Jesuit Sleight of Hand

Pope Francis has announced his Jubilee “Year of Mercy” which is to celebrate the Second Vatican Council, a novelty since from the beginning, the Holy Years and most especially the very rare Jubilee Years are based on events and dates relating to Our Lord Jesus Christ. Yet this remarkable event will celebrate the work of man, Vatican II. Why is that?

Professor Patrizia Fermani explained on the website Riscossa Cristiana:

This is where the sleight of hand comes in. Here we have the formidable idea of giving a sacramental form to the revolutionary political program. All they have to do is give it the solemn form of a jubilee. This will disguise, even for those who are dazed, obtuse or confused, the reversal of the Church’s mission under a load of religious pathos. Bergoglio’s mercy, general amnesty with a retroactive blotting out of sin, has to have a theological and sacral form capable of vanquishing all resistance.

In primitive religions, mystical exaltation was also the sublimation of what is irrational and carnal. Bergoglio’s jubilee aims at the sublimation of the new rites of modernity that have become the rites of the ecumenical, atheistic and popular New Church of the third millennium, and by its momentum it will produce the definitive consecration thereof.”

Professor Fermani is a founding member of Giuristi per la Vita (Lawyers for Life) and founder of the Comitato Nel Nome dell’Infanzia (Committee on Behalf of Infancy). By her phrase “in primitive religions”, we understand pagan. And we agree, the Bergoglio/Kasper “Year of Mercy” manipulates poor sinners enslaved by their persistence in sins to believe that the Church offers them a form of mercy with no requirement to turn away from that sin, the visible church is tragically misleading poor sinners. Precisely the reason that the Angel of Fatima urged the prayer, “… By the infinite merits of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg the conversion of poor sinners”.

On March 15, the Italian journalist Antonio Socci wondered on his website antoniosocci:

Will the Holy Year that has just been announced be centered on Jesus Christ, like the preceding ones, or on Pope Bergoglio? …The Jubilee—ever since the first one in 1300—has always been set on dates that refer to the years of the birth and death of Jesus Christ. Including the (very rare) Extraordinary Jubilees.

The one in 2016 is the first Jubilee in the history of the Church that is not centered on the historical event of Jesus Christ, of His earthly life. Since they had to find some reason to convoke it in 2016, Bergoglio decided that it would be held for the 50th anniversary of the closing of Vatican Council II.

But what sort of an anniversary is that? They have never held a Jubilee for a Council. Then, too, the Second Vatican Council ended in 1965, not in 1966, and therefore they are not celebrating the 50th but the 51st anniversary of the conclusion of the 21st Council of the Church.

Therefore this is a pretext that is more than anything else ideological and even self-referential, because it is centered on an ecclesial event rather than on Christ. (If we had to consider similar events in the history of the Church, we could organize a Holy Year every year.)

The first Jubilee in history that will not be centered on the Christ-event will have, as its undisputed media protagonist, Pope Bergoglio, the pope who incidentally does not greet the faithful with the traditional phrase, ‘Praised be Jesus Christ,’ but rather with ‘Good day’ and ‘Good evening,’ so that the media salute him as the ‘agreeable pope’.

The Corriere writes in a front-page story: ‘It will be dedicated to mercy.’ But that is redundant, because all Jubilees, by their very nature, are dedicated to divine mercy. The Cathedral in Siena has over its portal an engraved slab that records the words with which Boniface VIII proclaimed the first Jubilee in history, in 1300, and the key word is precisely “mercy”.

Why, then, did they decide to say that the 2016 Jubilee will be particularly centered on mercy and is characterized by that?”

As Professor Fermani stated above, the answer lies in the dogged determination of Pope Francis and the Kasper Faction to push through their radical agenda to change the Church “irreversibly”, by the clever ploy of a Year of Mercy, based not on Our Lord Jesus Christ, but on the workings of a disobedient group of “experts” at Vatican II. Each and every one of those men had sworn a solemn oath against the Modernist heresy, against, in fact, all that they subsequently accomplished after Pope Paul famously blew the Apocalyptic Trumpets.

Disobedient Pope John XXIII opened the Council by stating,“Today, the Bride of Christ [i.e., the Church] prefers to use the remedy of mercy instead of taking up the weapons of severity.” Pope Francis has repeated this quote approvingly in announcing his Holy Year. Cardinal Kasper has confirmed that Pope Francis intends to use the Holy Year of Mercy in his irreversible reform agenda for the church.

Think on these things, and pray the Rosary. We all must amend our lives, do penance and pray as never before.

Much of this article was taken from:

The Message of Fatima and the Synod

What connection, if any, is there between next October’s Synod on the Family and the message of Our Lady of the Rosary at Fatima?

At Fatima, the Blessed Virgin did not ask extraordinary things. Essentially, what she asks is:

  • The daily recitation of the Rosary, “o terzo”, a third of the Rosary, in Portuguese.
  • Devotion to the Immaculate Heart
  • Practice of the devotion of First Saturdays of Reparation
  • The consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart.

Several strong signs were given to the popes to point them towards Fatima’s message: Pope Pius XII was consecrated a Bishop on the same date that Our Blessed Mother first appeared at Fatima, May 13, 1917, and he was given his very own apparition related to Fatima when between October 30 and November 8, 1050, he witnessed the sun appear to dance. Pope John Paul II who was the only pope to experience first hand the oppression of Communist rule, barely survived an assassination  attempt on May 13, 1981. Although these popes appeared to understand the connection with Fatima, they did not go so far as to actually obey Our Lady’s commands.

The Consecration of Russia, if it were properly done by the Pope in unison with the Bishops of the Church would serve several purposes.

  • It is an act that must be initiated and commanded by the Pope personally, therefore it would correct the Vatican II error of collegiality. It would assert the Pope’s authority over Russia, thus correcting the Orthodox schism.
  • Such an act would indicate the mediation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, thus correcting Vatican II’s error of false ecumenism with protestant heretics.
  • The Consecration of Russia as requested by the Blessed Virgin indicates the goal of conversion of Russia to the true faith, thus correcting the Vatican II error of religious liberty.
  • If the Pope were to promote the devotion of the First Saturdays it provide a strong instruction to the world that sin offends God and that we must pray and make reparation to prevent souls from falling into hell. What an excellent teaching against the pernicious heresy of the neo-modernist theology that is devastating the Church!

