Monday, January 31, 2022

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). 

58 comments:

  1. The example of the apostate Mother Teresa should provoke reflection on the "healings" carried out by "saint" JP2 the Great Apostate and the other "saints" "popes" of the V2 sect. A man who spreads heresies and sets up worship service and counterfeit sacraments cannot be a saint.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,
      All V2 Sect "saints" areas fraudulent as the "miracles" alleged to support them!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Not all, the snakes threw in many genuine ones like Theophane Venard, Charbel Makhlouf, Eugene de Mazenod, Kuriakose Chavara, Spanish and Chinese Martyrs in order to maintain plausible deniability and keep many poor souls in the V2 sect.

      Delete
    3. Mary's Vagabond,

      I agree here with you.

      God Bless,
      Dapouf

      Delete
    4. Mary's Vagabond,
      I tend to agree, but keep in mind, we don't know if a true pope would have canonized any of the people you mentioned. I would say, in my opinion, that Fr. Maximillian Kolbe and Fr. Damien would be canonized saints, but that's just the non-Magisterial, non-binding opinion of a mere layman.

      Was Padre Pio a saint? I have very serious reservations about his alleged miracles and sanctity. Again, only my opinion. My point is that without a true pope, we really can't know who are the "genuine ones."

      Pope Blessed Innocent XI had his cause for canonization opened two years after his death in 1689. He was beatified by Pope Pius XII in 1956!! The Vatican II sect has not "canonized" him, and actually removed his remains in 2011 to put those of "Blessed" Wojtyla there--who became "St" John Paul the Great Apostate three years later in 2014.

      Would Pope Blessed Innocent be canonized if there were a true pope? None but God can say for sure.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. What a crime to remove the remains of a true Pope to install those of an impostor! Wojtyla deserves the common grave as a burial.

      Delete
    6. Throw him to the Marianas trench, the deepest point on earth.

      Delete
    7. Introibo: Happy New Year. That's an interesting point you bring up about Father Pio. I have never been a fan of his (my personal opinion) and the stories I've read about him never really impressed me personally.

      I've always thought the fact that the Novus Ordo and the Traditionalists both fall over themselves for him was a bad sign.

      Perhaps you'll right an essay of him someday. Along the same lines, I don't know if this is true, but I've heard that his sister was immediately opposed to V2 and left her convent, whereas he was more accommodating. There apparently was some friction between the two on account of her opposition to Vatican II. Again, I don't if that is true or not.

      Delete
    8. DZ,
      Happy New Year! As for Padre Pio, please see my post:
      http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2017/01/was-padre-pio-ecumenist.html

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  2. The Magdalena of the Cross story was terrifying.

    It was also better than most horror films that are a sadistic fantasy, because it has a happy ending.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Catholic Archive,
      It is nice to know that in the end good will triumph over evil, and no one is beyond the reach of God Who wishes to save all. The scary and historical story makes those two points clear!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Standing ovation from me. Thank you for doing part 2. The case of Sr. Magdalena of the Cross was a creepy story that I had never heard of before. I think you have a plethora of "miracles" you could write about. Keep exposing them.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,

      I 100% agree with you!

      God Bless,
      Dapouf

      Delete
    2. Lee and Dapouf,
      Thank you! I will expose evil at every opportunity.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  4. THAT WAS GREAT! Thank you for writing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Saddlery Tack,
      Thank you my friend!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  5. Introibo,

    Excellent follow up to part 1! At the beginning of the Charlatans part, it reads "To give but one example, Theresa Caputo (nee Brigandi) (b. 1966)". I was just curious as to what the "(nee Brigandi)" means.

    God Bless,
    Dapouf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dapouf,
      "nee Brigandi" is a shorthand expression for "her maiden name was Brigandi." Hence, she was born Theresa Brigandi, and goes by her married name of Theresa Caputo.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo,

      Thanks for the extra knowledge!

