Monday, September 10, 2018

Perversion And Modernism


 You'd have to be an ostrich with your head in the ground not to be aware of the latest homosexual scandals and cover-ups perpetrated by the Vatican II sect hierarchy, and extending up to no less than Bergoglio himself. The entire Vatican II sect is shaken to its rotten core, more so than 2002 when the scandals were brought to light by the Boston Globe.  The reported abuse coming out of Pennsylvania is almost too horrific to type. Sect members will think the crimes and cover-ups are reasons for the "pope" to resign, or they will join a Protestant sect because those Jack Chick tracts were right after all about "Rome being the root of all evil." Still others will blame celibacy, as if normal men who would otherwise make good husbands and fathers became child molesters since they couldn't marry (If you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn real cheap).

The scandal should not be used by Traditionalists to "prove" sedevacantism. Moral corruption does not cause loss of office, only heresy does that. In this case, the moral rot can be traced back to Modernism--loss of faith leading to loss of morals. To be certain, there have always been immoral clergy in the Church who did horrific things. It was a bishop who betrayed Our Lord for money, hanged himself and now burns in Hell. (There were only 12 bishops at the time, or 8.33% were bad). Christ knew Judas Iscariot was evil, but chose him anyway, to prove that His Church will prevail despite evil in the clerical ranks. What is happening now is substantially different. It's not the corruption that was rooted out by St. Francis of Assisi in the 13th century. The institution perpetrating the crimes is not the Catholic Church, but a man-made sect brought about by heresy.

It cannot, therefore, be "corrected" by a "papal resignation," or better reporting requirements. The problem is supernatural, and the world does not want to hear of such. The Church was infiltrated by Her enemies, a false sect set up at Vatican II through heresy, and the moral rot is a logical result of the moral relativism that comes with Modernism--"the synthesis of all heresies"--as Pope St. Pius X called it. This post will demonstrate the link between Modernism and rampant sexual perversion in the Vatican II sect. It will be shown how (a) Christ condemns homosexuality, (b) the Magisterium condemns it, and the Vatican II sect then changes course, leading to perversion's acceptance in society with devastating consequences.

Condemnation by Christ
The story of Sodom, told in Genesis 19, explains how Lot (Abraham's nephew) was met by two strangers at the gate of the city. These men were actually angels in disguise. Lot brings them to his house and, after a meal but before going to bed, the men of Sodom (young and old) surround the house and demand to have sex with them. Lot refuses to allow the gang rape of his guests and (tragically) offers them his virgin daughters instead. The men of Sodom are not interested in the women, only wanting sex with the men. The mob is about to break down the door of the house, when the "men" reveal themselves and save Lot by striking the mob with blindness. Revisionists tell us this is a case of attempted gang rape and  being "inhospitable" to guests, it is not "loving and consensual relations" that God would not condemn.


That Sodom was condemned for unnatural vice (later to be named after the city itself--"sodomy") is made clear by the New Testament, specifically, the epistle of St. Jude 1: 7: "In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." (Emphasis mine). Doesn't leave much room for declaring "the sin of Sodom" as being a lack of hospitality.

 Each time Our Lord refers to that immoral city, He refers to its sinfulness and agrees that it stands condemned:


  • St. Matthew 10:15, "Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town." (Clearly implying that on Judgement Day, Sodom and Gomorrah will stand condemned)
  • St. Matthew 11:23-24, "And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted to the heavens? No, you will go down to Hell. For if the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."
  • St. Luke 10:12, "I assure you, even wicked Sodom will be better off than such a town on judgment day."
  • St. Luke 17:30, "But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from Heaven and destroyed them all."
The inescapable logic:


First, Sodom was destroyed by God for it's "sexual immorality and perversion." (St. Jude 1:7)

Second, this perversion is homosexuality, because Genesis 19 clearly states it was men wanting sex with two angels who appeared as men, and they had no (sexual) use for women.

Third, Our Lord Jesus Christ is recorded referring to Sodom no less than four (4) times, and each time He agrees the city stands condemned for this sin ("sodomy") and calls Sodom "wicked." 

Therefore, Jesus Christ condemned homosexuality. True, He never uses the word "homosexuality," but He never specifically condemned "rape" by name, so are we thereby to blasphemously assume He didn't condemn it?

The Magisterial Pronouncements
In 314, the Council of Ancyra, although not an Ecumenical Council, had great influence upon the Church. Canon 17 condemns those who have "defiled themselves with beasts, being also leprous..." invokes God's wrath on bestiality, and likens homosexuality to leprosy. It further sets forth the penalties for "bestial lusts" in Canon 16:

"Let those who have been or who are guilty of bestial lusts, if they have sinned while under twenty years of age, be prostrators fifteen years, and afterwards communicate in prayers; then, having passed five years in this communion, let them have a share in the oblation. But let their life as prostrators be examined, and so let them receive indulgence; and if any have been insatiable in their crimes, then let their time of prostration be prolonged. And if any who have passed this age and had wives, have fallen into this sin, let them be prostrators twenty-five years, and then communicate in prayers; and, after they have been five years in the communion of prayers, let them share the oblation. And if any married men of more than fifty years of age have so sinned, let them be admitted to communion only at the point of death." (See http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3802.htm)

The Council of Elvira, approximately 305–6 A.D. was one of three councils, together with the Council of Arles (314) and the Council of Ancyra, that first approached the character of an Ecumenical Council and prepared the way for Nicea in 325. Eighty-one canons are recorded. Of interest are numbers 18 and 71.

Canon 18: Bishops, presbyters, and deacons, once they have taken their place in the ministry, shall not be given communion even at the time of death if they are guilty of sexual immorality [in particular homosexuality].  Such scandal is a serious offense.

Canon 71: Those who sexually abuse boys may not commune [receive Holy Communion] even when death approaches.
(See https://www.webcitation.org/6AS7rgB7f?url=http://faculty.cua.edu/pennington/canon%20Law/ElviraCanons.htm; Commentary in brackets mine).

The Third Lateran Ecumenical Council 1179 A.D. 