The Consecration of Russia can only be done by a chastened, penitent Pope, one who has learned the hard way of the futility of following a religion of man. This is in stark contrast to the shallow arrogance exemplified by the current Pope of the Twitterverse and his encyclical on climate change.

For those who wonder what it will take to bring about the humility and obedience required for this long awaited act, perhaps we won’t need to wait much longer. Our Lord reminded Sister Lucia of the French King who waited too long to obey His request to consecrate France to His Sacred Heart. He then remarked of the requested Consecration of Russia, “They will do it, but it will be late.” 2017 will be 100 years, which when applied to the French King was “too late”. And so we are now at the countdown.

In October this year, 2015, we have the culmination of the Synod against the family, the Pope’s stated attempt to change the Church “irreversibly” by setting up a false law of mercy against the clear doctrine of the Church on the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of marriage. This monumental affront to Our Lord Jesus Christ will occur 98 years after the Virgin of Fatima’s message to the world.

Around the world, the true Faith is stirring, reviving. In several monasteries and convents, in spite of the efforts of the World’s First Humble Pope®, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is returning, bringing about a resurgence of the Faith. Our Catholic youth are rediscovering the True Mass, so long hidden from them. Families, without much help from a weakened, effeminate clergy are raising strong, Catholic children. Although not in great numbers, some heroic prelates are beginning to stand up for the Faith against the Kasper agenda.

The battle lines are forming, even though so many Catholics are oblivious. For those who are paying attention, like the wise virgins of the parable, this must be a time to watch, to pray and to prepare. Each of us must work to know the message of Fatima and share this message with others, and above all, to obey as best we can the requests of Our Lady of the Rosary in her Fatima message.

NOTE: This post belongs to evensong at Return to Fatima.  I am not in any way associated with the person who takes my articles without permission.

Remember, Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!

~ by evensong for love of the Immaculate Heart of Mary

The New Evangelization in Action

At the Parish level, the “New Evangelization” is, in practice, the sledge hammer that Pope Francis is using to effect his irreversible paradigm shift. In this article I will show how it is working out in our diocese. When we moved here eight years ago, we first registered in a novus ordo parish and so we receive the diocesan magazine through that registration. But after some rather disconcerting episodes within that parish, we began attending an indult Traditional Latin Mass at an inner city Novus Ordo parish. Although our sympathies are with the SSPX as the true Remnant of the faith, we are unable to travel to their Chapel very often and so most Sundays have been attending the TLM at that parish. So my observations actually draw from several sources: the Diocesan Magazine, the Quarterly Newsletter of the parish we are registered in and the inner city parish where we attend the TLM most weeks.

The Bishop of our diocese rarely makes waves. He keeps a rather low profile, unlike the Dolans and Cupiches. His predecessor allowed an indult TLM and he gives the impression of tolerating it. That is not so, but is not what we are discussing here. However, since the Bishop has not quite eliminated our TLM, I had not thought much about where he stood on the matters before the Synod. That is, until recently, when, within a few weeks, we received both the Bishop’s Diocesan Magazine, and our old parish’s Newsletter.

First came the Diocesan Magazine which had an article titled “Teaching Children the Importance of Mass”. Here is an informative excerpt, which is quoted from a lay minister:

(He) said there are other everyday parts of life that can be used to teach children about the four-part Order of Mass: the introductory rites, the Liturgy of the Word, the Liturgy of the Eucharist and the concluding rites.

“That can be explained to them as we gather, we tell stories, we share a meal and we are sent forth”, Reilly said.

“The first one they can understand if they can recall visiting someone else’s home. “Someone greets you, which happens here (at church) and we have a meal.”

“The concluding rites can be connected to the goodbyes parents and children say to those whose house they’ve visited, he said.”

This was in the Bishop’s own Magazine, not something independent. “Share a meal”, “have a meal”. Scriptures reduced to telling stories, and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass reduced to sharing a meal among friends. It’s no wonder people slog into Mass dressed for a pool party or barbecue.

Next came the parish newsletter. In it is an article titled, “Focus on Faith, Leaders in the New Evangelization”. The article has a photo of the Bishop with the words, “(Bishop) says Catholics must reach beyond their comfort zone to reach non-active Catholics”. In the article, we read about the Bishop’s initiative to nurture the new evangelization by training lay leaders. He contracted with the Catholic Leadership Institute for a year long Parish Ministry Disciples program. The article then quotes Barbara Eckert, senior leadership consultant with CLI: “We hope that in these parishes, there’ll be a new breath of what it means to be a Catholic. And, along with all that beauty, try to let people know we’re Catholic in a way that’s highly invitational and approachable.”  In case you are wondering what is being recommended to improve the invitational skills of Catholics, the article continues with a contribution from Father X., the Pastor who explained that while his parish may at first glance appear to be a vibrant parish, it has a “deep problem”, with “a lot of brokenness in our parish that we don’t reach out to.” The article went on to describe Father X’s solution to this brokenness:

“We are called to love people ‘where they are’. That means going back to the core of the Gospel. He then illustrated his point with an example that challenged three different parishioners. All three had received  invitations from family members to attend weddings — gay (sic) weddings — and asked Father X if they should attend.

The parishioners saw the invitations as a moral dilemma. Father told them they were actually opportunities to demonstrate the power of the greatest commandment.

Father said he told one of the three, ‘If you want to go to the wedding or not, it’s up to you. But if you stay home and have hostility against your relative, then you are a sinner. If you go to the wedding and you show your love, that is the witness to the Truth.’

“If people believe it’s a sign of acceptance of gay marriage, simply say, ‘No, it’s a sign of love.’ Go to the wedding. Don’t judge. Just love, because love is our greatest testimony. “

Notice that Father X set up a false dichotomy in his narrative; if you do not go to the sinful wedding you have hostility and are a sinner. He presents no choice for lovingly affirming the 2,000 year teaching of the Church. This is the same error promoted by Pope Bergoglio through the Synod.

