Sunday, January 26, 2014

Satan Has United Them

 This past week, January 18-25, 2014, has been the "International Week of Prayer for Christian Unity" in the Vatican II sect, promoted by the U.S. Conference of "Catholic Bishops." The theme of this monstrosity is "Has Christ Divided Us?" The upshot in Modernist theology is that since we're all part of the "Church of Christ" in one degree of participation or another, why  are we kept apart by "our common faith in Christ" from full participation, one and all? The Vatican II sect bishops' website has a list of resources available including:
  • Suggestions for observing the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity
  • Thematic poster art, music, and prayer cards (English/Spanish)
  • Scripture readings, commentaries and questions for reflection
  • Ecumenical prayer service model
  • Historical and contextual information

  •  The last part is interesting. When you understand the historical context, you realize it's incompatible with authentic Church teaching and hence heretical. Begun originally as the “Octave of Christian Unity” with the approval of Pope St. Pius X, this week-long observance had as its non-ecumenical intention of bringing back into the fold of the Catholic Church all schismatics and heretics (e.g, the Orthodox and Protestants). Now, it's about forgetting dogma and uniting in "LCD religion" (that's least common denomination heavy on feeling good about the "Lord Jesus" and absent any idea that to be Christian means to belong to His One True Church and accept Her teachings).

     Compare what Antipope Francis had to say with the Instruction of the Holy Office On The "Ecumenical Movement" under Pope Pius XII in 1949.

    Antipope Francis:
    "As we find ourselves in his presence, we realize all the more that we may not regard divisions in the Church as something natural, inevitable in any form of human association. Our divisions wound Christ’s body, they impair the witness which we are called to give to him before the world. The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, appealing to the text of Saint Paul which we have reflected on, significantly states: “Christ the Lord founded one Church and one Church only. However, many Christian communities present themselves to people as the true inheritance of Jesus Christ; all indeed profess to be followers of the Lord but they differ in outlook and go their different ways, as if Christ were divided”. And the Council continues: “Such division openly contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world, and damages the sacred cause of preaching the Gospel to every creature” (Unitatis Redintegratio, 1).

    Christ, dear friends, cannot be divided! This conviction must sustain and encourage us to persevere with humility and trust on the way to the restoration of full visible unity among all believers in Christ. Tonight I think of the work of two great Popes: Blessed John XXIII and Blessed John Paul II. In the course of their own lives, both came to realize the urgency of the cause of unity and, once elected to the See of Peter, they guided the entire Catholic flock decisively on the paths of ecumenism. Pope John blazed new trails which earlier would have been almost unthinkable. Pope John Paul held up ecumenical dialogue as an ordinary and indispensable aspect of the life of each Particular Church. With them, I think too of Pope Paul VI, another great promoter of dialogue; in these very days we are commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of his historic embrace with the Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople.

    The work of these, my predecessors, enabled ecumenical dialogue to become an essential dimension of the ministry of the Bishop of Rome, so that today the Petrine ministry cannot be fully understood without this openness to dialogue with all believers in Christ. We can say also that the journey of ecumenism has allowed us to come to a deeper understanding of the ministry of the Successor of Peter, and we must be confident that it will continue to do so in the future. As we look with gratitude to the progress which the Lord has enabled us to make, and without ignoring the difficulties which ecumenical dialogue is presently experiencing, let us all pray that we may put on the mind of Christ and thus progress towards the unity which he wills."

    Got that folks?  Our divisions "wound Christ's Body?" The Church is a perfect society and She is not at all harmed by those who leave through schism and heresy. It is they that go on the way of perdition! The "Bishop of Rome" (glad he's honest enough not to call himself the pope!) is supposed to be "open to dialogue" and you'll never hear an exhortation to join the One True Church as the ONLY means of unity! Now compare the Holy Office in 1949:

    "Also they (who seek the reunion of heretics and schismatics with the Church) must restrain that dangerous manner of speaking which generates false opinions and fallacious hopes incapable of realization; for example, to the effect that the teachings of the Encyclicals of the Roman Pontiffs on the return of dissidents to the Church, on the constitution of the Church, on the Mystical Body of Christ, should not be given too much importance seeing that they are not all matters of faith, or, what is worse, that in matters of dogma even the Catholic Church has not yet attained the fullness of Christ, but can still be perfected from outside. They shall take particular care and shall firmly insist that, in going over the history of the Reformation and the Reformers the defects of Catholics be not so exaggerated and the faults of the Reformers be so dissimulated, or that things which are rather accidental be not so emphasized, that what is most essential, namely the defection from the Catholic faith, be scarcely any longer seen or felt. Finally, they shall take precautions lest, through an excessive and false external activity, or through imprudence and an excited manner of proceeding, the end in view be rather harmed than served.

