Archive for June, 2019

from Novus Ordo Watch

We live in the year of our Lord 2019. Although it has been evident for a long time that this world is headed in the wrong direction, certainly the last six years of “Pope” Francis have convinced a great many who consider themselves faithful Catholics that something is terribly amiss, not just in the world but also in the institution they believe to be the Roman Catholic Church. The world is drowning in unbelief, false philosophies, immorality, and hostilities; and the religion practiced and preached in the Vatican is simply no longer the Catholic religion of Pope Pius XII and his predecessors.

However, there is no reason to be discouraged or despair. On the contrary. Judging from the viewpoint of Divine Revelation and prophecy, we could say that “everything is going according to plan” — so to speak. While we must at all times fight for religious truth, good morals, decency, common sense, and true justice, nevertheless we know that this world will at some point in the future be ruled by the Antichrist, not because God positively desires it so, but because He permits it as part of salvation history in order to draw a greater good from it. This has been revealed to us in Holy Scripture by Almighty God Himself (e.g., 2 Thess 2; 1 Jn 2:18; cf. Mt 24).

Although the knowledge that it will and must happen is no excuse to surrender, to sit back and watch it all come about, it is cause to not despair, to not be dismayed, and to understand why all these frightening social and pseudo-ecclesiastical upheavals against God’s law — both natural and revealed — are happening, and why God is permitting them. This, in turn, boosts our trustful and loving surrender to Divine Providence, full of Faith and hope, keeping in mind that even though the times in which we live are evil, nevertheless Almighty God, who is all-knowing, all-good, and all-powerful, has chosen to place us into precisely this time of human history and no other — and He did so because He foreknew that this would be most conducive to our salvation.

Some years ago, True Restoration Media conducted three interviews with Bishop Donald Sanborn, rector of Most Holy Trinity Seminary in Brooksville, Florida, on the history of Christendom, beginning with the Edict of Milan in the fourth century and ending in 1788, the eve of the French Revolution. This journey through the history of Western civilization is so powerful and so informative that we cannot recommend it too highly to anyone who wishes to understand how it is that we have come this far, and what lies ahead.

In the past, the three videos on the history of Christendom were available to the public only through a True Restoration subscription or by purchase. We are excited to announce that Novus Ordo Watch has now sponsored the release of these videos to the entire public — they are now free of charge:

FIRST VIDEO: The History of Christendom from the Edict of Milan to 1274

SECOND VIDEO: The History of Christendom from 1274 to 1648

THIRD VIDEO: The History of Christendom from 1649 to 1788

Listen to Bp. Sanborn as he explains how Christian society as it is willed by God was realized perfectly in the High Middle Ages (13th century), which were the apex, as it were, of Christian civilization, and what has caused its gradual but steady decline ever since. Understand how it all hangs together — how we went from a society imbued with the sacred and the supernatural, in conformity with Catholic teaching, to a Freemasonic-naturalist society in which God has been discarded and man and his “liberty” enthroned in His place. Understand how we got from St. Thomas Aquinas to Martin Luther, why the latter can be called the “father” of the modern world, and how the Protestant Reformation inevitably had to lead to Socialism, Communism, Freemasonry, and Modernism. As the “synthesis of all heresies”, dubbed such by Pope St. Pius X (Encyclical Pascendi, n. 39), Modernism is still with us today and has ushered in the current eclipse of the Catholic Church as part of the “operation of error” warned about by St. Paul the Apostle (2 Thess 2:10).

Bp. Sanborn’s video series on the history of Christendom is eminently educational and quite fascinating. It is not boring! At the end of it you will say, “It all makes sense now. I can see clearly now why we are where we are, how we got here, and where it’s all headed.”

You might wonder why this series on the history of Christendom ends in 1788, and why that which is perhaps the most important part, beginning with the French Revolution of 1789, is not included. The reason is that an interview with His Excellency on that most recent part of Church history was never conducted; however, it is covered in True Restoration‘s audio program The Root of the Rot, of which the first 7 episodes are likewise free:

We must never lose sight of the fact that all the trials we are now undergoing, both in the Church and in society, are not a negation or refutation of the holy Catholic religion, but actually its vindication and reaffirmation, which will ultimately lead to its inevitable, divinely-guaranteed triumph.

