Archive for August, 2018

from Novus Ordo Watch

All hell has broken loose…

After Viganò’s Volley:
Novus Ordo Sect in Meltdown Mode

A Chronological Overview

[UPDATE: More links added Aug. 30, 2018]

One struggles for words to describe what is happening in the Novus Ordo Sect right now. All hell has broken loose, and we appear to be witnessing a meltdown of epic proportions. It is difficult to absorb it all and calmly analyze the situation because news keeps breaking….

In this post, instead of offering some great commentary or analysis, we’ll have to content ourselves simply with providing links to stories that sketch all the developments in chronological order. The situation is “fluid”, as they say…

Background Information

Saturday, Aug. 25, 2018

Sunday, Aug. 26

Monday, Aug. 27

Reactions from Select Blogs and Web Sites

Appearing on EWTN’s Nightly News on Aug. 27, Vatican journalist Ed Pentin reported that Vigano is concerned that his life is in danger and that it is not known where he is living:

A succinct chronological overview of how the Vigano testimony ties in with the Vatican Bank scandal of 2009/10, the Vatileaks scandal, the resignation of Benedict XVI, and the election of Francis, is provided in this informative video clip of Dr. Taylor Marshall, who until the most recent events was always an avid defender of Bergoglio:

As this catastrophic Novus Ordo crisis develops, we will certainly be “watching” and keeping you informed.

from Novus Ordo Watch

A papal reality check…

A Conspiracy against the Catholic Church?

The True Popes Speak

When discussing the issue of Sedevacantism with Novus Ordos, it is not uncommon that someone will dismiss it on the grounds that it involves a “conspiracy”; and of course nothing is more absurd to contemporary man than giving credence to a position that differs from what most others hold to be the obvious truth.

Two thousand years ago, our Blessed Lord taught: “…the truth shall make you free” (Jn 8:32). People who love and seek the truth ought to be concerned about, not whether something involves a conspiracy, but whether it is true. Whether a matter involves a conspiracy or not is completely irrelevant to its truth or falsity. Unfortunately, we live in times where such an observation, entirely reasonable, will simply not be considered by many because they have been conditioned to associate the terms “conspiracy” and especially “conspiracy theory” with foolishness and absurdity.

Yet, when we turn to a standard dictionary for the meaning of the term “conspiracy”, what we discover is fairly harmless:

conspiracy
[kuh n-spiruh-see]
noun, plural con·spir·a·cies.

1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose:
He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

(Source: Dictionary.com; formatting given.)

So much for the noun. The corresponding verb is “to conspire”, which has the following definition:

conspire
[kuh n-spahyuh r]
verb (used without object), con·spired, con·spir·ing.

1. to agree together, especially secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal:
They conspired to kill the king.
2. to act or work together toward the same result or goal.

(Source: Dictionary.com; formatting given.)

The origin of the word “conspire” is quite simple. It comes from the Latin words for “together” (con or cum) and “breathe” (spirare), as the above-linked source confirms.

People who conspire, then, etymologically speaking, are “breathing together” — that is, they are planning something, they are working in unison to make something happen. Is that such an absurd, inconceivable, and idiotic thing? Rather, doesn’t this happen in all sorts of ways on a daily basis?

Once you understand what the word “conspiracy” really means, all its rhetorical force vanishes. Peoplework together to achieve some intended goal all the time, mostly for good but sometimes for evil. Sacred Scripture itself is filled with examples of this, such as the following:

  • Jacob conspired with his mother to receive his father’s blessing through deceit (Genesis 27)
  • Some of the Israelites conspired to make and worship a calf made of gold (Exodus 32)
  • The Israelites conspired to send spies into the Promised Land before entering it (Josue 2)
  • Judas conspired with members of the Sanhedrin to deliver Jesus Christ into their hands (Matthew 26)
  • In the last days, there will be a conspiracy of antichrist forces against the Body of Christ to deceive even the elect (Matthew 24; 2 Thessalonians 2)

And so forth. Both secular and Church history, too, are filled with conspiracies, i.e. with individuals collaborating for a common purpose, whether for good or for bad: the Barbarians conspired to overthrow the Romans, Mohammed conspired with his followers to conquer Mecca, some treacherous clergy conspired against St. Joan of Arc, Napoleon’s men conspired to take Pope Pius VII prisoner, Hitler conspired to attack Poland, Colonel von Stauffenberg conspired with other German soldiers to assassinate Hitler, at every conclave the cardinals “conspire” to elect a Pope, and on and on it goes. Even the official narrative of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, is a conspiracy: 20 Muslims conspiring to hijack planes and fly them into buildings. That’s a conspiracy (whether it’s true or not is another matter, but it has nothing to do with whether or not it’s a conspiracy).

So, believing that the enemies of the Catholic Church have conspired against her is, in and of itself, neither silly, nor crazy, nor unreasonable, nor worthy of being dismissed for any other reason. In fact, if there not be found wanting in human history people conspiring for all sorts of worldly interests, it stands to reason that if “our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places” (Eph 6:12), then certainly there will be a conspiracy also against the Body of Christ — in fact more so than against anything else.

Satan himself, after all, does not merely seek people’s temporal destruction but, even more so, their eternal demise; and just as he has been warring against the Lord Jesus Christ from the beginning, so he wars daily against His Mystical Body, the Church. For the more the devil succeeds in harming the Church, which is the Ark of Salvation, the more souls will certainly perish. Therefore our Blessed Lord warned us: “And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Mt 10:28).

For Catholics, the best confirmation of the truth of the foregoing reflections comes from the Church’s own Magisterium. Not only did the Popes of recent centuries warn repeatedly of “conspiracies” against the Church, they specifically referred to “secret societies” plotting to harm the Mystical Body of Christ.

The following list will restrict itself to some applicable quotes from the 19th and 20th centuries, when the threat of persecution against the Church was at its most imminent.

Pope Pius VII

  • “Therefore, omit no watchfulness, diligence, care, and effort, in order to ‘guard the deposit’ of Christ’s teaching whose destruction has been planned, as you know, by a great conspiracy.” (Encyclical Diu Satis, n. 11, 1800)

Pope Leo XII

  • “The princes know what conspiracies have everywhere arisen to weaken both the sacred and civil law in this holy matter.” (Encyclical Quod Hoc Ineunte, n. 12, 1824)
  • “…We forbid forever under the same penalties which are contained in the Letters of Our Predecessors already reported in this Our Constitution, … all secret societies, those which now are and those which perhaps will afterwards sprout out, and which propose to themselves against the Church and against the highest civil powers those things which We have mentioned above, by whatever name they may finally be called.” (Encyclical Quo Graviora, n. 7, 1826)

Pope Pius VIII

  • “When this corruption has been abolished, then eradicate those secret societies of factious men who, completely opposed to God and to princes, are wholly dedicated to bringing about the fall of the Church, the destruction of kingdoms, and disorder in the whole world. Having cast off the restraints of true religion, they prepare the way for shameful crimes.” (Encyclical Traditi Humilitati, n. 6, 1829)

Pope Gregory XVI

  • “If the right hand of God had not given Us strength, We would have drowned as the result of the terrible conspiracy of impious men.” (Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 1, 1832)
  • “In this you must labor and diligently take care that the faith may be preserved amidst this great conspiracy of impious men who attempt to tear it down and destroy it.” (Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 8, 1832)
  • “Now, however, We want you to rally to combat the abominable conspiracy against clerical celibacy. This conspiracy spreads daily and is promoted by profligate philosophers, some even from the clerical order.” (Encyclical Mirari Vos, n. 11, 1832)
  • “In the individual rural chapters, they spread the same ideas and aroused a wicked conspiracy. Moreover, now and again, they produced a pamphlet with many additions and dared to print it under the bold title: ‘Are reforms necessary in the Catholic Church?’” (Encyclical Quo Graviora, n. 3, 1833)
  • “Finally, it [our encyclical letter Mirari Vos] concerned that freedom of conscience which should be thoroughly condemned and the repulsive conspiracy of societies enkindling destruction of sacred and state affairs, even from the followers of false religions, as We have made clear by the authority handed down to Us.” (Encyclical Singulari Nos, n. 3, 1834)

