To Lead Astray, If Possible, Even The Elect

 

In last week's post, I attempted to give some reasons as to why miracles don't always happen, no matter how sincere our prayers and how laudable our intentions. Some of my readers asked for a follow-up post on how to discern true miracles from false ones. After all, the Vatican II sect claims miracles as proof of their counterfeit Catholicism. What makes those miracles false? Our Lord Jesus Christ warned us, "Beware of false prophets, who come to thee in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." (St. Matthew 7:15). In the days of the Great Apostasy in which we live, it is more necessary than ever to be able to discern the false from the true. 

Brief Summary of Church Teaching on Miracles

I will reiterate what I had written before:

The definition of a miracle. According to theologian Parente, the word miracle comes from the Latin word miror---I wonder. In the broad sense, it is an extraordinary event which calls attention and excites wonder. Theologians explain it is: (a) done by God as principle cause; (b) done in the world; (c) in a way superior to all forces of nature; and outside or above, but not in violation of the laws of nature, but by an exceptional happening brought about by a divine power that intervenes in created things, producing an effect superior to their natural power. The possibility of the miracle rests chiefly on the absolute dominion of God as the First and Free Cause of the Universe, Whose laws are subordinate to Him and cannot limit either His freedom of action or His power. Only the logically impossible and that which violates His Nature (sin) are impossible to Him. (See Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology, [1951], pg. 188).  

Miracles are an effect wrought in nature by the direct intervention of God. They are proofs of the truth of the Catholic religion.

Proof: From the Oath Against Modernism promulgated by Pope St. Pius X for all clerics on September 1, 1910:

Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. (Emphasis mine)

From the Vatican Council (1870):

If anyone shall say that miracles are impossible, and therefore that all the accounts regarding them, even those contained in Holy Scripture, are to be dismissed as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianity cannot be proved by them; let him be anathema.

Miracles cannot be used to help give credibility to that which is false. Any "miracle" that does so is either (a) naturally explained, and therefore not a miracle, or (b) of demonic origin.

Proof: A miracle is a deed that is sensible, extraordinary, and of divine origin. Hence, since transubstantiation is not sensible, it cannot be considered a miracle in the strict sense. Miracles can only be used to support that which is true and good. It is impossible for God to deceive. Moreover, God would equivalently be producing falsehood if He were performing some miracles in order to demonstrate that some false doctrines or a doctrine that is altogether human has been revealed by Himself. We should recognize that God allows extraordinary things to be performed by the devil. (See theologian Tanquerey, A Manual of Dogmatic Theology, [1959], 1:40-45; Emphasis mine)

In Exodus 7: 8-13, we read:

The Lord said to Moses and Aaron, "When Pharaoh says to you, 'Perform a miracle,' then say to Aaron, 'Take your staff and throw it down before Pharaoh,' and it will become a snake." So Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did just as the Lord commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a snake. Pharaoh then summoned wise men and sorcerers, and the Egyptian magicians also did the same things by their secret arts: Each one threw down his staff and it became a snake. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staffs. Yet Pharaoh’s heart became hard and he would not listen to them, just as the Lord had said." (Emphasis mine).

While we must believe in miracles (especially those contained in the Holy Bible), we are not bound to believe in every specific event claimed to be miraculous. We should only give credence to those events considered miracles by the authority of the Church. 

Proof: Many events thought to be miraculous were denied as such by the Magisterium of the Church prior to the defection of the hierarchy at Vatican II. 

• Many people claimed that they saw the statue of Our Lady of Assisi move and smile. (1948) The Church later declared there was no apparition of Our Lady in Assisi, and no miraculous events.

• There are people hundreds of years into the canonization process as of 1958 (death of Pope Pius XII) whose alleged miracles were never confirmed despite large numbers of witnesses.

• Theresa Neumann (d. 1962) was alleged to have survived only on the Eucharist for 30 years, and claimed the stigmata. The Church has never confirmed nor denied these miraculous claims which were investigated beginning in 1928.

Types of Miracles 

According to theologian Tanquerey:

A miracle is physical, intellectual, or moral, according to whether it happens beyond the laws of the physical, intellectual, or moral order. In the past theologians made this distinction among miracles: beyond nature, above nature, and against nature. A miracle is said to be beyond nature when the miraculous effect could have been brought about by nature, but in a completely different way; a miracle is said to be above nature when it could not have been produced by nature in any manner; a miracle is contrary to [against] nature when nature, following its usual laws would have produced the opposite effect. However, a miracle is not against nature directly, but more truly it is against the tendency that is a part of any nature. (See Manual of Dogmatic Theology, [1959], 1:38; Emphasis in original). 

Miracles in the intellectual order would be, e.g., the knowledge of the Apostles gained regarding the Truths of the Faith at Pentecost. Miracles of the moral order would be like the Apostles who were afraid, now embracing martyrdom with supernatural fortitude. I will limit discussion in this post to miracles in the physical order, which are four in number: healings, exorcisms, raising the dead, and power over the forces of nature. (Exorcisms are a special healing of the body of a person  possessed by a demon).

We must remember miracles:

• Are performed for the glory of God and the good of humanity, and are the primary or supreme ends of every miracle.

• Are evidences attesting and confirming the truth of a Divine mission, or of a doctrine of faith or morals

• Are wrought to attest to true sanctity. Thus, e.g., God defends Moses ( See Numbers 12)

• Benefits either spiritual or temporal. The temporal favors are always subordinate to spiritual ends, for they are a reward or a pledge of virtue, e.g. the widow of Sarephta (1 Kings 17), the Three Children in the fiery furnace (Daniel 3), the preservation of Daniel (Daniel 5), the deliverance of St. Peter from prison (Acts 12), of St. Paul from shipwreck (Acts 27). Thus semeion, i.e., "sign", completes the meaning of dynamis, i.e., "[Divine] power". It reveals the miracle as an act of God's supernatural Providence over men. It gives a positive content to teras, i.e., "wonder", for, whereas the wonder shows the miracle as a deviation from the ordinary course of nature, the sign gives the purpose of the deviation. 

(Above bullet points taken from the 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia)

Vatican II Sect "Healings"

Through the "Catholic" Charismatic Movement, "miracles of healing" allegedly abound. Other Vatican II sect clergy eschew the supernatural entirely; the sect encompasses both errors and shuns the truth which lies in the middle. Miracles are performed in the Church only when necessary according to circumstances of time and place; consequently they will be more frequent in one age than another. At the beginning of the Church, they were more necessary. As Pope St. Gregory the Great wrote, "Miracles were necessary in the beginning of the Church that the faith might grow by their nourishment. In the same way we water newly planted trees until we see they have taken root in the soil; then we cease to water them any longer." (See theologian Berry The Church of Christ, [1955], pg. 67). 

Theologian Tanquerey gives four categories to be considered when distinguishing true miracles from  diabolical prodigies:

1. The character of the miracle worker (where there is one)

2. The manner in which the miracle takes place

3. The effects of the miracle

4. The doctrine with which the miracle is connected

(Ibid, pg. 44)

Many so-called "miracles" are healings performed within the context of a "healing service" usually during the Novus Bogus "mass." Not all false miracles are of demonic origin. Before moving on to those phonies, there are healings which are psychologically induced, and those of charlatans. These will be examined first.

