The Pope of “Inclusiveness” and “Ecumenism”

Cancels His own Religion

Read My lips!

“I am the pope, I do not need to give reasons for any of my decisions” ¹

Jorge Bergoglio Cancels the Latin Mass of 2000 years

 

APOSTOLIC LETTER ISSUED “MOTU PROPRIO” BY THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS «TRADITIONIS CUSTODES» On the Use of the Roman Liturgy Prior to the Reform of 1970 Guardians of the tradition, the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome constitute the visible principle and foundation of the unity of their particular Churches. [1] Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, through the proclamation of the Gospel and by means of the celebration of the Eucharist, they govern the particular Churches entrusted to them. [2] In order to promote the concord and unity of the Church, with paternal solicitude towards those who in any region adhere to liturgical forms antecedent to the reform willed by the Vatican Council II, my Venerable Predecessors, Saint John Paul II and Benedict XVI, granted and regulated the faculty to use the Roman Missal edited by John XXIII in 1962. [3] In this way they intended “to facilitate the ecclesial communion of those Catholics who feel attached to some earlier liturgical forms” and not to others. [4] In line with the initiative of my Venerable Predecessor Benedict XVI to invite the bishops to assess the application of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum three years after its publication, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith carried out a detailed consultation of the bishops in 2020. The results have been carefully considered in the light of experience that has matured during these years. At this time, having considered the wishes expressed by the episcopate and having heard the opinion of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I now desire, with this Apostolic Letter, to press on ever more in the constant search for ecclesial communion. Therefore, I have considered it appropriate to establish the following: Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite. Art. 2. It belongs to the diocesan bishop, as moderator, promoter, and guardian of the whole liturgical life of the particular Church entrusted to him, [5] to regulate the liturgical celebrations of his diocese. [6] Therefore, it is his exclusive competence to authorize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in his diocese, according to the guidelines of the Apostolic See. Art. 3. The bishop of the diocese in which until now there exist one or more groups that celebrate according to the Missal antecedent to the reform of 1970: § 1. is to determine that these groups do not deny the validity and the legitimacy of the liturgical reform, dictated by Vatican Council II and the Magisterium of the Supreme Pontiffs; § 2. is to designate one or more locations where the faithful adherents of these groups may gather for the eucharistic celebration (not however in the parochial churches and without the erection of new personal parishes); § 3. to establish at the designated locations the days on which eucharistic celebrations are permitted using the Roman Missal promulgated by Saint John XXIII in 1962. [7] In these celebrations the readings are proclaimed in the vernacular language, using translations of the Sacred Scripture approved for liturgical use by the respective Episcopal Conferences; § 4. to appoint a priest who, as delegate of the bishop, is entrusted with these celebrations and with the pastoral care of these groups of the faithful. This priest should be suited for this responsibility, skilled in the use of the Missale Romanum antecedent to the reform of 1970, possess a knowledge of the Latin language sufficient for a thorough comprehension of the rubrics and liturgical texts, and be animated by a lively pastoral charity and by a sense of ecclesial communion. This priest should have at heart not only the correct celebration of the liturgy, but also the pastoral and spiritual care of the faithful; § 5. to proceed suitably to verify that the parishes canonically erected for the benefit of these faithful are effective for their spiritual growth, and to determine whether or not to retain them; § 6. to take care not to authorize the establishment of new groups. Art. 4. Priests ordained after the publication of the present Motu Proprio, [as of the date of this letter— July 16th — ed.] who wish to celebrate using the Missale Romanum of 1962, [:]   should submit a formal request to the diocesan Bishop [...who [then — ed.] shall consult the Apostolic See BEFORE granting this authorization.[which will never be granted — ed.] Art. 5.   Priests who already celebrate [as of the date of this letter — July 16th — ed.] according to the Missale Romanum of 1962 should request from the diocesan Bishop [who then, and with no time frame indicated for a response from Rome — ed.] the authorization [which, of course, they will never get — ed.] to continue to enjoy this faculty.   Art. 6. Institutes of consecrated life and Societies of apostolic life, erected by the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, fall under the competence of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life. Art. 7. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, for matters of their particular competence, exercise the authority of the Holy See with respect to the observance of these provisions. Art. 8. Previous norms, instructions, permissions, and customs that do not conform to the provisions of the present Motu Proprio are abrogated. Everything that I have declared in this Apostolic Letter in the form of Motu Proprio, I order to be observed in all its parts, anything else to the contrary notwithstanding, even if worthy of particular mention, and I establish that it be promulgated by way of publication in “L’Osservatore Romano”, entering immediately in force and, subsequently, that it be published in the official Commentary of the Holy See, Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Given at Rome, at Saint John Lateran, on 16 July 2021, the liturgical Memorial of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, in the ninth year of Our Pontificate. FRANCIS https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/motu_proprio/documents/20210716-motu-proprio-traditionis-custodes.html [Formatting (not any editing) by the Boston Catholic Journal to highlight salient commands]

