the One, True, Holy, Catholic Church
understanding of its sacred dogmas must be perpetually
Holy Mother Church
declared; and there must never
be a recession from that meaning under the specious
name of a deeper understanding”
(Blessed Pope Pius IX, 1st Vatican Council, S.3,
C.2 on Revelation, 1870 ex cathedra)
Mary, Conceived without
pray for us who have recourse
The Despotism of Francis
the Benevolence of God
WHY DOES GODS ALLOW
We do not
argue that Seat of Saint Peter is empty — which is to say that we
are not Sedevacantists (from the Latin “sede vacante”, “the
chair being vacant”)
Indeed, we maintain that the Chair is, in fact, occupied.
That it is presently occupied by a heretic, pantheist and madman in
no way invalidates the statement that the papacy is indeed occupied.
Some popes have been saints. Some have been scoundrels. Jorge Bergoglio,
regrettably, is certainly among the latter.
The “Cathedra Petri” is not and has never been empty (apart,
of course, from the interregnum between the death of a pope and the
nomination of his successor — the longest of which was 3 years (1268-1271)
With Francis occupying the Cathedra Petri since
2013 however, this position has become increasingly
untenable. At what point does a man — including a pope —
cease to be in communion with the Church? At what point
does he cease to be Catholic? If he does not hold what
the Church teaches, what Sacred Scripture teaches, what
Sacred Tradition teaches, what the authentic Magisterium
of the Church has taught for 2000 years — in what sense
do we hold him to be in communion with what he
has openly repudiated — even suppressed?
Is the Pope Catholic?
and non-Catholics have, for some time now, nevertheless
asked themselves what was once an amusing question
intended to be a litmus test for the faithfulness of a
Catholic. “How can you possibly question her fidelity to
the Church? She’s as Catholic as the pope!” This, of
course, presupposes that the pope is the paradigmatic
Catholic entrusted with preserving and
promoting Catholic teaching, dogma, the Sacred
Deposit of Faith, the authentic and unbroken Catholic
Magisterium, and a millennia of Catholic Tradition.
can legitimately be asked — but without
anticipating a positive response. Indeed, under
the papacy of Francis, to be “as Catholic as the pope”
is to be an uncertain, uncommitted Catholic, unsure of
the credentials of the Catholic Church and uncertain of
the morality historically predicated of Her and derived
from Sacred Scripture. A
non-creedal Unitarian Universalist would be more in
keeping with the mind of Francis than Catholicism as it
has been historically understood.
attempt to make sense of this apparent paradox,
(actually an Hegelian Dialectic) there are a few
things that we must be clear about; harsh as they may
appear, they are quite nearly incontrovertible:
not a proponent of Catholicism , but an ideologue
whose primary concern is an elusive and esoteric
notion of “encounter” with all that is alien to
Catholicism and most often antagonistic toward it — a
program of assimilating other cultures by
repudiating Catholic dogma and identity. For Francis
there is nothing specific in the way of identity —
essentially there is no differentiation—nothing
is unique, nothing idiomatic: it is only sameness
expressed in other terms that can never be incongruent.
Uniqueness is anathema — even if that means
sacrificing millennia old Catholic beliefs inseparable
from the unique identity of Catholicism. Catholicism is
an obstacle and if it is not consonant with every other
belief system, it is Catholicism that must yield.
Remember the absurd “Encounter Groups” which
proliferated in the 60’s? (not coincidentally the era of
Vatican II) These were even more flexible than Francis’s
obscure — and rigid vision of the notion of
Encounter. Yes, “rigid!” — the very epithet that
Francis solely reserves for Traditional Catholics.
with cultural, ethnic, political and religious
differences, we can close ourselves in a rigid
defense of our so-called identity
or open ourselves to the encounter with the
other and cultivate together the dream of
a fraternal society”, Francis pleaded.”
It appears that for Francis there is no unique
“Catholic identity” that is distinguishable from every and
any other social and religious
identity. Each is simply a culturally inflected
iteration of the other.