Canon 11: "...Let all who are found guilty of that unnatural vice for which the wrath of God came down upon the sons of disobedience and destroyed the five cities with fire, if they are clerics be expelled from the clergy or confined in monasteries to do penance; if they are laymen they are to incur excommunication and be completely separated from the society of the faithful..." (See http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum11.htm) 

Pope St Pius V:

Cum Primum  April 1, 1566:

"Having determined to do away with everything that may in some way offend the Divine Majesty, we resolve to punish, above all and without indulgence, those things which, by the authority of the Sacred Scriptures or by most grievous examples, are more repugnant to God than any others and raise His wrath: that is, negligence in divine worship, ruinous simony, the crime of blasphemy, and the execrable libidinous vice against nature. For such faults peoples and nations are scourged by God Who, according to His just condemnation, sends catastrophes, wars, famine, and pestilence ... and if he is a cleric, he will be subject to the same punishment after having been stripped of all his degrees [of ecclesiastical dignity]." (Emphasis mine).

Horrendum Illud Scelus August 30, 1568:

P I U S , B I S H O P

Servant of the Servants of God: For perpetual memory. That horrendous crime, for which polluted and filthy
cities were burned by the frightful judgment of God, pains Us most bitterly, and gravely stirs our soul, so
that, insofar as it is possible, we might strive to crush it.

I. It is reasonably established in the [Third] Lateran Council that any Clerics who are discovered in that act
of incontinence that is against nature, because of which the wrath of God came upon the children of unbelief, should be expelled from the clergy, or be cast into monasteries for the purpose of doing penance.

2. However, lest the contagion of such a disgrace, from the hope of impunity – which is the greatest incentive to sin – strengthen in boldness, we have decided that the clerics who are guilty of this nefarious crime are to be more gravely punished, so that the avenger of the civil laws, the secular sword, might certainly deter those who do not fear the death of the soul.

3. And therefore, seeking to more completely and forcefully pursue what We already decreed regarding this matter at the beginning of our Pontificate, any and all priests and other secular and regular Clergy of whatever grade and dignity who practice such a dire sin We deprive of every clerical privilege, and of every
Ecclesiastical office, dignity, and benefit, by the authority of the present canon. So that, having been degraded by Ecclesiastical Judgment, they may be handed over to the secular power, which may exact from them that same punishment that is received by laity who have fallen into this ruin, which is found to be constituted in legitimate ordinances....

Given at St. Peter’s in Rome, in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1568, on the third Kalends of September (August 30), in the third year of Our Pontificate.

1917 Code of Canon Law

Canon 2357: section 1:  Lay persons who have been legally found guilty of a crime of sexual immorality committed with a minor under 16 years of age or rape, sodomy, incest, pandering, are ipso facto infamous, besides being subject to other penalties which the Ordinary may deem proper to inflict.

Canon 2359: section 2: Deprives clerics (guilty of the same crimes enumerated above) of "any office, benefice, dignity, or position which they may have and in more serious cases be deposed."
(See Canonist Bouscaren Canon Law: A Text and Commentary (1951), pgs. 931-932).

Vatican II: Finding Virtue in Vice
When the Vatican II sect was created by the Modernists, they sought to conform Christ to the world. Modernism is the polar opposite of Catholicism. By introducing false principles by which theology should be guided, they lead the way to acceptance of unnatural behavior. The "Constitution on the Church in the Modern World" (Gaudium et Spes) begins the moral decay:

Para. #54:  "The circumstances of the life of modern man have been so profoundly changed in their social and cultural aspects, that we can speak of a new age of human history.New ways are open, therefore, for the perfection and the further extension of culture. These ways have been prepared by the enormous growth of natural, human and social sciences, by technical progress, and advances in developing and organizing means whereby men can communicate with one another. Hence the culture of today possesses particular characteristics: sciences which are called exact greatly develop critical judgment; the more recent psychological studies more profoundly explain human activity; ..." (Emphasis mine). 

Para. #62: "In pastoral care, sufficient use must be made not only of theological principles, but also of the findings of the secular sciences, especially of psychology and sociology, so that the faithful may be brought to a more adequate and mature life of faith." (Emphasis mine). 

The pagan aspects of psychology and sociology were thereby introduced. Vatican II joins modern psychology in the heretical teaching of humanity's "intrinsic self-worth." In Gaudium et Spes, para. 24 states, "...if man is the only creature on earth God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself," as if people possesses such value in themselves that it would cause God to create them.  In the Catholic meaning, the self-worth or "dignity of man" cannot be considered as a characteristic in people's very nature that imposes respect for all choices, because this dignity depends on right will turned toward the Good and is therefore a relative and not an absolute value. 

The stage was set for a series of "declarations" that would weaken and collapse traditional morality in sexual matters. In 1975, the Modernist Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (sic) promulgated a Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics.  The declaration, approved by Montini (Paul VI), reverses the presumption of guilt on the part of those who commit sexual sins. Paragraph # 10 states: "It is true that in sins of the sexual order, in view of their kind and their causes, it more easily happens that free consent is not fully given; this is a fact which calls for caution in all judgment as to the subject's responsibility." (In sins of serious matter, it is presumed that free consent of the will is present, unless the Confessor finds out otherwise. One would--logically and naturally--presume that those engaging in sodomical acts are not coerced or unaware of what they are doing. Here, the declaration adopts erroneous principles of modern psychology that people are "born" homosexuals with desires they "can't help" and act upon them with less than full consent of the will). 

On October 1, 1986, the same Modernist Congregation, headed by Ratzinger at this time, released the Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic (sic) Church On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons. This 'letter" (or "declaration") states in para. #7: "Homosexual activity is not a complementary union, able to transmit life; and so it thwarts the call to a life of that form of self-giving which the Gospel says is the essence of Christian living. This does not mean that homosexual persons are not often generous and giving of  themselves; but when they engage in homosexual activity they confirm within themselves a disordered sexual inclination which is essentially self-indulgent." Here, those who engage in unnatural vice are often "generous and giving" of themselves. Couldn't you say the same of all serious sinners, such as thieves and wife beaters? 