 

Dicite vulpi illi: ¹

Francis will die — but the Latin Mass of 2000 years will never die ... never!

Bergoglio feared the growing popularity of the Latin Mass  — especially among the young — and what he fears he futilely tries to kill ... by edict. On July 16, 2021, he tried to do it by fiat and without warning. This is the badge of cowardice: unexpectedly strike and kill what you fear and what threatens you; outlaw or penalize what you cannot control and which encroaches upon your inflated sense of sovereignty.

Bergoglio and Herod have much in common: destroy the approaching King while He is young and growing ... before He deprives you of your petty power and reveals to you — and the world — that you are simply the unfaithful Vicar only — not the King.

Give no heed to Bergoglio & Company

Do not follow him — nevertheless pray for him and his coterie of worldly, powerful, and disaffected cardinals, bishops, priests Religious, and Modernist theologians — for it is what CHRIST would have us do for those who hate us and ridicule us:

“Ego autem dico vobis : Diligite inimicos vestros, benefacite his qui oderunt vos, et orate pro persequentibus et calumniantibus vos” (Saint Matthew 5.44)
“But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you.”

Do not to descend to the malice of the unfaithful vicar, but rather, as Saint Paul admonishes us:

“Noli vinci a malo, sed vince in bono malum.” (Romans 12.21)

“Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil by good.”

 

A crimson line has been drawn: it will finally separate the hirelings from the Shepherds.

 

Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal

_______________________________

¹  bishop-accountability.org

²  Saint Luke 13.32 (“Go and tell that fox ...”) Christ referring to Herod

   Printable PDF Version

Comments? Write us: editor@boston-catholic-journal.com

 

---

 

 

The Demonic Perversion of the Confessional
 

and the Perpetuation of

 Homosexuality in the Priesthood

 

“Archbishop Carlo Viganò claimed that Pope Francis “continued to cover” for McCarrick, and not only did he repeal the sanctions imposed by Benedict, but also made McCarrick “his trusted counselor.” He claimed that McCarrick, the former archbishop of Washington, advised the pope to appoint a number of bishops in the United States , including Cardinal Blaise Cupich of Chicago, Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, and Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego.” [all homosexual advocates — ed.]

Francis’ Response?

 

“I Will Not Say a Single Word”

“Pope Francis said [Aboard the papal plane, Aug 26, 2018 / 15:30 pm] that he will not comment on claims by a former Vatican ambassador to the U.S. that the pope knew about allegations against Archbishop Theodore McCarrick and reinstated him in ministry. The pope said people should make up their own minds about the claims. Asked whether it was true that Archbishop Carlo Viganò, the statement’s author, had informed him in 2013 about McCarrick’s alleged sexual misconduct with priests and seminarians, and if it was true Benedict XVI had previously imposed sanctions on the former cardinal, the pope said he was distracted by the previous question and would have preferred to talk about the trip. ... “I read the statement this morning, and I must tell you sincerely that, I must say this, to you ... I will not say a single word on this.” *

Why did Francis refuse to reply to the shocking accusations brought about by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò with these infamous words? Twice he claims that he “must” say nothing about the accusations. “Must”. He does not say “I choose not to ...”, or “I would prefer not to ...” — but that he “MUST not”. Francis chose his words very carefully. Why?

