Monday, May 10, 2021

Modernizing Scripture


One of the most misunderstood treasures of the Deposit of Revelation is the Holy Bible. The problem began, not with the alleged "ignorance" of Catholics concerning Sacred Scripture in ages past, or the equally spurious claim that the Church forbade Catholics to read it. Rather, it originated with the heretical Protestant so-called "Reformation" of the 16th century. Luther, Calvin, and the others taught the false and evil doctrine of sola scriptura (i.e., "the Scripture alone") as the only rule of faith. Protestant sects quickly multiplied without Magisterial authority to correctly interpret the Bible; every man gave the Bible his own private interpretation. 

Protestants had many false ideas about Sacred Scripture, and made their own versions of it, which were better suited to fit as proof texts for their numerous heretical doctrines. They jettisoned seven books of the Old Testament (2 Maccabees was considered particularly odious as it referenced Purgatory), and Luther came very close to omitting the Epistle of St. James as it declared faith without good works to be dead. Protestants became adept at citing Scripture and memorizing verses to bedazzle Catholics unknowledgeable in the Faith. More than one Catholic thereby lost their faith and joined a Protestant sect. 

Other non-Protestant sects emerged (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses) with their own "bible" and interpretations to support their unfounded tenets. Then came the Great Apostasy at Vatican II. The heretics who created the V2 sect also warped the true sense of Scripture to support their Counterfeit Catholicism. I find that, even today, most Traditionalists don't understand many of the ideas associated with the Bible. In this post I will (a) give the Church's teaching on the Divine Origin and Inspiration of the Bible, Biblical Inerrancy, and (b) the condemned ideas of the Modernists adopted by the Vatican II sect.

The Meaning of the Divine Origin and Inspiration of Holy Scripture

(All principles in the first two sections are condensed from theologian Nicolau, Sacrae Theologiae Summa IB, [1955], pgs. 554-714 on Holy Scripture---Introibo). 

1. The Bible is unique because unlike any other books, it was composed not by the mere work of humans. The Holy Ghost had such an active role, it is correct to say that God is the Author of the Bible. The human writers acted under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, as instrumental causes. Therefore, the Bible is truly called The Word of God. 

2. This working together of God and Man in the composition of the Bible is known as Divine Inspiration. How God inspired the writers is explained by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus: For, by supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write-He was so present to them-that the things which He ordered, and those only, they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down, and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. (para. #20). There are, therefore, three main elements: (a) God influenced the writers' minds to rightly understand all, and only, those things God wanted written, (b) God influenced their wills to make them determined to write these things, and (c) He influenced them that they correctly and without error wrote all down. It is important to note that inspiration takes place at the time it is written. Approval by the Church that a book belongs to the Bible does not make it inspired, rather it recognizes it as such.  

3. Inspiration includes the whole Bible in every sentence. Again, Pope Leo teaches: But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred. (Ibid). Inspiration is not to be conceived of as dictation, whereby the Holy Ghost told the sacred writers each word to write. Each author could express his individuality in the writing style. This is why there is different wording and styles applied throughout the Bible. Even accounts of the same event are recorded differently by Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. 

4. The Bible is only inspired according to the original writing (referred to as the "autographs"). Copiers can make mistakes, and translations can be inaccurate. Neither the mistakes or inaccuracies are inspired. The Magisterium will correct any such defects and make sure God's Word is not corrupted. 

5. The fact of the Bible's Divine Inspiration and Origin is infallibly decreed by the Church. The Ecumenical Councils of Florence and Trent call God the Author of the Old and New Testaments. The Vatican Council of 1870 infallibly decreed: CANON IV: If anyone shall not receive as sacred and canonical the Books of Holy Scripture, entire with all their parts, as the Holy Synod of Trent has enumerated them, or shall deny that they have been Divinely-inspired; let him be anathema.

Church Teaching on Biblical Inerrancy

1. Inerrancy means that the sacred books of the Bible are totally free from error in all their statements. This is a logical corollary to their being Divinely Inspired. Since God is the Author of the Bible, and God is all-truthful, there can be no errors in the Bible. To assert otherwise is to impute error to God; the very notion of which is false and blasphemous.  Pope Leo XIII sums it up very well:

For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. (Ibid). 