In paragraph #10, we are treated to this gem: "It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law." While I don't advocate violence against anyone, the State has the right to imprison such persons; and what, exactly, constitutes "violent malice in speech"? 

I guess Pope St. Gregory the Great was guilty of "violent malice in speech" when he said, "Brimstone calls to mind the foul odors of the flesh, as Sacred Scripture itself confirms when it speaks of the rain of fire and brimstone poured by the Lord upon Sodom.  He had decided to punish in it the crimes of the flesh, and the very type of punishment emphasized the shame of that crime, since brimstone exhales stench and fire burns. It was, therefore, just that the sodomites, burning with perverse desires that originated from the foul odor of flesh, should perish at the same time by fire and brimstone so that through this just chastisement they might realize the evil perpetrated under the impulse of a perverse desire." (St. Gregory the Great, Commento morale a Giobbe, XIV, 23, vol. II, p. 371). 

In the 1986 U.S. Supreme Court Case Bowers v. Hardwick,478 U.S. 186, the right of the government to criminalize homosexual sodomy was upheld 5 to 4. It was decided the same year as Ratzinger's letter. The Protestant Chief Justice had more wisdom than Ratzinger. Writing a concurring opinion, Chief Justice Warren Burger stated: 

"I join the Court's opinion, but I write separately to underscore my view that, in constitutional terms, there is no such thing as a fundamental right to commit homosexual sodomy.

As the Court notes, ante at 192, the proscriptions against sodomy have very "ancient roots." Decisions of individuals relating to homosexual conduct have been subject to state intervention throughout the history of Western civilization. Condemnation of those practices is firmly rooted in Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards. Homosexual sodomy was a capital crime under Roman law. See Code Theod. 9.7.6; Code Just. 9.9.31. See also D. Bailey, Homosexuality [p197] and the Western Christian Tradition 70-81 (1975). During the English Reformation, when powers of the ecclesiastical courts were transferred to the King's Courts, the first English statute criminalizing sodomy was passed. 25 Hen. VIII, ch. 6. Blackstone described "the infamous crime against nature" as an offense of "deeper malignity" than rape, a heinous act "the very mention of which is a disgrace to human nature," and "a crime not fit to be named." 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries 215. The common law of England, including its prohibition of sodomy, became the received law of Georgia and the other Colonies. In 1816, the Georgia Legislature passed the statute at issue here, and that statute has been continuously in force in one form or another since that time. To hold that the act of homosexual sodomy is somehow protected as a fundamental right would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching."

Seventeen years later, in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), the Supreme Court reversed its decision in Bowers using the same reasoning as Ratzinger. The majority opinion declared, "It suffices for us to acknowledge that adults may choose to enter upon this [homosexual] relationship in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons. When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice." (Emphasis mine) The author of the opinion? Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, a member of the Vatican II sect. In 2015, Kennedy would author the decision declaring "same sex marriage" a Constitutional "right."

MAPing A Course of Destruction
The Modernist views that the individual, and not God or Magisterium, as determining what is true. Hence, Bergoglio saying, "Who am I to judge?" and telling a sodomite, Juan Carlos Cruz, that "God made you that way." According to one report, "The new remarks appear to go much further in embracing homosexuality as a sexual orientation that is designed and bestowed by God. It suggests that Francis does not believe that individuals choose to be gay or lesbian, as some religious conservatives argue." (See https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/20/pope-juan-carlos-cruz). 

There is no eternal and unalterable moral law, except on paper, as far as the Vatican II sect is concerned. Now added to the alphabet soup of perversion--"LGBTQQIA"--we have "MAPs" or "Minor Attracted Persons," i.e., pedophiles. (See e.g., https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/09/pedophiles-lgbt-community/). Some say the idea of "MAPs" is a hoax. It's no hoax that there is evidence, withheld and covered up by the psychology establishment and the media, that links homosexuals with disproportionately high levels of pedophilia. According to researcher Muir (1993),  Homosexuals and the 10% fallacy; Wall Street J March 31, study after nationwide study has yielded estimates of male homosexuality that range between 1% and 3%, so overall, perhaps 2% of adults regularly indulge in homosexuality. Yet they account for between 20% to 40% of all molestation of children. 

  It began with taking out the Anti-Modernists from positions of power. My spiritual father, Fr. Gommar A. DePauw, was in charge of admissions to St Mary's Major Seminary for the Archdiocese of Baltimore. When Archbishop Keough died in 1961, Roncalli replaced him with Modernist Lawrence Shehan, whose first act was to remove Fr. DePauw and replace him with a priest who was "pastoral" to those "attracted to men." 

As the sodomites entered the ranks of the hierarchy, they were able to gain access to their perverse desires while hiding behind a Roman collar. As the scandal broke after years of covering up for each other, they cast a cloud over the real Catholics--Traditionalists--since the world recognizes the Vatican II sect as the Catholic Church. The Vatican II sect has "retreats" for sodomite "couples," "Cardinal" Marx of Germany endorsing blessing "homosexual unions," "gay pride" so-called "masses," and the list of abominations rolls on with an admitted "gay mafia" inside the Modernist Vatican itself. 

Conclusion
 Modernism breeds both doctrinal and moral relativism. There is no absolute standard of right and wrong--"who are we to judge?" The Modernists not only pervert doctrine, they are themselves perverted and perverting--using an incremental approach to "normalize" homosexuality and pederasty. We have "Uncle Ted" McCarrick sleeping with seminarians and priests, huge numbers of pedophiles and "bishops" who cover up for them, including Bergoglio himself. It's not celibacy, it's not failure to implement more stringent reporting measures that's to blame. To borrow and revise a 1992 U.S. presidential campaign slogan; "It's the heresy, stupid!" 

