What Vatican II Could Have Been

 

My best friend is an ardent reader of what have been called "alternate history books." The premise of these books is to posit a realistic scenario (or scenarios) if something in history had happened differently. To give but a single example of such books, there is one entitled Dropping the Atomic Bomb on Hirohito & Hitler: What Might Have Happened if the A-Bomb Had Been Ready Early by Jim Mangi. A description is given by the publisher:

...what might have happened if the atom bomb had been available somewhat earlier than it really was (?) What if the atomic bomb had been ready for deployment in, say, February 1945? Had the atomic bomb been ready sooner, how would this have affected the war in Europe, and in particular Germany’s surrender? What would the impact have been in the war in the Pacific against Imperial Japan, and how would the Soviets have reacted? And what would the following Cold War have looked like? These are all questions and scenarios that the author rigorously examines. Solidly based on real people and actual events, in this book James Mangi describes the Manhattan Project to build the atom bomb getting an earlier start after President Roosevelt appointed an energetic scientist, Walter Mendenhall, to study the feasibility of the bomb, instead of the more traditional bureaucrat, Lyman Briggs, he actually chose. This scenario, he reveals, might well have produced a war-ending atomic bomb earlier, the effects of which rippled through the post-war world.

I must admit that it is most interesting to ponder such things, even though I almost exclusively read non-fiction. These books are partial non-fiction as they are based on certain real persons, facts, and situations. The rest is fictitious speculation and conjecture. I'm willing to bet many (perhaps even most) Traditionalists have wondered what the Church and the world would have been like now had the Robber Council never taken place. 

Recently, I was reading the original drafts of six documents of Vatican II, translated from the Latin by a Vatican II sect priest, Fr. Joseph A. Komonchak (ordained 1963). I started contemplating a different kind of alternate Church history. What if Cardinal Ottaviani had been validly elected at the October 1958 conclave and had taken the name of "Pope Pius XIII"? (Fr. DePauw informed me that it was Cardinal Ottaviani, not Siri, who was the favorite to win, and Ottaviani was so sure of the outcome, he even chose the name Pius prior to entering that fateful conclave ---Introibo). What if those drafts (called schemas) had been duly passed by a True Council called by Pope Pius XIII to combat modern errors? Thanks to Fr. Komonchak, we can have a pretty good speculative outlook. 

Although these schemata carry no Magisterial authority at all (as they were never passed), it nevertheless shows what the most erudite, orthodox, approved theologians taught on various subjects, and furthermore believed that it was ripe for being defined by the Church. I must admit, those theologians were prescient; it was as if they knew what would happen if certain errors were left unchecked. I will highlight some salient points, and you, the reader, can imagine what Vatican II could have been. 

A Catalogue of Errors Condemned

Preliminary note: These schemata were the product of the very best and most Anti-Modernist approved theologians under Pope Pius XII. However, they were drafts made to be worked on at the Council. If there were a true pope, each schema would be debated and subject to additions, omissions, and alterations by the Council. When in final form, if it should pass by majority vote of the Bishops, it would then be presented to the pope for his approval and promulgation. Only then would it have binding Magisterial authority. For my purposes here, I will assume these schemata were each in their final form and approved/promulgated by (the alternate history) Pope Pius XIII. 

What follows is what jumped out at me while reading each schema. The six drafts were:

1. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE SOURCES OF REVELATION (SR).

2.  DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH (CC).

3. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DEFENDING INTACT THE DEPOSIT OF FAITH (DDF)

4.  DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHRISTIAN MORAL ORDER (CMO)

5. A DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON CHASTITY, MARRIAGE, THE FAMILY, AND VIRGINITY (CMFV).

6. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY, MOTHER OF GOD, AND MOTHER OF MEN (BVM)

The text of each schema cited will be in red font. My commentary will be in the usual black font and all emphasis (in red or black) is mine.

From the schema on the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (CC)

a) The One True Church of Christ is the Mystical Body of Christ and Identical To the Apostolic Roman Church. 

Para. #4: But of all the figures, because it more clearly expresses the social element along with the mystical, the principal one is the figure of the body which, at Christ's inspiration, Paul used: "And he is the Head of the Body of the Church" (Col 1:18); "which is His Body and the fulness of Him who fills all in all" (Eph 1:23). For all those who have entered the Church through baptism and have put on Christ in the communion of the saints, since they share in the one Eucharistic Bread, are made perfect in the unity of the one Body: "Because there is one bread, we, though many, are one body, for we all share in the one bread" (1 Cor 10:17). 

This paragraph cites to Pope Pius XII's encyclical, Mystici Corporis, and raises its teaching (already taught since St. Paul himself) to dogma. 

Concluding paragraph: The holy Synod teaches and solemnly professes, therefore, that there is only a single true Church of Jesus Christ, that Church which in the Creed we proclaim to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic, the Church which the Savior acquired for Himself on the cross and joined to Himself as body to head and as bride to bridegroom, the Church which, after His resurrection, He handed over to be governed by St. Peter and his successors, the Roman Pontiffs. Therefore, only the

Catholic Roman is rightly called the Church.

A most beautiful exposition of Catholic dogma that unequivocally states the One True Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, is identical to the Catholic Roman Church. In the footnote, it explains the appellation "Catholic Roman:"  The First Vatican Council deliberately said "Catholic apostolic Roman" and not "Roman Catholic," because the latter smacks of the doctrine of the three branches. The so-called "Branch Theory" was advanced by Anglican heretics in the 18th century. They taught that the Catholic Church is comprised of three "branches;" the Eastern Church, the Roman Church, and the Anglican Church. These schismatic branches, according to the heretical theory, will eventually be united into the future "ecumenical" Church, a synthesis of all of the confessional Churches at present separated in practice but united in origin and substance with the reality of apostolic Catholicism. To avoid any connection with such false ecclesiology, the term "Catholic Roman" Church was employed. 

Compare the damnable Vatican II sect document on the Church which replaced this one, Lumen Gentium, para. #8:

This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him, although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure.

The Church of Christ is therefore distinct from the Catholic Roman Church. It "subsists" there because it contains all the "elements" but it subsists in other sects too according to how many "elements" each one has. To have all the elements is best, but to have just some is good too, and leads to salvation. This is the heresy in ecclesiology that leads to all the other errors and heresies in Vatican II. 

b) Feeneyism Condemned. Baptism of Desire is Expressly Taught. 

Para. #8: The Holy Synod teaches, as God's Holy Church has always taught, that the Church is necessary for salvation and that no one can be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded by God through Jesus Christ, nevertheless refuses to enter her or to persevere in Her. Just as no one can be saved except by receiving baptism--by which anyone who does not pose some obstacle to incorporation becomes a member of the Church--or at least by desire for baptism, so also no one can attain salvation unless he is a member of the Church or at least is ordered towards the Church by desire. But for anyone to attain to salvation, it is not enough that he be really a member of the Church or be by desire ordered towards it; it is also required that he die in the state of grace, joined to God by faith, hope, and charity.

Cited by the schema as authorities for this formulation:  For the teaching of the Church, see the Athanasian Creed (Dz 40); Pelagius II, Letter Dilectionis vestris (Dz 247); Innocent III, Profession of Faith for the Waldensians (Dz 423); Boniface VIII, Bull Unam sanctam (Dz 468); Clement VI, Epist. Super quibusdam (Dz 570b); the Council of Florence, Decree for the Jacobites (Dz 714); the Tridentine Profession of Faith (Dz 1000); Benedict XIV, Profession of Faith for the Maronites (Dz 1473); Gregory XVI, Enc. Mirari vos (Dz 1613); Pius IX, Enc. Quanto conficiamur maerore (Dz 1677); Syllabus, n. 16-17 (Dz 1716-17); Pius XII, Mystici Corporis (AAS 35 [1943], pp. 242-43); Humani generis (Dz 2319); Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston, Aug. 8, 1949.