Pope Pius IX

  • “The sacred celibacy of clerics has also been the victim of conspiracy.” (Encyclical Qui Pluribus, n. 16, 1846)
  • “But if the faithful scorn both the fatherly warnings of their pastors and the commandments of the Christian Law recalled here, and if they let themselves be deceived by the present-day promoters of plots, deciding to work with them in their perverted theories of Socialism and Communism, let them know and earnestly consider what they are laying up for themselves. The Divine Judge will seek vengeance on the day of wrath. Until then no temporal benefit for the people will result from their conspiracy, but rather new increases of misery and disaster. For man is not empowered to establish new societies and unions which are opposed to the nature of mankind. If these conspiracies spread throughout Italy there can only be one result: if the present political arrangement is shaken violently and totally ruined by reciprocal attacks of citizens against citizens by their wrongful appropriations and slaughter, in the end some few, enriched by the plunder of many, will seize supreme control to the ruin of all.” (Encyclical Nostis Et Nobiscum, n. 25, 1849)
  • “Therefore we must deplore all the following: the blindness covering the minds of many; the fierce war against everything Catholic and this Apostolic See; the hideous hatred of virtue and rectitude; the profligate vice dignified with the deceitful label of virtue; the unbridled liberty of thinking, living, and daring everything at will; the unrestrained intolerance of all rule, power, and authority; the mockery and contempt for sacred things, for holy laws, for even the finest institutions; the lamentable corruption of improvident youth; the annoying aggregate of bad books, pamphlets, and posters flying about everywhere and teaching sin; the deadly virus of Indifferentism and incredulity; the tendency to impious conspiracies, and the fact that both human and divine rights are despised and ridiculed.” (Encyclical Exultavit Cor Nostrum, n. 2, 1851)
  • “But if always, venerable brethren, now most of all amidst such great calamities both of the Church and of civil society, amidst so great a conspiracy against Catholic interests and this Apostolic See, and so great a mass of errors, it is altogether necessary to approach with confidence the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace in timely aid.” (Encyclical Quanta Cura, n. 9, 1864)
  • “They [these laws] would also introduce the perversion of Catholic discipline, encourage defection from the Church, and strengthen the coalition and conspiracy of the sects against the true faith of Christ.” (Encyclical Vix Dum A Nobis, n. 11, 1874)
  • “We are very confident in the Lord, beloved sons, pastors, and clerics, that you, who have been ordained not only for your own sanctification and salvation but also for that of others, in face of this huge conspiracy of the unholy and of so many dangerous allurements will prove yourselves a strong comfort and help to your bishops because of your demonstrated piety and zeal.” (Encyclical Graves Ac Diuturnae, n. 6, 1875)

Pope Leo XIII

  • “But the supreme pastors of the Church, on whom the duty falls of guarding the Lord’s flock from the snares of the enemy, have striven in time to ward off the danger and provide for the safety of the faithful. For, as soon as the secret societies began to be formed, in whose bosom the seeds of the errors which we have already mentioned were even then being nourished, the Roman Pontiffs Clement XII and Benedict XIV did not fail to unmask the evil counsels of the sects, and to warn the faithful of the whole globe against the ruin which would be wrought.” (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, n. 3, 1878)
  • “Let the people be frequently urged by your authority and teaching to fly from the forbidden sects, to abhor all conspiracy  to have nothing to do with sedition, and let them understand that they who for God’s sake obey their rulers render a reasonable service and a generous obedience.” (Encyclical Diuturnum, n. 27, 1881)
  • “The Roman Pontiffs Our predecessors, in their incessant watchfulness over the safety of the Christian people, were prompt in detecting the presence and the purpose of this capital enemy immediately it sprang into the light instead of hiding as a dark conspiracy; and, moreover, they took occasion with true foresight to give, as it were on their guard, and not allow themselves to be caught by the devices and snares laid out to deceive them.” (Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 4, 1884)
  • “…We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is; and by sermons and pastoral letters to instruct the people as to the artifices used by societies of this kind in seducing men and enticing them into their ranks, and as to the depravity of their opinions and the wickedness of their acts.” (Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 31, 1884)
  • “It is enough to recall rationalism and naturalism, those deadly sources of evil whose teachings are everywhere freely distributed. We must then add the many allurements to corruption: the opposition to or open defection from the Church by public officials, the bold obstinacy of secret societies, here and there a curriculum for the education of youth without regard for God.” (Encyclical Quod Multum, n. 3, 1886)
  • “Again, at present, when contemplating the depths of the vast conspiracy that certain men have formed for the annihilation of Christianity in France and the animosity with which they pursue the realization of their design, trampling under foot the most elementary notions of liberty and justice for the sentiment of the greater part of the nation, and of respect for the inalienable rights of the Catholic Church, how can We but be stricken with deepest grief?” (Encyclical Au Milieu Des Sollicitudes, n. 2, 1892)
  • “Indeed, fearing nothing and yielding to no one, the Masonic sect proceeds with greater boldness day by day: with its poisonous infection it pervades entire communities and strives to entangle itself in all the institutions of our country in its conspiracy to forcefully deprive the Italian people of their Catholic faith, the origin and source of their greatest blessings.” (Encyclical Inimica Vis, n. 3, 1892)
  • “For a long time now it has bored its way under the deceitful guise of a philanthropic society and redeemer of the Italian people. By way of conspiracies, corruptions, and violences, it has finally come to dominate Italy and even Rome. To what troubles, to what calamities has it opened the way in a little more than thirty years?” (Encyclical Custodi Di Quella Fede, n. 3, 1892)

Pope Pius XI

  • “It is the respect which has had its expression in vastly extended and hateful police-measures, prepared in the deep silence of a conspiracy, and executed with lightning-like suddenness, on the very vigil of Our birthday, which was the occasion of many acts of kindness and of courtesy towards Us on the part of the Catholic world, and of the non-Catholic world also.” (Encyclical Non Abbiamo Bisogno, n. 66, 1931)
  • “Moreover, the Secret Societies, which by their nature are ever ready to help the enemies of God and of the Church — be these who they may — are seeking to add fresh fires to this poisonous hatred, from which there comes no peace or happiness of the civil order, but the certain ruin of states.” (Encyclical Caritate Christi Compulsi, n. 7, 1932)
  • “A third powerful factor in the diffusion of Communism is the conspiracy of silence on the part of a large section of the non-Catholic press of the world. We say conspiracy, because it is impossible otherwise to explain how a press usually so eager to exploit even the little daily incidents of life has been able to remain silent for so long about the horrors perpetrated in Russia, in Mexico and even in a great part of Spain; and that it should have relatively so little to say concerning a world organization as vast as Russian Communism.” (Encyclical Divini Redemptoris, n. 18, 1937)

Aside from these juicy quotes, we also recall that the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century decreed that “if any clerics or monks are found to be either forming a conspiracy or a secret society or hatching plots against bishops or fellow clergy, [they are to] lose their personal rank completely” (Canon 18, 451).

Moreover, Bl. Anna Maria Taigi, in her miraculous visions, saw the conspiratorial undertakings of the Masonic sects to make war against the Church, and she warned the Pope about the matter, assisted in this by St. Vincent Strambi as the mediator (it is for this reason that Novus Ordo Watch is dedicated to St. Vincent and Bl. Anna Maria).

So, what is going on here? Were all these Popes and saints looney “conspiracy theorists”? Or could it be that perhaps those who today scoff at all these admonitions are themselves the looney ones, having nothing but contemptuous disregard for the papal and saintly warnings against conspiratorial efforts to subvert our holy Catholic religion?

Can anyone really read Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2 without concluding that there must be, at some point and in some way, a conspiracy that seeks to bring about the eternal ruin of our souls? In fact, has Satan not conspired with his demons to bring souls to eternal damnation, ever since he first tempted Eve (Gen 3:1-5)?

The persecution of the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church, is also well attested to by the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel which Pope Leo XIII promulgated on May 18, 1890, as part of a larger “Exorcism against Satan and the Apostate Angels” (note in particular the parts highlighted in bold red):

O GLORIOUS ARCHANGEL St Michael, Prince of the heavenly host, defend us in battle, and in the struggle which is ours against the principalities and Powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, against spirits of evil in high places. (Eph 6.) Come to the aid of men, whom God created immortal, made in his own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of the devil. (Wis 2, 1 Cor 6.)