A) Mind Over Matter

Most of those caught up in these "healing services" do not want to hear of demonic influence (which probably occurs in some of them). They are not open to hearing that Satan will gladly cure a malady (inflicted by him) in order to bring about the "cure" and keep a soul in a false religion leading to perdition. Many so-called healings are the result of the power of suggestion. Some ailments are caused by the power of suggestion (known as psychosomatic illness). So too, can the mind cure certain ailments. According to Dr. Paul Brand, who studied such cases and co-published an article in Christianity Today entitled, "A Surgeon's View of Divine Healing" ( issue of November 25, 1983), he cites the following documented examples:

• In the placebo effect, faith in simple sugar pills stimulates the mind to control pain and even heal some disorders. In certain experiments, among those with terminal cancer, morphine was an effective pain killer in two-thirds of patients, but placebos were equally effective in half of those! The placebo tricks the mind into believing relief has come, and the body responds accordingly.

• Through biofeedback, people can train themselves to direct bodily processes that previously were thought involuntary. They can control blood pressure, heart rate, brain waves, and even vary the temperature in their hands by as much as 14 degrees.

• Under hypnosis, 20 percent of patients can be induced to lose consciousness of pain so completely that they can undergo surgery without anesthetics. Some patients have even cured warts under hypnosis. The hypnotist suggests the idea, and the body performs a remarkable feat of skin renovation and construction, involving the cooperation of thousands of cells in a mental-directed process otherwise unobtainable.

• In a false pregnancy (known as pseudocyesis), a woman believes so strongly in her condition that her mind directs an extraordinary sequence of activities: it increases hormone flow, enlarges breasts, suspends menstruation, induces morning sickness, and even prompts labor contractions. All this occurs even though there is no physical cause, that is, no fertilization and growing fetus inside. 

B) Charlatans (Frauds)

To give but one example, Theresa Caputo (nee Brigandi) (b. 1966) is popularly known as the "Long Island Medium." A member of the Vatican II sect, she claims to talk to the dead. Ron Tebo, a private investigator, has declared her a fraud. "For her more on-point readings, Tebo believes Caputo may arrive fully prepared: He suspects her assistants run a background check or even eavesdrop on certain audience members outside the theater to guarantee a catch." (See RadarOnline, 6/4/14). She has published two books, the latest entitled, You Can't Make This Stuff Up : Life Changing Lessons From Heaven (2014). The fact that being a medium puts one in contact with demons and is condemned explicitly by the Bible and Church teaching does nothing to make the Vatican II sect excommunicate her or even warn against what she does. 

According to theologian Jone, "Spiritism claims to be able to communicate with the spirit world and endeavors to establish such commerce with it. Although spiritism is for the most part fraud, still the intention alone to enter into communication with spirits is gravely sinful. Therefore, it is mortally sinful to conduct a spiritistic seance or to act as a medium." (See Moral Theology, pg. 100; Emphasis mine). 

C) Demonic Counterfeits--Historical Example

[The following account is an example of how some members of the One True Church can be fooled by alleged miracles of a so-called saintly nun. Some, knowing the teaching of the Church well, were not fooled. Let this historical record serve as a warning to us who do not have the privilege of a pope and hierarchy united with him.---Introibo]. 

The case of Sr. Magdalena of the Cross

(Condensed from mysticsofthechurch.com/2011/12/sister-magdalena-of-cross-nun-who-made.html, and other sources; I take no credit for writing this account.--Introibo). 

A devout child, at the age of five she was praying in her church in Cordoba when she heard beautiful, ethereal music and a handsome young man with long black hair appeared before her. He was assumed to be Jesus Himself, and word spread through the city.

She had visions; she fell into ecstasy. She made a lame man walk and a deaf man hear. Someone looked in her eyes when she was in a trance and saw the heavens and the Holy Trinity and the Communion of Saints. At age ten she tried to crucify herself on a wall. Dying from the infected wounds, on Easter Sunday she tore off her bandages and said that Jesus had cured her. She stopped eating, but seemed healthy. She whipped herself bloody, but the wounds healed overnight. Strangely, two of her fingers had not grown; they remained the size of a small child’s. Some believed those were the fingers Jesus had touched in her first vision.

At seventeen she joined a Franciscan convent. She carried a heavy cross around the convent, kissed her companions’ feet, and ate only Holy Communion. Her fame spread. On the day she took her vows and became Magdalena of the Cross, the archbishop himself came to the ceremony, and rather than exhorting her to Christian piety, as is usual, he asked her for her prayers. A dove descended from the ceiling of the cathedral, landed on her shoulder, and seemed to speak into her ear. Then it flew outside and rose straight up into the sky. The news traveled, people all over Spain wrote for help from her prayers, donations poured into the convent. She predicted various events that all came true.

Then, on the day of the Feast of the Annunciation in 1518, she told her abbess that she was pregnant. She had never left the convent; the only man she saw was her confessor. The archbishop sent three midwives to examine her and her virginity was intact. On Christmas Eve she announced that she was about to give birth, but that her guardian angel had told her she must do this completely alone to increase her suffering. She was locked in a little house; the whole convent prayed.

She later told them that at midnight she had given birth to a magnificent child who radiated blinding light; the cold air of her chamber had become warm. Her hair suddenly grew very fast so she could swaddle the child in it, and it miraculously turned from black to blonde and then to black again. On Christmas morning, she found herself alone, the baby gone, her breasts chapped from suckling. The midwives were called in again, and confirmed that she indeed had the marks of childbirth.

Thanks to this miracle, her convent became the richest in Spain. Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain, and Queen Isabella asked for a piece of her habit to wrap around their own expected baby, the future Prince Philip II, in order to give the royal child the “assistance of a living saint from birth, to envelop him in Divine grace.” The archbishop consulted Magdalena on the construction of a new cathedral and largely used the convent’s overflowing treasury to build it.

She was made the abbess of the convent and imposed severe mortifications and penances. The nuns were to crawl on their knees and make the sign of the cross with their tongues on each other’s shoes; cord whips were replaced with iron-tipped ones. Contrary to the tradition that self-mortification should be done in darkness and solitude, Mother Magdalena ordered that the nuns perform it with candles lit and in front of the others. They were encouraged to wear crowns of thorns and belts with spikes pointing inward, to kneel on nail-studded boards, to stretch out on the floor and have the other nuns walk over them. They were ordered to confess to graver sins than they had ever admitted, but as for Magdalena herself, St. Francis had appeared before her and told her she no longer needed to confess at all.

In 1543, she fell seriously ill and was near death, normally the moment for a confession of one’s entire life. But as soon as her confessor put on his stole, she went into convulsions. It was suspected that she might be possessed by demons. An exorcist was called. He noticed that in her ecstasies her eyes were not fixed, one of the hallmarks of true rapture. He stabbed her with a needle and she had no reaction. Then he dipped the needle in holy water and stabbed her again. She moaned, a sure sign of possession.

She was told she would not live to see the next Christmas. She suddenly sat up in bed and cried out: “1544! The forty years as announced! I am a cursed dog! Take me to Hell!” She screamed “revolting blasphemies,” rose into the air and was suspended there. Another exorcist was called. Horrible words and demonic laughter issued from her mouth. The cardinal ordered an inquisitor to investigate, and gradually the story was revealed:

The beautiful young man she had seen as a child was not Jesus, but a devil named Balban, who turned into a shimmering mist and then into a monster with a toothless mouth, a wide, flat nose, and twisted horns, and then back into a beautiful young man again. He promised her fame for forty years if she consented always to obey him; he left the mark of the devil on the two fingers that never grew.

It was Balban who secretly fed her all the years when she claimed to eat nothing but Communion [she never received Communion. When it was time to receive at Mass, she would fall to the floor and claim "Jesus put the Host directly into her mouth." A lie from Hell). Her pregnancy was a cruel joke they had played on the nuns and the clergy. She was "impregnated" so as to mock the Virgin Birth.  Exorcised and repentant, Magdalena was sent to prison. She begged the Inquisition to consign her to the flames, but it was decided—perhaps to save face among the many influential people she had deceived—that the fault was the demon’s, influencing a young child, and that this pact with the devil had finally ended after forty years.

