| Welcome, Guest |
You have to register before you can post on our site.
|
| Online Users |
There are currently 418 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 416 Guest(s)
Bing, Google
|
| Latest Threads |
Fr. Ruiz's Sermons: Last ...
Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons November 2024
Last Post: Stone
5 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 19
|
The Simulacrum: The False...
Forum: Sedevacantism
Last Post: Stone
5 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 31
|
Fr. Ruiz: Renewal of the ...
Forum: Rev. Father Hugo Ruiz Vallejo
Last Post: Stone
Today, 04:56 AM
» Replies: 15
» Views: 1,206
|
Interview with the Editor...
Forum: The Recusant
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:15 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 120
|
Purgatory Explained by th...
Forum: Resources Online
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 09:03 AM
» Replies: 37
» Views: 3,670
|
Last Sunday after Penteco...
Forum: Pentecost
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 08:57 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 11,656
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Twen...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:30 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 92
|
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Feas...
Forum: November 2024
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 10:27 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 121
|
The Catholic Trumpet: Whe...
Forum: Articles by Catholic authors
Last Post: Stone
11-23-2024, 07:06 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 99
|
Bishop appointed by Commu...
Forum: Socialism & Communism
Last Post: Stone
11-22-2024, 04:57 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 104
|
|
|
| Hymn for Holy Thursday: Pange Lingua |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-16-2021, 11:33 AM - Forum: Lent
- No Replies
|
 |
Pange Lingua Gloriosi Corporis Mysterium is a hymn written by St Thomas Aquinas (1225--1274) for the Feast of Corpus Christi. It is also sung on Maundy Thursday
|
|
|
| Hymns for Palm Sunday |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-16-2021, 11:30 AM - Forum: Lent
- No Replies
|
|
Taken from The Catacombs archived site:
Generously assembled by Fr. Ruiz.
Thank you, Father!
Hosanna Filio David
Pueri Hebraeorum:
Pueri continued-
Gloria, laus et honor
Lauda Jerusalem:
Gradual Proper for Palm Sunday-Christus factus est
|
|
|
|
| Australian Health Minister hospitalized following AstraZeneca shot |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-16-2021, 11:00 AM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- No Replies
|
|
Australian Health Minister hospitalized following AstraZeneca shot as gov’t cracks down on vaccine dissent
Further compounding Australians’ doubts in their government’s messaging around the COVID-19 vaccine rollout is a recent crackdown
on doctors and other healthcare professionals who dissent from the $24 million campaign to convince all Australians to take the jab by October this year.
AUSTRALIA, March 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – Australian Health Minister Greg Hunt was hospitalized with a severe case of cellulitis just two days after receiving his first dose of the abortion-tainted AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine.
While the definitive claim that his condition is “not considered to be related to the vaccine” was made almost immediately by Hunt’s office, medical research into cellulitis following various vaccines including Pneumococcal, Influenza, and DTaP is well-documented.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has sought to downplay concerns about Hunt’s health, telling the press, “He'll be fine by next week, he'll be back up on his feet.”
Further compounding Australians’ doubts in their government’s messaging around the COVID-19 vaccine rollout is a recent crackdown on doctors and other healthcare professionals who dissent from the $24 million campaign to convince all Australians to take the jab by October this year.
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, the Australian Health Practitioner Regulatory Agency (AHPRA) released a joint statement warning healthcare practitioners that they risk regulatory action if they share supposedly false or deceptive information with patients – or on social media – that could undermine the national vaccination program as the AstraZeneca vaccine rollout begins.
The AHPRA is the Australian Government’s medical watchdog, encompassing 15 national healthcare boards including the medical, nursing and midwifery, pharmacy, dental, chiropractic, Chinese medicine, paramedicine, and osteopathy boards of Australia – all of whom supported this directive.
“There is no place for anti-vaccination messages in professional health practice, and any promotion of anti-vaccination claims including on social media, and advertising may be subject to regulatory action,” spokesman for the medical boards and Pharmacy Board chairman Brett Simmonds said.
An AHPRA spokeswoman said in a statement to the Herald that practitioners who breached national boards’ codes of conduct might be subject to investigation and other action on a case-by-case basis.
100,000 Australians have now been vaccinated, mostly with the Pfizer/BioNTech shot, but as Melbourne-produced AstraZeneca vaccines begin their rollout on March 22 they will become the “workhorse” that most Aussies receive, according to chief health bureaucrat Professor Brendan Murphy.
At the same time several European countries are banning batches of AstraZeneca following a host of blood clot-related adverse events.
|
|
|
|
| Pope calls for ‘new world order,’ says ‘wasting’ COVID crisis would be worse than pandemic |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-16-2021, 10:04 AM - Forum: Pope Francis
- Replies (1)
|
|
Continuing in the footsteps of his Conciliar predecessors ...