Fight this day the battle of the Lord, together with the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in Heaven. But that cruel, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan, who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with all his angels. (Apoc 12.)

Behold, this primeval enemy and slayer of man has taken courage. Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the name of God and of his Christ, to seize upon, slay and cast into eternal perdition souls destined for the crown of eternal glory. This wicked dragon pours out, as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity.

These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions.

In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.

Arise then, O invincible prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and bring them the victory.

The Church venerates thee as protector and patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious powers of this world and of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude.

Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church. Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly conciliate the mercies of the Lord; and beating down the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations.

The original Latin text with the decree of promulgation can be found in the Acta Sanctae Sedis XXIII (1890-91), pp. 743-747. The English translation has been taken from this source. A shortened version of this St. Michael prayer can be found in the Church’s official collection of indulgenced prayers, the Raccolta, n. 446 (approved for an indulgence of 500 days by the Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary, May 4, 1934).

What is especially noteworthy in this prayer is that Pope Leo, who composed it, makes explicit reference to “the Holy Place … where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world.” There, he says, the diabolical enemies of the Church “have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered,” which is an allusion to Zach 13:7 and Mt 26:31.

Is this not exactly what we have seen happen since the death of Pope Pius XII? From the conclave that was supposed to elect his successor, there emerged an antipope (John XXIII) instead, who set into motion a new religion with a false hierarchy, thus “striking the shepherd” (the Pope) and eclipsing the True Church, as prophesied in Apoc 12 according to Fr. Sylvester Berry (see links below).

That a Great Apostasy — a falling away from the Faith due to a seduction caused by an “operation of error” (2 Thess 2:10) with “false Christs and false prophets” and lying “signs and wonders” (Mt 24:24) — and a Mystical Passion would afflict the Catholic Church before the Second Coming of Christ is part and parcel of the Deposit of Faith received from the Apostles, who in turn received it from our Blessed Lord Himself.

The following links elaborate on this and provide important explanations:

The key takeaway here is that, informed by the Deposit of Faith through an orthodox interpretation of Sacred Scripture, Catholic theologians did not at all consider it crazy or absurd that there would be at some point a great falling away from the Faith through an enormous disaster befalling the Church, and this would happen as a prelude to the coming of the Antichrist.

On the other hand, it is the Vatican II Church which tries to make people believe this is a silly idea only held by whackos who are out of their minds. Indeed it was “Pope” John XXIII himself who had the audacity to mock the Popes’ and saints’ warnings in this regard, saying in the opening speech of his so-called Second Vatican Council: “We feel we must disagree with those prophets of gloom, who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world was at hand” (Address Gaudet Mater Ecclesia, Oct. 11, 1962). After over 50 years of Vatican II, it is absolutely clear that the “prophets of doom” were right, and John XXIII was wrong.

But why would the Vatican II Church take such an arrogant position, and one that amounted to a complete turnabout compared to the traditional position? Simple! Because the Novus Ordo Sect is itself the Great Deception! It is no accident that just when the Masonic conspiracy against the Catholic Church succeeded in eclipsing the Papacy by putting the first of a line of usurpers in the Vatican, it would start to pretend that nothing but great times were ahead (recall the heart-warming “Lunar Discourse” of John XXIII the night of Oct. 11, 1962). The expectations were bright and cheerful, but the reality that followed was stark and somber. We are reminded here of the lamentation of Jeremias: “We looked for peace and no good came: for a time of healing, and behold fear” (Jer 8:15).

What had been marketed as a “New Springtime in the Faith” and hailed as a coming “New Pentecost” for the Church, turned out in reality to be nothing short of the Great Apostasy prophesied in Holy Scripture, the “operation of error” predicted by St. Paul, which would come upon us in punishment for our sins:

And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.

(2 Thess 2:8-11)

Unfortunately, to this very day, there is a great number of people who are still pretending that, more or less, all is well. Among them is none other than “Pope” Francis himself, who said in September of 2013: “The Church is not falling to pieces. It has never been better. This is a wonderful moment for the Church, you just need to look at its history” (source and commentary here).

“Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter,” says Isaias (5:20). You are looking at a spiritual, theological, doctrinal, and moral wasteland and are being asked to believe it’s the Spotless Bride of Christ. Think of how far the apostasy has advanced even just in the past five years under Francis!

In 1994, former member of the Vatican’s honor guard Franco Bellegrandi caused quite a stir when he published his book Nikita Roncalli: Counterlife of a Pope (free PDF here). Bellegrandi had worked in the Vatican from the late 1950s to the mid-1960s, that is, during the entire reign of “Pope” John XXIII. Later he became a correspondent for the Vatican’s own in-house newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano(more here). In his explosive book, Bellegrandi revealed, among other things, that the election of Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII) and later Giovanni Montini (Paul VI) had been pre-arranged by Marxist-Masonic forces behind the scenes:

In the Vatican’s high spheres it was indeed no secret that after Pius XII, the coming Conclave would elect Venice’s patriarch Roncalli, who, in turn, would “bring” on the See of Peter Giovanni Battista Montini. From Milan, the Brescian bishop with the owl-gaze, whom in Rome they nicknamed “Hamlet,” or the “Cat,” was pulling the strings of a colossal game, with the precious help of a group of powerful prelates among which distinguished themselves Belgian cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens, Dutch Bernard Jan Alfrinck, and German Agostino Bea, with the secretive support of international Marxism. That colossal game that would upturn the contents and the aspect of the Church, of Italy, of Europe, and of the whole world with all its established checks and balances, needed, to get in motion and develop, a formidable “battering ram.” This “battering ram” that hit with irresistible violence against the bi-millenarian walls of the Church, shattering their inviolate compactness, was Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli. Behind him the fury of the “New Course” would burst into the vanquished citadel. All had long been predisposed, with precision, so that the cardinal from Sotto il Monte would become a breaking Pope [sic]. The College of Cardinals was so well guided and oriented that today, years after that Conclave, it has even been given a more credible version of the little mystery of the three “fumate,” white, black and then again white, which came, in brief sequence, out of the chimney of the Sistine Chapel, causing confusion within the packed crowd with their nose in the air in St. Peter’s square. In spite of the plans, the Armenian cardinal Agagianian, was elected on the last ballot – Hence the first “fumata bianca.” Directly followed by the black smoke, as the elect, giving in to immediate pressures, would decline the appointment, clearing the way for Roncalli, announced by the ultimate white smoke.

I accompanied, in that Conclave, cardinal Federico Tedeschini, Datano di Sua Santità and Arciprete della Patriarcale Basilica Vaticana, who much loved me, and to whom I was sincerely and affectionately bound. In the quiet of his study, loaded with brocades and crowded with portraits, in the old palace of Via della Dateria, by the Quirinale that handsome cardinal, tall and aristocratic in his venerable oldness, by the pale and delicate face on which his gray-blue eyes shone luminous, had told me, sadly, of those, unfortunately, authentic forecasts and had guided by hand my bewilderment in that intricate maze of political interests, personal ambitions, of rivalries, of conflicts between power groups, which intertwined, so thickly, in the ante-chamber of that Conclave and that would have borne, beneath the vaults of the Sistine packed with the crying throngs of Michelangelo, that result that had been established and that the unknowing Catholics would attribute to the Holy Spirit’s intervention. And I felt like laughing, as I watched the disheveled and sweating and frantic rushing of the journalists hunting for indiscretions and rash forecasts and the hermetic faces and indefinite grins with which the most eminent princes of the Church resisted, or eluded, their assaults.

(Franco Bellegrandi, NichitaRoncalli, English transl., pp. 31-33.)

(The smoke signals Bellegrandi is making reference to are discussed in more detail in our post Smoke Signals: The White Smoke of Oct. 16, 1958.)

It is no accident that John XXIII’s Second Vatican Council took up the three Freemasonic ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity, and foisted them on the unsuspecting faithful as religious freedom, collegiality, and ecumenism. By now, the Novus Ordo Church is essentially a mouthpiece of Freemasonry, teaching its basic tenets in place of sound Catholic doctrine, with some minor modifications, of course, for plausible deniability. Hence the constant emphasis on Masonic ideas such as the rights of man (ever hear of the rights of God from the Vatican?), an exaggerated notion of human dignity, freedom of religion, ecumenical practices, interreligious dialogue, peace through natural fraternity among all men, and so forth. These errors were all condemned by the true Catholic Popes before the ecclesial eclipse, in such important documents as the following:

But there we go again with our nutty conspiracies — any and all evidence proving it apparently notwithstanding.