In the inner city novus ordo parish where we attend the Traditional Mass most Sundays, we have noticed a change which reflects the Bishop’s New Evangelization initiative as well. The Pastor of this parish is known for his reverence towards the Mass, and his insistence on reverence for the Holy Eucharist. It has been his practice during the several years we have attended that on the major holy days, such as Christmas and Easter, to stress that only Catholics who are in a state of grace, that is not in a state of mortal sin, may receive Holy Communion. Usually he announces that there is a priest in the confessional to hear confessions, and several people generally get up and go to confession at that time. Father has also spoken out in favor of the Church’s traditional teachings on marriage. But at his Easter Mass, Father did not mention, for the first time in my memory, the need to be in a state of grace to receive Holy Communion. Father simply noted the larger than normal attendance, with many new faces, and welcomed them to our “worship service” and then, after a moment’s hesitation, he added, “Mass”.

When you consider the above, they show us how Pope Bergoglio is proceeding with his stated “irreversible changes”. Over the past 50 years since Vatican II, the hierarchy has neglected catechising, while placing the emphasis on a generalized and subjective, “Be nice to others”. Consequently, it is not only laymen who are ignorant of their faith, but even priests, Bishops and Cardinals. Thus, our local Bishop can produce a diocesan magazine with such heretical statements as the first quote above, describing the Mass as “telling stories and sharing a meal”.

As others have pointed out, the Kasper Agenda, which Pope Francis has described as “serene theology” does not simply attack the Church’s teaching on marriage, the family and perversions of sexuality. By pushing to admit those living in mortal sin to Holy Communion, it undercuts the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, His greatest gift to us. Thus they are undercutting the very foundation of our faith.

The Pope and his wrecking crew have a much easier time of it now, since Catholics have been taught by their trusted pastors that, A. The Mass is a gathering where we tell stories and have a meal with friends, and B. Christ’s command to love others excludes “judging” them.

The result is that Novus Ordo Catholics feel compelled to welcome active homosexuals and those who are living together without valid Catholic marriage, and “share a meal” with them. Folks, this train left the station a long, long time ago. Barring an act of God, Pope Bergoglio will accomplish his long awaited “irreversible change”.

It is possible that this attempt by Pope Francis to irreversibly change the Faith at the next Synod will trigger the final stage of the Chastisement. The resultant schism may actually jar complacent Catholics from their lethargy and indifference.  And then again, maybe not…

Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!

Our Lady of Fatima, Queen of the most holy Rosary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

Cardinal Müller to the Rescue?

What strange times these are! Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith would not be my choice for the title of Defender of the Faith. I have written of his blasphemy against the Blessed Virgin Mary previously (see here) and he is also known for supporting liberation theology. However, Cardinal Müller proved to be a strong support for the Church’s doctrine regarding marriage and the family during and after the attacks on them by Pope Bergoglio and the Kasper contingent. That is why I was fascinated to see the following article originally posted by Andrea Tornielli at Vatican Insider, which John Vennari at Catholic Family News brings to us:

The German cardinal has suggested a new area of responsibility for his dicastery: to provide the “theological structure of a pontificate”

In one of the numerous interviews he has given over the past few weeks focusing on the next Synod, Cardinal Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, spoke about a new task for his dicastery. It is a task that is never been mentioned in the documents outlining the precise competencies of the former Holy Office.

In an interview with French Catholic newspaper La Croix, the German cardinal stated: “The arrival of a theologian like Benedict XVI in the Chair of St. Peter was no doubt an exception. But John XXIII was not a professional theologian. Pope Francis is also more pastoral and our mission at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to provide the theological structure of a pontificate.” So according to Müller’s statement, the former Holy Office must “theologically structure” Pope Francis’ pontificate. And this is probably the reason why the Prefect gives public statements on such a frequent basis, like never before.

This is a significant piece of news bearing in mind what is stated in article 48 of “Pastor Bonus”, the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia promulgated by John Paul II in 1988, that: “The proper duty of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to promote and safeguard the doctrine on faith and morals in the whole Catholic world.”

While the Pope “by the will of Christ Himself”, as Francis recalled at the end of the 2014 Synod, is the “supreme Pastor and Teacher of all the faithful” (Canon 749). Until a few decades ago (the last to do so was Paul VI) it was the Pope himself who personally presided over the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, precisely because of this task which, by virtue of the Petrine primacy, only he has the power to exercise. A primacy which belongs to the Bishop of Rome, which involves presiding “in charity” and resolving theological questions where needed.

Cardinal Müller’s words – which introduced the new task of “provid[ing] the theological structure of a pontificate”, a task that had not been formalised until now – went practically unnoticed. While on the one hand his words open up new doctrinal scenarios in relation to Church tradition, on the other hand they seem to suggest that, according to Müller, the current pontificate – and St John XXIII’s too – lacks sufficient theological “structure”.

Originally posted at Vatican Insider

It is difficult to see how Pope Bergoglio’s theological deficiencies can pass unnoticed by any but the most obtuse Catholics, and yet, this move of Cardinal Müller is certainly a novelty. What bearing this will have on the gathering storm of the impending final Synod is anyone’s guess.

Interesting times, eh?

Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!

Our Lady of Fatima, Queen of the Rosary, Queen of Peace, pray for us!

Two Long Years of Pope Bergoglio

Frequently, when talking or corresponding with other Catholics, people express how difficult it is to not get disheartened by the way the media seems to be enamored of Pope Francis and totally oblivious to the damage being done. That is true here in America, where, other than the rock solid traditional Catholic media, such as The Remnant and Catholic Family News, there are only a handful of objective Catholic journalists. One of the best of them, Patrick Archbold, recently got fired from the National Catholic Register for speaking objectively about the Pope. In Europe and the UK however, there are some interesting reports from mainstream media about the changing impressions of Pope Francis as his papacy continues.

The following post is a brief review of articles in the media about Pope Francis. Where I have commented, the print is in blue.

Press Review: Pope Francis in the eyes of Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom
If the French press, with a few rare exceptions, seems to be completely won over to the new face Pope Francis wishes to give the Church, worry is rising in other European countries as the 2nd Synod on the family approaches (October 4-15, 2015).