Pray much, especially the Holy Rosary, as urged by our Lady of Fatima, and devote yourself to her Immaculate Heart. She will guide us through these difficult and stormy times into which our souls have been placed by Divine Providence.

Everything is going according to plan. It’s time we all understood the plan.

Links to Related Information:

Pride Month?

June 22nd, 2019 by Vigilo

from In Veritate

The Roman poet Horace once said: You may drive out nature with a pitchfork, yet she’ll be constantly running back.

June is the traditional month for the “pride” marches of the sodomites. This June will be particularly active, owing to the fiftieth anniversary of the demonstrations at the Stonewall Bar in Greenwich Village in 1969 in which the sodomites made their first attempt at public acceptance.

But is this appetite for unnatural sex acts something to be proud of? Is it something to be celebrated and admired by all?

Everyone knows that sodomitic sex acts are contrary to nature. Even the most perfunctory examination of the physiology of the sex organs and their functions tells any intellectually honest person that they are meant for reproduction. The obvious conclusion is that to use them for any purpose other than reproduction is contrary to nature.

The Left argues pleasure. But pleasure is not against nature, they say. Response: it is against nature if it accompanies an act which is against nature. For all pleasure, as St. Thomas Aquinas points out, can only be had as an accompaniment to some other act. God has enhanced certain acts with pleasure in order that the acts be accomplished. Principal among these are acts pertaining to eating, for the preservation of the individual, and acts pertaining to reproduction, for the preservation of the species.

All of this is crystal clear. It is confirmed by the fact that there is a male and female in many other aspects of life: electrical couplings, plumbing couplings, and even in audio equipment. The reason is that all reality — with the exception of God Himself — is composed of act and potency, that is, a principle which gives and a principle which receives. The human race figured this out around 350 B.C.

There are many sins against nature. Among them is artificial birth control. Another is solitary impurity. There is something special about the sin of Sodom, however, since it carries with it a particularly pertinacious revolt against the order which God has established. “Male and female He created them.” (Genesis I: 27)

There is a saying in philosophy which reads: Natura est quodammodo Deus, that is, Nature is in a certain way God. This should not be taken in a pantheistic sense, but with the meaning that God’s nature is stamped upon all creation in the form of the eternal law, which is an order which reflects His own divine nature. This order is visible everywhere, and it is what makes our lives livable. Consider the perfect order of the planets and stars, the rising and setting of the sun, the phases of the moon, the constancy of gravity, the constancy of the characteristics and properties of the chemical elements and compounds, the marvelous order of the human body, the constancy of the composition of air throughout the whole planet, the correlation between available food and our digestive systems, the ecology of plants and animals. These are only a few of the many examples of the natural order, a reflection of God’s infinite wisdom.

The eternal law which governs all creation becomes for man what we call the natural law, that is, a code of morality which is based on nature itself. It simply means that man is bound to always act in accordance with his God-given nature. Any act, therefore, which is contrary to nature is intrinsically evil, evil by its very nature, and therefore can never be posited for any reason whatsoever. Man must accept death, if need be, in order to avoid a sin against the natural law. Among sins against the natural law are murder, stealing, lying, and all the sins against nature in the domain of sex, which are listed as four: artificial contraception, solitary sins, bestiality, and sodomy. Of these the fourth is considered to have a special malice because it such a blatant perversion of nature. For this reason it was punished very severely by God in the Old Testament.

The reason why these sexual sins against nature are so grave is that the act of reproduction for humans is an act in cooperation with God’s creative act of a human being with an immortal soul. For this reason, it is called procreation. Hence to thwart God’s plan and purpose, which is clear from nature, is to most gravely offend the divine majesty.

All these things having been said, we return to the question: Should persons who have an appetite for unnatural sex acts be proud of this appetite? Should this appetite — and its consequences in the practical order — be admired as an alternative and legitimate way of life?

The answer is clearly in the negative. An appetite is merely a habitual desire for something. Hence the morality of the desire depends on the morality of the object of desire. This is true of adultery, for example. This is why Our Lord said: “But I say to you, that whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matthew V: 28) We know, therefore, that the desire for adultery is sinful.

