Often we receive replies from outraged Catholics that we must have lost our mind. What? We don't follow the 'pope'? What? Have we left the Catholic Church? Oh my, no, but for those who cannot see beneath the veneer and have bought into all the verbal engineering of the progressives, they see that we refuse to recognize the legitimacy of such men as Benedict XVI and before that John Paul II, John Paul I, Paul VI and even John XXIII. Why? They ask, but refuse to listen to the answer. They seem clueless, much like the men of Troy who failed to understand the motive of the Greek's massive gift until it was too late. So also today's conciliar Catholics and, to some degree, those who rail against sedevacantists. Instead of connecting the dots and seeing the logical conclusion, they either stick their heads back in the proverbial sand or retaliate with a quickly scribbled screed and hit the send button to hurry their invectives at us with no validation or proof of backing up their assessments. You'll note, every Catholic, who has arrived at the syllogism of sedevacantism through the grace of God, has a treasure of documentation to prove just what we have been holding to since 2004: The conciliar 'popes' are heretics. Catholics cannot be heretics and be truly Catholic. Since the conciliar 'popes' are not truly Catholic. Ergo: They cannot be true Popes. Ergo they are antipopes.
Now to those ignorant of their faith, them are fightin' words. But we're used to it for Christ has alerted us in St. John 15: 20, "If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you : if they have kept My word, they will keep yours also." What surprised many Traditionalists was that the persecution would not come so much from the secular sector but rather by those who have hijacked the holy Faith. We can see why anything goes as far as heresies and tolerance toward all pagan religions, but not those who practice the Faith of our Fathers. And yet, should we be surprised? They have not kept Christ's word so why should they keep ours? In other words, we were told ahead of time. We should be prepared; yes, even to being prepared to accept being falsely judged, persecuted, scourged and mocked. They have tried their darndest to place a crown of ignominy on the heads of every traditional Catholic, attempting to shame many to forsake the truth in favor of the world's favors and human approval. Whenever any true Catholic is tempted to please man, our advice is to remember St. Paul's words in Galatians 1: 10, "For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I did yet please men, I should not be the servant of Christ."
And that is what these men we call "antipopes" are: not servants of Christ. That is proven by Paul's words just prior to that in Galatians 1: 8: "But though we, or an Angel from Heaven, preach a gospel to you beside that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." To re-emphasize how important those words are, the Apostle to the Gentiles repeated it in verse 9: "As we said before, so I say now again: If any one preach to you a gospel besides that which you have received, let him be anathema."
Now we know these antipopes are anathema because they oppose what reliable true Popes and dogmatic infallible Councils have decreed.
In the CREDO & CULTURE Pages of The Daily Catholic we provide the resource of all the legitimate major Councils of the Church. Now weigh those against the documents of Vatican Two Council and you will have more to read, or should I say 'wade' through, with the pastoral-only documented time-bombs of anathema within the heretical decrees of the Second Vatican Council than all the other twenty councils combined. Not only that, but you will see a drastic change of style and purpose from those twenty that preceded it. You will see first hand, if you have studied all the councils up through Vatican I in our Major Councils of the Church archives, that Modernism, humanism, ambiguity and relativism, not to mention ecumenism and other 'isms' raised their ugly heads with these Vatican II documents couched so cleverly and deceitfully in truisms that the faithful would not be able to decipher what was really going on if they didn't fully know their Faith. Pope Pius IX stated that "Liberal Catholics are the worst enemies of the Church" and who do you think were the largest block of periti at Vatican II? As if you didn't already know. Liberals. Two of those chief progressive periti made their intent very clear:
- First, the notorious liberal theologian Fr. Eduard Schillebeeckx made no secret of the intent: "We have used ambiguous terms during the Council, and we know how we shall interpret them afterwards."
- Then we have from the most liberal of all, Hans Kung this blatant statement: "This time we are going to stay in the Church, and we are going to dismantle the Catholic Church from within."
Was it mentioned that a close friend of Kung's was and continues to be the man who usurped the throne as the godfather of bafflegab, one Father Joseph Ratzinger?