Note well that the top theologians cite to the very documents the Feeneyites claim exclude Baptism of Desire (e.g., Unam Sanctam). Bye, bye Fred and Bobby! For someone who wishes to do all God wants of him, and leads a morally upright life by cooperating with actual graces, God can, before the moment of death, infuse his intellect with Faith, and give him perfect contrition so as to fill the soul with sanctifying grace. He therefore dies within the Church and in the state of grace; the requirements to be saved. 

c) That the Sacraments are not permitted to non-Catholics, is once more affirmed.

Para. #54: The principal obstacle to liturgical communion between Catholics and the separated brethren is the nature of the communion in worship by which the members of the Church themselves are linked with one another. For the communion of the members of the Church with one another in their sacred worship is a gift of Christ himself, given solely to his one Church, by which the union in faith and in communion under one supreme pastor is consummated and which is a sign of that unity in truth and love by which the Church is the mystical Body of Christ and already here on earth a figure and anticipation of heavenly union in Christ.

Since, therefore, in the sacred liturgy, carried out by ministers in Christ's name and with the Church's mandate, the communion of the faithful confesses the faith of the Church (see Acts 2:42), active participation in the sacred liturgy must per se be considered a certain profession of faith.

Consequently, the active participation of dissident Christians both in the very worship of the Church in general and in particular receptions of the sacraments generally cannot be permitted, since, intrinsically, it is contrary to the unity of faith and communion and, extrinsically, it obscures the sign of the unity of the Body of Christ, and from such defects the dangers of religious indifferentism, interconfessionalism, and scandal often flow.

Compare to Vatican II's decree for Eastern Rite Churches, Orientalium Ecclesiarum, para. #27:

Without prejudice to the principles noted earlier, Eastern Christians who are in fact separated in good faith from the Catholic Church, if they ask of their own accord and have the right dispositions, may be admitted to the sacraments of Penance, the Eucharist and the Anointing of the Sick. 

d) There is but One True Church of Christ that ALWAYS possesses Unity, Catholicity, Holiness, and Apostolicity.

Para. #48: Since the Church, as the One and unique institution of salvation, was built by Christ to be the one and only sign lifted up among the nations, nothing can ever intrinsically violate Her unity.

The Church is always One, Catholic, Holy, and Apostolic. No amount of those leaving to start or join false sects can ever change that. Compare to Vatican II's decree on ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, para. #4 where heretical and schismatic sects impede the Church from being "fully Catholic:"

Nevertheless, the divisions among Christians prevent the Church from attaining the fullness of catholicity proper to Her, in those of her sons who, though attached to Her by Baptism, are yet separated from full communion with Her. Furthermore, the Church Herself finds it more difficult to express in actual life Her full catholicity in all Her bearings. 

e) Religious Liberty Condemned.

Para. #42: The good of the State itself requires that the civil power not consider itself indifferent towards religion. It was established by God to help men acquire a truly human perfection; it must, therefore, not only provide its members the opportunity to procure temporal goods, both material and cultural, but must also assist them so that the spiritual goods for leading a religious life can more easily abound. Among those goods none is to be more highly regarded than to know and acknowledge God and to fulfil the duties owed to God, for these are the foundations of all private virtue, and indeed of all public virtue as well.

These duties toward God are not to be fulfilled only by individual citizens, but also by the civil power, which in its public acts represents the civil society. For God is the author of civil society and the source of all the goods which through it flow down to every member. Although, in the order willed by Christ, liturgical worship belongs only to God's Church, still the civil society must also worship God in some social way.

In the light of its nature, it will especially do this if by procuring the common good it faithfully observes the laws of God established by the divine Majesty for this economy of salvation. This demands above all that full freedom be granted to the Church and that whatever the Church judges to hinder the attainment of the eternal goal is excluded from legislation, governing, and public activity. The goal indeed should be to make it easier to live a life on Christian principles, one conducive to eternal life.  

Ironically, the very American theologian censured by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office for his heretical teachings on Church and State, the Jesuit Fr. John Courtney Murray, was to  become the principle author of the heretical Vatican II declaration on religious liberty, Dignitatis Humanae. 

In 1954, the Holy Office solemnly condemned Murray's four principle errors:

• the Catholic state is not the ideal
• full religious liberty can be considered as a valid political ideal in a truly democratic state
• it is sufficient for the state to guarantee the freedom of the Catholic Church by a general guarantee of religious liberty
• the teaching of Pope Leo XIII on the obligations of States to God is not applicable to the democratic state.

Murray was ordered to submit his writings to the censors in Rome before publication. His Jesuit superiors ordered him to write no more on the topic of religious liberty, to which he acquiesced.

In 1957-1958, the Holy Office was preparing a document on religious freedom. A draft included a list of 21 errors, 14 of which were drawn from Murray’s writings. When Pope Pius XII died and Roncalli was "elected," the condemnations of error were ordered scrapped by His Wickedness, false "Pope" John XXIII. Here is what Dignitatis Humanae, para. #3 heretically teaches:

The religious acts whereby men, in private and in public and out of a sense of personal conviction, direct their lives to God transcend by their very nature the order of terrestrial and temporal affairs. Government therefore ought indeed to take account of the religious life of the citizenry and show it favor, since the function of government is to make provision for the common welfare. However, it would clearly transgress the limits set to its power, were it to presume to command or inhibit acts that are religious. 

 From the schema on the Dogmatic Constitution Defending Intact the Deposit of Faith (DDF)

a) The True Catholic Development of Doctrine is clearly Expounded and Defended.

Para. #31:The Sacred Council, therefore, acknowledges and professes that true development in understanding and presenting the doctrine of faith does take place in Christ's Church, in such a way that new definitions of revealed truth can even be made. But it declares legitimate only a development which consists simply in an increase in human knowledge about revelation, and not in the growth of the deposit itself. For the deposit remains in itself immutable, since any truth that may be proposed newly by the Church is contained therein at least implicitly and therefore is supported by divine authority.

Compare with the Modernist conception of development of doctrine contained in the Vatican II's declaration on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, para. #8:

The Tradition that comes from the apostles makes progress in the Church, with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realties and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts (cf. Lk. 2:19, 51). It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth. Thus, as the centuries go by, the Church is always advancing towards the plenitude of divine truth, until eventually the words of God are fulfilled in Her. 

The last sentence is telling: Thus, as the centuries go by, the Church is always advancing towards the plenitude of divine truth, until eventually the words of God are fulfilled in Her. The "plenitude of truth" is evidently the same thing as the "whole, complete truth" towards which the Holy Ghost leads. The "Spirit of God" leads to the "whole, complete truth" which the Church however does not yet possess; otherwise it would not have need of being led nor of tending there incessantly. This is to say that the Church does not yet fully possess Revelation and has not a true, perfect deposit of Faith. This is clearly heretical.

In 1907, Pope St. Pius X, CONDEMNED the following propositions of the Modernists in Lamentabili Sane:

21. Revelation, constituting the object of the Catholic faith, was not completed with the Apostles.

22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort.

54. Dogmas, Sacraments and hierarchy, both their notion and reality, are only interpretations and evolutions of the Christian intelligence which have increased and perfected by an external series of additions the little germ latent in the Gospel.

58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, since it evolved with him, in him, and through him.

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.

62. The chief articles of the Apostles’ Creed did not have the same sense for the Christians of the first ages as they have for the Christians of our time.

All of the above condemned propositions show the Modernist heresy of "development" whereby dogmas (and even the Church Herself) "evolve" over time into something completely different since truth is not immutable according to Modernism. Vatican II adopted this idea. 

b) The Rightful Place of Private Revelations.

Para. #32: With regard to private revelations which are claimed to have occurred after the death of the Apostles, the Holy Synod declares that they are to be subjected completely to the judgment of the Church's Pastors, lest the faithful be deceived, since Christ warned, "False prophets will arise and will deceive many" (Mt 24:11). It also declares that they are worthy of consideration only when they are in total agreement with the truths contained in the public treasury of faith and when they promote the living of the Christian life under the leadership of the Pastors. They cannot offer an opportunity to bring forth any ecclesiastical institutions unless they have a dogmatic foundation elsewhere. And, finally, it is never permitted because of them to introduce new doctrines or to begin new undertakings if the Church is unwilling. It further teaches that we neither must nor can give private revelations, even approved ones, the assent of Catholic faith but only the assent of human faith, according to the rules of prudence if these indicate that such revelations are probable and piously credible.