      God Bless,
      Dapouf

      Delete
  6. To cut some slack to Magdalena of the Cross, I suspect many alleged miracles are rumors spread by gossip.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Poni,
      That could be the case. The record is by no means "infallible." However, the record is strongly supported by several lines of evidence. I would venture to say MOST of the account is true and accurate. It is a real life "horror movie" that shows the power of Satan, as well as the Ultimate Power of Christ and His One True Church in defeating Satan, who will have his final crushing defeat at the end of time (See Apocalypse 20:10).

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  7. "At age ten [the future Sr. Magdalena of the Cross] tried to crucify herself on a wall." Read also: Attempted suicide.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should have raised a red flag on the Bishops.

      Delete
    2. DZ,
      You raise an interesting point. Is it really attempted suicide if one is possessed and thereby not responsible for his actions? Is the fact that she made the pact with the devil mean that she is responsible for all that follows as a result? I think it would be the latter and perhaps attempted suicide disguised as "mortification" and "penance."

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. Introibo,

    Now that I'm thinking hard about it, how could such a possession/pact come about for this little girl? At the tender age of five and even in a church, I find it so bizarre that this devil was permitted to present himself to her. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on this.

    God Bless,
    Dapouf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dapouf,

      You might find this story edifying: https://www.olrl.org/stories/exorcism.shtml

      Lee

      Delete
    2. Dapouf,
      Lee's link is excellent. God has allowed innocent children to be possessed to manifest God's glory, the evil of the devil, and his ultimate defeat. In St. Mark 9:17-21, we read:

      A man in the crowd answered, “Teacher, I brought you my son, who is possessed by a spirit that has robbed him of speech. Whenever it seizes him, it throws him to the ground. He foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth and becomes rigid. I asked your disciples to drive out the spirit, but they could not.”

      “You unbelieving generation,” Jesus replied, “how long shall I stay with you? How long shall I put up with you? Bring the boy to me.”

      So they brought him. When the spirit saw Jesus, it immediately threw the boy into a convulsion. He fell to the ground and rolled around, foaming at the mouth.

      Jesus asked the boy’s father, “How long has he been like this?”

      “From childhood,” he answered.

      Although the age of reason is seven, Sr. Magdelena may have been a prodigy. She chose wrongly, but God delivered her, and she died penitent.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. Lee and Introibo,

      Thank you both so much! Both your posts have greatly edified me! That exorcism story gave me goosebumps.

      God Bless you both,
      Dapouf

      Delete
  9. I can't resist:

    https://novusordowatch.org/2022/02/faithless-francis-apostates-part-of-church/

    Bergoglio says the darndest things.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,

      Indeed he does! He might've gone a bit too far this time, and that's great! See the latest bulletin at St. Getrude The Great, Bp. Dolan writes that he's been contacted by some semi-trads because of the latest Bergoglian blasphemy.
      May the grace of God open their eyes to the Truth, at last!

      God Bless,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
    2. It's a sign of the times ! The Great Apostasy is on ! Let those who can understand understand !

      Delete
    3. Joanna S.

      That's great news about what's going on at Bp. Dolan's. Bergoglio not only blasphemed, he said the most outrageous of all heresies. That apostates are the Communion of saints and that all are saved sinners including blasphermers and should be considered our brothers. To add to that, the recent statement regarding Abu Dhabi from 3-4 yrs ago is now an official act of heresy.

      Just when you think Bergoglio hasn't out done himself, he comes up with something that does.

      Lee

      Delete
    4. Lee,
      Thanks for the link!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. Lee,

      I wonder what Bergoglio would say if someone asked whether Hitler would be considered our brother, if he were still alive.

      God Bless,
      Dapouf

      Delete
  10. As I recall, the two healings "JP-II" - one French nun had some relapse, one Latin American woman had some delay, even if healing was unusually quick.

    The one for "P-VI" involves suddenly saving the mother and baby, but it seems the pregnancy went on without amniotic liquid, i e abnormally, up to birth.