    Therefore the whole and entire Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained: by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding the nature and way of justification, the constitution of the Church, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ. It should be made clear to them that, in returning to the Church, they will lose nothing of that good which by the grace of God has hitherto been implanted in them, but that it will rather be supplemented and completed by their return. However, one should not speak of this in such a way that they will imagine that in returning to the Church they are bringing to it something substantial which it has hitherto lacked. It will be necessary to say these things clearly and openly, first because it is the truth that they themselves are seeking, and moreover because outside the truth no true union can ever be attained. (Emphasis mine).

    Can anything be further apart than the Roman Catholicism espoused by Pope Pius XII, and the Modernism of Antipope Francis? Christ cannot divide us in the One True Church, but Satan can unite those in the Antipope's ecumenical monster---"Frankenchurch." God help us.

    Sunday, January 19, 2014

    SSPX: A Little Modernism Goes A Long Way Towards Hell

     Pity the "recognize and resist" members of the Society of St. Pius X. When you recognize an apostate as "pope," and want to become part of its One World Church someday, you begin to breath in the poisonous air of Modernism which kills all it infects. After all, if Jorge Bergoglio is really the pope, what basis do you have for deciding the wheat from the chaff? You must submit to the Roman Pontiff, not act as some uber-Magisterium that can decide when he's right and when he is wrong. Case in point: I reproduce below an open letter to the Superior General of the SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay about the Modernism that is infecting the Society in India. It involves publication by SSPX priests called (I kid you NOT) "The Flying Squirrel" (with apologies, I suppose, to fans of the old "Bullwinkle" cartoon). I will comment at the end. (For brevity, I have omitted footnotes and reference to exact page numbers in The Flying Squirrel.)

    Open Letter to Bishop Fellay, Superior

    General, SSPX
    Feast of St. Hilary of Poitiers

    Regarding your SSPX India publication called “The Flying Squirrel”


    An anonymous letter from the Catholics at

    Your Excellency:

    We are writing about your Society’s India publication called “The Flying Squirrel”.
    You are responsible before God for what goes on in your Society. Although you do not read all SSPX publications before they are distributed, you have the responsibility and power to choose who writes them. You have the responsibility and power to publicly correct scandals and publicly punish those committing them.

    Although we think it is highly unlikely you will ever correct the public scandal

    recently caused in most English-speaking countries by The Flying Squirrel, here is your chance. Your Society’s Flying Squirrel has been circulating on several continents.

    Based on the past, we doubt you will publicly correct the mortally sinful scandals in

    your Society’s Flying Squirrel, because you have yourself been leading your Society into the liberalism of which the Flying Squirrel is merely a manifestation.

    First of all, why does your Society’s new publication adopt the name, “The Flying Squirrel”? Did your Society run out of saints and Catholic symbols (like the Cross), after which you could name this periodical? Until recently, your Society’s India

    publication was called the Salve Regina. No longer. Does the new
    SSPX think that a Catholic name lacks the “freshness” and contemporary “feel” evoked by an irrational animal?

    On pages 2-3, your Society’s Flying Squirrel publishes a complete sermon of Pope Francis. Why is that? Could your Society find nothing more edifying and orthodox than this? Could your Society find nothing from any source, which was not tainted by the pope’s humanism and liberalism?
    Using conciliar terminology, Pope Francis refers to the “Eucharist” he is

    celebrating, which is the new mass, of course
    . Your Society makes no comment about these scandals and evils.
    Pope Francis’ sermon is empty, conciliar rhetoric – certainly nothing which could
    help any traditional Catholic. Yet the Flying Squirrel
    publishes it. The pope urges that Christ be the “center” but never says the center of what. He does say, though, that we should take “paths of searching” and “creative paths” which are “going to
    the outskirts”, but not take “isolated paths”.

    The pope preaches human service. This fits with his social worker agenda.

    . The pope preaches letting ourselves be “conquered” by Christ. But, he explains, this
    means “to always reach out to those in front of me”. This fits well with the pope’s continual themes of naturalism, humanism and social welfare. For example, Pope Francis says that: “The most serious of the evils that afflict the world these days are

    youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old.” Your Society’s
    Flying Squirrel shows its solidarity with the pope’s humanism, by its masthead motto: “Love brotherhood”.

