Monday, August 10, 2020

Vatican II: Misery And Despair

The Robber Council of 1962-1965 (better known to the world as the Second Vatican Council), produced sixteen heretical documents. Four of those documents were "promulgated" by Montini ("Pope" Paul VI) on December 7, 1965, the day before the Council ended. Altogether, Vatican II passed four Constitutions, nine Decrees, and three Declarations. Two of the four Constitutions were called "Dogmatic" (Dei Verbum [on Divine Revelation], and Lumen Gentium [on the Church]), and the last was labeled as "Pastoral," Gaudium et Spes (On the Church in the Modern World).The Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium  [on the liturgy] does not specify itself with either appellation. Gaudium et Spes (translated as "Joy and Hope," will hereinafter be referred to as "GS"), was one of those last four documents put out by the Council. It is most pernicious and often overlooked because of the more glaring heresies of the other Constitutions.

Approved by the bishops on a vote of 2,307 in favor and 75 opposed, GS is a Modernist masterpiece. An objection that is often used by the "recognize and resisters" (R&R) of the SSPX and other such groups (including some "conservative" members of the Vatican II sect) is that the documents of Vatican II were "pastoral" and not dogmatic. Vatican II was a "pastoral Council" and GS in particular says it is a "Pastoral Constitution;"therefore you can effectively ignore the teachings.

Pastoral simply means "after the manner of a shepherd." "Pastoral" and "dogmatic" are not mutually exclusive terms as R&R would like us to believe. A "pastoral"council, if it teaches on faith and morals, is also doctrinal or dogmatic in character. "Pope" Paul VI stated in his audience of January 12, 1966: "In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner any dogma carrying the mark of infallibility."

"Extraordinary" in this context refers to solemn dogmatic definitions, which everyone agrees Vatican II did not pronounce. Montini goes on to declare:

"...but it [Vatican II] nevertheless endowed its teachings with the authority of the supreme ordinary magisterium, which ordinary (and therefore obviously authentic) Magisterium must be docilely and sincerely received by all the faithful, according to the mind of the Council regarding the nature and scope of the respective documents." (Emphasis mine).

Moreover, as was pointed out, two of the Council's Constitutions expressly call themselves "Dogmatic," i.e., Lumen Gentium ("The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church") and Dei Verbum (i.e., "The Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation"). To claim that Vatican II gave no dogmatic teaching directly contradicts the Council itself. Furthermore, Montini expressly reaffirmed the fact that a pastoral role rather implies than excludes doctrinal teaching in his motu proprio Pastorale Munus of 1963 which declares in the first sentence: "The pastoral office was linked by Christ to the grave responsibilities of teaching and sanctifying, of binding and loosing." (Emphasis mine).

When the bishops of the world gathered together in the Vatican from 1962-1965 and gave morally unanimous consent to their teachings on faith and morals to the Church, and which were promulgated by "Pope" Paul VI, all the requirements of an exercise of the infallible Universal Ordinary Magisterium were met. If Montini were truly pope, you must submit and believe all of what was taught at Vatican II. To claim the Council was not infallible, can only be sustained as true if there was no pope with whom those bishops could hold union with, and who could ratify their decisions. Welcome to sedevacantism.

This post will shed light on how the Modernist Robber Council produced GS, and its heretical character.


Attempting to Conform Christ to the Modern World
GS was released to the Council Fathers on September 21, 1965. It was the longest schema (draft) with which they were presented. Its goal was to achieve "dialogue" with the world. 

Chapter One: centered on "The Dignity of the Human Person"
Chapter Two: focused on "The Community of Mankind"
Chapter Three: stressed "Man's Activity in the World"
Chapter Four: explained "The Role of the Church in the Modern World" 
(See Vatican II Exposed as Counterfeit Catholicism, by Frs. Francisco and Dominic Radecki [2019], pgs. 502-504; I have culled information from these pages for this section. It is an excellent resource that I highly recommend.---Introibo). 

The schema was composed by a veritable roll call of Modernist theologians, all censured under the reign of Pope Pius XII, who were rehabilitated under Roncalli ("Pope" "St" John XXIII) and helped/encouraged by Montini ("Pope" "St." Paul VI). The most prominent heretics were Yves Congar, Marie-Dominique Chenu, Joseph Ratzinger, and Joseph Frings. The theologian with the greatest influence on its formulation was Rahner.