She was sent to another convent, where she lived for many more years in blameless expiation for her sins.

The Teaching of the Church Applied to Vatican II Sect "Healings"

1. The character of the miracle worker.

Here is a brief bio of four Vatican II sect clergy who "heal" people "miraculously:"

1. "Fr" Richard McAlear was "ordained" in 1970, and began his "healing ministry" in connection with involvement with the Catholic (sic) Charismatic Movement in 1976. He says a "healing mass" in which "After attending Father McAlear's healing mass, many individuals experience emotions that are sometimes too powerful to express in human language; all experience a deep peace." (See http://www.frmac.org/about-the-ministry.html)

2. "Fr" Fernando Suarez was "ordained" in 2002 and is currently 55 years old. He is Filipino and on January 26, 2008, two people died and seven were rushed to James Gordon Hospital, Olongapo City while waiting for Suarez' "healing mass." Juanito Eleazar, 69, was one of those who died. She had a heart attack amid more than 15,000 worshipers having lined-up 

3. Fr. Ralph DiOrio was ordained in 1957. He claims that "On Sunday, May 9th, 1976 (Mother’s Day), Father Ralph Anthony DiOrio, Jr. was openly blessed with the Holistic Charisma of Healings." (whatever that means). He claims that he knew he had the "gift of healing" his whole life. He is quoted in People magazine as saying, "Whether church officials of any denomination accept us or not, we’re here to stay. That’s God’s plan, not mine." His "healing ceremonies" resemble a Protestant revival. He retired January 2017. 

4. Fr. Francis MacNutt (d. 2020) was ordained in 1956. He became involved in the Catholic (sic) Charismatic Movement during the late 1960s. In 1980, he broke his vows to "marry" a woman more than 20 years his junior and set up a "healing ministry." In 1993, the Vatican II sect granted him a "dispensation" from his vows and "Bishop" John Snyder performed their Church wedding in Florida. In 2007, the Modernist Vatican co-sponsored an international conference with his "Christian Healing Ministries" for 450 Catholic (sic) leaders from 42 countries. He turned the organization over to his concubine when he turned 92. 

These are four "characters," alright. Ask anyone who is caught up in these "healing masses":  To what doctrine of faith and/or morals do they attest? That false sects are a "means of salvation"? That "there is no Catholic God"?

Do any of the aforementioned healers seem especially holy?

What benefits are given? "Emotions and a feeling of deep peace"?

2. The manner in which the miracle takes place. 

Beware of the following which inevitably happens at these "healing masses(sic):"

The "Healer" claims "you must have faith" and "If you don't believe strongly enough, God can't heal you." God is in control of the universe and faith is not some condition without which He cannot act. God can cure whomever He wishes, in His Divine Providence. Someone without faith may be cured because of others praying for them, or because of a greater spiritual good that will result for the one healed, or perhaps another. Of the thirty-seven (37) miracles Christ performed as recorded in the Bible, fifteen (15) were done with no faith on the part of the recipient (e.g., the healing of the ear of Malchus in St. Luke 22: 49-51). On the other hand, psychological healings (power of suggestion) does require belief--not in the true faith, but in the "healer" or even a placebo.

The "Healer" needs to touch you or have you place your hands on some object (blessed or not).

God does not need anyone to touch anything to heal. Consider how Christ brought Lazarus back from the dead without touching him, and He healed the centurion's servant from afar. Making contact with people (or objects--"put your hands on the TV and be healed" as those phony Protestant "televangelists" would declare back in the 1970s and 80s) is part of a psychological build up.

The "Healer" claims the cure is gradual. Miraculous cures are instantaneous and permanent. People who claim they "begin to feel better" and then go to doctors to complete the "miracle" shows a true case of psychological healing, not Divine Intervention.

3. The effects of the miracle.

The people are convinced that the Vatican II sect, with all its heretical teachings is really the Roman Catholic Church, thereby keeping them in grave error.

4. The doctrine with which the miracle is connected. 

Modernism.

Most of these "healing services or masses" are conducted like Protestant revivals, where the emotions of those present are worked up to the point of making them susceptible to induce certain cures. Point to be made: tell those involved with these "healing masses" that mental suggestion, charlatans who place false people in the audience to be "healed," and demonic activity to dupe people, can all be possible causes of "miraculous cures."

Conclusion

What about Novus Bogus wafers that "bleed," etc.?  Again, look at the criteria. Why wouldn't Satan want people to think a Masonic bread and wine service is "mass"? The Vatican has been faking miracles. In one of the alleged “miracles” used in the “canonization” Of Mother Teresa, it involved the cure of a young Indian woman, Monica Besra, who claimed that a tumor on her ovary was cured when a medal of Mother Teresa was touched to her body where she felt pain.

Dr. Ranjan Mustafi, the chief gynecologist treating her, claims that it was the four drugs to which she was responding. The Vatican never contacted Dr. Mustafi to investigate, and nevertheless claimed "there was no medical explanation" for her cure.

The Vatican II sect has false miracles to complement its false worship, false sacraments and false beliefs/morals. This should not surprise us. It was taught by the theologians of the Church that this would happen. According to theologian Berry: The prophesies of the Apocalypse show that Satan will imitate the Church of Christ to deceive mankind; he will set up a church of Satan in opposition to the Church of Christ. Antichrist will assume the role of Messias; his prophet will act the part of the Pope, and there will be imitations of the Sacraments of the Church. There will also be lying wonders in imitation of the miracles wrought in the Church.  (Ibid, pgs. 65-66; Emphasis in original). 

Look to the definition and criteria for authentic miracles as taught by the Church. Anyone who claims something is "a miracle," should be viewed in light of said criteria. Whatever draws people away from the truth of the One True Church, do not believe it.  No one is required to believe any particular miracle not approved by the Church; therefore in these times I suggest staying away from any "miraculous claims." Remember well the words of Our Lord, "For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive, if possible, even the elect." (St. Matthew 24:24). 

Expecting Miracles

 

It has been my experience that most people who lose their Faith do so over emotional issues rather than intellectual ones. When you read the Bible, it is full of miraculous accounts. In the New Testament alone, Our Lord Jesus Christ performs no less than 37 specifically recorded miracles, not including His Resurrection. Jesus Christ:

• Turns Water into Wine at the Wedding in Cana (St. John 2:1-11)

• Cures an Official's Son at Capernaum in Galilee (St. John 4:43-54)

• Drives Out an Evil Spirit From a Man in Capernaum (St. Luke 4:31-36)

• Cures Peter's Mother-in-Law Sick With Fever (St. Mark 1:29-31)

• Cures Many Sick and Oppressed at Evening (St. Matthew 8:16-17)

• Produces The First Miraculous Catch of Fish on the Lake of Gennesaret (St. Luke 5:1-11)

• Cures a Man With Leprosy (St. Luke 5:12-14)

• Cures a Centurion's Paralyzed Servant in Capernaum (St. Matthew 8:5-13)

• Cures a Paralytic Who Was Let Down From the Roof (St. Mark 2:1-12)

• Cures a Man's Withered Hand on the Sabbath (St. Matthew 12:9-14)

• Raises a Widow's Son From the Dead in Nain (St. Luke 7:11-17)

• Calms a Storm on the Sea (St. Mark 4:35-41)

• Casts Demons into a Herd of Pigs (St. Luke 8:26-39)

• Cures a Woman in the Crowd With a Hemorrhage  (St. Mark 5:25-34)