In Italy, in Corrispondenza Romana, on March 9, 2015, historian Roberto de Mattei commented on an interview he granted to several periodicals:

“(…) Francis does not make outright statements against dogmas, but his pastoral strategy is in itself revolutionary, for it subordinates the truth to praxis, and what is more, on a matter as sensitive as that of the family. He thus marks a profound discontinuity in the history of the papacy that had not been noticed for the past 50 years.

CR: The Church is not ready for this change.
“I most certainly do not wish to support such a direction. It seems to me more correct to say that Francis disorients cardinals, bishops, priests and parishes. Take the petition addressed to the Pope by 120,000 faithful from all over the world, asking him to express himself clearly at long last on the indissolubility of marriage. Even the very fact of tolerating second marriages and thus opening communion to remarried divorcees would affect the Church’s doctrine.”

CR: On this point, there was a very strong confrontation during the last synod between the progressivists and the conservatives.
“I should rather say a fracture in which the paragraphs of the final document, the ones on homosexuals and divorcees, did not obtain the necessary 2/3 support. The real novelty of this assembly was the African and Eastern European bishoprics’ strong opposition to the reforms. Precisely those bishops from the outskirts that Bergoglio never stops praising. That is one of the paradoxes of this pontificate.”

CR: What are the others?
“In October, the pontiff met with the popular movements, giving an image of himself as a peronist, very close to the social bodies. And yet, upon whom does the Vatican call to certify the appraisals of the Institute for the Works of Religion? An institution of capitalist globalism such as Ernst & Young. Again: Bergoglio speaks of de-centralizing the power in the Church, but proves himself to be a strong centralizer.”

CR: Who continues to enjoy wide approval?
“Yes, in the world of the media and outside the Church, where he has surpassed even Wojtyla in popularity. But within the Catholic world he is much less appreciated. Even the participation in the Angelus and the audiences at St. Peter’s Square is decreasing.”

In Germany, on March 13, 2015, for the 2nd anniversary of the pope’s election, a press review presenting a critical assessment was published on

The Pope of Words, a commentary by Lucas Meyer-Blankenburg in the Südwestrundfunk: “ After two years full of words, what Francis really wants still isn’t clear. The euphoria of the beginning of his pontificate has worn off. The steps he takes do not seem to lead in any precise direction; instead of concrete facts, we have flowery words.” (…)

Pope Francis is Dividing the Church, by Julius Müller-Meiningen in the Augsburger Allgemeine: “The early enthusiasm for Pope Francis has worn off. And even within the Vatican, the pope is dividing his cardinals into two sides, thus creating powerful enemies. At present, are even the faithful giving up on him? ‘Papa piacione’, they call him at the Vatican, meaning, ‘the Pope who only seeks to please’. For the applause of the atheists, the Church’s critics and the sheep who have wandered from the ‘straight path’, is all his. It must look suspicious to the Catholic world, or at least to important sectors of it. Two years after taking office, Francis has divided the Church. There have always been different sides, different opinions, and even violent trench wars. ‘It has never been this serious,’ says a prelate who has been observing the Vatican from the inside for years.

Two Years of Francis’ Pontificate: Grey Clouds in the White Smoke, by Gerhard Kiefer in Badische Zeitung: “Francis, who turned 78 in December, and is now older than Benedict XVI was at his election, is forcing a ‘dynamic of rupture’. From this dynamic is to come the second Synod on the Family, next fall, at the Vatican, where Rome’s sacramental treatment of remarried divorcees – as well as those who have contracted homosexual and lesbian unions that they want blessed – will be decided. After the synod, the pope will have to decide alone – a synod is not a council.

“The reaction to Francis’ decisions, enthusiastic or horrified, likely either to rally a majority or to provoke a schism, will condition the answer as to whether he, too, will resign, and if so, when he will do so, thus demystifying his function even more.”

Mercy and reform projects. Pope Francis has launched many things in two years, by Thomas Jansen in Katholische Nachrichten-Agentur: “It is hard to imagine today that right after Francis took office, the following possibility was seriously considered: that the pope would abandon his claim to exercise a universal pontifical authority and be content with more or less a role of primus inter pares. (But) in concluding the bishops’ synod, Francis underlined the primacy of the pontifical jurisdiction in stronger terms than his predecessor Benedict XVI ever used.”

On Radio Vatican (German editorial), Cardinal Walter Kasper made this declaration that is not a criticism, but is highly significant: “‘The pope will continue to carry out his program,’ such is Cardinal Kasper’s conviction. ‘But what he wrote in Evangelii Gaudium is a program for a century that no pope could carry out in the time his pontificate lasts. His principle is not so much to provide posts as to initiate processes that are meant to be irreversible. That is his intention.’ According to the cardinal, this certainly has practical consequences, as can be seen in the nominations of cardinals: ‘he wishes to change the face of the Church – not her substance – and to give her a new direction’.”

Here we have Cardinal Kasper reporting that Pope Bergoglio intends to make “irreversible” changes in the Church. Where have we heard that before? Oh, I remember, Cardinal Maradiaga, Coordinator of Pope Francis’ Council of Cardinal Advisors, stated at a conference 20 January 2015 that, “The Pope wants to take this Church renovation to the point where it becomes irreversible.”

The Unpredictable. Two years of Francis’ Pontificate by Markus Gunther in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: “Francis was liked from the start. Then there was one misstep after another. Little by little, even his most unconditional admirers have come to feel that in the end, only one person is guilty. Him. But recess is over. From now on we have to be ready for anything every day: firm advice on education, questionable digressions on matching four-legged and two-legged mammals, anecdotes full of good intentions and poorly told jokes: Francis offers it all, with a mixture of theological seriousness and South American nonchalance. For a long time that even seemed to play in his favor: … Thus was it possible to reinterpret once or twice in the pope’s favor things that were really incomprehensible and inacceptable. And when things were really bad, the media was held responsible, and misunderstandings were invoked: once again, someone had misunderstood the pope. Francis was untouchable. But that has changed. […] The limit has been reached. (…) Difficulty separating the public and private domains. Doubts on the pope’s motives. Many desires mistaken for realities: ‘a breath of fresh air in the Vatican’. Indignant remarks after the Christmas allocution (in which the pope harshly criticized the cardinals, Ed. Note)”.

