Ninety-one years ago today, as the world slumbered in naivete, the Bolshevik Revolution was merely weeks away from becoming a reality when the Mother of God appeared for the final time at the Cova in Fatima, Portugal and, through the power of God, manifested the Miracle of the Sun to bring many back to her divine Son Jesus Christ. Mary was sent to reinforce all that Divine Revelation has foretold and impart the simple measures necessary to curtail the impending doom and gloom that would follow if mankind did not heed her final warning.
As we can see so clearly today, mankind has not heeded Mary's messages at Fatima. If her admonition that "more souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than anything else" was prevalent in those seemingly "innocent" days, what do you suppose today when modesty can hardly be found in Webster's let alone anywhere except in traditional chapels? Mankind has pushed the envelope so far in the direction of aberration of the body that there is nothing sacred anymore. Babies? Kill 'em if they hamper your lifestyle. Want to be promiscuous, no problem, we'll mass market and liberally advertise in every medium any and all methods to enhance your carnal pleasures while making sure you go against God's ordaining will of populating Heaven. Want to pervert God's natural order? Why not call such an evil, disgusting and downright nauseous perversion "gay"?
Evidently those who have bought into the latter do not take to heart the inerrant words of holy Writ nor remember what befell those who dared God's patience in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. They forget what happened to Adam and Eve just for taking a bite. They forget the temporal punishment doled out to Moses just for striking a rock twice. Like the Jews of old, they say si, si with their lips, but no, no with their deeds and the Almighty can take only so much and then, well, can you say banishment to Egypt or Babylon? Here today, gone tomorrow.
In this world gone amok, as it will and should, because it has failed to place its trust in the only means for peace on earth: our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ as Sovereign King with Mary our Immaculate Queen, I could write so much and yet, on such temporal matters, it would be like the blind leading the blind.
I couldn't begin to tell readers about the stock market crash, but then I'm not alone, no Wall Street or Washington "expert" can either.
I couldn't begin to tell readers where to put their hard-earned earnings, but then in that also I'm not alone, no banker or Treasury Secretary can either.
I couldn't begin to tell readers what the temporal answers are to the issues addressed incessantly and boringly by the sorry and dangerous chosen candidates for head of the politburo of the People's Republic of the United States of America, but then neither can the candidates or their peers in Congress, who are the real culprits in enabling this implosion and ruin of the great American "dream."
I couldn't begin to tell readers who is going to win the election, though the biased pollsters and, as Rush Limbaugh appropriately calls the mainstream press, "drive-by media" will tell you even if you don't ask. One question: When did Journalism 101 start teaching subjectivity and the art of selling one's soul? Never have I seen such blatant, obvious bias propaganda in tilting the scales for a man called by supporters the "Messiah" which only prompts straight-thinkers and those who know the scriptures to think "antichrist."
I couldn't begin to tell our troops in Iraq, many who signed up to protect and defend their state how they were conscripted into an international and unpopular war that, despite the "success" of the Surge, has shown no fruit and accomplished nothing except empowering the evil empire of Islamism. Who cares where Osama Bin Laden is hiding when you have an even scarier scenario with Barack Hussein Obama out in the open replicating the very tactics of Vladimir Lenin, Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and Hugo Chavez, not to mention Nation of Islam radical Louis Farrakhan and Kenya's bloody dictator Raila Odinga. Oh wait, the latter two are close personal comrades of Obama to this day. You'll notice I didn't mention sixties radicalist Marxist Bill Ayers or Saul Alinksy or "Rev." Jeremiah Wright or "Fr." Michael Phfleger or the corrupt Chicago Daley machine that has its roots in the communist manifesto. Well, what do you know, I did mention them.
I could mention many more, especially those faux "Catholics" in Congress and in chanceries who are no more Catholic than our dog Lady Siena. Though you might get an argument that the canine has a better chance of getting to Heaven than say a Joe Biden if it's true "all dogs go to Heaven" whereas heretics and apostates do not. Keep in mind, I am not calling Joe Biden a dog, just an apostate.
I couldn't begin to tell families who are losing their homes because of staggering mortgage payments that there is an answer to their woes except to remind them that no one is entitled to anything except "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" in our Bill of Rights. It mentions nothing about home-ownership or bailouts of bad debts. While the blame for the current economic crash can be spread to a number of culprits, no one is innocent in this financial fiasco for too many bought into the mantra, parrotted on Madison Avenue, "I want it all and I want it now!" There are consequences for not taking responsibilities for our actions or inactions. The important thing is to learn from our mistakes, and we all make them, but how can we learn if the trend is to reward failure? What kind of message does that send tomorrow's generation who will be stuck with a humongous, staggering, stifling debt?