Pope calls for ‘new world order,’ says ‘wasting’ COVID crisis would be worse than pandemic‘If we don’t roll up our sleeves and immediately take care of the Earth, with radical personal and political choices,
with an economic ‘green’ turn by directing … sooner or later our common home will throw us out the window,” the Pope said.
VATICAN CITY, March 15, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In true globalist phraseology, Pope Francis has called for a “new world order” following the COVID-19 “pandemic.” He also advocated for global change on “green” issues, warning that “we cannot waste any more time.”
Just yesterday, Vatican News published an excerpt of the Pope’s book length interview “God and the World to Come,” giving an insight into the content of the full work, which will be available in book stores starting tomorrow. Speaking to the Italian journalist Domenico Agasso, Francis stated, “The world will never be the same again.”
In language apparently drawn from the globalist playbook, the Pope called for “a new world order,” built upon his concept of solidarity, which in turn is drawn from his comments and publications on irreligious fraternity. He called for an eradication of “bullying, poverty and corruption.” At the same time, he emphasized the importance of universal healthcare, which would come about through the practice of “social cohesion.”
Francis also copied the phraseology of globalist leaders by mentioning how the COVID crisis should not be wasted: “Let us all keep in mind that there is something worse than this crisis: the drama of wasting it. We cannot emerge from a crisis the same as before: we either come out better or we come out worse.”
He called the COVID “pandemic” an “alarm signal on which humanity is forced to reflect,” referring to the “cornerstones of reconstruction” which would be a key part of his new world order.
“This time of trial can thus become a time of wise and far-sighted choices for the good of humanity, of all humanity,” he added.
In fact, the Pope even linked the theological aspect of salvation, to the promotion of a new world order in line with globalist policies, suggesting that salvation was dependent upon their success. “We can no longer blithely accept inequalities and disruptions to the environment. The path to humanity’s salvation passes through the creation of a new model of development, which unquestionably focuses on coexistence among peoples in harmony with Creation.”
Should his words be ignored, the Pope warned, there could be “no future for anyone,” and thus the world must “prepare for tomorrow under the banner of human fraternity,” since there is “no alternative.”
Francis advocated for a “more austere existence,” which he deemed necessary in order to effect a “fair distribution of resources.” His words seemed reminiscent of billionaire globalist Bill Gates, who suggested that “rich countries” should swap beef for 100% synthetic meat in order to help environmental policies.
The Pope then expressed his support for businesses and industries only continuing if they align themselves with the globalist green agenda. He talked of “conditions” to bring about “ethical and responsible” financial investing, which would “obtain the result of limiting support to companies that are harmful to the environment and to peace. LifeSiteNews recently reported on how this very proposal is currently being prepared by the world’s major financial institutions and globalist leaders, with adherence to the green agenda and the United Nations’ pro-abortion Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s) possibly determining whether or not one has access to finance in the future.
Francis presented four conditions to be used in determining the approved businesses of the future: “inclusion of the excluded, promotion of the least, the common good, and care of Creation.” The head of the Catholic Church did not propose promotion or teaching of the Catholic faith, or freedom from connection to anti-life and anti-family policies such as abortion and LGBT ideology as conditions for an ethical business.
Going further he repeated his own theme of imminent worldwide catastrophe unless people adhere to the green agenda.
“If we don’t roll up our sleeves and immediately take care of the Earth, with radical personal and political choices, with an economic ‘green’ turn by directing technological developments in this direction, sooner or later our common home will throw us out the window,” stated Francis. “We cannot waste any more time.”
This is by no means the first time that the Pope has publicly signaled his allegiance to the globalist agenda. Back in December 2020, Francis used the phrase build back better,” the slogan that has become synonymous with globalist polices. The phrase was the name of Joe Biden’s website after the election (BuildBackBetter.gov), on which he claimed to be “restoring American leadership.”
Shortly after that, he joined with companies across the globe to promote a new “economic system” of capitalism in line with the Sustainable Development Goals, despite their link to abortion, and his own call for simple, austere living.
This was then followed up by a partnership between the Vatican and the UN, in which the Pope once again showed his globalist tendencies by promoting education about “sustainable lifestyles,” “gender equality,” and “global citizenship,” yet avoiding any mention of the Catholic faith.
The Papal call for a new world order appears to be quite similar to the goals of the World Economic Forum (WEF), which was founded by globalist Klaus Schwab. Schwab’s “agenda” is a “Great Reset” of capitalism, finance, and global affairs, and like Francis, he sees COVID-19 as the opportunity to effect global change.
Schwab’s anti-freedom and anti-Christian Great Reset initiative calls for “new foundations for our economic and social systems,” as well as “a new social contract that honors the dignity of every human being.”
One vision of the future after the Great Reset is the much-publicized article positing a world in which private ownership is non-existent and all products have become services offered at the whim of the government. With his own call for an austere life, it would seem that Francis is echoing this suggestion of the Great Reset.