In the United Kingdom, on March 24, the Catholic Herald  published an open letter signed by 461 priests asking the participants in the next Synod on the family to “maintain the traditional discipline” concerning the reception of the sacraments, in other words, not to grant remarried divorcees permission to receive communion. “We urge all those who will participate in the second Synod in October 2015 to make a clear and firm proclamation of the Church’s unchanging moral teaching, so that confusion may be removed, and faith confirmed,” they wrote, re-stating their “unwavering fidelity to the traditional doctrines regarding marriage and the true meaning of human sexuality, founded on the Word of God and taught by the Church’s Magisterium for two millennia.” They requested the “upholding the Church’s traditional discipline regarding the reception of the sacraments, and that doctrine and practice remain firmly and inseparably in harmony.” (H/T DICI.)

And so we see that once you escape the stifling oppression of the USCCB’s dictatorship of the Catholic media, there actually is a bit of intelligent, objective reporting out there. But for now, we need to do all we can to support good blogs, like eponymous flower, harvesting the fruit and Catholic newspapers like Catholic Family News and The Remnant, because they are the sole voice of sanity in an increasingly disoriented world.

We have 25 weeks until the Synod Against the Family and the Eucharist, So please:

Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!

“Come Down From the Cross!”

My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?
My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?

“And they that passed by, blasphemed Him, wagging their heads,  And saying: ‘Vah, Thou that destroyest the temple of God, and in three days dost rebuild it: save Thy own self: if Thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.’ In like manner also the chief priests, with the scribes and ancients, mocking, said: ‘He saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He be the king of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him. He trusted in God; let Him now deliver Him if He will have Him; for He said: I am the Son of God.’ ” (Matt. 27, 39-42)

In the great spiritual classic, The Passion of Jesus and Its Hidden Meaning, Father James Groenings, S. J. teaches us that the mocking words with which the scribes and pharisees attacked Christ during His passion are the same words and attitudes modern man  uses to deride the saving message of Christ’s cross. Father Groenings remarks, “To encourage the Redeemer to descend from the cross, they sneeringly add the promise, ‘And we will believe Him’. … What wretched hypocrisy and lying!”

Remarking that the sermon of the cross is to the modern world a foolish scandal, Father Groenings points out that “There might perhaps be no objection to believing in Christ if only He would descend from the cross, if only He would cease to preach, from this pulpit (of the cross) the crucifixion of the flesh and of vicious inclinations. … One would, with pleasure even, tread the path of virtue and of perfection if only Christ would descend from the cross, that is, if the practice of virtue were possible without continued mortification and self-denial.”   St. Gregory the Great assures us that, “It was a greater deed to destroy death through the Resurrection than to preserve life by descending from the cross.” But that point of view is utterly rejected by modernism, which places material comfort and the esteem of the world above all else.

The crucifixion is a scandal to modernism and this has never been so apparent as today, with Pope Francis’ blasphemous “Way of the Cross” which proposes to place superficial inanities on the lips of Our Savior as He trod the Way of the Cross, and then uses the  Eleventh Station, “Jesus Is Nailed to the Cross”, as a pretext to demand the abolition of the death penalty. To juxtapose the sacrificial death of Our Lord Jesus Christ with the execution of murderers is so offensive, and even more so by the supposed Vicar of Christ. But it is totally understandable with the renewed emphasis on stripping from the faith all references to sin, judgement, and hell. If the modern church wants to separate mercy from justice — and it definitely does! — then the crucifixion of Christ becomes just as much a scandal as it was to the pharisees of Christ’s time.

The Faith teaches us that sin is the greatest evil, because it separates us from God. But modernism, in contrast, believes suffering to be the greatest evil and relativizes sin away, thus negating the need for the crucifixion. Indeed, to Pope Francis, the only sinners worthy of condemnation are the faithful Catholics who will not get on board with his whole mercy and tolerance schtick. But oddly enough, that tolerance and mercy only gets extended to those outside the faith, those who have chosen to thumb their noses at the 2,000 year old dogmas and practices of the faith such as the proscription against fornication, adultery and sodomy. Now, if we are to be accepted by our hierarchy as merciful, loving Catholics, we must ignore the crucifixion, which is an anachronism since we are taught by Cardinal Kasper and his ilk that sodomites have gifts to offer us, and we should not only welcome them into our churches, we should invite them to partake of the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of the unblemished Lamb Who gave His life to free us from sin.

How can this be? I have wondered at this for some time, but it was not until I read the text of Pope Francis’s Way of the Cross that I realized, this can only happen because these people, Bergoglio and Kasper, Marx and Forte and the rest, have lost their faith. The Bergoglio Way of the Cross shows no evidence of the Catholic Faith that we all knew and accepted prior to Vatican II. Please follow the link and read for yourself how pathetic and asinine this “Way of the Cross” is. Then pray for this poor Pope that he open his heart to the Holy Ghost and allow God to bring him to the faith, the one faith by which alone we are saved. 

Pray the Rosary and confound the devil!

Mario Palmaro Died One Year Ago

In memory of the incomparable Mario Palmaro, who died March 9, 2014, here is a classic article written by Palmaro and Gnocchi. It pretty much sums up what is so noxious about this most humble pope’s shameless seeking after the applause of the crowds of unbelievers. The article first appeared in Il Foglio and was reprinted in Rorate Caeil.

cop Mario Palmaro scritte mod.indd

The Field Hospital of Twitter Followers

Alessandro Gnocchi

Mario Palmaro

 It is not necessary to be that old to have an idea of what a Cronicon was and, perhaps, also to have glanced at one. It was the diary in which every priest wrote down the noteworthy events of the parish of whose cure he had been entrusted. Some of them shone like literary jewels, because the old priests, after finishing the breviary, did not have to watch TV or be on Facebook or Twitter. They prayed, they studied, they read, and if they had a talent to write, they used it in the daily chronicles of their flock. In any case, each in his own way, handed down a keepsake of the memorable events in their parish, among which they never missed noting how many communions they had distributed.