• Raises Jairus' Daughter Back to Life (St. Luke 8:40-42; 49-56) 

• Cures Two Blind Men (St. Matthew 9:27-31)

• Cures a Man Who Was Unable to Speak (St. Matthew 9:32-34)

• Cures an Invalid at Bethesda (St. John 5:1-15)

• Feeds 5,000 Plus Women and Children (St. Luke 9:10-17)

• Walks on Water (St. Mark 6:45-52)

• Cures Many Sick in Gennesaret as They Touch His Garment (St. Matthew 14:34-36)

• Drives the Demon Out of a Gentile Woman's Demon-Possessed Daughter (St Mark 7:24-30)

• Cures a Deaf and Mute Man (St. Mark 7:31-37)

• Feeds 4,000 Plus Women and Children (St. Matthew 15:32-39)

• Cures a Blind Man at Bethsaida (St. Mark 8:22-26)

• Cures a Man Born Blind  (St. John 9:1-12)

• Exorcises a Boy With an Unclean Spirit (St. Luke 9:37-43)

• Produces a Miraculous Temple Tax in a Fish's Mouth (St. Matthew 17:24-27)

• Cures and Exorcises a Blind, Mute Demoniac (St. Luke 11:14-23)

• Cures a Woman Who Had Been Crippled for 18 Years (St. Luke 13:10-17)

• Cures a Man With Dropsy on the Sabbath (St. Luke 14:1-6)

• Cures Ten Lepers on the Way to Jerusalem (St. Luke 17:11-19)

• Raises Lazarus from the Dead in Bethany (St. John 11:1-45)

• Restores Sight to Bartimaeus in Jericho (St. Luke 18:35-43)

• Withers the Fig Tree on the Road From Bethany (St. Mark 11:12-14)

• Heals a Servant's Severed Ear While He Is Being Arrested (St. Luke 22:50-51)

• Produces a Second Miraculous Catch of Fish at the Sea of Tiberias (St. John 21:4-11)

(N.B. Some of these miracles are recorded in more than one Gospel. For sake of brevity, I cited only one reference for those miracles.---Introibo). 

Traditionalists will often pray, make novenas, have Masses offered, etc. for some urgent necessity. Many times, they are asking God to prevent a loved one from dying of a disease or prevent a calamity, such as losing their house in a hurricane. When the loved one dies, or the calamity is not averted, they become bitter. "God raised Lazarus from the dead, so why couldn't He stop my (mother/father, wife/husband, sibling, best friend, etc.) from dying?" "Christ calmed the storm and walked on water but couldn't prevent my house from being destroyed?" This will often lead to anger at God, and they will cease to practice the Faith--or what's worse--lose their Faith to become agnostics or atheists.

The atheist publisher of Skeptic magazine, Michael Shermer, was once a devout Protestant. He relates how the paralysis of his college girlfriend lead to his atheism. She was in an automobile accident that broke her back and rendered her paralyzed from the waist down. Shermer declared, "If anyone deserved to be healed it was her, and nothing happened, so I just thought there was probably no God at all."(See wsj.com/articles/michael-shermers-skeptical-eye-1504279779).

When something like this happens, some well-meaning Traditionalist (layman or clergyman) will usually say something unhelpful, such as, "We must accept this as God's Will." The statement is true, but intellectually unsatisfying. "Why was this God's Will? Why is everything some 'mystery'?" To be certain, some people are so overwhelmed with emotion, no amount of reason can reach them. In this post, I will attempt to give some reasons as to why miracles don't always happen, no matter how sincere our prayers and how laudable our intentions. Perhaps by being well-informed prior to an experience of this sort, someone can come to peace and keep the Faith. 

Church Teaching on Miracles in Brief

The definition of a miracle. According to theologian Parente, the word miracle comes from the Latin word miror---I wonder. In the broad sense, it is an extraordinary event which calls attention and excites wonder. Theologians explain it is: (a) done by God as principle cause; (b) done in the world; (c) in a way superior to all forces of nature; and outside or above, but not in violation of the laws of nature, but by an exceptional happening brought about by a divine power that intervenes in created things, producing an effect superior to their natural power. The possibility of the miracle rests chiefly on the absolute dominion of God as the First and Free Cause of the Universe, Whose laws are subordinate to Him and cannot limit either His freedom of action or His power. Only the logically impossible and that which violates His Nature (sin) are impossible to Him. (See Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology, [1951], pg. 188).  

Miracles are an effect wrought in nature by the direct intervention of God. They are proofs of the truth of the Catholic religion.

Proof: From the Oath Against Modernism promulgated by Pope St. Pius X for all clerics on September 1, 1910:

Secondly, I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time. (Emphasis mine)

From the Vatican Council (1870):

If anyone shall say that miracles are impossible, and therefore that all the accounts regarding them, even those contained in Holy Scripture, are to be dismissed as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, and that the divine origin of Christianity cannot be proved by them; let him be anathema.

While we must believe in miracles (especially those contained in the Holy Bible), we are not bound to believe in every specific event claimed to be miraculous. We should only give credence to those events considered miracles by the authority of the Church. 

The Argument From Evil and Miracles

There are those who claim God cannot exist because of the evil in the world. The free will defense claims that moral evil must be allowed for humans to be moral agents and not automatons. However, what about physical evils, such as diseases, starvation, and natural disasters? Why doesn't God stop them, or stop them more often? Even moral evils can have their consequences vitiated by God's miraculous intervention. For example, if someone tries to murder an innocent person by shooting them, God can hold the would-be murderer accountable for his attempted act and murderous intention while deflecting the bullet or turning it into jelly. The argument is usually formulated thus:

1. The Church says God is all-good (Omnibenevolent) and all-powerful (Omnipotent).

2. If God were Omnibenevolent, He would want to stop evil.

3. If God were Omnipotent, He would be able to stop evil.

4. However, evil exists and has not been stopped.

5. Therefore, there is no Omnibenevolent, Omnipotent God as the Church teaches. 

Those who understand Church doctrine know that evil is the result of the Fall of our First Parents, and evil will be defeated for good at the Parousia (The Second Coming). The argument can be given a defeater by adding the word "yet" at the end of premise number 4. "However, evil exists and has not been stopped yet." Hence, God has reasons for permitting evil, and it will ultimately be defeated. There are still those who wonder why God can't intervene more often to stop evil. Below, I will offer several possible explanations for non-miraculous intervention. It is by no means intended to be exhaustive.

Reasons Why God Does Not Always Miraculously Prevent Evil

1. It is not possible to have constant miracles. 

Since evils occur all the time, God would need to intervene constantly to prevent them. However, the definition of miracles, given above by theologian Parente, makes it clear that miracles are "an exceptional happening." If God constantly intervenes, such intervention would no longer be exceptional, but ordinary--ceasing to be miracles since this constant intervention is the "norm."

2. Constant miracles would hinder the full use of moral freedom.

God is not directly known by our senses, in the way we see, e.g., trees and other physical objects. This is necessary for Faith and morals. If there were constant miracles, no one could doubt the existence of God, and many people would do what is right based on "being watched" rather than love of God. Moral development would be stopped because evils are necessary in our fallen state to become virtuous. We develop courage through facing our fears. We develop patience and trust in God through trials and tribulations.

There was a story (perhaps apocryphal) pre-Vatican II of a young girl involved in an accident that left her in a wheelchair. The people in her parish prayed and had Masses said for her cure. When no cure was forthcoming, one cruel man said to her, "You don't have enough faith to be healed and get out of that wheelchair." The pious girl replied, "It is you who don't have enough faith to be able to get into this wheelchair and accept God's Will." The truth is that God delivers some people from their sickness, and others through their sickness. The infinite wisdom of God knows what is better for us, even when we don't. 