In fact, the most undeniable evidence of all comes from the Masons themselves, evidence that was publicly unveiled by order of two Popes. We are speaking of a document called the “Permanent Instruction” of the Italian Alta Vendita lodge. This paper outlined a 19th-century battle plan for the (attempted) destruction of the Roman Catholic Church. By the wonderful workings of Divine Providence, it fell into the hands of Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII, both of whom ordered it to be published. Check out the following three links:

The evidence that testifies to the existence of an impious conspiracy devised by the Masonic sects against the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, is overwhelming and undeniable. Only a fool would close his eyes in the face of it and pretend the threat does not exist.

Pope Leo XIII, in his 1884 encyclical against Freemasonry, did not mince words:

We wish it to be your rule first of all to tear away the mask from Freemasonry, and to let it be seen as it really is; and by sermons and pastoral letters to instruct the people as to the artifices used by societies of this kind in seducing men and enticing them into their ranks, and as to the depravity of their opinions and the wickedness of their acts. As Our predecessors have many times repeated, let no man think that he may for any reason whatsoever join the masonic sect, if he values his Catholic name and his eternal salvation as he ought to value them. Let no one be deceived by a pretense of honesty. It may seem to some that Freemasons demand nothing that is openly contrary to religion and morality; but, as the whole principle and object of the sect lies in what is vicious and criminal, to join with these men or in any way to help them cannot be lawful

(Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum Genus, n. 31)

Sedevacantism holds that the Masonic conspiracy against the Church scored a decisive breakthrough at the conclave of 1958, when, at least to all appearances, the true Pope was overthrown and an impostor installed (John XXIII). This is the watershed event from where the new Modernist church formally takes its beginning, that false religion which still today masquerades as the Catholic Church in the Vatican.

But the ultimate proof of this is had, not so much in direct evidence regarding the conclave or the Masonic plans, but rather in the effects produced by the conclave and the subsequent new religion that emerged, one which cannotabsolutely cannot, be the Catholic religion because it teaches doctrine at grave odds with the Catholic Faith, so that he who embraces the teachings of the Vatican II Church necessarily abandons the doctrines of the Catholic Church of Pope Pius XII and his predecessors.

Still don’t believe it? Fine. But whatever you believe about this, make sure you make it dependent on evidence, not on whether it presupposes a conspiracy, or whether you like the conclusions that follow from it. Seek the truth at all times, not merely the vindication of a dearly-held pre-conceived position you may find comfortable or convenient.

The great Fr. Frederick Faber of immortal memory once said the following in a sermon he preached:

We must remember that if all the manifestly good men were on one side and all the manifestly bad men on the other, there would be no danger of anyone, least of all the elect, being deceived by lying wonders. It is the good men, good once, we must hope good still, who are to do the work of Anti-Christ and so sadly to crucify the Lord afresh…. Bear in mind this feature of the last days, that this deceitfulness arises from good men being on the wrong side.

(Rev. Frederick Faber, Sermon for Pentecost Sunday, 1861; qtd. in Rev. Denis Fahey, The Mystical Body of Christ in the Modern World)

Ask yourself on whose side you’d rather be on Judgment Day: that of countless Catholic Popes, saints, and martyrs, who in their writings and teachings warned us against the nefarious plots devised by the Church’s enemies for her undoing — or on the side of the “hear no evil, see no evil” Novus Ordo apologists whose very livelihoods often depend upon their defense of Francis and his henchmen?

Once we look at everything in a calm and objective manner, informing ourselves of traditional Catholic teaching and soberly accepting the facts right in front of us, we realize that a diabolical conspiracy has indeed been carried out against the Catholic Church, and that affirming this does not make us looney or stupid but puts us in pretty darn good company.

On all levels — doctrinally, morally, liturgically, architecturally — the Vatican II Church has left behind a devastated vineyard. Only one conclusion is reasonable: “An enemy hath done this” (Mt 13:28).

from Novus Ordo Watch

It’s tough when your ‘Pope’ isn’t a Catholic…

Capital Chaos: Francis Adherents scramble to explain Catechism Change on Death Penalty (Part 1)

In his Letter to Priests for Holy Thursday of 1993, “Pope” John Paul II noted that the so-called Catechism of the Catholic Church he had just promulgated a few months earlier is directly linked with the Second Vatican Council: “The Catechism presents the ‘newness of the Council’, and at the same time situates it in the whole of Tradition” (source; italics removed). The Vatican II Modernists have always had success in driving their revolution forward by balancing their novelties with paying lipservice to Sacred Tradition, in continuity with which the new religion is claimed to stand. Yet, upon closer examination, this alleged continuity is quickly exposed as a ruse.

On Aug. 2 of this year, John Paul’s successor Francis made that hermeneutical tightrope a bit more difficult to walk when he amended the Catechism’s article no. 2267 on capital punishment. This change now has Novus Ordo apologists and commentators in a tizzy. As we showed in our last post on the topic, reactions to the change vary widely and can be classified into five basic categories: (1) doctrine was not changed; (2) doctrine was changed and that’s terrific; (3) doctrine was changed and that’s horrible; (4) it’s ambiguous, so we need a clarification; and (5) whatever.

This chaos is typical of Francis, who introduces it deliberately so as to cause the greatest possible damage to souls, always retaining a minimum of plausible deniability that his apologists can hang on to if need be so as to exonerate him and keep the chaos going, at least long enough until everyone’s attention is focused on the next Bergoglian whopper.

In our prior post, we provided links to a select few of the various reactions coming from each camp. In this current post and its follow-up, we will look a bit more closely at some of them and show how, no matter what position is taken, if Francis were a true Pope, then Catholics would now be facing an impossible situation.

In December of last year, “Fr.” Giovanni Scalese, the Novus Ordo Superior of Afghanistan, rightly pointed out that Francis’ landmark speech on the 25th anniversary of the promuglation of the Vatican II Catechism (Oct. 11, 2017) was “programmatic” and represented a “turning point”. After identifying Francis’ privileging of “pastoral care” over doctrine as “Phase A” of a Bergoglian revolution, Scalese warned what would constitute “Phase B”:

“Phase B” will move from a de-emphasis on doctrine to a demand that doctrine evolve with the times, the priest said.

“One gets the impression that the October 11 speech marked a transition to a new phase in which, while re-affirming that doctrine doesn’t change, one emphasizes the need for doctrine to progress,” Scalese wrote. “Until now this has never been said; until now one prefered not to speak of doctrine … and to concentrate on pastoral care. But now discourse on doctrine has been taken up again, to say that it must evolve to respond to the challenges of changing times.”

Seeing that in Francis’ papacy pastoral care now has precedence over doctrine, “it is quite understandable that one thinks of revising doctrine,” stated Scalaese.

The Barnabite priest said that there is an authentic form of “development of doctrine in the Church,” that is “possible, legitimate, and even necessary.” He doubted Pope Francis was moving forward with such an authentic development.

Scalese observed that when presenting his speech, Francis brought up two crucial points about the doctrine of the Church: 1. that the deposit of faith must be kept intact and 2. that it must be made intelligible to people of our times and express “its implicit potentialities.” Scalese thinks that Francis was “exclusively” concerned with the second point, however, and that this overemphasis “gives rise to the suspicion that an ‘update’ to the previous magisterium is being prepared.”

He suggested that Pope Francis’s remarks about the death penalty are a “pretext” and that after changing what the Catechism says about that, the pontiff might make other changes requested by “a few groups (e.g. about homosexuality).”

(Dorothy Cummings McLean, “Pope Francis’ pastoral changes have set the stage for doctrinal changes: Philosopher priest”Life Site, Dec. 15, 2017)

Scalese could not have been more spot-on! His analysis was incredibly sharp and his prediction accurate.

Now that Francis has updated the Catechism, his Novus Ordo apologists are tripping over each other trying to explain and defend his move while maintaining that it doesn’t mean that Catholic doctrine can change. That Francis’ apologists are not even in agreement with each other about what Francis has actually done, or how to explain or defend it, is testimony to the latest mayhem this “Pope” has unleashed.