    Your Society’s publication of Pope Francis’ sermon includes the pope’s praise of Fr.
    Pedro Arrupe, the heretical advocate of liberation theology.
    With the pope’s inexhaustible series of grave scandals and errors, how can you say (as you do) regarding Pope Francis, that it is “difficult to arrive at a judgment about his words”?
    Besides Pope Francis’ sermon, your Society’s Flying Squirrel contains a two-page “meditation” from the thoroughly-conciliar so-called “Catholic”, Kathleen Finley.
     This “meditation” begins by using what it calls a “centering”
    This is syncretism and ecumenism! The SSPX is here promoting the vocabulary of yoga, eastern paganism and the New Age!
    The “meditation” which the SSPX is promoting here, is directed generically to the “Creator”, so as to offend no one. The request made to the Creator, is to “experience” Him. This experiential religion is the heresy of immantism and is rank Modernism. See, Pascendi, St. Pius X, §14.
    In this “meditation”, there is no kneeling before a Catholic holy image. Instead the reader is told to sit near a door (to be examined) and focus on a lighted candle. As the “meditation” continues, it is simply an exercise in naturalism, humanism,
    careful attention to everyday sensations, and appreciation of what mankind has accomplished. The reader is told to notice the texture of the door, the details of the doorknob, and appreciate the work of man. The “meditation” then quotes several passages from the heretical, protestantized
    New Revised Standard Version
    of the Bible. At this point, the “meditation” enters its second phase, considering how doors are a symbol of our lack of inclusiveness
    and lack of openness to others. Finley asks the reader: “Do you want to ‘open the door’ a bit further to God [and] … anyone else?”

    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains many other scandalous articles. For
    example, it includes an article promoting the humanist, naturalistic activities of Opus Dei members, who declare they were inspired by Pope Francis and the founder of Opus Dei. Their task was to teach boys to play soccer and use computers. As one Opus Dei member explained: “Seeing children of different religions play
    together is something very special and a sign of a bright future”. 

    Your Excellency, why doesn’t your Society spend more time condemning the errors of heretics and pagans, and reminding readers there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, instead of promoting Opus Dei’s works of interreligious harmony?

    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel contains a naturalistic, politically correct article about gender discrimination and the human rights violations of infanticide against baby girls.  This article relies on analysis by the “director of a Jesuit centre for human rights” and is full of jargon such as the condemnation of India’s “patriarchal outlook”. The article laments that women do not often “become professionals or reach important positions”.


    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains an article about India’s lack of religious freedom, resulting in the persecution of a “Pentecostal” minister for attempting to “convert” a woman to join his (heretical) sect.  This article misleadingly makes it look as if religious liberty for heretics is a good thing, whereas it is an error of Vatican II.

    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains an article rejoicing that the conciliar church in India now has a new radio station, through which it can promote its conciliar errors.
    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains an article promoting a conciliar cardinal who erected a statue of Mary depicted in Indian attire. The article characterizes this statue as a “masterpiece of inculturation”. This cardinal is accused of seeking converts for the Catholic Church and he denies this accusation. 
    The article then adds the commentary of a conciliar priest-sociologist who defends the Catholic Church as a protector of the human rights of indigenous people. Lastly,the article says that although Indians have different religions, they are unified by culture.
    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains an article promoting the conciliar bishops of India for joining with government and secular groups to give humanitarian aid to Hindu pilgrims.

    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel
    contains an article about population control and the human rights violation of forced sterilizations.  There is no mention of the
    laws of God or the teaching of the Catholic Church, in this article concerning many millions of abortions, sterilizations and ubiquitous artificial contraception.

    Your Society’s Flying Squirrel contains an article about the lack of religious freedom and toleration in India. It contrasts the views of a Hindu leader, with the pluralistic opinions of the president of the “Global Council of Indian Christians”.

    Your Excellency, your Society’s Flying Squirrel gives the impression that the issues it treats are important – although they are not – compared to what it should be talking about, e.g., condemning heresy, making converts, preaching the Social
    Kingship of Christ and the Catholic Faith! The Flying Squirrel
    is a grave public and international scandal! Such scandals are not sufficiently corrected except by strong, public measures made known in every place to which the scandal itself

    Your liberalism is manifest in your choice of major superiors
    Based on your track record, we think that your most likely reaction to the Flying
    will be to give a promotion to India’s SSPX prior (who is responsible for this publication) making him an SSPX major superior. The ilk of your major superiors is clear. With very few (and decreasing) exceptions,they actively promote error and liberalism. To take just one example: your SSPX district superior for South America, Fr. Christian Bouchacourt, recently stated publicly: “The Jewish people did not commit deicide.”
    Fr. Bouchacourt’s statement is a conciliar error which contradicts infallible Apostolic Tradition and the continual teaching of the Fathers, Doctors, Popes and
    other sacred writers. For example, St. Thomas Aquinas taught: “The Jews therefore sinned, as crucifiers not only of the Man-Christ, but also as of God.” (‘et ideo Judaei peccaverunt, non solum hominis Christi, sed tamquam Dei crucifixores.’). Summa Theologica, IIIa, Q.47, a.5 ad3.