I couldn't begin to list the number of people we know who are affected by this current crisis that only intensifies in scope, for the just will suffer as well as the unjust, but I would like to mention one who is a microsm of so many who placed their trust in a finite system and have been betrayed. That would be our dear friend Helen Cooper. whose husband Irv passed away in 2000 in the state of Sanctifying Grace and was a wonderful mentor in my endeavors in the 80's. She, like so many others have seen their life-savings nearly wiped out. Nor can I tell others who, in past years, were regular contributors to The DailyCatholic but in recent times those funds have dried up. Nor can I offer any business advice to countless others who have seen their portfolios, 401K's and other nest eggs vanish in less than three weeks. All I can do is extend my sympathy and prayers, and remind them what our Lord says in St. Matthew 19:24 about how it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get to Heaven. That's an imagery of a dromedary I can't quite imagine, but maybe losing temporal riches can be a blessing in disguise. Just know that those who capitalized on others misfortunes, who dishonestly squandered other people's money, who stole, lied and covered up, will have their day before the Supreme Judge and that goes for politician, prelate and the pompous predators who, when push comes to shove, suddenly develop a case of amnesia. I guarantee they will be reminded of the truth at their Particular Judgment.
While there are many things I couldn't begin to explain or provide answers for regarding temporal matters, I can tell you what the solution is for all of these collective chaotic crises that have seemingly hit all at once. It is really no different than in olden times as we ask, with David in Psalm 129: 3 from yesterday's Introit, "If Thou shalt observe iniquities, O Lord, who shall endure it?" The only answer is to repent, turn back to God and the only Church He founded: the true Roman Catholic Church from Saint Peter through dear Pope Pius XII.
Now, of course, realistically that isn't going to happen for, as our Lord says "Many are called, but few chosen." Even with tragic temporal consequences threatening to capsize capital gains I doubt that many will be repentant enough to convert, fully convert and drastically change their lives. Yes, even in drastic times taking the drastic steps of renouncing the world, the flesh and the devil is unlikely because the vast majority, as we and our contributing writers have pointed out, have been so dumbed down that they wouldn't know the truth even when it is staring them in the face, which is what Christ is doing and yet they blink and look for other avenues of relief. Don't they realize all they need to do is knock? But instead they continue to knock God, blaming Him for their misery and misfortune without having a clue that penance and sacrifice is one of the vital qualifications for entrance into the presence of the Beatific Vision. Was that not the essence of our Lady's messages at Fatima?
It was merely an affirmation of what St. Paul points out in Hebrews 13: 4, "We have not here a lasting city, but we seek one which is to come." and, that is why no one should ever give up hope. If one places their trust in man, then they will get what we have today: total chaos. If one places their trust solely in Christ and the unchanging doctrines of His holy Church, there can only be joy in knowing that our time here on earth is but a drop of water in a never-ending ocean of happiness. Yet so many place their emphasis on that one drop that they jeopardize their chances of ever becoming part of that heavenly sea.
Why, I'm sure you are asking, would anyone be so dumb as to choose an infinitesimal fleeting drop over an infinite eternity? Good question. The answer lies in the father of lies who has been so successful in these times, as Sacred Scripture warned, as Our Lady warned, as countless saints and concerned Roman Pontiffs warned and did all they could to safeguard the Faith and souls with what they thought would be failsafe measures to assure protection.
Such steps were taken by Popes Paul IV and St. Pius V with their infallible decrees Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio and Quo Primum; by Pope Pius IX with his Syllabus of Errors and Pope Leo XIII with his "absolutely null and utterly void" reinforcement that Anglican Orders (and consequently like-man-made conciliar Orders) are invalid through publishing his Apostolicae Curae as well as his encyclical on safeguarding the Unity of the Church Satis Cognitum and, of course, his powerful prayer he composed the "Prayer of St. Michael the Archangel" as part of the mandated and vital Leonine Prayers at the end of every Low Mass. And then we have His Holiness Pope St. Pius X who put it all out there in condemning the synthesis of all heresies - Modernism - with his infallible encyclical Pascendi Domenici Gregis which he backed up with a mandatory Oath Against Modernism to ensure the pastors and shepherds would not succumb to heresy.
As we all know, that went out the window in the sixties. Why? You know why. And that why is the very reason we are in the situation we find ourselves in globally today both temporally and spiritually: BANKRUPT!