It was he, along with theologians  Henri de Lubac, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Hans Kung, Edward Schillebeeckx, Louis Bouyer, Jean DaniĆ©lou, Jean Mouroux and the aforementioned Congar, Chenu, and  Joseph Ratzinger (later "Pope" Benedict XVI) who began a Neo-Modernist movement that despised the Neo-Scholasticism which had served the Church so well. The movement was called "Nouvelle Theologie" (French for "New Theology") by the great anti-Modernist theologian Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, often pejoratively called "the sacred monster of Thomism" by his enemies because of his love of the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas and his hatred of Modernism.

 In 1946, Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange wrote a scathing criticism of the movement (which liked to call itself  ressourcement ---"return to the sources"), because they claimed they were "returning to patristic thought." Garrigou-Lagrange demonstrated that the theologians of the movement did not "return to the sources" but deviated from the long-standing theological tradition of the Catholic Church, thus creating a "new theology" all their own, and a disguised resurgence of Modernism. In 1950, Pope Pius XII responded with his great encyclical Humani Generis which condemned many of their errors, such as rejecting the traditional dogmatic formulations that emerged throughout Church history as a result of scholastic theology, re-interpreting Catholic dogma in a way that was inconsistent with tradition, falling into the error of dogmatic relativism and criticizing biblical texts in a way that deviated from the principles of biblical hermeneutics outlined by his predecessors (principally Pope Leo XIII).

During debate at Vatican II, opponents of the Modernist schema criticized it heavily for subscribing to naturalism and ignoring sin. It calls for the advancement of scientific endeavors, but ignores the spiritual. However, this is only scratching the surface of its errors. 

Gaudium et Spes: A Catalog of Heresy
1. Universalism. GS, in keeping with the false and heretical ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium, teaches the salvation of all humanity. One of the key tenets of this document, it is beloved by Wojtyla ("Pope" "St" John Paul II) who incorporated it in his encyclicals and the heretical 1992 Catechism of the Catholic (sic) Church.

In GS para. #22 we read, For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man. By His Incarnation, Christ took on a human nature; True God and True Man. There is no Church teaching that somehow Christ "has united Himself in some fashion with each man." That is a theological novelty of Vatican II. This teaching is pure heresy as can be clearly seen from the teaching of Wojtyla:

Redemptor Hominis (1979), para. #13: Christ the Lord indicated this way especially, when, as the Council teaches, "by his Incarnation, he, the Son of God, in a certain way united himself with each man"(Emphasis in original). Continuing in the same encyclical, Wojtyla writes, Accordingly, what is in question here is man in all his truth, in his full magnitude. We are not dealing with the "abstract" man, but the real, "concrete", "historical" man. We are dealing with "each" man, for each one is included in the mystery of the Redemption and with each one Christ has united himself forever through this mystery. (Emphasis mine).

Query: If Christ has united Himself forever to each person simply by virtue of the Incarnation, how is it possible for someone to be damned? Answer: No one can ever be damned because Hell involves eternal separation from God, which is incompatible with the teaching of GS and Wojtyla--- that all humans are united forever with Christ and thus all must be saved. It is Catholic truth that no one is saved unless they are within the One True Church of Christ and die in the state of sanctifying grace.

Proof:  Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441, ex cathedra: The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives...

Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors (1864), CONDEMNED Proposition #17:

Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ.

In GS, Vatican II goes further than heretic Martin Luther, who claimed there is salvation by faith alone. Here, even faith is not necessary. You are saved in view of the Incarnation simply because you were conceived.

2. The Deification of Humans.  In para. #12, GS teaches,  According to the almost unanimous opinion of believers and unbelievers alike, all things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown.  Man is the center of everything. We have an anthropocentric world where humanity is the measure and crown of all things. This is the theme of the entire document; Humans are "God."

Here's what the Church teaches:
Pope St. Pius X, encyclical E Supremi, (1903), para. #9
Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God and the power of his Christ." (Apoc. xii., 10.) But if our desire to obtain this is to be fulfilled, we must use every means and exert all our energy to bring about the utter disappearance of the enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time - the substitution of man for God...(Emphasis mine).

From Sacred Scripture:
For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
(Romans 1:22, 25; Emphasis mine).

Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre: Thus saith the Lord God: Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said: I am God, and I sit in the chair of God in the heart of the sea: whereas thou art a man, and not God: and hast set thy heart as if it were the heart of God. (Ezekiel 28:2).

Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. (Jeremiah 17:5; Emphasis mine).