70 comments:

  1. In the religion of man, the dignity of man is the highest good, regardless what God may have instructed. Of course, such errors could not have emmanated from the Catholic Church as held by so many psuedo-traditionalists. As the evidence keeps piling up that the V2 sect cannot be the Catholic Church, expect the R&R and neo-con NO crowd to become increasingly desperate. I read somewhere an article about the "deposition" of Pope Benedict IX by a Council. It is as if the first and only Vatican Council never occurred. To save face with V2 they have jettisoned V1.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You’re right, Tom. Many in the R&R camp would rather become heretics themselves than admit Bergoglio can’t be pope!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. What is most disturbing about this NO sect abuse crisis is so many psuedo-trads creating anticipatory hope in some sort of "canonical" or extra conciliar cleansing. As if the tossing of out of Bergolio or a Wuerl is going to address the core issue. Oh there may eventually be a sacrificial goat thrown to the mob to sate the blood lust of the neos and semi-trads. And don't kid yourself that it'll be Wuerl or Farrell. They will find something on Burke or Chaput also. They are all corrupted by allowing and promoting a sodomite anti-clergy. Modernism will never be mentioned. Not even by the RR crowd. So sad.

      Delete
    3. Tom,
      There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. That should be the motto of the R&R and “conservative” V2 sect. Let’s thank God you and I (and Sedevacantists everywhere) have no blinders on.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  2. I disagree with the premise of this article. You are taking an age-old problem and using it to support your sedevacantist religion. If you think that clergy morality problems in the catholic church are some new problem then you are mistaken. Yet, this is what sedevacantists always do best. They take a problem, magnify it, and use it to justify their schism. By the way, I am quite familiar with the homosexual clergy problems in your Sedevacantist groups including the CMRI, SGG, and many others. So this proves absolutely no correlation between your personal opinion of what constitutes the "true" faith and immorality. Your sects have been plagued by the same problem from their beginnings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I’m relating facts. My post freely admits there have always been corrupt clergy. I also stated that IT IS NOT PROOF OF SEDEVACANTISM. The enormity of the problem has been brought about by the false teachings regarding homosexuality and sin—along with many other heretical teachings.

      So, right off the bat, you either didn’t read or didn’t understand what was clearly written. This is what R&R and the Vatican II sect do best.

      “Homosexual clergy problems” in Traditionalist ranks? Certainly there can be one or two bad apples but (a) you offer no proof for your assertion and (b) to say that the CMRI, SSPV, etc are raping children and Bp Pivarunas and Bp. Kelly are covering it up is just plain calumny.

      What constitutes the True Faith which has been taught by the popes, theologians, and councils for centuries and was word for word contradicted by Vatican II—that’s fact not my opinion. If you want to argue ecclesiology, I’d be glad to do so.

      The only sect here is Vatican II and the doctrinal and moral monsters they have as clergy.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. I was also a R&R and i tought sedevacantism was an heresy. But if you think that the One True Church can teach heresy overall, and the Popes can teaches heresy overall, you are stating that the gates of hell hath prevailed and that is imposible.

      ¿Do you think that the "pope" can say that Luther understood the Gospel?. This is more than a pen slip.

      And even if before there were perverted priests, they were punished, defrocked, or given to secular authorities. NOT protected.

      Delete
    3. @ponialbinegro

      You found the truth my friend, and you’re not afraid to speak it!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. Introibo, thank you for your blog about Fr Stepovich and assisting at a una cum fransisco mass. That was helpful. I am at a chapel with a SV and an RR (I know I know its crazy). But I now know I can assist at a mass there, but I think the whole culture and philosophy of the place is based on the principle of liberalism. What would you say to becoming a MEMBER of a RR or SSPX? I have started to say to myself that I just go to mass there, but am not a member. Ive even pulled away from the Holy Name society becaus of their tolerance of RR. Am I being too scrupulous about this? I really cant stand hearing sermons about "Pope" Francis.

      Delete
    5. Wow, I don’t know how a sede priest and an R&R priest can co-exist without being at each other’s throats! Nevertheless, in my opinion, I think you’re being prudent in not joining an R&R Organization. You can attend the Mass, but to actually join makes you unnecessarily involved in their wrong and wacky theology. If you are strong in the Faith you might do so to win some people over to Sedevacantism BUT you also run the risk of being “exposed” and denied Communion as some SSPX priests are known to do!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. @Introibo....I think the poster here was referring to SGG, NOT SSPV. I think you may have misread his comment.

      Delete
  3. Introibo,
    Thanks for the excellent article!! I have read numerous articles on various versions of events as to how the crisis came about, but none comes close to your article, as it is the TRUTH! One such article I came across directly states that Cardinal Spellman under Pope Pius XII was the direct cause for the crisis! Link below:

    http://thewandererpress.com/catholic/news/frontpage/the-crisis-starts-with-cardinal-spellman/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the kind words and the information, Joann! It keeps me writing.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  4. I know for a fact that many of the Sede sects have had problems with scandalous affairs including homosexual behavior by the clergy and other things. If you deny this you are a liar. Two of the most prominent Sede sects (CMRI and SGG) have had this problem with their leadership and clerics. Since these two groups make up the largest percentage of the Sedevacantist sects that is very significant. According to your theory, there should not be such scandals among those who have the "true faith and sacraments." The percentage of Sede sex scandals are most definitely statistically higher than in the Novus Ordo.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really hope you don’t do anything that requires use of logical reasoning.

      First, “you know for a fact” that Traditionalist clergy (especially the CMRI and Saint Gertrude the Great—-which is a Church not an Organization like CMRI) have “scandalous affairs” and “homosexual behavior” with their clerics and leaders.

      And your proof is.....??? In the United States a person is PRESUMED INNOCENT of a crime until proven guilty. You offer no citations to newspaper articles, court cases, etc, that declare or even imply such has taken place. And you’re claiming that if I deny your fabricated tale I’M A LIAR? You should look up the sin of CALUMNY in a moral theology text pre-Vatican II.

      Second, you misrepresent me once more. I said in my post that :

      “To be certain, there have always been immoral clergy in the Church who did horrific things. It was a bishop who betrayed Our Lord for money, hanged himself and now burns in Hell. (There were only 12 bishops at the time, or 8.33% were bad)”

      What part of that don’t you comprehend? However, the false teachings of the Vatican II sect regarding the acceptance of sodomites in the Church and society lead to the PROVEN ABOMINATIONS IN THE SECT—and cover-ups going up to Bergoglio himself.

