Monday, September 27, 2021

Kung Fool

On April 6th of this year, the notorious apostate and infamous theologian who helped usher in the Great Apostasy at Vatican II, Fr. Hans Kung, died at age 93. That he did all he could to destroy Catholicism in the mind and hearts of people is undeniable. What is not well-known is that he not only contemplated suicide for himself, but taught that suicide is morally acceptable under certain circumstances. Convincing someone terminally ill and depressed to kill themselves (and it is acceptable to God) is the easiest way to damn a soul to Hell. They allow despair to blind them to the truth that God is the Author of Life and He decides when a person is to depart this world. By convincing the sick to end their lives against what they know about the sacredness of human life (and they are unable to receive the Last Rites) any who do so will most likely be damned.

 This post will examine the life of this evil man, his perverse and whacky teachings, and have a special focus regarding his suicide advocacy. The teaching of the One True Church on suicide will be examined as well.

Hans Kung: An Enemy of Christ from the Start
Kung was born in 1928 and was ordained to the priesthood in 1954. He earned a doctorate in sacred theology in 1957 at the Catholic Institute of the Sorbonne with his dissertation being on Protestant theologian Karl Barth. Less than a year later, the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office opened a file on him (file 399/57i)  for suspicion of Modernism. Although his thesis was orthodox, it was susceptible to misinterpretation; and Cardinal Ottaviani, as Pro-Prefect of the Holy Office, wasn't convinced that the 29 year old theologian hadn't done so on purpose.
(See, e.g. ncronline.org/news/people/hans-k-ng-celebrated-and-controversial-swiss-theologian-has-died as but one source of his early run in with the Holy Office). Just three years later, he was rehabilitated by Roncalli. 

Sure enough, in 1964 Kung published a more elaborate version of the Barth thesis as well as an English edition, Justification: The Doctrine of Karl Barth With a Catholic Reflection which was rife with Protestant errors.  At 34, he was the youngest peritus (i.e., theological expert) at Vatican II. Along with his Modernist comrade, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (later "Pope" Benedict XVI), they eschewed clerical garb and chose to wear a suit and tie instead. Kung hated being called "Father" preferring the title "Dr." or even just "Hans Kung" as he hated the idea of a "priesthood" apart from the Protestant notion of the "priesthood of all believers." 

Kung and Ratzinger were on the side of the heretical Rhineland bishops, serving their de facto ringleader, the despicable Joseph Cardinal Frings. They were a constant voice for Modernism, and sabotaged the efforts of the Traditionalists at every turn. My spiritual father, Fr. Gommar A. DePauw, JCD, was a peritus for Cardinal Ottaviani and Bishop Blaise Kurz in their attempt to stop the Modernist takeover. Fr. DePauw told me of how Ratzinger and his allies battled him frequently at the Council, and were largely responsible for the Great Apostasy in pushing through their heretical agenda. So-called "Vaticanologist" Peter Hebblethwaite, a Jesuit who left the priesthood to marry, wrote that all Kung’s proposals at the Second Vatican Council were accepted, some in modified form, in the council’s final documents. (See nytimes.com/2021/04/06/world/europe/hans-kung-dead.html). 

Interestingly, Ratzinger would turn on his former friend in the 1970s when he was "campaigning for pope." To ingratiate himself with Wotyla (John Paul II), he had Kung's ability to teach as a "Catholic" theologian at "Catholic" institutes of higher learning revoked when Kung refused Ratzinger's order as head of the "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith," to change some theological opinions in two books. Ratzinger helped Wotyla seem "conservative" whilst dismantling all that was Catholic from their new sect. Twenty-six years later, he was rewarded by becoming the next  false pope, and he made amends with Kung. Kung was never dismissed as a priest, and losing his theological status in 1979 turned out to mean only that he was moved to a different part of the same German university teaching "ecumenism."  He wrote many densely researched books, and would draw crowds on lecture tours. 