Today, instead, one counts the number of followers on Twitter. But it is one thing to count the communions of the flock that one knows sheep by sheep. It is another thing to count the clicks of an unknown world. It is one thing to unite oneself to the Mystical Body of Christ feeding bodily of his Body and Blood, and another thing to feel that one is part of a community without the necessity to show one’s own body.

The emphasis on ten million followers reached on Twitter by Pope Francis does not contribute to holding the two levels of communication as separate. On the contrary, it results in substituting  the concept of conversion for the concept of success, the one thing that the world is able to understand and to promote. The means of communication that are naturally worldly, are not able to permit one to deal with things that involve hard work like a radical change of life. Everything must be easy and within everyone’s reach: if the Catholic Church wants to be there it must become a phenomenon that is able to be dealt with like all the others. The pax mediatica does not extend beyond the confines and the laws of the media-sphere.

But the idea that for the Catholic it is permitted to have a peaceful rapport with the world is an illusion that one cannot even define as charitable. It is founded on the conviction that there would be no hostility from the world in its confrontations with Christ. Even more, the world on its own would listen to the proclamation of the Gospel that, up to today, the inadequacy of the Church and her Tradition had rendered impossible. This misunderstanding rises from the overshoot of the classical distinction of two concepts of the world that live together in all the Gospels and in the Tradition. There is one world that is the object of the love of God that should by loved by the Christian. But there is also the word “world” used by Christ to refer to the kingdom of the Enemy that has in the rebellious angel its undisputed prince. A Catholicism that forgets this nature of the world is no longer, strictly speaking, a true Catholicism. It becomes a religion of “good will”, destined to be dissolved on TV in an painless way, perfect for one evening performance with high ratings.

“The dialogue of the Church with the world of which today we hear so much talk”, wrote the Dominican Roger Thomas Calmel in 1967, “can never be that of two people speaking to each other on a plane of parity, in whatever way one thinks of the world. The first things that are striking in the encounter between the Church and the world is the transcendence of the Church and her irreducibility….The result of this is that the encounter between the Church and the world can never be like two friendly companions who begin a dialogue as equals, on a summer night, under the trees in a public garden. The only authentic and saving encounter of the Church with the world is that of the Confessors without stain, of the inflexible Doctors, of the faithful Virgins and of the invincible Martyrs, covered in the red tunic colored by the blood of the Lamb….We must separate ourselves from the world when we are not able to do as the world wishes without offending Christ.”

These are words that sound strange, especially if one is preparing to fit out a field hospital where one does not deal with subtleties. But, even when one treats someone with first aid, even more if one does it for souls, it is necessary to pay attention to the place in which one raises the camp tents. Not all of the campgrounds are equal. Concerning this the Thomist doctrine of the Three Cities comes to our aid. There is the city of God, the Church, essentially supernatural, without sin although made up of sinners. Her fundamental task is to proclaim the Gospel, to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice, to save souls. Obviously this does not mean that the Church not does not bring benefit to the building of civilization, and therefore there is no opposition between the essential and primary mission of the Church, the salus animarum, and the promotion of a more human civilization.

The second is the city of Satan, made up of the three concupiscences that man carries within himself and from the action of Satan. This city is in perpetual development, and works again and again without pause its assaults on two different levels. Above all, on the religious level, in the most intimate essence of man, through its false priests and its false dogmas. And then on the level of political society, where it dedicates itself to shape customs, to change laws, to transform the authority that governs citizens.

Finally, there is the human city, in which cultures and civilizations succeed one another as they unwind through the ages. This city has organization, laws, customs, and authority, all of which are better or worse according to the influence exercised by the other two cities. The city of men enters constantly into the sphere of attraction of the two supreme cities, suffering the imperious advance of the prince of this world. Nevertheless, the city of Satan never manages to impose itself in the whole city of man. In some little, out of the way church there will be always be a priest who celebrates the Mass in a holy way; in a little apartment a solitary old woman with unshakeable faith will say the Rosary; in a hidden corner of a House of Divine Providence a Sister will look after a baby considered by all as having no worth. Even when all seems lost, the Church, the City of God, continues to radiate its light on the City of Man.

A Catholic raised in the shade of this doctrine, simple and efficacious, would have to know that the persecution of the world in confrontations with the Church is unjust, but understandable. In fact, it is impossible for an act of making peace to come about. It would not be other than by an incessant, dramatic and universal request to conform oneself to the man of the Cross: an unpardonable affront and an incomprehensible request for the prideful modern world.

But, if even this continues to be the nature of the Church, one cannot say that the task has been carried out efficaciously. There is at least a well grounded fear that the number of followers on Twitter is inversely proportional to the strength and the clarity of the message. A serious preaching on the Last Things, a threatening description of a Hell that is anything but empty, the painful highway that passes through the narrow gate, the tartness of dogma, the rigor of reason: these do not seem to be material for many clicks of approval. Catholics, believing or not believing, prefer by far to play around with a “happy” idea of mercy, almost as if everyone could continue to be as one is, and to do what one does without ever having to give an account for one’s acts. A similar conception of mercy is able to reheat the heart of a don Rodrigo, certainly not the heart of the Innominato. And it is certainly more Tweetable than that, for example, which Padre Pio used to say: “I have more fear of the mercy of God than his justice. The justice of God is well known; one knows what are its laws that govern it, and, if one sins against and offends the divine justice, one can make an appeal to mercy, but if one abuses mercy, to whom does one have recourse?” And yet, one cannot say that Padre Pio did not have a large following. But his success walked along paths different from the paths of the Internet. Who walks with the one who is suffering learns how to suffer; who goes along with a blogger learns how to blog.

The temptation of an easy Christianity, without work and without sacrifice, seems made to measure for men who have been bred, brought up in a world in which even the other pillar of formation, the school, for ten years has been undermined…..

The demolition of the little platform on which stood the teacher’s desk has ended up distorting the normal relationship between the teacher and the student. The “tu” substituted for the “Lei” has made of the teacher a simple peer to the learner. The downgrading of formal language in every day speech has brought about a change in the contents of what is taught. The idea that the instruction and education at an early age of every student was already sufficient has led to the conviction that it is enough as it is and to the negation of any necessity to improve a student’s education.