      The percentage of Sedevacantist sex scandals are statistically higher than the V2 sect? And your proof is (once more) as non-existent as your ability to reason.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. @Introibo---I am probably regarded as a "hard line" Sedevacantist. That is, I believe Sedevacantism to be correct (I don't, however, believe one must be Sedevacantist to be saved or Catholic); I just see an existential discontinuity in concluding otherwise, given the prescient facts that are available to all. It is not, however, in my mind, a "movement", nor do I think of it as such. This is why I don't join any Traditionalist groups: It is a belief. Nothing more. Nothing less.

      That having been said, however, you and I both know that there have been many accusations against both of these groups (SGG and CMRI); it's just patently misleading to state otherwise.

      And, while, respectfully, in American jurisprudence, one is presumed innocent until demonstrated otherwise, in the ecclesiastical realm there is the concept of --- if there is 'an external violation of law, malice [being] presumed.'

      Parenthetically, I will add this: EVEN IN American jurisprudence, when it comes to setting bail, there is a presumption that the accused is guilty of the charge. As a former bail agent, I heard a judge mention this once from the bench when he denied a motion to release a defendant on her own recognizance.

      I have nothing at all---not even remotely ---to do with CMRI, SGG, (or, for that matter, SSPV, SSPX) et al, but I do find it a curious thing that if -- say, you or I were accused of infidelity --- the names people would be throwing around would be 'Susan', perhaps; but 'Steven' ---uhhh.....NO, never. For some reason, the accusations against representatives of these groups is just the opposite.

      I also don't think that just outright dismissing the poster's comments above (whom I would disagree with theologically)-- is helpful. Humility requires an admission even when our nemeses---theological or otherwise---present and provable points. (There are people, I'm sure, as an attorney, whom you believe are "guilty as charged", but whether it is demonstrable in a court of law is another thing entirely.)

      Finally, the fact that St. Peter Damian addresses this issue in great detail in the 11th century(!) demonstrates that this is, even if peripherally, a systemic problem in the Catholic Church (not just the Novus Ordo, which is
      not the Catholic Church). The Catholic Church. Else, why did a canonized saint write about this in such great detail?

      And, I hasten to add, my comments here are not an attack on you nor a criticism of you. They are, however, a reminder that just because someone vehemently disagrees with Sedevacantism (or whatever theological flavor suits one's preference) --- one cannot thereby conclude that all observations should be dismissed out of hand entirely.

      Delete
    3. My friend,
      With all due respect, I did not dismiss what the above poster wrote insofar as I fully admit that there have always been evil clerics in the Church. However, the V2 sect is not the Catholic Church, and the false teachings regarding sexuality and sin allowed for the admission of sodomites into the seminaries. It also encourages unnatural vice in society. Add to this the absence of Grace via the Mass and sacraments--and there is no need to wonder how the sect claiming to be the Catholic Church is a pit of heresy and vile sin.

      You correctly note that in ecclesiastical law,'an external violation of law, malice [being] presumed.' So, where is the "external violation"? It is not anyone who says "Father X is a sodomite" or "I saw Father X in a homosexual act." It reminds me of the boors at the (thankfully defunct) blogs "Pistrina liturgica" and "The Lay Pulpit." Week after week they would make accusations with nothing to back it up. They claim Bp. Dolan is "dubious" because Abp. Lefebvre (allegedly) ordained him with one hand to the priesthood. They claim "witnesses" they know saw it. I asked them to name just one, and ALL of these so-called witnesses did not want to come forward (how convenient).

      An external violation would be words or actions in the external forum that gives rise to the imputation of guilt. If a Traditionalist priest says in front of witnesses "I am a homosexual" or is photographed marching in the "gay pride" parade, then guilt is presumed. An external violation is not mere gossip or calumny or a hunch.

      The judge who denied bail had better go back to law school. Bail is set not because guilt is presumed, but to prevent against the risk of flight **IF** the accused is guilty. It's taking a reasonable precaution, not a presumption of guilt.

      I stand by my dismissal of the poster's calumnious remarks. Treating malicious gossip as "Gospel Truth" or "evidence" is no evidence at all. He has no citation to ANY credible source wherein a Traditionalist cleric was accused of molestation of a child, covering up same, or engaging in homosexual conduct in the external forum.

      There was once malicious gossip about my best friend and me. Both of us got married later in life. We didn't hang out in bars picking up women and other sinful behaviors. We enjoy skiing, and would sometimes go on skiing vacations when we had off (we're both lawyers). Well, if you're 35 years old, single, not picking up women, and going on a trip with another 35 year old man (also single and not a womanizer)--you must be sodomites, right? Please.

      Moreover, the poster claims that this still-to-be-proven "sedevacantist homosexual clergy" is proportionately greater than the Vatican II sect. Really? Based on what facts? What statistics? It's based on his own sinful ipse dixit. Shame on him, and you should be more careful about confusing humility and the refusal to condone sinful accusations against the good name and character of Traditionalist clergy.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. We're going to have to agree to disagree, because my lot is still with the first poster. I think he has a legitimate point -- perhaps not for the "right" reasons, but a legitimate point nonetheless, at least partly.

      Delete
    5. Isn’t it well known that Schuckart of the CMRI was a pervert?

      Delete
    6. @anonymous10:13

      Yes, he was. He was also a cult at the time, much like Palmar de Troya. The CMRI cleaned house and are a respectable organization. Schuckart was a bad apple for certain. However compare the Great Fr (Bp.) Guerard des Laurier and Fr Arrigo. One bad apple hardly is indicative of the orchid.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  5. St. Augustine had to know of the coming day of the "pervert and the modernists". Why else would he have said this:

    'The Apostle commands us to rejoice, but in the Lord, not in the world. For, you see, as Scripture says, whoever wishes to be a friend of this world will be counted as God's enemy.'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bernard,
      Indeed, the Great Apostasy and all the evil it brings was foretold in both Scripture and Tradition. In my opinion, the most frightening passage is St. Luke 18: 8, When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

      Christ is God and knows everything so He wasn’t asking due to lack of knowledge. The clear import of His statement is that VERY FEW will have kept the One True Faith of His One True Church.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  6. "...a religious superior guilty of sodomy has not only committed a sacrilege with his spiritual son but has also violated the law of nature. Such a superior, damns not only his own soul but takes another with him."