The Christian faithful should thus carefully restrain immoderate curiosity about wonders that are not sufficiently approved by the Church's Pastors. For there are people who pursue such things as if the very Deposit of faith were insufficient to nourish the Christian life or as if richer pastures lie before the sheep of Christ outside the Deposit. 

c) Occultism forcefully condemned. 

Para. #33: Such curiosity becomes truly pernicious when it moves believers to give themselves over to the superstition of divination of any form, but especially to that spiritualism that attempts by human effort to evoke sensible communication with spirits or with separated souls in order to attain various information or various helps. "There shall not be found among you anyone who practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer.. For the Lord abominates all these things" (Dt 18:10-12). The Apostolic See has not neglected in various of its documents to oppose evil spiritualism with appropriate remedies.

Para. #34: In many regions superstition is creeping widely and is being spread more every day, sometimes also deceitfully under the false title of parapsychology, the discipline whose task it is to explain facts that appear to contradict the ordinary laws of psychology. The Sacred Council declares that the divine law prohibits as a very serious sin against religion both to want to call out the souls of the dead and to wish to establish perceptible communications with them or with any other spirits,

however it may be done, publicly or privately, even if the intention is to address only good spirits and the whole exhibition has the appearance of propriety, piety and religion. It forbids all Christians even out of mere curiosity to attend or to promote in any way spiritualist sessions or other meetings of this sort.

Para. #35: The Holy Synod does, however, exhort all the faithful to imitate the example of holy Mother Church by praying for the faithful departed that they may attain the vision of God and intercede with Him for us; it also exhorts them to commend themselves to the holy Angels who in God's fatherly providence guard the human race and are ready by direction, assistance, and enlightenment to help individuals not to succumb to their malicious enemies.

The approved theologians saw the ugly head of the occult slowly beginning to rise during the 1950s.

Had this condemnation emanated from a true Council, led by a true pope, I have no doubts in my mind that the occult revival and invasion after Vatican II--which made occult practices ubiquitous---would never had happened. 

d) Polygenism condemned. 

Para. #49: The sacred Synod, therefore, rejects the views of those who assert either that after Adam there have been here on earth true men who did not derive by natural generation from that one first parent or that Adam represents some multitude of first parents; such views contradict Catholic doctrine.

For it is not at all apparent how such views are compatible with the sources of revealed truth, and the acts of the Church's Magisterium present about original sin, which proceeds from the sin truly committed by the one Adam and which is transmitted to all by generation, and which is in each person as his own.

Here, the schema ratifies the condemnation of Pope Pius XII regarding polygenism in para. #37 of his encyclical Humani Generis:

When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own. 

From the schema on the Dogmatic Constitution on the Christian Moral Order (CMO)

a) Moral Relativism Condemned.

Para. #1: When the infinitely good and infinitely holy God revealed the mystery of his holiness and love in the work of creation and redemption, he at the same time showed men the way of love and holiness. For this reason, in accord with the Apostle's statement, "This is the will of God, your sanctification" (1 Th 4:3), the Second Vatican Council [this is a schema; this is what Vatican II was intended to profess, but did not] solemnly professes that there is an ordering [ordinatio] of the same infinitely good and infinitely holy God by which to measure the rightness and wrongness of human acts. This ordering of divine wisdom, which men share by knowledge, becomes the rule and norm of holiness for them so that, as Sacred Scripture teaches, they may be holy as God Himself is holy.

Observing this moral order with the help of God, without which no one can serve the divine will, man conforms his will to the will of God; and, sharing in the law of liberty (see Jas 1:25), he not only becomes a faithful servant of God, but also shares in that freedom of the children of God in virtue of which, freed from the slavery of sin,  he can tend towards his ultimate end, which in this economy of salvation is God himself, Father and Son and Holy Spirit, to be possessed in heaven by contemplation and by love. The moral order, therefore, is not a fiction of the human mind, but really exists, just as the will of God, infinitely wise, good, and holy, really exists.  

b) "Situation Ethics" condemned.

Para. #15: Finally, there are people who so make love the only criterion of morality and its single norm that they think the other virtues are not important. It is true that the love by which the just love God above all things and love the neighbor because of God is "greater" than faith, hope, and the other virtues (1 Cor 13:13); it does not, however, remove the need for both these kinds of virtues, but so nourishes and fosters them that we may come "to the extent of the full stature of Christ" (Eph 4:13).

The Holy Council therefore encourages that all the activities of the Christian faithful "be done in love" (1 Cor 16:14). But they should not therefore make the mistake of thinking that a man "acts in a Christian manner" only when love is the motive or that the other virtues are unimportant, as if God crowned only an explicit act of love. For acts ofthe just that proceed from another proper motive or impulse condignly merit the growth of grace and of glory, not however without that love.

Care should likewise be taken that simple people not misunderstand the statement, "Love and do what you wish," and mistakenly think that only one precept, namely Thou shalt love, has to be kept in the Christian life. For such a life is reduced to some uncertain feeling of love, completely neglecting the keeping of the commandments, in contradiction of the Lord himself, who said,

"If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:17), and elsewhere---

"Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me" (Jn 14:21).

"Situation Ethics" is a system made popular by Episcopal "priest" turned atheist, Joseph Fletcher (d.1991). Fletcher wrote ten books and hundreds of articles, book reviews, and translations. Situation ethics essentially states that other moral principles can be cast aside in certain situations if love is best served. Fletcher supported abortion on demand, euthanasia, infanticide, contraception, pre-marital sex, and every form of sexual perversion. In his 1966 book, Situation Ethics, Fletcher wrote, Whether any form of sex is good or evil depends on whether love is fully served. (pg. 139). He also opined that ...only the end justifies the means. (pg. 120). Vatican II never mentions (let alone condemns) moral relativism or situation ethics. 

From the schema on the Dogmatic Constitution on Chastity, Marriage, the Family, and Virginity (CMVF)

(a) Transgenderism condemned.

Para. #4: It should be noted that God alone is the absolute lord of man's life and of its integrity, particularly with respect to what makes man naturally capable of and associates him with God in the propagation of human life.

Attempts to change one's sex, therefore, when this is sufficiently determined, are wicked; nor is it allowed, in order to save the health of the whole man, to mutilate his genital organs or to render them infertile, if there are other ways to provide for his health.

 Nor in any case is or can there be a right to transplant into the human body the sexual organs of animals which produce the germinative cells of their own genus, or vice-versa; nor also to try to unite the human germ cells of each sex in a laboratory, even if this is done without violating modesty and chastity and solely for the sake of scientific progress. 

This principle condemns transgenderism before it was even known by the general public. As to the experiments with gametes, the footnote in the schema had this to say:

Here the Constitution has in mind all those modern experiments being made to unite the vital human germ cells, even independently of an intention at artificial fertilization, but for other purposes. Many

are waiting for the Church clearly to say that these experiments are in every hypothesis illicit, even if civil legislatures until now, as far as we know, are doing nothing; indeed materialists may take the occasion publicly to ridicule divine principles in the newspapers.

b) So-called "free love" and false ideas about marriage condemned.

Para. #22: The Sacred Synod must severely condemn so-called "temporary" or "experimental" or "companionate" marriages. It also rejects as unworthy of a man and especially of a Christian those instructions by which through various skills a real hedonism in sacred and holy marriage is propagated.

It also rejects theories by which a violation of marital fidelity is considered allowed to spouses, either when the mutual love between the couple has failed or when the sexual impulse is falsely thought to be impossible to keep within the limits of monogamous marriage.