It is because the massive majority defaulted on the tenets of the Faith and chose to close their eyes to obvious anathema that in saner times would have been condemned and put down immediately. But we had grown lazy, perfect foils to satan's wiles. After two world wars, a devastating depression, America was looking for the brass ring. The sacrifice and earn-your-way mentality of the last great generation (parents during WWII) was abandoned for the new-age gurus whose siren of "you can be anybody you want to be" had followed the "don't tell me what to do" generation of the sixties, fogged by the incessant marijuana smoke that clouded minds everywhere during the most devastating revolution in the history of the Church, if not of all time.
So then, do we blame Vatican II on the weed? No, but we can clearly see now it was a rebellious weed that was allowed to be planted by Angelo Cardinal Roncalli who had vowed before God not to allow it when he took the solemn Papal Coronation Oath. By his omission or commission, either way a grave sin before God, that insidious weed was allowed to grow unchecked and choke out the sensus Catholicus of the masses. A new religion was formed and those who resisted were ridiculed, persecuted and banished to the hinterlands. All that went before was chucked because it hindered the conciliar agenda of building a kingdom of peace on earth without Heaven's help through tolerance and diversity, universal salvation, humanism, ecumenism, all falling under that great umbrella of Modernism, condemned by holy Mother Church. Yet few raised objections.
This brings me to a matter that I must address. In my editorial last week, I issued a necessary challenge for the sake of unifying the traditional movement to Atila Guimar„es as well as his colleague at Tradition in Action Dr. Marian Therese Horvat and Catholic Family News editor John Vennari to tell me what they do not understand about Pope Paul IV's ex cathedra decree Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio. I have not heard back from any of them even though I had given them a heads-up on Monday that I would be publishing my editorial This Interminable Interregnum this past Wednesday. However, I did get an inkling in Atila's latest post on Tradition in Action from this past Friday. In writing a response to a letter writer who rightly questioned Dan O'Connell's bizarre logic that sedevacantism is not a possible alternative in the face of the Great Apostasy, Atila's answer in When Does a Heretical Pope Become an Invalid Pope? is even more bizarre.
Now I challenge Atila again in the respectful but same firm manner he addressed John Paul II five years ago when he co-wrote the work "We Resist You to the Face." I have sent this challenge to Atila beforehand so it is not a "Pearl Harbor", if you will, but rather a loving, charitable plea to connect that last dot to see how his rationale of remaining "inside the church" is futile for it is a false church.
He writes, and I quote, "Given that all the Conciliar Popes have stood behind the heresy of universal salvation - that a man can be saved in any religion - we believe that those Popes may be - and most probably are - heretics, and therefore, illegitimate Popes." There you have it. Right? Wrong. For the next sentence he backtracks on this logical statement by saying, "But they still remain valid authorities of the Church until a new Pope will declare their heresy, or until the ensemble of the faithful will make their authority lose its effectiveness."
Huh? In other words, folks, Atila agrees that they're "probably" heretics, definitely illegitimate, but then he falls back on the tired pabulum that, tough luck, we can't do anything about it and must accept them as "valid authorities of the Church" because we don't have a "new Pope who will declare their heresy." As I wrote in "This Interminable Interregnum" there can be no "new Pope" to do so if he comes from the ranks of the current body of "cardinals." True succession can only come from a body of true successors of the Apostles who are not heretics and have not been excommunicated. As mentioned, that is only possible with the small band of true bishops we have today in the traditional ranks, all of whom do not subscribe to conciliarism and most of whom will not make one concession whatsoever to the false church formed at Vatican II. I say "most" because SSPX bishops are still straddling the fence and, after reading Father Anthony Cekada's personal account of what really happened in the split between the Nine priests and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre it is quite an eye-opener that should cause many to tread carefully within Society parishes.
But back to Atila's rationale on the other reason one has to accept a heretic as a "legitimate" Pope. This one blows my mind, for he follows that up with gibberish about knowing when a pope loses his office is a "a social-political problem." Say what? Yes, he goes on to say, "Since the Church is a visible society, for an authority to lose its validity, the error that causes such loss must be known and rejected by a considerable number of its members or the more influential." In other words, majority rules? That doesn't resonate with Catholic truth. Did not Saint Augustine say, "Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it, and right is right even
if nobody is doing it"? So if everyone is following the pied piper toward the abyss we have to wait until everyone says "no" or a few "more influential" members dare shout above the din of yes-men careening toward ruin? Do you see the insanity of such? Besides, the Church is not a democracy. It is a hierarchy with Christ as the Head. Go against Him, as Atila has admitted "all the Conciliar Popes" have and you would still follow such a rebel who dares God? I think not. Besides, the same holy Doctor of the Church identified the priority, "the death of the soul is worse than the freedom of error." Therefore by recognizing Benedict, those who do give him more freedom to spread error which will definitely cause the death of souls.