Pope Pius XII says of Pope Leo's teaching in Divino Afflante Spiritu:

This teaching [on Inerrancy], which Our Predecessor Leo XIII set forth with such solemnity, We also proclaim with Our authority and We urge all to adhere to it religiously. No less earnestly do We inculcate obedience at the present day to the counsels and exhortations which he, in his day, so wisely enjoined. (para. #4).

2. Inerrancy extends to all matters written, not just concerning faith and morals. In Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII taught: 

For some go so far as to pervert the sense of the Vatican Council's definition that God is the Author of Holy Scripture, and they put forward again the opinion, already often condemned, which asserts that immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters. They even wrongly speak of a human sense of the Scriptures, beneath which a divine sense, which they say is the only infallible meaning, lies hidden. In interpreting Scripture, they will take no account of the analogy of faith and the Tradition of the Church. Thus they judge the doctrine of the Fathers and of the Teaching Church by the norm of Holy Scripture, interpreted by the purely human reason of exegetes, instead of explaining Holy Scripture according to the mind of the Church which Christ Our Lord has appointed guardian and interpreter of the whole deposit of divinely revealed truth.(para. #22). 

3. However, Inerrancy does not mean that everything written in the sacred books of the Bible is an actual historical event because there are many allegories, parables, etc., which have no need of an historical basis, because they belong to a different type of instruction. With these exceptions, (which must be established on the grounds of substantial evidence and a careful avoidance of sweeping generalizations), the historical truth of Sacred Scripture is a principle to be taken as a starting point for all work of interpretation of the sacred books; it is not a conclusion or end-product of research. 

Modernist Errors on Sacred Scripture

In his famous syllabus condemning the errors of the Modernists, Lamentabili Sane, the great Pope St. Pius X showed how the vile heretics were assailing God's Word. Everything he condemned is now either taught or tolerated by the Vatican II sect. As analysis of all the errors would require several posts, the most egregious will be here examined.

(a) The use of Non-Catholic exegetes (interpreters of Biblical texts). 

Condemned proposition #19. Heterodox exegetes have expressed the true sense of the Scriptures more faithfully than Catholic exegetes.

We see the proliferation of "ecumenical bibles." One such "bible" is The Message. It was written by a Presbyterian minister and Vatican II sect member. Although not approved for "official use" by the Vatican II sect, it has not been officially condemned either. Here is just a sample of how the verses are rendered:

 The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood (St. John 1:14).

This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: So that no one need be destroyed. By believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn't go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was. He came to help, to put the world right again. (St. John 3:16-17).

Here are (what is left of) The Beatitudes in St. Matthew 5: 3-10:

You’re blessed when you’re at the end of your rope. With less of you there is more of God and his rule. 

You’re blessed when you feel you’ve lost what is most dear to you. Only then can you be embraced by the One most dear to you. 

You’re blessed when you’re content with just who you are—no more, no less. That’s the moment you find yourselves proud owners of everything that can’t be bought. 

You’re blessed when you’ve worked up a good appetite for God. He’s food and drink in the best meal you’ll ever eat. 

You’re blessed when you care. At the moment of being ‘care-full,’ you find yourselves cared for. 

You’re blessed when you get your inside world—your mind and heart—put right. Then you can see God in the outside world. 

You’re blessed when you can show people how to cooperate instead of compete or fight. That’s when you discover who you really are, and your place in God’s family. 

You’re blessed when your commitment to God provokes persecution. The persecution drives you even deeper into God’s kingdom. (See 

This ridiculous rendering of the verses by a Protestant isn't merely stupid, it comes with serious doctrinal problems. Consider St. Luke 1:28, where the angel Gabriel calls the Virgin Mary "full of grace." That phrase is very important theologically, because Mary was the only human being to be conceived in the fullness of grace. (Christ was both God and Man; Mary had only a human nature). The very verse was used as proof of the Immaculate Conception when Pope Pius IX infallibly defined it in 1854. "The Message" translation has it rendered, Good morning! You’re beautiful with God’s beauty, Beautiful inside and out! God be with you. Obviously, being "beautiful inside and out" is not the equivalent of "full of grace." Even approved V2 sect translations (New American Bible) used material from Protestant exegetes and rendered the passage: "Hail, O highly favored daughter!" Every canonized female saint can be considered a "highly favored daughter" of God, but only Mary was "full of grace."