Let us go ahead now and examine what some of Francis’ professional defenders are saying about the amended Catechism text.

Patrick Madrid

On the Aug. 7 and 8 editions of his daily 3-hour radio show, the popular Novus Ordo apologist Patrick Madrid was clearly struggling to make sense of Francis’ move. Acknowledging the perennial Catholic teaching that capital punishment is intrinsically permissible and therefore cannot be contrary to the Gospel, Madrid was forced by the laws of logic to put forward the absurd contention that the new text inserted in to the Catechism is “a pastoral opinion that Pope Francis is asserting”, and that this opinion is “different from the doctrinal truth that the death penalty is not morally illicit” (Aug. 7, hour 2, beginning at the 33:21 min mark).

In other words, Madrid is claiming that Francis is leaving the “doctrinal truth” of the permissibility of capital punishment untouched — something he agrees no Pope could possibly change — and merely applying a “pastoral approach” (both phrases are Madrid’s) that forbids it for the present time. That this argument runs afoul of the fact that Francis has amended the Novus Ordo Catechism to say that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person‘”, is an objection Madrid is unable to answer (underlining added). A caller who contended that this statement is verifiably false, Madrid was not able to gainsay.

The following day, Madrid repeated his position and elaborated a little (Aug. 8, hour 2, beginning at the 20:49 min mark). What’s noteworthy is that Madrid readily admits that there is no way that capital punishment could possibly be morally wrong now, given Divine Revelation and prior Church teaching, and thus it cannot now be rejected on the grounds of “human dignity.” Yet that is precisely what Francis is asserting in the Catechism, and no amount of appealing to some “pastoral approach” can defuse that contradiction. Sedevacantist blogger Steve Speray had this to say about the radio apologist’s position: “Madrid understands the error of Francis’ teaching but asserts that a pope has the right to make and apply a heretical and blasphemous opinion as a pastoral approach.”

Madrid’s justification for holding such a blatantly counter-factual position is that it is the only way to keep all religious truths coherent, else one would have to conclude that [Novus Ordo] Catholicism is false. When towards the end of the second hour on Aug. 8, a caller named Jim pressed him on this clearly inadmissible — pardon the pun — line of argumentation, Madrid gave a response that is as intriguing as it is cryptic:

There’s a whole lot I would like to get into on this topic, but for a variety of reasons it’s not, probably, the best thing to do, because, you know, St. Paul talks about how, if you have a weaker brother, don’t cause him to stumble. Something that might be right for you might cause problems for him, so have some forbearance. So that’s what I’m trying to practice here, Jim, to be completely frank with you… OK… So just so you understand where I’m coming from. I’m trying to help people get down off the ledge who are really rattled by all this, and they don’t understand how it can be that Pope Francis is saying that it’s inadmissible because it appears… by all appearances to them, that he’s overturning, or trying to overturn, 2000 years of Catholic teaching which says exactly the opposite of that, not to mention Scripture.

So, please understand, Jim, my role here on the radio… it’s kind of a high-wire balancing act, and I’m trying to find a way forward for people so that they can understand this sufficiently so that they’ll come down off the ledge. And they’re not going to lose their Faith, and they’re not going to turn against the Pope, or they’re not going to abandon their Catholic identity. So, at the very least, even if you don’t like how I’m doing it, please understand what I’m trying to do, and pray for me.

(The Patrick Madrid ShowAug. 8, 2018, hour 2; beginning at 52:47 min mark)

Wow! If you can read between the lines, Madrid says more than a mouthful here. Although he may think he is being charitable and prudent, the fact of the matter is simply that what he is doing is wrong because the end does not justify the means. Madrid seems to be essentially saying that he’s giving his hearers a “solution” to the conundrum of Francis’ Catechism change on the death penalty that he knows does not jibe with the facts; and the justification he gives for doing so is that he doesn’t want people to lose the Faith. In other words, if the truth about Francis leads people to lose the Faith, then it’s okay to lie about him? Impressive. This is surely a new one for a “Catholic” apologist to argue.

It’s tragic that Madrid has not considered that there is a genuine solution to the Catechism conundrum, one that does justice to Catholic teaching and to the facts about what Francis just did: Jorge Bergoglio is not actually the Pope. That would explain how he could change 2000 years of Church teaching, wouldn’t it? In fact, it’s the only possible solution. But at least we now have a major Novus Ordo apologist on record conceding that if it is necessary to deny the facts to keep the idea alive that Francis is Pope, then that’s just too bad for the facts.

Steve Kellmeyer

Out of all the posts defending Francis’ death penalty change we have seen, Steve Kellmeyer gets an award for writing the most stupid one of them all. Please excuse the bluntness, but it’s entirely appropriate, as we will now show. It’s one thing to make arguments that are factually inaccurate, fallacious, insufficient, etc., but Kellmeyer has outdone himself this time so that his blog post belongs in a category all by itself.

After claiming that Francis has made a disciplinary change and not a doctrinal one (even though the amended Catechism text says that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person’”), Kellmeyer seriously argues:

Today, governments have no excuse. Any society which is poor suffers from poverty because the murderers and thieves are in the government, not in the street. The unjust aggressor isn’t the man on trial, it is the government that tries the man. In the modern world, we are now treated to the spectacle of one extremely powerful murderer and thief (the corrupt government) putting a petty murderer and thief to death in order to cover up and distract from its own sins.

…The death penalty is now a sin used by a corrupt government to cover up and distract from its own sins. The United States is one of a rather small list of countries that still use the death penalty. Is there anyone here who would truly try to support the idea that the US government is free from corruption? One sign of our corruption is precisely our insistence on the death penalty.

(Steve Kellmeyer, “The Death Penalty Teaching Hasn’t Changed”The Fifth Column, Aug. 4, 2018)

That’s it: Francis has declared capital punishment to be inadmissible because nowadays governments are full of big murderers trying to distract from their crimes by executing little murderers — got it! No doubt, this is what the “light of the Gospel” tells us is clearly inadmissible because of the dignity of the human person. Now we understand what Francis’ change really means!

Kellmeyer then continues with his comedy show:

And, to be fair, the death penalty has always had a basic problem. It assumes infallibility on the part of the police and the courts, that they have found and convicted the correct man. Since only the Pope is infallible, and even then only on points of morality and doctrine, that basic presupposition has always been suspect. Honest men and women have always acknowledged this basic flaw.

Ah yes, the death penalty requires infallibility on the part of the state in order for it to be licitly carried out. Of course! It’s just unfortunate that God didn’t think of that when He first legislated the execution of murderers: “Whosoever shall shed man’s blood, his blood shall be shed: for man was made to the image of God” (Gen 9:6). For the record, we note that it is only Mr. Kellmeyer who demands infallibility for executions to be permissible, not the Divine Lawgiver who instituted the punishment in the first place.

Obviously capital punishment may only be applied when the defendant is found to be guilty of a capital crime beyond reasonable doubt. If this isn’t sufficient for Mr. Kellmeyer, then he ought to advocate for the abolition not just of the death penalty but of all punishment, because it is only permissible to punish those whose guilt is certain. It simply makes no sense for a jury to say, “We’re not sure whether the defendant is guilty, therefore we recommend not death but life imprisonment.” If the jury is unsure of a man’s guilt, he ought not to be punished at all, not only not with execution. Severity of punishment has no connection with certainty of guilt; it is, rather, tied to the gravity of the offense committed by an individual already known to be guilty.

In a follow-up post on the issue, Kellmeyer did not fare any better in terms of sound argumentation. After confusing divine admonitions directed at private individuals not to exact vengeance on our enemies, with the requirement of the civil authority to inflict just penalties on criminals, the “orthodox Catholic” apologist then fails to distinguish the Mosaic Law abrogated by Christ (cf. Mt 5:17-18; Mt 5:43-44; Jn 8:3-7) with the Natural Law, which retains perennial validity and was endorsed by the Messiah (cf. Jn 19:11; Lk 23:39-41; Rom 13:1-4), precisely as the Catholic Church has taught for two millennia.

Kellmeyer can try to disguise his shoddy theology by means of strong rhetoric, but he won’t get away with it here.