Atila offers a few examples to try to convince readers of this bizarre logic of because the world accepts a heretic as a Pope so we must too.
He first gives the analogy of a drunken father who "destroys family life." According to Atila, the father doesn't lose authority when the children, yes the children, "realize their father is morally wrong," but when "they make his authority lose its effectiveness." Under this criterion there would be few fathers left in this world for children everywhere have rebelled against their parents who are not drunk, but thanks to modern technology, indoctrination in schools, media, society and churches, have rejected the authority of their fathers and mothers, those who are fortunate to still have a two-parent family. The children have rejected the very authority God has designed for their salvation.
The second example he gives is a captain who betrays his troops. This is probably his best example of equating what has happened since Vatican II, but it still carries little weight to supporting his arguments for by the captain's betrayal of his men or country he would automatically lose his authority before God and law, and the troops rebelling would ony be an effect of the cause.
I will deal in detail with his third example, but first let us examine his fourth example. Atila addresses the situation where "two strong opposite parties fighting inside a kingdom, and one denies obedience to the king, he may lose control of the country."
Yes, that is true, but what if these opposite parties are lopsided - a David vs. a Goliath, if you will. Will a single slingshot of truth convince the majority of Philistines (read conciliar Catholics) that David (personified in the small body of traditional Catholics faithful to Catholic truth) has felled the behemoth bully (read Benedict XVI presently).
No, it has proved that has not worked and Atila's apostolate is proof of this as are ours, CMRI, TraditionalMass.org, Christorchaos.com, the Society of Traditional Roman Catholics (strc.org), the-pope.com, and Traditio.com, not to mention SSPXasia.com. We've all fired every slingshot of truth we can and still the Philistines-in-a-fog place all their hope in a man and "kingdom" that is doomed. Therefore, he "may lose control of the country" (read conciliar church), but we know he won't because the Philistines have been so indoctrinated to accept the novelties and heresies of Vatican II that they can't decipher the difference. Therefore we can continue to hurl all the pebbles possible, but it still leaves those stoned still stoned in their thinking.
Under such circumstances then, are we to agree with Atila's assessment? He writes:
"Now let me apply this case to the case of the Church: For a Conciliar Pope to lose his authority, we have to resist him, expose his errors as much as we can so people become aware of his errors and enter into resistance against them. The larger the number of persons who know his errors and do not follow them, the more his government becomes ungovernable, and the more the validity of his authority is questioned."
In other words, according to Atila, such a decision as to a Pope's invalidity can only be determined if the inmates running the asylum come to their senses and the mob-mentality rules. In all respect for Atila's scholarly background, such reasoning is ludicrous.
Now let us go back to the third example he proffered, that being of the case of a governor who is corrupt. In order for the governor to lose his authority, the public must "make his faults known to create an atmosphere of general opposition so that his own subordinates will oppose him" Well, we all know that doesn't work or most of the governors of this land would be out on their fannies. That reminds me of another governor - and no, I'm not speaking of Mrs. Sarah Palin - but rather one long before her who, though afraid of the masses, still stayed in office even though he was making the biggest mistake of his life because he had been corrupted by power. I speak of Pontius Pilate who dared Christ with the words recorded in the Gospel of Saint John 19: 10, "Speakest thou not to me? Knowest thou not that I have power to crucify Thee, and I have power to release Thee?" Well we all know our Lord's response: "Thou shouldst not have any power against Me, unless it were given thee from above. Therefore, he that hath delivered Me to thee, hath the greater sin" (St. John 19: 11).
Let that soak in, folks. Any power granted to a Pope comes from above. Atila agrees because he writes the following to summarize Tradition in Action and his own position: "When a Pope becomes a pertinacious heretic, God knows it. Therefore he loses the pontificate before God. He becomes an illegitimate Pope." Those are Atila's own words that I will repeat with emphasis: "When a Pope becomes a pertinacious heretic, God knows it. THEREFORE HE LOSES THE PONTIFICATE BEFORE GOD. He becomes an ILLEGITIMATE POPE."
Since "all the Conciliar Popes" have been "pertinacious heretics", as Atila agrees, is it not true that they have lost their pontificate in God's eyes by Atila's own admission when he writes the following?