It is also mistaken to state that civil authority itself never has the power to punish adulterers, and indeed with an equal penalty for both men and women. It also rebukes those who say, and indeed under the pretext of benefitting the Church, that mixed marriages are generally and in themselves to be fostered rather than tolerated. That position is also mistaken which maintains that a marriage can be declared invalid or dissolved solely because of a failure of love.

Finally the Sacred Synod most severely condemns so-called "free love," by which, under a false pretext of constructing a new fraternity and society, sin is committed against the divine order and a lethal wound is inflicted not only on marriage but also on the family and society. 

Compare to the Vatican II sect having "marriage preparation" classes for "cohabitating couples." These fornicators, living in a persistent state of mortal sin, are not made to separate bed and board, confess, and stay chaste until marriage. 

c) Feminism Condemned.

Para. #26: It is mistaken, therefore, to deny the divine origin of the family and to subvert the order which God set within it or to remove it from the control and influence of the divine order and of the Church. And therefore this Sacred Synod, while it defends the rights of the woman, rejects that evil form of emancipation by which, whether as a daughter or a wife or a mother, her proper nature, function, and role are disfigured by some false view of her equality with the man.

Nor does it approve of that way of acting by which some people, indeed civil authority itself, moved by some false exaltation of freedom, either denies or belittles or, what is worse, practically destroys, to the detriment of the family's good, the natural and distinct qualities of man and woman.

d) Periodic Abstinence vindicated.

Para. #27: Today especially, a distinctive sign of truly Christian parents should be that generous way

of acting, one in accordance with the norms of Christian virtues, with which they think correctly about the number of their children and act accordingly. The Sacred Synod is not at all unaware of the many and great difficulties which spouses may encounter on this matter. It therefore teaches in general that by divine law, natural or positive, there is no universal norm with regard to the number of children to be had in each family. In each case should be considered what individual conditions, the good of the whole family and of society suggest, according to the dictates of Christian prudence, linked also with the other virtues. In their particular deliberations, the faithful should not be moved only by temporal and material considerations, but first of all by supernatural ones, and they should be led by the light of reason and of faith.

And, as befits Christians, in measuring the number of their children, they should be mindful of divine Providence by which all things are wisely ordered. In so serious a matter, the faithful should avoid irrational and blind instinct and the various forms of hedonism.

If they both agree and if they have a just cause, it is licit for the faithful to make use of marriage only on those days which are known to be infertile. But renouncing the use of marriage becomes illicit for them if, as the Apostle noted (see 1 Cor 7:5), it brings the spouses into a proximate danger of sin. Let the supreme rule be the Apostle's general advice: "Let all your acts be done with charity" (1 Cor 16:14). And therefore values and reasons that are merely medical, eugenic, economic, social or of some other temporal and material order, may not be opposed to, preferred to, or equated with the values and reasons of a higher order, the order of religion and morality. (Emphasis mine). 

Remember that the greatest approved theologians, noted for their orthodoxy, knew that periodic abstinence was permissible for just cause--as this schema demonstrates. This gives the lie to Fred and Bobby Dimond, wreaking havoc on married people's consciences that they must have, in all cases, the most children possible. It was a false pope that allowed this document to be destroyed! Can you imagine if this passed in a true Council with a true pope? It would be a world where Fred and Bobby would need to get real jobs suited to their dispositions and intellects (e.g., asking customers, "Would you like fries with that?").

From the schema on the Dogmatic Constitution on the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and Mother of Men (BVM)

a) The Blessed Virgin Mary is Co-Redmeptrix of the Human Race.

Para. #2: The Word of the eternal Father willed to receive his human nature from a woman so that as

death came from a woman so also life would arise for us from a woman and thus liberation would be accomplished by both sexes

He did not accomplish this, however, until the designated Mother, redeemed in a more sublime way by the foreseen merits of Christ, had given her free acceptance (see Lk 1:38) so that by the incarnation the Son of God would become her Son also and the new Adam and Savior of the world. By this consent Mary, the daughter of Adam, not only became the Mother of Jesus, the one divine Mediator and Redeemer, but with him and under him also joined her work in accomplishing the redemption of the human race. This salvific consent of the Mother of God and thus her participation in the work of redemption lasted from the time of the virginal conception of Jesus Christ until his death; it especially shone forth when, not without the divine plan, she stood by the cross (cf. Jn 19:25), when she powerfully shared her only Son’s, with him and through him with all her heart offered him as the price of our redemption, and when she was given to men as their Mother by the same Christ Jesus dying on the cross (see Jn 19:26-27). Because, however, the mystery of human redemption was not completed until the Holy Ghost Christ had promised came on the day of Pentecost, we contemplate Mary in the Cenacle with the Apostles persevering in prayer (see Acts 1:14) imploring by her prayers too the outpouring of the Spirit.

b) The Blessed Virgin Mary is Mediatrix of All Grace.

Para. #3: This humble "handmaid of the Lord," for whom "he who is mighty has done great things" (see Lk 1:49), is called the Mediatrix of all graces because she was associated with Christ in acquiring these graces, and she is invoked by the Church as our advocate and Mother of Mercy, because even now she remains the associate of the glorious Christ in heaven and intercedes for all through Christ so that in the conferral of all graces to men there is present the maternal charity of the Blessed Virgin. But in no way is the mediation of our only Mediator--according to the absolute sense of the words of the Apostle (1 Tm 2:5): "There is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus"--obscured or diminished; indeed this mediation of Christ is extolled and honored. For it is in Christ that Mary is Mediatrix, and her mediation comes, not from any necessity, but from the divine pleasure and from the superabundance and virtue of the merits of Jesus; it rests on the mediation of Christ, entirely depends on it, and obtains its entire force from it.

This was the hardest schema for the Modernists to relegate to the trash bin. Devotion to Mary and her privileges was "in the DNA," so to speak, of lay Catholics and Catholic clergymen. The Modernists went to work quickly to stop it. Led by arch-Modernist Cardinal Frings, his henchman peritus (theological expert), Fr. Ratzinger (later false pope Benedict XVI), and the wicked theologian Fr. Karl Rahner, the Modernists made the plea that keeping this schema would "alienate the Protestants" and impede the "ecumenical movement" as it would be "hard for the Protestants to understand." Cardinal Spellman of New York, was fighting alongside the Traditionalists at that point, and submitted a written intervention composed with the help of Fr. DePauw.

Cardinal Spellman's intervention asked in disbelief how they could not define important Marian doctrines “because they would be rather difficult for Protestants to understand.” The Cardinal was opposed to this sort of reasoning, he said, because “the task of the Ecumenical Council is to teach the members of the Church, rather than those outside of it.” In the closest vote of the Robber Council, the Marian schema was discarded by a vote of 1,114 Council Fathers in favor of scrapping it, and 1,097 Council Fathers wanting to retain it. The Modernists won by 17 votes. 

Conclusion

Had Roncalli not usurped the throne of St. Peter as false pope John XXIII, the above is what Vatican II (if it were called at all) could have been. The world we would be living in would be so different; in the best way imaginable. The Church, far from being underground, would be in all Her glory. Let us always remember what was taken from us, and resolve all the more to hold on to the One True Faith, True Mass, and true sacraments. 

The words of John Greenleaf Whittier come to mind: For all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, “It might have been.”

Contending For The Faith---Part 17

 

In St. Jude 1:3, we read, "Dearly beloved, taking all care to write unto you concerning your common salvation, I was under a necessity to write unto you: to beseech you to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." [Emphasis mine]. Contending For The Faith is a series of posts dedicated to apologetics (i.e.,  the intellectual defense of the truth of the Traditional Catholic Faith) to be published the first Monday of each month.  This is the next installment.

Sadly, in this time of Great Apostasy, the faith is under attack like never before, and many Traditionalists don't know their faith well enough to defend it. Remember the words of our first pope, "But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." (1Peter 3:16). There are five (5) categories of attacks that will be dealt with in these posts. Attacks against:

• The existence and attributes of God
• The truth of the One True Church established by Christ for the salvation of all 
• The truth of a particular dogma or doctrine of the Church
• The truth of Catholic moral teaching
• The truth of the sedevacantist position as the only Catholic solution to what has happened since Vatican II 

In addition, controversial topics touching on the Faith will sometimes be featured, so that the problem and possible solutions may be better understood. If anyone has suggestions for topics that would fall into any of these categories, you may post them in the comments. I cannot guarantee a post on each one, but each will be carefully considered.