3. Constant miracles would destroy the regularity necessary for rational decisions and intellectual progress.

People made and wear seat belts because they want to be safe in case of a car accident. If God would intervene, why bother? Everything we do depends on constant laws of nature (like gravity) uninterrupted by constant miracles. We could never be certain what would happen next given a set of circumstances if God constantly intervenes. 

4. The problem of contradictory needs and miracles.

What if two people need something altogether different? Two men are in the same geographical region; one needs it to rain tomorrow for his crops, the other needs it to be sunny for his important meeting in the line of work he performs. God cannot do the logically impossible by making it rain and not rain at the same time and place. Someone cannot be saved by a miracle.

5. God cannot give credence to false beliefs via miracles.

What about people who hold false beliefs? Not all miracles will induce conversion and some will think miracles performed for all (regardless of belief or moral disposition) is an endorsement of holding any belief/moral system. Furthermore, if God makes everyone conform to the truth to avoid this result, free will is negated. 

6. Even making miracles more frequent may disrupt the ideal plan for maximum salvation of souls.

God, in His Omniscience, knows all possible future contingencies. He wants all to be saved, yet not all are saved by the choice of their own free will. No one but God can know how miraculous intervention would affect people, perhaps causing more pain, suffering, and even (counterintuitively) more disbelief. "He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead." (St. Luke 16:31; Emphasis mine). Only an Infinite Mind knows how much intervention is enough.

Conclusion

It is sad when we believe our prayers have not been answered. Actually, God's answer was, "This I cannot do for you, it is not ultimately for the best." Traditionalists should respond, "God knows better." Easier said than done, I know. Hopefully, this post will equip people with reasons why God does not miraculously intervene all the time, or with greater frequency. God's Will is always directed towards our good, as I hoped I have demonstrated; it's not something haphazard we must just accept. Given our limited knowledge of God's plans we can (and should) pray for miracles, but never demand them. “For My thoughts are not thy thoughts, neither are thy ways My ways,” declares the Lord. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than thy ways and My thoughts than thy thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8-9). 

A Type Of Occultism

 

If anyone doubts that the Vatican II sect is not the Roman Catholic Church, one need look no further than "Fr." Richard Rohr (b. 1943) for proof. Invalidly ordained a Franciscan priest in 1970, Rohr has been spreading lies and introducing an occult practice to millions of people for years, while never being censured in any way by the sect. Popular in many Vatican II sect parishes and retreat centers is the enneagram (pronounced "any-a-gram"). Members of the Vatican II sect are told it is a very ancient Christian tool for the discernment of spirits, for the struggle with our capital sin, our "False Self," and the encounter with our True Self in God. (See Richard Rohr and Andreas Ebert, The Enneagram: A Christian Perspective [2001], pg. xxiii). In reality, the enneagram is nothing more than a doorway to the occult that has invaded many disciplines; theology and psychology to name but two.

In this post, I will show the occult origin and true meaning of the enneagram, how it is falsely portrayed by heretics like Rohr, and the dangers involved in using it. 

Enneagram: A Figure of Evil

(I wish to credit the many sources cited in the compilation of this post, especially in the formation of this section. They are numerous and I take credit for none of it---Introibo). 

The enneagram is a figure composed of three parts. There is an outer circle, an inner triangle and an irregular hexagonal figure containing nine points that touch the outer circle. Each part of it is connected to gnostic spirituality: the circle represents unity, the inner triangle "the law of three," and the hexagon "the law of seven." By discovering your "personality type" (a number from one to nine) you can become "your true self." Most enneagram teachers use the nine points on the enneagram to represent nine personality types that, according to enneagram teaching, apply to all people. The nine types fall into three groups of three, associated with the head, the heart, and the “gut.” Every person inevitably embodies one of these nine personality types as soon as they choose a basic mode of responding to the world at about the age of four. Enneagram teachers claim that by use of the enneagram one can explain why people tend to act in particular ways and can prescribe goals for adjustment and development of one’s own personality. The first step is to determine one’s personality type from among the nine possibilities.

Once one’s personality type is determined, they teach that one should strive to attain the characteristics of the personality type indicated by following the diagram in the prescribed manner. One will make progress by moving against the direction of the arrows. For example, a personality of type one should try to become like a seven, not a four. According to enneagram teaching, you must shed your "false self" and find your "true self" in the enneagram's teachings. The most popular book on how to use the enneagram, The Road Back to You: An Enneagram Journey to Self-Discovery, by Ian Morgan Cron and Suzanne Stabile (2016) is based off of Rohr's teachings. On pg. 24, we are told:

The Enneagram teaches that there are nine different personality styles in the world, one of which we naturally gravitate toward and adopt in childhood to cope and feel safe. Each type or number has a distinct way of seeing the world and an underlying motivation that powerfully influences how that type thinks, feels and behaves.

Once you take the test to identify your personality type, you will come to realize:

The true purpose of the Enneagram is to reveal to you your shadow side and offer spiritual counsel on how to open it to the transformative light of grace. (pg. 31; Emphasis mine).

Then you work to rid yourself of your "old self" and become your "True Self" and the person God wants you to be. Rohr and his heretical, occult disciples are spreading this throughout the Vatican II sect through retreats and parish "spirituality courses" or "workshops." Many Vatican II sect clergy give "homilies" on it. (See fscenter.org/content/programs-retreats/enneagram). 

This false narrative about the "benefit" of the enneagram is used to persuade others that it is rooted in Christian history. Author Christopher L. Heuertz, in his book The Sacred Enneagram: Finding Your Unique Path to Spiritual Growth (foreword by "Fr." Richard Rohr), proposes the possibility the enneagram was in use in other ancient non-Jewish and non-Christian cultures and mystical religions. Some of the “evidence” cited is from New Age sources such as Beatrice Chestnut (b. 1964), a student of New Agers Helen Palmer and Dr. David Daniels (1934-2017).  Heuertz suggests Greek philosopher Pythagoras (c. B.C. 570 - 495) is said to have used a drawing resembling the Enneagram symbol as his spiritual signature after learning of it in Heliopolis, which was the center of worship of the Ennead or the nine deities of ancient Egyptian mythology. (See The Sacred Enneagram, pg. 43).

There's one small problem with this assertion. No authentic writings of Pythagoras have survived. (See Joost-Gaugier, Christiane L., Measuring Heaven: Pythagoras and his Influence on Thought and Art in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (2006), pg. 11). If no authentic writings of Pythagoras have survived, then the mythical “spiritual signature” cannot be authoritatively “said” to have been used. Next, Heuertz makes this bold statement:

Much has been written to suggest that the early Egyptian Christian monastic ascetics, the desert mothers and fathers, were the chief architects of the Enneagram, led by the fourth-century mystic Evagrius Ponticus. Ponticus’s writings are often cited to support theories on the Christian origins of the Enneagram, specifically as it relates to his work on his list of eight vices and virtues (in one place he names nine), which closely resemble the nine Virtues and Passions of the Enneagram as we have it today. (See Ibid, pg. 45). The claim that the enneagram goes back to Evagrius of Pontus (345-399 A.D.) and the Desert Fathers is fantasy at best and a pure falsehood at worst.