(b) Errors on Inspiration. 

Condemned proposition #9: They display excessive simplicity or ignorance who believe that God is really the Author of the Sacred Scriptures. 

Condemned proposition #64. Scientific progress demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine concerning God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, and Redemption be re-adjusted.

If God is not really the Author of the Bible, "error" can be ascribed to it. Hence, the exegete must "demythologize" the Bible and "re-adjust it" by making the Bible conform to scientism. Consider Fr. Raymond Brown (d.1998). Ordained in 1953 at age 25, Brown had racked up an impressive number of scholarly credentials pre-Vatican II. He was a theologian, having obtained his Doctorate in Sacred Theology from The Catholic University of America in 1955. He was a closet Modernist and came out in full force in the late 1960s. In 1971, he started teaching at Union Theological Seminary (a Protestant institution) in Manhattan without censure from the Vatican II sect. 

That same year, Brown called for "a scholarly reassessment" of the historical accuracy of Jesus' conception and virginal birth. The heretic dared to deny the Virgin Birth and claimed that a number of New Testament revelations, especially those related to Saints Matthew's, and Luke's infancy narratives, were mythological, just nice stories to underscore a certain truth. Nevertheless, "Cardinal" Roger Mahony of Los Angeles [called "Red Roger" by Fr. DePauw and others for his support of Marxist "Liberation theology"] described Brown as "the most distinguished and renowned Catholic (sic) biblical scholar to emerge in this country ever" and his death, Mahoney said, was "a great loss to the Church (sic)."

(c) Errors on Historicity. 

Condemned error #16. The narrations of [St.]John are not properly history, but a mystical contemplation of the Gospel. The discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations, lacking historical truth concerning the mystery of salvation.

The Church teaches that everything in Sacred Scripture which appears as an historical narrative should be understood in its literal meaning, unless there are sufficient and proven reasons for thinking otherwise, in which case the matter must be submitted to the Church. Such is the case in the first chapters of the Book of Genesis. Are they literal? here's what the Pontifical Biblical Commission decreed with the solemn approval of Pope St. Pius X:

In response to several questions relating to the Book of Genesis, on June 30, 1909, here's what the Commission decreed:

Question 7: Whether, since in writing the first chapter of Genesis it was not the mind of the sacred author to teach in a scientific manner the detailed constitution of visible things and the complete order of creation, but rather to give his people a popular notion, according as the common speech of the times went, accommodated to the understanding and capacity of men, the propriety of scientific language is to be investigated exactly and always in the interpretation of these? -- Reply: In the negative.(Emphasis mine).

Question 8:Whether in that designation and distinction of six days, with which the account of the first chapter of Genesis deals, the word (dies) can be assumed either in its proper sense as a natural day, or in the improper sense of a certain space of time; and whether with regard to such a question there can be free disagreement among exegetes? -- Reply: In the affirmative. (Emphasis mine). 

This is how Catholics solve such disputes. However, Modernist exegetes immediately reject the literal reading and go in search of whatever novelty in hermeneutics will make it sound "less supernatural."

Case in point:

Condemned proposition #36. The Resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order. It is a fact of merely the supernatural order (neither demonstrated nor demonstrable) which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other facts.

In 1967, the German Vatican II sect bishops, put out a pastoral letter on September 22 in which they stated, The words in the Gospel which affirm that Jesus has risen from the dead are, they [Modernist exegetes] tell us, the result of pious reflection of the primitive community in their attempts to explain the Pascal experience, a "happening" that cannot be explained in precise historical terms. It expresses their conviction that the cause of Jesus had not ended with the cross, but that it continued. This somewhat vague experience had first been understood as the missionary task entrusted to the apostles. Later, it was termed as a vision of the Risen One; and finally, it stabilized into the formula Jesus is risen from the dead. (All emphasis in the original). 

