or less charitable conversation. He was most patient and diligent in bearing fatigue; he practiced extreme poverty; he was most meek in bearing injuries; he was strong and constant against my enemies; he was the faithful witness of the wonders of Heaven, being dead to the flesh and the world, living only for God and for heavenly goods, which were the only things he desired. He was perfectly conformed to the Divine Will and so resigned to the dispositions of Heaven, that he ever repeated: ‘May the Will of God ever done in me!’ He rarely spoke with men, but continually with God, Whose Will he desired to perform. Wherefore, he now enjoys great glory in Heaven.”Rosalie Mary Levy, Joseph the Just Man, St. Paul Editions, 1955, pp. 148-149.)

Imagine what our ecclesiastical situation would look like if Catholics prayed to Saint Joseph for the restoration of the true Faith and the vanquishing once and for all of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and all of its novelties, including the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service. Imagine what the world would look like if Catholics invoked the intercession of the just man, Saint Joseph, to restore the Social Reign of His Divine foster-Son and of His Virginal Spouse, Mary Immaculate, banishing forever the falsehoods of Modernity and Modernism. Imagine what each one of our lives would be like if we asked him for the graces to imitate his love and his joy for serving Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Our Lady in humility and with patient endurance of trials and sufferings.

Saint Joseph has appeared with his virginal spouse in Knock, Ireland, and in Fatima, Portugal. Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos saw Saint Joseph bless the crowd three times as the Miracle of the Sun took place on October 13, 1917. Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has seen to it that his foster-father, the just and quiet man of the House of David, is honored by us for the role he played in our redemption and the role he plays in helping us to get to Heaven. Along with all of the other angels and saints, including Our Lady, Saint Joseph is present at every Mass.

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s prayer to Saint Joseph, found in his The Liturgical Year, is worth calling to mind:

We praise and glorify thee, O happy saint! We hail thee as the spouse of the Queen of heaven, and foster-father of our Redeemer. These titles, which would seem too grand for any human being to enjoy, are thine; and they are but the expression of the dignities conferred on thee by God. The Church of heaven admires the sublime favours thou hast received; the Church on earth joyfully celebrates thy glories, and blesses thee for the favours thou art so unceasingly bestowing upon her.

Though born of the kingly race of David, thou was the humblest of men; thy spirit led thee to seek obscurity, and a hidden life was thine ambition: but God chose thee to be an instrument in the sublimest of all His works. A noble Virgin of the same family of David, the object of heaven’s admiration, and the glory and hope of the world, is to be thy bride. The Holy Ghost is to dwell within her as in a most pure tabernacle; it is to thee, the just and chaste, that He entrusts her as an inestimable treasure. Espouse, then, to thyself her whose beauty the King of heaven so greatly desires.

The Son of God comes down to this earth, that He may live the life of man; He comes that He may sanctify the ties and affections of kindred. He calls thee father; He obeys thy orders. What strange emotions must have filled thy heart, O Joseph! when, knowing the prerogatives of thy bride and the divinity of they adopted Son, thou hadst to be the head of this family, which united heaven and earth into one! What respectful and tender love for Mary, thy blessed bride! What gratitude and profound worship of Jesus, Who obeyed thee as they Child! Oh mysteries of Nazareth! a God dwells among men, and permits Himself to be called the Son of Joseph!

O sublime minister of the greatest of blessings, intercede for us with God made Man. Ask Him to bestow humility upon us, that holy virtue which raised thee to such exalted dignity, and which must be the basis of our conversation. It is pride that led us into sin, and made us prefer our own will to that of God: yet will He pardon us if we offer Him the sacrifice of a contrite and humble heart. Get us this virtue, without which there can be no true penance. Pray also for us, O Joseph, that we may be chaste. Without purity of mind and body we cannot come nigh the God of all sanctity, who suffers nothing defiled to approach Him. He wills to make our bodies, by His grace, the temples of His holy Spirit: do thou, great saint, help us to maintain ourselves in so exalted a dignity, or to recover it if we have lost it.

And lastly, O faithful spouse of Mary! recommend us to our Mother. If she cast a look of pity upon us during these days of reconciliation, we shall be saved: for she is the Queen of mercy, and Jesus, her Son, will pardon us and change our hearts, if she intercede for us, O Joseph! Remind her of Bethlehem, Egypt, and Nazareth, in all of which she received from thee such marks of they devotedness. Tell her that we, also, love and honour thee; and Mary will reward us for  our devotion to him who has given her by heaven as her protector and support.

Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical letter, Quamquam Pluries, August 15, 1889, to promote devotion to Saint Joseph. Noting his own connection to Joseph, the son of the patriarch Jacob, Pope Leo went on to explain that persons of all social ranks, especially those who are poor and have little in the way of the resources of this world, have in Saint Joseph a special model and patron:

The special motives for which St. Joseph has been proclaimed Patron of the Church, and from which the Church looks for singular benefit from his patronage and protection, are that Joseph was the spouse of Mary and that he was reputed the Father of Jesus Christ. From these sources have sprung his dignity, his holiness, his glory. In truth, the dignity of the Mother of God is so lofty that naught created can rank above it. But as Joseph has been united to the Blessed Virgin by the ties of marriage, it may not be doubted that he approached nearer than any to the eminent dignity by which the Mother of God surpasses so nobly all created natures. For marriage is the most intimate of all unions which from its essence imparts a community of gifts between those that by it are joined together. Thus in giving Joseph the Blessed Virgin as spouse, God appointed him to be not only her life’s companion, the witness of her maidenhood, the protector of her honor, but also, by virtue of the conjugal tie, a participator in her sublime dignity. And Joseph shines among all mankind by the most august dignity, since by divine will, he was the guardian of the Son of God and reputed as His father among men. Hence it came about that the Word of God was humbly subject to Joseph, that He obeyed him, and that He rendered to him all those offices that children are bound to render to their parents. From this two-fold dignity flowed the obligation which nature lays upon the head of families, so that Joseph became the guardian, the administrator, and the legal defender of the divine house whose chief he was. And during the whole course of his life he fulfilled those charges and those duties. He set himself to protect with a mighty love and a daily solicitude his spouse and the Divine Infant; regularly by his work he earned what was necessary for the one and the other for nourishment and clothing; he guarded from death the Child threatened by a monarch’s jealousy, and found for Him a refuge; in the miseries of the journey and in the bitternesses of exile he was ever the companion, the assistance, and the upholder of the Virgin and of Jesus. Now the divine house which Joseph ruled with the authority of a father, contained within its limits the scarce-born Church. From the same fact that the most holy Virgin is the mother of Jesus Christ is she the mother of all Christians whom she bore on Mount Calvary amid the supreme throes of the Redemption; Jesus Christ is, in a manner, the firstborn of Christians, who by the adoption and Redemption are his brothers. And for such reasons the Blessed Patriarch looks upon the multitude of Christians who make up the Church as confided specially to his trust — this limitless family spread over the earth, over which, because he is the spouse of Mary and the Father of Jesus Christ he holds, as it were, a paternal authority. It is, then, natural and worthy that as the Blessed Joseph ministered to all the needs of the family at Nazareth and girt it about with his protection, he should now cover with the cloak of his heavenly patronage and defend the Church of Jesus Christ.

You well understand, Venerable Brethren that these considerations are confirmed by the opinion held by a large number of the Fathers, to which the sacred liturgy gives its sanction, that the Joseph of ancient times, son of the patriarch Jacob, was the type of St. Joseph, and the former by his glory prefigured the greatness of the future guardian of the Holy Family. And in truth, beyond the fact that the same name—a point the significance of which has never been denied—was given to each, you well know the points of likeness that exist between them; namely, that the first Joseph won the favor and especial goodwill of his master, and that through Joseph’s administration his household came to prosperity and wealth; that (still more important) he presided over the kingdom with great power, and, in a time when the harvests failed, he provided for all the needs of the Egyptians with so much wisdom that the King decreed to him the title “Savior of the world.” Thus it is that We may prefigure the new in the old patriarch. And as the first caused the prosperity of his master’s domestic interests and at the same time rendered great services to the whole kingdom, so the second, destined to be the guardian of the Christian religion, should be regarded as the protector and defender of the Church, which is truly the house of the Lord and the kingdom of God on earth. These are the reasons why men of every rank and country should fly to the trust and guard of the blessed Joseph. Fathers of families find in Joseph the best personification of paternal solicitude and vigilance; spouses a perfect example of love, of peace, and of conjugal fidelity; virgins at the same time find in him the model and protector of virginal integrity. The noble of birth will earn of Joseph how to guard their dignity even in misfortune; the rich will understand, by his lessons, what are the goods most to be desired and won at the price of their labor. As to workmen, artisans, and persons of lesser degree, their recourse to Joseph is a special right, and his example is for their particular imitation. For Joseph, of royal blood, united by marriage to the greatest and holiest of women, reputed the father of the Son of God, passed his life in labor, and won by the toil of the artisan the needful support of his family. It is, then, true that the condition of the lowly has nothing shameful in it, and the work of the laborer is not only not dishonoring, but can, if virtue be joined to it, be singularly ennobled. Joseph, content with his slight possessions, bore the trials consequent on a fortune so slender, with greatness of soul, in imitation of his Son, who having put on the form of a slave, being the Lord of life, subjected himself of his own free-will to the spoliation and loss of everything.