"Therefore, he loses the pontificate before God." If that is the case, and it is, then these heretics would also lose all grace. Hence, that would mean that the Grace of the Holy Ghost would be withdrawn no longer protecting a pope from error when he is illegitimate because he is not a true pope. What, pray tell, is the difference between "illegitimate" and can-in-no-way-be-Pope? Nothing! If these are illegitimate Popes as Atila has correctly assessed, then they cannot be legitimate successors of Peter and therefore have usurped the Chair of Peter. Ergo, the real Chair of Peter is empty. Ergo, the seat is vacant. Ergo, the Latin term employed by the Church: sede vacante applies to what the real situation is since the death of His Holiness Pope Pius XII: sedevacantism.
What are those, who cringe at this word established by holy Mother Church, so afraid of? I know in several discussions with Atila and Marian, their argument is that they choose to remain "inside the church" as opposed to sedevacantists whom they consider "outside the Church." Now, pray tell, how can one be "inside" a church that has been proven to be false? One might as well say they want to be inside the Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist, Mormon, Anglican or what have you church or inside the Jewish synogue or Islamic mosque or Hindu or Buddhist temple or Zorastrian tent or Native Indian teepee for that is what is inside the "church" Atila and Marian insist they must remain in. They think that by declaring they are sedevacantist they will be less effective even though 90% of what they publish rightly supports the sedevacantist position and that is the reason why we still link Tradition in Action on our front page. Don't they realize that the only way to be truly "inside the Church" is to cling uncompromisingly to each and every tenet and tradition of holy Mother Church and to realize that if God rejects these illegitimate popes we must as well? Not to embrace this position goes against all sanity no matter what the world thinks. And, have I mentioned, I could really care less what the world thinks? Forget the "social-political problem" that seems to hinder Atila for some unknown reason from realizing it matters not one wit to God.
Now I ask Atila and all others out there who think that they can still recognize-and-yet-resist all they want, how can they castigate those who do not recognize one who God does not recognize as legitimate? How can they justify such? How can Atila in one breath say that "all Conciliar Popes" are "pertinacious heretics" and that "God knows it" and "therefore, he loses the pontificate before God" and "becomes an illegitimate Pope" and in the next paragraph contradict that by saying "However, given that he has all the appearances of a Pope - duly elected by a College of Cardinals followed by a hierarchy of Bishops, and accepted by the Church as such - he is still a valid or a de facto Pope. To stop being a valid Pope, a considerable part of the members of this visible society called the Catholic Church should resist his authority and make it inefficacious"?
That folks, is pure rubbish for Atila has placed Caesar above God with such rationale. As one who has great respect for this Catholic scholar from Brazil, I'm amazed how far he's reaching to justify the unjustifiable.
In addition, as we proved in our last editorial "This Interminable Interregnum", despite the "appearances of a Pope" the College of "Cardinals" who elected Fr. Joseph Ratzinger were not true bishops and thus their cardinalate would be "absolutely null and utterly void." Ditto for the "hierarchy of Bishops" who are not legitimate both by virtue of being consecrated after 1968 in the new invalid rite of episcopal consecration and, even if they were consecrated before that, would have lost all authority due to their excommunication latae sententiae per Pope Paul IV's infallible decree intended for all perpetuity Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio and reinforced by his successors through Pope Pius XII.
Besides, Atila's words "accepted by the Church" begs the question of who is the Church. Is it the infallible, perennial Magisterium which has protected the Sacred Deposit of the Faith and passed down religiously all the constituted evangelic traditions intact from St. Peter through Pius XII or the ever-changing-with-the-winds novelty of the counterfeit church of conciliarism which has embraced multiple heresies as accepted teaching of the newchurch? Remember Saint Athanasius' words during the massive Arian heresy when 95% of the world's bishops were in heresy: "They have the churches, but you have the Faith." So also today they have the churches, or lodges, if you will in what they have done to those once consecrated houses of God.
But who has the Faith? Those who give credence to a heretic as a pope who God has rejected or those who, even if they be a small minority, stand with what holy Mother Church has decreed under the protection of the Holy Ghost and has already passed infallible judgment on "in perpetuity"? If you are truly Catholic that question is a no-brainer.