    Fr. Bouchacourt’s statement is plainly false for the same reason that our Lady is
    the Mother of God, viz ., she is the Mother of God because she is the mother (in His humanity) of a Person Who is God. The Jews committed deicide because they killed (in His humanity) a Person Who is God. Thus, they are God-killers – they committed deicide.
    One final thought
    The Flying Squirrel and the rest of the new SSPX remind us of some recent corporate history in the automobile business. GM (the large auto maker) owns the brand name, Oldsmobile. GM felt that the world had left behind the Oldsmobile brand. GM felt Oldsmobile’s only chance of survival was to update the brand to make it more contemporary, more youthful and more appealing to modern tastes.
    So GM updated Oldsmobile and heavily advertised its rebranding. The tag line of
    these ads was: “This is not your father’s Oldsmobile!”
    Your Excellency, Archbishop Lefebvre is your “father”, isn’t he? Because of your Society’s liberal makeover and rebranding, it seems to us that you should consider using the tag line: “This is not your father’s Society!”

    Incidentally, Oldsmobile went out of existence not many years after departing from its corporate “traditions”.
    Wow! This is "Traditional"? The writers of the letter retain the Catholic Faith, but fail to see that Antipope Francis has abandoned it. The cause of the errors, heresies and scandals is the failure to reject him wholesale and give up any/all ideas of being engulfed and destroyed by the Vatican II sect. Hopefully, the writers will, like a flying squirrel, leap out of the SSPX and its mad desire to become part of Antipope Francis, and join True Traditionalists in sedevacantism. Anyone who would stay in such an environment would have to be nuts---the perfect subjects to be consumed by the SSPX's Flying Squirrel.





























































































    Sunday, January 12, 2014

    A Poor Excuse

     Antipope Francis is a sly Modernist who seeks to bypass the important dogmatic and moral matters, all in the name of "having a poor church (sic) for the poor." Even as he elevated some of his clergy to "cardinals," Frankie harps on "the needs of the poor." And why not? This perfectly appeals to modern man's sensibilities. They like the idea of making sandwiches for the needy without getting bogged down by "small minded rules" that require you to deny unnatural lust and protect unborn human life.

     What is the teaching of the One True Church on the poor.....and the wealthy? It's not the recycled Marxism of Frankie. Below is a brief outline of the Church's teaching:

    The Poor
    Poverty is the state of being destitute of material wealth. Poverty may be absolute or relative. Absolute poverty is the state of those who are lacking temporal goods and require aid from others. These are the indigent, properly so called. Relative poverty is the condition of those who have no superfluous goods, but only the means to get by in life. These are the "working class poor."
    Poverty, both absolute and relative, may be involuntary or voluntary.  Involuntary poverty is when it is due to extrinsic conditions beyond the control of the person. Voluntary poverty is due to the surrender of temporal goods, as in the case of someone who takes a vow of poverty.
    The condition of poverty is of counsel not precept. Poverty is not a state of perfection, but simply a means to perfection. A poor man may attain virtue according to the use he makes of his poverty. Lastly, we must distinguish between affective and effective poverty. Affective poverty is the detachment of the heart from whatever wealth one may possess, be it great or small. Effective poverty is the actual lack of material goods, be it voluntary or involuntary. The Church teaches we must all have affective poverty, but not effective poverty, as a means to perfection. Further, the Church recommends relative poverty as a means of perfection in most religious. In Proverbs 30:8, we read, "Give me neither beggary, nor riches; give me only the necessities of life."
    The Wealthy
    Jesus does not condemn wealth, but the love or inordinate attachment to the things of this world. He counsels us to be "poor in spirit," but not in fact. He told the rich young man to keep the Commandments to attain everlasting life, and counseled poverty only as a means of perfection. (See St. Matthew 19:16-21). Lazarus of Bethany was rich, yet Jesus calls him a friend. (See St. John 11:11). Christ warns us that wealth makes it difficult, but not impossible to enter Heaven. His teaching that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter Heaven, was said of those who have placed the things of this world (their wealth, in this case) above God. (St. Matthew 19:24).
     Riches make it difficult to enter Heaven because:
    1. it affords us many comforts on Earth so that we are apt to for get God and the things of Heaven
    2. it affords us the means to satisfy our most exigent and dangerous passions
    3. they tend to render people proud and covetous
    The right use of riches (like the duty to help the poor) can
    • open up the gates of Heaven (See St. Matthew 25:34-35)
    • merit for us the help and blessings of God (See St. Luke 6:38; Proverbs 19:17)
     (The above was adopted from Civardi, Msgr. Luigi, How Christ Changed The World, 1961)
     But Antipope Francis makes giving to the poor the end all and be all of his version of "Christianity." He exalts the Corporal Works of Mercy over the Spiritual Works of Mercy, even though the latter are greater than the former. Corporal Works of Mercy only affect our neighbor's well being in this life, while the Spiritual Works of Mercy promote his ETERNAL interests.
     Moreover, the blatant phoniness of Frankie's appealing to help the poor was exposed just recently. Here in the U.S., the Little Sisters of the Poor faced a 2.5 MILLION DOLLAR FINE for refusing to supply contraceptives and abortion related "medicine" as per "Obamacare"---the Chief Communists "health care" program. 2.5 million is about half their worth, and nearly every cent of it goes to help the poor. Thankfully, Associate Justice Sonya Sotomayor granted the Little Sisters a stay, pending the U.S. Supreme Court's judicial review of this mandate to determine if it's constitutional. Did Antipope Francis denounce the Obama administration for this murderous mandate in the name of health? NO! Why bother with "small minded rules" about abortion and birth control? But what, you may ask, if that would sap millions of dollars from the poor in addition to violating Church teaching...would he not get involved THEN? Apparently not. Where is the "pope of the poor" when Communist Obama wants to take money away from the indigent? Good question. Apparently no one bothered to look underneath the rocks.

    Friday, January 3, 2014

    Little Monsters

     Antipope Francis is now warning against poorly trained priests, saying they can become "little monsters." Indeed, Vatican II sect seminaries are cesspools of Modernism (which destroys the soul) and perversion (destroying bodies as well as souls). The one-time Catholic seminary of the Immaculate Conception in the Diocese of Rockville Centre has been closed and merged with the seminary for the Archdiocese of New York. Prior to its closing it was known as the "Pink Palace" for its infestation with sodomites (both clerical and seminarian). Yet the absence of sound teaching in philosophy and theology is leaving the seminarian little more than a sentimental social worker upon graduation to an invalid ordination. But this is NOT the problem according to Frankie.

     Seminaries are breeding grounds of unnatural vice. Frankie denounced accepting into the seminary a man who has been asked to leave another religious institute. However, most problems come from accepting morally unqualified candidates in the first place.

    •   Going back as far as 1989, an article in Time magazine stated that 5% of candidates to the priesthood (1981-85) openly identified themselves as homosexual
    • In the year 2000, Vatican II priest Fr. Donald Cozzens published the book, The Changing Face of the Priesthood. It is a competent and serious study. According to Cozzens, anywhere from 23% to 58% of the Catholic (Vatican II) clergy are homosexual in orientation. About 55.1% of seminarians are gay
    • The known presence of homosexuals now promoted to "bishops" who comprise a "gay mafia" in the Vatican is the logical and tragic result of the new morality of Vatican II ("who am I to judge?")
    • Homosexuals make a mockery of the priesthood. What good is a vow of chastity? They are disordered and have no inclination to marriage and family. They are not giving up a human good to pursue perfection, they must give up perversion to be in accord with nature and God. Moreover, being in an all male vocation would be a constant occasion of sin
     No worries! Frankie wasn't really concerned about sodomites, many of whom will prey on the young. He believes that they must have hearts to serve the poor.  ‘‘We must form their (priests) hearts. Otherwise we are creating little monsters. And then these little monsters mold the people of God. This really gives me goose bumps,’’ he was quoted as saying. The problem is you can't form someone with a personality disorder for unnatural vice. Nor can you form a Catholic heart with heresy. The Vatican II sect has been cranking out little monsters for decades, and the effects on society are evident. They were created by the big monster, the Vatican II sect, i.e. "Frankenchurch"-- whose heretical ecclesiology makes a monstrosity out of anything good. This goes beyond goose bumps to night terrors.