October 21, 2002
vol 13, no. 120

E-mail       Print
When, Holy Father, when will this madness end?

    "Every tree that yieldeth not good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire. Wherefore, by their fruits you shall know them" (Matthew 8: 20).

Dear Holy Father,

   In my last commentary Lock and Load your Rosaries and let's roll! I remarked about how fast Rome was moving. No sooner said, then two significant events happened this past week that speak volumes of what is going on. I have just finished laboriously poring over, for the second time, your Apostolic Letter released Thursday, the occasion of your 24th anniversary as Supreme Pontiff of the universal Church. In Rosarium Virginis Mariae, there are some beautiful passages over some 18 pages, with three pages devoted to footnotes. There are 39 footnotes with a few to St. Louis Marie Grignon de Montfort, a few to Pope Leo XIII, and Blessed Bartolo Longo, and one each to St. Irenaeus of Lyons and to Dante. A total of eight references. The other thirty-one? Conciliar references. Yet, nowhere was there any specific reference to the holy founder of the Order of Preachers, Saint Dominic who was given the devotion to the Holy Rosary mystically from the Blessed Mother of God early in the thirteenth century. Why? So his Order and others could sustain the Christian world in the face of heresies.

   And nowhere in Rosarium Virginis Mariae was there any reference to the rampant heresies of today!!! Instead you referred, in paragraph 17, as "new challenges" rather than what they are: heresies! Instead of the great crisis within the Church and the world, you referred in paragraph 4 to "the urgent need to counter a certain crisis of the Rosary, which in the present historical and theological context can risk being wrongly devalued, and therefore no longer taught to the younger generation." Dear Holy Father, you and your cohorts are to blame for this. By watering down the Faith, by refusing to discipline your bishops and priests, by allowing novelty to go unchecked especially in deconstructing the eternal sacrifice, by writing tomes and tomes of relativism and ambiguity, the Rosary has remained important only to those who realize the power of this sacramental garland, who recognize the severity and urgency of Blessed Mary's plea at Fatima. Yet, instead of realizing the only way to reestablish the Social Kingship of Christ in all nations on this earthly court is through the Triumph of Mary's Immaculate Heart by following her request to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart, you bypass that with more rhetoric, taking the Catholic focus away from this truly Catholic devotion. I base this on your words "If properly revitalized, the Rosary is an aid and certainly not a hindrance to ecumenism." I beg to differ, your Holiness, for I pray, as all Traditional, loyal Catholics have prayed, that the Rosary will serve as a hindrance to ecumenism, and serve instead as it was always intended: as an aid to conversion. Have you forgotten the first dogma of the Church, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus - Outside the Church there is NO salvation!?

   You'll note that at Fatima, at Rue du Bac, at Lourdes, at LaSalette, and yes, even at Guadalupe, Our Lady never ever once mentioned the word "ecumenism." Even in this day and age when Marian Apparitions are seemingly everywhere, will you find messages from Heaven that refer to ecumenism. No, throughout the annals of approved private revelation in the Church, in total harmony with public revelation, the reference is always to "the conversion of sinners" - not the "ecumenism of sinners" or "compromise of sinners." And yet, you, in reference to your Acts of the Apostolic Sedes (ASS) 93, say "inasmuch as contemporary culture, even amid so many indications to the contrary, has witnessed the flowering of a new call for spirituality, due also to the influence of other religions, it is more urgent than ever that our Christian communities should become 'genuine schools of prayer.'" What 'flowering' are you thinking, Holy Father? Flowers produce fruitful buds. There are no fruitful buds. Why? Because of the influence of other religions. Again, Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus. Ecumenism and Secularization are NOT Catholic in any sense. Conversion is!