Yet, Tradition in Action's seemingly stubborn position prompts me to wonder. Are they worried that they might lose clientele and benefactors? That they might lose readers and hits? That they might be ostracized by others who remain ostriches with their heads in the sand? Is that what has prompted Catholic Family News to straddle the fence or The Remnant to basically sell out in being duped by the Motu Mess? Are they that afraid of losing subscribers or advertisers that they will compromise their principles and further confuse the faithful few who are still faithful? Are Atila and Marian afraid they won't sell enough books and tapes if they embrace the obvious conclusion of most of what they have published, so manifestly illustrated on their Church Revolution in Pictures? You know the idiom that a picture says a thousand words and these shocking, scandalous photos prove sedevacantism in living color or, in the case of older pics of Roncalli and Bishop Montini, in sepia tones. There are no greys for the case is so clear in black and white!
Personal ambitions aside for all parties, it cannot be about reputations and income, but about saving souls and expressing the truth with no exceptions for the sake of salvation. Our Lord's words in St. Mark 8: 35-38 come to mind: "For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For whosoever shall be ashamed of Me, and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of man also shall be ashamed of him, when He shall come in the glory of His Father with the holy Angels."
While the Lord knows, as we at The DailyCatholic struggle with every day, we all must put bread on our tables and pay our bills, and, indeed, every laborer is worth his wage. But can we really afford to compromise such an important issue that carries with it the very welfare of countless souls? By straddling the fence and trying to play both sides that one thinks he can resist at will whatever he wants, but still recognize such an entity when, by Atila's own admission, God does not, is fruitless, folks, and only confuses more souls.
We know, we've been there as has Dr. Thomas A. Droleskey and Gerry Matatics to name just a few. We knew, in our journey to the truth and the ultimate syllogism of sedevacantism in this time of the Great Apostasy, that it would entail great sacrifice and rejection by many who had previously supported us, but man's opinion and approval mean nothing in the big picture. Why can't our friends at Tradition in Action, Catholic Family News and The Remnant realize this? Why can't they connect the dots, which, once they have honestly done so, would be able to unite in forming a formidable Traditional Catholic force which will not give one iota of a concession to the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Imagine it: The three I mentioned above united in purpose with this publication, Fr. Kevin Vaillancourt's excellent The Catholic Voice, Bishop Robert McKenna, O.P' ministry, Bishops Daniel Dolan and Donald Sanborn and Fr. Cekada's works at TraditionalMass.org, Bishop Mark Pivarunas and the CMRI, Bishops Vezelis, OFM and Giles, OFM's The Seraph, Fr. Paul Trinchard's ministry, the priests of Trento, Dr. Droleskey, Gerry Matatics, John Lane in Australia, John Daly in England, and the ever-increasing sedevacantist trend in the United States where many independent chapels do not recognize Benedict as a valid pope. Think of the impact in laying out a clear path that, rather than confusing the faithful, would encourage them and give them hope that there truly is a light at the end of this interminable interregnum. Now if we could just work on Bishop Clarence Kelly and the SSPV to bury the hatchet we'd be even closer to having a united front.
Putting aside non-doctrinal differences is the answer for building a stronger Church Militant to combat the heretics for as I have often said, united we pray, divided we are prey! Think that kind of force wouldn't convince Bishop Bernard Fellay and the rest of the bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre to reject any of the insipid overtures from an insincere and dishonest modern Rome? Remember Lefebvre, though he paddled the waters of reconciliation with the heretics, also strongly stated (though lately that has been suppressed in SSPX publications)that sedevacantism was a very real and likely scenario. Also, consider the fact that the Society is shrinking in America whereas sedevacantist parishes are growing where presently the numbers of parishes is only ten shy of what the SSPX currently has. Think of the strength and fruits of all working towards one goal of overthrowing the Robber Barons! Do you not think with that kind of clout that we could make a dent, a big dent in the warped, indoctrinated lukewarm minds of so many trapped in their Novus Ordo lodges? Do you not think such a force, favored by God, could not move many presbyters to see the light and seek to be conditionally re-ordained as true sacerdotes, thus increasing the number of priests who can bring the true sacraments to more?
Think also with a joint cooperation of the traditional Bishops and parishes how priests would no longer be competing with each other over territories and petty differences. With the cost of living and travel skyrocketing, less travel time and costs for true priests would enable them to cover more areas in a smaller area by sharing. Think of the possibilities because all would be using the very same apostolic Traditional Latin Mass of All Ages that must be said in perpetuity. Think the numbers of converts wouldn't swell? It can be done, but it takes cooperation and, as I said, putting aside non-doctrinal differences that divide us.
Yesterday morning we prayed for this in the Collect, O God, our Refuge and Strength, Who art the Author of all godliness; hear we pray Thee, the devout prayers of Thy Church, and grant that what we ask confidently we may obtain effectually. and in the Postcommunion, Psalm 16, verse 6: I have cried for Thou, O God, hast heard me : O incline Thy ear unto me, and hear my words.