Oh, if we had only known what was happening. We were all so naive. One reason we swallowed it so is because the documents were not as widely circulated as they should have been and sooner. By the time they were 'spoon-fed' to us, most of us had already been brainwashed to accept whatever came down the pike because we assumed they were totally in-line with everything that went before in the exalted traditions of Holy Mother Church. Why even Paul VI assured us in his Missale Romanum of April 3, 1969 that the New Roman Rite would not alter traditions. He even went so far as to assimilate that what he was doing was nothing more than what the great, holy Pope Saint Pius V did in his Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum - the original one which Paul tried to imitate in name to give it more importance than it carried and to cover up what would happen if the Mass was tampered with. You will recall that Pius V stated in no uncertain terms in his Papal Bull Quo Primum:
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
What archbishop Giovanni Montin also forgot to add and so many overlooked is the fact the man called Paul VI not only never followed up with a definitive statement as St. Pius did with Quo Primum but we were led to assume that the Second Vatican Council's force carried the same weight as Trent's did. Yet, that is preposterous since Trent was an infallible dogmatic and doctrinal council whereas Vatican II was and remains only a pastoral council, a heretical one at that. Pastoral means recommendations, not doctrine. Therefore, while it was portended to be merely a guideline to better apply the faith in a changing world, in actuality what Vatican II laid were the foundations for a new church, a new religion that would accommodate the world - the community goals and aspirations of ecumenism, religious liberty, and the brotherhood of Man rather than the individual soul's dependancy on his divine Creator in all things; salvation of which could only be found through the Church Jesus Christ, the Son of God established. Because it was a man-made church they wanted, an emphasis was placed on humanistic temporal projects in harmony with all faiths on an equal basis which could more easily be carried out without the 'burden of guilt' and shackles of religious garb, regulations, and old traditions regardless of whether they were tried and true or not; regardless of the first dogma of the Church: "Outside the Church there is NO salvation!" If the world did not accept the Church's infallible Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus stance, then the 'church' would change to accommodate the world instead of vice versa. The results have been verses of vice through countless and fruitless innovations.
We all know the results of that innovation. That is exactly what Montini called it in his Missale Romanum fashioned by six protestant ministers and two apostate priests: "It must be acknowledged that the chief innovation in the reform concerns the eucharistic prayer." His predecessor Pope Pius XII warned of this:
"We observe elsewhere, with anxiety and some apprehension, an undue fondness for innovation and a tendency to stray from the path of truth and prudence. Certain plans and suggestions for the liturgical revival are mingled with principles which, either in fact or by implication, jeopardize the sacred cause they are intended to promote and sometimes introduce errors."
That sometimes turned into 'often times' from Vatican II on. Pius' immediate successor John XXIII and then Paul VI, and the rest of the Church, failed to heed Pope Saint Stephen's wise words, "Do not innovate. Rest content with tradition." Yet, as we can clearly see, Montini and his successor Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II did not "rest content with tradition." They innovated. Consider this revealing paragraph Paul wrote in his Missale Romanum:
"No one should think, however, that this revision of the Roman Missal has come out of nowhere. The progress in liturgical studies during the last four centuries has certainly prepared the way. Just after the Council of Trent, the study 'of ancient manuscripts in the Vatican library and elsewhere,' as St. Pius V attests in the Apostolic Constitution Quo primum, helped greatly in the correction of the Roman Missal. Since then, however, other ancient sources have been discovered and published and liturgical formularies of the Eastern Church have been studied. Accordingly many have had the desire for these doctrinal and spiritual riches not to be stored away in the dark, but to be put into use for the enlightenment of the mind of Christians and for the nurture of their spirit."
If that isn't a clue to the auto-demolition of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, what is? Note he says 'other ancient sources have been discovered.' So? No new doctrine can be revealed. That is dogma of the Church, yet a Pope says 'well, maybe there's something the Doctors, Fathers and Saints of the Church over nearly 2000 years didn't catch and so we'll leave it wide open for other thought to be considered and recognized.' As if the Perfect Plan of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the succinct, concise and undeniable, dogmatic truths of the Catechism of Trent were leaving Catholics with a void? Please! Is there any doubt how the smoke of satan entered the sanctuary? If there was such an interest in the 'Eastern Church' why did he draw up the Pact of Metz under Roncalli - a treaty which basically shut the most influential 'Eastern Church' - the Schismatic Greek Orthodox Church - out of the Council while accepting carte blanche the Schismatic Russian Orthodox Church and the promise to contradict all that Our Lady of Fatima asked for?
Answer that, dear friends trying to defend the Roman rascal from Germany, the founder of the communistic/Hegelian Consilio, who leads the mockery of crowning our dear suffering Lord not with laurels as Christ the King, but with cruel thorns by forging the sharp apostate shards deep into the lacerated Mystical Body of Christ. How? By empowering a new order wherein Modernism is portrayed as good, a direct contradiction of the holy Pope St. Pius X. How can this be? By twisting doctrine and using the hellish Hegelian jigsaw to arrive at more synthesis that take the Church further away from Christ and the Faith. These razor sharp points of heresy dig deep into His precious head and sting His Most Sacred Heart.