The physical resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is a real historical fact. It cannot be understood as the result of an inner experience, conditioned by time and expressible in other terms. In this one sentence the apostate German bishops destroy all of Christianity, for as St. Paul wrote, "And if Christ be not risen again, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." (1 Corinthians 15:14). In this same letter, the German bishops taught that the teaching authority of the Church can, and has,  fallen into errors. (See The Development of Moral Theology: Five Strands, by heretic Charles Curran [2013], pg. 273). If you think the German bishops were in any way censured, or had their pastoral letter condemned by Montini ("Pope" Paul VI), guess again. 


The study of the Bible must always be done with the guidance of the Magisterium. A good Catholic commentary, like that of theologian Haydock, will go a long way in helping a Traditionalist Catholic understand the true meaning of Sacred Scripture. Always look into what the Church teaches when some Protestant or member of the Vatican II sect bandies about Bible verses to support their contentions. Understanding the Bible as the Church does goes a long way to defeating the Modernists and other heretics who pervert the Word of God unto their own destruction. 


  1. Thank you for giving me yet another good reason to have fled the evil V2 sect which destroys all that is Catholic. I already owned an "ecumenical" New Testament and a Protestant bible, but I got rid of them. Protestantism is a religion of the book, like Islam, and both are praised by the V2 sect. When an entity that claims to be the Catholic Church praises the enemies of the Church, we know we are dealing with a fake church. It is a pity that the "traditionalists" who reject sedevacantism do not understand this.

    1. Simon,
      A very logical conclusion which many never reach!

      God Bless,


  2. even non-conservative novus ordos are disgusted by the New American Bible and gender inclusive translations like the NRSVCE and call them non-Catholic even though they are approved and were never condemned by the V2 sect. just shows...

    Question, can there be more inspired books left that are not yet declared canonical?

    1. @anon6:22
      According to theologian Nicolau, in answering the question, "Could an inspired book be lost?" (or not discovered), he responds that the Church has not defined anything concerning this question. More probably, it seems unlikely, although the eminent theologian Franzelin has a different opinion. (See "Sacrae Theologiae Summa IB" [1955], pg. 583). In my personal opinion, it seems that since public Revelation ended with the death of SSt. John the Apostle in 100 AD, and the Church is the Divine Guardian of ALL revealed truth, it seems that God would ensure that all of Scripture was delivered to the Church, and nothing remains outside Her knowledge, at least since the second century.

      God Bless,


  3. I've only ever referenced The Message once, when researching my post for "Whose Heel is it Anyway."

    Seeing those cited passages, only three words come to mind regarding Eugene Paterson's translation: insipid, puerile, and farcical.


    A Simple Man

    1. A Simple Man,
      Those words summarize it well!

      God Bless,


  4. Dear Friends,
    it's May, the month of Our Lady - I'd like to share with you an indulgenced prayer to the Heart of Mary which I think might be of great benefit to those of us who have little or no access to the Sacraments and are in danger of dying without them.

    This prayer is taken from a 1910 edition of the Raccolta, available at this link:
    (pp. 234-235)

    257. Prayer and Act of Praise
    i. 60 days, once a day.
    iii. Plenary, in articulo mortis, at the point of death, to all who in life have said this prayer every day. I, II (or at least with contrition).*
    * "I" stands for Confession and "II" stands for Communion, but an act of perfect contrition suffices for gaining the plenary indulgence at the point of death.

    The Prayer
    Heart of Mary, Mother of God and our Mother, Heart most amiable, on which the adorable Trinity ever gazes with complacency, worthy of all the veneration and tenderness of angels and of men; Heart most like the Heart of Jesus, whose most perfect image thou art; Heart full of goodness, ever compassionate towards our miseries; vouchsafe to thaw our icy hearts, that they may be wholly changed to the likeness of the Heart of Jesus. Infuse into them the love of thy virtues, inflame them with that blessed fire with which thou dost ever burn. In thee let the Holy Church find safe shelter; protect it and be its sweet asylum, its tower of strength, impregnable against every inroad of its enemies. Be thou the road leading to Jesus; be thou the channel whereby we receive all graces needful for our salvation. Be thou our help in need, our comfort in trouble, our strength in temptation, our refuge in persecution, our aid in all dangers; but especially in the last struggle of our life, at the moment of our death, when all hell shall be unchained against us to snatch away our souls: in that dread moment, that hour so terrible, whereon our eternity depends, ah, then, most tender Virgin, make us feel how great is the tenderness of thy maternal Heart, and how mighty thy power with the Heart of Jesus, opening to us a safe refuge in the very fount of mercy itself, that so we too may join with thee in Paradise in blessing that same Heart of Jesus for ever and for ever. Amen.