This question has baffled countless Catholics, journalists, and reporters concerning the widespread Abuse Scandal of Predatory Homosexual Priests. There is an answer — an answer that is at once conspicuously cogent, compelling, and credible. In fact, it may be the answer to the most salient question surrounding the worst scandal that has ever plagued the Roman Catholic Church in the 2000 years of Her history:
 

How was this possible?

Dr. Taylor Marshall, philosopher and director of the New Saint Thomas Institute, has provided us with a uniquely insightful answer which, when fully explicated, answers not only this vexing question concerning Francis, but the vicious mechanism by which homosexual predation within the clergy flourished and continues to be perpetuated.

The Answer is Breathtaking! The Sacrament of Penance — the Confessional — the very means established by Christ to renounce and repudiate sin and re-establish the soul to a state of grace consonant with God — has been perverted to become both the means and the end of perpetuating sin! Imagine, the devil has spuriously co-opted a Sacrament! The object is to perpetuate homosexuality in the the priesthood — and to destroy it — and with it, Christ’s Holy Catholic Church! How was this possible?
 

Manipulating the Seal of the Confessional!
 

In order to understand this answer, it is imperative that you understand the following:
 

• A priest may NEVER “under any circumstance break the “Seal of the Confessional” even if it costs him his life. If he does break that seal,
  he is automatically excommunicated from the Church (read on) and can no longer exercise any priestly function or faculty, celebrate any Mass, or receive Holy Communion. He is outside the Church. THIS IS THE VITAL POINT TO KEEP IN MIND.
   

• Let us assume that a homosexual priest has sodomized or sexually violated (raped) a young man.
   

• To protect himself from the possibility of the exposure of his sin and crime, he enters the Confessional. However, upon his confession, HE IMMEDIATELY BINDS THE PRIEST TO WHOM HE CONFESSES — both by the Seal of the Confessional and by Canon Law — TO NEVER REVEAL IT TO ANYONE, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, WHATSOEVER, no matter how many times he has done it or continues to do it.
   

• This is a VERY forceful and cogent explanation of why Francis remains silent. This — and this alone — is why Francis “Will not say a single word about it [the accusation].”

That is to say that Francis had two possible and compelling reasons for his refusal to say “a single word”:
 

1. By breaking the Seal of the Confessional himself, he would immediately be incurring excommunication latae sententiae (the punishment is concurrent with the action) upon himself.
    

2. And to BIND any priest to whom he himself may have confessed his complicity in perpetuating the same sin, from ever disclosing it.
    

We believe that this explanation exceeds mere conjecture, but there is no way that we can ever know it for certain for the very reasons we have already articulated: a priest can say absolutely NOTHING relative to what is disclosed in the Confessional — either exculpatory or inculpatory — not even by so much as the slightest gesture ... for in doing so, he would be automatically excommunicating himself.

 

Demonic Perspicacity

It is nothing less than a demonically clever artifice, for it uses a Sacrament, something holy and inviolable, which in itself (in se) cannot ever be evil — to enable a person to manipulate the sacrament in order to continue to commit or perpetuate evil without disclosure or penalty — and to bind any priest to silence who knows of his unspeakable sin through Holy Confession. It has been, and is, instigated by the devil and the demons. It is the work of darkness.

In a word, Francis could not respond to the question because, by Canon Law, if any priest — including the pope — breaks the “Seal of the Confessional” by word, gesture or deed; if he in any way whatever — violates the Seal of the Confessional and reveals the sins of the Penitent to anyone* — even to save his own life — and even if the Penitent is no longer living — the priest is automatically excommunicated latae sententiae (the instant he breaks the Seal) from the Church.

Of course Francis could never “say a single word” — not if he were to remain “pope” rather than excommunicating himself from the Church.