Likewise the desire for sodomy is sinful. Consequently the appetite for it — whatever its cause, whether genetic or by choice — is a disorder of the sexual function and leads to a desire for something which has a special immorality, one against nature. It could be compared to having an appetite for eating or drinking something poisonous.

Should this disorder, then, be the object of pride and admiration? Should there be pride parades of adulterers? Of those afflicted with obsessive-compulsive disorders? Of alcoholics? Of those suffering from schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, or paranoia? Of those inclined to bestiality? Of the sadomasochists? For these are all disorders of one form or other.

Of course not. The Left, however, loves the sodomite pride parades not because they think that this appetite is normal, but because it is the ultimate way of raising the horns of defiance against God Almighty. It is precisely because this disorder is so blatantly against nature, and therefore so abhorrent to everyone, even to the most politically correct, that it is the perfect vehicle of telling God to “go to hell.” It is the ultimate act of blasphemy on the part of the cultural revolution which has its origins in the 1960’s.

Remember Horace’s quotation, that nature, even if driven out with a pitchfork, will always come back. No pride parade, not even a thousand pride parades, will ever make natural what is intrinsically unnatural, and not all the political correctness in the world will take away the nauseous feeling which comes at the thought of unnatural sex acts.

It is to be remembered that the original sin of Adam and Eve was an intellectual sin, which was to “have the knowledge of good and evil.” Put in another way, it was the devil promising man that he, man, would be the measure of morality, and not God. Consequently, far more damage is done to society by the approval and acceptance of unnatural sex acts, than by these acts themselves. For this vice has always been with the human race, but no civilization in the history of the planet has ever approved of marriages between two persons of the same sex. Even the debauched Romans frowned upon homosexual acts.

The intellectual sin, therefore, of the pride parade, the acceptance of unnatural vice, is the worst sin of all. For this reason, supposedly conservative politicians who accept these things, and even praise this disordered appetite and inclination, are sowing the seeds of the ruin of the nation. For no nation which abandons the natural law can long stand.

The attitude of the Novus Ordo. There was one Novus Ordo bishop who said something Catholic about the upcoming pride parades. Bishop Tobin of Providence, Rhode Island, tweeted this:

A reminder that Catholics should not support or attend LGBTQ “Pride Month” events held in June. They promote a culture and encourage activities that are contrary to Catholic faith and morals. They are especially harmful for children.

On the other hand, a Jesuit by the name of Father James Martin, a prominent advocate of the LGBTQ agenda, tweeted this:

To all my many #LGBTQ friends, Catholic and otherwise: Happy #PrideMonth. Be proud of your God-given dignity, of the gifts God has given you, of your place in the world, and of your many contributions to the church. For you are “wonderfully made” by God (Ps 139).

The tragedy of these contrasting Novus Ordo views is the very fact that they are contrasting. Both the bishop and the Jesuit are “Catholics.” The contradiction of these statements concerning the observance of the natural law would ruin the unity of faith in the Catholic Church. It is this lack of unity of faith, one of the four marks of the Church, which is proof positive that the Novus Ordo religion is not the Catholic Faith. Even the arch-Modernist John Paul II said, on the occasion of a pride parade in Rome in 2000: “Homosexual acts go against natural law. The Church cannot silence the truth because it would not live up to its faith in God the Creator and would not help discern what is good from what is evil.” Such a statement is worthless, however, if the hierarchy does not enforce orthodoxy on this point. Indeed the repression of heresy is one way in which the Holy Ghost guides the Church. Just as our bodies expel diseases by means of antibodies in our blood, so the Church must condemn and expel heresies. Otherwise it defects from its God-given purpose, as the words of the heretic John Paul II indicate.

from Novus Ordo Watch

And now, another post for your “You sedevacantists are just a bunch of Protestants!” file.

On Tuesday, June 11, the Argentinian apostate Jorge Bergoglio graced the people unfortunate enough to be attending his daily worship service at the chapel of the Vatican’s Casa Santa Marta with yet another homily. In it, he revealed that he denies the Catholic dogma on the possibility of supernatural merit before God by the justified.