    Act of Praise to the SS. Hearts of Jesus and Mary.
    May the Divine Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary be known, praised, blessed, loved, worshipped and glorified always and in all places! Amen.

    God Bless,
    Joanna S.

    1. Joanna,
      So beautiful and timely to leave this prayer! Thank you so much!

      God Bless,


    2. I've finally found a reliable Polish translation of this prayer!
      Taken from a 1919 booklet on the devotion to Our Lady of Perpetual Help (with Imprimatur):
      The indulgenced prayer to the Sacred Heart of Mary can be found on pp. 77-79.

      Once I found this translation, I just couldn't leave it to myself. The plenary indulgence at the point of death for those who faithfully recite this prayer is a most precious gift of God to his True Church through Mary Immaculate.

      God Bless,
      Joanna S.

  5. How sad must it be to be a modernist always trying to steal the God’s miracles away, never believing in anything supernatural. What hypocrites, they hate the man who tells a child there is no Santa, yet they will say to the people there is no resurrection.

    It begs the question of why they even try to be Catholics at all? Unless they’re purpose is to destroy what is good.

    1. Ryan,
      Pope St. Pius X warned that Modernism would lead to atheism. This is exactly what is happening. We see two things going on:

      1. The rise of atheism

      and as a result of #1, with complete opposition to the supernatural, and the Vatican II sect having driven the True Church underground...

      2. The occult explosion.

      Say "Thank you" to Vatican II for this sorry state of affairs.

      God Bless,


    2. I agree Introbio
      I really do believe God punishes our sins with our own sins. He punishes modernists by forcing them to live in a world of modernism. I think there is often a bit of irony in God’s judgement, Dante would also agree.

    3. I once attended a wedding as an adolescent ( a long time ago), where a priest denied the afterlife and the existence of God. He said the following:

      You don't have to go to other religions, be it Buddhism or Islam; the end is the same for every human being. What counts is the "here now" and not the "here after". Science has taught us that there are no such thing as a God, miracles or an afterlife.
      Yet the Gospels are in a sence not fairy tales. Jesus taught us to dream of a better world and be good to our fellow man.The towers of the churches should therefore not point upwards, but to the left and right.

      I remember being very depressed during this time. "What is the meaning of life?" It was one of the many questions that kept haunting my mind. Somehow I was hoping for some support from God, from His Church, even though I didn't go to Mass then. However, the words of this priest turned me away from the Catholic Church, causing me to seek refuge in the inhuman philosophy called Buddhism. I couldn't grasp why a "man of God" would say such horrible things. Years later and after a suicide attempt, I happened to hear about Archbishop Lefebvre and modernism in the Catholic Church. Only then did I understand!

    4. @anon2:44
      A sad yet powerful testimony of God's power working in your life! I'm so glad you were saved, by God's Grace, from suicide and that demonic atheist "priest"--he'll soon find out the afterlife is real--especially Hell for unbelievers!

      Thank you for commenting my friend!

      God Bless,


    5. Yes Introibo, I was lucky and I am eternally grateful to God. However, knowing the truth about what happened to the Catholic Church is a great cross to bear. It's like finding the woman of your life, only to be told that she is terminally ill and dying. Had the Church not been taken over by the Modernists in the 1960s, I probably would have been a priest. My hatred for the counciliar sect, their phony teachings and their fake hierarchy is therefore immense. God bless you and your work!

    6. If the apostasy hadn't occurred,it's possible I would've been a Religious Brother.
      Being a Novus Ordo altar server from
      8-14 yrs old destroyed any interest.