Through these considerations, the poor and those who live by the labor of their hands should be of good heart and learn to be just. If they win the right of emerging from poverty and obtaining a better rank by lawful means, reason and justice uphold them in changing the order established, in the first instance, for them by the Providence of God. But recourse to force and struggles by seditious paths to obtain such ends are madnesses which only aggravate the evil which they aim to suppress. Let the poor, then, if they would be wise, trust not to the promises of seditious men, but rather to the example and patronage of the Blessed Joseph, and to the maternal charity of the Church, which each day takes an increasing compassion on their lot.  (Pope Leo XIII, Quamquam Pluries, August 15, 1889.)

Saint Joseph is our helper in time of need. After Our Lady herself, we should call upon Saint Joseph to help us at every turn as we endeavor to fulfill our daily duties and as we seek to labor hard at saving our souls as members of the Catholic Church, which is blessed to have him as her Universal Patron. We can have every confidence in the prayers and petitions we offer to our Protector and our friend, the lover of Holy Poverty and the Patron of a Happy, Holy Death, Saint Joseph of Nazareth.

Good Saint Joseph, just man of the House of David, pray for us to imitate your virtues. Pray for us to persevere in the graces won for us by the shedding of your foster-Child’s Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of thy Virginal Spouse, the Mediatrix of All Graces. Pray for us to be meek and humble of heart, consecrated as we must be to the Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, pray for us now and in death’s agony.

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, we love you, save souls.

Our Lady, ever virginal spouse of Saint Joseph, pray for us.

The Litany of Saint Joseph

Kyrie, eleison.
R. Christe, eleison.
Lord, have mercy on us.
R. Christ, have mercy on us.
Kyrie, eleison.
Christe, exaudi nos.
R. Christe, audi nos.
Lord, have mercy on us.
Christ, hear us.
R. Christ, graciously hear us.
Pater de caelis, Deus,
R. miserere nobis.
God the Father of heaven,
R. have mercy on us.
Fili, Redemptor mundi, Deus,
R. miserere nobis.
God the Son, Redeemer of the world,
R. have mercy on us.
Spiritus Sancte Deus,
R. miserere nobis.
God the Holy Ghost,
R. have mercy on us.
Sancta Trinitas, unus Deus,
R. miserere nobis.
Holy Trinity, one God,
R. have mercy on us.
Sancta Maria,
R. ora pro nobis.
Holy Mary,
R. pray for us.
Sancte Ioseph,
R. ora pro nobis.
St. Joseph,
R. pray for us.
Proles David inclyta,
R. ora pro nobis.
Renowned offspring of David,
R. pray for us.
Lumen Patriarcharum,
R. ora pro nobis.
Light of Patriarchs,
R. pray for us.
Dei Genetricis Sponse,
R. ora pro nobis.
Spouse of the Mother of God,
R. pray for us.
Custos pudice Virginis,
R. ora pro nobis.
Chaste guardian of the Virgin,
R. pray for us.
Filii Dei nutricie,
R. ora pro nobis.
Foster father of the Son of God,
R. pray for us.
Christi defensor sedule,
R. ora pro nobis.
Diligent protector of Christ,
R. pray for us.
Almae Familiae praeses,
R. ora pro nobis.
Head of the Holy Family,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph iustissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph most just,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph castissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph most chaste,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph prudentissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph most prudent,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph fortissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph most strong,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph oboedientissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph, most obedient,
R. pray for us.
Ioseph fidelissime,
R. ora pro nobis.
Joseph most faithful,
R. pray for us.
Speculum patientiae,
R. ora pro nobis.
Mirror of patience,
R. pray for us.
Amator paupertatis,
R. ora pro nobis.
Lover of poverty,
R. pray for us.
Exemplar opificum,
R. ora pro nobis.
Model of artisans,
R. pray for us.
Domesticae vitae decus,
R. ora pro nobis.
Glory of home life,
R. pray for us.
Custos virginum,
R. ora pro nobis.
Guardian of virgins,
R. pray for us.
Familiarum columen,
R. ora pro nobis.
Pillar of families,
R. pray for us.
Solatium miserorum,
R. ora pro nobis.
Solace of the wretched,
R. pray for us.
Spes aegrotantium,
R. ora pro nobis.
Hope of the sick,
R. pray for us.
Patrone morientium,
R. ora pro nobis.
Patron of the dying,
R. pray for us.
Terror daemonum,
R. ora pro nobis.
Terror of the demons,
R. pray for us.
Protector sanctae Ecclesiae,
R. ora pro nobis.
Protector of Holy Church,
R. pray for us.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi,
R. parce nobis, Domine.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
R. spare us, O Lord.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi,
R. exaudi nobis, Domine.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
R. graciously hear us, O Lord.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi,
R. miserere nobis.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world,
R. have mercy on us.
V. Constituit eum dominum domus suae.
R. Et principem omnis possessionis suae.
V. He made him the lord of his household.
R. And prince over all his possessions.
Deus, qui in ineffabili providentia beatum Ioseph sanctissimae Genetricis tuae Sponsum eligere dignatus es, praesta, quaesumus, ut quem protectorem veneramur in terris, intercessorem habere mereamur in caelis: Qui vivis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. Amen.
Let us pray
O God, in Thy ineffable providence Thou wert pleased to choose Blessed Joseph to be the spouse of Thy most holy Mother, grant, we beg Thee, that we may be worthy to have him for our intercessor in heaven whom on earth we venerate as our Protector; Thou who livest and reignest forever and ever. Amen.

 O Saint Joseph, whose protection is so great, so strong, so prompt before the throne of God, I place in thee all my interests and desires. O thou Saint Joseph, do assist me by thy powerful intercession, and obtain for me from thy divine Son all spiritual blessings, through Jesus Christ, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; so that, having engaged here below thy heavenly power, I may offer my thanksgiving and homage to the most loving of fathers. O Saint Joseph, I never weary contemplating thee, and Jesus asleep in thy arms; I dare not approach while He reposes near thy heart. Press Him in my name and kiss His fine head for me, and ask Him to return the kiss when I draw my dying breath. Saint Joseph, Patron of departing souls, pray for me. Amen!

Saint Joseph Altar, Christ the King Church Parish Hall, Lafayette, Lousiana, Laetare Sunday, March 18, 2007

Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, 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.

March 18, 2014, Article

March 18, 2014, Feast of Saint Cyril of Jerusalem and Commemoration of Tuesday in the Second Week of Lent:

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part four examines some of the “highlights,” if you will, of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s rhetoric and activity from the middle of May, 2013 to the end of June, 2013. This installment features a protracted introduction of the sort that was supposed to find its way into part three before it got posted late Friday March 14, 2014, without my intending to do so. 

Future installments will follow in due course. However, attention will be turned to the follies of naturalism tomorrow and to the complete, nearly universal triumph of the lavender agenda on Thursday. Friday’s commentary should focus on the Ukrainian crisis.

Today, March 18, is the thirty-second anniversary of the death of my late mother, Norma Florence Red Fox Droleskey. Please remember her immortal soul in your prayers today. 

Today is also the seventh anniversary of the death of Father Daniel Johnson, the longtime pastor of Saint Mary by the Sea Church in Huntington Beach, California, and the sixth anniversary of the death of Mrs. Theresa Colgan, the mother of one of my former students from Saint Francis College in Brooklyn, New York, during the 1985-1986 academic year.

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. May their souls and all of the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace. Amen.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, pray for us.

March 14, 2014, Article

March 14, 2014, Ember Friday in Lent and the Commemoration of the Lancing and the Nails that pierced Our Lord’s Holy Body:

One Year of Visceral Revolutionary Rhetoric and Activity, part two, continues the review of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s first few weeks of his masquerade as “Pope Francis.” Although I have written about this man for over a year now, even I have forgotten some of what he has done. It’s an astounding record of apostasy, something that serves, most unfortunately, a great “letter of reference,” if you will, for him to present the adversary upon his death if he does repent, abjure his errors and convert back to the Catholic Faith.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Ash Wednesday, 2014

March 5, 2014, Ash Wednesday:

We have now entered into our annual desert journey of Lent. We are to be detached more and more from worldly attachments, meditating upon all that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ suffered to redeem us, whose sins caused Him to undergo His fearful Passion and Death. This is a wonderful time to increase our spiritual reading and to decrease our use of the internet, yes, including this site, if doing so interferes with Lenten resolutions.

Two republished articles are thus offered for your reading today: Dust Unto Dust, 2014  and The Royal Road to Victory.