The claim is based on Richard Rohr and Andreas Ebert’s misinterpretation of a single passage in the writings of Evagrius from which the two authors imagined Evagrius was trying to describe an actual diagram. In fact, it is of interest that Rohr and Ebert did not claim a Christian origin for the enneagram in the earlier edition of their book. Ebert writes in the 1992 introduction to Richard Rohr and Andreas Ebert’s, Discovering the Enneagram: An Ancient Tool for a New Spiritual Journey (1992):

The Enneagram is a mysterious model of the psyche that is not originally Christian. I believe that the Enneagram can help us to find a deeper and more authentic relationship with God—even though it was not discovered by Christians. (See pgs. xii and xv; Emphasis mine). The claim actually was taken by Rohr from Helen Palmer (d. 1967), a New Ager psychologist who taught that everyone had "innate psychic abilities." These alleged abilities allowed her to "discern the origin of the Enneagram." It was used by ancients who had "mystical knowledge" and transformed into a "Christian tool of self-help and spiritual growth" by the early Christians. 

So much for fairy tales. Now, the true origin will be explained.

The Enneagram's Occult Origin

The word enneagram comes from Greek words “ennea” for “nine” and “gramma” for “writing” or “drawing.” The Enneagram as used today is a nine-sided diagram with nine points, each of the nine points representing a personality type. Lines are drawn connecting these points with other points. One must determine his or her type and proceed from there according to the particular teachings given. Enneagrams vary in how they are taught so there is no one standard model.

It was first used by the Armenian-Greek "mystic" George Gurdjieff (d.1949). For the personality “types” added later, it came from occultist Claudio Naranjo (d. 2019) Gurdjieff believed All knowledge can be included in the enneagram and with the help of the enneagram it can be interpreted. And in this connection only what a man is able to put into the enneagram does he actually know, that is, understand. What he cannot put into the enneagram makes books and libraries entirely unnecessary. Everything can be included and read in the enneagram. (See Ouspensky, In Search of the Miraculous [1950], p. 294)

 Gurdjieff was an Eastern Schismatic who got involved with both Freemasonry and Islamic "mysticism." He then taught "esoteric Christianity." (See Ibid, pg. 102). Gurdjieff believed all the secret laws of the universe could be seen in his diagram, and he used it to play around with mathematical formulas what he called the “Law of Seven” and the “Law of Three.” He also used the Enneagram to illustrate a special musical scale for which he developed “sacred dance” movements to act out the Enneagram, which Gurdjieff dance troupes still use today. It was never used for "personality types" until later.

Next, Oscar Ichazo, a Bolivian spiritual teacher, who ran an occult school in Arica, Chile, taught the enneagram, which he called the enneagon. He added his own ideas of “ego fixations,” which are patterns that had to be transcended to realize the true inner “essence” of Self. It is not clear how Ichazo learned about the Enneagram but some of his students believed he had learned it from Gurdjieff or Gurdjieff’s followers.

Ichazo claimed to be in contact with spirits named Metatron and the Green Qutb, though he sometimes claimed these were states of consciousness. Ichazo practiced Eastern meditation, studied the blasphemous Jewish Kabbalah, and was familiar with a host of esoteric occult practices and beliefs. (See, e.g., https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/hidden-lore-of-the-nine-points-narango-ichazo-and-the-school-1/). 

Ichazo’s student, Claudio Naranjo, a Chilean psychiatrist, and spiritual seeker, took the enneagram teachings to the Esalen Institute in Big Sur, California, an edgy hotbed of avant-garde psychology, New Age teachings, and experiments with psychedelics (Esalen played a crucial role in the human potential movement and influenced the New Age). Naranjo came up with the 9 personality types of the modern enneagram.

Naranjo claimed later in a video that he and Ichazo made up the idea that the Enneagram was ancient when they knew it wasn’t. Naranjo also claimed that he originated the 9 types from his observations but “mostly” via automatic writing. The enneagram was then popularized by the aforementioned New Ager Helen Palmer. The thrust of the Enneagram in the New Age was and still is a gnostic seeking of the “True Self” or “divine Self.”

The Enneagram Gets Incorporated Into The Vatican II Sect

A validly ordained Jesuit priest, Fr. Robert Ochs, studied the enneagram under Naranjo with full knowledge and consent of his superiors in the 1960s. He then was promoted to a seminary professor, and one of his students, Richard Rohr, made it the focal point of his "spirituality." He became deeply involved with the enneagram and its occult teachings. He brought it into the Vatican II sect and remains a "priest in good standing," never being censured for his ideas and teachings. In 2019, Rohr wrote a book, The Universal Christ: How a Forgotten Reality Can Change Everything We See, Hope For, and Believe. This book will reveal the heretical and occult teachings of "Fr." Richard Rohr:

• Rohr is a panentheist, believing  God and the world to be inter-related with the world being in God and God being in the world. He makes a distinction between Jesus and Christ. Rohr writes: “Christ . . . was clearly not just Jesus of Nazareth, but something much more immense”(pg. 3). Since for Rohr, everything in the universe is a manifestation of God, to call Jesus a manifestation of God is to merely say that Jesus is part of the universe. Hence, the title of the book: "The Universal Christ."

• God is a subjective term that denotes a way people look at the world. “Anything that drives you out of yourself in a positive way . . . is operating as God for you” (pg. 52).

• Revelation is not a distinct, self-disclosure of God, occurring in history. “This book . . . [seeks] to reground Christianity as a natural religion and not one simply based on a special revelation, available only to a few.” (pg. 7).

• Christ is more a process than a Divine Person.  “The Christ Mystery is not a one-time event, but an ongoing process throughout time—as constant as the light that fills the universe," and so not “limiting the Creator’s presence to just one human manifestation, Jesus” (pgs. 14, 16). He goes so far as to dedicate the book to his deceased dog Venus "whom...without fear of heresy, I can appropriately say that Venus was also Christ for me."

• The Crucifixion and Death of Jesus Christ did not save anyone. The sacrificial death of Christ was “not some bloody transaction ‘required’ by God’s offended justice in order to rectify the problem of human sin.”(pg. 140). Sin is a failure to put away our "false self." Original Sin does not exist. 

• Christ did not rise from the dead but was transformed into "beams of light." “If a video camera had been placed in front of the tomb of Jesus, it wouldn’t have filmed a lone man emerging from a grave . . . [but] something like beams of light extending in all directions” (pg. 177). 

This occult heretic now peddles his enneagram everywhere. His superiors in the Vatican II sect Franciscan Order, the "bishops," and Modernist Vatican headed by Bergoglio, have not done anything against him--nor is his book condemned for heresy. 

The Five Dangers of the Enneagram

The enneagram is fraught with serious problems for anyone who gets involved with it. Since the Vatican II sect does nothing to stop it, I must sound the alarm. Do not get involved and urge others to do the same; if they are already using it, urge them to cease.

1. The enneagram has no scientific value, even as a personality test.  It has no support in scholarly or academic studies even in discovering so-called "personality types." Most enneagram tests rely on the Barnum effect, a psychological phenomenon that occurs when individuals believe that personality descriptions apply specifically to them (more so than to other people), despite the fact that the description is actually filled with information that applies to almost everyone. More recently, a variety of more advanced Enneagram tests have been developed to provide a veneer of scientific legitimacy. Their usefulness is questionable, though, since, like the Myers-Briggs test, the personality number assigned by any particular test frequently differs from other tests or changes upon retesting.

