Strangely Familiar

 

One of the purposes of this blog is to warn Traditionalists of modern evils and dangers that have arisen since the Great Apostasy. Since the end of the Robber Council in 1965, two dangers have arisen that pervade society: (1) the Occult, and ironically, (2) the denial of the supernatural. Modernism, as Pope St. Pius X warned, leads to atheism. However, humanity is incurably God-centered. The pull towards that which is greater than us is innate. The First Commandment does not read "Thou Shalt Not Be An Atheist," but rather "Thou Shalt Not Have False Gods Before Me." With the One True Church obscured by the Vatican II sect, the people begin to look to the occult for answers. Even atheists replace the True God with the false "gods" of sex, money, power, etc. These evils come to us in many ways, including TV shows and movies. 

You'd need to be living under a rock not to have heard of the Netflix series Stranger Things, which many sources claim is one of the most (if not the most) popular series of all time. The show takes place in the 1980s, in a fictitious Indiana town. After the mysterious and sudden vanishing of a young boy, the people of the town begin to uncover secrets of a government lab, portals to another world, and sinister monsters. The boy's mother desperately tries to find him, convinced he is in grave danger, while the police chief searches for answers. I was told by co-workers and neighbors that I "had to" watch it because it was such a good show.

Finally, I decided to check it out, along with some popular movies and TV series; all of which I believed before watching that they would contain occult or anti-God messages and possibly occult origins. I wasn't disappointed. It was all strangely familiar. This post will explain the occult and anti-Christ messages/origins of some of the biggest movies and shows; both current and fairly recent.

What is the Occult?

The dictionary defines the occult as "supernatural, mystical, or magical beliefs, practices, or phenomena." Based upon my years of research, I see the occult more in-depth. The word occult comes from the Latin occultus, which means “concealed” or “hidden," as in an "occult heretic." The occult involves mystic knowledge and "magic powers" received from the spirit world and dispensed for the benefit of devotees or directed destructively at enemies by those who have been initiated into its secrets. The masters of occult power are known as medicine men (or women), witch doctors, witches, psychics, pagan priests, sorcerers, astrologers, gurus, yogis, shamans, mediums, seers, or healers.

Some of those involved with occult powers attribute them to a variety of deities, others to a “Force” inherent within the universe with a “dark” and “light” side into which humans can tap. Still others claim they are simply using a normal power of the mind which can be cultivated in a special state of consciousness. There are also those who blasphemously attribute occult powers to the God of the Bible. Occult powers that produce results which cannot be explained by science are found in the practice of almost every religion, from much that calls itself Christianity, to paganism, idolatry, witchcraft, and Satanism. Occultism is present even in religions which are opposed to one another. For example, it is found in the Sufism of Islam and in the Kaballah of Judaism; in aberrant "Christian" sects as well as in satanic and UFO cults.

The acceptance and proliferation of all aspects of the occult are increasingly viewed as perfectly legitimate and desirable in today’s world. We will see how this plays out in movies and TV. First, some older movies/shows will be examined, and then contemporary ones. 

Harry Potter and Twilight

 It's important to understand the demonic forces that are behind these seemingly innocent works and alert any friends and family with children/grandchildren of the danger. The Twilight series revolves around the dark romance between Edward (a 108 yr old vampire) and Bella (a teenage girl). Edward doesn't age so he appears young, but there remains an underlying pedophile problem never addressed. Edward belongs to a good "coven" of vampires who don't kill humans, drinking animal blood instead. He protects Bella from the bad vampires, even as he fights against his own perverse urges to drink her blood. Hence, Edward is portrayed as a "noble" vampire. The series is seeped in occult themes.

Similarly, Harry Potter tells us there are "good witches" and bad ones, when all forms of witchcraft (or "Wicca"), are condemned by God. Portraying evil as good, or having good potential, has never been so rampant as today. You will not see any condemnations coming from the Vatican II cult, as this is exactly what they believe---"elements" of truth and goodness can be found in what is false and wicked. Harry Potter also promotes moral relativism; nothing is right or wrong, it depends exclusively on the circumstances.  Even more frightening, is the little known fact that both Stephanie Meyer (who wrote the Twilight series) and J.K. Rowling (who wrote the Harry Potter series) both claimed to have gotten their ideas from an "outside source" that "revealed it to them."

For Rowling, during a train ride in 1990, she claimed, "I was staring out the window and the idea of Harry Potter just came. He appeared in my mind's eye fully formed." (See Reuters, "Harry Potter Just Strolled into My Head" 7/17/00) She also claims to hear in her head the conversations she writes:  "Dialogue just comes to me as if I'm overhearing a conversation." 

(See januarymagazine.com/profiles/jkrowling.html). 

As for Stephanie Meyer, a member of the Mormon sect, she claims that the story of Twilight was revealed to her in a dream:

"I woke up (on that June 2nd) from a very vivid dream. In my dream, two people were having an intense conversation in a meadow in the woods. One of these people was just your average girl. The other person was fantastically beautiful, sparkly, and a vampire. They were discussing the difficulties inherent in the facts that A) they were falling in love with each other while B) the vampire was particularly attracted to the scent of her blood, and was having a difficult time restraining himself from killing her immediately. For what is essentially a transcript of my dream, please see Chapter 13 ("Confessions") of the book." (See stepheniemeyer.com/twilight.html).

She further relates that after her dream, she began to hear voices that would not stop until she wrote what she heard:

"All this time, Bella and Edward were, quite literally, voices in my head. They simply wouldn't shut up. I'd stay up as late as I could stand trying to get all the stuff in my mind typed out, and then crawl, exhausted, into bed (my baby still wasn't sleeping through the night, yet) only to have another conversation start in my head. I hated to lose anything by forgetting, so I'd get up and head back down to the computer. Eventually, I got a pen and notebook for beside my bed to jot notes down so I could get some freakin' sleep. It was always an exciting challenge in the morning to try to decipher the stuff I'd scrawled across the page in the dark." (Ibid--Emphasis in original).

After she wrote her books, Meyers relates that "Edward" came to her in a dream to let her know he wasn't good. She told Entertainment Weekly, "(Edward told me) I had gotten it wrong, and he did drink blood like every other vampire and you couldn't live on animals the way I'd written it. We had this conversation and it was terrifying." (Emphasis mine). Could both women simply have active imaginations? When you consider both claim that the characters came to them out of the blue, both claimed they could literally hear what they had to write as from an external source, and all dealt with showing evil as good, I think a good case can be made these books and movies were demonically inspired.

Openly Satanic: Lucifer

Originally on Fox for three seasons (2016-2018), Lucifer came back at the request of over 300,000 people signing petitions. Netflix picked it up for another three seasons ending in 2021. The Fox website originally described the show this way:

“Bored and unhappy as the Lord of Hell, Lucifer Morningstar (Tom Ellis) abandoned his throne and retired to Los Angeles, where he has teamed up with LAPD detective Chloe Decker (Lauren German) to take down criminals.” 

Ironically, the show Lucifer portrays Satan as a somewhat reformed fallen angel who has had a change of heart and transformed himself into an angle of light. Of course, this is exactly the sort of thing that  God warns us that Satan would do, regarding his image, in an effort to get the unsuspecting to let their guard down (See 2 Corinthians 11:13-15). It worked, with 300,000 fools petitioning for it to continue. In the very first season, episode 9, entitled "A Priest Walks Into A Bar," Lucifer is seen going into a Vatican II sect confessional pretending to be a priest. A woman comes into confess lustful thoughts for another man (she's married). Lucifer encourages her to act on them and commit adultery. This is just the tip of the iceberg of the blasphemies spewed on this show.

Chilling Adventures of Sabrina

The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina ("CAOS") was one of the most popular series on Netflix from 2018-2020, and got cancelled due to problems during COVID. The show is loosely connected to Sabrina the Teenage Witch, that ran as a cartoon from 1971-1974, and then as a darker live situation comedy starring Melissa Joan Hart (1996-2003). This version of Sabrina depicts explicit Satanism in a positive light. The show centers around the lives of literal, explicitly Satan-worshipping witches gathering as the "Church of Night," learning Satanic law, casting spells, performing unholy rituals, offering animal sacrifices, and chanting blasphemies such as “Hail Satan” in hopes of summoning Satan himself.

CAOS follows the exploits of the half-human, half-witch Sabrina Spellman (sixteen years old), wrestling through her prophesied fate. She’s fated to become Satan’s queen and the harbinger of hell on earth. She doesn't want to be his bride. As an orphan, Sabrina has been raised by her aunts, Zelda and Hilda Spellman, both witches in the Satanic Church. Her cousin Ambrose Spellman, living with them, is a pansexual witch with a penchant for necromancy (conjuring the dead). Those who contact the dead are called mediums.

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." (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, [1961], pg. 100; Emphasis mine). 

Here is a partial listing of the evils depicted in CAOS. Sabrina:

• tortures people
• unleashes a demon
• kills a classmate
• signs the "book of the beast," promising her soul to Satan
• conducts a seance to talk with her dead mother 

This laundry list of evil deeds is just from Sabrina, the heroine of the show. Debauchery is the central theme. You name it, these characters do it — promote witchcraft, engage in school-sanctioned alcoholic sex parties, sexual assault, orgies, murder, incest, torture, sadomasochism, and even cannibalism. All of this takes place in Season One; I didn't need to go any further. By the way, one of the show's writers, Joshua Conkel, is a practicing Wiccan (witch).

Stranger Things: Strangely Anti-Supernatural

I left Stranger Things to examine last because despite appearing occult, it actually promotes a Naturalistic, anti-supernatural worldview. You read that last sentence correctly.

Naturalism is the worldview that says only material things exist. Thus, immaterial things such as the soul, angels, and God are not real. Reality is thus exhausted by physical things that are accessible to the senses and scientific investigation.

The supernatural worldview, by contrast, embraces the existence of an immaterial reality. In his letter to the church in Ephesus, the Apostle Paul writes, “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Ephesians 6:12).

Stranger Things certainly has all the regular trappings we associate with the occult; demon-like possession, monsters, and an alternate dimension called "The Upside-down." Yet, who do the boys turn to for advice when they need to access the Upside-down? They don’t go to a spiritual advisor, consult a spiritual book, or attempt some kind of occult ritual. Rather, they consult their science teacher, Mr. Clarke, who becomes a trusted advisor throughout the series. To access the Upside-down, they tap his scientific expertise because they assume it is an alternate physical dimension. It may contain different lifeforms and plant life, but it is not an immaterial, spiritual realm. This is atheism posing as occultism to attract viewers. Occult ideals and Satanic values are fairly similar to atheistic humanism. Social justice, individual liberty, and pleasure-seeking might not sound Satanic, yet are in fact the explicit tenets of real-life Satanism.

The first of nine Satanic Statements defining the Church of Satan (founded in 1966), is “Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.” (See churchofsatan.com/nine-satanic-statements). The Satanic Temple, another brand of Satanism, founded in 2013, lists seven core tenets, roughly summarized as (1) compassion/empathy (2) social justice (3) personal autonomy/liberty (4) respect for other people’s freedoms, (5) science, (6) fix your own mistakes, and (7) follow spirit of the law over the letter of the law. (See thesatanictemple.com/pages/tenets).

Objections Considered

To many people, I'm seen as a "fanatic," I'm "opposing anything not expressly religious," and I "see evil everywhere." The objections can basically be boiled down to this: “It’s just a movie/ TV show! What’s the harm in watching? Merely watching the show/movie isn’t the same as practicing the occult or worshiping Satan. In fact, the protagonist is fighting evil or trying to become good." Here are three reasons that these shows/movies do not belong in a Christian household:

1. The viewer cheers for evil posing as "good."

In CAOS, Sabrina tries to escape from Satan. Escaping Satan should be good, right? What the audience doesn’t realize is that underneath the sensationalized Satanism lurks an enticing occult way of life. By backing away from Satanism, Sabrina backs into Wicca (witchcraft), and a lighter shade of Satanism — and the audience is manipulated into cheering for her the whole time. By using the foot-in-the-door method, CAOS basically becomes promotional marketing for occult dabbling, all in the name of peace, harmony, and the auspices of being anti-Satan.

Likewise, Lucifer portrays Satan as a sympathetic character, seeking forgiveness and trying to do good. Jesus said,  “He (Satan) was a murderer from the beginning,” (See St. John 8:44) and comes “to steal and kill and destroy” (See St. John 10:10). It is Satan who inspires people to do all manner of evil from torture, rape, and child molestation to murder. Now, Satan is a handsome crime fighter in Los Angeles? (No doubt LA was picked over NYC because the name "Los Angeles" translates as "the City of Angels.") Angels cannot change their nature. At their test by God, those who chose God are good for eternity, and those who chose against God are forever evil.  As theologian Ott teaches, "As the blessedness of the good angels is of eternal duration...so the punishment of the bad angels is also without end." (See Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, [1955], pg. 119). Yet, people cheer for Lucifer. In Twilight, you cheer for Edward, who is in a sexual relationship with a minor aged 16, while he is over 100. 

Over the last several years, Hollywood has given us such "heroes" as a chemistry teacher turned meth dealer ("Breaking Bad"), a sociopath that kills other killers ("Dexter"), and now the "father of lies" himself; Satan. I shudder when I think of the number of people who will watch this as I recall the aphorism, "What goes into a mind comes out in a life." More than one viewer might be tempted to dabble in the occult. 

2. The viewer becomes desensitized to blasphemy and anti-Christian ideas/morals.

These shows/movies test common decency with tawdry scenes of rape, incest, graphic nudity, and explicit, bloody violence. In Stranger Things, no one prays or invokes Our Lord, unless it is to use the Most Holy Name of Jesus in vain (and done with incredible frequency). Harry Potter teaches there are no moral absolutes. 

3. The viewer is exposed to influences used to bring acceptance to the unacceptable.

So-called "social progressivism" pervades these movies/shows; especially feminism and sodomite "LGBTQIA+" perversion. To give but one example, in CAOS, Susie Putnam, a "trans-male" protagonist, uses magic to exact revenge on her bullies and to join the varsity men’s basketball team. Ambrose Spellman is a suave Satanic hero who glamorizes bisexual romance and polyamorous flings. How long before people think sodomites and transgenders "aren't so bad"? 

Conclusion

Please "learn to discern." Some of my readers got rid of their TV. Good for them, but I'm not advocating for that, as there are some good and pleasant things to watch. Nevertheless, the movies/shows discussed in this post draw a lot of its audience through a morbid focus on the occult. Occultism, sadly, has always been appealing at some level to humans. Occult knowledge and power have intrigued people ever since the serpent tempted Eve with the promise of becoming “like God, knowing good and evil” on her own terms (See Genesis 3:5). All of these movies and shows presented are full of occult symbols, practices, and ideology, with too many examples to recount, none of which are redeeming. There is no heroic escape from witchcraft, no fateful retribution reminding people that witchcraft and the occult are bad. In Stranger Things, the guise of the supernatural is used to reject God and the supernatural. In none of these movies or shows is there a single positive comment about Christianity. The only explicit references to Christianity are negative. The words of Isaiah “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20) are more applicable to our society than ever before. 

Lying For Luther

 

On April 7th of this year, the Argentinian apostate, Jorge Bergoglio (aka "Pope" Francis), calumniated a true pope:

Pope Francis on Thursday recalled the 500th anniversary of the election of Pope Adrian VI, who sought reconciliation between the Catholic Church and Martin Luther during his short pontificate.

“In his brief pontificate, which lasted only a little more than a year, he sought above all reconciliation in the Church and the world, putting into practice the words of St. Paul, according to which God entrusted precisely to the apostles the ministry of reconciliation,” Pope Francis said on April 7.

For this reason, Adrian VI sent the nuncio to the Imperial Diets of Nuremberg “to reconcile Luther and his followers with the Church and expressly asking forgiveness for the sins of the prelates of the Roman Curia,” he stated.

“Courageous,” Francis added. “He would have plenty of work today.”

Pope Francis spoke about Adrian VI, who was elected in 1522, during a meeting at the Vatican with the community of the Pontifical Teutonic Institute of Santa Maria dell’Anima, a college for German seminarians in Rome.

Adrian VI is buried in the Roman church Santa Maria dell’Anima, which is connected to the seminary. 

Born in Utretcht, then part of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, Adrian was the last non-Italian pope before the election of the Polish Pope John Paul II in 1978.

Pope Francis noted that, “in the political sphere, overcoming much resistance, [Adrian VI] worked to reach an agreement between the two bordering powers, King Francis I of France and Emperor Charles V of Habsburg, also so that together they could stem the increasingly threatening designs of conquest by the Ottoman army.”

“Unfortunately, Pope Adrian, due to his premature death, was unable to conclude any of these projects. Nevertheless, his witness as a fearless and tireless worker for faith, justice and peace remains alive in the memory of the Church,” Francis said.

He urged the members of the college seminary to follow the example of Pope Adrian VI to grow in their vocation as servants of the Church.

“In particular, thinking of his solicitude for the promotion of concord and reconciliation, I urge you to follow in his footsteps above all in your role as ministers of the sacrament of penance. This is important: The task of the confessor is to forgive, not to torture. Be merciful; be great forgivers: That is what the Church wants you to be,” he said.

“This means giving time to listening to confessions and doing it well, with love, with wisdom and with great mercy.”(See ncregister.com/cna/pope-francis-praises-adrian-vi-s-attempt-to-reconcile-with-martin-luther). 

Did Pope Adrian VI seriously "ask forgiveness for the sins of the Roman Curia" from Lutheran heretics? One immediately gets images of Wojtyla (JP II) wringing his hands and shedding crocodile tears as he "apologizes" to 

• women
• Jews
• those convicted by the Inquisition
• Moslems killed in the Crusades
• anyone else the Church "wronged"

He went so far as to "celebrate" a day of "Prayer for the Forgiveness of the Sins of the Church" on March 12, 2000. The name is blasphemous, as the members of the Church may sin, but the Church Herself cannot give evil. From July 24 to 29, 2022, Bergoglio visited Canada on a "penitential pilgrimage" for the supposed abuse of the Catholic Church in her treatment of the Native Indians, and "subversion of their [pagan] culture" by the "white European devil." 

Since the Church has been "driven underground" by Vatican II and without a visible Head since 1958, most can be forgiven if they thought this is what Pope Adrian VI was doing. For Bergoglio, who was raised pre-Vatican II and was educated in the Faith, there is no such excuse. According to Church historians Neill and Schmandt:

Adrian had been shocked at the conditions he found in Rome. The cardinals who met him were indistinguishable in dress and appearance from worldly princes. Rome was a motley collection of parasites, prostitutes, armed retainers, and diverse hangers-on who all partook one way or another of the Church's revenues. (See The History of the Catholic Church, [1957], pg. 360).  

To be clear, the problem was involving money, not Church teaching. He regretted genuine scandal given by these clerics, but never said it was a rightful cause of the so-called "Reformation." New World Encyclopedia has this to say:

Adrian came to the papacy in the midst of one of its greatest crises, threatened not only by Lutheranism to the north but also by the advance of the Ottoman Turks to the east. He refused to compromise with Lutheranism theologically, demanding Luther's condemnation as a heretic. However, he is noted for having attempted to reform the Catholic Church administratively in response to the Protestant Reformation. His efforts at reform, however, proved fruitless, as they were resisted by most of his Renaissance ecclesiastical contemporaries, and he did not live long enough to see his efforts through to their conclusion. (See newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pope_Adrian_VI; Emphasis mine). 

Finally, Adrian had a tendency to exaggerate, which the enemies of the Church used to their advantage:

His [Pope Adrian's] exaggerated acknowledgment that the Roman Court had been the fountainhead of all the corruptions in the Church was eagerly seized upon by the Reformers as a justification of their apostasy. (See newadvent.org/cathen/01159b.htm; [1913 Catholic Encyclopedia]; Emphasis mine). Pope Adrian VI was not on bended knee, asking Luther for "forgiveness;" he acknowledged the worldliness of some clergy and asked Luther and his followers to renounce their heresy and return to the One True Church, outside of which no one can be saved. 

This is not the first time in his false pontificate that Bergoglio has praised Luther. Twice (2016 and 2021), Francis placed a statue in the Modernist Vatican of arch-heretic Luther. In 2016, to begin the "celebration" of the 500th anniversary of the "Reformation" in 2017, Bergoglio said of Martin Luther:

The Church's greatest reformers are the saints, in other words the men and women who follow the Word of the Lord and practice it. This is the path we need to take, this is what reforms the church and they are great reformers. They may not be theologians, they may not have studied, they may be humble, but these people's soul is steeped in the Gospel, it's full of it and they are the ones who successfully reform the Church. Both in the Lutheran and Catholic Churches there are saints, men and women with a holy heart who follow the Gospel: they are the Church's reformers. (See lastampa.it/vatican-insider/en/2016/10/13/news/pope-those-who-defend-christ-but-turn-away-refugees-are-hypocrites-1.34786963; Emphasis mine). 

During the same talk, he gave his high estimation of the Catholic Faith:

The Pope picked up on a question put to him by a girl from Saxony-Anhalt, about the fact that 80% of locals do not belong to any Christian denomination: “Should I convince these friends - who are good and happy people - of my faith?” Francis said, repeating the question. “What should I tell them to convince them? Listen,” he said, “the last thing you should do is ‘tell’. You should live as a Christian who is chosen, forgiven and forging a path. It is not right to convince them of your faith, proselytism is the most powerful poison against the path of ecumenism...(Ibid; Emphasis mine).

What, then, should be the proper view on Martin Luther? Was he some misunderstood and brave reformer? The second part of this post will take a close-up look at the apostate priest.

The Martin Luther of History

(This section draws on several works, most notably, The Facts About Luther, by O'Hare; Luther's True Face, by Gleize, and Luther and Lutherdom, by Denifle, to which I give full attribution in the compilation of this section---Introibo). 

1. Was Luther a "Good Christian"?

The best judge of this question would be how he was viewed by many Protestant historians, with no love for the Catholic Church.

• One of these fearless writers was the Protestant Professor Seeberg of Berlin. He was no friend of the Catholic Church, but his deep study of the man and his movement forced him to say: “Luther strode through his century like a demon crushing under his feet what a thousand years had venerated.” The same author further remarks:“In him dwelt ‘The Superhuman’ or, in Nietzsche’s Philosophy, the ‘Uebermensch’ who dwells ‘beyond moral good and evil.’” 

• In November 1883 the English Protestant Bishop Bewick applied to Luther the epithets “foul-mouthed” and “scurrilous.” 

• In the December “Century” issued in 1900, Augustine Birrell, a distinguished English Protestant writer, declared that “Luther was not an ideal sponsor of a new religion; he was a master of billingsgate and the least saintly of men. At times, in reading Luther, one is drawn to say to him what Herrick so frankly says of himself: ‘Luther, thou art too coarse to love’

• Encouraged others to sin saying, "Be a sinner and sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly... No sin will separate us from (Christ), even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day." (Letter from Luther to Philip Melanchthon, August 1, 1521 A.D.)

• Wanted churches and convents destroyed 

• Promoted bloodshed 

• Permitted divorce and "remarriage"

• Broke his priestly vows to "marry" a nun, declaring the vows that both made to God non-binding by his own authority

2. Did Martin Luther Make the Bible Well-Known?

The story goes that Martin Luther "discovered" the "prohibited Book" (Bible) and read it, leading to his "conversion to authentic Christianity." This fable was first put into circulation by Mathesius, Luther’s pupil and a boarder in his house. Did Luther really "save the Bible" from the evil, "popish clerics" who allegedly hid it from the faithful? In a word: NO.

That Luther did not discover and was not the first to give the Bible to the people in the latter’s own language is easily proved.

• Fr. Lucian Johnston, in an able review of Grisar’s Work, says: Luther as well as every other man of education of his day was accustomed to the Scriptures from his youth. Like thousands of others in any other schools, he was a regularly appointed professor of Scripture. It was precisely this position as teacher of Scripture in his monastery that gave the outlet to his peculiar views. Had the Bible been as unknown as the popular biography supposes, Luther might not have developed as he did along Scriptural lines. Here again Luther’s memory played him tricks. He fell back for excuses upon- the supposed lack of Scriptures just as he did upon the presence of abuses, when, as a matter of fact, there is no evidence from his own earlier works to prove that these things exercised any material effect upon his early mental development.

• “Luther’s studies,” according to McGiffert, a non-Catholic writer, in his biography of the Reformer published in 1912, embraced the writings of the Church Fathers and particularly the Bible, to which he was becoming more and more attached. It was in his twentieth year, he tells us, that he first saw a complete copy of the Scriptures in the university library of Erfurt. He had hitherto supposed they embraced only the lessons read in the public services and was delighted to find much that was quite unfamiliar to him. His ignorance, it may be remarked, though not exceptional, was his own fault. The notion that Bible reading was frowned upon by the ecclesiastical authorities of the age is quite unfounded.  [The Scriptures] were read regularly in church and their study was no more prohibited to university students of that day than of this.

3. Luther Admits The "Reformation's" Failure

In Luther's own words:

• Unfortunately, it is our daily experience, that now under the Gospel [his] the people entertain greater and bitterer hatred and envy and are worse with their avarice and money-grabbing than before under the Papacy.

• The people feel they are free from the bonds and fetters of the Pope, but now they want to get rid also of the Gospel and of all the laws of God.

•  Everybody thinks that Christian liberty and licentiousness of the flesh are one and the same thing, as if now everybody was allowed to do what he wants.

• Townsfolk and peasants, men and women, children and servants, princes, magistrates and subjects, are all going to the devil.

• If we succeed in expelling one devil, he immediately is replaced by seven others who are much worse. We can then expect that after having driven away the monks, we shall see arise a race seven times worse than the former.

• Avarice, usury, debauchery, drunkenness, blasphemy, lying and cheating are far more prevalent now than they were under the Papacy. This state of morals brings general discredit on the Gospel and its preachers, as the people say, if this Gospel were true, the persons professing it would be more pious. 

True Reunion As Taught By A True Pope

Pope Pius XI issued the monumental encyclical Mortalium Animos, on true religious unity.

Para. #9: Everyone knows that John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment "Love one another," altogether forbade any intercourse with those who professed a mutilated and corrupt version of Christ's teaching: "If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed you." For which reason, since charity is based on a complete and sincere faith, the disciples of Christ must be united principally by the bond of one faith.

Para. #10: So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have unhappily left it. 

Conclusion

Bergoglio is lying for Luther. He sanitizes his life and false doctrines. He decries proselytism and exalts false ecumenism. The opening words of Exurge Domine, the decree of Pope Leo X condemning the errors of Luther, applies equally to false pope Francis:

Arise, O Lord, and judge your own cause. Remember your reproaches to those who are filled with foolishness all through the day. Listen to our prayers, for foxes have arisen seeking to destroy the vineyard whose winepress you alone have trod.  

Truth Be Told

 

"You certainly stuck up for your truth," the young associate at my law firm said to me. About two months ago, one of the partners had uncharacteristically confronted me outside his office where many others could see and hear us. He thought I had done something that was not in the best interest of one of my clients. I told him he was wrong, and a loud argument ensued. It ended with me pulling out a court paper which proved a fact of which he had been ignorant. He started to stutter and said in a loud voice, "We'll discuss this more later!" and proceeded to go back to his office. A small number of attorneys had congregated around us to hear what was transpiring. They went back to work, except for the associate who made that remark to me.

 "My truth?" I asked. "Sure," she said, "you needed to tell your side of what happened; that's your truth. You know, there's three sides to every story, yours, mine, and the truth." The associate in question is in her late 20s and Jewish. She was hired just prior to the COVID outbreak. Still being angry from the argument, and a hothead by nature, I asked her, "Do you believe six million Jews died in Nazi Germany?" She looked perplexed and answered, "Of course." I replied, "We'll that's your truth. There's three sides to the story, the Jews, the Nazis, and the truth." If looks could kill, I wouldn't be here. She hasn't spoken to me since.

Although I should have handled it better, my point remains: objective truth exists and we can have knowledge of it. Among those under age 40, the idea that truth can never be known for certain, and/or truth is somehow unique to each individual, is near ubiquitous. Truth, they say (especially moral and religious truth), is not something objective, but totally relativistic. This has affected people's approach to religion and morals. The attack on morals came first, because the enemies of God knew that there's no faster way for someone to lose their faith than by losing their morals. It started prior to the Robber Council. Religious relativism followed Vatican II, as the new sect taught that all religions are more or less true, and lead to Heaven.

The focus of this post will be to combat moral relativism and also the idea that the truth cannot be known objectively, only what's "true for you." 

The Beginning: Situation Ethics

While moral relativism has always been around, the incredible resurgence in the 21st century can be traced back to situation ethics which began prior to the Robber Council. Simply put, situation ethics is "a moral theory where the situation is taken into account first, before deciding on the rules of right and wrong. There is no set of principles, because what might be considered immoral in one situation could be considered the most moral thing to do in another." Hence, there are no intrinsically evil or good actions. The morality of any given act must be considered within the totality of the circumstances. This was solemnly condemned by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office in 1956:

Contra Doctrinam

Contrary to the moral doctrine and its application that is traditional in the Catholic Church, there has begun to be spread abroad in many regions, even among Catholics, an ethical system that generally goes by the name of a certain "Situation Ethics," and which, they claim, does not rest upon the principles of objective ethics (which ultimately is rooted in “Being” itself), rather, it is not merely subject to the same limit as objective ethics, but transcends it.

The authors who follow this system hold that the decisive and ultimate norm of conduct is not the objective right order, determined by the law of nature and known with certainty from that law, but a certain intimate judgment and light of the mind of each individual, by means of which, in the concrete situation in which he is placed, he learns what he ought to do.

And so, according to them, this ultimate decision a man makes is not, as the objective ethics handed down by authors of great weight teaches, the application of the objective law to a particular case, which at the same time takes into account and weighs according to the rules of prudence the particular circumstances of the "situation", but that immediate, internal light and judgment. Ultimately, at least in many matters, this judgment is not measured, must not and cannot be measured, as regards its objective rectitude and truth, by any objective norm situated outside man and independent of his subjective persuasion but is entirely self-sufficient.

According to these authors, the traditional concept of "human nature" does not suffice; but recourse must be had to the concept of "existent" human nature, which in many respects does not have absolute objective value, but only a relative and, therefore, changeable value, except, perhaps, for those few factors and principles that pertain to metaphysical (absolute and unchangeable) human nature.

Of the same merely relative value is the traditional concept of the "law of nature". Thus, many things that are commonly considered today as absolute postulates of the natural law, according to their opinion and doctrine, rest upon the aforesaid concept of existent nature and are, therefore, but relative and changeable; they can always be adapted to every situation.

Having accepted these principles and put them into practice, they assert and teach that men are preserved or easily liberated from many otherwise insoluble ethical conflicts when each one judges in his own conscience, not primarily according to objective laws, but by means of that internal, individual light based on personal intuition, what he must do in a concrete situation.

Many of the things set forth in this system of "situation ethics" contradict the truth of the matter and the dictates of sound reason, betray traces of relativism and modernism, and wander far from the Catholic doctrine handed down through the centuries. In many of their assertions they are akin to several non-Catholic ethical systems.

Having considered these things, in order to avert the danger of the “New Morality,” of which the Supreme Pontiff Pope Pius XII spoke in the Allocutions held on the days of March 23 and April 18, 1952, and in order to safeguard the purity and intactness of Catholic doctrine, this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office interdicts and prohibits this doctrine of "Situation Ethics” from being taught or approved, under any name whatsoever it may be designated, whether in Universities, Athenaeums, Seminaries or houses of religious formation, or in books, dissertations, lectures, whether, as they say, at conferences, or by any other means of being propagated or defended.

Given at Rome, from the Palace of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, on the day of February 2, of the year 1956.

[signed] Giuseppe Cardinal Pizzardo, Bishop of Albano, Secretary

(See theologians Ford and Kelly, Contemporary Moral Theology, [1958], pgs. 121-123; Emphasis mine). 

After the Robber Council, situation ethics became rampant, even in Vatican II sect schools. This was followed by Values Clarification. The "exercise-simulations" in values clarification are outright wicked. There is one such insidious simulation called "Lifeboat." In this (and similar scenarios) there are more people on the boat than food to survive. You're given a list of people with "pros" (a scientist) and "cons" (the scientist is also a paraplegic). You must then decide (individually or as a group) who will live and who gets thrown into the ocean to drown. What's the purpose of doing something so hideous? It has nothing to do with critical thinking and everything to do with the evil idea that some people have a fundamental right to choose life or death for others.

 The values clarification movement was developed primarily by philosopher John Dewey, an atheist. Accordingly, behavior should be the result of free, uninfluenced, autonomous choice, based on personal analysis of a given situation coupled with the moment's emotions and desires. Rather than adherence to an external moral code, Dewey pushed something he called "valuation" in which a given situation is explored and various "solutions" discussed. This directly contradicts Church teaching on making choices based on a rightly formed conscience.

 Hence, choices are good or foolish, never right and wrong. Sin and repentance are never mentioned.

Human sexuality programs came next in both schools and "religious education" programs in an attempt to inculcate appreciation for "waiting until marriage" by cultivating fear of bad consequences: pregnancy, disease, and heartbreak. They never state that premarital sex is sinful and they do not urge sinners to repent. Therefore, the dilemma posed to youth by their teachers is no longer a question of morality--- it is a health issue. And, yes, I'm talking about programs in Vatican II schools, not just public schools. 

Moral Relativism is further reinforced by our therapeutic era. Sin, repentance, and forgiveness have given way to self-realization or self-authentication. Treatment is in; consequences are out. We’re victims, not responsible moral agents. But we actually demean humans by refusing to hold them accountable for their actions. This therapeutic view has no room for evil—only what is statistically abnormal. It’s just another variation of relativism, this one dressed up in a psychiatrist’s white coat.

In contrast, the Church teaches there are objective morals. According to theologians McHugh and Callan, "Morality is the agreement or disagreement of a human act with the norms that regulate human conduct with reference to Man's Last End." (See Moral Theology, [1929], 1:22). Therefore, morality is based on God and is external, eternal, and unchanging. To further clarify:

1. Moral duties—positively (ought) or negatively (ought not)—aren’t a function of individual or cultural preferences or opinions. We don’t make up or invent morality and then it becomes right; objective morality is applicable to all.

2. Objective morality also includes (a) obligation—a duty to comply with what we ought to do (right) and to avoid what is forbidden (wrong)—as well as (b) virtue or character. We ought to pursue the good, and that for its own sake. We are duty-bound to do certain things and refrain from others, and we can’t forgo the cultivation of character.

Answering Moral Relativism

These days, a person will more than likely encounter a relativist who will spew one of two objections if anyone dares to assert moral absolutes:

• Your values are true for you, but not true for me
• Don't impose your morality on others

Each will now be considered.

Your values are true for you, but not true for me

 It is an observed and recorded fact that cultures disagree over what is right and wrong, even when the terms in dispute are clearly defined and accepted by both groups of people. This proves that moral codes are mere social conventions invented by people. What is good for one culture might be considered bad by another. To be moral simply means to act in accordance with one’s society. Even the U.S. Supreme Court speaks of a "relevant community" for determining what constitutes "obscenity." (See Miller v. California 413 U.S. 15 [1973]). In Miller, the Court says to look towards the "contemporary community standards" and rejects attempting even a "national standard" for determining what materials shall be deemed "obscene."

Reply: First, cultural relativism is descriptive, not prescriptive. It merely describes the way things are factually, without reference as to why things ought to be a certain way. Many disagreements are really factual, not moral. In the battle over abortion, the pro-abortionists never concede the unborn child is human. That would put them in a position of advocating for the killing of innocent babies, which everyone understands to be wrong. Instead they de-humanize the pre-born into mere "cells" and make the issue about "choice." Even the evil Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the infamous majority opinion in Roe v. Wade (legalizing abortion in the United States, 1/22/73 and thankfully reversed on 6/24/22), admitted in his very opinion that if the fetus was a person abortion could not be made legal.   This proves that many underlying moral precepts are shared by all humans irrespective of society. As another example, no culture has ever valued cowardice in battle.

Second, it does not follow from the premises of the thesis that no moral code is correct or can be known by people. Different cultures have disagreed in the past as to the shape of the Earth, but it does not follow that no one can ever know the correct shape of the world.

Third, the Supreme Court has done nothing to clarify moral judgments. Miller can easily be attacked for obfuscating the issue. Why is any given "relevant community" correct in its ethical assessments?  If there is no external Moral Norm, how could the Nuremberg Trials condemn Nazis for following the moral dictates of their relevant community? It might also be asked where, precisely, we find the apposite community. People hold simultaneous membership in several communities, each with differing moral codes. In New York City, one could belong to his/her family, extended family, social club, place of employment, religion, and New York State. Which one is the "relevant community?"

Fourth, normative relativism suffers from what has been deemed the "Reformer’s Dilemma."  If cultural/normative relativism is true, then a reformer who wishes to correct a perceived injustice becomes a logical impossibility. The reformer, such as a Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi, must stand outside the society’s moral code and pronounce some feature of it to be wrong. However, if you are moral if and only if you conform to society’s standards, the reformer is immoral by definition and there is no allowance for any substantial change to practices like apartheid. (See "Sociological Approaches to Ethics: Cultural Relativism" at http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil220/relativism.html).

Fifth, there are at least two logical inconsistencies with moral relativism. Suppose Society X believes that killing deformed babies is immoral, but Society Y thinks it’s moral to do so. How should a member of Society X view the killing of deformed babies in Society Y?  According to the moral code of Society X, he should condemn the acts as murder, but if the member of Society Y can only be ethical by following the code of his own community, how can you condemn that person for being moral by his society’s standards? The implication is that you can never condemn the acts of another relevant community. The logical extension is that the U.S. had no right to condemn the acts of Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan, and the North had no right to condemn slavery in the Confederacy. Lastly, cultural/normative relativism violates the Law of Non-Contradiction: To assert that "All morality is relative" (to culture or in general), you’ve just made an absolute statement that applies to all people in all cultures!  How can you deny the existence and/or ability to know moral oughts, and then pronounce that we ought to do/abide by the standards of our relevant community? This line of thought is self-refuting.

Don't impose your morality on others

If someone expresses disapproval of another's actions (e.g., they support abortion or use marijuana, etc.), the moral relativist will almost inevitably speak up by saying something like "You shouldn't try to impose your religious beliefs and morals on others."  This is especially used by those who don't want laws "imposing morality" (e.g., pro-life laws). 

Reply: All States should be Catholic because "error has no rights." This seems extreme in today's world where religion is seen as no more than opinion. However, morals are always legislated. For example, those who are in favor of capital punishment want those who intentionally kill innocent people to be executed and remove them as a danger to society forever. This involves morality. Those who oppose capital punishment also impose a moral viewpoint on both the victim and society. They are saying the crime against the murdered victim does not merit execution, and society need not be forever protected from repeat murderers. Therefore, the people against "legislating morality" are not opposed to legislating any moral standard (that would be impossible), but rather want to replace one set of moral standards for those of their own choosing. 

Even apart from law, those who tell you not to impose your morality are claiming it's immoral to impose your morals, and hence, self-refuting. We are all guided by the Natural Law.  Natural law is rooted in the teaching of Saint Paul, “When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts.” (Romans 2:14-15; Emphasis mine). The guiding principle of the Natural Law is inflexible: “Do good and avoid evil.” It might not always be clear as to what is good or what is evil, but it is what everyone seeks. 

The Truth About Truth

Generally, there are two ideas about truth today; the one advocated by my colleague, and what is called the "Correspondence Theory of Truth."

 View #1: Truth Is What’s True for You: In this view, truth is relative—a subjective opinion. “Truth” becomes true to you as you believe it. In other words, I’m convinced of it, so that settles it. Someone with this view might say, “You have your truth, and I have mine.”

View #2: Truth Is What Matches the Facts: In this view, truth is absolute—an objective reality. Truth isn’t personal, and it doesn’t belong to me or to you. Whether everyone, or most, or few, or nobody believes it, truth is what matches up with what’s real. In other words, It’s true, so that settles it, whether or not I believe it. It "corresponds to objective reality." Modernism, which has infected society, rejects the objective for the subjective. Hence, View #1 is all around us.

The definition of the Correspondence Theory of Truth can be put in simple terms: “Truth is what matches reality.” Or again, “Truth matches the facts.” People once believed the earth was flat and thought that if you sailed too far from land you’d fall off. It is true that people believed this, but that didn’t make it true. The earth was and is round, no matter what anyone has believed. No opinion about the planet’s shape has altered reality. Another way to describe truth is to say, “Truth is telling it like it is.” What we claim to be true must match the way things really are. My claim to have a thousand dollars in my savings account is only true if I actually have a thousand dollars there. If only a hundred dollars is in my account, my statement isn’t true—I did not tell it like it is.

In summary:

1. We don’t invent truth; we discover it. In the early 1500s, Ferdinand Magellan sailed around the world by heading west and returning from the east. His demonstration of the earth’s roundness wasn’t the invention of a new truth. Rather, he discovered what had always been true. 

2. Our understanding of the truth can change, but truth itself does not change. After Magellan’s voyage, people had a new understanding of what had always been true: The earth is round. 

3. Truth does not depend on how fervently or sincerely we believe something to be true. The correct answer to this true/false question: “The Twin Towers in New York City were attacked on September 11, 2000” is false. The date was September 11, 2001. It wouldn’t matter how strongly someone believed that event took place in 2000; the answer is still false.

4. When something is true, it’s true everywhere, for all people, at all times. Some cultures used to believe a dragon living under the earth (not the movement of tectonic plates) caused earthquakes—that the earth moved when the dragon moved. It’s true that they believed this, but that didn’t make it true. No one’s beliefs make anything true or false. Truth is true, and falsehood is false, no matter what anyone believes.

Bergoglio: Situation Ethics Celebrated

The very situation ethics which were condemned by the Holy Office under Pope Pius XII, are now taught by false pope, Francis. In 2016, Bergoglio issued Amoris Laetitia, which de facto permits those who divorced their legitimate spouse and shack up with a "civil marriage" in adultery can receive the Vatican II sect "communion." How is this accomplished? The use of situation ethics. In para. # 301:

For an adequate understanding of the possibility and need of special discernment in certain “irregular” situations, one thing must always be taken into account, lest anyone think that the demands of the Gospel are in any way being compromised.  The Church possesses a solid body of reflection concerning mitigating factors and situations. Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.  More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule.  A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin.  (Emphasis mine). 

Here, someone who "know(s) full well the rule" (objective norm of morality as Traditionally taught by the Church) can be in a “concrete situation” where he has no choice but to live in mortal sin (!) and is justified in staying in that condition. 

Para. #303 teaches:

Yet conscience can do more than recognize that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the overall demands of the Gospel. It [conscience]can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits, while yet not fully the objective ideal. In any event, let us recall that this discernment is dynamic; it must remain ever open to new stages of growth and to new decisions which can enable the ideal to be more fully realized.(Emphasis mine).

In plain English, this is a blasphemous statement that a person can come to the "realization" that God Wills him to stay in his sinful condition.

Is it any wonder immorality is so rampant? 

Conclusion

"True for you, but not for me," is a statement that is false in and of itself. The idea of "my truth" comes from those who reject the objective order of the world created by Almighty God and replace it with their own "reality" setting themselves up as little "gods." In the teaching of my spiritual father:

"Suffice it to say that there will always be a chasm dividing those who believe in God as the ultimate norm of morality for man created for a supernatural end, and those who look upon man as another temporary worker experimenting on this globe in order to get the best and the most out of this short existence."--Fr. Gommar A. DePauw, JCD, leader of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement (founded 1964), in The Educational Rights Of The Church And Elementary Schools In Belgium, his dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of Doctor of Canon Law, Catholic University of America Press, Washington D.C. (1953). 

Blessed Be Her Glorious Assumption

 

To My Readers: Thanks to Lee, I get a much needed break as he is the guest poster this week. It is a timely post that helps us better understand and appreciate Our Blessed Lady's Assumption into Heaven, which we celebrate next Monday, August 15th. It is my favorite Marian feast day. Please feel free to comment and ask questions as usual. Any questions/comments specifically for me will be answered as always, but it may take me a bit longer to respond this week. For those of you who are interested, and haven't heard my interview for Catholic Family Podcast regarding Father DePauw, it may be accessed here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHKeaEcrEns

My screen was blank and voice distorted to protect my anonymity.  I highly recommend Mr. Kevin Davis's Catholic Family Podcast. He is an outstanding Traditionalist Catholic gentleman.  

God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo

Blessed be Her Glorious Assumption

By Lee

1950 was a year of exultation in the Catholic Church because on November 1st, Pope Pius XII proclaimed and defined as a dogma the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Munificentissimus Deus (MD). Prior to this time, the Plenary Council of Baltimore (1885) had kept the Holy Mother's Assumption (August 15th) to be among the six feasts as holy days of obligation in the United States. It had great significance years before being proclaimed a dogma.

According to St. John of Damascus, at the Council of Chalcedon in 451, Roman Emperor Marcian requested the body of Mary, Mother of God. St. Juvenal, who was Bishop of Jerusalem replied “that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; where from the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven,” the saint recorded. This is known as the Dormition of Mary which many have held in the Eastern Churches.

Whether she died ("fell asleep") and her body and soul was taken up into heaven by God, or whether she was spared death and carried off much like that of Enoch (Gen. 5:24) or the prophet Elias (2 Kings 2:1) is for Catholics open for belief because Pius XII declared "by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory." (MD #44; Emphasis mine) Regardless of what state she was in, all Catholics are bound to believe is that Mary was assumed into Heaven or as Pius XII said, "if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith...  It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul." (MD #45,47)

A Meditation To Consider

The fourth glorious mystery (Assumption of Mary) of the rosary can be the most delightful, but sometimes hardest to think about, when in prayer. There is not much from the early Church written about it, so we are only left with the imagination and beautiful art passed down through the centuries. However, there is a book to help this problem called The Mystical City of God which has the most carefully detailed events recorded. This book is based on private revelation and so a Catholic is not bound to believe it, nor even agree with it, but the Church through its popes have highly recommended it to be read among the faithful. Here is an example of what a few of them said:

Pope Pius XI

On April 29, 1939 Pius XI granted an audience to the publisher of The Mystical City of God. He told him: “You have done a great work in honor of the Mother of God; she will never permit herself to be outdone in generosity, and will know how to reward a thousandfold. We grant the Apostolic Benediction to all readers and promoters of The Mystical City of God.”

Pope Leo XIII

In 1900 a devout Canadian lay woman undertook the project of printing in one book the instructions of Our Lady found at the end of the chapters in The Mystical City of God. She traveled to Rome, obtained an audience with Pope Leo XIII, and informed him of her project. The great Pontiff not only gave her the Apostolic Blessing, but to the amazement of many, he ordered her book to be printed on the presses of the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda in Rome. The book is still extant and is titled Sublime Doctrine de la Mère de Dieu sur les vertus Chretiennes (extrait de la ‘Cite Mystique de Dieu’ par le Ven. Marie d’Agreda) (Rome: 1900).

A few months later it was observed by a Canadian diocesan journal: “The reserve which is ordinarily maintained on the subject of private revelations has no longer any real reason to exist in relation to The Mystical City of God, since His Holiness Leo XIII has been so good as gladly to encourage the project of spreading among the faithful the science of the saints which is contained in that heavenly Life of the Mother of God.”

Pope Pius IX

He stated “The Mystical City of God is a most excellent book, very appropriate for propagating the veneration of the Virgin Mary, and an antidote against the evil doctrines of our days.”

Pope Benedict XIII

The Mystical City of God, having been minutely scrutinized periodically for decades by Rome, was finally given entire and unequivocal approval by Benedict XIII, who signed the following decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, which was examining the cause for the beatification of Ven. Mary:

“It is ordered that the cause of the above-mentioned Servant of God shall be continued before the holy Congregation of Rites without further examination of The Mystical City of God, and these books can be retained and read. March 14, 1729.”

For more info, go to neemcog.com/OfficialPapalApproval.htm

In her book The Mystical City of God, Ven. Mary of Agreda gives this account of the Assumption of Mary:

The Glorious Transition of Mary

The great Lady came to the entrance of her oratory in order to receive the vicar of Christ our Savior. Kneeling at his feet She asked his blessing and said: "I give thanks and praise to the Almighty, that He has brought to me the holy Father for assisting me in the hour of my death." Then came saint Paul, to whom the Queen showed the same reverence with similar tokens of her pleasure at seeing him. The Apostles saluted Her as the Mother of God, as their Queen and as Mistress of all creation; but with a sorrow equal to their reverence, because they knew that they had come to witness her passing away. After these Apostles came the others and the disciples still living. Three days after, they were all assembled in the Cenacle. The heavenly Mother received them all with profound humility, reverence and love, asking each one to bless Her. All of them complied, and saluted Her with admirable reverence. By orders of the Lady given to Saint John, and with the assistance of Saint James the Less, they were all hospitably entertained and accommodated...

The apostle Saint Peter, as the Head of the Church, called them all together in order to tell them of the cause of their coming, and spoke to the assembly: My dearest children and brethren, the Lord has called and brought us to Jerusalem from remote regions not without a cause most urgent and sorrowful to us. The Most High wishes now to raise up to the throne of eternal glory his most blessed Mother, our Mistress, our consolation and protection. His divine decree is that we all be present at her most happy and glorious transition. When our Master and Redeemer ascended to the right hand of his Father, although He left us orphaned of his most delightful presence, we still retained his most blessed Mother. As our light now leaves us, what shall we do? What help or hope have we to encourage us on our pilgrimage? I find none except the hope that we all shall follow Her in due time.

Saint Peter could speak no farther, because uncontrollable tears and sighs interrupted him. Neither could the rest of the Apostles answer for a long time, during which, amid copious and tenderest tears, they gave vent to the groans of their inmost heart. After some time the Vicar of Christ recovered himself and added: My children, let us seek the presence of our Mother and Lady. Let us spend the time left of her life in her company and ask Her to bless us. They all betook themselves to the oratory of the great Queen and found Her kneeling upon a couch, on which She was wont to recline for a short rest. They saw Her full of beauty and celestial light, surrounded by the thousand angels of her guard.

The natural condition and appearance of her sacred and virginal body were the same as at her thirty-third year; for, as I have already stated, from that age onward it experienced no change. It was not affected by the passing years, showing no signs of age, no wrinkles in her face or body, nor giving signs of weakening or fading, as in other children of Adam, who gradually fall away and drop from the natural perfection of early man or womanhood. This unchangeableness was the privilege of the most blessed Mary alone, as well because it consorted with the stability of her purest soul, as because it was the natural consequence of her immunity from the sin of Adam, the effects of which in this regard touched neither her sacred body nor her purest soul. 

The Apostles and disciples, and some of the other faithful, occupied her chamber, all of them preserving the utmost order in her presence. Saint Peter and Saint John placed themselves at the head of the couch. The great Lady looked upon them all with her accustomed modesty and reverence and spoke to them as follows: "My dearest children, give permission to your servant to speak in your presence and to disclose my humble desires." Saint Peter answered that all listened with attention and would obey Her in all things; and he begged Her to seat Herself upon the couch, while speaking to them. It seemed to saint Peter that She was exhausted from kneeling so long and that She had taken that position in order to pray to the Lord, and that in speaking to them, it was proper She should be seated as their Queen...

After some time She spoke to them again, and asked them to pray with Her and for Her in silence, which they did. During this quietness the incarnate Word descended from heaven on a throne of ineffable glory, accompanied by all the saints and innumerable angels, and the house of the Cenacle was filled with glory. The most blessed Mary adored the Lord and kissed his feet. Prostrate before Him She made the last and most profound act of faith and humility in her mortal life. On this occasion the most pure Creature, the Queen of the heavens, shrank within Herself and lowered Herself to the earth more profoundly than all men together ever have or ever will humiliate themselves for all their sins. Her divine Son gave Her his blessing and in the presence of the courtiers of heaven spoke to Her these words: "My dearest Mother, whom I have chosen for my dwelling-place, the hour is come in which thou art to pass from the life of this death and of the world into the glory of my Father and mine, where thou shalt possess the throne prepared for thee at my right hand and enjoy it through all eternity. And since, by my power and as my Mother, I have caused thee to enter the world free and exempt from sin, therefore also death shall have no right or permission to touch thee at thy exit from this world. If thou wishest not to pass through it, come with Me now to partake of my glory, which thou hast merited."

The most prudent Mother prostrated Herself at the feet of her Son and with a joyous countenance answered: "My Son and my Lord, I beseech Thee let thy mother and thy servant enter into eternal life by the common portal of natural death, like the other children of Adam. Thou, who art my true God, hast suffered death without being obliged to do so; it is proper that, as I have followed Thee in life, so I follow Thee also in death." Christ the Savior approved of the decision and the sacrifice of his most blessed Mother, and consented to its fulfillment. Then all the angels began to sing in celestial harmony some of the verses of the Canticles of Solomon and other new ones. Although only saint John and some of the Apostles were enlightened as to the presence of Christ the Savior, yet the others felt in their interior its divine and powerful effects; but the music was heard as well by the Apostles and disciples, as by many others of the faithful there present. A divine fragrance also spread about, which penetrated even to the street. The house of the Cenacle was filled with a wonderful effulgence, visible to all, and the Lord ordained that multitudes of the people of Jerusalem gathered in the streets as witnesses to this new miracle.

When the angels began their music, the most blessed Mary reclined back upon her couch or bed. Her tunic was folded about her sacred body, her hands were joined and her eyes fixed upon her divine Son, and She was entirely inflamed with the fire of divine love. And as the angels intoned those verses of the second chapter of the Canticles: "Surge, propera, arnica mea," that is to say: "Arise, haste, my beloved, my dove, my beautiful one, and come, the winter has passed," etc., She pronounced those words of her Son on the Cross: "Into thy hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit." Then She closed her virginal eyes and expired. The sickness which took away her life was love, without any other weakness or accidental intervention of whatever kind. She died at the moment when the divine power suspended the assistance, which until then had counteracted the sensible ardors of her burning love of God. As soon as this miraculous assistance was withdrawn, the fire of her love consumed the life-humors of her heart and thus caused the cessation of her earthly existence.

Then this most pure Soul passed from her virginal body to be placed in boundless glory, on the throne at the right hand of her divine Son. Immediately the music of the angels seemed to withdraw to the upper air; for that whole procession of angels and saints accompanied the King and Queen to the empyrean heavens. The sacred body of the most blessed Mary, which had been the temple and sanctuary of God in life, continued to shine with an effulgent light and breathed forth such a wonderful and unheard of fragrance, that all the bystanders were filled with interior and exterior sweetness. The thousand angels of her guard remained to watch over the inestimable treasure of her virginal body. The Apostles and disciples, amid the tears and the joy of the wonders they had seen, were absorbed in admiration for some time, and then sang many hymns and psalms in honor of the most blessed Mary now departed. This glorious Transition of the great Queen took place in the hour in which her divine Son had died, at three o clock on a Friday, the thirteenth day of August, she being seventy years of age, less the twenty-six days intervening between the thirteenth of August, on which She died, and the eighth of September, the day of her birth. 

The heavenly Mother had survived the death of Christ the Savior twenty-one years, four months and nineteen days; and his virginal birth, fifty-five years. This reckoning can be easily made in the following manner: when Christ our Savior was born, his virginal Mother was fifteen years, three months and seventeen days of age. The Lord lived thirty-three years and three months; so that at the time of his sacred Passion the most blessed Lady was forty eight years, six months and seventeen days old; adding to these another twenty-one years, four months and nineteen days, we ascertain her age as seventy years, less twenty-five or twenty-six days.*

Great wonders and prodigies happened at the precious death of the Queen; for the sun was eclipsed (as I said above in No. 706) and its light was hidden in sorrow for some hours. Many birds of different kinds gathered around the Cenacle, and by their sorrowful clamors and groans for a while caused the bystanders themselves to weep. All Jerusalem was in commotion, and many of the inhabitants collected in astonished crowds, confessing loudly the power of God and the greatness of his works. Others were astounded and as if beside themselves. The Apostles and disciples with others of the faithful broke forth in tears and sighs. Many sick persons came who all were cured. The souls in purgatory were released. But the greatest miracle was that three persons, a man in Jerusalem and two women living in the immediate neighborhood of the Cenacle, died in sin and impenitent in that same hour, subject to eternal damnation; but when their cause came before the tribunal of Christ, his sweetest Mother interceded for them and they were restored to life. They so mended their conduct, that afterwards they died in grace and were saved. This privilege was not extended to others that died on that day in the world, but was restricted to those three who happened to die in that hour in Jerusalem. What festivities were celebrated on that occasion in heaven I will describe in another chapter, lest heavenly things be mixed up with the sacred things of earth...

Her Burial

In order that the Apostles, the disciples, and many others of the faithful might not be too deeply oppressed by sorrow, and in order that some of them might not die of grief caused by the passing away of the most blessed Mary, it was necessary that the divine power, by an especial providence, furnish them with consolation and dilate their heart for new influences in their incomparable affliction. For the feeling, that their loss was irretrievable in the present life, could not be repressed; the privation of such a Treasure could never find a recompense; and as the most sweet, loving and amiable intercourse and conversation of their great Queen had ravished the heart of each one, the ceasing of her protection and company left them as it were without the breath of life. But the Lord, who well knew how to estimate the just cause of their sorrow, secretly upheld them by his encouragements and so they set about the fitting burial of the sacred body and whatever the occasion demanded.

Accordingly the holy Apostles, on whom this duty specially devolved, held a conference concerning the burial of the most sacred body of their Queen and Lady. They selected for that purpose a new sepulcher, which had been prepared mysteriously by the providence of her divine Son. As they remembered, that, according to the custom of the Jews at burial, the deified body of their Master had been anointed with precious ointments and spices and wrapped in the sacred burial cloths; they thought not of doing otherwise with the virginal body of his most holy Mother. Accordingly they called the two maidens, who had assisted the Queen during her life and who had been designated as the heiresses of her tunics, and instructed them to anoint the body of the Mother of God with highest reverence and modesty and wrap it in the winding-sheets before it should be placed in the casket. 

With great reverence and fear the two maidens entered the room, where the body of the blessed Lady lay upon its couch; but the refulgence issuing from it barred and blinded them in such a manner that they could neither see nor touch the body, nor even ascertain in what particular place it rested. In fear and reverence still greater than on their entrance, the maidens left the room; and in great excitement and wonder they told the Apostles what had happened. They, not without divine inspiration, came to the conclusion, that this sacred Ark of the covenant was not to be touched or handled in the common way...

So great was the care and solicitude for his most blessed Mother, that in this particular He used not so much precaution in regard to his own body, as that of the most pure Virgin. In her Immaculate Conception He made Her like to Himself; likewise at her birth, in as far as it did not take place in the common and natural manner of other men. He preserved Her also from impure temptations and thoughts. But, as He was man and the Redeemer of the world through his Passion and Death, He permitted with his own body, what He would not allow with Hers, as that of a woman, and therefore He kept her virginal body entirely concealed; in fact the most pure Lady during her life had Herself asked that no one should be permitted to look upon it in death which petition He fulfilled...

In order that this and many other miracles wrought by the power of God on this occasion might become better known to the world, the Lord himself inspired all the inhabitants of Jerusalem to be present at the burial of his most blessed Mother, so that there was scarcely any person in Jerusalem, even of the Jews or the gentiles, who were not attracted by the novelty of this spectacle. The Apostles took upon their shoulders the sacred body and the tabernacle of God and, as priests of the evangelical law, bore the Propitiatory of the divine oracles and blessings in orderly procession from the Cenacle in the city to the valley of Josaphat. This was the visible accompaniment of the dwellers of Jerusalem. But besides this there was another invisible multitude, that of the courtiers of heaven. It was composed of the thousand angels of the Queen, continuing their celestial songs, which were heard by the Apostles and disciples and many others, and which sweetly continued for three days.

When the procession came to the holy sepulcher in the valley of Josaphat, the same two Apostles, Saint Peter and Saint John, who had laid the celestial Treasure from the couch onto the bier, with joyful reverence placed it in the sepulcher and covered it with a linen cloth, the hands of the angels performing more of these last rites than the hands of the Apostles. They closed up the sepulcher with a large stone, according to custom at other burials. The celestial courtiers returned to heaven, while the thousand angels of the Queen continued their watch, guarding the sacred body and keeping up the music as at her burial. The concourse of the people lessened and the holy Apostles and disciples, dissolved in tender tears, returned to the Cenacle. During a whole year the exquisite fragrance exhaled by the body of the Queen was noticeable throughout the Cenacle, and in her oratory, for many years...

Having again gathered in the Cenacle, the Apostles came to the conclusion that some of them and of the disciples should watch at the sepulcher of their Queen as long as they should hear the celestial music, for all of them were wondering when the end of that miracle should be. Accordingly some of them attended to the affairs of the Church in catechizing and baptizing the new converts; and others immediately returned to the sepulcher, while all of them paid frequent visits to it during the next three days. Saint Peter and saint John, however, were more zealous in their attendance, coming only

a few times to the Cenacle and immediately returning to where was laid the treasure of their heart.

Her Assumption into Heaven

On the third day after the most pure soul of Mary had taken possession of this glory never to leave it, the Lord manifested to the saints his divine will, that She should return to the world, resuscitate her sacred body and unite Herself with it, so that She might in body and soul be again raised to the right hand of her divine Son without waiting for the general resurrection of the dead. The appropriateness of this favor, its accordance with the others received by the most blessed Queen and with her super eminent dignity, the saints could not but see; since even to mortals it is so credible, that even if the Church had not certified it, we would judge those impious and foolish, who would dare deny it. But the blessed saw it with greater clearness, together with the determined time and hour as manifested to them in God himself. When the time for this wonder had arrived, Christ our Savior himself descended from heaven bringing with Him at his right hand the soul of his most blessed Mother and accompanied by many legions of the Angels, the Patriarchs and ancient Prophets. They came to the sepulcher in the valley of Josaphat, and all being gathered in sight of the virginal temple, the Lord spoke the following words to the saints.

"My Mother was conceived without stain of sin, in order that from Her virginal substance I might stain lessly clothe Myself in the humanity in which I came to the world and redeemed it from sin. My flesh is her flesh; She co-operated with Me in the works of the Redemption; hence I must raise Her, just as I rose from the dead, and this shall be at the same time and hour. For I wish to make Her like Me in all things. All the ancient saints of the human race then gave thanks for this new favor in songs of praise and glory to the Lord. Those that especially distinguished themselves in their thanks giving were our first parents Adam and Eve, saint Anne, saint Joachim and saint Joseph, as being the more close partakers in this miracle of his Omnipotence. Then the purest soul of the Queen, at the command of the Lord, entered the virginal body, reanimated it and raised it up, giving it a new life of immortality and glory and communicating to it the four gifts of clearness, impassibility, agility and subtlety, corresponding to those of the soul and overflowing from it into the body.

Endowed with these gifts the most blessed Mary issued from the tomb in body and soul, without raising the stone cover and without disturbing the position of the tunic and the mantle that had enveloped her sacred body. Since it is impossible to describe her beauty and refulgent glory, I will not make the attempt. It is sufficient to say, that just as the heavenly Mother had given to her divine Son in her womb the form of man, pure, unstained and sinless, for the Redemption of the world, so in return the Lord, in this resurrection and new regeneration, gave to Her a glory and beauty similar to his own. In this mysterious and divine interchange each One did what was possible: most holy Mary engendered Christ, assimilating Him as much as possible to Herself, and Christ resuscitated Her, communicating to Her of his glory as far as She was capable as a creature.

Then from the sepulcher was started a most solemn procession, moving with celestial music through the regions of the air and toward the empyrean heaven. This happened in the hour immediately after midnight, in which also the Lord had risen from the grave ; and therefore not all of the Apostles were witness of this prodigy, but only some of them, who were present and watching at the sepulchre. The saints and angels entered heaven in the order in which they had started; and in the last place came Christ our Savior and at his right hand the Queen, clothed in the gold of variety (as David says Ps. 44, 10), and so beautiful that She was the admiration of the heavenly court. All of them turned toward Her to look upon Her and bless Her with new jubilee and songs of praise. Thus were heard those mysterious eulogies recorded by Solomon: Come, daughters of Sion, to see your Queen, who is praised by the morning stars and celebrated by the sons of the Most High. Who is She that comes from the desert, like a column of all the aromatic perfumes? Who is She, that rises like the aurora, more beautiful than the moon, elect as the sun, terrible as many serried armies? Who is She that comes up from the desert resting upon her Beloved and spreading forth abundant delights? (Cant. 3, 6-9; 8, 5). Who is She in whom the Deity itself finds so much pleasure and delight above all other creatures and whom He exalts above them all in the heavens! O novelty worthy of the infinite Wisdom! O prodigy of his Omnipotence, which so magnifies and exalts Her!

Amid this glory the most blessed Mary arrived body and soul at the throne of the most blessed Trinity. And the three divine Persons received Her on it with an embrace eternally indissoluble. The eternal Father said to Her: "Ascend higher, my Daughter and my Dove." The incarnate Word spoke; "My Mother, of whom I have received human being and full return of my work in thy perfect imitation, receive now from my hand the reward thou hast merited;" The Holy Ghost said: "My most beloved Spouse, enter into the eternal joy, which corresponds to the most faithful love; do Thou now enjoy thy love without solicitude; for past is the winter of suffering for Thou hast arrived at our eternal embraces." There the most blessed Mary was absorbed in the contemplation of the three divine Persons and as it were overwhelmed in the boundless ocean and abyss of the Divinity, while the saints were filled with wonder and new accidental delight.

​Conclusion:

I personally believe in the account given by The Mystical City of God and agree with the popes who give their approval and blessing for the faithful who read it. The beautiful thing about the Catholic Church is that it has treasures, such as these writings, to increase in the faithful lively sentiments of faith, hope, and charity. From Eucharistic miracles, to the stigmata, to incorruptibles, relics, Marian apparitions (approved), wonders of the saints, exorcism stories, and so many other things, what other Church can contend with the Catholic Church as being the One True Church? Absolutely none.