May we ask Our Lady to send us all of the graces necessary to make this Lent of 2014 the best one of our lives as we seek to prepare to enter deep into the Paschal Triduum of Our Lord six weeks from tomorrow, that is, on Maundy Thursday, April 17, 2014.

As noted late last evening, the Miraculous Novena of Grace began yesterday. Please do join us in praying this powerful Novena. Thank you.

The next original article on this site will appear tomorrow, Thursday, March 6, 2014, the Feast of Saints Perpetua and Felicity and the Commemoration of Thursday after Ash Wednesday.

Yesterday’s original article, A New King Has Come To Power, was described in the About Today’s New Article page on this site.


Our Lady of Sorrows, pray for us.

A New King Has Come To Power

Everything in the counterfeit church of conciliarism is unstable as falsehood is of its nature based of the illusion of stability. Falsehood of its nature is inherently unstable. There is nothing secure, nothing stable in the “doctrines” and the “pastoral practices” of Modernism, something that Pope Saint Pius X pointed out in 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.)

The Modernists in the counterfeit church of conciliarism have done us the inestimable favor of explaining to us that they do not believe in the immutability of Catholic doctrine, including the very Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church. Numerous articles on this site have included Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI’s lifelong belief that it is impossible for human language to express the various “meanings” contained found in doctrine as any particular dogmatic formulation necessarily is contingent upon the subjective circumstances of the historical moment in which it was made. The entirety of conciliarism is based upon this denial of the nature of dogmatic truth, which is nothing other than utter blasphemy against the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, under Whose infallible protection and guidance our true popes and the fathers of Holy Mother Church’s true general councils make doctrinal statements and other declarations pertaining to the Holy Faith.

The now retired prefect of the conciliar Congregation for the Destruction, Deformation and Deconstruction of the Faith, William “Cardinal” Levada, who is, apart from being a close friend of the doctrinally, liturgically and morally corrupt Roger Michael “Cardinal” Mahony, a former student and protege of Father Joseph Ratzinger, expressed this precise blasphemous heresy almost exactly seven years ago now in an interview that he gave to the Whispers in the Loggia website:

The role of the Church in that dialogue between an individual and his or her God, says the Cardinal, is not to be the first interlocutor, but the role is indispensable. “We believe that the apostles and their successors received the mission to interpret revelation in new circumstances and in the light of new challenges. That creates a living tradition that is much larger than the simple and strict passing of existing answers, insights and convictions from one generation to another.

But at the end of the day there has to be an instance that can decide whether a specific lifestyle is coherent with the principles and values of our faith, that can judge whether our actions are in accordance with the commandment to love your neighbor. The mission of the Church is not to prohibit people from thinking, investigate different hypotheses, or collect knowledge. Its mission is to give those processes orientation”.  (Levada Gives Rare Interview: “I Am Not Responsible for the Crusades, Past or Present.)

In other words, William Levada believes in the concept of dogmatic evolutionism that was condemned by: Pope Pius IX in The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864, and by Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council over which he presided (April 24, 1870); Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and in The Oath Against Modernism, September 8, 1907; and by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950. Levada believes what was taught to him by Ratzinger directly.

Jorge Mario Berogoglio believes the same thing, although he is not bothered in the least by any apparent contradictions between the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church as does not believe that there is any such thing as immutable truths. Everything is negotiable in light of the “pastoral needs” of “the people,” something that I attempted to point out only two days ago now, Sunday, March 2, 2014, Quinquagesima Sunday, in To Tickle Itching Ears One Must Abandon The Holy Cross.

Bergoglio’s own “theologian,” “Archbishop” Victor Manuel Fernandez, the rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina, has stated this clearly, although Bergoglio has not been obtuse in the past in his contempt for doctrinal exactitude, which he has expressed repeatedly, including in Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013:

“The problem is that fanatics end up turning certain principles into a never-ending battle and deliberately only ever focus on these issues,” Mgr. Víctor Manuel Fernández, Rector of the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina said, referring to “non negotiable” values as they are called. Fernández, who was nominated archbishop by Pope Francis, was interviewed by Vatican correspondent Paolo Rodari (who writes for Italian daily La Repubblica) and their discussion became a book entitled “Il progetto di Francesco. Dove vuole portare la Chiesa” (“The Francis project. Where he wants to take the Church”, EMI publications, pp.142, €10,90)

Some questions dealt with Francis’ approach to ethical issues, an area that is currently being hotly debated. This is evident from how people have embraced certain appeals the Pope has made, especially ecclesial movements, people who cannot express their Christian identity fully without making enemies and having to put up a fight. “The moral issues in question need to be contextualised in order to be understood fully. This means having a context that is closer to home as well as a broader one,” Fernández said.


This broader context which Francis talks about in the Evangelii Gaudium “is the kerygma, it is an invitation to an encounter with God who loves and saves people and for this reason presents us with the possibility of a better life. This is what it means to “make hearts burn” and this is the most important thing. Presumably, when the Church goes on about philosophical or natural law-related questions, it does so in order to create a dialogue with non believers on moral issues. And yet by using dated philosophical arguments, the Church is not at all convincing and it misses the chance to proclaim the beauty of Jesus Christ’s ability to set people’s hearts on fire. Said philosophical arguments do nothing to change people’s lives. But if we manage to set others’ hearts on fire  or at least show them what’s so attractive about the Gospel, then people will be more willing to discuss and reflect on answers regarding morality.”

According to the Argentinean theologian “there also needs to be reference to a context close to home, that is always positive in light of what is being considered or proposed. For example, it is no good opposing same-sex marriage because people tend to see us as a group of resentful, cruel, insensitive, over-the-top even, individuals. It is an entirely different thing to talk about the beauty of marriage and the harmony of differences that form part of an alliance between a man and woman. This positive context speaks for itself when it comes to showing that the use of the same term “marriage” to describe same-sex unions, in unsuitable.”

Fernández believes some have taken non negotiable principles too far, “distorting Benedict XVI’s teaching.” “Some have even claimed that all Church teachings depend and are based on non negotiable principles. This certainly is heresy! To claim that Jesus Christ, his resurrection, fraternal love and all that the Gospel teaches us depends on ethical principles is a distortion of Christianity.


“For example,” Fernández goes on to say, “the Pope stands firm in his opposition to abortion because if he does not defend the innocence of human life, we aren’t left with many other arguments with which to defend human rights. Of course this is not negotiable, but it doesn’t mean that certain moral principles are the source of all other truths of the Christian faith. The crux of our faith, which sheds light on everything, is not this, but the kerygma. This is the only way to understand the key role played by the “truth hierarchy” which this Pope wants to restore. The problem is that fanatics end up turning certain principles into a never-ending battle and deliberately only ever focus on these issues.”


Francis, the Argentinean theologian said in his interview with Rodari, “is asking us to embrace a certain style, to give things the right balance and focus. The Pope asks us not to “always” focus “exclusively” on certain moral principles for two reasons: so that we don’t put people off by being too over-insistent and above all so that we don’t destroy the harmony of our message. Radical circles within the Church ridicule the Pope when they say: “now the Pope forbids us to talk about these issues.” This is a lie and defaming the Pope is immoral. They are all moral when they discuss issues that interest them but not when it comes to other issues.”


“Up until two years ago some people would never have accepted the Pope’s words being questioned but now all sorts of critical comments are being spread and written about Pope Francis. This is no reflection of faith, it is an ideological battle: I’ll defend the Pope if he defends my own opinions.” The theologian concludes by saying that “if we look at each case individually, there are other aspects that are not negotiable: loving one’s neighbour, seeking justice for the oppressed, being honest in business dealings…” (Rationalizing Dogmatic and Moral Relativism.)

This can be dispensed with relatively quickly:

First, Victor Manuel Fernandez does not understand that dogmatic truth is based upon Divine Revelation, which is immutable because God is immutable. Period. No true Catholic bases his belief in the immutability of doctrine on “ethical principles. We do so because we accept the very Word of God as He has revealed Himself to us through His Catholic Church as He canst neither deceive nor be deceived.