The truth of the matter is the Masonic mindset had already thoroughly penetrated the Holy See. The Eastern Church - or Eastern mysticism is very much a part of Freemasonry. Consider the times - the sixties when this false thinking was at its zenith, when the Hari Krishna, Buddha the Dalai Lama and Thomas Merton were the 'in' gods. Think it couldn't seap into the Vatican? Guess again. Remember Archbishop Annibale Bugnini and Fr. Joseph Gelineau? Multiply that by ten, twenty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one million or more and you see the tableau more clearly.
The similarities of the Masonic Mass and the Novus Ordo
What I am about to share with you here in a review of all we have conveyed to you over the past six years and more, should raise the cockles of your soul in outrage and confirm further what we have published in archives on these pages and especially on the CREDO & CULTURE Page should instill in you the eerie awareness and deliberate similarities between the Novus Ordo and a Masonic 'Mass.' One example I and others discovered in our research is the Mass of the Gnostic Catholic Church in Ordo Templi Orientis, a Masonic Lodge where the Frater Jacobus is the 'Priest of Rose of Babalon Sanctuary.' The architect of this 'Mass' was none other than the 'father of modern satanism' - the occult British 'prophet' who died in 1947 - Aleister Crowley. They have not only similar modern vestments, but an Introit, a Collect, Creed, Offertory, Canon, Consecration, and Communion. Sacrilege of sacrileges.
"The Priest bears the sacred lance which he passes off to the High Priestess, dressed in blue, who represents Our Lady Nuit. She holds the book and gathers the children and...aspirants...at the reading. She encircles the free-standing altar and then brings the gifts of bread and wine all the while going through a ritual in which children circle with her to 'perform' and to 'give a hailing sign.'...A Deacon then 'addresses the congregation...The Law is proclaimed, and the congregation performs an act signifying unity of purpose: the step and sign of a Man and a Brother."
Does this sound familiar to the gyrations that go on during a Novus Ordo 'Mess'? Have you heard the terms "unity of community"? "social justice"? "peace and justice"? Code words for anti-Catholic Marxism. Enough said? Still not convinced? Well how about this? Before she offers the 'gifts' to the High Priest
"She pulls down the veil of the Tomb... [Oh, the blasphemy gets worse!!!] She is then enthroned as the 'Virgin' and becomes no longer material, but of divine substance... Then the Priest leads the Priestess of the East and sets her upon the summit of the Earth, the High Altar upon which rest the Paten and Hosts...Then the congregation rises and the Priestess declares the Law while the Priest parts the veil with the lance...She then puts down the elements of the Eucharist and proceeds to the Consecration where the congregation stand."
Do you see the picture yet? The elevation of feminism with a woman playing an integral role on the altar. Believe me, the clamor for women priests has nothing to do with the rationale of shortage of priests in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. It is all a concerted plan to force them into the fray. Oh, that won't happen, you say? Remember they said the same about altar girls. In fact John Paul II stated in Inaestimabile Donum, section 18, on April 3, 1980:
"There are of course various roles that women can perform in the liturgical assembly: these include the reading of the word of God and proclaiming the intention of the Prayer of the faithful. Women are not however permitted to act as altar servers."
Instead of upholding this, Wojtyla caved less than ten years later. Or was it in the cards anyway? Remember, he also was a peritus at Vatican II. One had to ask if he did relinquish his power to the bishops for the sake of collegiality, democracy. Wait, do we really have to ask in light of the evidence? If not, why did he allow something that he stated definitively could not be done? And because he gave an inch there, what is to stop the 'movers and shakers' for a one-world-religion to install women as conciliar presbyters? Ratzinger sure won't. No, the New Order church is in a free fall and only God can pull it out of its dive...if they call on Him and repent. That's a big IF.
Committing Spiritual Suicide
The faithful have to realize by Montini's actions in doing away with the continual sacrifice he indeed incurred the wrath of God as St. Pius V warned. The fruits of that wrath are only too obvious as has been pointed out on these pages many times (cf. Matthew 7: 16-27). They can be nothing else but barren. And speaking of barren that is what the Novus Ordo is compared to the Immemorial Latin Mass of All Ages. Do you see more clearly the similarities of the New Mess with the abomination of the Masonic Mass? Want more? Okay, in the latter the consecration is symbolic. Definitely Christ is not offered up, but rather
"The idea of Regeneration is the principle theme where man becomes simultaneously material and divine...The Lord of the universe is the Sun...The Priest calls upon him by the Sign of Light to appear, enlighten, encourage, and fulfill. He invokes with the Holiest of all Mantras...Then the Priest blesses the elements. He arouses them...Then he and the Priestess create the Sacrament. In keeping with the nature of the Anthem, as well as with the majority of the ceremony, the Serpent and Lion are thrice invoked. The Priest and the People declare the Law to one another. The Priest consumes the sacrament, declares godhood, and invites the People to do the same... After communion or the 'covenant of friendship' the Masonic Mass closes with 'a benediction, invoking the blessing of Heaven, and reaffirming their fraternal ties to one another...The benediction ends with the word Amen."