(much as Masons envision) rather than a
Communion of Saints
binding every Catholic to every other Catholic in the
Church Militant, the Church Suffering, and the
Church Triumphant in Heaven with the singular goal of
reaching Heaven, rather than “perfecting society
on earth” as the Communists envision? Every
member of a “fraternal society” will eventually perish. But
not so for those who cleave to the Body of Christ (His
Church) — and not the World — and who will not
perish, but have everlasting life. (Saint John 3.15)
Compelling Question is this: Given Francis’s Malfeasance,
Why does God Allow it?
To clearly understand the predicament into which Francis’s papacy has
placed us, we must first come to terms with what are called:
God’s Active Will
God’s Permissive Will
Let us look at paradigms of each.
God’s Active Will is always,
in and of itself, absolutely good, for it is integral with God Himself
Who is all-Good.
God does not actively will “relative”
goods — that is to say, goods limited by other considerations and
apportioned only as possibility allows.
• In Himself pure actuality (there is no potentiality in God: He
cannot potentially be “more” than what He actually is), there
is nothing that can constrain His active willing, as though He were
compelled to will lesser goods within a spectrum of possible goods
to which He is confined.
• God is absolutely free — without limitation or confinement;
concepts are impossible to predicate of God as omnipotent. Each
and every expression of God’s active will is ordered to the unmitigated
good. “God is light, and in Him there is no
darkness.” (1 Saint John 1.5).
• Our first paradigm would actually be two-fold: the Decalogue
(the Ten Commandments: Exodus 20:2–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21) and
the Sermon on the Mount (Saint Matthew, chapters 5- 7) in
which we find the Active Will of God: “This is what I want you to
do and to refrain from doing.” This is God’s express will.
Will of God
The most succinct
definition of the next paradigm —
Will of God — is as follows:
In light of God’s conferring Free Will on man (God’s creation
of man without this perfection would consequently be an imperfect
creation by an all-good and all-powerful God, for freedom of will is
an incontestable good — the privation of which results in an amoral
world in which there is nothing meritorious and nothing blameworthy
— much as we understand the operations of a machine that cannot do otherwise
than its designer intended — a mere automaton to which we cannot ascribe
any moral predicates.
As a consequence, man, possessing the perfection of free will, is
free to choose what he wills, good or evil, and not what God wills.
The same freedom may align man to God’s Express Will (he chooses to
do what he knows God commands him to do — rather than that which he
may otherwise be inclined to do — which is to say that his own will
is freely aligned with the perfect will of God — before which he can
plead no ignorance). What is more, God cannot revoke this perfect gift of free
will without simultaneously abrogating
that singular perfection with which He endowed man — and then re-create man as
a free will).
However faithfully or unfaithfully a pope executes his Petrine Office
is largely determined by the man. He may be good or he may be evil.
In either case — even given the exalted office conferred upon him — he is
withal and necessarily exercising his own free will. Even a pope is
free to do what he wills, rather than what God wills. He can incorporate
and exercise the legitimate responsibilities of his office, or he can
be despotic and utterly ignore them. It is up to the man.
That God may actively or permissively will the Petrine Office to be
occupied by the feckless despot Jorge Bergoglio as a scourge to a
perverse and faithless generation, a generation which, unable to make God in their
image, contrived to make His Vicar in their image instead — is altogether
and increasingly likely.
equally remember two episodes, one from the Old
Testament, and one from the New Testament in which we
find God bringing good even out of evil:
In Genesis 15.18-20 we find the Patriarch Joseph thrown
into a dry well to die by his eleven brothers, to whom
he said when they were reunited,
thought evil against me: but God turned it into
good, that he might exalt me, as at present you see,
and might save many people.”
Pilate surely believed that it was in his power to
crucify Christ or to free Him — but Jesus responds:
shouldst not have any power against Me, unless it
were given thee from above.”
(Saint John 19.11)
are two striking examples of God’s Permissive Will —
not simply respecting the free will He conferred upon
man, but of His power to bring a seemingly impossible
good out of the evil devices of men. Most often we do
not see the end to which his benevolent, Permissive
Will, is directed — and may not in this life at all. We
are left with the assurance by Saint Paul:
know that to them that love God, all things work
together unto good, to such as, according to His
purpose, are called to be saints.”