3. Falsifying the Words of Christ to Place Man As God.

From GS para. #24: This is why the first and greatest commandment is love of God and of neighbor.

Sheer blasphemy. Here is what Christ said:  And there came one of the scribes that had heard them reasoning together, and seeing that he had answered them well, asked him which was the first commandment of all.

And Jesus answered him: The first commandment of all is, Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one God.

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength. This is the first commandment.

 And the second is like to it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is no other commandment greater than these. (St. Mark 12:28-31; Emphasis mine).

The first and greatest Commandment is therefore love of God, and the second is love of neighbor as yourself. This is what Christ said and what the Church always taught until Vatican II.  To place these two Commandments on equal footing is to equate God and Man, or to (once more) deify humans.

4. False Principles Regarding Marriage and Women
GS para. #48 states, By their very nature, the institution of matrimony itself and conjugal love are ordained for the procreation and education of children, and find in them their ultimate crown. 

While at first glance, this statement may seem orthodox, it is not. The procreation and education of children is the primary purpose of Holy Matrimony, and the mutual love and support of the spouses is the secondary purpose which is subordinated to the primary purpose. What Rahner and company did was to invert the primary and secondary purposes of Matrimony. If the procreation and education of children is the "ultimate crown" of marriage, it logically follows that the "crown" is merely a consequence which flows from the mutual love of the spouses; the secondary purpose.

This is the modus operandi of the Modernists in regard to the Sacraments; invert the primary and secondary ends to make them heretical and (with the exception of some baptisms and marriages) invalid. The Mass, the unbloody Sacrifice of the Cross which produces the Eucharist, is now a communal happy meal in the Vatican II sect. Extreme Unction is no longer for forgiveness of sin and the preparation of the soul for Judgement, but "Anointing of the Sick" for bodily health given outside the danger of death. Confirmation is not making soldiers for Christ to fight Satan, but becoming "mature in the Faith." Penance is not being forgiven for sin and then making satisfaction for sins forgiven, but being "reconciled"with God after having a discussion with a "priest" who functions as an ersatz social worker. Baptism is not the remission of Original Sin and becoming part of the One True Church, it's about becoming "welcomed into the community of believers." Holy Orders is not for making a man an alter Christus who offers Sacrifice to God and forgives sin, but makes a man the "president of the assembly" who "celebrates the mysteries of God and the sacraments."

The Status of Women: False Feminism.
GS para. #12 teaches, But God did not create man as a solitary, for from the beginning "male and female he created them" (Gen. 1:27). This statement is, once more, deceiving. God did create man and woman, but the citation to Genesis leaves out Genesis 2:18, 23: "And the Lord God said: It is not good for a man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself...And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man." (Emphasis mine). GS gives the false idea that man and woman were created at the same time, thereby implying strict equality.

Although God is Spirit, He created man in His image and likeness. Woman was created from man. Therefore, men are directly in the image of God, and women are indirectly in the image of God. This is one of the major reasons women cannot be validly ordained as priests. St. Bonaventure, Doctor of the Church, explains that Orders does not look to the soul alone, but to the soul united to the body, and by this reason the signification [of God's image] is produced which must be a visible sign.  Men are therefore directly in the image of God, Who has called Himself "Father," and Whose Son [masculine reference] took on a male body. Men can therefore signify the Image of God and Christ in a direct manner, which women cannot do. (See theologian Wahl, The Exclusion of Women from Holy Orders, [1959], pgs. 45-55).

From these false principles, the door is open to various evils, such as:

  • the acceptance of artificial contraception
  • the acceptance of sodomite "marriage," because if the procreation and education of children is not the primary purpose of marriage, a major objection to perversion is removed
  • promotion of women as "priests"


Conclusion
GS has been shown to be a heresy-filled document, like everything else that came out of that most evil and Satanic Second Vatican Council. A false Council, presided over by two false popes, can only produce false and heretical teachings. Moreover, it created a false sect pretending to be the Catholic Church. The sect follows the teaching expressed in GS, where humanity is exalted as "God." GS is permeated with Naturalism, and disregards the truth that the Kingdom of God is not of this world. Life is not all about human happiness and fulfillment on Earth through political means and scientific progress; it's about gaining eternal salvation in Heaven. 