And this, very likely, is also HOW homosexuality became so pervasive within the priesthood and the episcopacy! Each was covering for the other by binding the other to silence through the sacred Seal of the Confessional — even if the Confessor was not homosexual himself!
 

This self-perpetuating problem can be understood in a broader context:

• homosexual seminarians ...
   

• become homosexual priests ...
   

•  — who become homosexual bishops ...
   

• who become homosexual cardinals ...
   

• who then vote for a pope who himself may be homosexual or at least sympathetic to advocating homosexuality.
   

The longer the ordination of homosexuals, the more pervasive homosexuality will become in the Church —until, in an ultimate effrontery to God, a “synod” or “council” or “pope” declares, to its self-serving purposes, that homosexual acts are no longer sinful — despite every word condemning it in Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Church for 2000 years.

Consider once again, the following scenario: a homosexual seminarian has viciously sinful and perverse sexual relations with another seminarian — or a homosexual priest has raped an Altar boy or preyed upon a youngster (one shudders to think of such horrendous scenarios — and thousands occur!) Guilt torments him, afflicts him, for he recognizes that what he has done is so monstrous, such an offense against God and man, that he cannot tolerate it himself. What does he do?

He goes to confession ...

This is where the vicious cycle begins. Once he reveals his sin to the Confessor, that priest is bound not to let what he has heard from this seminarian influence him in any way. It is as though a confession never occurred as far as the world outside the Confessional is concerned — and the priest effectively becomes a sacred amnesiac. The priest cannot act upon what was confessed to him in any way. Even if the offender routinely has sex with other men, the Confessor cannot in any way influence the candidate’s soon-to-be vocation as a priest. It is nothing less than diabolically conceived, implemented, and perpetuated — it has the “Mark of the Beast” upon it, from conception to conclusion. What is worse — if possible — in confessing the vile sin of homosexual predation, he stirs the lingering lust in the Confessor — who himself is a homosexual predator — who then marks his target for further grooming to satisfy his own perversion!. He has just found another  ... like unto himself!

In a diabolical mockery of the Sacrament of Confession, the two, if both are priests, resume their predatory perversion and reciprocally confess and absolve each other! And — to use Francis’s flimsy deflection — not “a single word” can be said to anyone!


“NOT A WORD CAN BE SAID”

It cannot be sufficiently impressed upon us that the moment the seminarian kneels in the Confessional (or, more commonly in the Novus Ordo Church, sits in a lounge chair and comfortably encounters the priest face-face in what resembles a clinical session — an environment that lends itself to “other pertinent” and more frightful possibilities inside the “Room of Reconciliation” — “NOT A WORD CAN BE SAID” to anyone outside the Confessional — ever.

 

THIS IS HOW HOMOSEXUALITY IS PERPETUATED IN THE PRIESTHOOD!

One very troubling question remains: which side of the Confessional was Bergoglio in? The Confessor’s or the Penitent’s ... or both? He cannot reveal this. And this may well account for his malicious reference to the Confessional as “a torture chamber”.

Before the Sacrament of Penance itself is mindlessly vilified, it is equally vital to understand that the Sacrament of Penance is inviolably sacred and indefeasibly holy, for only through this Sacrament is sin absolved, the penitent cleansed, and upon enacting his penance, exempted from all temporal punishment, and reconciled to God and the Church. Mortal Sin is removed and with it — eternal punishment in a very real place called Hell.

To use this sacred Sacrament, by which sins are absolved — to SUSTAIN, and even IMPLEMENT sin itself — is a sin so grave, so sacrilegious, so blasphemous, that a category even greater than that of “Mortal Sin” itself seems necessary. Something, perhaps, akin to “Demonic Sin”? Why? Because complicity in this category of sin is so heinous, so blasphemous, that it is a participation in a sin that can only be predicated of the demons — and the “Father Lies” himself.