It is true that Jorge has uttered some things good and true — but because
one utters some things that are true and good, we cannot infer that the one saying
them is himself good ... or true.
An Apposite and Frightening Paradigm
Here our paradigm is no one less than Satan,
who himself quoted Scripture in the Temptations of Christ (Saint Matthew
4.1-11) What he said was true in his unsuccessful attempts to seduce
Christ from redeeming the souls of men, but because he quoted directly from Holy Scripture itself in
no way mitigates his evil.
Some things that Bergoglio (Francis) says are both good and true
(when comprehensible — but far too many
are arrogant, evil and unjust) — and just as Lucifer can take the form of
an angel of light *, so Francis can take the form of an apostle
He can quote Scripture, too …
*“For such false apostles are deceitful
workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no
wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light.”
(2 Corinthians 13-14
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Boston Catholic Journal
Printable PDF Version
Demonic Perversion of the Confessional
Homosexuality in the
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.]
“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.”
How was this possible?
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.
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:
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!
1958 —the Year of the
Authentic Catholic Pope
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
With something far more
profound and painful than “regret”, we have come
what had become increasingly obvious — and which
found its clearest expression, its
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
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.
Whatever became of this most
that is nothing less than the very reason
CHRIST ESTABLISHED HIS CHURCH?
is unlikely that the
vast, indeed, the overwhelming majority of today’s Catholics
have not so much as heard of this phrase as old as the Church
itself; certainty, not in English — and with greater certainty
still, not from the pulpit.
The very concept of “the salvation
of the soul” appears to have been non grata in homiletics
for quite nearly 60 years (corresponding, unsurprisingly, to
the implementation of Vatican II) — despite the fact that the
imperative itself is clearly and unambiguously codified as the
supremus lex (the supreme law) of the Roman Catholic
Church in (Canon Law 1752):
“Salus animarum supremus
lex esto” — “the
salvation of souls … must be the supreme law in the Church.”
It is nothing less than the sole reason for the
the Suffering, Crucifixion,
Death, and Resurrection … of Christ:
the salvation of souls!
Christ as Savior, Christ as Redeemer,
cannot be understood apart from this most fundamental and utterly
simple concept: He came to save souls — not to
heal bodies (although He did), not to rectify injustices,
not to rehabilitate politics, not to instruct
us on economics, and certainly not “save
the Environment” — which, sadly, appear to be the principal if not the
sole concerns of the present
pontiff, who, sadly, is more an emissary of the United Nations
and Globalist Ideology than the Vicar of Jesus Christ
on Earth. Certainly an indifferentist (every religion
is sufficient to salvation) and most definitely a heretic, he
is nothing remotely proximate to his putative job description.
the Great Apostasy
Myth called Ecumenism
PV2 = Enrolled prior to Vatican II and deleted after Vatican II
Friday September 24th
in the Year of Grace 2021
This Day, the Twenty-Fourth Day of September
The Feast of our Lady of Ransom.
At Autun, the birthday of the holy martyrs, Andochius,
priest, Thyrsus, deacon, and Felix, who were sent from the East
by blessed Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, to preach in Gaul, where they
were most severely scourged, hanged up a whole day by the hands, and
cast into the fire. Remaining uninjured, they had their necks broken
with heavy bars, and thus won a most glorious crown.
In Egypt, the holy martyrs Paphnutius and his
companions. Whilst leading a solitary life, St. Paphnutius heard
that many Christians were kept in bonds, and, moved by the spirit of
God, he voluntarily offered himself to the prefect, and freely confessed
the Christian faith. He was bound with iron chains, and a long
time tortured on the rack. Then, being sent with many others to Diocletian,
he was fastened by his order to a palm tree, and the rest were struck
with the sword.
At Chalcedon, forty-nine holy martyrs,
who, after the martyrdom of St. Euphemia, under the emperor Diocletian,
were condemned to be devoured by the beasts, but being miraculously
delivered, were finally struck with the sword, and went to Heaven.
In Hungary, St. Gerard, bishop and martyr,
called the Apostle of the Hungarians. He belonged to the nobility of
Venice, and was the first to shed upon his country the glory of martyrdom.