GS also expresses a false hope in the alleged "goodness of Man" whereby a "utopia on Earth" can be realized and Christ's One True Church is not necessary because all are united to Christ by reason of the Incarnation. Heaven is assured to all, so concentrate on the things of this world. Bergoglio is truly the perfect and logical expression of Vatican II. Remembering what GS teaches, these quotes of Francis make sense :

  • The most serious of the evils that afflict the world these days are youth unemployment and the loneliness of the old. The old need care and companionship; the young need work and hope but have neither one nor the other, and the problem is they don't even look for them any more. They have been crushed by the present. You tell me: can you live crashed under the weight of the present? Without a memory of the past and without the desire to look ahead to the future by building something, a future, a family? Can you go on like this? This, to me, is the most urgent problem that the Church is facing.

  • And I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God, there is God and I believe in Jesus Christ, his (sic) Incarnation.

  • Proselytism is solemn nonsense; it makes no sense. We need to get to know each other, listen to each other and improve our knowledge of the world around us.

Gaudium et Spes promised "Joy and Hope" in the "New Springtime of Vatican II." However, in giving us heresy that has found its way into all areas of life, it has only produced misery and despair--both in the temporal world and eternally for those who don't reject it before Judgement.

66 comments:

  1. Are you going to analyze all V2 documents? I haven't read them all, I only read Nostra Aetate. But I already know a lot of things from my research and reading to be able to conclude that a new church was born from V2 but which is not the true Catholic Church, with a new doctrine which is not the Catholic faith. In short, V2 is the work of Satan, the father of lies. Unfortunately, the vast majority of those who say they are Catholics don't know any of this and continue to go to the party called "Mass" and think that the guy dressed in white is the Pope.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      You have things pretty well figured out! Will I analyze all V2 documents? As of now I cannot say, but it is a real possibility!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  2. Benedict XVI was censured by Pope Pius XII?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon5:59
      He was suspect of Modernism, was rebuked by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis and Cardinal Ottavianni was looking to censure some of his writings. For more, please see
      https://novusordowatch.org/2020/05/ratzinger-recognized-as-dangerous-modernist-early-on/

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  3. Perhaps you can rename all the documents of V2. Misery and Despair is the opposite of Joy and Hope. Dei Verbum can become Satanic Lies or Diabolical Disorientation. Opps, that one has been used already by the R&Rers.

    ReplyDelete
  4. As someone who previously attended the FSSP for many years (prior to joining CMRI in Holy Week of 2019), I distinctly recall how often me and various other parishioners would gather after the 'Latin Mass' for coffee and lunch in the downstairs rec room, lamenting and criticizing 'Pope' Francis about whatever he had spoken about that week, and trying to our utmost to square what was coming out of the Vatican with authentic Catholic Tradition.

    In retrospect, what strikes me is that our attitudes towards the putative hierarchy - the prelates we outwardly professed to be true Catholic authorities - were Protestant in character, instead of authentically Catholic.

    I also recall with some degree of humor that during a catechism class with 'Fr.' James Gordon FSSP, he vigorously advised us to utilize resources like the Baltimore Catechism or the Catechism of the Council of Trent instead of the 'Catechism of the Catholic Church' (CCC) promulgated by 'Pope' John Paul II. His rationale was that the CCC was ambiguous and lacking in clarity relative to older catechisms, and could mislead if incorrectly interpreted (to paraphrase).

    Why is it humorous? Because it's an attitude utterly foreign to John Paul II per his apostolic constitution Fidei Depositum, under Section IV, 'The Doctrinal Value of the Text': "The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith...Therefore, I ask the Church's Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion and to use it assiduously in fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and calling people to the Gospel life. This catechism is given to them that it may be a sure and authentic reference text for teaching Catholic doctrine and particularly for preparing local catechisms. It is also offered to all the faithful who wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable riches of salvation (cf. Jn 8:32). It is meant to support ecumenical efforts that are moved by the holy desire for the unity of all Christians, showing carefully the content and wondrous harmony of the Catholic faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, lastly, is offered to every individual who asks us to give an account of the hope that is in us (cf. 1 Pt 3:15) and who wants to know what the Catholic Church believes." (Citation: http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_jp-ii_apc_19921011_fidei-depositum.html)

    In retrospect, I wonder if 'Fr.' Gordon ever realized just how much he implicitly condemned John Paul II's authority - much less the teaching authority of the Church he claimed to be a priest of - by denigrating the CCC so (which he was right to do, even if his motives were misguided).