_________________________
* https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/39231/pope-i-will-not-say-a-single-word-on-viganos-allegations-of-cover-up 
** Who may not be genuinely penitent at all, in which case the absolution granted by Christ through the priest is invalid and the “penitent” is further guilty of the greater sin of Sacrilege
1 The Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 decreed, “Let the confessor take absolute care not to betray the sinner through word or sign, or in any other way whatsoever. In case he needs expert advice he may seek it without, however, in any way indicating the person. For we decree that he who presumes to reveal a sin which has been manifested to him in the tribunal of penance is not only to be deposed from the priestly office, but also to be consigned to a closed monastery for perpetual penance.” See also: Canon 983.1 of the current Code of Canon Law, which declares that “It is a crime for a confessor in any way to betray a penitent by word or in any other manner or for any reason.” (#2490 CCC).
 

Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal

Printable PDF Version
Comments? Write us: editor@boston-catholic-journal.com

 

---

 

 

NON HABEMUS PAPAM
 

 

 

1958 —the Year of the Last

Authentic Catholic Pope

 

It is typically the prerogative of the  Protodeacon of the College of Cardinals who ceremoniously proclaims the election of a new pope with the words “Habemus Papam!”, or “We have a Pope” — following a conclave of Cardinal Electors who nominated him.

With something far more profound and painful than “regret”, we have come to acknowledge what had become increasingly obvious — and which found its clearest expression, its culmination, in the neo-pagan “papacy” of Jorge Bergoglio (“Francis”).
 

The See of Rome is no longer Catholic, as Catholicism had been understood and practiced for the 2000 years preceding Vatican II

That is to say, it had ceased to be identifiably and authentically Catholic following that calamitous consistory known to us as “Vatican II” which occurred between October 11, 1962 until December 8, 1965. Since that initial and unprecedented defection of Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli — “John XXIII” — together with what appear to have been at least latently apostate cardinals who nominated him to implement a Modernist agenda replete with the heretical ideologies that define it — and which Saint Pope Pius X had clearly enumerated in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis in 1907, stating that Modernism is the “synthesis of all heresies”, and therefore unequivocally antithetical to the One, True, Holy Catholic Church of the preceding 2000 years.

As a matter of public record and verifiable assertions, Jorge Bergoglio is merely the de facto “pope” of what is, in every aspect, a new religion altogether; a secularized religion that superficially resembles the authentic Catholic Church as it existed prior to 1962 — which it definitively renounced — while choosing to retain a simulacrum of it.

In other words, Jorge is, in fact, an actively presiding High Priest — of a spurious “Conciliar Church” that is distinct from, and opposed to, the authentic “Holy Roman Catholic Church”  of 2000 years and, as such, is eo ipso without any lawful ecclesiastical authority outside the counterfeit “Conciliar Church” that emerged from “Vatican II”. The conclave that elected him was overwhelmingly compromised and canonically unlawful; and while appearing to have the faculties of electors — but obstinately remaining in a state of heresy — they in fact possessed none of the requisite legitimate credentials. See Saint Gallen conspiratorial group

The counterfeit papacy of Jorge Bergoglio is unquestionably the most perfidious and destructive in the 2000 year history of the Catholic Church. We do not “judge” the man — that is reserved to God. We do, however, examine his public statements and actions in light of the Sacred Deposit of Faith and Tradition (Tradere: “to hand down, to pass on”) entrusted to Holy Mother Church by God — and find them irreconcilable with Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, the Depositum Fidei, and the canons of logic.

The question now is WHERE are we to find the One, Tue, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church from time immemorial? It is and ever will be. Christ promised as much. But if the “First See” can no longer be found in Rome, where is it? Where is the Chair of Saint Peter? And if we can discover it, who occupies it? — if anyone! If we hold that “the Chair is empty” in light of the repudiation of orthodox Catholic canons— are we to be understood as “Sedevacantists” ... or simply “orthodox”?
 

God by any other name ...