Somewhat ironically then, the Pope encouraged young people to “dream big,” saying that through working for one’s dreams, one can “protect them from those who want to take them away from them: pessimists, dishonest people and profiteers.”
|
|
|
|
| The Recusant: What Is Bishop Williamson's Current Teaching? [April 2017] |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-15-2021, 03:49 PM - Forum: True vs. False Resistance
- No Replies
|
|
Taken from The Recusant
What Is Bishop Williamson's Current Teaching?
(April 2017)
About a year ago, we produced an article entitled: “Which of the Following Statements is Acceptable to You?” Since then, that article has already been rendered obsolete and out-of-date by the several further statements by Bishop Williamson, each of which deepens and elaborates his stand against Tradition. Because we all have short memories, we thought it wise to at least try to collect them all in one place. It was no small endeavour. The wording is ours, the teaching his. We provide the original source, so that, as always, you can see for yourself. And as always, we invite the reader to check that we are not making this up or lifting quotes out of context. Judge for yourself…
On The Conciliar Church:
· The New Religion can be used to build your Faith. (1)
· The problem with Vatican II is that it is ambiguous. (2)
· It is dangerous to distance yourself from the conciliar church. By distancing yourself from it you risk becoming a Pharisee disconnected from reality. (3)
· There is still Faith in the conciliar church. (4, 20b)
· The conciliar church is the Mainstream Church. (3)
· There is still good in the conciliar church so we mustn’t reject it completely.(4, 5)
· Not all priests in the conciliar church should get out of it. (6)
· If you know someone trapped in the conciliar church, you don’t need try too hard to get them out of it. (7)
· Tradition is not necessary for salvation. (21c)
On the New Mass:
· There are Eucharistic miracles happening in the New Mass. These miracles are genuine and they have lessons for Traditional Catholics. (8)
· The New Mass can nourish your Faith. (1, 10)
· Though it is the principal destroyer of the Church, the New Mass can give grace and spiritual nourishment. (9)
· Attending the New Mass may do more good than harm spiritually. (1)
· The problem with the New Mass is that it is ambiguous. (2, 11, 15)
· Though not as good as the Traditional Mass, the New Mass is better than nothing. (12)
· Though dangerous, the New Mass is helping souls to keep the Faith. (10, 13)
· Not everyone should avoid the New Mass and not every New Mass should be avoided. (6, 14)
· The New Mass can be what you make of it. A priest can celebrate it decently, a layman can attend it devoutly. Those who say otherwise are flying in the face of reality. (15)
· How will your children/grandchildren keep the Faith? By going to the New Mass. (16)
· The Council of Trent says that there is grace in the New Mass, as long as it is valid. (17)
· People who say that you don’t get grace from the New Mass are just looking down their noses at Novus Ordo Catholics as though they’re trash. They almost don’t believe that Novus Ordo Catholics have souls. (18)
· Because the New Mass is a mixture of good parts and bad parts, good people can use it to keep the Faith whilst remaining within the Novus Ordo. (19)
· That some people find their way out of the New Mass and come to Tradition proves that the New Mass was giving them grace, which is what allowed them to do it. (10, 20)
· Novus Ordo Catholics who don’t understand about the problems with the New Mass can go to the New Mass and receive grace from it. (9, 21)
· Traditional Catholics who do understand about the problems with the New Mass can go to the New Mass and receive grace from it. (22)
· Almighty God and His Blessed Mother are using the New Mass to save the souls of Novus Ordo Catholics in the Novus Ordo and through the Novus Ordo. (21)
· Many New Masses are liberal and can’t be attended. Others aren’t and can be. (23)
On Sedevacantism:
· If someone wants to be a sedevacantist, we needn’t bother trying to show them that they are mistaken. (7)
· Not all sedevacantist Masses should be avoided. (24)
· Sedevacantism is dangerous and it can lead to losing the Faith, but you can be a sedevacantist if you want. (25)
On Where to Attend Mass:
· You can attend Mass at the SSPX. (26)
· You can attend Mass at a sedevacantist chapel. (24)
· You can attend Mass at a Feeneyite chapel. (27)
· You can attend the Indult/Motu Proprio Mass - just go to the least contaminated one. (28)
· You can attend some Novus Ordo Masses, though there are many which you can’t attend. (23)
· You can attend “Resistance” priests and bishops, (including me!) who compromise on Faith and Morals. (29)
· …but beware of Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Hewko! (29)
On the Condemnations of the Church before the Council:
· Lawful judgements or sentences pronounced by the Church before the Council may be belittled, disregarded or ignored at leisure if you personally disagree with them. (30)
· Banned books on the Index, books containing heresy, immorality/impurity and books condemned by the Church can be read as long as you personally get something out of reading them. (31)
· Banned books on the Index, containing heresy and immorality and condemned by the lawful sentence of the Church in 1949 can be promoted as being “...what God Himself has given to us.” (32)
On the Resistance, Authority and Structure:
· We needn’t bother imposing even a true viewpoint on anybody. (33)