The heretical ramblings of the false pope, who goes by the stage name of Francis, were reported by the Vatican’s in-house propaganda arm, Vatican News:

Christian life, said Pope Francis, is lived gratuitously. “Without cost you have received; without cost you are to give,” he said, was how Jesus described the core of salvation.

He said salvation cannot be bought, because God “saves us free of charge” and “requires no payment”.
As God has done with us, so we are to do with others, he said.

“Realize that the Lord is full of gifts for us. He asks just one thing: that our hearts be open. When we say ‘Our Father’ and we pray, we open our heart, allowing this gratuitousness to enter. Often when we need some spiritual grace, we say: ‘Well, now I will fast, do penance, pray a novena…’ Fine, but be careful: this is not done to ‘pay’ or ‘buy’ grace. We do it to open our hearts so that grace might enter. Grace is freely given.”

All God’s gifts, said Pope Francis, are given without cost. And he warned that sometimes “the heart folds in on itself and remains closed”, and it is no longer able to receive “such freely given love”.

We should not bargain with God, he said.

“In our spiritual life we always run the risk of slipping up on the question of payment, even when speaking with the Lord, as if we needed to bribe the Lord. No! That is not the correct path… I make a promise, in order to expand my heart to receive what is already there, waiting for us free of charge. This relationship of gratuitousness with God is what will help us to have the same rapport with others, whether it be in Christian witness, Christian service, or the pastoral work of those who guide the people of God. We do so along the way. Christian life means walking. Preach and serve, but do not make use of others. Serve and give freely that which you have received freely. May our life of holiness be permeated by this openness of heart, so that the gratuitousness of God – the graces that He wishes to give us without cost – may enter our hearts.”

(Devin Watkins, “Pope at Mass: ‘Serve others freely, as God freely loves you’”Vatican News, June 11, 2019; italics removed; underlining added.)

What we see here is a clever attempt to instill heresy in the souls of the hearers by means of half-truths, which are the most dangerous kinds of lies. Like most heretics, Francis is not ashamed even to hijack a passage found in Sacred Scripture to serve as the foundation of his denial of dogma; in this case, Mt 10:8: “Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give.”

Here is a video clip showcasing this spiritual atrocity:

It is evident that Francis denies the possibility and value of the justified meriting graces and even Eternal Life itself.

To understand what this means, let’s first take a look at what a pre-Vatican II dogmatic theology dictionary says concerning this. It defines the concept of merit thus:

The right to a reward due for a morally good action. Merit can be de condigno (condign; adequate), if there is an equal proportion between the good act and its reward, and de congruo (congruous; of convenience) if, in the lack of such proportion, there intervenes some reason of convenience or of benevolence that moves the rewarder. Supernatural merit is that which arises from an action performed under the influence of divine grace, and thus in relationship with the supernatural end: the beatific vision. Five conditions are required for supernatural merit: (1) state of mortal life (status viatoris – state of the wayfarer), because death is the end of the test…; (2) state of sanctifying grace, because sin renders relationship impossible with God; (3) free will, without which there is no responsibility and, therefore, no reason for reward or punishment; (4) good work, since evil deserves punishment; (5) divine agreement or consent (accepting and ordering the good work to its reward), because the supernatural order is absolutely gratuitous and no creature can acquire a true and proper right with reference to God, without His own divine disposition in this regard. Man, fulfilling these conditions, can merit, even condignly (de condigno), the increase of grace and life eternal, called a “crown of justice” by St. Paul.

Christ, during His mortal life, merited for Himself the glorification of His human body (His soul already enjoyed the beatific vision), and for the whole human race He merited, especially by His passion and death, all supernatural gifts and life eternal. His merit, like His satisfaction, has an infinite value, and this value is, more probably, according to the rigor of justice (i.e., implies the proper and full concept of justice), because it is the merit of the Word of God Himself, who is the operating subject in His assumed nature. Mary has merited de congruo for us all that Jesus merited de condigno. Lutheranism, holding human nature intrinsically corrupted by original sin to the point of the loss of free will, denied all possibility of merit in man. The Council of Trent condemned this error, asserting both free will and, under the influence of grace, merit [Denz. 809 and 842].