Prayer is always the answer, but we ca't rely only on God to do everything. We must do what St. Augustine advises, and that is to pray as if everything depends on God, and work as if everything depends on us. We've got to employ all-out effort in both. We must all reintensify our prayer life for it is only through the Grace of God that one can see so clearly the current tragic situation with the Papacy today. I also would cautio that we, who have embraced apostolates to spread Catholic truth, cannot afford to play both sides of the street. We cannot have our cake and eat it too. To use one more cliche, we cannot call both sides of the coin. And speaking of coins, recall yesterday's Gospel where Christ asked for a coin and rebuked the Pharisees who were trying to trap Him, saying, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."
Now Atila concludes his "argument" for remaining with the status quo by saying that this is what "occurs" to him at the moment "to explain how our position of resistance is correct." But it is not for he has totally ignored the infallible decree of Pope Paul IV, though he does bring up Saint Robert Bellarmine's words from "De Romano Pontifice" in which the holy Cardinal wrote, "Just as it is lawful to resist the Pope that attacks the body, it is also lawful to resist the one who attacks souls or who disturbs civil order, or above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say that it is lawful to resist by not doing what he orders and preventing his will from being executed." This passage is used both for and against the sedevacantism position depending on which way you spin it for it really applies only to a true Pope. If a man were not a true pope, then we must not only resist him but reject him as an enemy of of the Faith, an adversary of Christ. It is interesting that Atila believes St. Robert was referring to the "Renaissance Popes who lived prior to him: St. Robert Bellarmine lived from 1542-1621; Alexander VI was Pope from 1492 to 1503." Keep in mind, foks, that this is pure conjecture on Atila's part and gives no credibility to such a statement considering St. Robert did not here identify specifically the rascal Alexander but is referring to any pope - past, present and future - who would attack souls or disturb the civil order.
Two things are important to note here. First, while Pope Alexander VI was an immoral Pope guilty of having concubines, accused of simony and nepotism, etc. he never taught another doctrine or deviated from the constituted evangelic traditions. He was a bad pope, a really bad, bad pope who caused much scandal and probably was the linchpin for the unrest that created the Protestant revolution, but he was still a legitimate Pope. Not so, by Atila's own admission, of "all the Conciliar Popes." Secondly, once again Atila is strangely silent about Pope Paul IV's infallible decree for all time, an ex cathedra document that would naturally trump anything St. Robert said, which St. Robert Bellarmine would readily agree with.
Finally, Atila says "Only by uniting all traditionalists in this position will we be effective." No, Atila my good friend, it will not be and that has been proven to be the case for there is even more confusion through compromise and in making even one iota of concession to the false church where "pertinacious heretics" have ruled for the past 50 years. Hasn't the Motu Mess Hoax taught you anything of the Hegelian Ratzinger's tactics? You, Atila, have filled your volumes of your excellent landmark Eli Lamma Sabbacthani series with detailed documentation of Ratzinger's heresies and cunning as well as who influenced him to deviate from the Faith.
To Atila and all others out there who try to rationalize their stance,
the only way we can unite the traditional movement is in accepting what God has deigned, that they are not true Popes and that the only syllogism is sedevacantism in order to unite behind the traditional bishops who give no concession or recognition to the counterfeit church of conciliarism and to encourage said true prelates to come together in a universal Synod of those true Successors of the Apostles to further God's will and help effect what you, Atila, have said, "If during this process of spreading resistance, God intervenes and a holy Pope enters the scene, he will have all the means to judge and declare those Conciliar Popes heretics and be followed by a large number of Catholics."
As my bride Cyndi wrote last month in To Dream the Impossible Dream, we keep waiting for divine intervention when we fail to realize that God has provided such intervention through those loyal to the true Faith and His true shepherds, those who can legitimately trace their succession back to the Apostles. It is not going to happen by gaging it on being "followed by a large number of Catholics" for that will be the eventual good fruits of uniting under one banner for the Faith: Sedevacantism which is the state of the Church today until we can once again, after 50 years of interregnum, submit in total obedience to a true Vicar of Christ.
Those who have sat on the throne over the past 50 years have been imposters, antipopes if you will. In fact, many will argue they are antichrists and the bad fruits bear this out as Jesus asserted in the Gospel of St. Matthew 7: 15-21, as well as being reinforced by St. John the Evangelist's own words in his first epistle, chapter 2: 18, "Little children, it is the last hour: and as you have heard that antichrist cometh, and now there are many antichrists : whereby we know that it is the last hour."