(I remember the first time I asked Fr. DePauw what he thought of Hans Kung. You always knew when Father didn't like someone; the look of utter contempt and disgust on his face was always unmistakable. After getting such a look from him and before he told me all about him, he began by stating, "I gave lectures for free when I was an academic like him. But mine were intelligible. (long pause) And Catholic."). 

Kung's Theology: Anti-Catholic and Ecumenical
  • Kung's Goal: A One World Religion within a One World New Global Order
In 1993, Kung drafted the Declaration Towards a Global Ethic for the World Parliament of Religions, which was accepted by 200 leaders of 40 sects. It reads:

No new global order without a new global ethic!

We women and men of various religions and regions of Earth therefore address all people, religious and non-religious. We wish to express the following convictions which we hold in common:

• We all have a responsibility for a better global order

• Our involvement for the sake of human rights, freedom, justice, peace, and the preservation of Earth is absolutely necessary

• Our different religious and cultural traditions must not prevent our common involvement in opposing all forms of inhumanity and working for greater humaneness

• The principles expressed in this Global Ethic can be affirmed by all persons with ethical convictions, whether religiously grounded or not

• As religious and spiritual persons we base our lives on an Ultimate Reality, and draw spiritual power and hope therefrom, in trust, in prayer or meditation, in word or silence. We have a special responsibility for the welfare of all humanity and care for the planet Earth. We do not consider ourselves better than other women and men, but we trust that the ancient wisdom of our religions can point the way for the future

Conspicuously absent from a document written by a valid Catholic priest in good standing with the Vatican II sect is any mention of Christ, His One True Church, or the moral teachings of the Church.  Instead, a "global ethic" intended to usher in a "global order" must be produced by "the ancient wisdom of our religions." The "global ethic" is naturalistic, eschewing any supernatural ends, and mentions "Ultimate Reality," a Masonic "Great Architect of the Universe." 

According to religioustolerance.org, Kung's declaration  ...was signed by 143 respected leaders from all of the world's major faiths, including the Baha'i Faith, Brahmanism, Brahma Kumaris, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Indigenous, Interfaith, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Native American, Neo-Pagan, Sikhism, Taoism, Theosophist, Unitarian Universalist and Zoroastrian. The Council for a Parliament of the World's Religions offers it to the world as an initial statement of a group of rules for living on which all of the world's religions can agree.

  • Kung denies Infallibility
In his 1970 book Infallible? An inquiry, Kung asked for "open debate" on the topic by (Modernist) theologians. He also eschews scholastic philosophy and theology which developed the dogma.
Reality Check:
Unfortunately these advocates of novelty easily pass from despising scholastic theology to the neglect of and even contempt for the Teaching Authority of the Church itself, which gives such authoritative approval to scholastic theology. This Teaching Authority is represented by them as a hindrance to progress and an obstacle in the way of science. Some non-Catholics consider it as an unjust restraint preventing some more qualified theologians from reforming their subject. And although this sacred Office of Teacher in matters of faith and morals must be the proximate and universal criterion of truth for all theologians, since to it has been entrusted by Christ Our Lord the whole deposit of faith - Sacred Scripture and divine Tradition - to be preserved, guarded and interpreted, still the duty that is incumbent on the faithful to flee also those errors which more or less approach heresy, and accordingly 'to keep also the constitutions and decrees by which such evil opinions are proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See,'... (See Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, paragraph # 18, 1950)

  • Kung Believes Traditional Sacramental Rites BEFORE Vatican II are Invalid
In 2012, Kung wrote a letter to his friend/enemy Ratzinger (Benedict XVI), asking him not to restore to "full Communion" the four bishops consecrated by Abp. Lefebvre in 1988 because:

The pope would be including in the Church bishops and priests that are definitely invalidly ordained. According to the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul VI  "Pontificalis Romani recognitio", of July 18, 1968, the ordination of bishops and priests by Archbishop Lefebvre is not only illegal but also invalid. This view is shared among others by a relevant member of the "Doctrinal Commission", Karl Josef Becker, SJ, now a cardinal. (See https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/05/freak-extremes-meet-hans-kung-becomes.html).