  6. Introibo,
    Doesn't Vatican II in "Dignitatis humanae" simply teach that man cannot be forced to embrace true religion? Furthermore, I have encountered the opinion of Novus Ordo church apologists that these words prove that the Council is talking about true religious freedom of the Catholic religion:
    "First, the council professes its belief that God Himself has made known to mankind the way in which men are to serve Him, and thus be saved in Christ and come to blessedness. We believe that this one true religion subsists in the Catholic and Apostolic Church, to which the Lord Jesus committed the duty of spreading it abroad among all men. Thus He spoke to the Apostles: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have enjoined upon you" (Matt. 28: 19-20). On their part, all men are bound to seek the truth, especially in what concerns God and His Church, and to embrace the truth they come to know, and to hold fast to it.
    This Vatican Council likewise professes its belief that it is upon the human conscience that these obligations fall and exert their binding force. The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it makes its entrance into the mind at once quietly and with power.
    Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ."
    How would you respond to such an allegation?

    God Bless,

    1. Pawel,
      Religious Liberty is heretical to the core, and that's what Vatican II teaches. The very document was drafted by arch-heretic John Courtney Murray, whose ideas and writings were censured by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office in 1954. Less than 10 years later, he was rehabilitated by Roncalli.

      Vatican II does not simply state that the civil government can't force people to accept the Truth. The Vatican II decree demands that states concede false religions the right to exist:

      (P.2) “This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom... The Council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person, as this dignity is known through the revealed Word of God and by reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed; thus it is to become a civil right.”

      (P.2) “Therefore, the right to religious freedom has its foundation, not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth... and the exercise of this right is not be be impeded?”

      Now for the True Traditional Teaching--please compare--on religious TOLERANCE:

      “Liberty is a power perfecting man, and hence should have truth and goodness for its object. But the character of goodness and truth cannot be changed at option. Those remain ever one and the same and are no less changeable than nature itself. If the mind assents to false opinions, and the will chooses and follows after what is wrong, neither can attain its native fullness, but both must fall from their native dignity to an abyss of corruption. Whatever, therefore, is opposed to virtue and truth, may not rightly be brought temptingly before the eye of man, much less sanctioned by the favor and protection of the law” (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei).

      As His Holiness, Pope Leo XIII said, “It is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights.” The Popes, the true Vicars of Christ on earth, have had the perennial duty to root up and destroy heresy while planting and nourishing what is true. Divine Justice and the integrity of the true religion demand that error be condemned and that the forces of evil be thwarted. Evil and error can be, at most, tolerated in this vale of tears. Never can it be said to have the right to exist.

      For more, please see my post:

      God Bless,


    2. Introibo,
      Thank you for your help as I don't understand this issue very well. However, I would like to make a clarification.
      On the contradictions some see between Dignitatis humanae and Pope Pius IX's Syllabus of Errors, Novus Ordo theologian Brian Mullady has argued that:
      "the religious freedom condemned in the Syllabus of Errors refers to religious freedom looked at from the point of view of the action of the intellect, or freedom respecting the truth; whereas the freedom of religion guaranteed and encouraged by Dignitatis humanae refers to religious freedom looked at from the point of view of the action of the will in morals. In other words, those who see in these different expressions a change in teaching are committing the fallacy of univocity of terms in logic. The terms "freedom" refer to two very different acts of the soul."
      How would you respond to such an allegation?

      God Bless,

    3. Pawel,
      That is gobbledygook that sounds profound but means zilch. In his "homily" of 1/25/98, Wojtyla said, "It is helpful to recall that a modern State cannot make atheism or religion one of its personal ordinances." That means anyone can believe anything without State interference and there should NOT be a Catholic government. Who interpreted V2? John Paul the Great Apostate. Obviously, if he is pope, what he says is the correct doctrine, right?

      Compare:Thus, Gregory XVI in his encyclical letter Mirari Vos, dated August 15, 1832, inveighed with weighty words against the sophisms which even at his time were being publicly inculcated-namely, that no preference should be shown for any particular form of worship; that it is right for individuals to form their own personal judgments about religion; that each man's conscience is his sole and all-sufficing guide; and that it is lawful for every man to publish his own views, whatever they may be, and even to conspire against the State. On the question of the separation of Church and State the same Pontiff writes as follows: "Nor can We hope for happier results either for religion or for the civil government from the wishes of those who desire that the Church be separated from the State, and the concord between the secular and ecclesiastical authority be dissolved... Again, that it is not lawful for the State, any more than for the individual, either to disregard all religious duties or to hold in equal favour different kinds of religion... (See Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, para. #35, 36)