Second, Victor Manuel Fernandez’s denigration of the Natural Law as having any kind of relationship to moral truth demonstrates that he does not understand or accept the fact that God is the Author of the Natural Law, which is as immutable as that of doctrine itself. The precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law are immutable. The Catholic Church is the sole teacher and repository of the Divine Positive Law and she is the authoritative interpreter of all that is contained in the Natural Law, something that Pope Pius XI made clear in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929:

The Church does not say that morality belongs purely, in the sense of exclusively, to her; but that it belongs wholly to her. She has never maintained that outside her fold and apart from her teaching, man cannot arrive at any moral truth; she has on the contrary more than once condemned this opinion because it has appeared under more forms than one. She does however say, has said, and will ever say, that because of her institution by Jesus Christ, because of the Holy Ghost sent her in His name by the Father, she alone possesses what she has had immediately from God and can never lose, the whole of moral truth, omnem veritatem, in which all individual moral truths are included, as well those which man may learn by the help of reason, as those which form part of revelation or which may be deduced from it.  (Pope Pius XI, Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

Third,  Victor Manuel Fernandez confirms what I have been saying for years about the opposition of the conciliar “popes” to abortion and to the perverse notion of “marriage” between persons of the same gender, namely that such opposition is based on a regard for “human rights,” not for the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II spoke in terms of “human solidarity” and “human rights.” So did Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. So does Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis. One never heard Ratzinger/Benedict and one never hears Bergoglio/Francis mention the binding precepts, say, of the Fifth, Sixth and Ninth Commandments. They have respect for “human rights,” not for the immutable law of God. What matters is the “kerygma,” not the law of God. This is nothing other than what I termed it yesterday, Situation Ethics or Moral Relativism.

Fourth, Victor Manuel Hernandez has a very short selective memory concerning “opposition” to “papal” teaching, which did not begin with the “election” of Jorge Mario Bergoglio on March 13, 2013. All manner of priests, religious and theologians publicly opposed Giovanni Montini/Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968, even though it was a completely revolutionary document that inverted the ends of marriage and paved the way for “Catholic contraception” by means of “natural family planning” (see Forty-Three Years After Humanae Vitae, Always Trying To Find A Way and Planting Seeds of Revolutionary Change.) Similarly, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI were denounced regularly as “conservatives” by ultra-progressive conciliar revolutionaries. The only thing that has happened now is that the former “dissenters” are now in charge, and they are the ones invoking “loyalty to the ‘pope'” now to demand adherence to the new program. Then again, a true pope is deserving of our obedience. As the conciliar “popes” have promoted that which is against the Faith, of course, we know that they cannot be true popes and that we must have no association with them whatsoever. Victor Manuel Hernandez is living in a fantasy world that has no connection with reality, whether supernatural or natural, in the slightest.

Fifth, it is the likes of Karol Wojtyla/John “Paul” II (and his “living tradition), Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI (and his “hermeneutic of continuity”), Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Victor Manuel Fernandez (and their “kerygma”) who are guilty of heresy, not believing Catholics who understand that the truths of the Divine Positive Law and Natural Law are immutable because God is immutable. The Oath Against Modernism makes this abundantly clear:

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day. And first of all, I profess that God, the origin and end of all things, can be known with certainty by the natural light of reason from the created world (see Rom. 1:90), that is, from the visible works of creation, as a cause from its effects, and that, therefore, his existence can also be demonstrated: Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. Thirdly, I believe with equally firm faith that the Church, the guardian and teacher of the revealed word, was personally instituted by the real and historical Christ when he lived among us, and that the Church was built upon Peter, the prince of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors for the duration of time. Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical’ misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one which the Church held previously. I also condemn every error according to which, in place of the divine deposit which has been given to the spouse of Christ to be carefully guarded by her, there is put a philosophical figment or product of a human conscience that has gradually been developed by human effort and will continue to develop indefinitely. Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely confess that faith is not a blind sentiment of religion welling up from the depths of the subconscious under the impulse of the heart and the motion of a will trained to morality; but faith is a genuine assent of the intellect to truth received by hearing from an external source. By this assent, because of the authority of the supremely truthful God, we believe to be true that which has been revealed and attested to by a personal God, our creator and lord.

Furthermore, with due reverence, I submit and adhere with my whole heart to the condemnations, declarations, and all the prescripts contained in the encyclical Pascendi and in the decree Lamentabili, especially those concerning what is known as the history of dogmas. I also reject the error of those who say that the faith held by the Church can contradict history, and that Catholic dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, are irreconcilable with a more realistic view of the origins of the Christian religion. I also condemn and reject the opinion of those who say that a well-educated Christian assumes a dual personality-that of a believer and at the same time of a historian, as if it were permissible for a historian to hold things that contradict the faith of the believer, or to establish premises which, provided there be no direct denial of dogmas, would lead to the conclusion that dogmas are either false or doubtful. Likewise, I reject that method of judging and interpreting Sacred Scripture which, departing from the tradition of the Church, the analogy of faith, and the norms of the Apostolic See, embraces the misrepresentations of the rationalists and with no prudence or restraint adopts textual criticism as the one and supreme norm.

Furthermore, I reject the opinion of those who hold that a professor lecturing or writing on a historico-theological subject should first put aside any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Catholic tradition or about the divine promise of help to preserve all revealed truth forever; and that they should then interpret the writings of each of the Fathers solely by scientific principles, excluding all sacred authority, and with the same liberty of judgment that is common in the investigation of all ordinary historical documents.

Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact, namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was, and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different, may never be understood in any other way.

I promise that I shall keep all these articles faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing. Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. . .  (Pope Saint Pius X, The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)

The charge of heresy is thus laid at the doorsteps and upon the persons of Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ratzinger/Benedict and Bergoglio/Francis and their supporting cast of conciliar revolutionaries, including the likes of Victor Manuel Fernandez. The inherent instability that is the very nature of heresy and all falsehood, whether pertaining to supernatural or natural truth, is such that its proponents become laws unto themselves, having no regard even for their predecessors in the pathways of heresy and falsehood.

As I have been writing for many years now, the conciliar revolutionaries have established the principle that the teaching of the “past” can be understood in “different ways” according to the circumstances of the moment or that it can be ignored entirely. This “teaching,” however, makes the “magisterium” of one conciliar “pope” irrevelant to his successors, who believe that the “teaching” and or disciplinary decisions of one conciliar “pope” can be ignored with impunity by another according to the “necessities” of the moment or to be “faithful” to the “kerygma” of the heart according to what is said to be the “wholeness” of the teaching of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

This is what his happening at present with the recently installed conciliar “bishop” of the Diocese of Fort Worth, Texas, Mr. Michael Olson, who has, just several weeks into his “episcopal” reign of terror, ordered the President of the College of Saints John Fisher and Thomas More to cease staging the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition by presbyters within the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter. Once again you see, Ratzinger/Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007, is no more binding to Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis and his conciliar “bishops” than, say, The Oath Against Modernism, which was “revoked” by Giovanni Montini/Paul VI in 1967 was to Ratzinger/Benedict. Bergoglio has now authorized open warfare against Summorum Pontificum, which was designed to “pacify the spirits” of traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures, just as Ratzinger/Benedict has waged a lifelong warfare against the nature of dogmatic truth.  By doing this, of course, Bergoglio is being perfectly consistent with his past, which included suppressing a traditional community of religious women during his time as the conciliar “archbishop” of Buenos Aires, Argentina (see Francis: The Latest In A Long Line Of Ecclesiastical Tyrants.)

Here is the initial report, found on the Rorate Caeli website, of this latest salvo in Bergoglio’s war against Catholic Faith, Worship and Morals, a war that has been waged rhetorically and programmatically:

In a stunning and breathtaking letter, the Most Rev. Michael Olson, the newly-ordained bishop of the Fort Worth Diocese and the second-youngest bishop in the United States, has fully and totally banned the offering of the Traditional Latin Mass in the chapel of Fisher More College, where it has been offered for the last three years on a daily basis by chaplains all approved by his predecessor bishop according to the college. This blow comes after the students of the college raised $300,000 in about a week to keep the school open for the spring semester (see here). 

Rorate has exclusively obtained — through a source who has requested anonymity — a copy of the letter sent last week by the bishop after a personal meeting with the college’s president, Michael King. Even more striking, the letter from Bishop Olson states that he’s doing this “for your own soul,” addressing Mr. King, apparently saying in some twisted way the offering of the Mass in the Extraordinary Form is a danger to Mr.King’s soul

When asked by Rorate for a response to the letter from Bishop Olson, the school declined to comment.  (BREAKING & EXCLUSIVE: Bishop Bans Fisher More College from offering Traditional Latin Mass to studentsStunning letter gives no reason, simply bans the Mass said daily for last three years at school for sake of “your own soul.”)
Ah, such a tender, touching concern for souls.
Remember, Jorge Mario Bergoglio made it very clear recently that he was worried about why young Catholics could be attracted to any version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. He does not want their minds “poisoned” by developing an “attachment” to “that Mass.” Michael Olson, you see, has his marching orders, and those who think that the “law” is on their side seem to forget that the new king is the law. He “don’t like” the old law. It is as simple as that.
Without minimizing the suffering that the administration, faculty, students of the College of Saints John Fisher and Thomas More is experiencing at this time, it is time for traditionally-minded Catholics who have desired to maintain their “good standing” in the counterfeit church of conciliarism to recognize that Summorum Pontificum was a trap in and of its nature and that its very existence was subject to the sufferance of men who offend God daily by means of propagating false doctrines and forbidden practices, such as participating in “ecumenical prayer services” or personally esteeming the symbols of false religions, and who have a burning, seething hatred for all that is associated with what is said to be the “past” of the Catholic Church.
As has been noted on this site many times before, the late Monsignor Klaus Gamber, who was not a traditionalist, explained that the doctrinal and liturgical revolutionaries hate the Immemorial Mass of Tradition because they hate the Faith upon which it is based and which it express with eloquence, beauty and perfection:

Not only is the Novus Ordo Missae of 1969 a change of the liturgical rite, but that change also involved a rearrangement of the liturgical year, including changes in the assignment of feast days for the saints. To add or drop one or the other of these feast days, as had been done before, certainly does not constitute a change of the rite, per se. But the countless innovations introduced as part of liturgical reform have left hardly any of the traditional liturgical forms intact . . .