The four axes along which moved the devastation of the school are replicated in the form, content and the method by which the Catholic liturgy was reformed. It is enough to think of the destruction of the altar rails and the transfer of the altars into the nave in the form of a simple table, the priest turned to the people instead of turned to God as the sort of a simple presider of an assembly, the repudiation of the Latin language for that of the vernacular, the irruption of the so-called theology of the Pascal Mystery that treats every man as definitively saved, sufficient in itself and therefore in the condition to not have to adore God, but to celebrate the feast itself. Perhaps it is not by chance if, at the origin of the revolution in school education, we find a priest.

In a world, as much in civil as in religious life, that languishes because of the lack of sacrifice and reverence, it is necessary to restore Someone and Something to sacrifice oneself for and to revere. Benedict XVI had tried to do this by restoring the Cross at the center of the altar and Communion received kneeling and on the tongue. This was not a scene at a field hospital, but touched directly souls because it was the fruit of the knowledge that man is a rational, and therefore liturgical, creature. Man is a creature that, thanks to the gestures and words given as a gift, and therefore irreformable, is able to elevate himself towards God and escape from the demonic. In the “Sayings of the Desert Fathers”, they explain how the devil does not have the capacity to know the thoughts of men because he is of a different nature, but that he can guess at their thoughts by the movements of their bodies. From this comes the importance of bodily comportment and the veneration that Catholicism has always nourished for the one who makes perfect gestures creating a ring of inviolable purity and performing an exorcism intended for the one who stands near him.

All of this demands hard work, demands discipline and ascetical practices, demands that one stand close to the Cross and fulfill divine justice cooperating with the passion of Christ. This arises from what exists in the life of man in its most dramatic form: sin, understood first as an offense to God and only then as an injury to creatures. But if, as the theology dominant today teaches, man is saved due to the sole fact that he is in the world, if sin is reduced to a social act, if it is not necessary to bring reason into line with a truth wrapped in mystery, the hard work no longer makes sense.

After such a change in its horizon, the liturgy, culmen et fons of the Christian life, assumes a purely social value, it speaks of man to man, and it is transformed into a social matter. It is not by chance that today the homilies of the Pope are collected and transmitted with an ardor perhaps excessive while his celebrations of Mass slide into second place. This is a typical modern tic. While there was a time when the splendor of the liturgy made one see a sermon, however brief, as a somewhat bothersome interruption, today the accent placed on the sermon makes one feel as if any claim that the liturgy may make is somehow intrusive.

The nakedness of the discourse has the upper hand over the veil of the liturgy. But the sermon, on its own, just because it is naked, is not capable of gathering what is essential. The condition of the man who has lost the state of grace with the sin of Adam renders him unfit for such a task. Man, by himself, is no longer able to perceive the ultimate meaning of things and for this reason the liturgy, until it surrendered to the charms of enlightenment, always assisted him, re-clothing the material matter that he has before his eyes. The veiling becomes in this way the visible sign of the nimbus of grace and holiness, become visible to the eyes of man. The purpose of veiling is not to hide an object from sight to make it a secret. The material aspect of things that are veiled is recognized, but alone does not say anything about their ulterior nature. To say it is instead the veil that covers them. And, if the veil is parted and in the same way the other veils are parted that are superimposed, there is one more veil that one encounters: The Host itself, as one popular Eucharistic hymn sings: “under the veils that the grains of wheat make up”.

Perhaps it is this splendor, humanly useless, that is what is urgently needed in a world that has stopped using its intelligence the day on which it lost its sense of shame.”

[First published in Il Foglio. Translated by Fr. Richard G. Cipolla]

Readers may remember that Palmaro and his writing partner and dear friend, Alessandro Gnocchi were fired from Radio Maria Italy at the instigation of the Vatican after they criticized Pope Francis. Palmaro’s friend and writing partner, Alessandro Gnocchi has compiled his writings into a book, “Il Buon Seme Forirà”, (The Good Seed will Bear Good Fruit) which is available at present only in Italian. (Thanks to Eponymous Flower blog).

Immaculate Heart of Mary pray for us all now and at the hour of our death!

The Message of Fatima – 2015

Please note, this post has been updated since Father Gruner’s death.

The following post has been reposted from time to time due to its relevance.  If you find it useful, please send it along to others who might benefit. Thank you!

The oldest of the shepherd children of Fatima, Lucia explained the message of Fatima to Father Fuentes years later:

Father, the Most Holy Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world, but She made me understand this for three reasons.”

Sister Lucia of Fatima at Dorothean Convent, 1945
Sister Lucia of Fatima at Dorothean Convent, 1945

“The first reason is because She told me that the devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Virgin. And a decisive battle is the final battle where one side will be victorious and the other side will suffer defeat. Also, from now on we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the devil. There is no other possibility.

“The second reason is because She said to my cousins as well as to myself, that God is giving two last remedies to the world. These are the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of MaryThese are the last two remedies which signify that there will be no others.”

“The third reason is because in the plans of Divine Providence, God always, before He is about to chastise the world, exhausts all other remedies. Now, when He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever, then as we say in our imperfect manner of speaking, He offers us with certain fear the last means of salvation, His Most Holy Mother. It is with certain fear because if you despise and repulse this ultimate means, we will not have any more forgiveness from Heaven, because we will have committed a sin which the Gospel calls the sin against the Holy Ghost. This sin consists of openly rejecting, with full knowledge and consent, the salvation which He offers. Let us remember that Jesus Christ is a very good Son and that He does not permit that we offend and despise His Most Holy Mother. … Our Lord Jesus Christ has always defended the honor of His Mother.”

“Look, Father, the Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary, to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, whether temporal or above all spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families, of the families of the world, or of the religious communities, or even of the life of peoples and nations, that cannot be solved by the Rosary. There is no problem, I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary. With the Holy Rosary we will save ourselves, we will sanctify ourselves, we will console Our Lord and obtain the salvation of many souls.”