(Pietro Parente et al., eds., Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology [Milwaukee, MN: Bruce Publishing, 1951], s.v. “merit”; italics given; underlining added.)

It is certainly true that fallen man cannot, by his natural powers, merit grace. God gratuitously, that is, freely, condescended to offer us His grace so that we would have the opportunity to right our relationship with Him. Thus the Council of Trent taught dogmatically:

It [the Synod] furthermore declares that in adults the beginning of that justification must be derived from the predisposing grace of God through Jesus Christ, that is, from his vocation, whereby without any existing merits on their part they are called, so that they who by sin were turned away from God, through His stimulating and assisting grace are disposed to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and cooperating with the same grace, in such wise that, while God touches the heart of man through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself receiving that inspiration does not do nothing at all inasmuch as he can indeed reject it, nor on the other hand can he of his own free will without the grace of God move himself to justice before Him. Hence, when it is said in the Sacred Writings: “Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you” [Zach. 1:3], we are reminded of our liberty; when we reply: “Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted” [Lam. 5:21], we confess that we are anticipated by the grace of God.

[Canon 3:] If anyone shall say that without the anticipatory inspiration of the Holy Spirit and without His assistance man can believe, hope, and love or be repentant, as he ought, so that the grace of justification may be conferred upon him: let him be anathema.

(Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 5; Denz. 797, 813)

In the sense just explained, it is true to say that God saves us “free of charge.” There is nothing any of us did, or could have done, to dispose God to have mercy on the fallen human race and restore it to a state of justification. It was entirely God’s own goodness and mercy that did this: “For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; not of works, that no man may glory” (Eph 2:8-9).

However, now that God has shown mercy to us and freely given us the opportunity to be reconciled with Him, we can and must willingly cooperate in order to actually obtain the justification offered. This cooperation is a free act on our part; but it is made possible and fruitful only by the assistance of God’s undeserved grace.

Thus the Council of Trent says that we are “justified gratuitously, because none of those things which precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace itself of justification; for, ‘if it is a grace, it is not now by reason of works; otherwise (as the same Apostle says) grace is no more grace’ [Rom. 11:6]” (Chapter 8; Denz. 801).

Once justification has been received and the soul is regenerated in sanctifying grace and sins have been remitted, the justified can merit an increase in their justification:

Having, therefore, been thus justified and having been made the “friends of God” and “his domestics” [John 15:15; Eph. 2:19], “advancing from virtue to virtue” [Ps. 83:8], “they are renewed” (as the Apostle says) “from day to day” [2 Cor. 4:16], that is, by mortifying the members of their flesh [Col. 3:5], and by “presenting them as instruments of justice” [Rom. 6:13, 19], unto sanctification through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church; in this justice received through the grace of Christ “faith cooperating with good works” [Jas. 2:22], they increase and are further justified, as it is written: “He that is just, let him be justified still” [Rev. 22:11], and again: “Be not afraid to be justified even to death” [Sirach. 18:22], and again: “You see, that by works a man is justified and not by faith only” [Jas. 2:24]. And this increase of justice Holy Church begs for, when she prays: “Give unto us, O Lord, an increase of faith, hope and charity” [13th Sun. after Pent.].

(Council of Trent, Session 6, Chapter 10; Denz. 803)

The Council of Trent underscores the above dogmatic teaching by issuing the following canons against anyone who would dare to contradict it, as the Lutherans and many other Protestants do:

[Canon 24:] If anyone shall say, that justice received is not preserved and also not increased in the sight of God through good works but that those same works are only the fruits and signs of justification received, but not a cause of its increase: let him be anathema.

[Canon 32:] If anyone shall say that the good works of the man justified are in such a way the gifts of God that they are not also the good merits of him who is justified, or that the one justified by the good works, which are done by him through the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ (whose living member he is), does not truly merit increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life (if he should die in grace), and also an increase of glory: let him be anathema.

(Council of Trent, Session 6; Denz. 834, 842)

These two canons anathematize Francis, for it is precisely his contention that the justified cannot merit any graces from God — all they can do is “open their hearts”, or “enlarge their hearts” (as Zenit translated it), so as to simply (or perhaps better or more bountifully) “receive” what God was going to give them anyway: “I make a promise, in order to expand my heart to receive what is already there, waiting for us free of charge… the graces that He wishes to give us without cost”, the Antipope said, as quoted above. But a bigger heart — to use Bergoglio’s insufferable metaphorical pseudo-theology — is one thing, and the Catholic concept of merit quite another.