Implicit in this statement is a false and invented principle, that when the Church changes a Rite, the previous Rite is no longer valid. It is also a true, yet subtle admission, that there is great discontinuity between the Catholic Church and the Vatican II sect; such that they no longer express the same theology and cannot be one and the same Church.

  • In his book The Church (1967), Kung compares believers in the miraculous and approved apparitions to ancient heretics
From the book: As in Montanism, some post-Tridentine visionaries have been dominated by apocalyptic conceptions (prophecies of an imminent end of the world, a great war, an apocalyptic catastrophe, or the conversion of Russia), which causes in the devotees terror and, at the same time, attraction and fascination. This is one of the reasons for their astonishing success... As in Joachimism, there are mystical numbers and anticipated dates: important events have taken place on the 13th day of the month ....As in Joachimism, a new religious congregation is often considered necessary to spread the ideas according to which .... a specific work of piety (a statue, a devotion, a medal) is considered as important as the Word of God witnessed in Scripture. 
(pgs. 282-283)

 Montanism was a second century heresy, and Joachimism refers to the 13th century monks who were fixated on end of the world prophesy.  While no one needs to believe in apparitions and private revelations, and it is not sinful to do so (unless such rejection stems from contempt for Church authority), Kung denigrates Fatima for being a manifestation of the supernatural, condemning such beautiful practices as the Five First Saturdays as some sort of "superstition" and (in typical Protestant fashion) exalting the Bible above all else.

  • Kung Honored by Freemasons
According to the May 26, 2007 edition of The Tablet, we read on pg. 39, "The architect of the Global Ethic Foundation, the Swiss theologian Hans Kung, has been awarded the German Freemasons' Culture Prize. Grand Master Jens Oberheide said that the ideal of a common, ethical foundation based on human rights and the demand for freedom, equality, and fraternity that underlay Kung's foundation, was also 'fundamental' for Freemasons. Although the Vatican has rejected Freemasonry, Kung said the award was an encouragement and added, 'Hope...accompanies every new beginning."


Kung: "When the Going Gets Tough...Kill Yourself"

In his 1984 book Eternal Life?: Life After Death as a Medical, Philosophical, and Theological Problem. Kung teaches that people have the right to die with human dignity, and so there are situations where doctor-assisted suicide is morally acceptable. In 1995 the Swiss apostate, working with Walter Jens and others, published A Dignified Dying: A Plea for Personal Responsibility that discussed psychological and religious aspects of terminal illness and reiterates his earlier thoughts. 

In Eternal Life? Kung writes:
No advocate of a more active assisted death [i.e. Assisted Suicide] thinks that the person becomes "nonhuman" or "no longer human" as a result of incurable sickness, senility or definitive unconsciousness. On the contrary, precisely because man is and remains human, he has a right to live a life worthy of a human being and to die with human dignity, a right that may possibly be denied him if he is continually dependent on surgical apparatus and medicaments: that is, when all that is possible is to go on merely vegetating, to sustain a merely vegetative existence. In this light none of the three partial objectives of assisted dying—prolongation of life, diminishing suffering and preservation of freedom—may be made absolute, but must all be brought into harmony with each other.(pg. 169)

In Wojtyla-esque fashion he appeals to "human dignity" as a justifying reason for assisted suicide. He answers the most common objection, that people do not have the right to determine when they die, and it is for God alone to determine when a person's life should end. He does this by appealing to Church teaching on artificial contraception (!) if you can believe it. The sophist apostate theologian claims that not long ago, all forms of artificial birth control were opposed, because of the common belief that only God determines when a person is born (and when they die), and many theologians argued that using birth control was directly murdering a vast number of descendants, because they were prevented from being born. (There is not one approved theologian that taught such nonsense). 