· Priests and Bishops don’t have authority and so cannot advise people on what they should do or where they should go. People are on their own and have to work it out for themselves. (34)
· I don’t have any authority. I cannot have any authority. (34)
· Don’t look to me for leadership. I see my role as being a friend and adviser. (34a, 35)
· Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops to pass on his authority. (36)
· Why am I consecrating Fr. Zendejas? To pass on my authority. (36)
· Priestly Congregations and Seminaries are out of date. (37)
· There cannot be any structure or organisation in the Resistance, it just isn’t possible. It’s too late. The time for structures is over, is yesterday. (38, 39, 40)
· There can’t be any authority or structure in the Resistance without the Pope approving it. (39)
· I’m not sure what the Resistance is, what it should be, or even if I believe in the Resistance at all. (40, 41)
· I can use the apparent lack of structure/authority as an excuse to refuse to ordain or tonsure seminarians, because, after all, there is no structure for them to be ordained into. (42)
· Yet in spite of everything I have said about not having structure or authority, I can instantly go back on that if I perceive that having a structure and authority might help to defeat my “rivals”. (43)
Concordance of Sources:
1 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma9_10iVBik - 28th June 2015 - Mahopac, New York:
“While the new religion is false, it’s dangerous, it strangles grace and it’s helping many people to lose the Faith: at the same time, there are still cases where it can be used and is used still to build the Faith … The essential principle is: do whatever you need to do to keep the Faith. … There are cases where even the Novus Ordo Mass can be attended with an effect of building one’s Faith instead of losing it. … Be very careful with the Novus Ordo … But, exceptionally, if you’re watching and praying, even there you may find the grace of God. If you do, make use of it in order to sanctify your soul.”
2 - Eleison Comments #437:
“The Novus Ordo Mass, like Vatican II which it followed, is ambiguous, favours heresy and has led numberless souls out of the Church … Doctrinally, the Novus Ordo Mass is ambiguous, poised between the religion of God and the Conciliar religion of man. Now in matters of faith, ambiguity is deadly, being normally designed to undermine the Faith, as the Novus Ordo Mass frequently does. But as ambiguity is precisely open to two interpretations, so the Novus Ordo Mass does not absolutely exclude the old religion.”
3 - Eleison Comments #438:
“Therefore the NOM and the Novus Ordo Church as a whole are dangerous for the Faith, and Catholics are right who have clung to Tradition to avoid the danger. But as they have had to put a distance between themselves and the mainstream Church, so they have exposed themselves to the opposite danger of an isolation leading to a sectarian and even pharisaical spirit, disconnected from reality.”
4 – Eleison Comments #447:
“But if one respects reality, one is bound to admit that there is still faith in the Newchurch.”
5 – Eleison Comments #447:
“Two weeks ago these “Comments” stepped back onto a minefield, and defended the position that there is still something Catholic in what has become of the Catholic Church since Vatican II. … on the one side the present leaders of the Society of St Pius X act as though the official Church in Rome is still so Catholic that the SSPX cannot do without its official recognition. On the other side many souls that really have the Catholic faith utterly repudiate the idea that there is still anything Catholic whatsoever left in the “Church” now being led by “Pope” Francis… ...to say that there is nothing at all of these [‘Catholic decency and devotion’] left in the Newchurch seems to me to be a gross exaggeration.”
6 – www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kTtOUdw9iw - 5th November 2014, St. Catherine’s, Ontario:
“I don’t say to everybody inside the Novus Ordo, priests and laity, I don’t say: ‘You’ve got to get out!’ ”
7 - Eleison Comments #348:
“Therefore, it seems to me, if James is convinced that to save his soul he must stay in the Newchurch, I need not hammer him to get out of it. If Clare is persuaded that there is no grave problem within the Society of St. Pius X, I need not ram down her throat why there is. And if John can see no way to keep the Faith without believing that the See of Rome is vacant, I need urge upon him no more than that that belief is not obligatory.”
8 – Eleison Comments #438:
“However, these [Novus Ordo] miracles – always assuming they are authentic – have lessons also for the Catholics of Tradition…”
9 – Eleison Comments #492:
“The NOM is the principal destroyer of the true Church, and the main engine of the Newchurch. …and so to innocent souls not yet aware of its intrinsic danger for the Faith, it can by its Consecration and good parts, still give grace and spiritual nourishment”
10 – Eleison Comments #445:
“…to this day there must be multitudes of Catholics who want and mean to be Catholics and yet assume that the right way to be Catholics is to attend the NOM every Sunday. And who will dare say that out of these multitudes there are none who are still nourishing their faith by obeying what seems to them (subjectively) to be their (objective) duty? God is their judge, but for how many years did easily most followers of Catholic Tradition have to attend the NOM before they understood that their faith obliged them not to do so? And if the NOM had in all those years made them lose the faith, how would they have come to Catholic Tradition?”
11 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September, 2016 - Emmett, Kansas:
“The ambiguity is the slide between the good and the bad.”
12 – Eleison Comments #437:
“So does it not make sense that in punishment for their modern worldliness these sheep would broadly lose the true rite of Mass, while in reward for their desire for Mass they would not lose every valid Mass?”
13 – www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2bymrcN93M&t=3497s - 19th September, 2016, Veneta, Oregon:
“The Novus Ordo is false, but it’s not only false, it’s part true part false. The false part is very dangerous, but the true part enables souls to keep the Faith.”
14 – www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma9_10iVBik - 28th June 2015 - Mahopac, New York:
“I do not say that every person should stay away from every single Novus Ordo Mass.”
15 - Eleison Comments #447:
“As an essential part of the subjective and ambiguous religion, the NOM can be what you make of it. A priest can celebrate it “decently,” a Catholic can attend it “devoutly.” The inverted commas are to placate the hard-liners who will insist that with the NOM there can be neither true decency nor true devotion, but when they say such things, I think that they are flying in the face of reality.”
16, 17 & 18 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGcr24n8fJo - 20th May 2016, St. Athanasius, Vienna, VA:
“I’m sure you ask yourselves ‘What kind of word are my children going to have to grow up in? How are they going to keep the Faith?’ Very good questions. By prayer and Charity and by frequenting the sacraments, so long as they are still available, so long as it’s at all still possible to reach the sacraments. And some Novus - I’ve got into quite a lot of controversy for saying this, but it’s true - there is no question that some Novus Ordo Masses are valid. And if they’re valid, then it’s defined by the Council of Trent that grace passes, “ex opere operato” is the strict phrase. And you and I have no right before God to look down our noses and to write off these Catholics as though they’re just trash.”
AND - youtu.be/X2bymrcN93M - 19th September 2016, Veneta, Oregon:
“I mean the problem - dare I say that the problem with many Traditional, with a number of Traditional Catholics: they almost don’t believe that Novus Ordo people have souls. The Novus Ordo is just a bunch of rejects who deserve to be abandoned. Well I don’t believe that that’s how God sees them.”
19 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September, 2016 - Emmett, Kansas:
“I mean, in real life, have you ever met a good person who’s nothing but good? Uh-uh. [No.] Have you ever met a bad person who’s nothing but bad? Uh-uh. In real life, it’s always a mixture of good and bad. And those rites are a mixture of good and bad. … I’m not saying the Novus Ordo is OK. I’m saying it’s - there is still good along side all the bad. The bad is terrible, you’re quite right to have gone away from the bad, don’t go back to it. But don’t say that there’s no good in it at all and that there can be no grace passed attending the Novus Ordo Mass”
20 a - www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September, 2016 - Emmett, Kansas:
“How do the many Novus Ordo souls that make their way to Tradition, how did they keep the Faith until they got to Tradition? Because they profited by what is still good in those bad rites.”
AND
b - www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2bymrcN93M&t=3497s - 19th September, 2016 - Veneta, Oregon:
“But most souls that make their way to Tradition came from the Novus Ordo. And they came - did the Novus Ordo stop them from coming to Tradition? No. They realised that the Novus Ordo is not right, but it wasn’t so bad that it had corrupted their faith to the point where they couldn’t break out of it. Many souls in the Novus Ordo still have the Faith.”
21 a - https://youtu.be/X2bymrcN93M - 19th September, 2016 - Veneta, Oregon:
“So you’ve got, if you want to keep the New Mass to be as like the old Mass as possible, you can do it to quite an extent. OK? So the New Mass is ambiguous. You’ve got the easy, soft alternatives which are going to lead to a complete change of the Catholics’ idea of the Mass, which is very bad, or you have got alternatives included which, if you want to stick to the old Mass, you can make the New Mass relatively like the old Mass. OK? So, you’re not obliged to apostatise. … OK, now those that want to stick to God: is God going to allow, to leave it easy for them to apostatise? Or is Almighty God and His Mother, are they still concerned with the salvation of all of these souls? The Novus Ordo people have souls. If they have souls, then the Mother of God wants to save them and Almighty God wants to save them, Our Lord Jesus Christ wants to save them.”
AND
b “So, this new framework is making it easier for the people and the priests to forget what the Mass is. Do all Novus Ordo Catholics deserve to be left in that condition? Or do some of them deserve to be given a reminder of what the Mass is, to help them to pull themselves together and not just slide down and go with the flow? It seems to me that Almighty God has a concern for these, for the Novus Ordo - for many souls in the Novus Ordo, who do not deserve to be misled.”
AND
c “You know, I mean Heaven has got all these souls to look after and try to get to heaven, not just those souls who make their way to Tradition.”