Is, then, being an orthodox Catholic, or even a Sedevacantist (who holds that the Chair of Saint Peter is temporarily vacant) more scandalous than a “Conciliar Catholic” who maintains that there is no inconsistency in worshipping Pachamama idols together with Jesus Christ, or who holds that the God of the Catholic Saints and Martyrs is the same god as Islam’s Allah (a concept no Muslim would tolerate)? Or, for that matter, that the Sixth Commandment against adultery is not incompatible with divorce, and that, moreover, cohabitating adulterers can receive Holy Communion in good conscience — no matter what God said! Are “Post-Conciliar Catholics” more in keeping with the mind of Christ in promoting “Accompaniment” (in sin, more often than not) as more vital than conversion to the end of the salvation of souls— indeed, that the efforts of Missionaries to proselytize pagans into the one true Faith is really just so much “solemn nonsense”, as Jorge describes it?

We believe, rather, that we must be understood simply as orthodox Catholics had always been understood: as faithful to the Sacred Deposit of Faith and the authentic Magisterium of the Church over the two millennia preceding “Vatican II”, the widely vaunted “Aggiornamento”, and the unmitigated abdication of Catholicism in the pursuit of a pseudo-Ecumenism that has increasingly become pantheistic.

Largely secular issues such as discrete national states, politics, economics, environmentalism, commercial ventures, social justice, global warming, immigration, sovereign borders, aboriginal cultures, plastic in the ocean — to mention a few — have no place in an institution established solely to the end of the salvation of souls! Their strident advocates are many and broadly distributed in the “City of Man”. Only one institution — the Holy Catholic Church — is the sole advocate of the “City of God” to which it calls all men to eternal salvation and everlasting happiness.

Much, much, more remains to be said — so much of authentic Catholicism remains to be articulated against the hyphenated Catholics:

• New-Age Catholics

• Charismatic-Catholics

• Neo-Catholics

• Progressive-Catholics

• Traditional-Catholics

• Othodox-Catholics

• Liberal-Catholics

• Conservative-Catholics

• Trad-Catholics

• Neo-Trad Catholics

So much remains to be re-acquired because it has not been taught for 60 years; it has been forgotten, contemptuously dismissed, suppressed, and ridiculed by Jorge as “rigid” (by which assessment Christ is the paradigm of “rigidity”, for He was absolutely inflexible in His teachings! May we be as inflexible, and as rigid, as our Lord!) and by his five predecessors as “unenlightened by new and ever-evolving secular ideologies” — or as Jorge dismissively claims, simply “Stuck in the past”. To wit:

• Joseph Ratzinger (“Benedict XVI”)

• Karol Józef Wojtyła (“John Paul II”)

• Albino Luciani (“John Paul I”)

• Giovanni Montini (“Paul VI”)

• Angelo Roncalli (“John XXIII”) the Proto-New-Age-Pontiff with the clarion to “throw open the windows of the Church”

Each of the above shamefully offered more than “a grain of incense” to false gods on the altar of Ecumenism in Assisi and elsewhere. The kissing of the Koran by nominally Catholic popes was not simply scandalous, but treasonable to the Catholic Faith and to Christ Himself to Whom alone allegiance and latria is due! Jorge’s claim that virtually all religions worship the same God is a blatant abrogation of the very First Commandment: “Thou shalt not have strange gods before me.” (Exodus 20.3). There are far too many instances to enumerate in which the One, True, Holy Catholic Faith is either attenuated, ignored, or dismissed altogether by every pontiff since Pope Pius XII.

Of course we understand that such insistence on authentic Catholicism, on the factual rendering of the Gospels and Epistles, the Church Fathers, and the Sacred Deposit of Faith and Tradition will be greeted with much enmity, contempt, ridicule, and disdain. Actually, we delight in this! Ever we have held that a faithful Catholic cannot be on mutually good terms with the World and God. Saint James was clear about this: “Know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God?” (St. James 4.4)

We choose God.

“If the world hate you, know ye, that it hath hated Me before you. If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” (Saint John 15.18-19)

O, hope beyond joy!
 

II. 