Now, he asserts the reverse is true, artificial birth control is generally accepted because it has finally been acknowledged that God has placed the beginning of life under the control of humanity. (Generally accepted and taught by the Church are two entirely different things. Moreover, the Vatican II sect is still technically against artificial contraception [e.g., Montini's Humanae Vitae]). Kung writes:

At one time many moral theologians interpreted and rejected active, "artificial" birth control as a denial of God's sovereignty over life, until they had to admit that the beginning also of human life had been placed by God under man's responsibility (not at his [sic] arbitrary choice). It is conceivable that the end too of human life has been placed more than hitherto under the responsibility (not at the whim) of man by the same God, who does not want us to shift off onto him [sic] a responsibility that we ourselves should bear? (Ibid, pg. 170).

The Teaching of the Church on Suicide
Suicide is either direct or indirect, according to both the intention and mode. A person who kills himself from knowledge and choice makes the act direct. The mode is direct if what is done tends by its very nature to cause death (e.g., taking a lethal dose of cyanide). Someone who is mentally ill would only kill himself indirectly. The mode is indirect if that which is done tends from its nature to another end, i.e. to struggle with a criminal wielding a gun. It is wrong to assume that all people are mentally ill, and the suicide is only indirect (although one is free to assume a majority may be psychologically disturbed). 

 Direct  suicide is always a mortal sin that deprives the person of ecclesiastical burial unless they were able to give signs of repentance before death (See Canon 1240, section 3). If the person who attempts suicide is unsuccessful, they are subject to various penalties pronounced in Canon 2350, section 2. If it is doubtful that the person killed himself, the doubt is decided in the decedent's favor that he did not, provided there would be no scandal. 

Suicide is a grave sin for three (3) reasons:

1.It is a most grave offense against the rights of God. The act usurps God's authority over life and death. "Thou, O Lord, hast the power of life and death." (Wisdom 16: 13). Human life has intrinsic worth because it comes from God, and God wills the salvation of all. The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity took on a human nature and died for humanity, to give all a chance to get to Heaven. 

2. It is a grave offense against society. A community has the right to be benefited by the lives of their members. It has a demoralizing effect on those who loved the person. People valuable to society would rashly kill themselves in a fit of depression thinking they are not valuable. Even members of society not able to contribute in any substantial, material way would deprive others of an example of fortitude, or the opportunity to show charity and mercy to the needy. 

3. It is a grave offense against the natural law. You cannot "love thy neighbor as thyself," unless there is love of self (not inordinate). Those who kill themselves to escape pain and miseries, incur the greater evils of death and moral cowardice, to be followed by eternal damnation--the greatest of all evils and suffering.  

(Material above condensed from theologians McHugh and Callan, Moral Theology, 2: 117-123). 

According to theologian O'Donnell, there are two kinds of dominion that are inherent in creation. Dominion means authority or power over another. This is how it applies to suicide:

  • Absolute Dominion. One is said to have absolute dominion in a substance when the substance in question is essentially subordinated to one's final end and has become the object of one's lawful rights. Hence, a man can have absolute dominion in his own property and livestock. Its final purpose is subordinated to and ordered for man's final end, and man may use it as a mere means to his own purposes, even to the extent of destroying the substance.
  • Useful Dominion. Useful dominion is that restricted power or prerogative which a man has in regard to another substance whereby he has the same right to use a thing, but with certain restrictions which are imposed by the higher rights of others. Thus if a man lends me his car or his horse I may lawfully use it, but cannot destroy it for my own purposes because his title to ownership gives him a prior right to the thing.
Dominion in human life. Man can have, at most, only a useful dominion over human life. I may hire another man to work for me and use his labor for my own purposes, but I cannot exercise an absolute dominion in his substance, by destroying it for my own ends and thus relegating him to the position of being a mere means to my own end... Thus when we are dealing with human life---one's own life or the life of another---we are dealing with something in which man can have, at most, only useful dominion. Absolute dominion in human life is an exclusive Divine prerogative; it belongs to God alone. Right order demands that any invasion or diminution of human life be considered in the light of this exclusive Divine prerogative. The doctor must always remember that the lives and the bodies of his patients are not subordinated to himself, as a physician, nor to the State, nor to the science of medicine, nor even to the patient himself. They are subordinated to God alone. (See Morals In Medicine, [1956], pgs. 52-53; Emphasis mine).  