Of course, no one at the Vatican batted an eye. Presumably, none of the clergy in attendance knew or cared enough to object to this latest “papal” heresy. And since it doesn’t touch on an issue relating to the Fifth, Sixth, or Ninth Commandment and is entirely about a supernatural truth to boot, this makes the matter wholly uninteresting to a great many people in the Vatican II Sect who are otherwise quick to put up a blog post, publish a video, host a petition, or voice their protest in some other way.

And yet, we must repeat: What Francis said is heresy. It is the direct denial of a truth revealed by God and proposed as such by the Church. (Jimmy Akin, call your office.) Pertinacious public adherence to it renders one a non-Catholic. This matter is much more serious than anything having to do with what Francis did or didn’t know about Theodore McCarrick, for example. And that’s not to downplay the crimes of McCarrick.

Prayer, fasting, mortification, and other works of penance simply as means to “open your heart” to be better disposed to receive what you cannot merit? Now that’s something Martin Luther — that “witness to the Gospel”, as a recent Vatican document unashamedly calls him — could get on board with!

from In Veritate

This is really nothing new, as we already know that Vatican II sees non-Catholic religions as having value in the order of salvation, indeed as means of salvation, which is an explicit heresy.

What is interesting about Bergoglio’s statement, however, is that he openly approves of freedom of conscience, that is, the right to choose whatever religion you want and to practice it.

He states:

In order to respect diversity, dialogue must seek to promote every person’s right to life, to physical integrity, and to fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of conscience, of thought, of expression and of religion. This includes the freedom to live according to one’s beliefs in both the private and public spheres. In this way, Christians and Muslims – as brothers and sisters – can work together for the common good.

What Bergoglio states here was solemnly condemned by Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura. What is significant, however, is that he repeats not only Vatican II’s call for the freedom to practice one’s religion, but also freedom of conscience.

Conscience is none other than man’s intellect in the act of determining the morality of an act to be done here and now. Conscience is not a faculty which discovers the truth, but instead is merely the application of the law to a determined act. Consequently the conscience is not free to choose what it pleases, but is necessarily bound to the law which it must apply to the acts we perform.

Freedom of conscience is therefore an impious doctrine, since it releases the intellect from its duty to know the law of God and to apply it. Man has no right to freedom of conscience. Why? Because

God has revealed a religion and a law, and all consciences must accept and obey this religion and this law.

The Catholic Church does not exclude, provided there be serious reasons which justify it, a toleration of false religions, but it can in no way condone the tenet that one has a right to a false religion. For all right is based in God and emanates from God. Right is a moral faculty — ability — to posit an act which is morally correct, that is, which is in conformity with God’s law. The very thought that God would posit a right in someone to defy Him by embracing a false religion is blasphemy.

The letter to all the bishops

June 6th, 2019 by Vigilo

from In Veritate

Recently a group of somewhat prominent clergy and lay people wrote a letter to all the bishops of the world urging them to declare Francis a non-pope. About ninety people have signed on to it.

Few people may remember, but I did precisely the same thing in 1991. I wrote a letter in Latin and sent it to all the Novus Ordo bishops of the world. I received no positive response. In fact, a paltry few responded.

What is praiseworthy about this recent letter is that it is a step in the right direction. It shows that some neocons (Novus Ordo conservatives) have finally come to the realization that Francis is a heretic who needs to be declared, and that a new conclave should elect a new pope.

This absence of a declaration on the part of cardinals or bishops is what prevents many Catholics from saying that Francis is not the pope. While they may have doubts about him, they do not want to make the decision on their own that he cannot be the pope.

Those who hold to the material/formal sedevacantism, as I do, also see such a declaration, at least by one or some bishops who have converted from Vatican II to the true Catholic Faith, as necessary for a solution to the problem in the Church.

What is also positive about the letter is that it was not an angry tirade, but a very calm and scholarly presentation of the facts of Bergoglio’s deviation from the Catholic Faith, not only personally, but also in his teaching.