At Clermont, in Auvergne, the departure out of this life of
St. Rusticus, bishop and confessor. In
the diocese of Beauvais, St. Geremarus, abbot.
And elsewhere in divers places, many other holy martyrs, confessors,
and holy virgins.
Omnes sancti Mártyres,
oráte pro nobis. ("All ye Holy Martyrs, pray for us", from the
Litaniae Sanctorum, the Litany of the Saints)
Response: Thanks be to God.
Roman Martyrology by Month
Why the Martyrs Matter
day we bring you a calendar,
a list really, of the holy Martyrs who had suffered and died for
Christ, for His Bride the Church, and for our holy Catholic Faith;
men and women for whom — and well they knew — their Profession of
Faith would cost them their lives.
They could have repudiated all three (Christ, Church, and Catholic
Faith) and kept their lives for a short time longer (even the
lapsi only postponed their death — and at so great a cost!)
What would motivate men, women, even children and entire families
to willingly undergo the most evil and painfully devised tortures;
to suffer death rather than denial?
Why did they not renounce their Catholic Faith when the first flame
licked at their feet, after the first eye was plucked out, or after
they were “baptized” in mockery by boiling water or molten lead
poured over their heads? Why did they not flee to offer incense
to the pagan gods since such a ritual concession would be merely
perfunctory, having been done, after all, under duress, exacted
by the compulsion of the state? What is a little burned incense
and a few words uttered without conviction, compared to your own
life and the lives of those you love? Surely God knows that you
are merely placating the state with empty gestures …
Did they love their wives, husbands, children — their mothers, fathers
and friends less than we do? Did they value their own lives less?
Were they less sensitive to pain than we are? In a word, what did
they possess that we do not?
Nothing. They possessed what we ourselves are given in the Sacrament
of Confirmation — but cleaved to it in far greater measure than
we do: Faith and faithfulness; fortitude and valor, uncompromising
belief in the invincible reality of God, of life eternal in Him
for the faithful, of damnation everlasting apart from Him for the
unfaithful; of the ephemerality of this passing world and all within
it, and lives lived in total accord with that adamant belief.
We are the Martyrs to come. What made them so will make us so. What
they suffered we will suffer. What they died for, we will die for.
If only we will! For most us, life will be a bloodless martyrdom,
a suffering for Christ, for the sake of Christ, for the sake of
the Church in a thousand ways outside the arena. The road to Heaven
is lined on both sides with Crosses, and upon the Crosses people,
people who suffered unknown to the world, but known to God. Catholics
living in partibus infidelium, under the scourge of Islam.
Loveless marriages. Injustices on all sides. Poverty. Illness. Old
age. Dependency. They are the cruciform! Those whose lives became
Crosses because they would not flee God, the Church, the
call to, the demand for, holiness in the most ordinary things of
life made extraordinary through the grace of God. The Martyrology
we celebrate each day is just a vignette, a small, immeasurably
small, sampling of the martyrdom that has been the lives of countless
men and women whom Christ and the Angels know, but whom the world
does not know.
“Exemplum enim dedi vobis”,
Christ said to His Apostles:
“I have given you an example.” And
His Martyrs give one to us — and that is why the Martyrs matter.
Geoffrey K. Mondello
Boston Catholic Journal
Note: We suggest that you explore our newly edited and revised
SS. Martyrum Cruciatibus — The Torments and Tortures of the Christian
Martyrs” for an in-depth historical account of the sufferings
of the Martyrs.
Totally Faithful to the Sacred
Deposit of Faith entrusted to the Holy See in Rome
opera tua ... quia modicum habes virtutem, et servasti
verbum Meum, nec non negasti Nomen Meum”
know your works ... that you have but little power, and yet
you have kept My word, and have not denied My Name.”
Copyright © 2004 - 2021 Boston Catholic
Journal. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise stated,
permission is granted by the Boston Catholic Journal for the
copying and distribution of the
articles and audio files under the following conditions:
No additions, deletions, or changes are to be made to the
text or audio files in any way, and the copies may not be
sold for a profit.
In the reproduction, in any format of any image, graphic,
text, or audio file, attribution must be given to the Boston