At this critical juncture, the traditional Roman rite, more than one thousand years old and until now the heart of the Church, was destroyed. A closer examination reveals that the Roman rite was not perfect, and that some elements of value had atrophied over the centuries. Yet, through all the periods of the unrest that again and again shook the Church to her foundations, the Roman rite always remained the rock, the secure home of faith and piety. . . .

Was all this really done because of a pastoral concern about the souls of the faithful, or did it not rather represent a radical breach with the traditional rite, to prevent the further use of traditional liturgical texts and thus to make the celebration of the “Tridentime Mass” impossible–because it no loner reflected the new spirit moving through the Church?

Indeed, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the prohibition of the traditional rite was announced at the same time as the introduction of the new liturgical texts; and that a dispensation to continue celebrating the Mass according to the traditional rite was granted only to older priests.

Obviously, the reformers wanted a completely new liturgy, a liturgy that differed from the traditional one in spirit as well as in form; and in no way a liturgy that represented what the Council Fathers had envisioned, i.e., a liturgy that would meet the pastoral needs of the faithful.

Liturgy and faith are interdependent. That is why a new rite was created, a rite that in many ways reflects the bias of the new (modernist) theology. The traditional liturgy simply could not be allowed to exist in its established form because it was permeated with the truths of the traditional faith and the ancient forms of piety. For this reason alone, much was abolished and new rites, prayers and hymns were introduced, as were the new readings from Scripture, which conveniently left out those passages that did not square with the teachings of modern theology–for example, references to a God who judges and punishes.

At the same time, the priests and the faithful are told that the new liturgy created after the Second Vatican Council is identical in essence with the liturgy that has been in use in the Catholic Church up to this point, and that the only changes introduced involved reviving some earlier liturgical forms and removing a few duplications, but above all getting rid of elements of no particular interest.

Most priests accepted these assurances about the continuity of liturgical forms of worship and accepted the new rite with the same unquestioning obedience with which they had accepted the minor ritual changes introduced by Rome from time to time in the past, changes beginning with the reform of the Divine Office and of the liturgical chant introduced by Pope St. Pius X.

Following this strategy, the groups pushing for reform were able to take advantage of and at the same time abuse the sense of obedience among the older priests, and the common good will of the majority of the faithful, while, in many cases, they themselves refused to obey. . . .

The real destruction of the traditional Mass, of the traditional Roman rite with a history of more than one thousand years, is the wholesale destruction of the faith on which it was based, a faith that had been the source of our piety and of our courage to bear witness to Christ and His Church, the inspiration of countless Catholics over many centuries. Will someone, some day, be able to say the same thing about the new Mass? (Monsignor Klaus Gamber, The Reform of the Roman Liturgy, p. 39, p. 99, pp. 100-102.)

To want to be clothed with the mantle of “approval” by the conciliar revolutionaries, of course, one must choose of his own free will to be silent about offenses to Christ the King and His Sacred Deposit of Faith in order to have “access” to a modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that is staged, not offered, at least for the most part, by men who are not truly ordained priests of the Catholic Church.

One must choose to be silent as a conciliar “pope” or  conciliar “bishop” enters into a place of false worship and calls it “sacred” as he participates in rites that come straight from the devil.

One must choose to be silent as a conciliar “pope” writes in a document published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis that the Old Covenant was not superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ instituted at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday and that He ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday as the earth quaked and the curtain in the Temple was torn in two from top to bottom.

One must choose to be silent as a conciliar “pope” prays from the blasphemous Talmud with his favorite pro-abortion Talmudic rabbi, Abraham Skorka, from Argentina.

One must choose to be silent as a conciliar “pope” blasphemes Our Lord repeatedly, including saying that He only “pretended” to get angry with the Pharisees, and as the same “pope” blasphemes Our Lady by imagining her to have said “Lies!” to the God the Father as she stood so valiantly at the foot of the Cross of her Divine Son.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his stooges, including men such as Michael Olson, let all manner of heresies be taught in formerly Catholic universities and colleges, many of which permitted vulgar, pornographic and blasphemous films to be shown or plays to be produced for the “entertainment” and/or “education in diversity” of the student body.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, following the example of his predecessors, and his stooges permit all manner of pro-abortion, pro-perversity Catholics who hold elected or appointed positions in civil government to remain in perfectly “good standing” without a word of protest to them. Most of these officials support statist programs that are said to be “for the poor,” and that is only the “kerygma” that matters to Bergoglio and his hacks.

Men such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Michael Olson must attack all remaining vestiges of Catholicism within the conciliar structures. Those who ignore this revolutionary program for what it is, apostasy, cannot expect anything other than what has happened to the administration, faculty, staff and students of the Colleges of Saint John Fisher and Thomas More, which was based on the belief that its mission, as well-intentioned as it may be, could “coexist” with a religion that is alien to the Catholic Faith and thus offensive God and harmful to the eternal and temporal good of the souls for which Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem. New kings come to power, and they do not consider them bound by anything that previous kings have taught or decreed.

The new attack on the stating of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition at the College of Saints John Fisher and Thomas More is yet another visible, practical sign that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s pathologically obsessive rhetorical attacks on Tradition and those who adhere to it are meant to be given “flesh and bones,” so to speak, in the practical order of things.

There is even a report that the warfare that has been waged for the last six months against the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate because of the devotion of a sizable number of friars to the patrimony of the Roman Rite and the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church may result in the community’s total suppression and the subsequent absorption of its members into the conciliar-controlled Order of Friars Minor, Capuchin:

“One of the key issues is the threat of a certain self-reference, that is, the desire to stress at all costs its distinctive peculiarities. Instead, I believe certain proof of maturity to try to overcome this attitude, recognizing and humble spirit with the building of the Franciscan Church as the ultimate referent of their charismatic experience

These words that Fidenzio P. Volpi OFM Cap, the Commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, wrote in his first communication of the summer of 2013, might reveal in the coming days or months in the nature of a real programmatic text.

A reliable source makes us know the fact that Germany would study the plan to forcibly join the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate Order of Friars Minor Capuchin erasing of fact and law, the Congregation founded by Father Manelli.

We entrust in each case the prayers of all those who read us the intercession of the Holy Virgin and the salvation of the Congregation of Franciscans of the Immaculate, whose work for the restoration of orthodoxy in the Church gave great fruit and has raised the hopes of the Catholics around the world. (Google Translation of Text found at: Source claims to know of potential plan to assimilate the Friars into the Franciscan Capuchins. Text of link to Italian original found at Novus Ordo Watch News Digest.)

It remains to be seen whether this report is fully accurate. If it is, however, it is clear that the attack on the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate is, apart from representing the first open manifestation of Bergoglio’s plans for the “Motu Proprio” Summorum Pontificum, a full-force effort to erase the spirituality of Father Maximilian Koble, the founder of the Knights of the Immaculta, including his desire to promote Total Marian Consecration to build the City of Mary Immaculate.

Father Maximilian Kolbe is a thorn in the side of men such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his personal Grand Inquisitor (Persecutor) of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate because he was opposed to Zionism. He was opposed to Communism. He was opposed Nazism. He was opposed to Judeo-Masonry and all forms of naturalism. He was opposed to all forms of liberalism. Perhaps most damning of all in the eyes of the conciliar revolutionaries, the late Father Maximiliam Kolbe, M.I., hated what he called “modern ecumenism:”

“Only until all schismatics and Protestants profess the Catholic Creed with conviction, when all Jews voluntarily ask for Holy Baptism – only then will the Immaculata have reached its goals.”

In other words” Saint Maximilian insisted, “there is no greater enemy of the Immaculata and her Knighthood than today’s ecumenism, which every Knight must not only fight against, but also neutralize through diametrically opposed action and ultimately destroy. We must realize the goal of the Militia Immaculata as quickly as possible: that is, to conquer the whole world, and every individual soul which exists today or will exist until the end of the world, for the Immaculata, and through her for the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (Father Karl Stehlin, Immaculata, Our Ideal, Kansas City, Missouri, Angelus Press, 2007, p. 37.)

The devil, working through Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Fidenzio Volpe, is attempting to fight against and “neutralize through diametrically opposed action and ultimately destroy” the work of a slave of the Immaculate, Father Maximilian Kolbe as anyone who opposes false ecumenism, including one who is a “canonized” saint in the conciliar church, must have his work eliminated from view.

It is the conciliar officials who are heretical, not those who reject their legitimacy, their doctrines, their liturgies, their endless harangues and their blasphemies and sacrileges.

It is the conciliar officials who are in schism from the Catholic Church, not those who recognize them to be enemies of Christ the King and the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem.

There is no need to catalog yet again each of the many errors that persist in the minds of the conciliar officials, starting with Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis Hundreds upon hundreds of articles on this site have catalogued these errors. Others, to be sure, have critiqued these errors much more ably than has been done on this website. The errors are there for all who have the grace to see them and to accept the fact that it is the conciliar officials who are outside of the Catholic Church, not any of us who reject their nonexistent legitimacy.

It is simply time for Catholics who know all of this to be true to stop groveling at the feet of spiritual robbers and to admit the obvious: that the See of Peter is vacant because the conciliar is false and the men who have claimed to hold the papacy since October 28, 1958, have propagated a religion according to the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man as improved by Modernism and its evolutionary view of dogma, not the immutable Faith of our fathers that was taught by Our Lord and handed down to us infallibly from the time of the Apostles by our Holy Mother, the Catholic Church.

Among the truths rejected by the conciliar revolutionaries is that of the Social Reign of Christ the King. The very saint whose holy life is celebrated today, Saint Casimir, stands as a rebuke to the likes of Wojtyla/John Paul II, Ratzinger/Benedict and Bergoglio/Francis, each of whom has taught the importance of “healthy secularity,” that is, the “benefits” of that which the Catholic Church has, calling to mind the words of Pope Saint Pius X in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, never ceased to condemn as the circumstances required, namely, the “separation of Church and State.”

Consider this account of Saint Casimir’s life as found in the Divine Office for today:

This Casimir was the son of Casimir III., King of Poland, by Elizabeth of Austria, his wife, (and was born upon the th day of October, in the year 1458.) From his childhood he was taught by the best masters, and was trained in all godliness and good learning. While he was still a boy he wore rough haircloth, and chastened himself with much fasting. He forsook the softness of his princely bed, and lay upon the hard ground, and on stormy nights he would go out secretly and prostrate himself before the doors of the churches, crying to God for mercy. He was unwearied in contemplating the Passion of Christ, and when he was present at Mass, so profound was his recollection, that he seemed to be altogether beside himself.

He made the propagation of the Catholic faith one of the chief works of his life, and strove hard against the schism in Ruthenia. He persuaded his father to forbid by law that the schismatics should build any new churches, or repair the existing ones when they fell into decay. So great was his liberality and tenderness toward the needy and the afflicted, that he came to be called the father and guardian of the poor. From his infancy he never soiled his purity, and in his last illness, when his physicians advised him to seek for relief from his grievous sufferings by the sacrifice of his chastity, he cheerfully determined rather to die.

Being made perfect in a short space, and full of piety and good works, he foretold the day of his own death, and, gathering round him a choir of priests and monks, he rendered his soul into the hands of God Whom they were praising, upon the fourth dayof March, in the year of our Lord 1482, the 25th of his own age. His body was carried to Wilna, where many miracles are reputed to have been wrought around it. At his grave a dead girl is said to have received her life again, blind men their sight, cripples the power of walking, and many sick folk health. Moreover, on an occasion when the Lithuanians in scanty numbers were exposed to the shock of a powerful enemy, they believed that he appeared in the air, and gave them the signal victory which they won. On the assurance of these things, Leo X. was moved to add his name to those of the Saints. (Matins, Divine Office, March 4.)

Saint Casimir’s defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King should inspire us to recognize that not a single, solitary Catholic who rejects the Sacred Rights of Our Divine Redeemer to reign as the King of all men and of each and every nation, including the United States of America, is a member in good standing of the Catholic Church. His example of prayer and penance and fasting and mortification should inspire us as well on the cusp of Lent today, Shrove Tuesday, to deny ourselves in this life so that we might have life everlasting in Heaven, please God and by the graces He won for us and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces, that we die in states of Sanctifying Grace.

We need to pray to Saint Casimir that Catholics who truly love God will come to His defense and have nothing to do with the conciliar revolutionaries who reject the doctrines of the Holy Faith, including that of the Social Reign of Christ the King that he exemplified with such great and heroic sanctity.

On this day before we enter the desert of Lent, we must be brutally honest about our sins and the harm that they have done to our souls and to the Mystical Body of Christ, earnestly seeking to live more and more penitentially, seeking to offer up all of our prayers, especially by means of Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, and penances and physical sufferings and fastings and humiliations that come our way in a spirit of reparation to God through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. We are very much responsible for the malodorous state of the Church Militant on earth and the world-at-large.

To Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart belongs the triumph that will vanquish the lords of Modernism once and for all as we follow Christ the King, not the “kings” of conciliarism who hath not regard for each other, no less for Him and His inviolable, immutable teaching.

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 Casimir, pray for us.

Pope Saint Lucius I, pray for us.

March 1, 2014, Article

March 1, 2014, Our Lady’s Saturday, the First Saturday on the month of March:

We have entered the month of March, the month of our dear Saint Joseph. Lent begins in but four days, although it certainly seems as though the past year of Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s frenetic activity of nonstop revolutionary propaganda and action has extended the holy season of Lent to a year-round observance.

Today’s principal article, Resignationism Follies, attempts to put the absurdity of the “resignationism” conspiracies to bed, noting that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI had long considered resigning from the conciliar “Petrine Ministry,” and that he intended to establish a precedent for his successors to follow by actually resigning of his own free will.

There may be a shorter article for posting later today, followed by one on Monday, as it stands now, on the triumph of the agenda of the Homosexual Collective in all aspects of law, government and what passes for “popular culture.”

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.



Silence! Don’t Hurt the Blaspheming Heretic’s Feelings

But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: “Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.” To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: “Have confidence; I have overcome the world.” Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind.

Yes, I meant to extract those two sentences from the indented quotation from Pope Leo XIII’s Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, in order to emphasize their importance.

Silence is what so many self-appointed “gatekeepers” of what is said to be “mainstream traditionalism” have kept as the conciliar “pontiffs” have blasphemed the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity for all the world to see. These “gatekeepers” act as though their silence will somehow clothe the “papal” emperor with a “bullet proof” shield even though anyone with access to the internet can find out exactly what the conciliar “popes” have said and done on any given day.

It is almost as though blaspheming God while promoting multiple heresies is “no big deal.” Indeed the silence kept by so many of these self-appointed “gatekeepers” of what is said to be “mainstream traditionalism” is premised on the belief that Catholics must be “protected” from the words and actions of “ignorant” “popes” who act the part of Vatican court jesters to amuse the crowds whose ears are tickled by “papal” words and actions. This means that a Catholic should expect that a “pope” is so unreliable a teacher of the Catholic Faith that it is necessary to keep a “prudent silence” about his apostasies.

Numerous examples have been provided on this site of how the Antipope Emeritus, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, offended the honor and glory and majesty of God. A significant number of these were summarized in Mister Asteroid Is Looking Pretty Good Right About Now. It boggled my well-worn pea-brain how supposedly “traditional” Catholics who used to froth at the mouth and rend their garments at the words and actions of the soon-to-be-“canonized” Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II said and wrote nothing whenever the “restorer of Tradition” who had issued Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007, offended the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity. The duplicity and the hypocrisy were astounding to behold.

Lost on these self-appointed “gatekeepers,” however is that there was  nothing “traditional” about denying the nature of dogmatic truth and entering synagogues and mosques, calling them “holy” or “sacred” places, and esteeming the symbols and “values” of one false religion after another, including what the hardly “new” (nearly five years now) false “pontiff” did in Washington, District of Columbia, itself, on Thursday, April 17, 2008, as he personally esteemed the symbols of five false religions (see April 17, 2008 – 6:15 p.m. – Interreligious Gathering) something that millions upon millions of Catholic martyrs submitted themselves to unspeakable acts of torture and death rather than to give even the appearance of consenting to of their own free wills.

Pope Pius XII made this abundantly clear in Ci Riesce, an allocution given to Italian lawyers on December 6, 1953:

Her deportment has not changed in the course of history, nor can it change whenever or wherever, under the most diversified forms, she is confronted with the choice: either incense for idols or blood for Christ. The place where you are now present, Eternal Rome, with the remains of a greatness that was and with the glorious memories of its martyrs, is the most eloquent witness to the answer of the Church. Incense was not burned before the idols, and Christian blood flowed and consecrated the ground. But the temples of the gods lie in the cold devastation of ruins howsoever majestic; while at the tombs of the martyrs the faithful of all nations and all tongues fervently repeat the ancient Creed of the Apostles. (Pope Pius XII, Ci Riesce, December 6, 1953.)