2. The enneagram’s origins are in the occult. The enneagram is not an ancient Christian tool that has been around for ages but was invented in the 1970s by Oscar Ichazo and Claudio Naranjo from automatic writing. What is automatic writing? Automatic writing is a form of spirit contact where you allow a spirit to write through you. You become, in effect, a medium. As I've written before, mediums are condemned by both the Bible and Church teaching. "Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD; because of these same detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you." (See Deuteronomy 18:10-12; Emphasis mine.) According to theologian Jone, "Spiritism claims to be able to communicate with the spirit world and endeavors to establish such commerce with it. Although spiritism is for the most part fraud, still the intention alone to enter into communication with spirits is gravely sinful. Therefore, it is mortally sinful to conduct a spiritistic seance or to act as a medium." (See Moral Theology, pg. 100; Emphasis mine). Imagine if you were told to use a Ouija Board to "understand yourself better" and "grow closer to God." That is as blasphemous as the use of the enneagram for "spiritual growth in God." The enneagram is inspired by the forces of Hell.

3. Heretic and Occultist "Fr." Richard Rohr popularized and "Christianized" the enneagram. To state that something which originated with the automatic writing of two occultists was really something used by early Christians, was a fable told to Rohr by a New Ager. Rohr now happily perpetuates this false narrative. Moreover, you cannot make something "Christian" which has no scientific validity, and is inimical to genuine Catholic spirituality. There can be no "Catholic Tarot Cards." Yet Rohr will continue to make the ludicrous claim that the enneagram is now "Christianized" since its alleged use by "Desert Fathers." 

Rohr also claims we are not all born sinners, as he denies Original Sin in particular and redefines personal sin. We need to put off our “false selves” and discover the divine ("True Self") within ourselves. Rohr promotes the enneagram as a great tool to do that. He has gained a huge following, especially among millennials, but his teachings are heretical and must be rejected. 

4. The enneagram excuses sin. Each "personality type" from 1 to 9, has a "weakness" that is inherent and (allegedly) very hard to get rid of to be your "True Self." Therefore, you have an excuse as to why you steal, watch porn, take God's Name in vain, etc., because you are a particular personality type, and it's hard to change. It's not your fault you are like this, and you are a guiltless "work in progress." There is nothing really wrong as long as you want to find your "True Self."

5. The enneagram emphasizes self over Christ. You need to discover and work on your personality type to achieve advancement in "spiritual growth." Do not work on eliminating sin and gaining virtue via Christ and His One True Church. The enneagram's types supplant the Sacraments, The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Rosary, etc. as the pathway to salvation. 

Conclusion

The enneagram is an occult tool promoted by a heretical Vatican II sect "priest" to pull people away from the true path to sanctification and salvation. Your "personality type" and achieving your "True Self" by means of the enneagram's teachings become supreme. The Vatican II sect allows it to be promoted (there was a "warning" against it by the Vatican II sect "bishops" in the United States about 20 years ago, but no formal condemnation). Actions speak louder than words. In a post by journalist Austen Ivereigh in 2016, he stated:

On the Enneagram, that personality-type identifier first created by the desert fathers which received its modern form from the Jesuits, Francis is an Eight — as Father Richard Rohr OFM, the leading Catholic authority on the Enneagram, has confirmed to me in an email.

(Pope Francis, incidentally, knows the Enneagram well and is not against it. But he is wary of the way it can be misused and lead to excessive introspection if not deployed within a solid spiritual framework.)

(See cruxnow.com/analysis/2016/12/francis-80-redeemed-leader-looks-like; Emphasis mine). 

Replace "enneagram" with "Ouija Board" or "seances" in that statement by Ivereigh and see if it makes any sense. Richard Rohr, despite publishing multiple heresies against the most basic dogmas of the Church, has not been censured in any way and functions as a Vatican II sect "priest." If anyone reading all this cannot see that Bergoglio cannot be pope and the Vatican II sect cannot be the Roman Catholic Church, they should add a tenth "personality type" for such people---The Culpably Ignorant. 

The Chair Of St. Peter And Sedevacantism

 

To My Readers: I am so blessed to have guest posters as I navigate work --and my many other responsibilities-- that increasingly grow and deplete my time to research and write for my blog. This week, Lee does a fine job (as always) of guest posting. Please comment, and I will check in for anyone who asks me a direct question this week. God Bless you all, my dear readers.---Introibo

The Chair Of St. Peter And Sedevacantism

By Lee

On January 18th the Church celebrates the feast day of the Chair of St. Peter in Rome, and has been doing so ever since the 4th century. However, in 1960 John XXIII removed this feast from the liturgical calendar along with some other feast days such as St. Peter in Chains on August 1st. How ironic that a usurper of the very Chair of St. Peter abolishes such feast days in a new calendar for a new religion. It's as though he is giving us a hint that by his very actions, he doesn't belong in the same Chair which he abhors and disdains.

Many websites (including this one) have already explained many aspects of the importance of sedevacantism. In this article I'm going to explain why it's of absolute importance for Catholics to adhere to the papacy and how the only option we are left with is sedevacantism in order to remain Catholic.

Let's first consider a Catholics obligation to believe in Vatican I when it states:

SESSION 4 : 18 July 1870  

First dogmatic constitution on the church of Christ (Pastor Aeternus)

Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs

2.) For no one can be in doubt, indeed it was known in every age that the holy and most blessed Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pillar of faith and the foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom from our Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior and Redeemer of the human race, and that to this day and for ever he lives and presides and exercises judgment in his successors the bishops of the holy Roman see, which he founded and consecrated with his blood .

3.)Therefore whoever succeeds to the chair of Peter obtains by the institution of Christ himself, the primacy of Peter over the whole church. So what the truth has ordained stands firm, and blessed Peter perseveres in the rock-like strength he was granted, and does not abandon that guidance of the church which he once received.

4.) For this reason it has always been necessary for every church–that is to say the faithful throughout the world–to be in agreement with the Roman church because of its more effective leadership. In consequence of being joined, as members to head, with that see, from which the rights of sacred communion flow to all, they will grow together into the structure of a single body .

Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff

2. Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.

3. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one Supreme Shepherd .

4. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation.

5. This power of the Supreme Pontiff by no means detracts from that ordinary and immediate power of episcopal jurisdiction, by which bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the apostles by appointment of the Holy Spirit, tend and govern individually the particular flocks which have been assigned to them. On the contrary, this power of theirs is asserted, supported and defended by the Supreme and Universal Pastor; for St. Gregory the Great says: "My honor is the honor of the whole Church. My honor is the steadfast strength of my brethren. Then do I receive true honor, when it is denied to none of those to whom honor is due."

6. Furthermore, it follows from that supreme power which the Roman Pontiff has in governing the whole Church, that he has the right, in the performance of this office of his, to communicate freely with the pastors and flocks of the entire Church, so that they may be taught and guided by him in the way of salvation.

8. Since the Roman Pontiff, by the divine right of the apostolic primacy, governs the whole Church, we likewise teach and declare that he is the supreme judge of the faithful, and that in all cases which fall under ecclesiastical jurisdiction recourse may be had to his judgment. The sentence of the Apostolic See (than which there is no higher authority) is not subject to revision by anyone, nor may anyone lawfully pass judgment thereupon. And so they stray from the genuine path of truth who maintain that it is lawful to appeal from the judgments of the Roman pontiffs to an ecumenical council as if this were an authority superior to the Roman Pontiff.

Chapter 4: On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff

2. So the fathers of the fourth Council of Constantinople, following the footsteps of their predecessors, published this solemn profession of faith: "The first condition of salvation is to maintain the rule of the true faith. And since that saying of our lord Jesus Christ, You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, cannot fail of its effect, the words spoken are confirmed by their consequences. For in the Apostolic See the Catholic religion has always been preserved unblemished, and sacred doctrine been held in honor. Since it is our earnest desire to be in no way separated from this faith and doctrine, we hope that we may deserve to remain in that one communion which the Apostolic See preaches, for in it is the whole and true strength of the Christian religion."