What is imperfect about the letter is that it concentrated only on the recent heresies regarding sexual morality, ignoring the root problem of Vatican II itself, as well as the heresies and heteropraxis (heretical activity) of John Paul II and Ratzinger. In fact John Paul II is often cited in the letter as a source of “orthodoxy.”

Unless Vatican II is seen as the source of the Church’s problems, and is annulled, any attempt to fix this problem of unorthodox teachings is bound for failure.

The root of Vatican II is Modernism. Modernism was condemned as the synthesis of all heresies because it is a mentality that is capable of producing any heresy. The mentality is that the Church must be changed to fit the modern world.

From this bottomless pit of Modernism springs the error of relativism of truth, which is the most basic characteristic of the modern world. It comes to us from the eighteenth century philosophers, and ruins the objectivity of truth. For the modern world, truth is what you make it. Truth is not ruled by an object which is the same for everyone, but by your experience of that object. So what is true for you may not be true for someone else. But both are in possession of the truth because they are faithful to their own experience.

This sounds crazy, and it is. This idea, demented though it is, is what operates modern society. It is the reason why we have abortion, same-sex marriages, transgenderism, “identifying” with a certain race or gender which is different from what you were born with. In the area of religion, it leads to ecumenism, according to which there is no one true religion or one true church. Every religion has value and truth, because it conforms to the experiences of those who adhere to it. The natural conclusion of ecumenism is freedom of religions and freedom of conscience.

Ecumenism is the poison which has destroyed the Catholic Faith in our Catholic institutions. The Catholic Church, and it alone, was founded by Christ. Therefore anything outside of its boundaries is a false religion. This doctrine is absolutely essential to Catholicism. Ecumenism, however, destroys this doctrine, and consequently destroys the faith’s adherence with firmness and supernatural certitude to Catholic teaching.

From this relativism of truth flow all of the abominations of ecumenical meetings and other violations of the First Commandment perpetrated by the Vatican II “popes.”

From it as well flow all of the sexual heresies of Francis. From the relativism of Vatican II also flows the immorality of the clergy. As Ratzinger himself said, in the 1960’s Catholic moral theology collapsed, and with this collapse came the disappearance of absolutes.

In addressing the heresy of Francis, therefore, the letter is ignoring the root cause. It would be like trying to weed your garden simply by snipping off the tops of the weeds.

Despite this imperfection, however, the letter marks a refreshing departure from the “nothing-has-changed” approach to Vatican II, and the voluntary blindness to the “emperor’s new clothes” when it comes to heresies pouring out from the Modernist inmates of the Vatican. It means that at least some in the neocon community have taken the arguments of the sedevacantists seriously.

What is deplorable is that this letter did not emanate from the high clergy — bishops and cardinals — but from lower clergy and even laymen. This letter should have been written in 1965, and should have come from the pen of Cardinal Ottaviani and others like him. Instead, they remained silent. I think that history will judge them very harshly for doing so.

I highly doubt that the signers of this document will receive any positive reaction from the bishops. Fr. Cekada has pointed out, in one of his excellent videos, that there is little to expect from a hierarchy which, in a “papal” visit to Brazil, is waving its arms back and forth to the promptings of sodomitic dancers.

What is also to be deplored is the fact that the Society of Saint Pius X was not the author of this letter. They always criticize sedevacantists for making a judgement about the “pope” before obtaining a legal declaration. Why then, do they not undertake a worldwide campaign for such a declaration? Why has this been left to the neocons? The reason is that the Society of Saint Pius X is seeking a reconciliation with the Modernists, and a letter such as this would ruin all of their plans.

I do admire the courage of the signers of this document, however, since by doing so they are destroying their ecclesiastical careers.

from Novus Ordo Watch

The Interreligious Dialogue of St. Boniface Winfrid

June 5 is the feast of St. Boniface Winfrid in the Roman calendar, an eighth-century Englishman who evangelized the Germanic peoples with such zeal and success that he is commonly known as the Apostle of Germany.