The main deity is the sun, but they invoke all kinds of other 'deities' that span the spectrum from Babylon and early Egypt to the Knights Templar, Jacques de Molay even satanist Anton LaVey and Timothy Leary. They have the Book of the Law, which "is construed Masonically as any book that contains a divine revelation of will." It can be either the Bible, the Torah, Talmud, or the Koran, depending on the community's majority belief. Communitarianism reigns supreme and all become both "material and divine." Remember that phrase, "unity of community"?
If this doesn't convince you once and for all that the Novus Ordo is a sacrilege, an "abomination of desolation" (St. Matthew 24: 15), read the late Father James F. Wathen's excellent, irrefutable work The Great Sacrilege. Read the dogmatic decrees of the Council of Trent and compare for yourself. The New Mass is not only sacrilegious, but scandalous as well. Yes, all need to acknowledge it as scandalous and heed Saint Francis de Sales' wisdom:
"Those who commit these types of scandals are guilty of the spiritual equivalent of murder by destroying other people's faith in God by their
terrible example. But I'm here among you to prevent something far worse for
you. While those who give scandal are guilty of the spiritual equivalent of
murder, those who take scandal - who allow scandals to destroy their
faith - are guilty of spiritual suicide."
Wow! Even if you don't give credence to the New Mess, but the Motu Mess, then you are caught between a rock and a hardplace, a hard hot place because those who pick and choose what they want to be cannot be Catholic. If they are Catholic and still recognize the conciliar 'popes' as legitimate, then they MUST follow EVERYTHING proclaimed. They have no right to choice. To believe in the Primacy of Peter, one must give full allegiance to him who is Christ's true and legitimate Vicar on earth. Were we to have a true Pope, there would be no DailyCatholic unless we had specific permission from His Holiness to exist. I might add, were we to have a true Pope it's highly doubtful we would have need of this publication for a true Pope would appoint true shepherds, validly ordained and consecrated and would never dare change one iota of the "constituted evangelic traditions" handed down to him by previous reliable and true successors of the first Apostle. See Solemn Papal Oath to see the truths of this statement and how the conciliar antipopes have gravely violated this Oath to God!
So you see to recognize the validity of a heretic as pope and then accept the heresy that the Church can err, are you not guilty of spiritual suicide? You no longer can claim innocence by ignorance to the truth! This especially is applicable to those who should know better whether they be priests, bishops or traditional journalists.
To further cement this fact, let's look at remarks made by their man in the Vatican Fr. Joseph Ratzinger. What did he have to say about the New Mass? Let's look at his own words in his book, My Life: Recollections 1927-1977 wherein he states:
"The drastic manner in which Pope Paul VI reformed the Mass in 1969 provoked extremely serious damage to the Church...
The suppression of the Old Mass marked a break in the history of the liturgy, the consequences of which could only be tragic....
I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy, which at times is actually being conceived etsi Deus non daretur : as though in the liturgy it did not matter any more whether God exists and whether He speaks to us and listens to us. But if in the liturgy the communion of faith no longer appears, nor the universal unity of the Church and of her history, nor the mystery of the living Christ, where is that the Church still appears in her spiritual strength?...
I was dismayed by the banning of the Old Missal, seeing that a similar thing had never happened in the entire history of the liturgy...The promulgation of the banning of the Missal that had been developed in the course of centuries, starting from the time of the sacramentaries of the ancient Church, has brought with it a break in the history of the liturgy whose consequences could be tragic...
But the fact that was presented as a new structure, set up against what had been formed in the course of history and was now prohibited, and that the liturgy was made to appear in some ways no longer as a living process but as a product of specialized knowledge and judicial competence, has brought with it some extremely serious damage for us. In this way, in fact, the impression has arisen that the liturgy is 'made,' that it is not something that exists before us, something 'given,' but that it depends on our decisions. It follows as a consequence that this decision-making capacity is not recongized only in specialists or in a central authority, but that, in the final analysis, each 'community' wants to give itself its own liturgy. But when the liturgy is something each one makes by himself, then it no longer gives us what is its true quality: encounter with the mystery which is not our product, but our origin and the wellspring of our life...
The impression was given that this was completely normal...The old structure was broken to pieces, [cf. 1 Mach 1: 23] and its pieces were used to construct another structure, to the detriment of the liturgical tradition. The crux of the problem was that the reformed liturgy was presented as a new structure, in opposition to the one which had been formed through history."