   And that is what Our Lady promised at Fatima. Conversion of sinners. IF the Pope, in union with all the bishops of the world, consecrated Russia to her Immaculate Heart she promised that Russia would be converted. If this were not done, she also promised that Russia's errors would spread throughout the world and within the Church. Her words at LaSalette also confirm this. You should know them well if you are the devotee of Our Lady that you say you are. And if you are, then why have you disobeyed your Heavenly Mother? Please, don't tell us it was done. Because Jesus Christ Himself affirmed that would be a lie, for By their fruits you shall know them" (Matthew 8: 20). We all know the fruits of Vatican II - despite the false rhetoric and euphoria that everything is hunky-dory, forty years has proven the tree is barren. Therefore, to say in reference to the Second Vatican Council, that it is "the 'great grace' disposed by the Spirit of God for the Church in our time" would seem to be a lie. I am not saying that Pope John XXIII was lying for, quite possibly, he could not foresee that the aggiornamento he was trying to effect would grow into the stale, fetid air of satan's very own breath. But after 40 years of this awful stench, to continue to posture that Vatican II and all that followed was of God is preposterous. Why? "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit" (Matthew 8: 18).

   Yet, in the spirit of novelty, you have now left the Holy Rosary vulnerable to all kinds of innovation. This beautiful prayer has its roots in the prayer of the early hermits who prayed the 150 Psalms. In times where they did not have ready access to the content of the Psalms, they substituted, out of necessity, a prayer to God through Mary - ergo the scripturally sound Hail Mary. So why now, after nearly 2000 years of aligning the Holy Rosary with the Psalms have you discarded this tradition of 150 Hail Mary's and increased it to 200?

   You write that "for the Rosary to become more fully a 'compendium of the Gospel', it is fitting to add, following reflection on the Incarnation and the hidden life of Christ (the joyful mysteries) and before focusing on the sufferings of his [sic] Passion (the sorrowful mysteries) and the triumph of his [sic] Resurrection (the glorious mysteries), a meditation on certain particularly significant moments in his [sic] public ministry (the mysteries of light). This addition of these new mysteries, without prejudice to any essential aspect of the prayer's traditional format, is meant to give it fresh life and to enkindle renewed interest in the Rosary's place within Christian spirituality as a true doorway to the depths of the Heart of Christ, ocean of joy and of light, of suffering and of glory."

   Okay, why? Why now, after nearly 800 years does there have to be a personal addition to the Rosary? Just as Gary Morella wrote, "The Mass wasn't broke, it didn't need fixing," so also the Rosary wasn't broke. It doesn't need fixing. What it does need is to be spread wide and far as true devotion - true Catholic devotion as Our Lady has always asked. Yet, just like Vatican II, it is nothing more than pandering to non-Catholic interests by watering down what has been passed down to placate those "who wouldn't understand." If you recall, your Holiness, Jesus didn't placate. He never compromised and neither should we as members of His Mystical Body - members of the Church Militant. Those are two very Catholic terms that were sorely lacking in your Apostolic Letter. Terms very liberally used by the previous twenty councils. That was the only thing that was liberal in the Councils of the Church leading up to Vatican II.

   As you stated quite clearly in introducing the "Luminous Mysteries" in paragraph 21: "I think that the following can be fittingly singled out." Well, Holy Father, by your very words those are your thoughts, not the Church's. After all, even though the Rosary is approved by the Church, and the most powerful prayer this side of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we are not bound to believe it in the true sense of Catholic teaching for it is private revelation. As the Church teaches, private revelation, when in harmony with public revelation, is on the bottom rung. But it is a step taken to achieve higher levels. Heaven has a method to its marvels. Indeed 90% of the Religious Orders were founded on messages from Heaven. But has Heaven held something back that only the people of these present times would now understand as enlightenment and which would indicate that those who preceded us and many of whom even gave their lives for their Faith, were misguided or wrong? I think not. In fact, I know that cannot be true. What was handed down in the Truths and Traditions of Holy Mother Church cannot be changed. The Sovereign Pontiff - the Vicar of Christ - has a moral responsibility before God to continue the traditions handed down and keep unsullied the Sacred Deposit of the Faith. That, by the way, is part of the Sacred Papal Coronation Oath you were supposed to have taken just as all your predecessors did. Why, Holy Father did you reject this solemn oath? Many think it could be because your predecessor Paul VI, and even John XXIII had possibly already violated this sacred oath specifically the part that says, "I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein."

   I invite the readers of this open letter to read the PAPAL CORONATION OATH to see what I mean and tell me, tell the millions and millions of Catholics that the Vatican II popes did not betray the oath. Many have expressed that, with no oath to constrain your actions, you have allowed, even encouraged novelty, compromise, innovation and ecumenism which only water down the Fidei Depositum. Please read it carefully, especially the part where it says "If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful Day of Divine Justice." These are serious words before God, which, even though you did not take it, you must realize you are still accountable before the Almighty.

