Cardinal Pietro Parolin, will lead proceedings in a papal conclave if it happens before he turns 80 in 2035.



Cardinal Re (L) & Cardinal Parolin ®
Mario Tama/ Adam Berry/Getty Images

Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re incenses Pope Benedict XVI’s coffin, Jan 2023.

Quote:The voting process is carried out in three phases. The first phase, which can be called the pre-scrutiny, comprises:

1) the preparation and distribution of the ballot papers by the Masters of Ceremonies, who give at least two or three to each Cardinal elector;

2) the drawing by lot, from among all the Cardinal electors, of three Scrutineers, of three persons charged with collecting the votes of the sick, called for the sake of brevity Infirmarii, and of three Revisers; this drawing is carried out in public by the junior Cardinal Deacon, who draws out nine names, one after another, of those who shall carry out these tasks;

3) if, in the drawing of lots for the Scrutineers, Infirmarii and Revisers, there should come out the names of Cardinal electors who because of infirmity or other reasons are unable to carry out these tasks, the names of others who are not impeded are to be drawn in their place. The first three drawn will act as Scrutineers, the second three as Infirmarii and the last three as Revisers.

Pope Francis and then-new Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Vatican Secretary of State, attend a mass with newly appointed cardinals at St Peter’s Basilica on February 23, 2014 in Vatican City, Vatican.

• Archbishop Lefebvre’s mission—why the SSPX was founded and what it stood for.
  
• The warning signs of betrayal—how the seeds of compromise were planted years before 2012.
  
• The GREC conspiracy—a secretive effort to bring SSPX under Vatican II’s control.
  
• The shift in doctrine—how SSPX leadership prepared its priests and faithful for submission.
  

So many errors of Pope Francis are rooted in Vatican II.
From the very liberal America Magazine, The Jesuit Review:

Vatican II called for a common date for Easter in the East and West. Will it ever happen?



Pope Francis meets with Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople in the library of the Apostolic Palace at the Vatican Sept. 30, 2023, ahead of an ecumenical prayer vigil for the Synod of Bishops in St. Peter's Square. (CNS photo/Vatican Media)

How Pope Pius XI defended the history of Genesis, special creation of St. Adam
Before becoming Pope Pius XI, Fr. Achille Ratti wrote a theological work supporting Adam’s special creation – an argument he upheld throughout his life, countering growing scientific and theological shifts toward evolution.

Quote:Our Holy Father, Pope Pius XI, in private audiences, from time to time recalled with pleasure this work of his (“which cost him no little labor”), and reconfirmed his conclusions.[2]

Quote:Great theologians of the early centuries of the Christian era, like Saint Augustine, did not read Genesis as history. It’s only in the last hundred years, mostly in the United States, that you have people coming up with a radically different view.

Quote:What is to be held of the first origin of man as regards the body, according to faith and sound theology?

The answer is this: It is clear from divine revelation that the first parents, not only regarding the soul, but also regarding the body, were formed by God himself, not by simple concurrence, but by direct and immediate action, although not creative.

Quote:Ratti distinguishes the formation of the body as “not creative” in the strict sense that the body was not called into being out of nothing like the soul was, but rather was formed from the material of mud and the rib. St. Thomas Aquinas defines creation in the unequivocal sense as the original emanation of each thing into being from nothing:

Quote:“‘To create is to make something from nothing’… we must consider not only the emanation of a particular being from a particular agent, but also the emanation of all being from the universal cause, which is God; and this emanation we designate by the name of creation … it is impossible that any being should be presupposed before this emanation. For nothing is the same as no being. Therefore as the generation of a man is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘not-man,’ so creation, which is the emanation of all being, is from the ‘not-being’ which is ‘nothing.’[3]

However, per Aquinas, the whole man, as a composite of both body and soul, can be said to have been created out of “not-man” in that immediate and simultaneous action, as he was brought from a state of non-being into being in all of his principles:

“Creation does not mean the building up of a composite thing from pre-existing principles; but it means that the ‘composite’ is created so that it is brought into being at the same time with all its principles … for creation is the production of the whole being, and not only matter.”[4]

Quote:In the first place, then, we must show the way to find out whether a phrase is literal or figurative. And the way is certainly as follows: Whatever there is in the Word of God that cannot, when taken literally, be referred either to purity of life or soundness of doctrine, you may set down as figurative.[5]

Quote:Is the formation of the body from mud impossible to reconcile with purity of life or sound doctrine? Certainly not. Pope Leo XIII likewise cites “the rule so wisely laid down by St. Augustine – not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires…[6] Does reason or necessity compel us to believe that an all-powerful God could not create a body from mud? Certainly not! Therefore, we ought to take the words literally.

Quote:It remains to say a few things about the antiquity of human origin. Holy Scripture nowhere expressly presents a complete chronology which extends to the creation of Adam; but what it sparsely reports presents no little difficulty, especially if one considers the discrepancies between the Hebrew text and the Septuagint and Samaritan versions; but the Vulgate version follows the Hebrew text.

Even greater and far more numerous discrepancies occur among the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers. Cardinal Meignan counts one hundred and fifty different calculations, none of which can be called reprobate; in fact, Des Vignoles collected more than two hundred different indications of the time from Adam to Christ, the minimum of which he counts as 3,483 years, the maximum as 6,984. It is true that in all the aforesaid calculations, a common foundation was sought in the Holy Scriptures themselves. For, after certain minor difficulties, it was seen that the following numbers of years could be gathered from inspired books.

From Adam to Noah’s flood:

according to the Vulgate and Hebrew text… 1,656

according to the Samaritan text… … … … 1,306

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 2,242

From Noah’s flood to Abraham’s birth:

according to the Vulgate… … … … …292 or 293

according to the Samaritan text… … … … … 942

according to the Septuagint… … … … … … 1,183

From Abraham to Christ’s birth:

with hardly a few decades of difference… 2,190

Having said this, it follows that neither Holy Scripture nor Tradition contains a chronology of the human race that is at least completely defined. Here again, it is certainly possible to follow any of the chronologies received here and there in the Church.

Quote:Though they posited various dates for Christ’s birth, all the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers who mentioned the subject taught a recent creation as a matter of faith in Scripture, in opposition to the old-earth mythologies of the pagans (not, as some have said, simply due to their ancient scientific conceptions). The Church teaches:

“In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. [7]

Even modernist bible scholar M.J. Lagrange had to admit the substantial sensus fidelium on the young earth within the Church over the centuries, regardless of the differing proposed dates. Lagrange found himself arguing that the ancient Fathers had been right to interpret Genesis 1-11 as teaching a young chronology, because the text indeed does teach it, even though it is not true, and that God intentionally used their errant belief in the historicity Genesis 1-11 to bring them to spiritual truths, as they would not have otherwise been able to grasp them if he had explained them at that time in a manner fitting with what we now “know” through science.

This is heresy, because we are bound to hold that whatever Scripture teaches is inerrant, and that such inerrancy extends not just to spiritual truths but also to statements touching history and the natural world[8]. However, in defending this position Lagrange aptly exposed the ridiculous inconsistency of those “concordists” who try to defend one tenet of Scripture (i.e., the universal flood) by denying that another tenet (i.e., the young chronology) was ever upheld by the Church:

“Then came the turn of the philologists. It seemed to them that there would never have been time enough for the formation of languages had the Deluge swallowed up all mankind … but, in point of fact, the arguments of the scientists were only conclusive if biblical chronology were upheld…And so, when the universality of the Deluge was defended by this [concordist] school, they held that biblical chronology was non-existent. They went so far as to foster the delusion that Catholic opinion had never admitted a chronology, because it did not agree as to its limits: as though the differences of opinion, reached as the result of so much painful effort, did not suppose a common groundwork known to all.“[9] (emphasis added)

By the very admission of this preeminent modernist, to believe that the tradition of the Church on the biblical chronology was either non-existent, insubstantial, or due to mistaken exegesis, is delusional, but to accept an old universe is to believe that Scripture teaches falsehood. Therefore, the best option for a pious Catholic is to believe in the young universe – “young” only in relation to the uniformitarian extrapolations of naturalists, and not in relation to any objective chronology of the world.

The Catacombs would like to recommend a new traditional Catholic Resistance website, The Catholic Trumpet!

Contact: thecatholictrumpet@gmail.com

Quote:Who We Are

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, your unwavering source for defending Catholic tradition against the modernist compromises within the SSPX, the Fake "Resistance" and beyond. Our mission is to expose the gradual erosion of the true Faith since Vatican II, documenting every betrayal and deviation from the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. We provide meticulously sourced content from trusted traditional Catholic websites, offering clear warnings for any sources that do not fully align with a true Catholic uncompromising stance.

-The ☩ Trumpet

Quote:Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com

September 2, 2024

Welcome to TheCatholicTrumpet.com, the uncompromising voice in the defense of Catholic tradition and truth. This platform is dedicated to exposing the modernist compromises and deviations within the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and other similar entities, calling all faithful Catholics to rally against the errors that have infiltrated the Church since Vatican II.

At TheCatholicTrumpet.com, we blow the trumpet on the gradual erosion of the true Faith through false accords, compromises, and the adoption of modernist practices that undermine the legacy of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Here, we document and analyze every instance of betrayal, compromise, and contradiction that has taken place within the SSPX, standing firm in the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre's unwavering dedication to the pre-Vatican II Church.

This website is not just a repository of information; it is a clarion call to all traditional Catholics to remain vigilant and steadfast. We provide a wealth of resources, including meticulously sourced documents, critical analyses, and insights into the ongoing battle for the soul of the Church. From the errors propagated by the New Mass to the subtle compromises made in dialogue with modernist Rome, TheCatholicTrumpet.com is your go-to source for the truth.

We extend our heartfelt gratitude to dedicated outlets like TheRecusant.org and TheCatacombs.org, whose hard research and comprehensive sourcing have laid the groundwork for our mission. While we have no official association with these outlets, we are fans of their work and aim to amplify their efforts by providing succinct snippets from their long publications, helping to illuminate the path for those seeking clarity amidst the confusion.

Join us in our mission to restore the true Catholic Faith and resist the tide of modernism. Together, by the grace of Our Lady, we will reclaim the Church and see the reign of Christ the King restored.


-The ☩ Trumpet