Keep in mind this beloved disciple is the author of the Book of the Apocalypse. If anyone outside of Christ and His Blessed Mother has been shown these times, it would have been St. John. And speaking of many antichrists, there is no doubt that Obama is one of the antichrists. Make no mistake about that. But he is not alone. Add to his ranks all those who have rejected Jesus Christ and embraced the world. St. John affirms in verse 21-26, "I have not written to you as to those who know not the truth, but as to those who know it: and that no lie is of the truth. Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son. Let that which you have heard from the beginning, abide in you : If what you have heard from the beginning abide in you, you also shall abide in the Son, and in the Father. And this is the promise which He hath promised us, eternal life. These things have I written to you concerning them that seduce you."
And, oh, have we been seduced! whether it be by "pertinacious heretics" occupying Modern Rome and every diocese in the world or the secular sector in government and commerce that claim we can have peace on this earth without recognizing Christ as our Sovereign King and Mary as our Immaculate Queen. They can promise relief of everything that ails man, but they cannot deliver because God will not aid antichrists, especially when they reject His laws both natural and supernatural. Is it a sin to vote for a pro-abortion candidate? Of course it is. In fact I will go further in such assessment: Any politician or prelate or person who does not vehemently oppose and work uncompromisingly to defeat deliberate murder in the womb from conception on and the spread of perversion through legitimizing sodomy, can well consider themselves antichrists as well for they have rejected Christ and accepted the lie. We can never render to Caesar the things that are God's.
Anyone, whether they be politicians, lobbyists, hedge-fund traders or speculators, the oil cartel, lukewarm prelates, high-on-the-hog CEO's, or media wags, can try to justify and play the blame game all they want when it comes to the current state of the world and our country and the economic collapse which was long ago foretold for these times. Some can even try to dupe the vast majority into believing that a mysterious man with a dubious background of doubtful U.S. citizenship at birth, heavy Muslim influence in his youth, who was weaned on the corrupt Chicago machine that is infamous for throwing ethics to the wind, and a man with no track record of any fruitful accomplishments can mesmerize millions into electing him as the Messiah, erh, President of the People's Republic of the United States.
But then, as Dr. Droleskey so adroitly pointed out in his recent essay Socialism, Straight From Your "Pro-Life" Conservative, the current lame duck president George Bush has already paved the way, along with other antichrists throughout the world whether they be in the Vatican, in the Kremlin, in Iran, in Korea, in Pakistan, you name it or in your own neighborhood for we have not heeded Blessed Mary's dire warnings at Fatima, and before that at LaSalette, Rue du Bac and Quito, Ecuador. Because we have not learned from and remembered the past, we are condemned to repeat it. This is something playing out before our very eyes as I write this commentary with the government takeover of banks, radical judges rewriting the Constitution, greed and fraud at every level of government, business and ecclesial climes the world over. It is playing out in a false church posing as the universal Catholic Church with a pertinicious heretic who promotes men who are abject criminals such as Bernard Law and William Levada to avoid prosecution while replacing them in their former appointments with their sad sodomite-friendly patsies in Sean O'Malley and George Niederauer, not to mention the sorry lot of lukewarm false prophets, wolves in sheep's clothing who, as previously mentioned, Christ identifies in the Gospel of St. Matthew 7: 15-21.
What Ratzinger and the antipopes before him have done is reward failure, just as this bailout by the U.S. Government is doing today. What those who recognize unlawful laws are doing is condoning a failed system that can never succeed without Christ as our Head. If only Atila and the rest of those who, for some reason have not yet received the grace to clearly see why holy Mother Church remains in the state of sedevacantism (which is perfectly acceptable in Church history even if the time frame has exceeded all projections for no set time for the duration of an interregnum was ever established), could only realize that by recognizing Benedict, they continue to reward failure - a big failure before God and man. No matter how much they resist him, by recognizing him as a true pope when God and His Church do not, is to continue rewarding failure at the expense of countless souls.
It all comes down to this, folks: Unless all traditional groups and apostolates are willing to connect that last dot to truly see the state of the holy Catholic Church today and come together for the common, noble and necessary purpose of saving souls, we'll continue to see more insanity, collusion and corrosion in temporal and spiritual sectors as more and more clueless dumbed-down souls accept the "operation of error to believe a lie" (2 Thessalonians 2: 10) and blithely, blindly applaud the doomed logic of the devil's agenda. Will they never learn? Rewarding failure never works.