    Sincerely,

    A Simple Man

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simple Man,
      In my opinion “Fr” Gordon” suffers from the selective belief system of the Vatican II sect “conservatives;” you can pick what you like even if in stark contradiction with the teachings of your “pope.” It simply isn’t Catholic. He’s not even R&R but in “full Comminion” with Bergoglio. For FSSP, it’s all a matter of “preference,” and if what you prefer goes against your hierarchy, it is somehow both Ok and consistent.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Simple Man, I too remember those “lamentable” conversations during coffee hour after Mass. Now after Mass, the conversations tend toward “how was I so blind all those years.”

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. 2 Thessalonians 2, 11-12:

      11 And therefore God sends on them a power that deludes people so that they believe what is false,

      12 and so that those who do not believe the truth and take their pleasure in wickedness may all be condemned.

      Delete
    5. Simon,
      Good Bible verses to remember!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. FSSP is worse than "Fr" Ted the
      Novus Ordo guru.
      They pretend to be Catholic but aren't even validily ordained.
      At least "Fr" Ted the guru makes no pretense about being a new age moron.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  5. Countless of semi-trads (and Novus Ordos who reject Vatican II as heretical, yes they exist) remain in the Vatican II sect comforted by people that like saying Vatican II was not binding and all.

    Just pastoral and all that.

    Taylor Marshall for example, who's very famous in the semi-trad community. I can no longer say that Taylor Marshall is a Novus Ordo in 'good faith'

    https://novusordowatch.org/2020/07/how-taylor-marshall-distorts-paul6-on-vatican2/

    Just like feenyites and vacancy pushers, people like him are intellectually dishonest and unscholarly cut quotes from people they quote from to reverse the actual meaning of their words.

    "Anything but sedevacantism!" is the true motto of the semi-trads.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon8:36
      You’re right. It’s amazing what mental gymnastics people do in order to not face facts. Even to the point that people remain in the sect while admitting V2 to be heretical!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  6. I have asked myself why Pope Pius gave Roncalli the red hat when he strongly suspected him of modernism while he held a prestigious position at the Curia. The reasoning I have heard was that if Pius shipped him back to Venice to sit in the chancery as Cardinal Roncalli, he couldnt do much damage as he would just be forgotten there. But that didnt work, did it?
    I have Fr. Radecki's book "Vatican II Exposed...", too. Yes, it is an excellent resource citing all names, dates, timelines, documents and the upshot of the aftermath of the Council.
    I highly recommend it. (But have one of those big old wooden bookstands to put it on because it is a large, heavy hardcover publication. It wasn't available in soft cover.)
    Thank you once more for a really good post, Intro.
    Jannie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jannie,
      Thank you! Re: Roncalli, Fr DePauw had said that Pius was convinced by his confessor, Cardinal Bea, that Roncalli had reformed and was now solidly Catholic. No one, not even Fr DePauw, suspected that Bea was a closet Modernist and snake in the grass. The pope is in no way protected by the Holy Ghost in making appointments. It was a tragedy beyond description.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  7. Did not Pius XII promote Bp.Montini to Archbishop of Milan?
    This post was held by Bp.Ratti before coronated Pius XI.
    Great blog entry!
    God bless -Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      Yes. He was advised by scoundrels to appoint scoundrels!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Pius XII also approved Opus Dei.
      Could it be Pius XII was becoming one of them,given his 1956 Holy Week wreckovations?
      Did our Blessed Lord save Pius from himself by ending his life?
      -Andrew

      Delete
  8. Hello Introibo! Been sharing your articles. This one particularly caught a lot of attention. This particular question has nothing to do with Gaudium et Spes but on Orientalium Ecclesiarum. This commenter is from Eastern Rite in the Vatican II sect:

    <>

    Some of his follow up questions:

    <>

    After my reply to him that Archbishop Ireland was an Americanist and wasn’t particularly good nor representative of Roman Catholicism, he replies:

    <>

    Thank you Introibo! God bless!

    —JCA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JCA,
      Thank you for sharing my posts! As you can see, for some reason part of your comment didn’t come through. Feel free to retype and resend.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Sure Introibo! This was his first comment:

      “What people don’t realize is that Vatican II was actually good for the Eastern Catholic Churches. It ushered in renewal that led to a rediscovery of ancient Eastern liturgical praxis and spirituality. The chaos that occurred in the west following the council did not occur in the east. We have the same documents yet they have not caused the same chaos as the west has seen. Therefore, I would argue that the real problem is in how the western church interpreted and pastorally implemented these documents.”

      One of his follow ups seeming to accuse the pre-Vatican II Church:

      “Indeed without Vatican II the Eastern Churches would have become extinct. At one time Greek Catholics were very often encouraged to simply join the Latin Church. On the whole the Eastern Churches were treated with distain and suspicion especially by Roman Catholic bishops in North America. Consider how Archbishop John Ireland treated Father Alexis Toth when he sought faculties to serve the Greek Catholic Parish in Minneapolis. There is an old joke among Greek Catholics that Ireland was the most successful apostle of Orthodoxy in North America because his attitude toward Greek Catholics resulted in the defection of 250,000 Ruthenians to the Russian Metropolia.”

      My reply was that Archbishop Ireland was not representative of Roman Catholicism for being an Americanist, he replies:

      “So when Vatican II encouraged Eastern Catholics to rediscover their true liturgical and spiritual patrimony... was that not a good thing??? It wasn’t just Ireland who was opposed to the existence of the Greek Catholic Church. Let’s also not forget how damaging this decree was to the Eastern Churches in the Western Hemisphere:

      https://archive.org/details/CumDataFuerit1929

      All because married Greek Catholic priests were supposedly a source of “scandal” to Roman Catholic faithful.”

      Thanks!

      —JCA

      Delete
    3. Aren’ Greek Catholics heretics?
      - Poni

      Delete
    4. JCA,
      The Eastern Rites were always small compared to the Latin Rite. He offers no proof for the assertion that Eastern Rites would have become extinct. What’s really important is not the Rite but the Integral Catholic Faith. All Eastern Rites have had their Codes of Canon Law “updated” to comply with the heresies of Vatican II. The fact that they may have some valid sacraments avails them nothing if it is not offered “in persona Ecclesia.” The Eastern Schismatics have valid sacraments. All of which do not help them outside the One True Church.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    5. Thank you Introibo! I will relay this reply to him. I might be back with more follow ups.

      God bless!

      —JCA

      Delete
    6. Poni,
      No. Greek Catholics are an Eastern Rite of the Roman Catholic Church pre-Vatican II. Greek ORTHODOX are heretics.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    7. JCA,

      I would simply reply as follows: good ends do not excuse evil means.

      As such, the growth of the Eastern Rites after V2 does not excuse the heresies of V2.

      It's really that simple.

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    8. I believe the Dimond's promote attending the Eastern Rite.

      JoAnn

      Delete
    9. Thank you for that simple answer A Simple Man! Please help us in Facebook. Your “nom de guerre” would make a perfect profile. Yours too Introibo.

      God bless!

      —JCA

      Delete
    10. Eastern "Catholics" under the Vatican II Church are truly heretics, denying the *singular previlege* of the Immaculate Conception, the Ecumenical Council of Trent's teaching on forms of sacraments, etc, and are even explicitly condemned by Pope St. Pius X as to the epiclesis being necessary.

      They think it's always been that way, forgetting the fact that Rome in the past has tried Eastern-Rite bishops of suspected heresy teaching that an epiclesis is necessary, that Rome has added the Words of Consecration to the Eastern Anaphora that lacks it, obviously because it's invalid, unlike what JPII and BXVI would have you believe that the Words of Consecration are "disperesed" which is against Catholic theology, and Eastern Catholics were obviously bound to accept that we all are except for Christ and Mary conceived in original sin. That the Eastern-Rite teaches that no one is conceived in original sin just because we have "different theologies" is a novel idea.

      Delete
    11. Joann,
      Fred and Bobby promoted the Eastern Rite until they saw the ridiculous contradiction to their positions that many of their followers pointed out. They currently stay Home Alone!

      —Introibo

      Delete
    12. @anon8:02
      You are correct that Vatican II Eastern Rites are heretical. Anything connected to the sect is heretical! Pre-Vatican II they were fully Catholic, in spite of some who held Eastern Schismatic views and were held suspect by the Vatican which had a true pope and enforced dogma.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    13. Introibo,
      Did the Eastern Rite change their Priestly Ordination after Vatican II? If they didn't would it be ok to go to an Eastern Rite Priest for confession if no other Traditional Priests are available? Thanks.

      JoAnn

      Delete
    14. Joann,
      Some Eastern Rites are indistinguishable from the so-called Latin Rite. The Maronites emulate the Novus Bogus where it’s practically indistinguishable. Did Ordination change? Some claim the putative bishops sometimes use the Pauline invalid rite, others introduce novelties like the “priests” of the Novus Bogus ad lib things.

      In short, you’d need to examine all particulars. In my opinion, unless you can do all that, the “priest” may be just a layman so steer clear.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    15. Greek and Russian Orthodox priests are valid, but I would never go to them for sacraments. The same should go for valid traditional priests that puts Jorge’s blasphemous name in the canon. I don’t care is an SSPX/Indult priest is valid, I am not approaching them for sacraments. Too often the discussion is focused on whether a priest is valid or not. While it is crucial that a Catholic only approach valid priests, the better criteria to ascertain is if the priest is in union with Bergoglio or not. If so, stay away. If there are any Eastern sedevacantists, I have not heard of them. The ones I know are either schismatics or in union with Bergoglio.

      Delete
    16. Please, I don't think it's that easy.

      It's not just that they admit Novus Ordite "priests" to the Eastern Rites, the Eastern Orthodox (if not all, most) accept Anglican "priests" as valid priests, and may accept former Anglican "priests". (Sidenote: "Pope" John XXIII actually praised this when he was a cardinal) And Eastern "Catholics" freely accept former Eastern Orthodox clergy. You'd have to go to a somewhat complicated line of succession if one wishes to inspect. And I don't think that's really possible, since it isn't always tracked as to which bishop consecrated a bishop as a priest.

      For example, we don't even know who ordained Bp. Thuc as a priest.

      Delete
    17. Tom,
      You state "I don’t care is an SSPX/Indult priest is valid, I am not approaching them for sacraments." You must be fortunate enough to live near a Sede Chapel. Some of us do not have access to Sede Chapels. I was told by a Sede Priest 5 yrs ago that I could go to a pre-Vatican II ordained Priest for Confession. The Priest was 89 yrs old and very conservative, in fact, he said an indult Latin Mass and did not approve of Francis. You further state "the better criteria to ascertain is if the priest is in union with Bergoglio or not. If so, stay away." If people have choices staying away is an option. Some do not have options. In that case a pre-Vatican II Priest may be all that is available. Also, pre-Vatican II how would one know if they went to Confession and the Priest was a secret Mason, or a closet homo - they wouldn't know. The Confession and Penance would still be valid regardless if the Priest was a heretic for "once a Priest always a Priest".
      JoAnn

      Delete
    18. @anon8:33
      You make valid points.

      @Tom @Joann,
      I’m in basic agreement with Tom that those in actual union (not R&R) must be avoided and R&R should be avoided if possible. Joann, however, is correct that a valid priest of the V2 sect, since not a declared heretic, may be approached for the sacrament of Penance, outside the danger of death, if there is no Traditionalist priest available, and you would be for a long time in sin.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    19. The point I am trying to make is not so much about what to do in each and every situation. The point I am trying to make is that Novus Ordo “priests” should be treated as protestant ministers and R&R priests should be treated as schismatic eastern orthodox.

      Delete
    20. Introibo, since jurisdiction is necessary for Penance,

      if one confesses to a secret freemason priest outside the danger of death, is it valid? Since freemasons are automatically excommunicated?

      Delete
    21. Tom A., Novus Ordites are undeclared heretics

      Delete
    22. @anon6:06
      The confession would be valid. Canon 209 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law makes it clear that in case of common error (everyone in your hypothetical would believe him to have jurisdiction since his Masonic membership is secret) the Church gives supplied jurisdiction so that his secret Masonic membership would not invalidate his Absolution in the confessional nor would it invalidate marriages he performs.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    23. Introibo,
      There is an Ukrainian Eastern Rite Priest near where I live. He was ordained in the early 1970's in the Ukraine before coming to the U.S. Considering those circumstances would it be ok to assume his ordination is valid?

      JoAnn

      Delete
    24. Probably unrelated, but just an FYI,

      there is an Eastern Catholic sedevacantist priest in Ukraine that works with Bp. Dolan.