Today the so-called Catholic News Agency sent a tweet with a link to its biographical page about this great bishop and martyr, which notes:

St. Boniface was very bold in his faith, and was well known for being very good at using the local customs and culture of the day to bring people to Christ. He was born in Devonshire, England, in the seventh century. He was educated at a Benedictine monastery and became a monk, and was sent as a missionary to Germany in 719.

There, he destroyed idols and pagan temples, and built churches on the sites. He was eventually made archbishop of Mainz, where he reformed churches and built religious houses on those sites.

He was martyred on June 5, 754 while on mission in Holland, where a troop of pagans attacked and killed him and his 52 companions.

One story about St. Boniface tells about when he met a tribe in Saxony that was worshipping a Norse deity in the form of a huge oak tree. Boniface walked up to the tree, removed his shirt, took an ax, and without a word, chopped it down. Then he stood on the trunk, and asked: “How stands your mighty god? My God is stronger than he.”

(Source; underlining added.)

It doesn’t take much to recognize the manifest incongruence between this great Catholic saint on the one hand and, on the other, the absurd program of perpetual interreligious dialogue that is the Golden Calf of the Vatican II Sect which Catholic News Agency represents and promotes on a daily basis.

Here is more information on the incident of St. Boniface cutting down the oak tree the German heathens worshipped:

To show the heathens how utterly powerless were the gods in whom they placed their confidence, Boniface felled the oak sacred to the thunder-god Thor, at Geismar, near Fritzlar. He had a chapel built out of the wood and dedicated it to the prince of the Apostles. The heathens were astonished that no thunderbolt from the hand of Thor destroyed the offender, and many were converted. The fall of this oak marked the fall of heathenism.

(Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. “St. Boniface”)

Ladies and gentlemen, can you imagine the outrage that something like this would cause in our day, not simply from all sorts of secularists, humanists, pagans, etc., but quite especially from the “Catholic bishops” and most of all “Pope” Francis himself? If St. Boniface were to do something like that today, we would never hear the end of it from Francis and his entire Vatican II gang, which would condemn him in no uncertain terms for:

  • Proselytism — instead of dialoguing with and witnessing to the pagans non-Christian brothers and sisters by establishing soup kitchens, collecting clothes for the needy, and otherwise worrying about their integral human development, he dared to preach Christ; in this way he disrespected the consciences of the members of the indigenous community and violated their human dignity, which can never be taken away
  • Triumphalism — instead of building a bridge of fraternity and dialogue, he offended the religious sensibilities of the people by arrogantly issuing a challenge to them and their traditions; he denigrated their religion, making his own religion appear as superior to theirs, and he tried to rigidly impose his own certainties on them
  • Not respecting the Divine Will concerning other Religions — Boniface’s actions were a direct denial of the teaching of the Abu Dhabi declaration signed by Francis, namely, that “[t]he pluralism and the diversity of religions … are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings”
  • Not respecting our “Common Home” — his cutting down of the tree was a violent attack on the environment, our common home, and contradicts the encyclical Laudato Si’, which prescribes the proper care of creation; moreover, by using a pretext of religion to waste a natural resource, he committed blasphemy and disrupted the ecological harmony that exists between all the members of creation; his action represents an improper dominion over Mother Nature, which we have a duty to safeguard and protect

As you can see, St. Boniface wouldn’t make it very far in the Vatican II religion, nor would he be held in esteem by today’s Modernists-masquerading-as-Catholics. Therefore, any celebration of this great bishop and martyr by the Novus Ordo establishment is pure hypocrisy. Were Boniface alive today, Francis would be the first one to denounce him!

Definitely not a Vatican II bishop: St. Boniface cuts down the “Sacred Oak” of the pagans

Sixty-five years ago, Pope Pius XII published a beautiful magisterial document on St. Boniface, on which sedevacantist writer Tom Droleskey has provided some commentary:

It is interesting that it was a Norse god that the Germanic peoples worshipped, specifically Thor. Such pagan idolatry is experiencing a resurgence in our day in Iceland, where a new heathen temple is currently being built that looks an awful lot like a Novus Ordo church from the outside:

The remains of St. Boniface are kept and venerated at Saint Savior cathedral in Fulda, Germany.

At least until the Muslims take over.

Image source: Wikimedia Commons
Licenses: public domain