What is more, with the approval of the second Council of Lyons, the Greeks made the following profession: "The Holy Roman Church possesses the supreme and full primacy and principality over the whole Catholic Church. She truly and humbly acknowledges that she received this from the Lord himself in blessed Peter, the prince and chief of the apostles, whose successor the Roman Pontiff is, together with the fullness of power. And since before all others she has the duty of defending the truth of the faith, so if any questions arise concerning the faith, it is by her judgment that they must be settled."

Then there is the definition of the Council of Florence: "The Roman Pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, the head of the whole Church and the father and teacher of all Christians; and to him was committed in blessed Peter, by our lord Jesus Christ, the full power of tending, ruling and governing the whole Church."

6. For the Holy Ghost was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles. Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this See of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Savior to the prince of his disciples: "I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."

The problem with those who fail to submit to the Roman Pontiff

If Francis I-John XXIII are truly the vicars of Jesus Christ on earth, then according to Vatican I their authority binds on all Catholic consciences and it would be schismatic to reject them. We see over and over again so called traditional Catholics ignoring and ridiculing their pope as if it's a traditional belief to resist a pope. In their case it isn't just over sinful commands but against his ruling authority, his teaching, and while they are so bent on saying they are popes, act as though that is all they care about it. They won't defend them in any other way but will in fact denounce him as though he were the most meaningless man on earth.

When in the history of the Church has a pope ever been resisted on a day to day basis as we see with the so called one today? How is it traditional to preserve tradition by resisting a pope, when traditionally speaking Catholics have always obeyed the pope? How can anybody dare say that he can error and still be the head and teacher of the whole Church? Did not St. Robert Bellarmine say "The Pope is the Teacher and Shepherd of the whole Church, thus, the whole Church is so bound to hear and follow him that if he would err, the whole Church would err."  De Romano Pontifice, Book IV, Chapter 3

Could a Council judge a pope if he were a heretic?

There is a common belief among pseudo traditional Catholics that a council will judge and depose a pope. These same people (mostly lay folk) know personally their popes are heretics but to avoid sedevacantism excuse their pope for the bishops and cardinals to decide that for them, when they know that it won't ever happen since a majority of the Vatican II sect Bishops and Cardinals side with Francis and subscribe to Vatican II.

Since Vatican I declared that the pope can be judged by no one, we have a beautiful historical example written by Count Joseph de Maistre in a book called The Pope where he explains how councils are convoked by the pope to settle issues and he alone has the power to assemble them and not the other way around. (Shout out to commenter The Catholic Archive for I found a link to this book off his website).

He states:

Wherever there is a Sovereign, and in the Catholic economy his existence is undeniable, there can be no legitimate assemblies without him, No sooner is his veto pronounced, than the assembly is dissolved, or its co-legislative power suspended; if it resist, their is a revolution.

This very simple and undoubted truth, which can never be shaken, shows in its full light, the extreme absurdity so much discussed: Whether the Pope be above the council, or the council be above the Pope? For it is the same as to inquire, in other words, the Pope be above the Pope or the council above the council?

I firmly believe with Leibnitz, that God has hitherto preserved the truly ecumenical councils from all error contrary to sound doctrine. I believe, moreover, that He will always so preserve them; but since there can be no ecumenical council without the Pope, what signifies the question, whether it be above or inferior to the Pope?

Is the King of Great Britain superior to parliament, or is the parliament above the king? Neither way; but the king and parliament united constitute the legislature or the sovereignty; but there is not an inhabitant of three kingdoms who would not rather have his country governed by a king without a parliament than by a parliament without a king...

To the Sovereign Pontiff alone belongs essentially the right of convoking general councils, which do not exclude the moderate and legitimate influence of sovereigns. He alone is judge of the circumstances which require this extreme remedy. Those who pretend to assign this power to temporal authority, quite overlook the paralogism into which they fell. They suppose an universal and (what is more) everlasting monarchy. They go back without reflecting, to those times when all the mitres in the world could be called together by one scepter only, or two. The Emperor alone, says Fleury, was able to convoke general councils, because he alone could command the bishops to undertake extraordinary journeys. He for the most part defrayed expenses of them, and indicated the place they were to be held in. The Pope confined themselves to asking for these assemblies,  and they often asked without obtaining. ( pgs.12-14)

Is sedevacantism just a opinion? 

A theological opinion is a position which has faulty and insufficient evidence in its favor, so that you would not be surprised to find out that the opposite is true. Sedevacantism would be a theological conclusion because it is an absolute certainty which can be connected to truths of the Faith in such a way that, if denied, you would have to deny the Faith as well. Therefore, Francis I- John XXIII either are popes or they are not popes because to determine obedience and unity of Faith a person would have to know this, which is precisely why it is an important subject matter. We must know because if we are not following a true pope we would be in danger of schism and if we are following a false pope we would be in danger of believing false doctrine. There is no middle ground and it is a pity that so many so called traditionalist even among some sedevacantist who treat this as though it is just an opinion that can be left up to the individual when unity of faith and government are part of the One true Church from how a Catholic would have to follow it.

The Catechism of the Council Trent explains the importance of Unity when it states:

Unity In Government

The Church has but one ruler and one governor, the invisible one, Christ, whom the eternal Father hath made head over all the Church, which is his body; the visible one, the Pope, who, as legitimate successor of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, fills the Apostolic chair.

It is the unanimous teaching of the Fathers that this visible head is necessary to establish and preserve unity in the Church. This St. Jerome clearly perceived and as clearly expressed when, in his work against Jovinian, he wrote: One is elected that, by the appointment of a head, all

occasion of schism may be removed. In his letter to Pope Damasus the same holy Doctor writes: Away with envy, let the ambition of Roman grandeur cease! I speak to the successor of the fisherman, and to the disciple of the cross. Following no chief but Christ, I am united in communion with your Holiness, that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that on that rock is built the Church. Whoever will eat the lamb outside this house is profane; whoever is not in the ark of Noah shall perish in the flood...

Unity In Spirit, Hope And Faith

Moreover, the Apostle, writing to the Corinthians, tells them that there is but one and the same Spirit who imparts grace to the faithful, as the soul communicates life to the members of the body. Exhorting the Ephesians to preserve this unity, he says: Be careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; one body and one Spirit. As the human body consists of many members, animated by one soul, which gives sight to the eves, hearing to the ears, and to the other senses the power of discharging their respective functions; so the mystical body of Christ, which is the Church, is composed of many faithful. The hope, to which we are called, is also one, as the Apostle tells us in the same place; for we all hope for the same consummation, eternal and happy life. Finally, the faith which all are bound to believe and to profess is one: Let there be no schisms amongst you, says the Apostle. And Baptism, which is the seal of our Christian faith, is also one. 

Conclusion

If Francis I-John XXIII are true vicars of Jesus Christ since when did popes (like them) pray with Voodooist priests and animists to their false gods, or ever sympathize with Martin Luther and even go as far as saying he didn't really error on justification and that he is a witness of the gospel, or say that the Blessed Virgin Mary was not born a saint, or say that Christ didn't really descend into hell, or say that altar girls enrich the liturgy, or call Eastern Orthodox members and pastors in the Church of Christ, or say Sodomite people were born that way, or say that error has rights, or say the Moslem's worship the same God as Christians, or invite Protestants to construct a liturgy in more conformance with Protestantism, or have ties with the Freemason or global elites?

So much could be added but Our Lord was clear "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd giveth his life for his sheep. But the hireling, and he that is not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and flieth: and the wolf catcheth, and scattereth the sheep: And the hireling flieth, because he is a hireling: and he hath no care for the sheep. I am the good shepherd; and I know mine, and mine know me." (St. John 10: 11-14).