Christopher A. Ferrara

That The Remnant‘s senior polemicist Christopher Ferrara was going to weigh in on this Catechismchange was a given. As usual, his criticism of Francis was spot-on, but the problem with him is his stubborn refusal to let go of the idea that the man he has called an “Anti-Catholic Pope” and an “Undertaker Pope” in the past is nevertheless the Vicar of Christ on earth to whom we owe submission under pain of eternal damnation.

In an installment he wrote for his column at the Fatima Center, Ferrara declared in its title: “The Reversible Magisterium Is No Magisterium”. True enough though that may be (depending on exactly what is meant by it), it flatly contradicts what he argued as late as 2015 together with co-author Thomas E. Woods, Jr., in their book The Great Facade. There the two authors wrote: “Let us consider an actual example of a teaching of the ordinary Magisterium that was later found to be false and actually reversed by a Pope” (p. 151). They then pointed to Pope Pius XII’s Apostolic Constitution Sacramentum Ordinis, which Ferrara and Woods falsely claim corrected the “error” of the Council of Florence on what constitutes the matter of priestly ordination, when the fact is that Pius XII deliberately avoided making a defintive pronouncement about the past and only concerned himself with defining the matter and form for ordinations in the present and the future (see Sacramentum Ordinis, nn. 3-4).

So, is the Magisterium reversible for Mr. Ferrara or not? It’s tough to keep it all straight when you make it up as you go along. We have put together a meme to highlight the contradiction into which the self-appointed Magisterium sifter has argued himself (click image for larger version):

The reason why Ferrara tries to spin the Council of Florence controversy into a magisterial reversal of doctrine is that he needs a historical precedent to justify his position that he can resist the Novus Ordo Magisterium on the grounds that it will eventually be reversed, just as Florence once was. But even if his position on Florence were correct, this idea of refusing the present papal Magisterium because a future judgment is expected to be different, was shot down by Pope Leo XIII in 1885: “Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed” (Apostolic Letter Epistola Tua). Incidentally, this papal spanking also does away with “Fr.” Chad Ripperger’s absurd concept of “Magisterialism” he had to invent to keep from concluding that the Novus Ordo Sect isn’t the Catholic Church.

But, not to worry — Ferrara still has a joker up his sleeve that he is ready to play when needed. In his Fatima Perspectives installment, he does precisely that:

Here we see yet again the wisdom of Father Gruner’s observation, based on reason and common sense, that the Magisterium cannot contradict itself and that any actual contradiction of what the Magisterium teaches cannot, for that very reason, belong to the Magisterium.

(Chris Ferrara, “The Reversible Magisterium Is No Magisterium”The Fatima Center, Aug. 2, 2018)

Oh, such incredible wisdom! The late John Vennari once summarized “Fr.” Nicholas Gruner’s convenient thesis thus: “a Pope has no authority to teach anything that is false, and if he does so, it is not magisterium”. Although we have no record of the date anymore, we did capture a screenshot of Vennari’s comment when he posted it on Facebook:

This argument is by no means new. The heretic Johann von Dollinger used it to oppose the First Vatican Council’s definition of papal infallibility. The flaw in the argument is easily seen when we use an analogy: It’s like saying that your car is guaranteed never to break down, and if it ever does, then that proves that it isn’t a real car. This is irrefutable in principle — and that’s a problem because then the “guarantee” guarantees absolutely nothing at all. By the same token, to say that magisterial teaching can never contradict but then in the same breath to add that the way to determine whether a teaching is magisterial is to see whether it does contradict, is to say nothing of substance at all. The fact is, Ferrara & Co. have exonerated themselves of the guilt of rejecting the “papal” Magisterium by reducing the definition of “papal teaching” to whatever the “Pope” teaches that isn’t wrong. Thus, if it is wrong, why then it’s just not papal teaching. And now take a guess as to who gets to make the final determination on whether a particular teaching is wrong!

When evaluating whether a doctrine set forth by the Roman Pontiff is to be accepted, one can hardly put as a condition of acceptance the very content of the doctrine, for this would involve us in circular reasoning, as it would require us to know the truth apart from, and prior to the pronouncement of, the rightful Catholic teaching authority. But such a position reduces the Church’s Magisterium to being nothing more than an organ of repeating what is already known, endowed with a useless pseudo-infallibility that is enjoyed whenever something is promulgated that is, well, correct. By that logic, of course, anyone could claim to be infallible or authoritative, even Protestants, Pagans, and atheists; for, according to this faulty understanding, surely such people too ought to be listened to whenever what they say is correct, ought they not? Is, then, the Church’s teaching authority no different in essence from that of even a Pagan or a Communist whenever he says something that is true? Of course not, but this is what would follow if the recognize-and-resist distortion of the Catholic Magisterium were true, a distortion which they maintain solely in order to uphold the idea that Jorge Bergoglio and his five predecessors are valid Popes of the Catholic Church — and for no other reason.

At this point, some will no doubt want to bring up what is known as the Canon of St. Vincent, the rule of thumb proposed by St. Vincent of Lerins that identifies orthodox doctrine as that “which has been believed everywhere, always, by all” (Commonitorium Against Heresies [Sainte Croix du Mont: Tradibooks, 2008], p. 146). Appealing to this rule, a great many who consider themselves traditional Catholics believe themselves justified in rejecting anything from the Novus Ordo Magisterium that is not consonant with Tradition while still recognizing the “authorities” who teach it as legitimate and Catholic. Again, Dollinger made the very same argument when he resisted papal infallibility (for which he was excommunicated in 1871 by his local archbishop, Gregor von Scherr).

However, the Vincentian Canon was never meant to be interpreted as a layman’s filter of the Magisterium of Holy Mother Church, which would allow each believer to pick and choose as requiring his assent only those things he privately discerns to be “traditional”, regardless of what the divinely-commissioned teaching authority tells him. Rather, the Canon of St. Vincent is a helpful guideline to determine with safety what is certainly Catholic in a time of doctrinal confusion on those points of doctrine on which the Magisterium has not yet spoken. In 2015 we posted an article explaining this at length, quoting the necessary authoritative sources to show that this is indeed the understanding Holy Mother Church has of the Vincentian Canon:

The whole recognize-and-resist line of “what the Church has always taught” is inaccurate anyway. Since they believe the Vatican II Church to be the Catholic Church, if they wish to refer to what was taught before Vatican II, they ought to speak of “what the Church used to teach“, since their church hasn’t taught it in nearly six decades. That would be the correct and honest way to phrase it, but don’t expect them to start using that line. They won’t use it because it would immediately reveal the absurdity of their position, highlighting the fact that they believe in a defected Church, which is heresy.

Nevertheless, we see Ferrara confidently maintaining that a reversible Magisterium is no Magisterium. That the logical corollary of this must also hold true — namely, that a reversible Pope is no Pope — has apparently not occurred to the glib rhetorician.

Some Others

The most amusing response to Francis’ Catechism chaos came perhaps from Michael Voris, who basically sent a quick “nothing to see here, move along” reaction on Twitter after the story broke on Aug. 2. The founder of Church Militant Disneyland wrote: “Don’t be distracted by [the] death penalty story. Keep your eye on the ball. Episcopal Sodomy must be brought to an end. THAT is the only story that matters. Nothing else. Deflection. Distraction. Practically no one is affected by the death penalty. Everyone is impacted by Episcopal Sodomy” (source; cleaned up typos). Considering his group’s clear prior defense of capital punishment, it was a given that Francis’ change to the Catechism wasn’t going to be enthusiastically welcomed at the Detroit warehouse operation, but what Voris wrote here is not only false, it also betrays a failure to grasp what is really at stake.

Let’s be clear: The immoral and criminal behavior of many Novus Ordo clergy — from pedophilia to sodomy — is an abomination that cries to Heaven for vengeance. However, as evil as it is, this behavior is not what proves the Vatican II Sect to be a false church. Conceivably, such wickedness could occur in the true Catholic Church, and has, even if on a smaller scale, occurred in the past, as the scandal of immoral Popes, bishops, and other clergy in Church history demonstrates. On the other hand, a substantial change in doctrine, promulgated by the Sovereign Pontiff, is not possible in the true Church, not even in theory; and if it were possible, it would disprove Catholicism altogether. So Voris has it exactly backwards with regard to what is most important, but with his excessive preoccupation about unnatural vice, perhaps we should not expect him to realize that.