      God Bless,


  7. Hello Introibo,
    Is it doctrine that Moses really wrote the pentateuch?

    1. @anon11:20
      Yes. On June 27, 1906, The Pontifical Biblical Commission answered the following questions regarding Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and they were approved and ordered published by Pope St. Pius X:

      I: Are the arguments gathered by critics to impugn the Mosaic authorship of the sacred hooks designated by the name of the Pentateuch of such weight in spite of the cumulative evidence of many passages of both Testaments, the unbroken unanimity of the Jewish people, and furthermore of the constant tradition of the Church besides the internal indications furnished by the text itself, as to justify the statement that these books are not of Mosaic authorship but were put together from sources mostly of post-Mosaic date?

      Answer: IN THE NEGATIVE.

      II: Does the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch necessarily imply a production of the whole work of such a character as to impose the belief that each and every word was written by Moses' own hand or was by him dictated to secretaries ; or is it a legitimate hypothesis that he conceived the work himself under the guidance of divine inspiration and then entrusted the writing of it to one or more persons, with the understanding that they reproduced his thoughts with fidelity and neither wrote nor omitted anything contrary to his will, and that finally the work composed after this fashion was approved by Moses, its principal and inspired author, and was published under his name?


      God Bless,


    2. Thank you

      Very interesting.

      By the way, modern Novus Ordo translations like NAB are notorious for doubting this.

    3. @anon10:33
      It is true that the "scripture scholars" of the Vatican II sect are rabid Modernists. They implicitly deny the Divine origin of the Bible, reducing it to nothing more than a man-made book to teach certain moral lessons.

      God Bless,


  8. I am seeing, more and more, that there are as many forms of Protestantism as there are people who like to read the Bible and then do their own personal take about what the words of Holy Scripture mean.
    Seems that many of today's Christian/Liberty bloggers, who rightly condemn the widespread rejection of Jesus Christ at the base of the trouble we are experiencing, are either deliberately or unwittingly poisoning their message this way.
    They seem too competitive with one another on the internet, too. Some are profiting materially there by design, while others are not.
    One vlogging layman of otherwise goodwill calls himself a "Jamesian" Christian (whatever that is) - claiming he is a Scripture Scholar who knows the ancient biblical languages and has formulated a "doctrine" from his research that contains such ideas as: St. James was a natural brother of Jesus; that the Holy Grail is not the chalice of Christ's Blood, but His genetic bloodline; and more! It's like a thesis on the Da Vinci Code.

    The poison is in these mixed messages read and seen by those seeking a solid place of safety in an increasingly fractured and unsafe world. But it's simple...liberty does not permit error.

    Which brings me to the internet Gnostics who speak continuously about "God", but rarely invoke the Name of Our Savior. They have a book, too. They, including "Q"-ers, lure a lot of unsuspecting people into a false agenda by talking about how the "Shadow Government" is withholding "secret knowledge" from the masses, and if we follow these gurus (who, curiously enough, are not de-platformed, but free to shout from the housetops against those in power while gaining more dupes), we will become gloriously free and go from "Darkness into Light" by using their instructions how to go down "Rabbit holes", to unlock the "codes" and understand the "Matrix" to find our real strength.
    All of those references to things hidden, to secrets, to codes, darkness to light, etc...are New Age terms right from Theosophists like Alice Bailey and her ilk. We imbibe the same thing from all political sides. It sounds like empowerment but it leads directly to Antichrist. As most of us paying attention know, he will be seen as the bringer of light and peace - the one whom the Gnostics have the nerve to say fought valiantly on the side of man against a bad God who wanted to keep men from reaching their true potential as knowers of secrets that He jealously guarded. These new gnostics operate like the Serpent in the Garden.

    The good priest at our chapel recommended the Litany of the Saints as a powerful aid in opposing errors and remaining steadfast in Faith. I'm so grateful for him.

    Thank you Intro, for your work. I feel fortunate to know the Faith, and to know there are others like those here, trying to please God and honor Him by following His true Religion.
    I hold you as friends.


    1. Jannie,
      Thank you for your wise (and kind) words. You wisely see through the modern day New Age Gnostics posing as "saviors." These are tough times and rough days. I'm glad to have good people like you commenting and adding to the value of this blog.

      God Bless,