It remains to be said that the reluctant position into which we have found ourselves forced was not of our own choosing; it was, and remains deeply painful. Obedience to the pope was the sine qua non of every orthodox Catholic. It was unthinkable that a pope would openly contradict God, Holy Scripture, the Sacred Deposit of Faith, and Tradition. Indeed, to defend all four was, as we say, his “job description” — even to the point of the shedding of his blood. He was the faithful shepherd when all others fled. He laid down his life for his flock — as Christ did for him. He did not lead them into strange and foreign pastures, nor did he open the gate of the sheepfold to flocks that were not his own. Should a wolf in sheep’s clothing attempt to enter, his staff was ready and swift. After all, the sheep were entrusted to him, to do his master’s will — not his own. When this obligation to obedience, however, became obedience to sin and false gods, we fled the false shepherd who urged us to “accompany” him in implementing the priorities of the world, rather than the evangel of Christ.

We never left the sheepfold and never will — it was the shepherd who fled the fold to bring in recreants to mingle with and adulterate the faithful, and we can no longer call him our own — who belongs to these strange others as well. In the absence of a true shepherd, if we must bar the gate ourselves and at so great a cost to ourselves, bar it we will until the one with the Key arrives at the time of God’s choosing.

 

   Printable PDF Version

Editor
Boston Catholic Journal

 

 

---

 

 

 

The Odor of Sulfur ... not Sanctity

 

 “Get thee behind Me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto Me: because thou savorest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men.” 

 (Saint Matthew 16.23)

 

These were Christ’s words ... to Saint Peter — the first pope — when, of himself —
Peter decided the way that Jesus should go ... the way that he himself deemed the best path.

To comprehend the enormity of this, just imagine ... for that moment — Peter was Satan!
 

... And now it is Francis!
 

Who has not Smelled it?

Obedience to the pope presumes the pope’s obedience to Christ, and to the nearly 2000 year old Sacred Deposit of Faith that Christ entrusted to His Bride the Church. In Holy Scripture, in Sacred Tradition, and in the Deposit of Faith we find the fullness of truth and the unerring certainty of the will of God in all things. Who defects from any of the three defects from all and who teaches otherwise teaches heresy. He is separated from the Church. ¹

No one is exempt because no one is immune to grievous sin — sin so grave that excommunication is incurred latæ sententiæ (automatically: as soon as the sin is committed).  Canon Law 1463 states: “Certain particularly grave sins incur excommunication, the most severe ecclesiastical penalty, which impedes the reception of the sacraments and the exercise of certain ecclesiastical acts, and for which absolution consequently cannot be granted, according to canon law, except by the Pope, the bishop of the place or priests authorized by them.”

But what if the pope himself is the excommunicate (latae sententiae) ... or even worse?
 

Who is not confused?

In the face of the near daily assaults — by the present papacy itself and an episcopacy in apparent complicity with him — on 2000 years of the consistent teaching of the Church, on the very Deposit of Faith, and on the validity of Sacred Scripture itself, what Catholic has not asked — in the fearfully deep and most secret recesses of his soul — the question “Whence?” From whom and from what comes this relentless scourging of faith — even at the vertex of the Church itself — this overwhelming defection from all that is holy to all that is vile?

“There is smoke in the sanctuary” and instinctively we perceive it, recoil from it. It is proffered as incense but is pungent to our senses — as the fume of smoldering sulfur.

We are confused between the Word of God become Man and the word of man become god.

What a fearful divide rends the Body of Christ anew!  See how the sheep are scattered! Need we tell you who is the father of confusion and lies ...?

 

No Longer Inconceivable ...

Imagine ... the pope himself as the principle cause of confusion — and defection — in the Catholic Church. It is nothing less than ... diabolically clever.

It is Francis indeed whom satan has sought to sift like wheat ²  — and sadly, it would appear, with much success and to great measure.