Now I can hear all those out there saying. 'Yes, and see what he's done, once he was in charge he established the Motu Mass.' Yes, he did. But what is the Motu Mass, better referred in legitimate circles as the 'Motu Mess'? The "Extraordinary" while the sacrilegious 'eucharistic celebration' remains the "Ordinary" and preferred. Don't believe that? Look at how many Motus are being mothballed by Masonic potentates posing as bishops.
If those condoning compromise really knew their Faith, they'd realize there can be no concessions to conciliarism and that the unadulterated Mass of Tradition that cannot be sullied, altered or modified in any way. Yes, no pope or usurper has a right to do this. St. Pius V did not "change the Mass." He ratified and clarified, but he did not change it. Paul VI did and by doing so became, if not before that, a robber baron who was banished from the courts of Heaven and an apostate of the worst degree. If you do not believe me, please read the Papal Bull by another Paul, a legitimate one - Pope Paul IV who issued Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio. You see, we here at The DailyCatholic are not sitting in judgment, nor are any of our feature contributing writers nor anyone else because they have - from Roncalli to Ratzinger - already been judged by holy Mother Church. We are just being obedient to her in making this fact known so that souls will not commit spiritual suicide.
And that is exactly what the Motu Mess will lead to because already BeneRatz has tinkered with it, daring to change that which he has no authority to do and empowering without any authority men to do what only consecrated ordained men can do: confect the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Those installed as presbyters since 1969 on are NOT TRUE PRIESTS, but merely ministers in the same fashion a Protestant minister can function, but they do not have the full, true divinely ordained Sacrament of Holy Orders because Montini changed that as well. His Holiness Pope Pius XII laid down specific guidelines to assure true ordinations in his Sacramentum Ordinis.
So you see it doesn't matter if Father so-and-so says his Mess in English, Tag-a-log, Spanish, Italian, German or even in Latin, it is impossible for it to be a valid Mass if the celebrant is NOT a true priest! If you don't believe that, then invite the Baptist minister down the street or the Lutheran pastor or the elders of the Mormon church to celebrate your next 'Eucharistic celebration' or 'Motu Mess'. Heck they can even say it in pig latin because it's already a joke to God. No, that's not right, that would be a laughing matter. How can the loss of souls ever be hilarious? No, what it is to the Most Holy Trinity is an abomination of the highest degree. How do we know? Christ Himself said so in St. Matthew 24: 15 in reminding all of what His heavenly Father had imbued in the heart of His prophet Daniel.
Now if you would happen to discover an exception - a priest who was ordained before 1969, you know the retired ones - then you have to be on the alert to make sure he knows what he's doing and, if the lodge is shared with the Novus Ordo Seclorum, beware of mixing the cookies with consecrated Hosts. It's a real mess isn't it, this 'Motu Mess', intended as part of Ratzinger's Hegelian hangup of pleasing all camps and giving each a crumb but never the whole cake or enchilada, let alone the Bread of Angels.
And each time another innovation is introduced such as the abominable heretical Good Friday Prayer makeover, the thorns pierce deeper into our Lord and His Mystical Body. No the Catholic Church is not recognizable today except in the catacombs where there is no concession to conciliarism and where Christ is recognized by grace just as His Blessed and Sorrowful Mother always recognized her divine Son no matter how bloodied, scourged and disfigured He became. So also are we able to do that because holy Mother Church has passed down the infrangible truths and "constituted evangelic traditions" and we have kept them as they have been received just as St. Paul advised in 2 Thessalonians 2: 14 "Therefore, brethren, stand firm ; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle."
On the other side of the aisle, so to speak, or should we say tracks, lip service is given, but the abuses continue thanks to conciliarism; and so the persecution, intimidation and coercion against those seeking to stand firm in keeping the Traditional Latin Mass and making no concessions to conciliarism intensifies. Modern Rome cajoles and tries to create factions within the Traditional movement. It began with the pressure, intimidation and blackballing of traditional conservative bishops at Vatican II who objected to the new schemas. Most were silenced. Those who weren't? Well look at the treatment and character assasination aimed at Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Then, when he didn't blink when push came to shove, the robber barons set up Ecclesia Dei to discredit Lefebre as a "schismatic." Isn't it interesting how the pot calls the kettle black? Of course, because the Society veered from Lefebre's intention to remain solidly traditional and held as their ideal model the Diocese of Campos in Brazil thanks to Bishop Antonio Castro de Mayer. You can imagine the subterfuge that went into undermining that once His Excellency passed away. To borrow a metaphor from The Godfather, the "Freddie" of the Consilio family was Bishop Rifan. It wasn't long and the 'Campos Compromise' was announced.
The squeeze on the SSPX was in full swing. Those who balked could be compared to the euphemism of 'sleeping with the fishes' or to use another analogy: dead meat as far as the apostates in Rome were concerned. Their bait? Of course, it had been the Indult - or was that "Insult"? Like the Motu since, it was going nowhere so something else had to be done. Sweettalk seemed to work with the head of the Society Bishop Bernard Fellay whereby, Ratzinger plied him in return for the promise not to criticize Vatican II, promise to also accept the Novus Ordo as legitimate. Well, Fellay wasn't too hep on that at first, but everyone has a price and, as has been proven, Fellay had an achilles heel. He's also proven to have a strong toe, booting out several good priests such as Frs. Basilio Meramo, Peter Scott and Juven Soliman to name but a few of the many who have been summarily dismissed because they realize the trap set by the crafty spider who will do anything to protect what he helped create at Vatican II. Many who have been expelled realize the truth of sedevacantism now as well. If only Fellay could have seen the writing on the wall or the web being spun around him and those who have blindly followed him in Pied Piper fashion into the trap Ratzinger has set.
It has been Ratzinger's modus operandi since he first picked up a book on Georg Hegel. Even so, the Society, already having been burned more than once, should have seen the ruse. Perhaps the bauble of a red hat and prelature blinded the man from Econe. Even Ratzinger was smarter than Fellay; so much so that BeneRatz sweetened the pot by promising the Motu. Well he'd take care of his end, but there was still a problem that pricked at Ratzinger who knew sedevacantists knew he was not only not a true pope, but not even a bishop, let alone a valid cardinal. Can't have that kind of opposition or it would spoil the brew.
So what was the answer? Employ the Society to do the same hatchet job on the growing Sedevacantist movement as was done on Archbishop Lefebvre. How? By attacking the character of a valid, true Archbishop, one consecrated by Pope Pius XI, author of the encyclical condemning Ecumenism (Mortalium Animos). That prelate so raked over the coals was Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngo-dinh-Thuc, brother of South Vietnam's President Diem who was murdered with the full knowledge of Montini's Vatican and the U.S. on All Soul's Day in 1961. Thuc was betrayed and deceived by Montini. Try as Modern Rome did in using the Society as their hit squad, they stirred up a hornet's nest and the Sede camp came out with a solid front led by Fr. Anthony Cekada. The SSPX betrayed their hand when they used their official magazine as a puff piece to praise Novus Ordo ordinations and episcopal consecrations where before the bargain they had steadfastly resisted the nonsense that a man-made rite could ever replace a divinely ordained rite. But they tried in two consecutive issues of The Angelus to whitewash what they had previously preached and focused their animosity on sedevacantists, using other outlets sympathetic to the Society's cause as additional ammunition to demonize the two-millennium-old Church-established term "sede vacante" and denigrate the possibility of sedevacantism when, in truth, sedevacantism is an official position of the Church and has been since the death of St. Peter.
But the barbs and slander flew as all-out warfare broke out between the Recognize-and-Resisters, who believed Ratzinger was a true pope but refused to follow him, and Sedevacantists, who do not believe Ratzinger, nor his predecessors since Vatican II can possibly be true popes for they are not Catholic to begin with. Rather than uniting, it was bitter infighting. Oh, BeneRatz had to love it. The devil sure did. Divide and conquer. Oh, the additional thorns that have dug into the Mystical Body of Christ in this third millennium.
Why, oh why, would the Recognize-and-Resisters want anything to do with conciliarism? Why would they want to align with those who are told they must be tolerant of others, tolerate the innovations of the Mess of Paul VI and go along with the auto-demolition of our Faith. Not on your life!!! Peace at any price? No! Saint Catherine of Siena said the "peace can be worse than strife or war." We saw that at Assisi in 1986 and 2002. We see it often in Ratzinger's itinerary. Dr. Dietrich von Hildebrand foresaw this when he wrote that there is a strong tendency in the Church "to prefer communion [unity] to faith, thus , peace implicitly becomes the highest value." It may be for the new church, but not for the Church of the Fathers, Saints, Doctors and holy Popes of the Church Christ founded.
We are reminded in the Sacred Deposit of the Faith of the Communion of Saints and our role as members of the Church Militant. But so much has been compromised that this key equation has purposely been diminished. When we realize the compromising that has been going on for well over 40 plus years, has not the tolerance of others reached epic proportions? Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen put it very bluntly and correctly, "What the world is suffering from today is not intolerance, but tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, Christ and chaos." He said that in 1931! It has gotten much, much worse. In 1972 His Excellency said:
"Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops like bishops and your religious like religious."
And so, folks, it's up to us. We know that so many priests are not acting like priests and thank God for the dedicated sacerdotes who feed the lambs in the catacombs, despite their fallen human nature which has become so evident in the symbiotic purging in Cincinnati and now Milwaukee. We know definitely that the only bishops acting as true shepherds are those who will give no concession to conciliarism. We know that the conciliar potentates are definitely not acting like bishops, but then why should they? They're not Catholic. They're Freemasons or worse. In fact, it has just been revealed that one of the only true living exorcists, chief exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth is on record as testifying that there are several cardinals who are satanists. When asked if Ratzinger knew. He replied, "Of course." What we need to do is delve deeper and ask: Was he one of the 'cardinals'? Considering how he has played into satan's hands in handing the devil almost everything he wants, one would have to seriously wonder. And, if not, at least he is complicit in giving into the devil and by his silence, condoning the Seven Deadly sins. Dr. Thomas A. Droleskey delves into that in a recent piece Do Tell.
Add to that the exposure of his trusted man in the 'papal' household Angelo Balducci being charged with running a sodomite prostitution ring right under Benedict's nose and how Ratzinger has been so soft on homosexuality - so noticeably over the last decade - and you have to wonder even more. Want more? It has just been revealed that the latest to be implicated in the sex scandal is Ratzinger's own brother Georg who was headmaster of a Benedictine Monastery in Bavaria for thirty years where "hundreds of boys were sadistically and sexually abused" as reported by Reuters and posted on Traditio. And, of course, poor Benedict XVI is naive to all of this. Didn't know a thing. Puhleease!
The capper of all this takes place next Sunday when on Laetare Sunday conciliar Catholics can do no rejoicing when he manifestly, and publicly flaunting the act, commits yet another heresy when he preaches a sermon inside the Protestant Evangelical Lutheran Church in Rome (I know, that's a mouthful). You can bet he's not going to proselytize the congregation as Christ commands in St. Matthew 28: 19-20, St. Mark 16: 15-16, and St. John 21: 15-17. Considering Martin Luther was a rake well known for his sexual trysts and proclivity to immorality, perhaps ol' Benedict is just more comfortable in a Protestant church. And why not? He's not a Catholic!
Now if you can still say, with a straight face, that Joseph Alois Ratzinger is a true 'Pope' then the conciliar cabal has done a complete job of brainwashing you. And if you believe he's protected by the Holy Ghost, well, then we've got swamp land in Arizona you won't want to pass up.
It all follows, that how one prays, one believes; you know Lex orandi, lex credendi. Few believe anything any more and then there are so many who will not believe anything. The problem is if you don't believe in something, you'll fall for anything. That's been proven. Look hard because you won't find many
religious still being religious. The exception to that caveat, of course, being traditional orders that cling to the old tried and true Mass of all ages. Other than that, you won't find much spirituality - at least Catholic spirituality among the great majority of religious today. Oh, you'll find them busy with all kinds of social action and social justice (peace and justice=socialist code words for Communism and Marxism), but truly religious or dedicated to saving souls? No time for that!
So the task is left to the uncompromising sheep to stir the shepherds. We begin by educating them that to be truly Catholic, they must return to what the Church taught and practiced up until the turbulent sixties of the 20th century. It's sink or swim time, folks. Those who are comfortable in their Novus Ordo parish, those who don't want to rock the boat by charitably but firmly confronting their pastor as to his vital need to return to the Latin Rite and make it readily available to the flocks, and to abandon the counterfeit church of conciliarism, all its trappings and the robber barons who rule it. If they don't, well I hope they like being called Protestants for they truly are. Only in the Traditional Latin Mass can a Catholic be fully Catholic. Regardless of what you hear from modern Rome, regardless of what you hear from your worldly, politically correct cowering 'bishops' that they are the ordinary magisterium. They can't even be a pastoral-only magisterium, for they no longer have any semblance to a 'magisterium.'
The great conundrum of
today's so-called 'magisterium' in trying to justify its authority with the infallible, perennial Magisterium of the Church is the bogus comparisons of Vatican II with the Council of Trent. While so many insist that Vatican II was a pastoral-only council! The point is that if that is true, then why did it become LAW? Oh, it didn't? Well, then what's the fuss? Seriously, folks, the proof is in the pudding for even though no anathemas were declared then or since and the fact Paul VI himself confirmed that it was not dogmatic, the way it was carried out was with the intent to bury Trent. To do this was blatantly anti-Catholic despite the spin and, whether it was pastoral or dogmatic in the conciliarists' mind, it doesn't matter. It had and has no force or valid authority and will someday be wiped from the books.