    Saint Peter Damian, Book of Gomorrah.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Meanwhile, blind men like Michael S. Rose descend the depths of modernist hell and do not add 2 + 2 to find the 4: the Conciliar Sect is not the Catholic Church.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don’t understand what it will take for some to wake up. Only Divine Intervention would appear to awaken them.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. “They have ears, but do not hear, they have eyes, but do not see”. The god of this world has people blinded. It is the world that entered into the Church at Vatican II and the god thereof is Satan. I don’t want to be in the world when I go into a Church. I want to be out of the world. “You can’t love two masters”. People today have been conditioned by psychologists, the feminist movement, etc., that it is ok to just have it all. Just my two cents.

      Delete
    3. Joann,
      Excellent observation with which I agree!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. I remember the 'Archbishop' of Seattle having a 'Mass' for Queers in the late 1980's.
    Don't forget the Novus Ordo queer quartet singing at
    Bishop Bernardin's funeral in 1990's.(he was consecrated 1966 so I refer to him a Bishop)
    How anyone can be surprised by Fr.Vigano's letter is beyond me?
    (He was ordained March 1968 so he is a valid Priest)
    -Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      Unfortunately, nothing surprises me regarding the absolute corruption and moral decay which is the Vatican II sect!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  9. This was an excellent article. Very well researched and so true; doctrinal perversion and moral perversion go hand in hand.

    Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you my friend! Comments like yours keep me writing!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Thank you my friend! Comments like yours keep me writing!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Well I'll say this: Bp Danny Dolan is as gay as they come. I feel like I'm being raped just listing to his gay voice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To my readers:
      I published this disgusting comment to show the "evidence" of "gay Traditionalist clergy." That's not to say there can't be some bad apples, but it must be proven with REAL EVIDENCE. These are the people who want us to think we Traditionalists have the same problem (in greater proportion no less!) as the Vatican II sect.

      I apologize to Bp. Dolan for what this cretin's calumny.

      To anonymous-calumniator@7:04:
      I feel mentally violated reading your pathetic comments so bereft of logic, reason, and charity. Get a life, get an education, go to confession and maybe save your soul.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Anon sounds like a typical, vicious sodomite. They hate what they do and hate themselves for it. But they refuse to change their ways, so they cope by projecting their filth onto others.

      Delete
    3. If you really want to prove that Sedevacantist Priests are sodomites, why don´t you get tons of evidence and write a letter like Vígano?. He does not just say: "Frankie defended McCarrick and that happened because Frankie sounds perverted when he speaks". What is truly charitable is not making calumnies just because you do not like sedevacantism.

      I was a R&R like you and knows R&R websites like Tradition in action, and none of them mentioned perversion in sedevacantist files. None of them, you can check. I do not know were do you get this information, why do you insult people and what is your obsession whit contradicting this article. If you think that we are a sect, and that we are damned, publishing your uncharitable coments is just a waste of time.

      Delete
  11. Is this phony indignation or do you and sweety Danny Dolan have one of those "special" bishop to layman relationships that have plagued the traditional catholic movement from the beginning? The scandals involving the SGG are well-known throughout the traditionalist movement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, it’s indignation at the degradation of a Traditionalist bishop based on morally and mentally challenged people like you! I don’t know Bp. Dolan. You sound like the misfits from Pistrina Liturgica.

      The sacadals are “well-known”—just as the one-handed ordination with no witnesses. Did you know that those who attribute homosexuality to others unjustly probably have repressed unnatural tendencies? Makes me wonder about you!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  12. Lord Have Mercy On Every Human, all sinners. :/

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm still learning from you, while I'm trying to reach my goals.
    I definitely love reading all that is written on your site.Keep the aarticles coming.
    I liked it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you my friend! As long as people are helped, I will continue to write. Comments like yours keep me going.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  14. It is almost as if Vatican I saw all this coming. At the first and only Vatican Council, Holy Mother Church defined the pure and spotless nature of the Papacy. Not in terms of personal behavior, but in dogmas, doctrines, and disciplines. The Council taught the faithful, and still teaches Catholics who will pay attention, the nature of the Church and the Papacy. It put to rest the Gallican heresies about a defective Church that needed to be resisted from time to time. But it is absolutely impossible to read the magesterial definitive description of Holy Mother Church and apply it to the modern cesspool of heterodoxy that claims the Catholic mantle. To continue to insist that the perverted heretics in Rome and the local Cathedrals and parishes are Roman Catholic is to deny the magesterial teachings of Vatican I (and only).

    ReplyDelete
  15. Even though evil is being brought to light, it's really a pity how so many have mistaken this for the Catholic Church. Just like the grinch who stole Christmas, Francis and his bandwagon have stolen the Catholic name, the beautiful buildings, but most importantly the salvation of many souls. I just hope that I'm not a goat in the end along with presumably these future goats.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We all must pray for the grace of Final Perseverance, my friend. If we remain true to Christ in these dark days, I’m confident He will see us through!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. As the title of this article suggests, modernism is directly linked to the crisis in the conciliar church. Therefore, when scouring the internet and news, if the author or reporter does not link modernism into the equation, then that is a good sign they themselves are a modernist and nothing they say will have any effect. They are simply spinning their wheels addressing the "crisis" and will in the lomg run solve nothing. Unfortunately, because they hold the brand name "Catholic," this crisis will further disillusion the world to the True Faith. Thanks to foolish trads and trad societies who continue to call heretics Catholic, The damage to the Catholic brand will intensify. Evangelization will become impossible as it once was and an era of martydom will return. There will always be witnesses to Christ, either through word or through sacrificial deed. We are transitioning from one era to another.