Having entirely ignored Francis’ change to the Catechism on Aug. 2, Voris’ Church Disneylandpublished an article on the subject the following day. The monograph was penned by a “Rev. Michael X.”, whose credentials are that he has a licentiate degree in Novus Ordo canon law. Strangely enough, the Rev. X. turned the entire subject into a matter of canon law, when Francis’ revision of the Catechism is first and foremost a matter of doctrine, specifically of moral and dogmatic theology, not canon law. The Rev.’s attempt to analyze Francis’ decree canonically, therefore, misses the mark entirely, and his conclusions are virtually irrelevant for that reason.

A most curious idea about papal authority in connection with the death penalty was put forward by a Dominican moral theologian by the name of “Fr.” Thomas Petri, who thinks that individual conscience can decide to dispense with what is recognized as papal teaching: Francis’ “teaching authority demands a certain submission of intellect and will from the faithful. At the very least, this means that Catholic faithful must give the Holy Father’s pastoral teaching significant weight in the formation of their conscience on this matter”, the Novus Ordo Dominican said to Catholic News Agency (source). In other words: The Pope Teaches – You Decide! This should be music to the ears of Chris Ferrara and other recognize-and-resist adherents, although it is coming from a Modernist who himself has perhaps given significant but still clearly insufficient weight to the encyclicals Pascendi Dominici GregisHumani Generis, and other papal teaching against Modernism and the Nouvelle Theologie (New Theology).

Lastly, a dishonorable mention belongs to the twice-ordained-but-still-not-a-priest “Fr.” John Hunwicke, who apparently expects the readers of his blog to take seriously his remark that with his amendment to the Catechism, Francis has promulgated heresy but without properly expressing it: “As in the case of Amoris laetitia, heresy is being promulgated but carefully packaged so that it is not formally expressed” (source; emphasis given). Apparently Mr. Hunwicke thinks that the indefectibility of the Church permits a Pope to promulgate heresy to the Universal Church as long as he is cunning enough to use sufficient subterfuge. In other words, according to Hunwicke, it is precisely when heresy is disseminated in its most dangerous form that the Church is not protected from it, whereas she isprotected from it when it is proposed less dangerously. Nothing says “perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy” quite like that (cf. Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Quas Primas, n. 22)!

This post will be continued in Part 2, to be published in a few days.

from Novus Ordo Watch

Diocesan Sodom and Gomorrah…

Perversion meets Blasphemy:
Diocesan”Catholic Youth” win Gay Pride Award

Francis is a big fan of the youth, or so he likes to be thought of, at least when they’re not looking for the pre-Vatican II days. While the “Pope” is currently preparing to find out what the Lord is saying to his false church by listening to those who have the least knowledge of religion and the least experience of life, the world has just gotten a glimpse of what Novus Ordo youngsters have on their minds in the heart of Europe: Sodom and Gomorrah, with a vengeance. No doubt there is indeed some “spirit” speaking there, although it’s definitely not the Holy Spirit!

On July 30, 2018, the official news portal of the German Conference of Novus Ordo Bishops published the following news item:

The Young Catholic Community (KjG) Rottenburg-Stuttgart has won the Christopher Street Day (CSD) Award in Stuttgart. On Sunday a jury made up of five judges honored the youth association’s group for their participation in the CSD parade. According to CSD, the award is presented annually to three groups that “demonstrate outstanding achievements by participating in the parade for diversity, acceptance, and equality.”

(“KjG gewinnt Preis des Christopher Street Days”katholisch.de, July 30, 2018; our translation.)

The post continues, but we will spare you the rest. The photos below tell the story well enough.

What is Christopher Street Day? Wikipedia explains: “Christopher Street Day (CSD) is an annual European LGBT celebration and demonstration held in various cities across Europe for the rights of LGBT people, and against discrimination and exclusion. It is Germany’s and Switzerland’s counterpart to Gay Pride or Pride Parades” (source here; caution: nasty pictures).

What the participation of that “Young Catholic Community” in CSD Stuttgart looked like, can be seen in the pictures that follow (click on each for a larger view, but keep a barf bag handy). More photos are available on the community’s official web site.

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the “Catholic youth” of 2018.

The first two images show the youngsters carrying banners. The one on the right identifies their group as being the so-called “Young Catholic Community”, together with their mascot, a dragon. How appropriate! “And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels: And they prevailed not, neither was their place found any more in heaven. And that great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, who seduceth the whole world; and he was cast unto the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him” (Apoc 12:7-9). The banner on the left shows a mugshot of Francis with his notorious words to Juan Carlos Cruz: “God has made you like that. God loves you like that. The Pope loves you like that, and you should love yourself and not care about what people say about it” (direct translation of words printed on banner).

The third picture shows a sign being held by one of the “Catholic” participants with a frigthful blasphemy: “Jesus also had two fathers.” This outrageous wickedness hardly needs comment. St. Joseph, Foster Father of God, most pure Spouse of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Terror of Demons, put an end to the abominable Modernist sect and deliver these youngster from the clutches of the evil one!

The fourth photograph shows a human; whether male or female, we dare not speculate.

The last image shows the meeting place from where the “Young Catholic Community” began its participation in the march glorifying the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah: St. Mary’s Church in Stuttgart. Just like last year.

Yes, you read that right: Last year a very similar thing took place, also beginning at St. Mary’s, although it was much more subdued compared to what they pulled off this time around. You can read about the participation of the diocesan “Catholic youth” in last summer’s perversion march here:

They definitely kicked things up a notch this time around. That condoms were distributed in bulk hardly needs mention.

Let’s face it: The time is long gone when calling for Catholic acceptance of perversion and sins that cry to Heaven for vengeance was confined to certain openly dissident groups, such as Call to Action and We are Church. Now you can find it on the web sites of the Novus Ordo Counterfeit Church’s official structures.

Recall that a few years back, the Rottenburg-Stuttgart diocesan web site featured a video commentary by one of its own “theologians”, who excitedly reported on the scandalous news story of two “Catholic nuns” in Italy who had abandoned the cloister in order to get married — to each other. Not only did the commentator endorse the perversion, he explicitly called for some kind of ecclesiastical rite of blessing or even “matrimony” for same-sex couples. The video was eventually taken down but only after public backlash over it. You can still read our report showing the full video footage with English subtitles:

Folks, they do it because they can. They know that with Francis at the helm, there will be no interference. He has given enough indications that he supports the pervert revolution, so they know they have free reign at this point. What you are seeing here is Amoris Laetitia in action; it is the Francis Effect in practice — and you know that this genie won’t go back in the bottle.

The diocese of Rottenburg-Stuttgart, by the way, was once (1989-99) shepherded by the infamous heretic “Cardinal” Walter Kasper, before “Pope” John Paul II called him to Rome to serve in the curia as the Vatican’s Chief Ecumenist. Kasper, by the way, means “Punch”, as in “Punch-and-Judy Show”, and that’s exactly what he’s been performing theologically from the beginning. That’s the same Walter Kasper who is continually praised by “Pope Francis” for his Modernist theology. That Kasper advocates permitting public adulterers to receive the sacraments without prior amendment of life, goes without saying.

The current pretend-bishop in Rottenburg who is responsible for all this is Gebhard Fürst, another man with a very fitting last name. Fürst means “prince”, and he is clearly a tool of the “prince of this world” (Jn 12:31). The Rottenburg diocese encompasses the city of Tübingen, by the way, that academic den of Modernism whose most infamous professor was none other than hell’s apostle, Hans Küng. In an interview with Der Spiegel in 2014, he declared presumptuously that he is quite confident of going to Heaven and insisted: “I am not a heretic.” As we’ve said before, the Novus Ordo Sect is finished in that country.

Clearly, marching for the acceptance and normalization of sodomy while blaspheming God and His saints, is par for the course for this diocese. In 2013, Francis had told the youth to “make a mess”, and now we know what it looks like when they do. If this is what can happen in 2018 under the banner of “Catholicism”, it defies imagination what the “Catholic youth” will be like in one or two generations.

One is reminded of the words spoken by our Blessed Lord in regard to the Holy City: “Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city” (Mt 10:15).

Surely this is true not only for Jersualem.