 

Manifest Complicity with Evil — and the “Father of Lies” himself

In our obligation to Charity (one of the three Theological Virtues: Faith and Hope being the other two), we should pray that Francis, together with the cardinals and bishops complicit with him, should renounce their complicity with satan, the father of lies and their collaboration with the manifest evil that they have embraced and propagated — and through which they would pull down the walls of the Church and make Christ a liar! Indeed, did not Jesus speak of this current Brood of Vipers when He said:
 

“You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.” (St. John 8.44)
 

Mass Defection

A frightening number of cardinals, bishops, and priests have lost their faith altogether and no longer believe what Christ Himself and Holy Mother the Church taught for 2000 years. Formally, this is called apostasy. They have defected from the Bride of Christ because She is pure and their desires are evil — She is not of this world — but they are! Her Body is chaste and their desires are perverse, corrupt, and defiled. It is precisely in the paradigm of the The Third Temptation of Christ that we find the provenance of this defection (apostasy). What Jesus Christ spurned (worldly “power and glory” ), they have lusted for — and in exchange for it have given the required tribute to the “father of lies” — Satan — who openly boasts of the “power” and “the glory of this world”, that: “to me they are delivered, and I give them to whom I will” (St. Luke 4.5-6).

 

The Tribute due to the father of lies

And what is that tribute? LIES.

If the father is a liar, then his brood can only be liars, too. Christ has already told us: “the desires of your father you will do ... for he is a liar, and the father thereof.” (St. John 8.44)

In exchange for power and perversion they have traded lies: lies about Christ’s teaching, lies about the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church, lies about the Sacred Deposit of Faith, lies about Catholic Doctrine and Dogma, lies about morals, lies about Heaven and Hell — lies about Sacred Scripture itself!  They have lusted for power — perhaps even more than they have shamefully and perversely lusted for other men — and to acquire this power they have traded truth for lies!

It is, we will find, through the Faithful, the Laity, that the Church will be delivered — just as it was in the days of the early heresies when miter and crozier, cardinal and bishop, were bent in submission to apostasy from the Faith — apostasies to which the laity, having learned the truth in holy simplicity, gave no heed. They could smell a wolf under the greatest abundance of wool.

Christ Himself is the Good Shepherd. “The sheep follow Him, because they know His voice. But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers.” (St. John 10:4-5)

Hold fast to the Faith of our Fathers! Cleave to Christ and to what He has taught us, to what Holy Mother Church taught us prior to Vatican II — and fear nothing, and no one — no matter his power or how ruthlessly he demands submission. “For there is no other name under Heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 4.12)

Did not Christ Himself promise:  “I will not forsake you.” (St. John 14.18)

Nor must we ever forsake Him through any inducement to sin — by whomsoever.

“Dilexerunt enim gloriam hominum magis quam gloriam Dei.”  “For they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God.” (St. John 12.43)

________________________

¹  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication_(Catholic_Church )

²   Saint Luke 22.31

 

Geoffrey K. Mondello
Editor
Boston Catholic Journal
 

   Printable PDF Version

Comments? Write us:  editor@boston-catholic-journal.com

 

Further Reading on the Papacy of Francis:

• Francis as the Prince of this World and the Logical Conclusion of Vatican II

• Our Francis who art in Rome

• When Silence becomes Scandal: Lessons not Learned

• The Art of Plausible Deniability: Closing Thoughts on Amoris Laetitia

• Two Great Mysteries: God Needs Us, according to Francis

• Francis — the Great Divider in the Post Modern Catholic Church

• Has Francis Abolished Hell and has Logic Superseded Faith?

• The Iron Fist of Pope Francis

• Against Pharisees: by Bishop Athanasius Schneider concerning Amoris Laetitia

• The Liability of Logic and the Francis Defect

• A Tale of Two Popes: The Newest Paradigm — The Emeriti, Resignation, and Dissolution

• Quotations from Chairman Francis and other Philosophical Absurdities

• PachaPapa — a Pagan Pope — and Definitely not my “Holy Father”

• Francis vs. Jesus Christ: a Serious Matter of Contradiction

• Carefully Crafted Bad Language — from the Vicar of Jesus Christ on Earth?

• What are we to Make of Francis and Friends?

 

 

---

 

It’s Snowing Babies!!

Why do we not hear this from every priest and in every parish?

 

---

 

 

Some
Questions and Answers

about
Authentic Catholic Teaching