      Delete
    3. You're wrong Tom. Modernism is not directly linked to the morality crisis in the church. As I pointed out above, there are numerous trad clergy who have been implicated in sexual misconduct. Some people attacked my character for daring to say it. Off hand, I personally know of five different (4 Sede and 1 SSPX) groups that have or had the same problems. So, according to your logic, that would make the following statement true: Traditional Catholicism is directly linked to immorality. I don't have the numbers but I'd be willing to bet the morality crisis in traditional catholicism is statistically higher than in the novus ordo.

      I have been challenged to give names or proofs but that is a dodge. If people choose not to believe me that is their prerogative.

      My opinion is that the Catholic Church attracts gays because of their priestly celibacy rule that came into effect long after the founding of the Church. It is a perfect fraternity for queers and always has been. If the church allowed men to marry and have families it would attract real men instead of gays. I might even go one step further by banning priests and deacons who are not married. If the church did that it would get rid of a good percentage of the problem over time.

      Delete
    4. @anonymous8:58
      Tom is absolutely correct and you merely parrot calumnies. There have always been bad clergy and always will be. The extent of the depravity and the cover-ups is staggering in the V2 sect.

      Look at the ambiguous verbiage you employ “numerous trad clergy”; you “personally know “ 5 different groups” with sodomite problems. Yet you are unable to produce ONE SINGLE NAME. What’s the “evidence”; someone “talks like he’s gay,” as one commenter said about Bp. Dolan. Yeah that’s hard core “proof.”

      You don’t know the numbers but you’re willing to bet the morality crisis is higher among Traditionalists. Based on your vast experience of five alleged groups without a single name and no citation to what the proof of these allegations were? Yeah. That’s highly logical.

      Asking for names and proof is “a dodge”? So if I claim your neighbors are sodomites but I have no proof, and can produce no names of which neighbors, you’d believe me? I don’t know what color the sky is in your world, but here it’s blue.

      No one should believe you not because it’s their prerogative but it’s proof they’re sane and don’t make ludicrous charges against people without evidence.

      Lastly, the sodomites were let in by the Modernists to the seminaries as I explained in my post above. Tom has proof and logic. You have neither.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    5. I make a statement from my personal experiences in the traditionalist movement and that makes me insane and a liar? So how do you know I wasn't a victim? Not saying I was but I'm also not saying I wasn't. How do you know someone close to me wasn't a victim in one or more trad groups? As for names, I have my reasons for not saying more than I did. Mission accomplished.

      Delete
    6. @anonymous3:04
      If your “mission” was to make baseless assertions against Traditionalist clergy and smear them, you’ve done the work of Hell quite well.

      How do I know you weren’t abused by a Traditionalist clergyman? I don’t. That’s the point. There IS INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE against the V2 sect. There is nothing but hearsay against Traditionalists. I’m being generous when I call statements about Bp Dolan’s voice being “gay” as “hearsay.” “Mentally and morally challenged assertions” are the more accurate description.

      Know one knows who you are so you could name someone, but you don’t. After 50 years of the Church being driven underground, and all the attention being given to pediphile clergy, do you really think there would be no arrests, lawsuits and publicity?

      Making serious statements against Traditionalist clergy without anything to back it up IS CALUMNY. Making assertions about Traditionalists having proportionately more problems than the V2 sect when you have nothing to back it up is more of the same. To be charitable you commit the logical fallacy of Hasty Generalization. This occurs when you take a small sample and try to extrapolate an idea about that sample and apply it to a larger population. For example, I know three Italian-Americans that lied to me, therefore most Italian-Americans are liars.

      You’ve demonstrated, most convincingly, that the accusations against Traditionalist clergy are mostly hot air, unlike the PROVEN abuse and cover-ups in the V2 sect.

      Many thanks,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    7. He states that the Church should led Priests to marry. It is heresy to contradict the Church Teaching on Priesthood. ¿How dost he know that there would be less sodomites if they marry?. A lot of Saints had been Celibate all of their lives, and they were human la´k those predators.
      And, if he knows personally those Priests, ¿why don´t he acusse them la´k Vigano?

      Delete
    8. @ponialbinegro
      Celibacy is a special calling that makes a man more Christ-like. “For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (St Matthew 19:12).

      It’s easy to throw around accusations, which is all we’ve seen demonstrated here. Bishop Dolan must be a sodomite because according to one comment, he has a “gay voice.” Those who oppose us are desparate to prove our clergy are as vile as the V2 sect.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    9. Priests were always allowed to marry in the Church going back to the Apostles. Rome changed their rules but the Orthodox Christians never did. Their clergy have always been permitted to marry. Poni, you have no idea what you are talking about.

      Delete
    10. The Eastern Schismatics changed doctrine on many things, whereas celibacy is disciplinary. That celibacy should be the ideal of the priesthood is absolutely correct, and poni recognizes this fact. St. Paul himself stated, "But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I." (1 Corinthians 7:8).

      As Pope Pius XII taught:

      " Innumerable is the multitude of those who from the beginning of the Church until our time have offered their chastity to God. Some have preserved their virginity unspoiled, others after the death of their spouse, have consecrated to God their remaining years in the unmarried state, and still others, after repenting their sins, have chosen to lead a life of perfect chastity; all of them at one in this common oblation, that is, for love of God to abstain for the rest of their lives from sexual pleasure. May then what the Fathers of the Church preached about the glory and merit of virginity be an invitation, a help, and a source of strength to those who have made the sacrifice to persevere with constancy, and not take back or claim for themselves even the smallest part of the holocaust they have laid on the altar of God." (See the encyclical "Sacra Virginitas," 1954, para. #5)

      Even in the Eastern Rites, pre-Vatican II, while married men could be priests, only the celibate could be chosen as bishops.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    11. I've been told Traditional Eastern Orthodox Bishops must be single with a lifetime of celibacy.
      Simultaneously,I've been told there are some Eastern Orthodox "clerics" who received "Holy Orders" via the invalid Old Catholic line.
      Idk how much of this is true or false.
      From what I can gather,the Utrecht Old Catholics have retained their validity.

      Delete
    12. @anonymous9:46
      You are correct about EO bishops. I have not heard about Old Catholics giving orders to the EO, but the Utrecht line was considered valid by the Church under Pope Pius XII. Things may have changed with them since. Hope this helps.