The more one accustoms oneself to keeping silent in the face of blasphemies, apostasies, heresies and scandalous liturgies is to condition one to keep silent in face of numerous and bolder attacks against the Holy Faith on the part of a particular conciliar “pope” and his “bishops.” In other words, silence in in the face of blasphemies, apostasies, heresies and scandalous liturgies is the most powerful “inoculation” known to man to avoid the problems that come from courageously denouncing blaspheming heretics and to resolve to have nothing to do with them or their false church and its false doctrines and false, sacramentally invalid liturgical rites.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has only increased the pace of the blasphemies, sacrileges, apostasies and heresies that have flowed forth from the lords of conciliarism in the past fifty-six years. Bergoglio is merely showing us the perfection of the inherent degeneracy of conciliarism’s false doctrines and its invalid liturgical rites. He is a serial blasphemer against the honor and glory and majesty of God (see Fundamental Heretics for a brief summary). And yet it is that many of the self-appointed “gatekeepers” of what is considered to be “mainstream traditionalism” believe that is best to keep silent about the “pope’s” defections from the Catholic Faith in order to “emphasize the positive.”

In order to do this, however, it is necessary to believe in the absurdity that a man who can blaspheme Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His Most Blessed Mother on a regular basis can be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter.

Given the deluge unleashed by Bergoglio’s “election” on Wednesday, March 13 2013, it is hardly possible to keep up with each of the Argentine Apostate’s speeches and actions. Indeed, even I missed the following set of remarks, which were delivered on Saturday, June 15, 2013, at the Casa Santa Marta and contain a direct blasphemy against Our Lord Himself:

Vatican Radio) Christian life is not a spa therapy “to be at peace until Heaven,” but it calls us to go out into the world to proclaim that Jesus “became the sinner” to reconcile men with the Father. These were Pope Francis’ words during his homily at Mass Saturday at the Casa Santa Martha.

The Christian life is not staying in a corner to carve a road which takes you into heaven, but it’s a dynamic that encourages one to stay “on the road” to proclaim that Christ has reconciled us to God, by becoming sin for us. In his usual profound and direct way, Pope Francis focuses on a passage from the Letter to the Corinthians, from today’s liturgy, in which St. Paul very insistent, almost “in a hurry”, uses the term “reconciliation”five times.

“What is reconciliation? Taking one from this side, taking another one for that side and uniting them: no, that’s part of it but it’s not it … True reconciliation means that God in Christ took on our sins and He became the sinner for us. When we go to confession, for example, it isn’t that we say our sin and God forgives us. No, not that! We look for Jesus Christ and say: ‘This is your sin, and I will sin again’. And Jesus likes that, because it was his mission: to become the sinner for us, to liberate us.

It is the beauty and the “scandal” of the redemption brought by Jesus and it is also the “mystery, says Pope Francis, from which Paul draws” zeal “that spurs him to” move forward ” telling everyone” something so wonderful “the love of a God” who gave up his Son to death for me. ” Yet, explains Pope Francis, there is a risk of “never arriving at this truth” in the moment when “we ‘devalue a little the Christian life”, reducing it to a list of things to observe and thus losing the ardor, the force of the ‘”love that is inside” of it:

“But philosophers say that peace is a certain ordered tranquility: everything is tidy and quiet … That is not the Christian peace! Christian peace is an uneasy peace, not a quiet peace: it is an uneasy peace, which goes on to carry this message of reconciliation. The Christian Peace pushes us to move forward. This is the beginning, the root of apostolic zeal. Apostolic zeal is not to go forward to persuade and make statistics: this year Christians in this country have grown, in this movement … Statistics are good, they help, but that is not what God wants from us ,is to persuade… What the Lord wants from us is to announce this reconciliation, which is his own core message . “

Concluding his homily the Pope recalls the inner anxiety of Paul. Pope Francis underlines that which defines the “pillar” of Christian life, namely, that “Christ became sin for me! And my sins are there in his body, in his soul! This – says the Pope – it’s crazy, but it’s beautiful, it’s true! This is the scandal of the Cross! “

“We ask the Lord to give us this concern to proclaim Jesus, to give us a bit of ‘that Christian wisdom that was born from His pierced side of love. Just a little to convince us that the Christian life is not a spa therapy: to be at peace until Heaven … No, the Christian life is the road in life with this concern of Paul. The love of Christ urges us on, it pushes us on, with this emotion that one feels when one sees that God loves us. We ask this grace. ” (Jorge Blasphemes the Divine Redeemer.)

Before turning attention to the sickening blasphemy contained in this “homily” of eight and one-half months ago now, anyone who blessed with a modicum of the sensus Catholicus can see that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has no sense of the horror of personal sin. Indeed, this terrible, disgusting little heretic believes that “love” is the only thing that matters, not a “list of rules to observe.” So much for the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.

Second, one who is blessed with a modicum of the sensus Catholicus can see that Jorge Mario Bergoglio does not care about winning converts to what he thinks is the Catholic Faith. He is concerned only about “proclaiming” the “love” of Our Lord according to the apostasies of conciliarism. This is called “the new evangelization.”

Third, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is bereft of any understanding that sin is a morally bad act that is committed in violation of the Divine Positive Law. Sin is a turning away from the Immutable God to  a mutable “good,” that is, something that is forbidden that is found by the sinner to be a “good” that is “attractive. Thus it is that sin of its very nature is a turning away from God in favor of a created “good.”

Fourth, Bergoglio was implying fairly strongly on June 15, 2013, that he believes in the moral theological heresy known as the “fundamental option,” which contends that one is never guilty of any kind of truly serious, no less mortal, sin unless his “option” is said to be against God. A sinner is just “fine” with God as long as he not opt to turn away from Him. It is no accident that this heresy was propagated in the 1970s by a Jesuit “theologian” by the name of Father Richard McCormack, who died in 2000, and it certainly does not matter to Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis that the “theology of the fundamental option” was condemned even by the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith in Persona Humana on December 29, 1975 (see Persona Humana) or condemned, albeit in the conciliarspeak of his personalist philosophy, by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II in an “apostolic exhortation, Reconciiatio et Paenitentia, December 2 1984, in the following terms:

Likewise, care will have to be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of ” fundamental option”-as is commonly said today-against God, intending thereby an explicit and formal contempt for God or neighbor. For mortal sin exists also when a person knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason, chooses something gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice already includes contempt for the divine law, a rejection of God’s love for humanity and the whole of creation; the person turns away from God and loses charity. Thus the fundamental orientation can be radically changed by individual acts. Clearly there can occur situations which are very complex and obscure from a psychological viewpoint and which have an influence on the sinner’s subjective culpability. But from a consideration of the psychological sphere one cannot proceed to the construction of a theological category, which is what the “fundamental option” precisely is, understanding it in such a way that it objectively changes or casts doubt upon the traditional concept of mortal sin. (Karol Wotyla/John Paul II, Reconciliatia et Paenitentia, December 2, 1984.)

This is one of the reasons that I held out hope, false hope as I learned later, that Wojtyla/John Paul II was going to “correct” things. Wrong.  A little bit of Catholicism now and again does not make one a Catholic when he defects from even one article contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith.

It is though, nevertheless the case that the heresy of the “theology of the fundamental option” was started by a Jesuit and it is being propagated anew by a Jesuit, albeit a layman who believes that he is a priest and a bishop when he is neither.

Fifth, one must have true contrition for one’s sins and make a firm purpose of amendment at the time of one’s confession to be absolved from them. Although Our Lord knows all things as He is God, He does want us to sin again, and He expects us to use the free will that He has given us to choose the good and reject the evil. Bergoglio’s blithe belief that Our Lord is “all right” with our sinning again is beneath contempt and utterly sickening.

Insofar as the blasphemy against Our Divine Redeemer is concerned, it is important to be direct and to the point.

The Theandric Person, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, has no sin on His soul. He is God.

Our Lord took upon Himself the guilt of our sins. He is not a sinner. It is both blasphemous and heretical to say that Our Lord, the God-Man, is a sinner and that sin is on His soul.

Our Lord is the propitiatory offering for human sins. It is by the shedding of the merits of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday that we are redeemed. It is the merits of that same Most Precious Blood

It is through the ministration of a true priest that the merits of the Most Precious Blood of Jesus are applied to our souls in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance, thereby obliterating them. While we must perform the penance assigned to us a by a priest as a condition of his Absolution and must resolve to live more penitentially to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, sins absolved in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance no longer exist after they are absolved by  true priest. It is as though they never existed. They are nothing, and they do not dwell in the soul of the Divine Redeemer.

What, then, is the meaning of Chapter Five, Verse 21 of Saint Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthinans?