    In other words, it could be God wanted to help these sincere people and yet hedged the miracles with warning signals "not canonically a miracle" - the best one would have been the one for "J-XXIII" as a sudden healing of intestinal conditions usually not so healed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hans,
      More false miracles for false popes becoming false saints!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. I do not agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I am not sedevacantist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jacinto,
      I am. If you accept Bergoglio as "pope" you believe that proselytism is solemn nonsense, atheists can go to Heaven, Catholic dogma can change, and false sects lead to Heaven as well--all of which your pope teaches and all of it contradicts what was taught prior to Vatican II.

      Therefore, you believe that the Church is right now and was wrong before? Then what good is having an "infallible Church" that really is not infallible and you never can be sure what to believe.

      I believe that the Church is Indefectible and Infallible and (as the Church teaches) a heretic cannot be pope. Dogma cannot change. therefore the changes came from a false sect pretending to be Catholic with a heretical "pope."

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  13. Why do you censures me?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jacinto,
      I have not censured you, nor do I censure anyone who is polite and doesn't use profanity and/or blasphemy.

      Praying for your conversion!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Jacinto,

      please look up the link kindly provided by Lee in the comments above: https://novusordowatch.org/2022/02/faithless-francis-apostates-part-of-church/.

      I hope and pray it'll help you come to the only logical and thoroughly Catholic conclusion that Francis cannot possibly be the Vicar of Christ, but he's a leader of a sect from hell.

      Ask Our Lady to give you the grace to see the Truth. She will surely hear you out!

      God Bless You,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
  14. Introibo,
    How does the R&R recognize Francis as Pope and resist the canonized fake saints such as JPII or do they recognize the fake saints as real saints as canonizations are infallible?
    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      The R&R make the false claim that canonizations are not infallible, so as to exculpate their "popes"!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  15. Ok, sorry; I thought I had been censored. I found this blog a month ago. I am a Catholic but with a rather unusual personal experience. Currently I am trying to resolve my doubts, which are many, but the serious crisis that the Church is going through has caused me many problems and in it I do not find certainties but more doubts. I thought that the sedevacantism position would help me clear up those doubts, but it is not. Some sedevacantist Catholics claim that John XXIII was Pope until 1962; others that their choice was invalid; some that Pius XII in this same blog stopped being Pope in 1956, others that he was Pope until 1958. Who is right? I am confused, in fact I only have confusion in me.

    I hope you don't make fun of my ignorance, I only have questions, not answers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jacinto,

      Nobody will make fun of your sincerity in discerning truth, though your initial messages were rather spontaneous and contained nothing of substance, so any misunderstanding prior to this more elaborative post by you is understandable. I'm also in the process of learning many things, and I'm sure that others with more experience and years than me can address the different groups within sedevacantism in great detail.

      From what I've seen, the overwhelming majority of sedes believe that "John XXIII"-"Francis" were not true popes. If anything, there will be disputes on whether "John XXIII" was initially elected validly and then subsequently lost his office or if he was never elected validly to begin with, but most believe that he at least, if he ever did have office, lost it shortly after his election.

      I myself have only heard of sedes that reject Pius XII from Novus Ordo sources, though I'm sure they exist in small numbers. Personally, I haven't really investigated this (Pius XII controversies), nor am I interested in it, since the entire point of sedevacantism is addressing how the Church could have produced Vatican II and the conciliar popes and theology with the Divine promises of Christ. Though Pius XII preceded these events, even if some may consider certain things he did imprudent, in hindsight, from what I've read from him and heard of him, I have not seen anything remotely near worthy of me suspecting him of heresy (which is not something that should be done so casually in the first place, in my opinion).

      Hopefully others can either correct me if I've gotten anything wrong, or elaborate on points I've already mentioned.

      By the way, could you expound on some of your doubts (since you mention that sedevacantism has created some), by any chance? This could help us address the hesitancy you currently have with the position.