   Yet novelty and innovation have had their day. This is obvious in how you want to alter the most Holy Rosary. There is a saying, that you give a man an inch and he'll want a mile. So also, if you give an opening for innovation, then what kind of Pandora's box are you opening, Holy Father? I can see it now, when you say in paragraph 34, Holy Father, "In public recitation it could be sung, as a way of giving proper emphasis to the essentially Trinitarian structure of all Christian prayer" or in paragraph 35, "In this way the Rosary can be better adapted to different spiritual traditions and different Christian communities. It is to be hoped, then, that appropriate formulas will be widely circulated, after due pastoral discernment and possibly after experimental use in centers and shrines particularly devoted to the Rosary, so that the People of God may benefit from an abundance of authentic spiritual riches and find nourishment for their personal contemplation." Huh? Just like the Mass of Paul VI, you have laid the Holy Rosary bare for every type of novelty and innovation. Yeah, soon we'll have Rock Rosaries, Folk Rosaries, Punk Rosaries, Polka Rosaries, maybe even Wiccan Rosaries. I doubt we'll have Gregorian Chant Rosaries since Chant went the way of the dinosaur as soon as novelty was suggested in the Mass - erh, excuse me - what you call the "Eucharistic celebration" - and abuse of the "Liturgy" was ignored by bishops and conciliar pontiffs.

   Who is to say that if we add the "Mysteries of Light" or the "Luminous Mysteries" that someone won't add the "Miraculous Mysteries" so we can contemplate on Jesus walking on water, curing the sick, feeding the 4000, raising Lazarus from the dead, and appearing at Emmaus? Or what about the "Pastoral Mysteries" to treat the parables of the king, or the ruler, or the wedding master, or the Good Shepherd, or the master of the vineyard? Or maybe we could come up with...well you get the idea.

   Permit me to ask a few further questions from your Apostolic letter. In paragraph 23 you wrote, "The glorious mysteries thus lead the faithful to greater hope for the eschatological goal towards which they journey as members of the pilgrim People of God in history. This can only impel them to bear courageous witness to that 'good news' which gives meaning to their entire existence." Wouldn't Catholics better understand if you said, "God made man to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next"? That's basic Baltimore Catechism. But the basics have been blurred by all this fancy rhetoric and volumes of words that say little, and a terminology that conveys an entirely different meaning to what was intended. It is part of the ambiguous, relativistic bent of the periti of Vatican II and those who followed.

   Consider the excellent series we just completed last week by Mario Derksen on your humanism that has been so prevalent in your works. Yes, this is constructive criticism. But it is necessary. I must point out, your Holiness, that Mario and all of the other writers who contribute literary material to The DAILY CATHOLIC, are not pope-bashers in any way. They cherish the Petrine Ministry and the truths of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. In fact, two of our regular contributors Atila Sinke Guimar„es and Dr. Marian Therese Horvat combined with Michael Matt and John Vennari, editors of The Remnant and Catholic Family News respectively, to write directly to you in a most respectable and respectful manner with their various works such as "We Resist You to the Face" and "Quo Vadis, Petre?" to name a few. Sadly, there has been no response from you, only from dumbed-down neo-Catholics who, try as they might, still don't understand why they can't force good fruit onto a bad tree or take off bad fruit from a good tree. It simply can't be done!

   What can be done, however, is to convey the truths in plain speak so the universal Church will understand. Therefore, I do want to thank you for your response to Pope Leo XIII and his encyclical on the Rosary Supremi Apostolatus Officio for it is truly a compendium of the simplicity and power of the Rosary. In two and a half pages the "Pope of the Rosary" said everything that needs to be said. We are encouraging our readers to go to this excellent encyclical and see the difference between what was absolute with a style that conveyed a simplicity and fullness of the Faith in pre-conciliar times to the complicating, compromising tomes that have been passed down over the past 40 years. Our precious Faith is not complicated, but I daresay in the last several decades you architects of Vatican II have thoroughly obscured so much. What was wrong with the Roman Catechism - the Catechism of Trent? For that matter, what was wrong with an even simpler catechetical explanation as the Baltimore Catechism? Why was it necessary to change and expand on the near perfect by issuing two editions of the new "Catechism of the Catholic Church"? Why was there any need to change Canon Law even? What was wrong with the Pio-Benedictine Code of 1917? For that matter what was wrong with anything passed down up until the Second Vatican Council? Was nothing sacred before then? That is the impression you have given to millions of Catholics who have, in blind obedience to you, forsaken many of the Truths and Traditions of Holy Mother Church. You have allowed them to grow lukewarm in their Faith by not being the watchful shepherd over the shepherds you appointed to protect the flocks. Surely, being the scholar you are, you must realize that the Second Vatican Council issued statements and ideas that were condemned by your predecessors prior to 1958. Rather than balancing what the other sacred councils passed down, you feed us a steady diet of Vatican II-speak.

   Rarely do we hear the word "Catholic" anymore, rarely do we hear 'one, holy' anymore, and rarely do we even see the word 'Apostolic Church.' Instead we are now the "People of God" which encompasses everyone, more of the "for all" mentality rather than the infrangible "pro multis." You know what I'm talking about. Our concern is that you have allowed the "pilgrim Church" to vacillate on the tenets of the Church and allowed sacred traditions to be trampled on. That, your Holiness, makes us very angry. You have betrayed the very oath you should have taken and kept. After all we are the Church Militant. But who are we fighting? Are we not fighting, as Paul says in Ephesians 6: 11-12, satan himself? "Put on the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and the Powers, against the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high." Is this not the reason for the Rosary? Is not the Rosary a compendium of the "armor of God"?

   Paul entreats us - you, me and all Catholics - to "be able to resist in the evil day, and stand in all things perfect. Stand, therefore, having girded your loins with truth, and having put on the breastplate of justice, and having your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, in all things taking up the shield of faith, with which you may be able to extinguish all the fiery darts of the most wicked one: And take unto you the helmet of salvation and the sword of the spirit, (which is the word of God). By all prayer and supplication praying at all times in the spirit; and in the same watching with all instance and supplication for all the saints: And for me, that speech may be given me, that I may open my mouth with confidence, to make known the mystery of the gospel: For which I am an ambassador in a chain, so that therein I may be bold to speak according as I ought" (Ephesians 6: 14-20).

   Are we not ambassadors "in a chain" both in reference to being chained to Christ and not of this world, though we are in it, and to a chain referring to the chain of love - the Holy Rosary which links us to Mary in supplication to her Divine Son, a duty we joyously embrace as members of the Church Militant in glorious union with the Church Triumphant and with the Church Suffering in a sorrowful, loving petition for those souls who have not yet been purified to behold the Beatific Vision? It is in this harmony with the Communion of Saints that we can fulfill our faith and mission as loyal Catholics in search of eternal salvation.

   You know, without a shadow of a doubt, that the evils Paul speaks of are within our beloved Church. I see it on your face. Please, please, Holy Father, have the strength and fortitude, the courage to stand up to it as the Apostle Paul says. Be not afraid of man, nor of the bishops - those power mongers who have so intimidated the Bishop of Rome for woe these many years. What are we to think when men whom you appointed like Cardinal Roger Mahony, Cardinal Karl Lehmann, Cardinal Walter Kasper and Cardinal Bernard Law, to name just a few, openly defy Church doctrine? What are we to think when you refuse to discipline openly sodomite priests and bishops? What are we to think when you protect homopederasts by falling back on Canon Law to stall and spin the media wolves. Regardless of Church law, when these sodomites infringe on the rights of the innocents, they are under the jurisdiction of civil law for they have broken civil law. If you truly wanted to clean up every diocese - and I do mean every diocese - you would clean house. Don't worry about the fall-out. I daresay, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, there would be a fresh wave of vocations. If you are going to stand by Canon Law, then enforce it. If you are truly against abortion then make a statement that will ring through every parish. Make a mandatory statement to your bishops to formally pronounce excommunication on anyone who legislates for abortion. Until you do take such bold, but necessary Catholic action, your credibility will continue to slip and more babies will be slaughtered in the womb. The more you push for abolishing the death penalty, the more you are weakening the pro-life movement. The time for grandstanding and handshaking and handwashing is over. It's time to don sackcloth and ashes for all of us for we have greatly angered the Just Judge. You, Holy Father, because you have allowed the Church to deteriorate so under your watch; we because we stood by and allowed you to, not speaking out until it was obvious the grave damage Vatican II has wrought.