22 – www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September 2016, Emmett, Kansas:
“Question: Then, does it mean that those knowing what they know, such as the souls here could go to that [Novus Ordo Mass] and expect to receive grace?
Bishop Williamson: If anybody here who knows what the Novus Ordo means went back to the Novus Ordo - pffff! - then [pause] - why would they want to go back? [laughter] Well, it’s, I would - they can receive grace. But they have to judge the priest…”
23 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn1jtS1VUGU - 25th September, 2016, Houston, Texas:
“A Mass which clearly pushes towards liberalism, like many Novus Ordo Masses, those you can’t attend.”
24 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn1jtS1VUGU - 25th September 2016, Houston, Texas
“You’ve got to do what you can. God doesn’t ask the impossible. He does ask the possible. The sedevacantist Mass is available. It’s close enough, and so - is it a devout priest? Is he a raving madman? Does he have the Faith? Sedevacantism is dangerous. But if there’s no other Mass available, I wouldn’t exclude attending it.”
25 - Eleison Comments #417:
“The opinion [sedevacantism] itself is dangerous precisely because it can be the beginning of a slide towards losing the Faith. … Now if a Catholic needs to hold that opinion in order not to lose his Catholic Faith, let him hold it.”
26 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September, 2016 - Emmett, Kansas:
“My opinion of the Society is that it is sinking, but not yet sunk. Now you may disagree with that, you're entitled to disagree with it, it’s only an opinion. I don’t think it’s yet sunk.”
AND - Eleison Comments #311 - June 2013:
“In particular there is confusion over whether to jump ship, i.e. stop attending SSPX masses. But why should one opinion fit all cases? All kinds of different circumstances can bear on such a question. Granted, to stay with the SSPX on its present false course involves a real danger of gradually sliding, but souls need sacraments, and by no means all SSPX priests are yet traitors.”
27 - de facto - Bishop Williamson himself has offered Mass and given confirmations at ‘Our Lady of the Pilar,’ the Feeneyite chapel of Fr. Gavin Bitzer, in Louisville, Kentucky, at least twice. The most recent occasion was on 25th May, 2016. See: www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZlQ5BSgs9E or see Recusant 34 for a summary of his sermon.
28 – Eleison Comments #505:
“Therefore, in my opinion, be content to attend the least contaminated Tridentine Mass that there is anywhere near you…”
29 – de facto – that Bishop Williamson agrees with the liberal things which he himself has said, which Fr. Zendejas has said and which others amongst his supporters have said, is self-evident. His words against Fr. Pfeiffer and Fr. Hewko tend always to be private and not public, but the very fact that he remains silent while at least two of the priests who support him and call him as “our bishop” (Fr. Chazal and Fr. Ortiz) have each separately told the faithful that they must not go to Fr. Pfeiffer or Hewko’s Masses, together with his refusal to tonsure any of their seminarians, give them holy oils or confirm their faithful, should tell the impartial observer all he needs to know.
30 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4JfHj8G6Qk - 26th May, 2016 - St. Mary’s Kansas:
“The Poem of the Man-God runs into tremendous opposition. I think it’s the devil, quite honestly. And I think the devil was in the Holy Office at that time. It says that the story is romanced, that’s one thing that the Holy Office says. I don’t find that the case. I find the Poem of the Man-God is full of sentiment, but it’s not sentimental, it’s very real. That’s my take.”
31 – Ibid.:
“… The Index has been abolished, yes. I read it and I don’t bother too much about - I don’t know all the background details. I get so much out of it myself that I’m not worried about it, you know.”
32 – Ibid.:
“What God Himself has given us in the modern age to act exactly as - He’s given us five big volumes- wait for it! - the Poem of the Man God! Maria Valtorta! It would make excellent family home reading.”
33 – Eleison Comments #420:
“At present I am more and more disinclined to impose even a true viewpoint on anybody”
34 a - www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNx-KwqxZow - June 2014 - Post Falls, Idaho:
“I don’t have authority. I cannot have authority. Friendship, advice, contact, support: no problem. Authority: problem. Can you imagine that commanding resistant priests is like herding cats, can you imagine? In which case, is it worth trying if it is bound to fail?”
AND
b - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma9_10iVBik - 28th June 2015 - Mahopac, New York:
“The essential principle is: do whatever you need to do to keep the Faith. ... You must work it out for yourselves. Any other question?”
35 - Eleison Comments #307:
“And that is why, right now, I envisage being little more than father, adviser and friend for any souls calling for a bishop’s leadership and support.”