“Finally, devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, Our Most Holy Mother, consists in considering Her as the seat of mercy, of goodness and of pardon, and as the certain door by which we are to enter Heaven.”

The message of Fatima is then that we are now in a life or death struggle, even though most people are oblivious. As Sister Lucia warns us, “we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the devil. There is no other possibility.Where do you stand?

The purpose of this blog is to call Catholics to return to Fatima. Re-examine the message given to us by the Blessed Virgin Mary. Remove the blinders that are making you think that Fatima was “a long time ago, and is no longer relevant”.

Fatima’s message is more relevant today than it ever was. When Pope John XXIII refused to release the message that Our Lady commanded be released in the year 1960, the world experienced a spiritual shock: the Vicar of Christ on earth refusing to obey the Mother of Christ. Never before in history has such a thing happened.

Continue reading “The Message of Fatima – 2015”

Holiness, a Mark of the True Church

The Synod continues and Pope Francis’s revolution continues apace, and so it goes. More than ever before prayer and penance are needed!

As the Synod unfolds, a few things come to mind. On another blog in a discussion on the possibility of Bergoglio changing Church teaching, a commenter remarked :

Can Bergoglio change Church teaching? The following analogy may provide a useful approach to answering this question.

In 1967, the British Parliament decriminalized buggery, but the legislation applied to England and Wales only, not Scotland. In Scotland, meanwhile, the Lord Advocate (roughly equivalent to the Attorney General) had instructed that there should be no prosecutions for buggery. The question is: did the Lord Advocate’s instruction change the law in Scotland – even though it was not legislation?

The answer to this question depends on the definition of “law”, about which there is no universal agreement. If, however, you take legal philosopher John Austin’s definition – “the command of a sovereign, backed by the threat of a sanction” – then the answer would of course be, “Yes”. The Lord Advocate had removed the threat of a sanction.

By removing the threat of a sanction, therefore, Bergoglio would be changing Church teaching, at least on this interpretation.

As a postscript to the above, the Catholic Encyclopedia makes the following remark under “Sanctity (Mark of the Church)”. A mark of the Church, of course, is a means by which the true Church is objectively identified:
“Her vindication of the indissolubility of marriage in the face of a licentious world affords the most conspicuous instance of this. She alone maintains in its integrity her Master’s teaching on marriage.”

When reading that I was so overwhelmed with nostalgia! The above quote about the sanctity of the Church from the Catholic Encyclopedia speaks volumes to what we have lost.

The true Church is Holy, that is how we know that she is the true Church. In today’s confusion, many are disheartened about the perceived lack of holiness in the Church. It distresses them to hear that pope Bergoglio has dismissed homosexuality flippantly, that he has called faithful Catholics pelagians and hardheaded and accused them of “obsessing” over abortion, contraception and sodomy (although he refuses to call it by its correct name).

In refusing to judge homosexuals, Pope Francis is refusing to follow Christ, Whose priest and Vicar he is supposed to be. This is a true lack of charity, because the sinner needs the Gospel preached, needs the truth to be told and needs to have their sins forgiven. The Church’s constant teaching all these years is that sodomy is a sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance. And just think of the actively homosexual priests who are not only engaging in such a horrendous mortal sin, but are also breaking their solemn vow of chastity and to compound matters, they celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass unworthily, blaspheming Our Lord and Savior and scandalizing His flock.

To all those who are confused and disheartened over the state of the Church today, Be of good heart, look for the holiness. That is where our sins are forgiven. That is where our souls are healed. Many Catholics today are misled into thinking that the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are not able to administer the sacraments, that their Masses are not valid and so on. Often, self-styled experts presume to pass judgement on those of us who attend SSPX Chapels, decreeing that we are schismatics. To them I say, look at the signs — where do you find holiness? where do you find fidelity to the unchanging dogma and tradition of the Faith?

Can your sins be forgiven if the only sin your priest believes in is the sin of intolerance? Can you find nourishment and peace for your soul in an environment that places social justice in place of total devotion to Jesus Christ, His Passion, Death and Resurrection? Hell is a reality, Jesus spoke of it often, yet the modernist Church ignores this reality.

It’s a shame that Pope Francis will not honestly and courageously confront the sins that shackle people today – he misses the opportunity to free them of their sins. His modernism blinds him to the needs of sinners and causes him to eschew ‘judgmentalism’. Our Lord’s words, “Be of good heart, son, your sins are forgiven you” is a beautiful encouragement for all of us today. Don’t be confused by the so-called canon law experts, who are like the pharisees of Jesus time. They parse the canon law, ignoring the constant teaching of the Church’s traditional magisterium. They rejected Him then, and they war against the small remnant of the Church that is sustaining the Faith today. Seek out the holiness, seek the priest that will preach — and live! — the true word of God. If he doesn’t preach Jesus crucified, he is not true to the Faith, and not holy either..

It is said that God only gives us the quality of priests we deserve, so we must strive to deserve better. To this end, let’s renew our rosaries and our fasting. If we do this thing right, we may all become lean, mean praying machines! (And spiritual warriors par excellence!)

Our Lady of Fatima pray for us!

O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us now and at the hour of our death!

~ posted by evensong ~



NOTE: Dr. Roberto de Mattei has correctly explained this situation and I have copied his explanation in the post One Popefrom September 16, 2014. There is also an updated post on May 25, 2016 which includes a later explanation from Dr. de Mattei, “The Fog of War”

Although I have kept this old post online for reference sake, Dr. de Mattei’s explanations in the above 2 posts is the best explanation of a totally unacceptable situation brought on by two modernists, Ratzinger and Bergoglio, both of whom have harmed the Church greatly.

As time goes on, more and more knowledgeable writers are concluding that there are serious problems with the “diarchy” resulting from having not one, but two “bishops in white” in residence at the Vatican. Robert Siscoe’s excellent article for The Remnant expresses it perfectly and is here presented in its entirety. (The bolded portion is added) If you don’t already subscribe to The Remnant, please consider it. Together with Catholic Family News, they are indispensable to keep informed. Here goes:

The two popes ?
Two Popes?

In a Papal “Diarchy”, Which Half Is Infallible?  Continue reading “Abomination”