      Que Dios le bendiga en estos tiempos difíciles(asumiendo que hablas español, forgive me if I'm mistaken, jeje),
      Dapouf

      Delete
    2. Jacinto,
      No one will make fun of you--these are confusing times! I agree with Dapouf above. All sedevacantists hold Vatican II and its "popes" gave error and evil to the Church. However, the Church cannot give error and evil, therefore it did not come from the Church, but a man-made sect falsely posing as the Catholic Church. Some consider John XXIII a true pope, but all reject Montini (Paul VI) and after.

      Please let me know on what points you are confused, and I will help the best I can! Praying for you!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. I do not recognize Roncalli as a valid Pope. There are suspicions about his membership in Freemasonry. If that were true, that would disqualify him from the papacy. And there is the dubious election of 1958; perhaps there was a Pope elected two days before Roncalli's usurpation and we don't know. In any case, he was a modernist.

      Delete
  16. Thank you very much for your answers; One of the many doubts I have - due to my ignorance, please forgive me - is whether the bishops and priests of the Church since Vatican II are validly ordained and consecrated bishops and priests or not, thanks to those who answer me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no validly ordained priest or bishop of the V2 sect, starting with Antipope Francis. The ordination rite put in place by Montini is invalid.

      Delete
    2. Jacinto,
      Please go to this site:
      http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/

      Then click on "Sacraments" and read "Absolutely Null and Utterly Void" by the late Fr. Anthony Cekada. He explains perfectly why the New Rite of Holy Orders by Montini (Paul VI) is invalid for making bishops since it was introduced in 1968. With no more valid bishops, the hierarchy of the V2 sect is almost completely gone.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. Jacinto,

      Fr. Cekada (RIP) explains how and why the Novus Ordo rite of episcopal consecration is inavlid in this great video:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahzcFOFA9qE

      It's very informative and the video itself is well-produced.

      Be careful when researching the subject of the new rite of episcopal consecration and priestly ordination - Youtube is infested with videos made by Feeneyite heretics, that is the Dimond brothers and their followers.
      Avoid them like hell fire! They make use of the photos depicting Novus Ordo abominations just to lure people into watching, and when they get the unsuspecting viewer on their hook, the'll feed them the Church-condemned heresy, that is the denial of baptism of blood and of desire.

      God Bless,
      Joanna S.

      Delete
  17. Greetings; So if I have understood correctly those priests ordained before 1969 of the Church from Vatican II have been validly ordained but not from that year?; Are there currently validly ordained priests in the Church? Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Priests ordained before 1969 or after that year in the traditional rite are valid priests.

      Delete
    2. Jacinto,
      One correction to Simon, any priest ordained before 1968 [not 1969], or after that year in the Traditional Rite by a valid catholic Bishop, are valid priests.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  18. What about Lourdes? Although you would say it is in the hands of, etc., can a real miracle occur there?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rev. PMJ,
      Your question is a most interesting one. First, we knows Lourdes was approved and had approved miracles pre-Vatican II when we had a true pope. Can the miraculous cures continue? Using the criteria of the Church, as expounded by theologian Tanquerey, it is the third and fourth points that are of concern:

      3. The effects of the miracle

      4. The doctrine with which the miracle is connected

      If any alleged miracle has the direct or indirect effect of convincing someone that the Vatican II sect is the Catholic Church, that Bergoglio is "pope," or Modernist tenets are to be accepted, then it cannot be a true miracle of God. If it has the effect of making/confirming someone as a Traditionalist Catholic, I would then consider that a true miracle. Please realize I say "consider" as I have no Magisterial authority to pronounce any alleged miracle as authentic.

      My compliments to you for reading a Traditionalist sedevacantist blog. It shows good will and your question was both intelligent and respectful. I'll be praying for your conversion--the SSPV or CMRI could use another good priest!!

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete