Singing For Satan---Part 10

This week I continue my once-per-month series of posts regarding an informal study I undertook in the early 1990s regarding rock and pop music. The purpose of my study (and the background to it) can be read in the first installment of August 7, 2017. If you have not read that post, I strongly encourage you to do so before reading this installment. I will only repeat here the seven (7) evil elements that pervade today's music:

1. Violence/Murder/Suicide
2. Nihilism/Despair
3. Drug and alcohol glorification
4. Adultery/ Fornication and sexual perversion
5. The occult
6. Rebellion against lawful superiors
7. Blasphemy against God, Jesus Christ in particular, and the Church

 The exposing of the bands/artists continues.

Michael Jackson

Michael Joseph Jackson (d. 2009) was one of the most (if not the most) popular music entertainers in world history. It is not without reason he has been given the title "The King of Pop." Jackson was one of eight children born in Gary, Indiana to Joseph and Katherine Jackson. He got his start in music at age 6 in 1964 when he formed the group The Jackson 5 with his four brothers. In 1971, Jackson signed on as a solo performer with Motown Records. Within ten years, he became an icon in pop music. His videos produced for the nascent MTV remain among the most popular of all time. In 1982, Jackson released his sixth studio album entitled Thriller. By November of 1983 it became (and remains as of this writing) the best selling album of all time, having sold just over sixty-six million units worldwide. 

He holds the distinction of being the most awarded musician of all time, having garnered 13 Grammy Awards, 24 American Music Awards, and he was inducted in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame twice. He had 13 number one singles in the United States alone, and he is the only recording artist to have a Top Ten hit in five consecutive decades. The Guinness Book of World Records lists Michael Jackson as "The Most Successful Entertainer of All Time." 

Jackson's "All Over The Place" Beliefs

Michael Jackson was raised as part of the Jehovah's Witnesses sect, which despite their protests to the contrary, is non-Christian. They deny the Trinity, the Divinity of Christ, and have their own bastardized version of the Bible called The New World Translation.  The Witnesses are expected to go door to door to proselytize (they have one up on Bergoglio). Jackson said, "Sundays were my day for ‘Pioneering,’ the term used for the missionary work that Jehovah’s Witnesses do. We would spend the day in the suburbs of Southern California, going door to door or making the rounds of a shopping mall, distributing our Watchtower magazine. I continued my pioneering work for years and years after my career had been launched." Upon becoming highly successful, he was "disfellowshipped" by the Witnesses (their version of excommunication) for being "too worldly," but he continued to self-identify as a Witness. (See e.g., https://lasentinel.net/Michael-Jackson-Jehovah-s-Witnesses.html)

 The year before his death, he was rumored to have converted to Islam and changed his name (not legally) to "Mikaeel." (See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1088225/Michael-Jackson-Muslim-changes-Mikaeel.html). This rumor was never confirmed, but he had an admiration for the Mohammedans. There was even speculation he had interest in Judaism, and that he converted to a "born-again Christian" three weeks before his death. There was controversy surrounding his album HIStory: Past, Present, and Future, Book I (usually shortened to just HIStory), because one of the songs ("They Don't Care About Us") contains the lyrics, "Jew me, sue me, everybody do me/ Kick me, kike me, don't you black or white me" which was deemed anti-Semitic. Jackson said the lyrics were about prejudice against all people and should not be construed as against the Jews. Nevertheless, he went back into the studio and re-recorded the song substituting the words "do me" and "strike me" for "Jew me" and "kike me," respectively. (See https://www.nytimes.com/1995/06/23/arts/jackson-plans-new-lyrics-for-album.html)

What is certain is that Jackson was deeply involved in New Age Occultism, which will be demonstrated next in this post. 

Jackson and the Demonic

 Jackson's video for the title track off Thriller is seeped in occult themes. It was so occult, that at the beginning of the video (when it first came on MTV) Jackson explained that due to his strong religious convictions, he did not believe in the occult. The following are the facts that give the lie to Jackson's claim of repudiating the occult--and one also has to wonder what "religious convictions" he really followed:

• The Thriller video was one of the most violent ever seen at the time. It shows 27 acts of violence including depictions of lycanthropy (a man turning into a beast or "werewolf"), a chase scene, and an off-screen murder.

• The video employed actor Vincent Price (d. 1993). Price was in many horror movies and was an occultist. A self-proclaimed Wiccan, Price had an old record, now an audio book (available on Amazon.com) entitled Witchcraft Magic: An Adventure in Demonology. The chapters include "How to Communicate with Spirits," "Curses, Spells, and Charms," and "How to Make a Pact with the Devil"

• Jackson began grabbing his crotch while dancing. His gestures in many performances simulated masturbation. 

• In the song Thriller he sings, "They're out to get you; there's demons closing in on every side/They will possess you/ unless you change the number on your dial"

• His famous "Moon Walk" wherein he dances moving backwards is exactly what occultist Aleister Crowley wrote about in his book Magick in Theory and Practice:

 First Method. Let the Exempt Adept first train himself to think backwards by external means, as set forth here following.

(“a”) Let him learn to write backwards, with either hand.

(“b”) Let him learn to walk backwards.

(“c”) Let him constantly watch, if convenient, cinematograph films, and listen to phonograph records, reversed, and let him so accustom himself to these that they appear natural, and appreciable as a whole.

(“d”) Let him practice speaking backwards; thus for “I am He” let him say, “Eh ma I”.

(“e”) Let him learn to read backwards. In this it is difficult to avoid cheating one’s self, as an expert reader sees a sentence at a glance. Let his disciple read aloud to him backwards, slowly at first, then more quickly.

(“f”) Of his own ingenium, let him devise other methods. 

(See online at http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib913.htm; Emphasis mine)

• His song Beat It, contains the backward masked words "Believe in Satan."

• According to the New York Times there was a cult that sprung up within the Jehovah's Witnesses sect called the "MJ Cult" wherein adherents believed that Jackson was the Archangel St. Michael who was described in the Book of Daniel 12:1 as the deliverer of the people, "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of Thy people." (See https://www.nytimes.com/1984/08/29/nyregion/dissent-grows-among-jehovah-s-witnesses.html) Since the JW sect thinks St. Michael the Archangel became Christ, in a very real sense, Jackson was seen as Christ by the MJ cult.

• He had a room with mirrors wherein he claimed to communicate with the spirit of notorious sodomite Liberace. According to Jackson, "I have my own secret room, with a moving wall and mirrors...[Liberace] is the voice I hear in there. I feel his presence very close to me. He's even given me permission to perform his theme song, 'I'll Be Seeing You.'"  Liberace's ex-lover, Scott Thorson, claimed to have had an affair with Michael Jackson for an extended period during the '80s. (See https://archives.sfweekly.com/shookdown/2013/06/14/5-celebrities-whove-communicated-with-dead-musicians) He claimed that other spirits spoke to him in that room, and music was audibly communicated to him through dreams, therefore he was merely the messenger bringing these songs into the world.

• In 2000, Vanity Fair reported that Jackson went so far as to bathe in blood and have a number of animals sacrificed so he could put death curses on Steven Spielberg and others. In the article, it was reported that Jackson attended a voodoo ritual in Switzerland, and a witch doctor named Baba sacrificed 42 cows as part of the death curse ceremony. Jackson ordered his former business adviser, Myung-Ho Lee, to wire $150,000 to a bank in Mali to cover the cost of the ceremony. The witch doctor promised Jackson that Spielberg, music mogul David Geffen, and 23 other people on Jackson’s hit list would die…but ironically, it was Michael Jackson himself who would end up dying a premature death! (See http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Music/03/04/leisure.jackson.reut/index.html)

Wacko Jacko

Known by his nickname "Jacko" in the press, Jackson's behavior soon earned him the new moniker of "Wacko Jacko."  Here is just a partial list of his erratic, and downright sick, behavior.

Michael Jackson has proudly admitted sharing his bed with children. He says he sees nothing wrong with a 44-year-old man having such relationships and insisting there is 'nothing sexual' going on; he declares: 'I give them hot milk, you know, we have cookies. It's very charming, it's very sweet, it's what the whole world should do." (See http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-158342/Why-I-sleep-little-boys-Michael-Jackson.html)

He was accused of child molestation in 1993 by 13 year old Jordan Chandler. Although the police confiscated pictures of scantily clad boys from Jackson's home, they were not pornographic under the legal definition. He was charged with no crime. Chandler's father sued and Jackson settled for $22 million and no admission of guilt

He was accused a second time of child molestation in 2002, but was acquitted on all charges after trial.

Jackson married Lisa Marie Presley, daughter of the late Elvis Presley in 1994. She was seen largely as his "beard" (term for a woman who pretends to be with a man to make him appear normal when he is a sodomite). She went out of her way to tell the media she and Jackson had sex together. They divorced in less than two years

Married long time friend Deborah Jeanne Rowe in 1996, had a son Michael Jr. in 1997, a daughter Paris in 1998, and divorced in 1999. 

He had a home and amusement park he called "Neverland Ranch" after the fictional cartoon character Peter Pan, a boy who "never wanted to grow up." 

Evil Music

In an effort to clean up rock and pop music's tarnished image, Jackson wrote the song, We Are The World for "Band-Aid," an effort by musicians to raise money for starving children in Africa, and performed in 1985. It contains superstars singing the song composed by Jackson and Lionel Richie. The lyrics sound nice but are perverse:

We are all a part of God's great big family and the truth, you know, love is all we need.

We are the world, we are the children, we are the ones who make a brighter day, so let's start giving. There's a choice we're making, we're saving our own lives, it's true we make a better day, just you and me.

Send me yourt heart, so they know that someone cares and their lives will be stronger and free. As God has shown us by turning stone to bread so we all must lend a helping hand.

In the sense God made us all, we are a family, but not in the egalitarian sense that God loves us in spite of our actions and apart from our beliefs. Second, Christ and His Church is what we need, not some nebulous idea of "love." Third, the song says "we're saving our own lives" but Christ says, "For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for My sake, shall find it." (St. Matthew 16:25). Finally, God never turned stone into bread. That's how Satan tempted Christ in the desert, "Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, 'If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.' Jesus answered, 'It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'" (St. Matthew 4:1-4). 

Just a sample of other songs:

• Billie Jean tells the story of an illicit affair with a groupie, and denial that the child she had is fathered by him

She told me her name was Billie Jean, as she caused a scene

Then every head turned with eyes that dreamed of being the one

Who will dance on the floor in the round (Have sex with her)...

Billie Jean is not my lover

She's just a girl who claims that I am the one

But the kid is not my son

She says I am the one, but the kid is not my son

• Work That Body is the tale of a sordid hook-up with a stranger

Girl, There's a better way

I'm talkin' bout me and you

You sittin' round with a long face

Thinkin' up nothing to do

And girl, there's a better way

I'm talkin' bout doin' the do

Your killin' time there's a better way

Than sittin' round being blue

Don't you know that there are better things to do?

Work that body

Work that body

All that body

Work that body

Work that body 

Everybody (give it to me)

Work that body

Work that body

All that body (give it to me)

Work that body

Oooohhhh

• In The Closet is not about sodomites, but sex with a nymphomaniac

One thing in life you must understand

The truth of lust woman to man

So open the door, and you will see

There are no secrets

Make your move, set me free

Because there's something about you baby

That makes me want to give it to you

I swear there's something about you baby...

She wants to give it

(She wants to give it, she wants to give it) Dare me

(She wants to give it, she wants to give it)

She wants to give it

(She wants to give it, she wants to give it) Yea

(She wants to give it, she wants to give it)

Conclusion

Michael Jackson was a tormented soul who sought refuge in everything except Christ and His One True Church. He was a deceiver, and his music was inspired by demons from Hell. He died on June 25, 2009 from a drug overdose. He would use propofol to sleep and had many other drugs administered by his personal physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, who was charged and convicted of involuntary manslaughter. He spent about two years in prison for giving too much anesthesia to Jackson, causing his death. Hopefully, he repented and found the True Church before his death. Only God knows. Of his music and his lifestyle, the only proper thing to do is say, "Beat it!"   

Slavery And The Catholic Church

 One of the biggest canards used against the Church is that She "supported slavery." Not only is this falsehood used by Protestants and atheists, but it's utilized even by members of the Vatican II sect, who go so far as to attribute "error" to Church teaching. (Ironically, they thereby tacitly admit that there is a contradiction pre- and post-Vatican II. Their sect, therefore, cannot claim to be the Mystical Body of Christ because it is dogma that the Church cannot give that which is evil or erroneous to Her members). In the 1975 book  Slavery and the Catholic Church:The History of Catholic Teaching Concerning the Moral Legitimacy of the Institution of Slavery by John Francis Maxwell, it quotes from the heretical Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes in support of the contention Vatican II "corrected" prior "erroneous" teaching on slavery: "Whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torture inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children... all these things and others like them are infamous. They poison human society, dishonor the Creator, and do more harm to those who practice them than those who suffer from the injury...Human institutions, private or public, must serve man's ends and minister to his dignity. They should be bulwarks against any kind of political or social slavery and guardians of basic rights under any kind of government...Economic enterprise is generally an affair of collaboration- thus it is wicked and inhuman to arrange and organize it to the detriment of anybody involved. Yet it often happens even in our time that those who work are made slaves to their own work. No "economic tows" Can justify this. (pg. 12, citing para. #27, and 29, See the book online at anthonyflood.com/maxwellslaverycatholicchurch.pdf).

What is the truth about slavery and Church teaching? Did She teach that treating certain classes of people as "subhuman" (think: African slaves in the United States prior to the Civil War [1861-1865]) was acceptable? Was Vatican II the "great liberator" of human dignity which "corrected" prior teaching on the topic? These are the questions to be explored in this post.

Defining the Kinds of Slavery

 There are two kinds of slavery: pagan slavery and Judeo-Christian slavery. For the pagan, slavery meant that one person owns another person as one would own an animal or a piece of property. The slave has no rights and is considered (legally and morally) sub-human. In the Judeo-Christian view, slaves are not property; they do not lose their rights or status as human beings. What is owned, in this view, is not the person of the slave, but rather the labor of that slave. This is the only kind of slavery ever recognized as legitimate and moral by the Church. 

Someone can acquire the right to another's work in various ways. As one example, a man could sell his labor to a wealthy family thus becoming part of that household. Each person has the right to sell their labor, even labor he would perform for the rest of his life, if that is his choice. Humans may legitimately become slaves to another as punishment for a serious crime. Since the State has the right to impose imprisonment, and even death for certain crimes, it stands to reason that the State has the lesser included authority to put a criminal to work at some service for the common good (i.e., slavery) for a certain period of time--or even for life. There was a time when chain gangs were used to build roads, and prisoners made car license plates for the government.  Hence, in ancient times, captured soldiers were made slaves. 

Why such a difference in outlook on slaves? The worldview of the pagan sees people as greater or lesser according to what they possess. They also view manual labor with disdain. The ideal life was one of leisure: "eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die!" In the Judeo-Christian worldview of the Old and New Testaments, people are created in the image and likeness of God. They have an eternal destiny for which they were created. Worth is based not on what you possess, but by how well you live in accordance to the Will of God. Manual labor is not to be despised because God Himself sentenced all to labor, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return to the earth, out of which thou wast taken: for dust thou art, and into dust thou shalt return." (Genesis 3:19). In the New Testament, most of the Apostles were simple fisherman. 

The Old Testament and Slaves

The title bondsman of the Mosaic Law, was really a kind of indentured servitude. Furthermore, the Book of Exodus lays down laws for the protection of the Hebrew slave:

"These are the ordinances that you shall set before them: When you buy a male Hebrew slave, he shall serve six years, but in the seventh he shall go out a free person, without debt. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him." (Exodus 21:1-3).

"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed; he shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt unfairly with her.  If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish the food, clothing, or marital rights of the first wife.And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out without debt, without payment of money." (Exodus 21:7-11)

"Whoever kidnaps a person, whether that person has been sold or is still held in possession, shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:16).

Other prescriptions involving slaves:

"If thy brother constrained by poverty, sell himself to thee, thou shalt not oppress him with the service of bondservants: But he shall be as a hireling, and a sojourner: he shall work with thee until the year of the jubilee, And afterwards he shall go out with his children, and shall return to his kindred and to the possession of his fathers, For they are my servants, and I brought them out of the land of Egypt: let them not be sold as bondmen: Afflict him not by might, but fear thy God. Let your bondmen, and your bondwomen, be of the nations that are round about you." (Leviticus 25:39-44).

"When thy brother a Hebrew man, or Hebrew woman is sold to thee, and hath served thee six years, in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free: And when thou sendest him out free, thou shalt not let him go away empty: But shalt give him for his way out of thy flocks, and out of thy barnfloor, and thy winepress, wherewith the Lord thy God shall bless thee. Remember that thou also wast a bondservant in the land of Egypt, and the Lord thy God made thee free, and therefore I now command thee this." (Deuteronomy 15:12-15)

The New Testament, The Early Church, and Slaves

  Christ lived for the first thirty years of his life as a simple Carpenter. He gave dignity to work and showed how God loved humble folk most especially. Catholicism established a supernatural equality among humanity with relation to God because all had to acknowledge their common duties to God, and common debt to Christ.

"For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink." (1 Corinthians 12:13). 

"The brethren who are with me, salute you. All the saints salute you; especially they that are of Caesar's household [in the household were slaves]." (Philippians 4:22; commentary mine)

"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward." (1 Peter 2:18). This "fear" is a reverential awe towards those in charge, even as today you must obey your employer, both those who are kind and those who are demanding. 

The Church Father, St. Gregory of Nyssa, disdained all forms of servitude:
"I acquired slaves and slave girls.’ What is that you say? You condemn a person to slavery whose nature is free and independent, and in doing so you lay down a law in opposition to God, overturning the natural law established by him. For you subject to the yoke of slavery one who was created precisely to be a master of the earth, and who was ordained to rule by the Creator, as if you were deliberately attacking and fighting against the divine command." (See Trevor Dennis, "Man Beyond Price: Gregory of Nyssa and Slavery," in Heaven and Earth : Essex Essays in Theology and Ethics Worthington, West Sussex: Churchman, [1986], 130).

St. Augustine wrote, "The state of slavery is rightly regarded as a penalty upon the sinner; thus the word slave does not occur in the Bible until the just man Noah branded with it the sin of his son. It was sin therefore, which deserved this name; it was not natural."

Papal Decrees Against the Pagan Notion of Slavery

Pope Eugene IV  in 1435 issued the Bull Sicut Dudum ordered that Catholics free all enslaved natives of the Canary Islands within fifteen days and failure to do so would incur automatic excommunication. Thus, fifty-seven years before Columbus’s first voyage, the pope unequivocally prohibited the enslavement of native peoples.

In 1537, Pope Paul III promulgated Sublimus Dei, which taught that native peoples were not to be enslaved. In 1591, Pope Gregory XIV promulgated Cum Sicuti, which was addressed to the bishop of Manila in the Philippines and reiterated his predecessors' prohibitions against enslaving native peoples. In the seventeenth century, Pope Urban VIII decreed in Commissum Nobis (1639) support for the Spanish King Philip IV's edict prohibiting enslavement of the Indians in the New World.


The need for cheap and abundant labor in the colonies is what led to the African slave trade. This renewed form of pagan slavery was also condemned by the popes, beginning with Pope Innocent XI. In 1741, Pope Benedict XIV  issued Immensa Pastorum, which reiterated that the penalty for enslaving Indians was excommunication. In 1839, Pope Gregory XVI's decree In Supremo condemned the enslavement of Africans.

The popes approved two religious orders dedicated to ransoming Christian slaves from the infidel Mohammedans; the Trinitarians, and the Mercedarians (Order of Our Lady of Ransom). The latter took vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, plus a vow "to become a hostage in the hands of the infidels, if that is necessary for the deliverance of Christ's faithful."

Pope Leo XIII declared in his encyclical In Plurimis, addressed to the bishops of Brazil:
 "Amid the many and great demonstrations of affection which from almost all the peoples of the earth have come to Us, and are still coming to Us, in congratulation upon the happy attainment of the fiftieth anniversary of Our priesthood, there is one which moves Us in a quite special way. We mean one which comes from Brazil, where, upon the occasion of this happy event, large numbers of those who in that vast empire groan beneath the yoke of slavery, have been legally set free. And this work, so full of the spirit of Christian mercy, has been offered up in cooperation with the clergy, by charitable members of the laity of both sexes, to God, the Author and Giver of all good things, in testimony of their gratitude for the favor of the health and the years which have been granted to Us." (May 5, 1888, para. #1).

It's been made abundantly clear that the Church never condoned pagan slavery, permitted Judeo-Christian slavery, and moved towards eliminating it altogether.

Vatican II's  Heretical Notions

From the aforementioned book by Maxwell, there are some blasphemous and heretical ideas about the Church. It's no wonder, because to make Vatican II good, the True Church as it was before the Council, must be depicted as fallible and capable of defection. Here's just a few samples from the book that contains both a Nihil Obstat and an Imprimatur from a valid bishop who himself defected to the new religion that is the Vatican II sect.

Maxwell: "The process of human development involves making mistakes and using the ability to learn from past mistakes. It would be surprising if the same process of human development did not apply to the Church and her pastoral and moral theology. Indeed it would be surprising if the use of the ability to recognize and admit and accept the fact of past mistakes were not one of the remedies for "triumphalist" attitudes in the Church."(pg.11; Emphasis mine)

Translation: The Church "develops" and "makes mistakes" in theology.

Reality Check: CONDEMNED PROPOSITION #53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable. Like human society, Christian society is subject to a perpetual evolution. (Lamentabili Sane, Pope St. Pius X against the errors of the Modernists).

Maxwell: "When any large-scale mistake of the fallible ordinary magisterium has been made, it is surely not
sufficient quietly to drop the erroneous teaching and hush it up and whitewash its past history."

Translation: The Church can err except in declaring infallible dogmas ex cathedra. 

Reality Check: According to theologian Van Noort: "The subject-matter of divine- Catholic faith are all those truths proposed by the Church's Magisterium for our belief as divinely revealed...The principle laid down above is contained almost verbatim in this declaration of the [First] Vatican Council: 'Further, all those things are to be believed with divine and catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn judgment, or by her ordinary and universal Magisterium, proposes for belief as having been Divinely-revealed.' [Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith]" (See Dogmatic Theology, Newman Press 3:220-221[1960]; words in brackets and emphasis are mine).

Maxwell: "In 1965 the common Catholic teaching concerning slavery was officially corrected by the Second Vatican Council." (pg. 125)

Translation: The Church was wrong until Vatican II.

Reality Check: CONDEMNED PROPOSITION #59. Christ did not teach a determined body of doctrine applicable to all times and all men, but rather inaugurated a religious movement adapted or to be adapted to different times and places. (Lamentabili Sane, Pope St. Pius X against the errors of the Modernists).

Conclusion

The fact that most people don't know the distinctions involved when it comes to slavery and servitude, makes the issue one that the enemies of the Church will use to attack Her. The Church has always stood strong against pagan slavery, and even advocated for the elimination of all forms of permissible servitude as unnecessary. The Vatican II sect has adopted a heretical ecclesiology, one in which the Church can give evil and teach error. This is clearly demonstrated in post-Vatican II theology books teaching that the Church "taught error" on the subject of slavery until "corrected" by the Robber Council in 1965.

The real problem of slavery, is the slavery of humanity to sin. When not in the state of sanctifying grace, a person is a slave to sin and Satan, making himself an enemy of God. The Vatican II sect is spreading the worst slavery of all, a slavery which if not broken will last forever in Hell. Satan is the cruelest of owners. Break free from the bonds of Bergoglio and his sect. Join (or remain ever faithful in) the One True Church, and stay in the state of grace at all times. The only real freedom anyone has is when they are servants of Christ the King, and Mary the Immaculate Queen. 

The Religion Of Psychology

 With the advance of the Vatican II sect, the spiritual needs of humanity were no longer being met. This resulted in the occult explosion and self-deification that plagues our world today. The First Commandment does not say, "Thou Shalt Not be an Atheist," but rather, "Thou Shalt Not have Strange gods before Me." The human race is incurably God-centered. Take away the True Faith, and people will search for meaning in all the wrong places. God's grace, found in the True Mass and sacraments, has dwindled. Something must replace it. On the one hand, you have occult and pagan practices (to give but one example, the number of "mediums" on television has never been higher). On the other hand, atheism and agnosticism are growing exponentially as well. Humanity glorifies itself and tells God, just as Satan did, "I will not serve."

 Modern psychology has, by and large, become a new religion. Don't misunderstand me, I have a good friend who is a psychologist, and he's a "conservative" member of the Vatican II sect. He has helped many people. One of the members of  Fr. DePauw's Ave Maria Chapel (when I first converted in 1981) was a psychologist, and very devout for his whole life. Unfortunately, the number of Christian psychologists, who correctly apply the sound principles of psychology, are growing fewer and fewer. Psychologists and mental health professionals are the new "priests" of the new religion of psychology.

The purpose of this post will be to expose the very dangerous errors of the new psychology, which infects both the world at large and the Vatican II sect.

Some Tenets of "Psychology-Religion"

 While there is an almost universal rejection Sigmund Freud's (the so-called "father of psychotherapy") diabolic theories, there are some of his ideas that have remained and infected the practice of psychology. True psychology should seek behavior modification, drug therapies, and help deal with trauma to overcome phobias, obsessive-compulsive disorders, etc. False psychology has pushed the following ideas:

• There is no sin. God is either denied or considered some vague "higher power."  No one needs forgiveness from God, they just suffer from an "addiction." Adulterers are merely "sex addicts." Those who bully others are "power addicts." Vatican II sect "priests" no longer offer sacrifice to God or forgive sin. They are more or less social workers using occasional religious verbiage. The confessional is not about doing penance, but discussing your "problems" that don't need supernatural remedies.

• Normalize the deviant. In 1973 the American Psychological Association (APA), removed homosexuality from its second edition of the  Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). This is the book which lists mental problems. Since then, sodomites are considered "normal," they were no longer to be considered sick and/or immoral. Now gender dysphoria, along with sodomy, is celebrated. A man who wants to be a woman, or vice-versa, is "healthy and normal" as opposed to sinful or sick. 

• Make deviant the normal. People who reject "sodomite rights" for religious and/or ethical reasons are "homophobic." In other words there's something wrong with you in opposing sins against nature that (literally) "Scream to Heaven for Vengeance." 

• Everything is ethical as long as you "don't hurt anyone" and there is "consent." Adultery is only wrong if your husband or wife doesn't consent. Having an "open marriage" where one or both can sleep around is ethical. Murder is wrong because someone gets hurt against their will. Euthanasia is ethical because the person consents to be killed. I once sat across from a woman psychologist while having lunch, and she struck up a conversation with me. I asked about her views on ethics and she bought into this garbage hook, line, and sinker. I asked if she thought anything was intrinsically sinful or unnatural. "No, nothing is, " she responded, "anything is OK as long as you're not hurting anyone and all involved consent to the action being done." "What about pedophilia?" I asked. "The child can't give true consent so it's wrong." "What about bestiality (sex with an animal)?" "The animal didn't consent to be your sex object!" she said sternly. With that, I pointed to the hamburger  she was eating and I inquired, "So tell me, when did the cow give consent to be eaten as your lunch?" (She got up and left). 

The Two Commandments: "Love Thyself and Accept Thyself"

 There are two fundamental principles at work in modern psychology; you must love yourself and accept who you are. It sounds both innocent and benevolent, but it is neither. It is a huge departure from Church teaching. 

1. Self love. "If you don't love yourself first, no one else will." How often have you heard this slogan? Psychology will play off this notion and make you believe, "I won't be good to others if I'm not good to myself." Next thing you do is send your three-year old off to daycare forty hours per week, or dip into family funds to drink and gamble.

 Should you love yourself? That depends. We should like ourselves when we live in conformity to the Will of God. We should like ourselves for the good we do. However, we should not like ourselves and feel guilt for the evil we do. This is anathema to psychology. Psychologists want us to think of the self-rejecting teenager, trying to be popular. She should just love herself. Really? Even if she's not popular because she spreads rumors and manipulates others? Modern psychology denies Original Sin and the Fall.

Vatican II incorporated this idea into the heretical document Gaudium et Spes para. #13, "For sin has diminished man, blocking his path to fulfillment." It should say that, sin "prevents man from attaining his salvation." The error promotes the belief that man's "fullness" (he's "diminished" and has a blocked path to reaching his "fullness" or "fulfillment") is the principal value and, moreover, is the basic element of the idea of sin. On the contrary, the Church's perennial teaching is that sin is an offense committed against God because of which we merit legitimate punishment, including eternal damnation.

2. Accept yourself because you're not responsible. 

• We are products of our environment. (Blame your parents, poverty, society, but not yourself for anything about yourself you don't like)

• Therefore, we are not responsible or accountable for our actions.(Denial of free will)

• Therefore, we are victims. (No sin, just "addictions." You're a "man trapped inside a woman's body"? You were determined to be that way, so be proud of gender dysphoria, etc.)

Ironically, modern psychology tells us we are responsible for our own happiness. Yet how can we be responsible for anything if we are biologically and/or environmentally determined? (Self-contradiction won't interfere with their teachings!). In the Vatican II sect, many clergy teach that God must love us unconditionally since we can't help the way we are as products of our society. One of my regular readers wrote that she went to "confession" in the Vatican II sect (before finding her way back to the True Church), and for "penance" she was told to sit for a while in the Church and "let God love you" (whatever that means--you can't make this stuff up).

 Vatican II joins modern psychology in the heretical teaching of humanity's "intrinsic self-worth." In Gaudium et Spes, para. 24 states, "...if man is the only creature on earth God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself," as if people possesses such value in themselves that it would cause God to create them.  In the Catholic meaning, the self-worth or "dignity of man" cannot be considered as a characteristic in people's very nature that imposes respect for all choices, because this dignity depends on right will turned toward the Good and is therefore a relative and not an absolute value.

Psychology's Less Than Admirable "Founding Father"

 That psychology began with antagonism towards God cannot be denied. Sigmund Freud ((1856-1939) remains the best known pioneer in the field of psychology. While his ideas are mostly ignored today, they still have had a great impact on society. Freud is portrayed as an atheist who shunned religion because of the "science of psychology" which supposedly proved God was a subconscious projection of the human mind.  Freud's criticism of the belief in God is called The Projection Theory. According to this theory, God is a projection of our own unconscious desires. As Freud wrote in his book The Future of an Illusion, "...the terrifying impression of helplessness in childhood aroused the need for protection...which was provided by the father...Thus the benevolent rule of a divine Providence allays our fears of the dangers of life."

Freud's Projection Theory commits the genetic fallacy in logic. This occurs when you try to discredit an idea based on its origin. Even if belief in God came from an unconscious desire for a father-figure, this doesn't prove God non-existent. Perhaps the very reason we have such a desire is because Our Creator made it innate within us to seek Him out. But was Freud a man who "had it all together" and was a convinced atheist? Dr. Paul Vitz, a former professor of psychology at New York University, and a former atheist himself, gives us some insight into Freud in his book Sigmund Freud's Christian Unconscious. [1988]

Here are some interesting facts on the "Father of Psychotherapy:"

• Freud was very interested in occult phenomena such as telepathy and poltergeists

• On Saturday evenings, he would frequently play tarock - a form of a tarot card game associated with the Jewish Kabbala

• In 1937, when he was urged to flee Nazism, he responded that his real enemy was the Roman Catholic Church

• Was a cocaine addict and his excuse was  "I was making frequent use of cocaine to reduce some troublesome nasal swellings." 

• The Catholic psychiatrist Gregory Zilboorg concluded: "Religion was, for Freud, a field of which he knew very little and which moreover seems to have been the very center of his inner conflicts, conflicts that were never resolved."

(See also The Freudian Fallacy: Freud and Cocaine by E M Thornton [1986]; and http://ww3.haverford.edu/psychology/ddavis/f_diary.html).  

  Conclusion

Psychology can be a force for good to help people. Unfortunately, it all too often turns out to be a substitute for religion--and a very poor one at that. The Vatican II sect is all about self-esteem and self-acceptance forgetting that Our Lord told us, "... If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me." (St. Matthew 16:24). A proper, Christian understanding of self-esteem and self-acceptance is good; but we must reject our sin-prone nature, deny our wants, and conform ourselves to the Will of God. To do anything less is to resign oneself to sin and Hell. There was an advertisement for a local Unitarian-Universalist sect that stated, "Come exactly as you are; God accepts you." Sounds like the motto for Bergoglio's "papacy." 

Recognizing That You Can't Resist

The folly of the "recognize and resist" crowd (R&R) becomes more apparent everyday Bergoglio pretends to be "pope." Nevertheless, there are some who cannot let go of the idea that a pope can be "resisted" in his disciplinary and doctrinal pronouncements. In September of 2016, the website Catholicism (sic) Has The Answer, there was an entry entitled, "Why Is Sedevacantism Wrong?" It goes on to list eleven "errors" of sedevacantism--- the usual discredited tripe to dupe those not well versed in Church teaching to remain in the Vatican II sect. This post will propound the teaching of the Church on the papacy and then demonstrate what's wrong with the criticism of the alleged "errors" listed against the sedevacantist position. To read the website article in its entirety, see http://catholicismhastheanswer.com/why-is-sedevacantism-wrong/.

The Vicar of Christ MUST be Obeyed

 The most cited passage for R&R is Galatians 2:11-14. We read, "But when Cephas [Peter "the Rock'] was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the circumcision. And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented, so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation.But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?" 

Here St. Paul publicly rebuked St. Peter for dissimulating about observing the Old Testament dietary laws. St. Peter knew that Catholics were not bound by Jewish dietary laws and, therefore, he did not follow them because he ate with Gentiles. However, when Jewish converts entered the scene, it seems St. Peter went back to observing those laws so as not to offend the converts. This was a big problem because the Gentile Catholics sensed a separation from the pope. St. Paul was right to correct St. Peter, and such fraternal correction was not disrespectful toward St. Peter’s office. Fraternal correction is an act of charity—even in relation to a pope, because popes are sinners, but not heretics! (See theologian Cornelius a Lapide, "Ad Galatas 2:11," Commentarium in S.S. (Lyons: Pelagaud1839) 9:445, 446, 447.) The principle applies only to fraternal correction. No theologian teaches that the pope can be "resisted" in regard to his universal and ordinary teaching authority. (See my post http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2018/03/the-ordinary-magisterium-of-papacy.html).

According to theologian Van Noort, "The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church...By the term "general discipline of the Church" are meant those ecclesiastical laws passed for the direction of Christian worship and Christian living." (See Dogmatic Theology, 2: 114-115; Emphasis mine). Therefore, you can resist an immoral command from the pope (e.g., "Kill my enemy for me," etc.) or fraternally correct an immoral act (e.g., setting a bad example, committing fornication, murder, etc.), but not legislation on the Mass. Hence, the SSPX, Salza, and the rest of the R&R crowd have no basis for rejecting the Novus Bogus "mass" (among many other things; I choose to  focus on the Mass as but one example). If Roncalli to Bergoglio are recognized by them as "popes," their ecclesiastical laws passed for the direction of Christian worship must be regarded as pure and holy.

This leads us to three options:

• The Novus Bogus "mass" is pure and holy; equal to the Traditional Mass. Attachment to the Traditional Mass is a mere preference (Official Society of St. Peter position)

• The Novus Bogus "mass" is evil because it is sacrilegious and/or invalid (The Church has defected and given evil. She is not infallible. This is heresy, and leads some into the Eastern Schismatics)

• The Novus Bogus "mass" is evil because it is sacrilegious and/or invalid, so it could not possibly have come to us from the Church, precisely because it is a dogma that the Church cannot defect. The man who promulgated it must have previously taught heresy as a private theologian and lost his office as pope, or was never validly elected pope from the beginning, as the Church's theologians have always taught could happen. (Sedevacantism)

It seems very clear because it really is apparent, as is all Church teaching. The R&R will attempt to circumvent Church teaching for their desperate want/need to "have a pope." 

The (Mythological) Errors of Sedevacantism

I will list the eleven alleged errors in red followed in most cases by a short synopsis of what was argued, by quoting the article and/or paraphrasing it. My response will follow each "error."

First Alleged Error: "A man who is a heretic, publicly or privately, cannot be, or ceases to be Pope, because he cannot be head of that which he has separated himself from." They offer two reasons; (1) "...this is false for otherwise the First Vatican Council would not have confined the Popes charism of infallibility to a certain event, specifically when he defines a doctrine to be excepted de fide by the whole Church. If it were impossible for him to be in error on matters of faith and morals other times this clarification would have no meaning." And (2) "It also would imply then that Pope John XXII would have never been the Pope, or at least not until the last day of his pontificate when he renounced the error which he had proclaimed publicly from the pulpit that the beatific vision is not seen by the Saints until the last judgment, an error which was clearly false by reason of the whole weight of the Church’s universal magisterium up until that time."

Response: As to #1, the pope cannot give that which is evil or erroneous to the whole Church. According to theologian Herrmann:

"The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments…. If she [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, she would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible."
(Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1, p. 258)

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, Para. #9:

"[T]he discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or be branded as contrary to certain principles of natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the rights of the Church and her ministers are embraced."

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, Para. #66

"Certainly the loving Mother [the Church] is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors."

The pope's infallibility extends to universal disciplinary laws. The pope can give "opinionative" decisions, which by their very nature could be modified or abrogated. In that sense he could be "wrong," but not in promulgating universal disciplinary laws, or deciding upon doctrinal issues. This is a misunderstanding of the 1870 Vatican Council's teaching on the papacy.

As to #2: Pope John XXII (1316-1334) preached a series of sermons in Avignon, France in which he taught that the souls of the blessed departed do not see God (Beatific Vision) until after the Last Judgement. It was open to debate among the theologians and had not yet been a made a dogma, so its denial is not heresy. Finally, he expressed his opinion as a "private theologian who expressed an opinion, hanc opinionem, and who, while seeking to prove it, recognized that it was open to debate." (Le Bachlet, "Benoit XII," in Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique, 2:662.). Therefore, he lacked the pertinacity required for loss of office as he declared himself expressing an opinion, and was willing to submit his judgement to the Church.

Second Alleged Error: Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio, which prevents a heretic from obtaining the papacy was superseded by the 1917 Code of Canon Law. It was not infallible.

Response: It need not be infallibly decreed because it expresses what is already known to be true by Divine Law; a heretic cannot become pope. According to canonist Coronata: "III. Appointment of the office of the Primacy. 1. What is required by divine law for this appointment: … Also required for validity is that the appointment be of a member of the Church. Heretics and apostates (at least public ones) are therefore excluded." (Institutiones 1:312; Emphasis mine). Such was the unanimous teaching of all pre-Vatican II canonists.

Third Alleged Error: "In the 1917 Code of Canon law, Canon 188.4 shows that a Pope who is becomes a heretic looses his office."  "...canon 188 §4, in speaking of "public defection from" (or "abandonment of") the Catholic faith, can mean only that kind of defection that is obvious and indisputable before all the world, even to doctrinally illiterate Catholics and non-Catholics. In this kind of defection, the cleric in question ceases even to profess the Catholic faith and clearly has not the slightest desire to continue in his previous clerical office. Sedevacantists must admit that these occupants of the Apostolic Palace, recognized by the world as popes, have all at least publicly professed to be Catholics throughout their respective pontificates and have shown every public sign of intending to continue exercising the papal office until their dying day."

Response: Sheer nonsense. A heretic can continue to call himself "Catholic" but that doesn't make it so. Isn't it "obvious and indisputable" that a "pope" who tells us "atheists can go to Heaven," "There is no Catholic God," and "proselytism is nonsense" no longer has the True Faith? According to theologian McDevitt, "A cleric, then, if he is to occasion the tacit renunciation of his office, must have defected from the faith by heresy or apostasy in a public manner..." Further, "It is to be noted immediately that adherence to or inscription in a non-Catholic sect is not required to constitute the publicity that the canon [188] demands." Finally, "..even if only a few loquacious persons witnessed the defection from the Faith...the delict would be public in the sense of canon 2197, n. 1" (The Renunciation of An Ecclesiastical Office: An Historical Synopsis and Commentary, [1946], pgs. 136-140). In the case of Bergoglio, since he couldn't attain office in the first place, this argument is even more futile.

Fourth Alleged Error: "The excommunicated cannot hold office or be elected Pope." This is false for according to Pope Pius XII’s Apostolic Constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, "None of the cardinals may in any way, or by pretext or reason of any excommunication, suspension, or interdict whatsoever, or of any other ecclesiastical impediment, be excluded from the active and passive election of the supreme pontiff. We hereby suspend such censures solely for the purposes of the said election; at other times they are to remain in vigor."

Response: This law of Pope Pius XII concerns only impediments of ecclesiastical law, not of Divine Law. As noted above, the impediment of heresy is of Divine Law according to the unanimous consent of the approved canonists and theologians. No pope can dispense from Divine Law. It's analogous to saying the pope could allow abortion or allow false worship--a complete impossibility.

Fifth Alleged Error: "Vatican II promulgated heresy, therefore the men who reigned over the council and have propagated it cannot be true popes."  This means that there was no heresy at Vatican II. Three reasons are advanced: (a) Montini (Paul VI) said Vatican II was only pastoral, (b) according to Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "When the pope speaks ex cathedra on faith or morals, then unconditional acceptance and submission is required of every Catholic. But it is false to extend this loyalty to encyclicals in which new theses are proposed." and (c) "the errors or alleged errors of the Second Vatican Council are shrouded in ambiguity making it impossible to truly convict the adherents or authors of heresy."

Response: (a) is easily dismissed. Montini said, "In view of the pastoral nature of the Council, it avoided proclaiming in an extraordinary manner any dogma carrying the mark of infallibility but it [Vatican II] nevertheless endowed its teachings with the authority of the supreme Ordinary Magisterium, which ordinary (and therefore obviously authentic) Magisterium must be docilely and sincerely received by all the faithful, according to the mind of the Council regarding the nature and scope of the respective documents."

(b) Von Hildebrand was not an approved theologian, but a philosopher and married layman. Pope Pius XII decreed, "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me"; and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians." (Humani Generis, para. #20)

(c) The Church teaches that God doesn't allow ambiguity to be taught by the Church:
Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos,January 6, 1928:

"The teaching authority of the Church in the divine wisdom was constituted on Earth in order that the revealed doctrines might remain forever in tact and might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men." (Emphasis mine)

Sixth Alleged Error: "The post-Vatican II Church cannot be the True Catholic Church because it has promulgated evil rites such as the Novus Ordo Mass, Communion on the Hand, and altar girls." These are "abuses" but not intrinsically evil.

Response: How about approving as "valid" a "mass" with no words of Consecration? Wojtyla did just that when he allowed members of his sect to receive "communion" with Eastern heretics, as recorded in the document "Guidelines for Admission to the Eucharist between the Chaldean Church and the Assyrian Church of the East." (2001). This sect's "anaphora" (the Canon which should contain the words of Consecration) never even contains the words "body" and "blood." This runs completely contrary to the Church's teaching on sacramental theology. Need I say any more?

Seventh Alleged Error: “Canon 844 of the New Code of Canon Law is intrinsically evil, and therefore could not have been promulgated by a valid pope.” 
It is supposedly an "error" because...
 "...it follows that even though in 1917 it was explicitly forbidden, the Church could give Holy Communion to those separated from her 'in good faith,' or 'through no fault of their own.' The judgment of whether someone is truly 'in good faith' is one that can only be made absolutely by God however the Church has given her ministers the authority to make the assumption for the good of souls who potentially receive sanctifying grace through the sacraments."

Response:  The idea that the true (1917) Code gave permission to give the sacraments to all those whom a priest believes to be outside the Church "in good faith" is not only false, it's not what the 1983 Code permits. Simply put, as long as they're baptized, non-Catholics can legitimately, according to the 1983 Code of Canon Law in the Vatican II sect, ask to be given "Communion", "absolution", and "Anointing of the Sick" — and then just as legitimately receive the same — without converting to Catholicism, as long as they have a "grave and pressing need", even outside the danger of death. This translates to, "I don't want to join the One True Church, I just 'need' your sacraments." Does that even make sense to you? It does if you buy into the heretical ecclesiology that the "Church of Christ" is distinct from the Catholic Church, and "subsists" there in its fullness, but it subsists in other sects according to how many "elements" of truth they possess. To have all the elements is best, but to have just some is good and leads to Heaven.

Eighth Alleged Error: "The Novus Ordo Mass changed the words of the consecration to the point where it is invalid, particularly with the vernacular change of ‘for many’ to ‘for all.’ The Mass has also deformed the intention of the priest rendering it invalid." 

Response: The very fact they approved a "mass" with no words of Consecration, makes having to refute this objection unnecessary.

Ninth Alleged Error: "Following the same logic which caused Pope Leo XIII to declare the Anglican church’s form of Episcopal Consecration invalid in ‘Apostolic Curae,’ the New form of Episcopal Consecrations are invalid."The form remains valid since it still expresses the grace of the Holy Ghost and the order of bishop.

Response: The form is invalid. Pope Pius XII specifically set forth what were the essential words necessary for ordination to the order of deacon, priest, and consecration to bishop. Why would any one want to change what was defined after so many years of study leading up to Pope Pius XII's decree Sacramentum Ordinis? Nevertheless, here's what Montini (Paul VI) made of the form in 1968:

 "So now pour out upon this chosen one that power which is from you, the governing Spirit whom you  gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, the Spirit given by him  to the holy apostles, who founded the Church in every place to be your temple for the unceasing glory and praise of your name."

To be valid, the form must, according to Pope Leo XIII (1) express the Grace of the Holy Ghost, and (2) unambiguously denote the rank bestowed (deacon, priest, or bishop). Even if "governing Spirit" is the Holy Ghost, the rank of bishop is not unambiguously signified. The article argues, "...we find the power of the order of the Episcopacy in the words “the power which is from you… the Spirit given by Him to the Holy Apostles” for faithful Catholics know that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles." The Apostles were also the first priests, and the Holy Ghost is given to priests as well as bishops. The order is not thereby unambiguously signified. Further, Dom Bernard Botte, the Modernist who was the principal creator of the new rite, maintained that, for the 3rd-century Christian, "governing Spirit" connoted the episcopacy, not the Holy Ghost! More ambiguity in the form which renders it "absolutely null and utterly void."

Tenth Alleged Error: "Cardinal Siri was elected to the Pontificate in 1958 and took the name Pope Gregory XVII but was illegally forced to step down because of death threats, possibly even threats of a nuclear bomb being dropped on Rome. Before his death he consecrated bishops and made cardinals secretly…"

Response: To allege that sedevacantists all subscribe to the so-called "Siri Thesis" or that it is in any way necessary to sedevacantism is (at the risk of sounding uncharitable) simply moronic. I don't subscribe to it, but I've written on it: http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2015/02/one-question-siri-cant-answer.html

Eleventh Alleged Error: "You’re missing the point! It is the teaching of Sts. Bellarmine, Francis De Sales, Alphonsus Ligouri that a heretical pope would ipso facto fall from the pontificate!" They claim the teachings of the theologians were not unanimous and there was conflicting opinion. "The Dominican Father Garrigou-Lagrange, (vehemently anti-modernist theologian and renowned neo-Thomist who lived from 1877-1964) basing his reasoning on Billuart, explains in his treatise De Verbo Incarnato, that a heretical pope, while no longer a member of the Church, can still be her head. For, what is impossible in the case of a physical head is possible, albeit abnormal, for a secondary moral head,

'The reason is that, whereas a physical head cannot influence the members without receiving the vital influx of the soul, a moral head, as is the Roman Pontiff, can exercise jurisdiction over the Church even is he does not receive from the soul of the Church any influx of interior faith or charity.'"

Response: Theologian Garrigou-Lagrange, in the place cited, speaks only of an occult, (i.e. secret) heretic. His purpose in this place is to defend St. Thomas Aquinas' teaching on membership in the Mystical Body, the Church, against what he perceives to be the error of St. Robert Bellarmine on the question, specifically in relation to membership by occult heretics. Sedevacantism holds that only contumacious, public heretics cannot lose (or cannot attain) the pontificate.

Conclusion

This is the best that R&R has to offer in opposition to sedevacantism, and it's not much. I dispensed with no less than eleven charges of our biggest "errors," and in just one post! It's getting more and more difficult to believe that the SSPX, Bp. Williamson's "resistance," and John Salza are in good faith. In the case of Salza, I wonder if he's still wearing a Masonic apron to deceive who he can into remaining with the Masonic/Modernist Vatican II sect.  

The Unholy Face

 He was born in Croatia, as Josip Grbavac, in the year 1967. Since circa 1995, he has been known to the world as Braco (pronounced  BRAT-tso) or "little brother." Also nicknamed "The Gazer," Braco has garnered a large following. Why? He does not claim to possess spiritual powers, or to be a "healer," yet thousands claim that by staring at his face (or sometimes even a picture of his face), they have experienced cures, sensations of energy, and inner peace. He has not spoken to anyone for an interview since 2002, however his website says the following:

Those meeting Braco´s peaceful Gaze(sic--capitalized as if belonging to God) for the first time commonly note this inviting feeling of familiarity, even friendship and trust. Others report this connection growing with time, becoming a uniquely personal foundation as their lives are enriched by the gift Braco shares. Braco’s work on behalf of people everywhere, to better lives and offer renewed hope, has been taking place since 1995, helping people in many countries: including Croatia, Slovenia, Germany, the United States, Mexico, Japan, Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, Holland, Czech Republic, Finland, Portugal, Denmark, Israel, Australia, Russia, Dominican Republic. And this list is growing with new countries offering invitations for Braco to visit. (See http://www.braco.me/en/about/introduction-braco/).

Braco does not espouse any religion, but simply spouts sweet platitudes such as, "Life is always worth living" reminiscent of the 1950s show with Abp. Fulton Sheen, Life is Worth Living, so they're not even very original platitudes. So why a post on this man? He is a danger, and very insidious. Unlike pagan gurus who openly espouse false teachings, what could be wrong with Braco? He doesn't claim to have healing power. The fact is that Braco is indeed claiming, albeit indirectly, that staring at his face promotes peace, happiness, and cures. What I hope to expose in this post, is that going to Braco is an evil inversion of devotion to the Most Holy Face of Jesus Christ. Just as "Divine Mercy" detracts from devotion to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, this deceitful man detracts and perverts devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus. He is peddling a form of anti-Christian New Ageism, and many people are falling for it.

"The Gift" Has Sinister Beginnings

 Braco claims to have received his "gift" from one Ivica Prokić (d. 1995). According to Braco's website, Prokic As a young boy of age seven, had a potent experience while playing by a river with other children. He passed out and later described "feeling a piece of the sun enter him", and this would become a determining moment of his outstanding abilities being awakened.

In childhood, Ivica already felt different from his friends, but it took him years to realize the nature of his special kind of abilities and talents. As a young man, he began experiencing unusual visions that grew more numerous and stronger with time. Eventually, he would recognize that some of the unique things he saw in these visions were becoming a reality, and then he finally came to understand many of the symbols he saw as well.

Moving to Zagreb, Ivica would undergo two more defining encounters. He underwent a near-death experience, which heightened his visionary abilities, and in 1989, he visited a bio-energetic clinic where his talents were recognized as prophetic in nature and exceptional for healing. Now Ivica found the certainty he needed to begin sharing his work to lovingly help people in their lives. His abilities had further developed to enable him to see the past, present and future of those who requested his aid.

Working techniques evolved, and Ivica would come to have short conversations with his visitors, offering advice for their lives, and for the lives of loved ones brought in photographs by visitors. Ivica also began writing short books and gave one to each person. These books offered to help people better understand themselves and life, and many people felt a special loving aid assisting them as they read, and afterwards.

This "gift" was given to Braco, as if he were a "little brother" of his; Braco met Ivica in October 1993. Their bond and recognition of each other was instant, and the friendship and trust that ensued was the foundation of Braco’s future.

Completing thirteen books, Ivica would write about Braco in several, naming him as his successor and carrying on the life mission he began. Years before Ivica met Braco, he also prophetically spoke of his coming to join him and work at his side.

Their meeting, filled with such joy and happiness, made Braco immediately decide to leave his career and former life-style to be at Ivica’s side. After Ivica’s death in April 1995, visitors did not stop coming to Srebrnjak 1 (the Center in Zagreb, Croatia), but instead came to Braco to tell him he was the one to carry on Ivica’s loving work. Braco accepted this responsibility and found in himself the talents to share the gift with people, that began helping visitors and their loved ones immediately, and continues today.

What do people pay to do when seeing Braco? Again from his website:

After visitors are welcomed and brief introductory information about Braco and his gift is shared, sometimes including a film clip, Braco will come on stage. He will stand in front of the group. During the five to seven minute duration of him sharing his Gaze(sic), he remains peacefully calm and motionless. His Gaze(sic) embraces the whole group, and he may not look at every single person individually. There are no therapeutic actions and he neither speaks to his visitors, nor touches them. He does not make any diagnoses, or provide any treatment. Braco’s Gaze(sic) alone is the way of sharing the gift with others.

• After Braco leaves the stage, time will be offered for a few people to share their own experience who wish to do so. A session usually lasts 30-35 minutes.
• Only adults (18 years or older) may gaze with Braco.
• Women who are pregnant past their third month may not attend.
• People with illnesses are advised to follow the recommendation of their doctor before and after their gazing experience.

Some people bring a photo of their children and other loved ones who are not able to gaze with Braco to create a loving connection for the non-gazing individual. (see Braco.me). 

What's Wrong With It?

1. Possible Foul Play. 

Braco's mentor, Ivica Prokic, died on the coast of South Africa by a freak wave. The exact circumstances of his death at the young age of 44 are unknown to this day. Interestingly, Prokic allegedly took off his gold jewelry and handed his money to Braco before his freak accident. 

2. Prokic claimed to have received "energy," had an NDE, and became a fortune teller.

His encounter (if he is not a charlatan), was not of God. Divination (fortune telling) in all its forms is condemned by God, "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). 

3. Meditating on Braco's face causes people to "feel energy." 

"That energy started moving inside me. I could actually see it," says Ashley Shapiro, who believes Braco’s gaze cured her respiratory disease. "I said, ‘Oh my good Lord in Heaven, I’m going to heal.'" (See https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/If-Looks-Could-Heal-Healer-Makes-South-Florida-Stop-140480503.html). 

The experience of a surge of energy or power is also related to the cultivation of altered states of consciousness.(See  Karlis Osis, et al., "Dimensions of the Meditative Experience," The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, vol. 14, no. 1, 1982, p. 121). Thus, "[Meditation is] a profoundly transformative process, for when practiced intensely, meditation disciplines almost invariably lead into the transpersonal [occult] realm of experience…. A progressive sequence of altered states of consciousness can occur, which may ultimately result in the permanent, radical [occult] shift in consciousness known as enlightenment or liberation." (See Roger N. Walsh, Frances Vaughan, eds., Beyond Ego: Transpersonal Dimensions in Psychology (Los Angeles, CA: J. P. Tarcher, 1980), pp. 136-137). The pagan meditation he encourages can open the door to possession via the occult. 

4. Braco uses a pagan sun symbol (and sells jewelry with the image for people to wear).

"Sun worship has also been found in Babylonian texts and in a number of Asian religious cults. Today, many Pagans honor the sun at Midsummer..." "The sun has long been a symbol of power and magic. The Greeks honored the sun god with "prudence and piety," according to James Frazer's . Because of the sun's sheer power, they made offerings of honey rather than wine -- they knew that it was important to keep a deity of such power from becoming intoxicated!

The Egyptians identified several of their gods with a solar disc above the head, indicating that the deity was a god of the light." (See https://www.thoughtco.com/pagan-and-wiccan-symbols-4123036)

5. It engenders Indifferentism and a cult of personality. 

The focus becomes this man's face, and it gives you peace and healing for some unknown reason. Nothing is attributed to God; every religion is treated as being just as good as every other belief system (Indifferentism). The so-called "theoretical physics" that support Braco's claims come from one Professor Alex Schneider, Board member of the Swiss Society for Parapsychology. This is not a "scientific endorsement." Moreover, the professor's explanation on Braco's site is little more than mumbo-jumbo meant to sound profound:

Basically, Braco’s influence is not to be understood as energies coming from his person. His charisma is such that his "higher" human qualities, together with the help of the catalysis of the individual participants (the above-mentioned group dynamics), puts him in a position to change the people standing before him in their deeper human layers in such a way that they are able to absorb harmonizing information, as well as to awaken these themselves. These then become effective in the outer being of the participants, such as self-healing. Braco always stresses that he is not a healer, meaning, he does not focus on influencing a physical disability of an individual.  Measurements done by Volkamer show that Braco’s subtle energies are about the same as those of any other spiritual healer. The unique feature of Braco, therefore, does not consist of the release of any healing energies, but is taking place on another level. (With nonsense like this written under the guise of being meaningful, Schneider might want to consider a career in politics).

How to Explain the "Healings"

1. The "Placebo Effect." In a psychology experiment, a placebo is an inert treatment or substance that has no known effects. "Even though placebos contain no real treatment, researchers have found they can have a variety of both physical and psychological effects. Participants in placebo groups have displayed changes in heart rate, blood pressure, anxiety levels, pain perception, fatigue, and even brain activity. These effects point to the brain's role in health and well-being." (See https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-the-placebo-effect-2795466). The huge build-up given Braco before you get into a staring contest with him, can make people believe something will happen and trigger the placebo effect. It's a type of group hysteria, where people experience the same "symptoms."

2. Natural Processes. Many people are taking conventional treatment while going to stare. The treatments start to work, and they attribute it to staring. It reminds me of someone who told me an old joke about a city kid who goes to a farm. The farmer tells him, "When the rooster crows, the sun is rising." The city kid said, "Wow! That's some pretty powerful rooster!"

3. Liars and lunatics. Some people want 15 minutes of fame, some might get paid by Braco, or some might be embarrassed to say they experienced nothing when everyone else allegedly did. People who are mentally unbalanced will often attend these type of events, and they imagine all kinds of things due to their illness.

4. Demonic activity. Braco got his "power" from someone who practiced divination; an occult practice. He uses pagan images and wants people to go into an altered state while meditating on him as some wacky "deity." It's not too hard to see demons at work.

The alleged healings can be the result of any (or any combination of) the above. One thing is certain: they are not true healings from God.  

Insulting the Holy Face of Our Lord

Devotion to the Holy Face of Christ was revealed by Jesus to Sr Marie of St Peter (1816-1848) a Carmelite nun of Tours in France. The primary purpose of the devotion is to make reparation for sins against the first three commandments: Denial of God (atheism / communism), blasphemy, and the profanation of Sundays and Holy Days.

The devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus, based on the life and writings of Sr. Marie of St. Peter, was eventually approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885 who established the devotion as an Arch-confraternity for the whole world. There are promises attached to the devotion, and a "Golden Arrow" prayer. Just as sins are like poison arrows in Christ's Sacred Heart, so those who recite the prayer and keep the devotion shoot a "golden arrow of love" into His Heart, bringing delight.

Devotion to the Holy Face is also a reminder of our true last end, the Beatific Vision of God face to face. According to theologian Pohle, "The supernatural beatitude of Heaven fundamentally consists in the intuitive vision of the Divine Essence (visio Dei intuitiva), as opposed to the purely abstractive and analogical knowledge which man has of God here below." (See Dogmatic Theology, B. Herder Book Co., [1955] 12:30). Now, we are to focus on the face of a mere man, devoid of true religious signification, seeped in occultic origin and influence, who wants you to pay for staring at him in the hopes of achieving peace and wellness. I'm surprised he can keep a straight face when taking people's money while saying he doesn't claim to be a healer! So why do you stare at people, and have them stare at you?

Conclusion

So, is Braco insane, possessed or a charlatan? Any one (or any combination) is possible. I doubt that he is deranged, unless "crazy like a fox" counts. He certainly does the devil's work, whether or not a case of actual possession, and he may certainly take advantage of people desperate for healing and peace of mind. Stay clear of this man, who could open you up to malevolent influences. Seek your peace in the Prince of Peace, Jesus Christ. While looking at an image of His Holy Face, recite the "Golden Arrow" prayer, ""May the most holy, most sacred, most adorable, most incomprehensible and unutterable Name of God be always praised, blessed, loved, adored and glorified in Heaven, on earth, and under the earth, by all the creatures of God, and by the Sacred Heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Amen."

Finally, let us develop a devotion for the Holy Face of Jesus Christ, as recommended by Pope Leo XIII in 1887 to the members of the Archconfraternity whom honor It:

I. To wear on their persons a picture of the Holy Face, to kiss it devoutly the 1st thing in the morning on awaking and at night before going to sleep, to consecrate their actions during the day to the divine Face, to resolve to perform them in its presence and before its eyes.

II. At the commencement of their prayers, or of any exercise of piety, has an easy means of placing themselves in the presence of God, and of combating distractions, to think of the Holy Face whose eyes are open and fixed upon us, to adore it with faith, to look at it with love.

III. In presence of the Blessed Sacrament, to recall to our remembrance the fact that the Face of the Savior is present there in the sacred Host: that it sees us, listens to us, blesses us, speaks to us interiorly.

IV. To endeavor in their conduct to imitate the virtues of patience, of gentleness, of serenity, of modesty, which shine in the Holy Face. Listen to the divine Master who said learn of me, and seeing me, that I am meek in face and humble of heart: knowing that, in fact the gentleness and humility of the heart of Jesus are, as in a very clear mirror, admirably reflected on the Face of the Man God.

V. In trials, sicknesses, accidents, temptations, to prostrate themselves before the picture of the Holy Face whether in their private Oratory, or above all, in the church of the Confraternity where it is specially exposed.

VI. To have in their houses a picture of the Holy Face which they shall honor as the protector of the family and the Guardian of the domestic hearth; to recite before it the prayers which are habitually said in common by the household.

VII. When they shall hear any blasphemies pronounced, or shall see and act of impious sacrilege which they cannot prevent, to recollect themselves and to pronounce with their hearts, if they cannot with their lips, the words: Behold, O God, our protector, and look upon the Face of thy Christ, or: May the Name of the Lord be blessed! Sit Nomen Domini benedictum!

VIII. To propagate the worship of the Holy Face in their locality, amongst their friends and acquaintances, and to make use of it in order to combat, in every possible manner, the terrible effects of indifference and irreligion.