It is not suicide to refuse extraordinary means of preserving life, and palliative care is the best its ever been. For example, in Oregon where assisted suicide is legal, the official reports indicate that the reason more than 90% of those who die from doctor prescribed suicide do so because they are concerned about loss of autonomy and loss of ability to engage in activities making life enjoyable.  Pain concerns are one of the least cited reasons for assisted-suicide requests. (See  Oregon Public Health Division, “Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act – 2014,” Feb. 2, 2015, p. 5). 

From the works of theologians such as Noldin, Connell, Jone, etc. there are three certain general principles:

1. Ordinary means to preserve life must always be used. It seems best defined as those things associated with the basics of life (food, water, rest, clothing, etc.) and what modern medicine can provide. There is never a good reason to starve someone to death. Even in "brain death" or a PVS ("persistent vegetative state"), we cannot know if the person is capable of suffering--suffering we wouldn't want an animal to endure, let alone a human being. 

2. Most of the now commonly available techniques of modern surgery, medicines, and other medicinal practices/devices should be classified as ordinary means of preserving life. 

3. Extraordinary means of preserving life need not be used. Those would seem to include experimental surgery, untested or unproven medicines and the like which cannot be used without prolonged suffering, devastating financial consequences, and offer no substantial chance of recovery.

We must be very careful in what we consider "extraordinary means" of preserving life. In the medical profession, there is the ideal which demands fighting off pain and death until the last possible moment. There is much to be said for that attitude. Many of the great advances in modern medicine, as well as perfection in surgical skill and technique, have been due to what might have frequently been called a "useless prolongation of life/suffering." Modern surgery is only considered an ordinary means of preserving life because of its extensive use in those stages of its development when it was considered an extraordinary means. We must not be too ready to lower that medical ideal, and slow medical progress in the immediate interest of a present case. The future betterment of humanity is also served by attempting "extraordinary means."

Conclusion
Kung is an evil man who, when stricken with Parkinson's Disease and going blind, considered suicide. Did he take the exit that he suggested to others? Of course not. He died at home at age 93. I shudder to think of his most likely sentence at Judgement. He fooled many by helping create the Vatican II sect, posing as the Catholic Church. He tried to fool people to think assisted suicide is moral; perhaps influencing some to take their lives and lose their souls. In 2016, Bergoglio responded to a letter from Kung saying he would "allow for discussions" on "the problem" of infallibility. Infallibility is not a "problem" to discussed, but a dogma to be believed. Some may be fooled into thinking infallibility need not be believed.

Hans Kung wanted a One World Religion, and the Vatican II sect is still working towards it. However, if he thought he could escape God's Judgement, there is no bigger fool than Hans Kung. 


54 comments:

  1. I almost spilled my tea when I read the title, lol!

    It's always good to expose the architects of the New Religion for what they really are. May those of good-will finally open their eyes to the stark reality and stop resisting the Truth. Thank you, Introibo!