   The Counter-Reformation Doctor of the Church Saint Robert Bellarmine, in his work de Romano Pontifice for the Sacred Council of Trent, stated "It is permissible to resist the Pope when he invades souls and troubles the commonwealth: and moreover, if he appears to be causing harm to the Church, it is permissible, I say, to resist him by not doing what he enjoins and by preventing his will to triumph." Your Holiness, if we are truly Roman Catholic - and we are - then we have no choice but to stand with and behind this Doctor of the Church. We must, in all respect to your holy and august office, resist not the Vicar of Christ but the person who currently occupies it, who by his actions, is anathema to what the Supreme Pontiff must be. Again, I refer you to the truths of the solemn oath as proof of my intention to resist you because it truly appears that you are invading souls, troubling the commonwealth, causing harm to the Church. I must take a stand and follow the perennial, infallible Magisterium in all matters of Faith and Morals.

   I know many readers are furious with you; that would be Traditional, loyal Catholics who realize there is a vast difference between the Faith of our fathers and what is passed off as Catholic, or as you say 'People of God' today. Then there are many neo-Catholics who are furious with me for bringing this all up. They were all behind me when I criticized the bishops for not being shepherds, but when the blame goes to the top, then they cannot see that the emperor has no clothes. These blindly obedient ones were quick to 'excommunicate' us because we chose to be truly obedient to our Faith. How dare we! A few years ago I was in that same pack of 'conservative' Catholics who blindly followed whatever you proclaimed. However, after our grace-filled pilgrimage to Lourdes in the Jubilee Year and your unorthodox actions throughout that year, including the outright deceit of the revelation of the "Third Secret of Fatima", and the subsequent appointment of Marxist, Masonic and Modernist cardinals in 2001, and then Assisi and the Jewish document this year - all abominable straws that would break any camel's back, not to mention your mishandling of the scandal that is running rampant throughout the U.S.A. - well the truth is so obvious, the evidence unmitigated in the face of what all previous sacred councils and pre-Vatican II pontiffs proclaimed. In truth, what is postured today in the 'new evangelization' and the new liturgy and new morality is foreign to Catholic Truth and Tradition. Oh, over these past 24 years you and the majority of sorry coven of lackeys you've appointed as bishops and cardinals are clever. Half truths permeate yours and their words and actions; but not the fullness of Truth. More and more the mask is coming off. More of your comrades in the periti are bold and proud enough to brag that they have been able to contribute to the destruction of the Church through the reforms of Vatican II. The more they reveal the more they incriminate you as an accomplice. The more you stubbornly persist in your ecumenical bent and promote secularization and globalization, the more the jury can see the undeniable evidence.

   That's what greatly concerns me and millions of other Catholics. Now we're mad because tampering with the traditions of the Rosary is too much. Knowing what your novelties have done in watering down the Faith in every other area, the red flag is raised quicker these days. We must ask what have you done to our beloved Church? Why do you embrace what your predecessors over the past 2000 years condemned? When you kissed the Koran; apologized for the Crusades, Inquisition and Missionary efforts; pandered to the Protestants; compromised with the Buddhists and Hindus; catered to the Jews; diminished the necessity of conversion by promoting 'dialogue' on a humanist scale and allowed an official document to be published that heretically claims the Jews don't need to be converted - what were you thinking? When you allowed the sodomites and Modernists to infiltrate and pollute our seminaries, chanceries, parishes and yes, the curia, and said little to nothing about one of the greatest scandals ever to hit the Church, what were you thinking? When you decided you would be the first pontiff in 1300 years not to take the solemn papal coronation oath, what were you thinking? Remember Christ's indictment in Matthew 8: 15-23. To deny Our Lord's syllogism is sheer madness. It's all about the fruits. When, Holy Father, when will this madness end?

Michael Cain, editor

October 21, 2002
vol 13, no. 120
CATHOLIC PewPOINT commentary