When will that be? When Eternal Rome returns and a true Successor of Peter once again sits on the Papal Throne. Will that happen through man's work or a miracle from Heaven? Only God knows. What we know is to stay the course and never cave to the cagey conciliarist cabal.
In the meantime the flip-flopping deception of these VaticantwoArians continues ad nauseam with each false pope dreaming up more innovations that cause the heavens to thunder as their grave sacrileges and heresies anger the just wrath of the Father more and more. But Modernists care not one iota for what God thinks, but what man thinks. This is manifested by the current 'magisterium' of modern Rome trying to play-up their importance,"in the light of tradition" by attempting to usurp the authority of the Infalliable, perennial Magisterium of Eternal Rome. Ratzinger confirmed such skimble-skamble in El Mercurio back on July 17, 1988:
"The Second Vatican Council has not been treated as a part of the entire living Tradition of the Church, but as an end of Tradition, a new start from zero. The truth is that this particular council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest level, as a merely pastoral council: and yet so many treat it as though it made itself into a sort of super-dogma which takes away the importance of all the rest."
So, in his mad Hegelian mindset, Ratzinger's intent has always been to retool things, until a square peg fits into a round hole, come hell or high water. That is why he keeps reiterating that all this anathema and other garbage from Vatican II must be considered "in the light of tradition."
In our effort to contribute to the planet, and in deference to waste management, we suggest that,
in the light of tradition and for the sake of tradition, dump everything from 1960 on! That will keep things in the light of tradition.
However, until that happens, the Mystical Body of Christ will continue to be pummeled with thorns. Perhaps Dr. von Hildebrand put it best:
"First, there is the mafia in the Church, the prelates who have not only lost their faith but who remain in the Church in order to destroy the Church: otherwise, they would leave the Church. If I would lose my faith, I would leave the Church. But to lose the faith and remain in the Church, there must be some reason for that. They use the slogan 'progress' as a means to camouflage their diabolical work of destruction and to fool the faithful. In order to draw them away from Christ and His holy Church. They are real servants of the anti-Christ."
Are you still going to allow these unfaithful 'prelates' to fool you? Do you still feel disposed to obey disobedient 'bishops', non-Catholic 'bishops', apostate 'bishops', 'bishops' who are not bishops like Ratzinger, politically correct 'bishops' and 'presbyters' posing as priests whose barometer for progress is gaged on the world's standards? If you do, if you stubbornly, even when knowing the facts, stick to the new world order mass - the Novus Ordo - that is definitely not the propitiatory sacrifice, but a ritual that is proven to be Masonic and Protestant in origin (unlike the Traditional Latin Mass of all Ages - the True Roman Rite which is divine in origin), then you must realize you are no longer Catholic. Oh, maybe in name, but to truly be Catholic means to cling to your Faith above all else.
Again, I remind you of Pope Saint Hadrian II's decree, "The first requirement of salvation is to keep the standard of the True Faith." It is not blind obedience to a popular pontiff and we shall prove that blindness leads to ruin - especially when these "popular pontiffs" are not true Sovereign Pontiffs by their words and deeds over the last five decades plus, which proves they are no longer Catholic - in our next commentary when I focus on the fourth Sorrowful Mystery, equating the Carrying of the Cross with the Modernist Reforms that continue to be "reformed" since Vatican II. Can you say Hegelian?!?
For now, I leave you to meditate on the third Sorrowful Mystery, to realize how by not heeding Our Lord's suffering so by their refusal to see the truth that they mock Him with a secular Mess - a Novus Ordo Secularum (look on your dollar bills for that Masonic symbol) and force the thorns deeper into His sacred skull by their lack of faith. Remember Jesus' words in St. Luke 18: 8, "But yet, when the Son of man cometh, shall He find, think you, faith on earth?" Think about that and think about the haunting words of Ratzinger, as quoted by Monsignor Klaus Gamber in his book from Una Voce Press in 1987 The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: Its Problems and Background, how Christ has been mocked and uncrowned because "The New Mass is the real destruction of the Roman Rite!"
So was this an honest cry to stop the madness or a boast? Like Paul VI who warned that satan was in the sanctuary, was that also a warning or a boast? We can see from his actions and what has been discovered since in the bad fruits, the latter holds true. As for Ratzinger, the answer is also quite obvious. We ask if you disagree, then why, dear friends, does Ratzinger persist in continuing to say and promote this very abomination? If you are still trying to defend him as a legitimate pope, then answer that before more thorns are pressed into Our Lord's Sacred skull and Heart. As you can readily see, it's a thorny problem that needs to be resolved.