      God Bless,
      ---Introibo

      Delete
  16. Anon 8:48, my point was not to say that trads are immune to sin. The link between this current crisis and modernism exists because of what modernism is. It is relativism, it denies objective truth. Once objective truth is denied, the abberosexual behavior can be legitimized through a continual Hegelian dialect. This is exactly wat happened since V2. Celibacy rules may set conditions for sodomites to gravitate to the priestly vocation. I don't know if that can ever be proven, however. But it is irrelevant. If the clergy and hierarchy maintained and objective Thomist philosophy, these sodomites would never have made it through seminary. This philosophy was steadlily eroded beginning with the death of Pope St Pius X. There may be queer trads out there, but it is the modernist heresy and modernist cleric that does more damage to souls than predator priests.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom, this statement "If the clergy and hierarchy maintained and objective Thomist philosophy, these sodomites would never have made it through seminary" is utterly false. It is nothing more than wishful thinking on your part. The problem of clerical abuse is historical. Big difference is those who would be considered minors today were have been eligible to become elected bishops and pope back in the day. It is these kinds of ridiculous sede sentiments that need to be corrected. The premise of this article is false for the same reason.

      Delete
    2. @It’s not wishful thinking that Modernists such as the despicable Lawrence Shehan of Baltimore removed Fr DePauw from his position in charge of admissions for the seminary and replaced him with a young Modernist priest who was”pastoral” towards those with same sex attraction.

      This is hardly a ridiculous sentiment. You’re typical of R&R and V2 “conservatives” who, regardless of REAL EVIDENCE, will try to exculpate the Robber Council and the sect it spawned at ANY cost.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  17. “There may be queer trads out there, but it is the modernist heresy and modernist cleric that does more damage to souls than predator priests.” Unless a person has been a victim of a predator, regardless by a priest or lay person, the violation to one’s soul is damage that is unspeakable. How one can equate damage done by heresy to being greater than raping a person’s body and soul is incredulous. They are both equally damaging.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      I’ll let Tom speak for himself, and I agree with you. I think what he meant (how I understood it) was that the relativism Of Modernism begets more Moral monsters. In that sense—furthering the evils—Modernism does more damage to both soul and body as it spreads.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Heresy and its adherence leads a soul to hell. Abuse does grave harm to the body and yes even to the soul. But unlike heresy, a soul is not damned for being a victim of vile abuse. A soul is damned for adherence to heresy. The philosophy of relativism along with the modernist heresy disarmed the Church from weeding out the predators. Did not Jesus warn us to fear the one who can damn us to hell and not fear the one who can only kill the body. I do agree that many victims suffer grave emotional and even spiritual damage from abuse. If looked at from a naturalistic point of view, the abuse is one of the most gravest sins man can commit against an innocent. But if looked at from a spiritual point of view, teaching heresy is by far the worst of all sins for it has eternal consequences.

      Delete
    3. Tom,
      Yes, but remember that any mortal sin kills the soul, yet the sin of fornication is not as horrible in its consequences as, for example, murder. Modernism is so horrible because it perpetuates both spiritual death, as well as the worst of temporal harms as it acquires adherents.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Yes, I think we are all saying the same basic premise. Damage to a soul is infinitely worse than damage to the flesh. And as Joann rightly said, the raping of such young innocence does damage both body and soul. What differentiates a Catholic response to the abuse crisis from the worldly response is that a Catholic should recognize the spiritual damage done by this act and the philosophy (relativism) that permitted these monsters to destroy these souls and the souls of all the faithful. While the worldly response is to focus soley on the earthly existence and temporal issues associated with the abuse. When Catholics are commenting and discussing this crisis with others, I urge them to remind the worldly Catholics and non-Catholics that there is a philosophical and theological componeny to this crisis. The abuse is a symptom of the relativistic society. That should never be forgotten.

      Delete
    5. Molestation is not a new predicament as it has been going on for centuries in the Church, well before Vatican II and its relativism. If person’s desire to believe relativism that is their free choice. When someone is molested and raped their free will is taken from them, as they don’t have a choice.

      Delete
    6. Also, what about Sodom and Gomorrah. How do you explain that?

      Delete
    7. Joann,
      Clearly I agree with you that molestation is one of the greatest of all sins. Our Lord Himself stated, “But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. ” (St Matthew 18:6).

      There has always been depraved clerics in the Church as you rightfully point out. The V2 sect has more than the Church ever had before, and the Modernists are to blame for letting the perverts in the seminaries and teaching moral relativism.

      Sodom and Gomorrah existed before the time of Christ. They rejected God and adopted a “do what thou wilt” mentality much like today’s perverts. To be certain, perversion is nothing new, unfortunately. However, with the Church driven underground after Great Apostasy, we are seeing a return to the libertine ways of Sodom.

      In sum, I certainly agree with you. The number of perverts in the V2 sect is the result of Modernism. It is a return to the paganism of old. Contrary to what some have commented here, we don’t see the problem in the SSPV, CMRI, etc. Not that we can’t or don’t have some bad clerics, but we do not have the numbers, proportionately or otherwise, as the V2 sect. Nor do we have massive cover-ups.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  18. Do you think it's possible the Bishops at V2 HAD to possess valid orders in order to subvert and pervert the Catholic Church?
    As in,only Bishops with valid Holy Orders had authority and with that authority and free will came the freedom to destroy the official magisterium and subsequent Holy Mass sacraments etc...
    Could it be possible the invalid Novus Ordo "Bishops",many of whom are invalid Priests/Diaconate themselves,don't have the authority to restore Holy Mother Church,or is the title of Bishop more important?
    Thank you,
    Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      I don't think you understand the situation. No one can destroy the Mass, Magisterium, etc. They will last until Christ returns. The fact that these evils came to be means they COULD NOT HAVE COME FROM THE CHURCH, BUT FROM PRELATES WHO DEFECTED THROUGH HERESY TO FOUND A NON-CATHOLIC SECT.

      As to restoring the Church see my post: http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2018/09/when-can-we-say-habemus-papam-again.html

      ---Introibo

      Delete