36 – Eleison Comments #504:
“…the Rome-centred Newsociety, still souls cling to [it] because of ... Catholic authority bequeathed to the latter by the Archbishop. […]
Archbishop Lefebvre defied that crippling, not least of all but rather above all, by his consecrating of four bishops to maintain a Catholic authority. […]
In 1988 the Archbishop consecrated four [bishops] for the same reason, two for Europe, and one each for North and South America. As of now the “Resistance” has two in Europe and one in South America. There remains a gap in North America. God willing, this coming May 11 Fr. Gerardo Zendejas will be consecrated bishop in the Traditional parish of Fr Ronald Ringrose in Vienna, Virginia , USA.”
37 - Eleison Comments #278:
“It is not clear that the present need is to rebuild a classic Congregation or Seminary. Both may be somehow out-dated. … But God is God, and for the salvation of souls tomorrow it may be that he will no longer resort to the classical Congregation or seminary of yesterday.”
AND – Eleison Comments #311:
“In the early 21st century there seems to me to be just not enough Catholic straw left to make a Catholic brick like the SSPX of the late 20th century.”
38 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yJsouJVpmw - 29th May 2016, 2016, St. Paul, MN:
“Today the situation is so bad that I don’t think a structure or organisation, I, my opinion is that a structure or an organisation can’t be put together. It’s too late.”
AND – www.youtube.com/watch?v=WncI57m_-aA - 19th March 2016, Brazil:
“The time for structures is past. What, what's he saying? The time for structures is yesterday!”
AND - www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kTtOUdw9iw - 5th November 2014, St. Catherine’s, Ontario:
“Don’t be under any illusion: it’s not going to be me who puts together a new SSPX. No way! The time for that is over. Put away your toys everybody and get with it. Grow up! ”
39 – www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNx-KwqxZow - June 2014 - Post Falls, Idaho:
“But authority comes from the Pope. Which is why if the Pope is not in his right mind, you can’t get Catholic authority from above. You just can’t get it. … In which case the Church is crippled, the Church is paralysed.”
AND - www.youtube.com/watch?v=WncI57m_-aA - 19th March 2016, Brazil:
“Without the Pope you can't be Catholic in any way. ... In our time, authority is dissolved. So, to structure a resistance with authority and obedience and superiors, don’t hope for it.”
AND - Eleison Comments #278:
“As for an alternative to the SSPX, we must learn the lessons to be drawn from its present severe crisis. The Catholic Church runs on authority, from the Pope downwards… Thus as God alone could establish Moses’ authority by a sensational chastisement of rebels (cf. Numbers XVI), so in our day surely God alone will be able to restore the Pope’s authority. ... Similar arguments apply to the re-starting of a classical Catholic seminary.”
40 - www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4qrXglMmjY - 18th September 2016, Emmett, Kansas:
“I’m afraid it’s darkness all around. The world is in chaos, the Church is in chaos, the Society is sliding […] And don’t be sure that we of the quote unquote “Resistance” are going to do any better. …there’s just not enough unity of purpose in hearts and minds for anything much Catholic still to be pulled together. That’s the truth. As I see it.”
AND – Eleison Comments #277:
“I think – I may be wrong – that [God] wants a loose network of independent pockets of Resistance, gathered around the Mass, freely contacting one another, but with no structure of false obedience [i.e. no structure] such as served to sink the mainstream Church in the 1960’s, and is now sinking the Society of St Pius X.”
41 – Eleison Comments #386:
“…any number of us in the quote unquote “Resistance”…”
AND - www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yJsouJVpmw - St. Paul MN, USA, 29th May 2016:
“If you and I are now part of the quote-unquote “Resistance” - Why quote-unquote? Because it’s a movement, it’s, it’s an unorganised movement, it’s not really organised. It’s some here, it’s some there, it’s pockets of resistance, many of them entirely independent of one another.”
AND - www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNx-KwqxZow - June 2014 - Post Falls, Idaho:
“The resistant groups, the resistants - a - n - t - s - and I very much prefer the expression resistants to the expression resistance … I very much believe in the resistants, I’m not sure I believe in the Resistance.”
42 – TheRecusant33.pdf - p.26, Letter to Fr. John Bosco, 27th January 2016:
“Alas, the Church is in chaos, because the Supreme Shepherd is struck and the sheep are scattered, as they may never have been scattered before. I do sympathise with your desire to have Boniface ordained, but into what structure would he be incorporated? … In Latin they say nobody is bound to do the impossible – nemo ad impossibile tenetur. In today’s situation it may be impossible for you or for him to do more than you are already doing. … For myself I am already very busy, probably too busy, distracted by the chaos.”
43 – radiocristiandad.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/pregunta-que-flota-en-el-aire and christusvincit.clicforum.com/t900-r-ponse-de-Mgr-Williamson-au-sujet-de-la-S-A-J-M.htm – 12th Sept. 2016 :
Question: “…Something is bothering me. In [the website] ‘Non Possumus,’ it was announced that Mons. Faure, has founded a congregation. You, however, had said at the episcopal consecration of Dom Thomas, that that was not the intention. For no one in the resistance has ordinary jurisdiction which diocesan bishops have.”