Visualize World Occultism

Maybe you've seen the bumper sticker "Visualize World Peace." You might question why it doesn't say "Think of World Peace," "Work for World Peace," or best of all, "Pray the Rosary for World Peace." The answer is simple. "Visualization" is an occult practice. Its proponents claim it works by using the mind to influence one’s perceptions and personal reality. They further state that everyone can properly control their alleged mental power, and thereby influence and change their ideas, consciousness, and even his or her physical and spiritual environment. Moreover, visualization is being pushed by some Protestants and members of the Vatican II sect as a way of "meditative prayer." 

In this post, the occult practice of visualization shall be exposed and the means to detect it will be explained. (For this post, I have used numerous sources both hard copy and online. Most notably, I acknowledge  A. R. G. Owen in I. M. Owen and M. Sparrow, Conjuring Up Philip  [1976],  Shakti Gawain, Creative Visualization  [1983], and G. Behrend, Your Invisible Power: The Original and Best Guide to Visualization [2017]. I take credit only for compiling the information I received into a concise post---Introibo). 

Visualization Described

By using your mind's eye to envision things, visualization claims you can actually make it happen. For example, visualization can supposedly be used to change one’s self-image from negative to positive by holding a positive image of oneself in the mind. Visualization may also serve to uncover a claimed “inner divinity” that can allegedly manipulate reality. By creating the proper mental image and environment and then holding it or projecting it outward, practitioners claim they can exercise mental power over every aspect of their lives. Related practices are also used in magick (i.e., occult) rituals to call on spirits in order to secure such goals.

Since the mind is potentially so powerful, proponents say, proper visualization methods can affect health, finances, educational abilities, relationships, career — and even one’s destiny. In the pagan Hindu and Buddhist religions, for example, the thought or image one holds at death is believed to powerfully influence one’s next life (the heretical doctrine of reincarnation). This is one reason given for adopting mental training exercises such as visualization. The influence of this practice cannot be overstated. 

Visualization is now employed in education at all ages, such as in counseling, creative writing, and problem-solving courses. It is also used to develop altered states of consciousness in students in order to acquire the capacity to reach “inner guides” or allegedly tap the “higher self” and its powers. It is used for enhanced learning potential, self-esteem, and stress reduction. 

Sports, exercise and health are using visualization and there is even a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to it, the Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity. The objective of the journal is stated as follows:

The Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity is the first peer-reviewed journal devoted to research on the role of imagery in sport, physical activity, exercise, and rehabilitation settings. Imagery, also referred to as cognitive enactment or visualization, is one of the most popular performance enhancement and rehabilitation techniques in sports and physical activity. Journal editor Sandra Moritz (University of North Dakota) is a recognized leader in the field, and the journal’s editorial board represents leading institutions in the U.S., U.K., and Canada. The single destination for all imagery-related research in sports and in physical activity, the Journal of Imagery Research in Sport and Physical Activity is an indispensable tool for scholars and practitioners of imagery, sports science, kinesiology, physical education, and psychology. (See degruyter.com/journal/key/jirspa/html?lang=en; Emphasis mine). 

Shamans, spiritists, magicians, and witches routinely use visualization, and it is commonly used in pagan/occult sects such as Rosicrucianism, Tantrism, Hinduism and Buddhism. With all this in mind, the next logical question will be explored below.

Why Do People Not Connected With The Occult/Pagan Get Involved With Visualization?

There are four (4) basic reasons people get involved with visualization when they are not a member of a pagan religion or already involved in occult activity:

1. The Quest for Personal Power. Visualization promises people the ability to transform reality to their benefit. It is "God-like" power. You can “think yourself rich” (or healthy, handsome/beautiful, happy, etc.). 

2. The Quest for Spiritual Enlightenment. Visualization claims to be able to evoke "the wisdom that lies deep within us." Suddenly, information you never knew will be revealed to you in your mind's eye, or you will meet your spirit guide who will give you "wisdom."

3. The Quest for Physical Health. Wild claims are made that visualization can make you super-athletic and cure every known malady. 

4. The Quest for "Contact with Jesus." Protestant and Vatican II sect clergy hold "guided meditation" retreats, seminars, and group meeting, which employ the basics of visualization under a different name, so participants can come "closer to Jesus." More will be written about this further below.

Unfortunately, people may get more than they bargained for when they use visualization techniques for personal power, spiritual/educational enlightenment, or physical/mental health. Visualization programs come with additional baggage — various accompaniments, world views, and physical and spiritual dangers.

Types of Visualization.

1. Programmed Visualization is an active process used individually; for example, the practitioner holds a positive image in the mind in order to “create” the desired object or situation. It can be performed on the psychiatric couch or in an occult ritual.

2. Receptive Visualization is a passive process; it “lets the movie roll” after an initial theme, setting, or the like is developed in the consciousness. The method is passive in that it receives whatever comes into the mind, which is usually interpreted as special guidance of some kind, such as instructions from one’s “higher self,” “inner guide,” or “divine consciousness.”

3. Guided Visualization, also termed guided imagery, employs a friend, therapist, or clergyman in either a therapeutic or religious context. This is the type used to dupe Protestants and Vatican II sect members who believe they will get "closer to Jesus." 

Distinction to be Drawn: Visualization vs. Imagination.

• Everyone uses their imagination (imagery) in everyday life. You can refrain from using it to imagine the worst. You can use it to, e.g., think of the mysteries of the Rosary as you're praying, which is both good and laudatory

• Imagery is a component of visualization but may be studied in and of itself, apart from visualization. In other words, imagery studies may be strictly scientific and neutral, or they may be placed into a larger metaphysical worldview

• Imagery is therefore not necessarily visualization. Visualization demands the exercise of will and faith within a context of relaxation, meditation, and often self-hypnosis

• The components of visualization often regulate its outcome. That is, they place it within a certain context, a certain worldview, and to that degree influence the method’s effectiveness, impact, and spiritual implications

The Dangers of Visualization

Since the practice of visualization can be adapted to almost any philosophy and uniquely colored by it, there is no well-defined worldview which could be presented that would be comprehensive. However,  restricting this analysis to popular and occult visualization, recognizing the potential for using it everywhere, it can be seen in a broad outline. Some principal components include the following:

• Pantheism : Everything is interconnected by divine energy, the One power, or ultimate cosmic reality

• Humans are divine in their true nature and each person controls his personal destiny; he is an integral part of this divine energy and can realize this experientially through proper technique and instruction

• The mind of each human has “infinite” potential; the “higher self” or unconscious mind provides the connecting link to the infinite and is believed to be the repository of vast wisdom and ability

• Visualization is an important technique that initiates contact with the ultimate cosmic reality.

These are the basic principles found in all things occult. Here are three specific spiritual evils emanating from visualization:

"Psychic Development"

Visualization is often used to develop alleged psychic powers. This fact is recognized by numerous experts in both the occult and visualization. For example one visualization pioneer stated, “The capacity to utilize visual imagination is a regular part of the training for psychics and healers in the Philippine spiritist churches.” (See Alfred Stelter, Psi-Healing [1976], pg. 41). Occultists Mike and Nancy Samuels write, “The receptive visualization state is a state in which a person can receive extrasensory perceptions of another person’s mind (telepathy), of objects or events (clairvoyance), of future events (precognition), and of psychic diagnosis.” (See Samuels and Samuels, Seeing With the Mind’s Eye [1983], pg. 270). 

Occult Ritual

Occult "magickian" (one who uses the occult to change reality, not a harmless "sleight of hand" entertainment "Magician") David Conway devotes an entire chapter, “Visualization and the Training of a Magician,” to the importance of visualization for magic ritual in his Magic: An Occult Primer:

… The technique of visualization is something you will gradually master, and indeed must master if you are to make any progress in magic…. It is our only means of affecting the etheric atmosphere. It enables us to build our own thought forms, contact those already in existence and channel elemental energy we need down onto the physical plane. (See David Conway, Magic: An Occult Primer, [1983], pg. 59). 

Spiritism and Demonic Possession

Conway also provides an example of a visualization practice used during magic ritual whose goal is to “produce, in reality, the spirit, god, or demon imagined through ritual.” No one knowledgeable in occult ritual has any doubt about the dangers here, least of all Conway. Visualization at this point becomes an integral component fostering spirit possession:

… The adept imagines that the god-form or the most congenial of the planetary or sefirothic forms is materializing behind his back. He visualizes this in as much detail as possible. Slowly, as the altar candles flicker, he will sense with a sureness which precludes all doubt that the visualized form is in fact towering inside the circle behind him. On no account must he turn his head to look at whatever is there; any temptation to do so must be sternly resisted: the form may be unbearably hideous or else possess a beauty that may literally be fatal.

In the meantime, the adept should endeavor to continue his mantra, although by now his heart will no doubt be beating furiously. Whatever else happens he must not move, even when he senses that the form is so close as to be almost touching him Above all he must not panic, but should comfort himself with the thought that he is safe enough provided he stays where he is.

At last—and he will certainly know when—the god-form will take control of him. To begin with, the adept will feel an exquisite giddiness somewhere at the base of his skull and quickly convulsing the whole of his body. As this happens, and while the power is surging into him, he forces himself to visualize the thing he wants his magick to accomplish, and wills its success. He must put all he has into this and, like our friends the Bacchantes, must whip himself into a veritable frenzy.

It is at this point that the force evoked will be expelled to realize the ritual intention. As he feels the force overflowing inside him the adept, while still visualizing the realized magical intention, bids it go forth to fulfill his wishes. (Ibid, pgs. 130-131; Emphasis mine). 

The Danger of "Christian Visualization"

Should any V2 sect "priest" tell you that there will be a prayer meeting (even the Rosary) with "guided imagery," please beware and tell anyone you know who attends such of the danger. If the "priest" is "conservative," and tells the parishioners to e.g., "imagine Jesus in the Garden, sweating drops of Blood for our redemption," at the start of the First Sorrowful Mystery of the Rosary, there is nothing wrong with it. It is not really "guided imagery," as it is a fruitful and worthwhile use of the imagination for a Traditionalist Catholic.

If "Father" says something along the lines of, "Imagine Jesus is with you now in some familiar location. What does He look like? Wait for Him to say something, and take His advice." Now, you have an occult worldview using visualization.  There are no safeguards which can be provided to ensure that imagination will not lead to the appearance of a spiritistic "Jesus." Demons pretending to be Jesus appear all over the place in the occult, from dictating occult texts such as A Course in Miracles, to direct appearances in the temples of the Mormon Church, to various occultists. Is a “Jesus” who truly manifests inwardly to guide and comfort or to erase bad memories, a “Jesus” who must appear at the beck and call of the emotionally needy in general? Is this not similar to the spirit guide (demon) of the occultist?

Apart from the occult, how much power does visualization per se really have? If humans were a "god-in-embryo," with divine energy at his disposal, and if his thoughts actually did create reality, then visualization should produce literal miracles. However, this is not the case. Given Church teaching, visualization is mostly impotent and, even in its allegedly “neutral” or “Christian” aspects, would only seem marginally useful at best. In other words, isn’t it true that (a) God’s ordering of the world and how attentively we live in harmony with it, and (b) obeying His moral standards, are vastly more important to any kind of physical and spiritual health than our mental pictures or manipulation of them through visualization, even in a so-called Christian context? When visualization does work, it is not of God, but from Hell. 

The "Philip Experiment"

If anyone doubts the authenticity of encounters with demons, there is actually scientific evidence of such. Whether real or imaginary (in the mind of an individual), the spirit world may still respond when beckoned. The story of “Philip” has a similar theme and is reported in the book Conjuring Up Philip and elsewhere. (See I. M. Owen, M. Sparrow, Conjuring Up Philip, [1976]). The story of the Philip Experiment is terrifying, and the 2014 movie The Quiet Ones, is loosely based on it.

A group of psychic investigators and parapsychologists with the Toronto Society for Psychical Research came together to see if they could, through “collective mental power alone,” that is, imagination and visualization, create the physical phenomena found in a seance and produce a "spirit" that was really a manifestation of the power of the collective mind. They got something totally unexpected. They named him (their expected manifestation) “Philip” and gave him an imaginary past and personality.  The following account (online) is a faithful telling of the experiment derived from the primary written sources I have read:

In September 1972, the Owen Group [as it was called] began formal weekly sittings in the “Philip room” during which they sat together and discussed Philip and his life, meditated on his being, and attempted to create a “collective hallucination” of his spirit. During the early sessions, the group sought to create a common mental picture of Philip and his surroundings, focusing on his appearance, day-to-day activities, and his feelings towards his wife Dorothea and gypsy lover Margo. Although some members occasionally claimed to “feel a presence” at times, and others reported seeing vivid images of Philip in their mind, after several months, no communication, no manifestations, no phenomenon of any kind could be created through their attempts – that is, until they decided to turn off the lights.

With no satisfactory result from their efforts, it was suggested (by British psychologist Kenneth J. Barcheldor) that the group change tactic, surmising that some group members harbored skepticism and hence, they should conduct their sessions in an atmosphere that was less academic and more conducive to the summoning of ghostly spirits. They began mimicking the procedures used in a traditional séance session – the lights were dimmed, and the group gathered around a table, surrounded with objects from Philip’s fictional time period. As popularized in traditional Spiritualism séances, group members sat around the table, placing their fingers lightly on the surface, and called for Philip to appear.

Shortly after the “traditional” séance settings began, suddenly, out of the blue, a loud rap echoed through the room. Members of the team noted later that the rap was distinctive, clear, and so violent that the table itself vibrated (members said that the sound was “felt” more than heard). This was followed by a number of distinctive knocks.

After these first communications from “Philip”, the group began querying the entity, agreeing on a “one rap for yes, two for no” means of expressing themselves. Through this new means of communiqué, the group learned finer details of Philip’s life. However, they noted that the only details Philip initially provided were historical details that any member of the group could have known beforehand. Hence, the Owen Group theorized that the information coming from “Philip” was information being fed into the conversation through their own collective unconsciousness.

From this point forward, however, the phenomena expanded, producing a wide range of paranormal activity that the group was never able to fully explain. Auditory study of the loud raps showed a unique sound envelope, one that could not be reproduced by the researchers.

Soon, the group recognized that the entity they had conjured had a distinct personality. He had likes, dislikes, and strong views on various subjects made clear to the group members by enthusiasm, or hesitancy, in his responses. Loud knocks were received in response to mundane questions but if the group asked Philip about his wife Dorothea, loud scratching noises would emanate from table or chairs instead.

Soon after the “verbal” communications began, Philip began producing extraordinary visible physical manifestations. In response to questions, group members began to hear whispers in their ears. In one of the early sessions, the group was stunned when the table suddenly, and violently, jumped and slid across the floor – despite the fact that the table rested on thick carpeting. At one point, it was documented that the table began to “dance”, tilting onto a single leg and spinning about.

Researchers now had serious questions about the results they were witnessing. To rule out hoaxers in the group, paper doilies were placed on the table, under the fingertips of participants, to foil any conscious attempts by members to make the table move. Cameras were brought in to film the proceedings, some placed strategically to capture any purposeful attempt to move the table using the participant’s knees. Still, the table would jump about, rock, and shake of its own accord.

The Owen Group members were both astounded, and terrified of what they were experiencing. According to participants, room lights would dim, and when the group politely asked Philip to return them to their normal brightness, they would instantly turn back on.

After feeling a distinct cool breeze blow across the table, the group asked if he could start and stop the wind at will. On command, Philip would send a whirlwind of air across the table and into the participants’ faces. On one occasion, it was reported that a fine cloud of mist formed and hovered over the center of the table.  Soon, the table began to move around the room, rushing across the room to greet latecomers and on several occasions, pushing, and trapping, a team member into a corner of the room.

Word of the experiment’s extraordinary results spread and quickly captured the attention of the public. A 16mm movie was produced by the group in 1974 (titled Philip: The Imaginary Ghost) which documented the experiment’s conception, what actually happened, and showed the table’s movements and loud, booming, raps. Media outlets responded and CBS Television even sent a crew to film the events for a TV documentary, Man Alive. During the filming, before a live audience of more than fifty people, Philip produced booming raps on the table, turned lights throughout the room on and off, and in front of all witnesses present, levitated the table off the floor.

The film crew, of course, was astounded but nevertheless, the Owen Group could not produce a scientific explanation for what they were witnessing. As far as anyone could tell, a physical entity had been summoned, and nobody knew how or why the manifestations took place.

Several books were penned about the events witnessed during The Philip Experiment. Iris Owen and Margaret Sparrows documented the events in their 1976 work, Conjuring up Philip, and several other paranormal-related books of the day included the incident in their works.  The 2014 movie The Quiet Ones was based upon the Philip Experiment case.

(See geekslop.com/life/strange/things-that-go-bump-in-the-night/2014/the-philip-experiment-1972-toronto-scientific-experiment-conjure-spirit-ghost-poltergeist). 

Conclusion

The Vatican II sect has welcomed pagan pantheism into the world. It even bases their spirituality on these pagan meditation practices. 

In this time of the Great Apostasy, visualization practices are here to stay. This underscores the necessity for Traditionalists to bring a thoroughgoing, truly Catholic critique to this occult method.

Faithful Amid The Raging Tempest: Fr. Wiktor Mroz O.F.M.

 

To My Readers: This week, my guest poster, Joanna From Poland, writes about a little known priest who had battled the Modernists with the tenacity of my spiritual father, Fr. Gommar A. DePauw, JCD.  I hope you will enjoy reading about his virtuous life as much as I did. Feel free to comment as always. If you have a specific comment or question for me, I will respond as usual, but it might take me a bit longer to do so this week. 

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

Faithful amid the raging tempest: Fr. Wiktor Mroz O.F.M.

By Joanna from Poland

This is a story of a simple Franciscan priest whose heroic life could be made into a Hollywood movie if the entertainment industry would not have fallen completely under Satan’s dominion (if you think I’m exaggerating, consider the latest Padre Pio biopic and I beg you not to see this diabolical garbage of a movie if you value your immortal soul and instead listen to the discussion concerning it on Catholic Family Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJlvJJ2Zvow).

To the best of my knowledge, Fr. Mroz is virtually unknown in the English-speaking world although he spent some 27 years serving the faithful in North America – it’s high time this zealous and faithful priest got the recognition he deserves. 

I take no credit other than for writing this brief introduction and conclusion, as well as compiling various sources in Polish, and translating their content into English. My own comments will be given in square brackets.

A Most Interesting Life

Fr. Wiktor Mroz was born on January 29, 1915. He would study for the priesthood in several Franciscan seminaries. His superior, confessor, and spiritual director was one and the same person – Maximilian Kolbe. [His baptismal name was Franciszek – Francis, and his real last name was Blaz – he changed it into “Mroz” in 1944 for safety reasons in the time of World War II; Wiktor – Victor was his religious name.]

One day young Victor prayed for discerning the will of God in his life. He was pondering what he should become – a lay brother or a priest. Father Maximilian [Kolbe] told him: “If you wish to save your soul, you have to become a priest." [Fr.] Kolbe added: “Your life shall be hard but your last years shall be happy." One day he [Fr. Kolbe] prophesized the number of years Fr. Mroz would spent as a priest – over 50 years of priesthood. 

Fr. Mroz was ordained a priest on June 20, 1941 – the same year Fr. Kolbe gave his own life in exchange for his neighbor [in a German concentration camp at Auschwitz in German-occupied Poland]. After his ordination, he served as an assistant pastor at Calvary [a town in Poland]. Then he was a professor at the Higher Franciscan Seminary in the city of Lviv [then part of Poland]. During World War II Fr. Mroz was a military chaplain for the Polish underground army [I will elaborate on Father’s heroic war years later in this post].

In 1944 he manages to get to Bavaria where he serves Polish Catholics in Munich and acts as a temporary military chaplain in General Patton’s Third Army. He served in the Polish Guards Companies in Erlangen from July 1945 to 1947 [established by the U.S. Armed Forces in 1945 in Germany as auxiliary units for dealing with security and other technical and organizational tasks in the region controlled by the USA]. 

In July 1947 Fr. Mroz goes to the United States where he works as an editor of a Polish daily newspaper for two and a half years. He gives a retreat in Wisconsin and works as a missionary. In December 1949 he volunteers for missionary work in Japan [where he would stay for nearly two decades] where he is in charge of teaching and administering medical care to the victims of the radioactive contamination. After 18 years in Japan, Fr. Mroz gets to Canada where he works as an assistant pastor in Francisca-run churches, and becomes a chaplain for St. Adalbert’s mission in Montreal. In 1969, Fr. Mroz moves to Buffalo, New York [the final destination on his adventurous route around Europe, Asia, and North America] and spends his first eight years in that city as hospital chaplain. 

November 25, 1977 at 11 a.m. Fr. Mroz leaves his Franciscan parish in Buffalo and joins the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement which was probably the first* organized movement [of traditional Catholics] in the USA.

* The first organization of Traditional Catholics was established by Fr. Gommar A. DePauw under the supervision of His Excellency Bp. Blaise Kurz on March 15, 1965. 

The ORCM was founded on an incentive from the Mexican cristero Father Joaquin Saenz y Arriaga S.J., who co-operated with [then] Fathers Carmona and Zamorra. Initially, the ORCM was comprised of Fr. Fenton, [then] Fr. Robert McKenna O.P., and [then] Fr. Kelly of the SSPX. In 1975, the ORCM is joined by Fathers Paul Marceau, Charles P. Donohue, Leo M. Carley, Daniel E. Jones, Joseph Gorecki, and Placid White O.S.B.

[Fr. Mroz recalls:] “When I entered the chapel of Our Lady of the Rosary in Monroe, Connecticut, I felt that I finally returned home, where I belong. In the ORCM I am once again at the right place – the place where there is the Faith for which I was ordained 19 years ago."

[Fr. Mroz had considered himself a traditionalist priest even before the joined the ranks of the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement since he continued to say the Traditional Latin Mass for many years despite the imposition of the invalid and sacrilegious Novus Ordo, as related in Buffalo News two days after Fr. Mroz died. Source: http://semperfidelisetparatus.blogspot.com/2013/04/buffalo-news-wiktor-mroz.html]

In November 1977, there were two lectures in the state of New York, one in Buffallo, and one in Rochester which gathered around 770 people. That’s seven hundred and seventy attendants. Thanks to Fr. Mroz, Catholic Mass was said on a regular basis in the area of Buffalo. In 1979, eleven priests of the ORCM offered Holy Mass in sixteen venues, such as in California, Colorado, Florida, and New York. 

Fr. Mroz established a new Franciscan headquarters. Brothers gather around Our Lady’s chapel in Paulsboro, New Jersey. They consider Fr. Maximiliam Kolbe to be their spiritual father. 

On July 20, 1991 Fr. Mroz celebrated his 50th anniversary as a priest, as foretold by Fr. Kolbe. 

His priestly anniversary remembrance picture reads:

Poland 1941-1944

Germany 1944-1947

United States 1947-1949

Japan 1949-1967

Canada 1967-1969

Buffalo, New York since 1969

In the Traditional Movement since November 1977

“Hold Fast to the Tradition” (2 Tes. 2:15)

Father Victor Mroz O.F.M. Conv.

A Franciscan master of novices who had known Fr. Mroz very well, said that the Polish Franciscan had suffered greatly from angina [a painful heart disease] for decades. He would never complain and saw it as his cross; the will of God, and an effective way of avoiding much greater suffering in Purgatory. Fr. Maximilian Kolbe was said to have exerted tremendous influence upon Fr. Mroz's life. 

Fr. Mroz died on April 28, 1992, in the odor of sanctity, on the feast day of St. Louis Marie de Montfort. He was buried at St. Adalbert’s cemetery in Lancaster. 

Source: http://semperfidelisetparatus.blogspot.com/2013/01/polski-franciszkanin-zapomniany-bohater.html

The Enemies He Had to Fight

Compiled and translated from: https://nondraco.wordpress.com/2020/05/29/wykleci-zolnierze-kosciola-walczacego/

Fr. Mroz was a fighting priest – his enemies being Ukrainian nationalism, German National Socialism, and post-conciliar neo-Modernism. The first of these forces of evil he had to combat in his own little fatherland, where he was sent to work as a young priest and catechist in October 1943 – in the village of Hanaczow near Lviv in war-torn Poland. The village was well-populated, having around 3,000 residents, including Polish refugees from Wolyn [people who managed to survive the cruel genocide perpetrated by their Ukrainian neighbors there – little did they know that they were not safe in Hanaczow either…] and Jews in hiding; soon a group of Soviet guerilla soldiers would arrive there too. 

Fr. Wiktor arrived at Hanaczow a few months after the Wolyn massacre had begun with the bloody Sunday of July 11, 1943, and its inhabitants feared they would share the tragedy of their fellow compatriots in Wolyn. It was decided that the village should have its defense organized after the example of other towns to fight against the genocidal Ukrainian Rebel Army – trenches shaped in the form of a triangle at the centre of the village as well as shelters. However, this proposition did not meet with the acceptance of the people of Hanaczow who did not believe that the Ukrainian attack would come, not wanting to abandon their homes and possessions. As a result of this refusal, it was decided that the defense posts will be placed on the outskirts of the village instead, which hindered the possible defense. 

Soon, the danger became real – in October 1943 a group of Ukrainians ambushed in the woods a lieutenant of the Polish army (a pre-war teacher who was married to a Ukrainian woman), read aloud his “death sentence," and murdered him with a shot at the back of his head; his body was robbed. The lieutenant was killed despite the Polish army’s intelligence having warned of an ambush planned by the Ukrainians. In the early November of 1943 three armed Ukrainians were captured by the Polish army near Hanaczow,  and were handed over to Germans who put them before the firing squad. The people of Hanaczow still refused to accept the defensive triangle proposed by the Polish army. In December there came news of yet more massacres perpetrated in nearby villages – among the brutally murdered were women and children. Hanaczow was attacked as late as February 2, 1944, on the feast day of Our Lady’s Purification [known in Poland as Our Lady of the Thunder Candle as She is invoked against thunderous tempests].

A few hours before the Ukrainian attack, the village’s defense forces were warned by the Polish army’s patrols that Ukrainian troops had been gathering in the woods south of the village. Around 9 p.m. nearly one thousand members of the Ukrainian Rebel Army surrounded Hanaczow and attacked it from multiple sides. The defenders suffered many casualties, and some of the houses were taken by the Ukrainians who murdered anyone they could get hold of. The defenseless were either killed with bayonets or slayed with axes. Fr. Wiktor was at the rectory which was one of the main points of defense, under heavy fire from both sides. After midnight, the Ukrainians retreated, having burnt down seventy buildings, and seeing Polish partisan troops hastening to the relief. Eighty-five (85) Poles were murdered. The school building was turned into a field hospital where about 100 wounded men were treated. The dead were buried together in one grave; Fr. Wiktor preached the funeral sermon.

After this first massacre, the people of Hanaczow  finally agreed to the initial defense plan, concealed shelters were built, and the defense of key buildings strengthened, including the church building. It was believed that the next attack would come at Easter, even the Ukrainians themselves would spread the news of the coming destruction of the village. In the face of this danger, the curate, Fr. Gacek, evacuated some of the inhabitants, including the women, the children, and the sick. 

Fr. Wiktor stayed at Hanaczow to be the people’s pastor, and, in the words of the local poet, “consoled the people so they do not lose heart”. He organized for his little flock the Holy Week ceremonies and gave practical advice in terms of self-defense. 

The Hanaczow massacre survivors relate the following:

“Over a dozen days before the coming attack, Father Wiktor – the chaplain, summoned all the inhabitants for a meeting in the old rectory, with the curate in attendance. Father gave practical tips on how to defend oneself, and absolutely forbade any family gatherings in the Ukrainian villages nearby. He threatened the gossip mongers, snitches, and traitors with severe punishments, as they do on the war front. Finally, he ordered all parishioners to move every night to the center of the village [where the defense was laid], for the sake of their own safety and that of their children, and to the houses near the rectory and the church. This last order was not welcomed by all, but its rightness was soon to be validated in all extent by the second attack.”

On April 8, Holy Saturday, the Polish army’s advance party reported a few hundred Ukrainians gathering near the village. Watch was kept all day and all night but the attack did not come. On April 9, Easter Sunday, at 6:30 Fr. Wiktor celebrated Solemn High Mass. About one thousand Ukrainians attacked the village at midnight with flare missiles. Some of them managed to reach the church and tried to put it on fire with incendiary weapons. Women and children who took shelter in the barricaded church were comforted by Fr. Wiktor who led prayers, telling the people to hide behind the brick wall base in the attic. He would also give absolution and Holy Communion alongside the Curate and another Franciscan Father. 

At last, on Easter Monday, at around 9 a.m. the enemy retreated for good. Those who witnessed the attack described having seen burnt cattle and the murdered , which included a pregnant lady with her belly ripped apart and a young girl with her breasts cut off. A wounded man managed to survive for he pretended to be already dead, but the Ukrainians stabbed to death his wife and five little children. 

Most of the village was burnt down, except for the defense area, and so in the next days the remaining inhabitants were gradually evacuated, and they would be shot at on their way by the Ukrainians. A few dozen Polish soldiers stayed in Hanaczow, (as well as about 100 locals) along with Fr. Wiktor, and a group of Jews. Some of the people suffered from typhus fever. 

Soon there came the final days of Hanaczow. The Ukrainians took advantage of a badly-organized series of acts of sabotage against the German army by the Polish army, and informed the Germans that Soviet and Jewish guerilla bands are stationed near Hanaczow. On May 2, 1944, at 4 a.m. the village was surrounded by SS troops, MPs, and Gestapo, armed with tanks and grenade launchers. Fr. Wiktor took care to put some of the inhabitants in the shelters, especially the wounded and the sick. The Germans started firing and setting the building ablaze.

Fr. Wiktor left the destroyed village, which once belonged to the Franciscan Order, as one among the last surviving residents. He rescued the Blessed Sacrament from the church. He managed to get to the Franciscan monastery in Lviv where he related the recent events. For his courage and sacrifice in the defense of Hanaczow he was decorated with the Cross of Valor and promoted to the rank of second lieutenant. He became chaplain for the Polish army and adopted his nom de guerre “Mroz” – his last name till the end of his courageous life as a true and faithful priest of Christ.

Conclusion

It is impossible to exhaust the life story of a priest like Fr. Wiktor Mroz in a 2,500-word post. He was a priest who showed truly heroic bravery and zeal for souls under some of the most horrible circumstances of life in a world ravaged by a war. It was a war of unheard of cruelty, and after all that he saw the One True Church being stripped of Her former glory and reduced to a tiny flock of Catholics scattered around the world. 

As was the case with Fr. De Pauw, Fr. Mroz was one of those faithful European priests who, after having experienced the horrors of World War II, found a safe haven in the USA but chose to fight the good fight against the worst kind of enemies; the Modernists and their false religion from Hell. He heeded the words of Our Lord: “And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in Hell” (St. Matthew 10:28). May their souls rest in everlasting peace.