Saint Thomas Aquinas provides the answer:

201. – Where we get the faculty to reconcile to God is indicated by the fact that he gave us the power to live justly and abstain from sins. By doing this we are reconciled to God. Hence he says, for our sake, he made him to be sin who knew no sin. As if to say: you can be reconciled to God, because he, namely, Christ, who knew no sin: “He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips” (1 Pet. 2:22); “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (Jn. 8:46). For our sake, he made him to be sin. This can be explained in three ways. In one way because it was the custom of the Old Law to call a sacrifice for sin “sin”: “They feed on the sin of my people” (Hos. 4:8), i.e., the offerings for sin. Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., the victim of sacrifice for sin. In another way, because sin is sometimes taken for the likeness of sin, or the punishment of sin: “God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., made him assume mortal and suffering flesh. In a third way, because one thing is said to be this or that, not because it is so, but because man considers it such. Then the sense is: he made him to be sin, i.e., made him regarded a sinner: “He was numbered with the transgressors” (Is. 53:12).

202. – He did this, so that in him we might become the righteousness [justice] of God, i.e., justified by God. Or justice, because he not only justified us, but also willed that others be justified by us. The justice, I say, of God, not ours. And in Christ, i.e., through Christ. Or another way, that Christ himself be called justice. Then the sense is this: that we might become the righteousness [justice], i.e., cling to Christ by love and faith, because Christ is justice itself. But he says, of God, to exclude man’s justice, by which a man trusts in his own merits: “For, being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness” (Rom. 10:3). In him, namely, in Christ, i.e., by Christ, because he was made justice for us (1 Cor. 1:30). (5-5: 2 Cor. 5:18-21.)

The same truths were taught by the Flemish Jesuit Cornelius a Lapide in the early Seventeenth Century:

2Co 5:21  Him, who knew no sin, he hath made sin for us: that we might be made the justice of God in him. Sin for us… That is, to be a sin offering, a victim for sin.

Him, who knew no sin. Experimentally, says S. Thomas, Christ knew no sin, though by simple knowledge He did, for He did no sin.

He  hath made sin for us. For us, says Illyricus, who were sin; because, he says, sin is the substance and form of our soul. But to say this of ourselves is folly, of Christ blasphemy. (1.) The meaning is that God made Christ to be the victim offered for our sin, to prevent us from atoning for our sins by eternal death and fire. The Apostle plays on the word sin, for when he says, “Him who knew no sin,” he means sin strictly speaking; but when he says, “He made Him to be sin for us,” he employs a metonymy. So Ambrose, Theophylact, and Anselm. In Psa_40:12, Christ calls our sins His. (2.) Sin here denotes, says S. Thomas, the likeness of sinful flesh which He took, that He might be passible, just as sinners who are descended from Adam are liable to suffering. (3.) Sin, in the sense of being regarded by men as a noteworthy sinner, and being crucified as a malefactor. So the Greek Fathers.

That we might be made the justice of God in him. (1.) That we might be made righteous before God, with the righteousness infused by God through the merits of Christ. So Chrysostom. He says righteousness and not righteous, says Theophylact, to signify the excellency of the grace, which effects that in the righteous there is no deformity, no stain of sin, but that there is complete grace and righteousness throughout. (2.) The righteousness of God was Christ made, in order that its effects, or the likeness of the uncreated righteousness of God, might be communicated to us by His created and infused righteousness. So Cyril (Thesaur. lib. xii. c. 3).  (3.) Christ is so called because God owes not to us, but to Christ and His merits, the infusion of righteousness and the remission of our sins. Cf. Augustine (Enchirid. c. 41). Cf. also 1 Cor 1:3030. Heretics raise the objection that Christ was made for us sin, in the sense that our sin was imputed to Him and was punished in Him; therefore we are made the righteousness of God, because it is imputed to us. I answer that the two things are not parallel; for Christ could not really be a sinner as we can really be righteous, nor does the Apostle press the analogy. He only says that Christ bore our sins, that we through Him might be justified. Moreover, Christ actually was made sin, i.e., a victim for sin (this is the meaning of “sin” here), and therefore we truly become the righteousness of God. So easily and completely can we turn the tables on these Protestant objectors. (Cornelius a Lapide’s Commentary on 2 Corinthians 5:17-21.)

It must be understood that the conciliar revolutionaries do not believe that what they believe to be Holy Mass in their new order of things is an unbloody re-presentation of perpetuation of Our Lord’s bloody Sacrifice of Himself to His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal God the Father on the wood of the Holy Cross in atonement for our sins. And it thus that they do not believe that the the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic liturgical service is a propitiatory offering for sin.

This is why Jorge Mario Bergoglio treats sin so easily with a dismissive “who am I to judge?” and how he can twist the true meaning of Saint Paul’s words in Chapter Five, Verse 21 of his Second Epistle to the Corinthians to imply to the undiscerning listener that our sins are part of His own soul. They are not. As noted in the passage from Cornelius a Lapide just above, the true sense by which Our Lord calls our sins His refers to His taking what appeared to be sinful flesh in order to be considered a sinner, a criminal, a malefactor when He was the spotless Victim, the innocent Lamb who taketh away the sins of the the world. There is none of this in the slap-happy, hipster talk of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who is content to make it appear that sin exists on the soul of the Divine Redeemer.

Those who have paid any attention to Bergoglio’s sermon from eight and one-months ago have tried to acquit him even though he has told us in his own words that he does not believe that God expects to keep the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, which he dismisses as a “list of things to observe.” We observe the law God because we love Him. Do good. Avoid evil. It is really very simple.

Most in what is called the traditional world have ignored Bergoglio’s sermon from eight months ago. Most in what is called the traditional world have ignore Bergoglio’s blasphemies against the Mother of God, including his having speculated that Our Lady was tempted to cry out “Lies!” to God the Father as she stood so valiantly at the wood of the Cross. To remain silent about such blasphemies, no less to believe that they can come from the lips of a true Successor of Saint Peter, is to demonstrate that one cares for human respect above all, not about laying down one’s life and precious reputation and/or marketability in order to defend Christ the King and His Most Blessed Mother when they re profaned and blasphemed by wolves in shepherds’ clothing.

The “strategic silence” of the self-appointed gatekeepers of traditionalism continues to permit believing Catholics to think that a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter can believe, speak and act in ways that are contrary to the honor and majesty and glory of God and thus to the eternal and the temporal good of the souls for which Christ the King shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross to redeem. This “strategic silence” accustoms Catholics to accept even greater increments of “papal error” with perfect interior peace of soul in the belief that this will just all somehow go away entirely on its our own.

Error just does not go away. It must be fought. Exhortations must be made to pray and to do penance. More Rosaries must be prayed on a daily basis. And we must separate ourselves from the conciliar robber barons once and for all lest we permit ourselves to accept cowardice as a good when courage is needed to defend the Holy Catholic Faith in all of Its inviolable integrity.

Well, the hour is later than I would have liked it to be.

Suffice it for the moment to remember that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict did not resign from the papacy on February 11, 2013, the Feast of the Apparition of Our Lady of Lourdes, as he never held it in the first place, and that his successor in the conciliar “petrine ministry,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio shares with him and each of the four other conciliar “popes” the distinction of being blaspheming heretics.

We must take heart from this account of the life of Saint Servatus:

Servatus held the bishopric of Tongres (Belgium) at a time when the whole of Christendom had Arian tendencies. The all-powerful emperor, Constantius, was a heretic and supported the heresy; many bishops no longer believed in the divinity of Our Lord; St. Athanasius and St. Hilary, great champions of orthodoxy, were in exile.

The story of the Jewish origins of St. Servatus and his kinship with St. Anne appears legendary. It is not known when he became bishop of Tongres, but by 336, when St. Athanasius spent his exile at Trier, he had already occupied the see. The declaration which he made before the Council of Cologne in 346 informs us both of his meeting with the celebrated Alexandrian doctor and of his own orthodoxy. This is what he says in reference to the bishop of Cologne, deposed on that occasion: “It is not from hearsay that I know what he has been teaching, but from having myself heard it. Our churches are adjacent; many times I have had occasion to contradict him, when he has denied the divinity of Jesus Christ. It has happened in the presence of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. .. . I judge that he can no longer be bishop of Christians; and those do not deserve to be considered Christians who remain in communion with him.”

After failing in his efforts to reconcile the usurper, Magnetius, with the Emperor Constantius, Servatus made a pilgrimage to Rome. He returned convinced that Tongres would soon fall to the Huns. Hastily he carried the relics of the church to Maestricht, and there, shortly afterwards, he died. The towns of Tongres remained thereafter for nearly a century without a bishop. (Omer Engelbert, The Lives of the Saints, Barnes and Noble, p. 186. For an online version, see The Lives of the Saints, page 186.)

We must remember that this is all a chastisement for our sins and those of the whole world. Things are only going to get worse, which is why we must remain steadfast in prayer to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, He Who is the King of all men and of all nations, through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary while we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits and remember these words that Our Crucified and Risen King spoke to saint Margaret Mary Alacoque:

I will reign in spite of all who oppose Me.” (Quoted in: The Right Reverend Emile Bougaud. The Life of Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers in 1990, p. 361.)

Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and the hour of our death.

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 Gabriel of the Sorrows of Our Lady, pray for us.