Image source: kjg-drache.de
License: Fair use

from Novus Ordo Watch

Conciliar Catechism chaos…

Bergoglio’s Lethal Injection:
Chaos ensues after Francis’ Death Penalty Update

Now that a few days have passed since Francis’ little aggiornamento to the so-called Catechism of the Catholic Church, it is time for a look at the chaos his move of declaring capital punishment to be contrary to the Gospel and human dignity, has caused in Novus Ordo Land.

The word “chaos” here is no exaggeration: The reactions to the amendment reflect the entire spectrum of those who profess themselves to be Roman Catholics and acknowledge the man’s claim to be Pope as valid, from ultra-liberal to hyper-traditionalist. Some are welcoming the change and accepting it with docility, others are trying to but are struggling to make sense of it. Then there are those who do not care what Francis says and have long tuned him out, whereas still others are simply shocked, bewildered, and upset. A review of the different reactions from various Novus Ordo clerics, theologians, philosophers, commentators, and bloggers reveals that one is veritably surveying a battlefield.

Before we proceed, a quick refresher might be in order. As regards the Catechism change on capital punishment, the following is — pardon the pun — Bergoglio’s death sentence: “Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person’, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide” (Antipope Francis, Rescript of Aug. 2, 2018).

That the secular press should see in Francis’ revision a substantial change goes without saying, and one really cannot fault them for it because no other conclusion is reasonable. But in this post we are not concerned with the reaction of the secular world; we will limit ourselves to what those who profess themselves to be a part of Francis’ religion are saying in response.

Thus we have gone through a whole slew of articles, posts, and audios from numerous sources professing to be Catholic. As a result, we have identified five major categories of how this is being received:

  1. The “No Substantial Change!” category, which asserts that Francis’ change is merely pastoral or, if doctrinal, represents a genuine development of doctrine, making explicit what was already implicit in the previous teaching.
  2. The “Church Teaching has Changed — hooray!” category, which holds that Francis has indeed changed doctrine in a substantial or significant way, and that this is a good thing.
  3. The “Church Teaching has Changed — he can’t do that!” category, which maintains that Francis has indeed changed doctrine in a substantial or significant way, but that this is a bad thing, either because he cannotought not, or is not allowed to do so.
  4. The “We need a Clarification!” category, which says that there is too much vagueness or ambiguity in the new text so that it is not certain what Francis is saying and therefore it is not certain what kind of change he has made, if any. The people of this persuasion are therefore asking for — you guessed it — a clarification.
  5. The “Whatever!” category, into which we have grouped those who had no coherent reaction, or where a clear position was not discernible or even attempted.

With this in mind, we now present to our readers the links to the various reactions:

Group 1: No Substantial Change!

Group 2: Church Teaching has Changed — hooray!

Group 3: Church Teaching has Changed — he can’t do that!

Group 4: We need a Clarification!

Group 5: Whatever!

So much for Francis being the principle of unity in the Catholic Church, otherwise known as Pope. In a way, one might say that just about anything of note that Francis says triggers reactions that can be grouped into one of these categories.

In 2016, this very “Pope” was reported to have said: “It’s not impossible that I will go down in history as the one who split the Catholic Church” (source). Francis is certainly trying to do his darndest to damage as many souls as possible. Although he is not actually the head of the Catholic Church, the problem is that most people in the world believe him to be. If he succeeds in formally dividing the Vatican II Church into two camps by means of a schism, this will arguably precipitate even greater harm to souls, as those on the conservative side of that split will mistakenly believe themselves to be the true Catholics who are untainted by Modernism and other heresy, when in fact they will simply be adhering to a less overt version of the same Modernism that Vatican II has unleashed on their church. This is a point we have made several times before on this blog:

We will leave our critical assessment of a select few of the above reactions to one of our next posts. In the meantime, you can watch EWTN anchor Raymond Arroyo discuss the issue with his guests “Fr.” Gerald Murray and Robert Royal on the Aug. 2 edition of his program The World Over (beginning at the 2:30 min mark). It is interesting to see conservative Novus Ordos trying to make sense of this mess their beloved “Holy Father” has created:

Perhaps the most remarkable of all the reactions to Francis’ Catechism change came from conservative Novus Ordo apologist Patrick Madrid in hours 2 and 3 of his Aug. 7 edition of The Patrick Madrid Show. Clearly aware of the perennial Catholic teaching on capital punishment, Madrid was forced by the laws of logic to put forward the absurd contention that it is “a pastoral opinion that Pope Francis is asserting”, and that this opinion is “different from the doctrinal truth that the death penalty is not morally illicit” (hour 2, beginning at the 33:21 min mark).

In other words, Madrid is claiming that Francis is leaving the “doctrinal truth” of the permissibility of capital punishment untouched — something he agrees no Pope could possibly change — and merely applying a “pastoral approach” (both phrases are Madrid’s) that forbids it for the present time. That this argument runs afoul of the fact that Francis has amended the Novus Ordo Catechism to say that “the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that ‘the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person‘”, is an objection Madrid is unable to answer (underlining added). A caller who contended that this statement is verifiably false, Madrid was not able to gainsay.

Madrid’s justification for holding this counter-factual position of the change being Francis’ “pastoral view” was that it was the only way to keep all religious truths coherent, else one would have to conclude that Catholicism is false. But of course there is a third option, one that unfortunately did not seem to enter into Madrid’s mind: Perhaps the man who mandated this change to the Catechism is not actually the Pope. That would resolve the conundrum, wouldn’t it? In fact, it’s the only possible solution. But at least we now have a major Novus Ordo apologist on record conceding that if it is necessary to deny the facts to keep believing that Francis is Pope, then that’s just too bad for the facts.

As Francis continues to steamroller through the devastated vineyard his five predecessors have left him, we seem to be getting ever closer to witnessing the total collapse of the Novus Ordo Church.

from Novus Ordo Watch

A Catholic injection lethal to Modernism…

FRANCIS WATCH
Episode 36 – 
Special Edition

“Pope” Francis and the Death Penalty

Listen on demand at any time — free!

With all the kerfuffle about Francis’ decree of Aug. 2, 2018, amending the text of the Catechism of the Vatican II religion with regard to capital punishment, host Stephen Heiner has invited Bp. Donald Sanborn and Fr. Anthony Cekada to meet for an “emergency session” to discuss the issue and its implications, such as:

  • What did Francis actually decree, and what motivated this change?
  • Is this theologically sound or defensible?
  • How does this square with the traditional Catholic teaching on the death penalty?
  • What about human dignity?
  • Are those who recognize Francis as Pope required to assent to this new teaching?
  • …and more!

In this special installment, which is being released outside of — and in addition to — the regular quarterly Francis Watch episodes, Bp. Sanborn and Fr. Cekada clean up Francis’ latest mess, answer objections, and lay out the timeless and true teaching of the real Catholic Church on this issue.

Listen to this informative 1-hour broadcast, completely free of charge (and with no ads!):

As always, Francis Watch is not boring or dry but exciting, insightful, and interesting — with plenty of humor, so necessary to retain in our difficult times.

Don’t miss this episode of Francis Watch, and be sure to share it with friends, family members, and potential converts. The broadcast is available for streaming and download on-demand at any time. More free episodes of Francis Watch are available at FrancisWatch.org.

To learn more about Francis Watch, and to access another two dozen episodes, visit member-supported Restoration Radio. The web site of Bp. Sanborn’s Most Holy Trinity Seminary can be accessed here , and Fr. Cekada has a blog here.

We have recently produced an episode of our own Novus Ordo Watch mini podcast, TRADCAST EXPRESS, on Francis’ doctrinal change regarding capital punishment. You can listen to it here:

For more incredible facts about Jorge Bergoglio, “Pope Francis”, please see our topical page:

If you’re tired of the endless Bergoglian circus and are wondering what has happened to the Catholic Church, we invite you to check out the following links:

It is our pleasure to be able to sponsor Francis Watch for the good of souls and for the greater glory of God. In this manner we try to fulfill in part our stated goal of helping to educate people in the true Roman Catholic religion and making people aware of how true Catholicism differs essentially from the fake Novus Ordo/Vatican II counterpart that is currently occupying the Catholic structures.

If you benefit from our work and would like to help keep it going — which is not possible without spontaneous contributions from people like you — you can make a tax-deductible donation here or support us in other ways.