    God Bless,
    Joanna S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joanna,
      Kung was truly evil; some don't realize how evil. Comments like yours keep me writing.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  2. The V2 sect is full of individuals like King Kung, starting with the false popes who have deceived the vast majority of Catholics with their false doctrines. The current false pope preaches for ecology and temporal issues rather than dealing with the things a true Pope should do: proclaim the Gospel, condemn the mistakes of the modern world, and convert nations. Bergoglio is one of those of whom Saint John speaks in the first epistle ch.4 v.5: "They are of the world: therefore of the world they speak, and the world heareth them."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      Indeed! They follow the "prince of this world;" "I will not now speak many things with you. For the prince of this world cometh, and in me he hath not any thing." (St. John 14:30)

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Taking the jab, if one knows what it is all about, is like a form of indirect suicide. Certainly it is a form of murder on the part of those who are pushing it. But for those who consent to it, we would reserve judgement, due to the extraordinary amount of lying out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cairsahr__stjoseph,
      I tend to agree, yet we may never know all the facts for some time. Disinformation is at an all-time high. Also, some are forced to comply or lose their job and can't support their families.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Yes, we don't know what the vax can ot cannot do

      Delete
    3. Introibo,
      Could you explain The Mark of the Beast? I have been reading where many people are claiming the vax is the Mark of the Beast. Thanks
      JoAnn

      Delete
    4. Joann,
      According to Fr. Herman Kramer who studied the issue for thirty years, the verse you refer to is found in the Book of the Apocalypse, Chapter 13: 16-18:

      "The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name. This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666."

      The number of the beast (666) means ultimate imperfection. 7=perfection, and the three of something is the highest, so 777 would be symbolic of God. 6=imperfection (coming up one short) so 666 will refer to the Man of Sin (Antichrist).

      According to Fr. Kramer "Antichrist will abolish all class distinction and make his followers alone the elite. It points to something like Communism." Furthermore, "The mark of distinction borne by antichristians will be a brand like that seared on the forehead of slaves in Roman times." (See "The Book of Destiny," [1956],pg. 325).

      What exactly will the mark be? No one knows. Do i think the vaxx is the Mark of the Beast? No, because Antichrist has not yet arrived, but it could be a precursor to the Mark of the Beast.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. Introibo,
      I was thinking also that the vax could be a precursor to the Mark of the Beast by conditioning people to submit.
      JoAnn

      Delete
    6. What are your thoughts on this Introibo?

      https://narrowdesert.blogspot.com/2021/09/greek-orthodox-archimandrite-fr-savvas.html

      Delete
    7. @anon10:09
      Do I believe in the vaxx? No (except in rare cases where someone old and sick may die either way--they might take the risk). Do I trust anything coming from an EO heretic? No.

      We just have to wait and see how all this plays out.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    8. The tale is interesting but I got to admit that it doesn't feel true. The vax is very mysterious.

      Delete
    9. A coworker who used to be friendly w me (nothing life changing just a friendly face) now says nothing to me and is even cold at times.
      This person received the jab 4 weeks ago.
      Very interesting though the blog story may not be true.
      -A

      Delete
  4. Is it sinfull to participate in an art contest in a venue/website were indecent graphic material is published?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon12:59
      If the venue allows indecency and is an occasion of sin, one must not participate.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  5. I'm sure I remember but what's a good argument against those like the dimonds who say the body of theologians are not an extension of the magisterium. Mainly in regards to V2. If the majority of theologians went along with V2 wouldn't the body of theologians be protected from error since they have reached moral unanimity? Like I said I'm sure I remember you addressing this point in a previous post but since we're talking theologians I figured it would be a nice refresher.

    Thanks my friend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David,
      What Fred and Bobby don't seem to understand is that we are talking about APPROVED theologians, i.e., those under the watchful eye of the pope and his bishops. If there is no pope, and the bishops apostatize along with them, they cannot be approved. It is analogous to an appliance no longer plugged into the power source. They then can fall into error--both individually and as a body.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Gotcha makes sense. I've seen NO defenders try to use similar arguments pro V2. Thanks again for the reply.
      God bless.

      Delete
  6. Goodnight,I had no idea Fr.Kung was this malevolent.
    Yes I knew he was bad but not to this extent.
    Thank you for this well researched article.
    God bless -Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      The evil of the Modernists seems limitless.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Modernists are as evil as their writing is obtuse.

      Delete
    3. @Ryan
      100% agree as I remember being young and being utterly frustrated bored etc by trying to learn about what I thought was Catholicism.
      I turned away from the Church for many yrs and their writings were one reason.
      In my opinion this was one of their objectives and it worked like a charm.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  7. Introibo: you, my friend, should write a book or a short treatise on the many Catholic truths that you learned from Father Depauw.

    Though I never met "your priest", I did know another priest who was regularly ordained before Vatican II and who also never once "offered" the N.O., nor even attended this devilish facsimile of the Holy Sacrifice. (Actually, he said he attended one N.O. when it was first "mandated" --- but he got up and walked out in the middle of it.)

    Such older priests, in my opinion, offer something that the younger ones can't: a bona fide experience of the life of the Church, with a true pontiff at her head.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon2:49
      The "biographical data" (so to speak) about Father rests with the Board of Directors of the CTM just as he wished. I will honor that wish, of course. However, my personal anecdotes as you suggested is another story. I just might do that when I retire in four years and can give it the time and attention it deserves!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I second this request! Anytime you mention Fr. De Pauw it is very edifying. Thank you! About that Board of Directors, I would assume it has changed over since Father died, correct? FYI, The Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation has the rights to his memoirs and books, but they do make them available, one has to find an expensive copy on eBay.

      Delete
    3. @Anonymous 2:49PM
      What was the name of your Priest friend?
      -Andrew

      Delete
    4. @anon12:28
      I will definitely do it when I retire! The Cardinal Mindszenty Foundation, as per agreement with Father, returned ownership to the CTM Board of Directors in 2005 upon their request after Father DePauw went to Judgement.

      The President of the Board, Mr. Richard Cuneo, is still President of the five member Board. He appoints Directors to replace those who die or resign. He has appointed two since then. All firmly support Mr. Cuneo, so I see no change in direction/leadership for quite some time. I have known Mr. Cuneo for 40 years. He is a good person, but we have disagreements, so I will never get an appointment to the Board.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. Mind bending to think even clerics such as Cardinal's Mindszenty and Heenan and Bishop Ackermam didn't pass on traditional Rite Apostolic Succession.
      -Andrew

      Delete
  8. Do any of you think the new anti-Pope decree limiting their doubtful Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will bring Souls to traditional Chapels which hold the
    Sede-vacantist or Sede-privationist opinion?
    -Andrew

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andrew,
      In my opinion, it will certainly help. Here in NY the SSPV had to open a chapel (in addition to their Church) on Long Island to accommodate a number of SSPX chapel members who left due to Bergoglio soon after he was "elected."

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  9. Today is the Day of St Jerome, Patron Saint of Librarians.
    Pray for the success of the Catholic Archive!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Catholic Archive,
      Your laudatory and edifying work is much needed and a great service to God. I will pray for your success always, and I ask all my readers to do the same!

      God Bless your family, your work, and you!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. Kung died aged 93. Gregory Baum died at the age of 94. Henri Fesquet, a despicable figure of French "liberal Catholicism" spreading heresies and blasphemies through his journalism, is still alive at the age of 105!
    It occurred to me that God seems to be giving such horrbile apostates long years for repentence as if He wanted to show us their diabolical obstinacy in sin is irreversible, that were they to live for another 100 years, they would still despise God and His Holy Church. This is what pride does to the heart and mind.

    God Bless,
    Joanna S.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We must not forget the antipope emeritus, who is still alive but whose hour of Judgment is approaching.

      Delete
    2. Also, remember the adenachrome theories. 🤔🤔🤔 Just saying.

      Delete
    3. The last Pius XII appointed Bishop died last at 104 yrs old.
      There were at least one Holy Mass offered for him a year before he died and offered after his Death.
      I agree our Blessed Lord gave these men many yrs to repent.
      Valid Bishop Leo Gerety is another example. Excellent insight.
      God bless -A

      Delete
    4. Bishop Leo Gerety*
      The 104 yr old Bishop was named
      Bp.Bernadino Pinera.

      Also please pray 1 decade of the Holy Rosary for all living valid Bishops and Priests within the Novus Ordo to become traditional Catholics.
      We need to step it up and pray for these Men daily.
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
    5. Andrew,
      it's indeed imperative that we pray for these validly ordained priests to convert to the True Faith, and four our valid traditionalist clergy and seminarians.

      God Bless You,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    6. Joanna,
      Great insight indeed!

      Andrew,
      Peter Gerety, a valid bishop (cons. 1966) was Vatican II sect bishop of Newark, NJ. A Modernist monster, he persecuted my friend and faithful priest turned Traditionalist, Fr. Paul Wickens (ord. 1955; d. 2004). I shudder to think where Gerety is now.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    7. +Gerety was succeeded by Theodore McCarrick, who might serve as another example where traditional ordination is guarantee of rectitude, although Gerety was an example of horrible un-Catholic politics not moral depravity. Perhaps he repented but men so close to earthly power tend to worship it and not God. I suspect Francis will do his best to ensure that the depraved McCarrick lives in comfort, as the lucrative and secret deal he brokered with Communist China to sell out its Catholics ensures comfort for the Modernist Vatican. Although if he repents, Francis might cut him off.

      Please pray for me for a private intention. I will pray for you.

      Delete
  11. Prayers for a relative. who is very sick.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Be assured of my prayers, Poni!

      God Bless,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    2. Praying for them Poni.
      God bless -Andrew

      Delete
    3. Poni,
      Be assured of my prayers as always, and I will remember your sick relative. I ask my readers to please do the same.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Thanks I am praying for you too.

      Delete
  12. Just asking, but have people become possessed by listening to AC/DC or bands of the kind?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Poni,
      It can lead to demonic vexation as well as possession. If you're singing "Highway to Hell" and mentioning "Father Satan" it goes without saying that is bad news. Whatever evil you invite into your life will take you up on the offer, to one degree or another.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. BTW, I DONT sing Highway to Hell. The one who does is "Abbot" Notker Wolf, who plays in a band called Feedback. He is the leader of benedictones in the Novus Ordo. St. Benedict left Rome to avoid temptations and was later mistreated by the devil. What would he say?

      Delete
    3. Hi Introibo,

      Completely unrelated, what are your thoughts on tattoos? I think they're stupid, but as far whether or not they're morally permissible, I can't figure it out and don't really know where to look.

      Thanks,
      Dapouf

      Delete
  13. Oh, adding onto my question about the morality of tattoos, I should be explicit that I'm referring particularly to tattoos that are not inappropriate (like contain sexually explicit, satanic, etc. images, words, etc.).

    Dapouf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dapouf,
      According to theologian Zalba, mutilation of the body is defined as: "the destruction of some member or the suppression of some function of the body." (See Regatillo-Zalba, Theologiae moralis summa 2 [1953] n. 251).

      Are tattoos and body piercings "mutilation of the body"? I was unable to find any theologian who tackled this problem head-on, and there are no Magisterial pronouncements either. It must therefore be presumed permissible in general. However, the morality (and advisability) are separate issues.

      Some pertinent questions to consider:
      Does this particular act of tattooing or body piercing involve a risk to my health?

      Would this act mutilate me—that is, would it inhibit the proper functioning of my skin or another organ of my body?

      Is the explicit message of my tattoo compatible with love of God and neighbor?

      Is the implicit message of my tattoo compatible with love of God and neighbor? Does it convey an implicitly unchaste message?

      Why do I want to get a tattoo or have my body pierced? Vanity? To be with the "in" crowd?

      In my opinion, tattoos and body piercings (esp on women) are unsightly, and unnecessarily make ugly your body which is indwelt by the Holy Ghost. Pagans used tattoos and Christians from antiquity avoided them. I don't have any, nor did I ever consider one for those reasons.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Every attractive woman I've known who gets tatoos slowly starts looking very unattractive.
      -Andrew

      Delete