      Delete
    25. Joann,
      It would probably be valid. You could confess if you have no one else available. Eastern Rites in the early 70s were mostly unchanged. However, there are multiple problems with the Eastern Rites after V2 as was pointed out elsewhere. Find out as much as you possibly can first.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    26. There is a Greek Catholic ordination from Hungary on
      YouTube.
      The Bishop,when I looked him up,is a Valid Eastern Rite Bishop.
      Idk much about them but it looked traditional,the Bishop was even wearing Episcopal gloves.
      I understand they must accept the Vat II heresies but if they ever convert to Catholicism and leave the Novus Ordo,they'll have valid orders.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  9. The Novus Ordo celebrity Robert Barron and his popular Word on Fire website have a good FAQ for all the R&R trads who want to totally ignore anything after 1962, other than saying the hierarchy is the hierarchy. https://www.wordonfire.org/vatican-ii-faq/#ordinary

    The SSPX is likely the most incoherent group of all, since they have pictures of Francis in their chapels but totally reject everything he says and publishes. They reject Vatican II, the new sacraments, new mass, new priests, all the encyclicals, and catechism. For most people, they just like being part of such as large international group and it feels safe to them.

    The FSSP is mostly full of cowards who like the smells and bells, but are fine being in communion with heretics. The Novus Ordo is fine to give them whatever old liturgies they want since the FSSP follows their orders anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lack of Coherence,
      Good analysis. Please keep in mind the FSSP “priests” are all invalidly ordained (except for the founders who were ordained by Abp Lefebvre), so they don’t care what they do. If the outward appearance keeps people in the V2 sect, all the better!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  10. I remember when Vatican II was instituted we were told that nothing had changed only that the Mass would be in English and Communion would be in the hand. From the first Novus Ordo Mass I attended I knew something was amiss and terribly wrong but all the people around me seemed ok with the New Mass so I thought it was just me who found it lacking. After years of stumbling around in the wilderness, I finally found Tradition and Sedevacantism 5 years ago. The last 5 years have given me great peace as I am home at last and the years of searching are finally over!!

    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      You’re response to God’s Grace has paid off! You found the truth—Deo gratias!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  11. Hi Introibo and others on this blog. I am a sede publisher from India I have a small problem in regard to sourcing a certain antique book of Novenas from Ebay (doesn't ship to India). Introibo, would you like to add another title to your library of 3000? It is Our Favorite Novenas by Fr. Dean AA Lings. Link is attached. I need some of the good American people on this blog to get the book scanned through Camscanner app on smartphone and mail me the pdf. My mail is michaeldutt93@gmail.com (Introibo, you can publish it). Cost is around 40 dollars, shipping is free within US and link is here
    God reward you for your charity
    https://www.ebay.com/itm/283448291377

    ReplyDelete
  12. Michael,
    Let’s see what we can make happen!

    God Bless,

    —-Introibo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Who's Michael?

      Delete
    2. @anon8:51
      If you read Mary’s Vagabond’s comment above, he lists his email as michaeldutt93@gmail. I’m assuming that’s his name.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  13. Is it sinful to eat food produced by a corporation who supports evil?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon2:24
      To willingly contribute to a food corporation that supports evil would make you guilty of material cooperation in the sin of another. This cannot be done UNLESS the reason for the action (your support) is good. (See theologian Jone “Moral Theology” [1961], pg. 87).

      Hence, if the only food you can obtain or afford comes from the evil corporation, you would be justified to eat the food. If you did not buy the food, you could eat it if scandal is avoided. Otherwise you should not eat it, but obtain food from other corporations.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Thank you for your response. Very much needed in this days.

      Delete
  14. This comment is off topic but wanted to share a video regarding Black Lives Matter being run by 3 lesbian witches and their satanic belief's. We are in a spiritual battle in this Country and the Christian soldiers need to pray hard and rise up to combat the demonic forces overtaking the Country.

    https://www.infowars.com/is-black-lives-matter-run-by-witches/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's getting worse too Joann.
      There have been 2 Freeway shootings in Louisville KY this week alone.
      God bless stay safe.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    2. Andrew,
      Last October I was approached by a black guy while I was in my car in broad daylight and he ordered me to get out of my car. He was attempting to high jack the car. When my dog who was in the backseat of the car jumped up front and started growling and barking at him and I grabbed my phone to call the police he retreated. I was very shook up and called the police 3 times but they never responded!
      JoAnn

      Delete
    3. Im sorry to hear that.
      Trash like him needs 25 yrs in a labor camp.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  15. My sister gave me a book on VRC just after i put on Brown Scapular. Prologue said progressives viewed Blessed Virgin Mary as stumbling block to union w protestants; conservatives wanted a title foe Her. That's all i needed to know. And, yes, I read all arguments against VRC and excellent, devastating. As novos ordo living in cave, who has seen 50 years in 18 mo... why isn't everyone sedevacantist?

    ReplyDelete