Answer: “For myself I have until now thought that a new Congregation was neither necessary, nor probably possible. But [Bishop Faure and his seminary]…needed, sooner or later, a structure to belong to. It is in fact sooner, i.e. now, rather than later, because a rival structure was coming on the scene...”
|
|
|
|
| Scientists at Sloan Kettering discover mRNA inactivates tumor-suppressing proteins |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-15-2021, 11:19 AM - Forum: COVID Vaccines
- No Replies
|
|
Scientists at Sloan Kettering discover mRNA inactivates tumor-suppressing proteins, meaning it can promote cancer
[align=left]Aletho News | 2021-03-02
There’s a secret layer of information in your cells called messenger RNA, that’s located between DNA and proteins, that serves as a critical link. Now, in a medical shocker to the whole world of vaccine philosophy, scientists at Sloan Kettering found that mRNA itself carries cancer CAUSING changes – changes that genetic tests don’t even analyze, flying completely under the radar of oncologists across the globe. So now, it’s time for independent laboratories that are not vaccine manufacturers (or hired by them) to run diagnostic testing on the Covid vaccine series and find out if these are cancer-driving inoculations that, once the series is complete, will cause cancer tumors in the vaccinated masses who have all rushed out to get the jab out of fear and propaganda influence. Welcome to the world of experimental and dirty vaccines known as mRNA “technology.”
Previously unknown cancer driving messengers are hiding in RNA, not DNA
This mind-blowing discovery should be published on every medical news site, newspaper, television news broadcast and on the CDC website, but unless you are reading this article and use DuckDuckGo as your search engine, you probably wouldn’t ever see it. That’s because Google is in on the fix, with Big Pharma and the VIC – the vaccine industrial complex. So here’s a more in-depth explanation of what we’re looking at, for real, regarding mRNA and vaccines. The information carrying molecule, messenger RNA, can instruct human cells ultimately in the same way as cancer drivers, playing a major role in causing cancer to thrive while inactivating natural tumor-suppressing proteins the human body creates to save you from cancer. This is the complete opposite of what the CDC and the vaccine manufactures are telling everyone right now about the Covid vaccines, and this is based on clinical research by molecular biologists at the Sloan Kettering Institute. Even sequencing the DNA in cancer cells doesn’t reveal these changes, that’s how sneaky the vaccines are. It’s like a Trojan horse that tells your cells to allow these changes to be made, as if they were safe, but they’re not. All assumptions being made about mRNA being ‘safe’ right now have been completely turned 180 degrees with this research. Consider this very carefully if you have not yet been vaccinated with mRNA technology, and you may want to ‘lawyer-up’ if you already got the jabs.
After your Covid vaccination, RNA is transported out of your cell’s nucleus, and will no longer function properly as a cancer tumor suppressor
Bill Gates and the Vaccine Industrial Complex are very sinister, as we all know, but to create vaccines that truncate (disable by cutting short) cancer tumor suppressors, and destroy the human body’s ability to protect against cancer, well, that’s just complete insanity. Truncated tumor-suppressor proteins are similar to the DNA mutations that cause cancer cells to mutate and multiply uncontrollably. Will America see cancer cases skyrocket over the next few years due to Covid vaccines? Only time will tell, but right now, science is revealing that it’s likely. Pay close attention. Therefore, anyone who is scared to death of the Covid vaccines is pro-science rather than anti-science, because the science shows the mRNA technology is very dangerous, especially concerning proteins that fuel cancer tumors. Let’s say that again: Science shows mRNA technology can fuel cancer tumor growth.
Substantial amount of people with blood cancer have the SAME inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes at the mRNA level
Scientists also discovered that a substantial amount of people with blood cancer, a.k.a. chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), have the same exact inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes at the mRNA level. In fact, the mRNA changes they detected could possibly account for the missing DNA mutations, and that spells out bad news for everyone who thinks the Covid vaccine series is “safe and effective.” It’s effective alright, at suppressing anti-cancer proteins, one might conclude. Even if just half (partial truncation) mRNA changes in human cells take place, it’s enough to “completely override the function of the normal versions that are present,” according to the Sloan Kettering team of scientists. These changes can also apply to 100 different genes at the same time, so the changes can add up quickly and cause horrific health repercussions. Of course, mainstream media will dismiss any connections made by these discoveries, but they’re paid to regurgitate pharma talk, so that’s not surprising at all. It is important to note that mRNA changes, according to researchers, are not limited to blood cancer, but have been linked to acute lymphatic cancer and breast cancer. Could this mean we’re looking at a new population control mechanism hidden in messenger RNA? About 20,000 people in the US develop “CLL” chronic lympthocytic leukemia each year. How many will quietly begin developing it now, and then have it suddenly “show up” five years from now? Symptoms include fatigue, enlarged lymph nodes, and night sweats. Did you get mRNA vaccinated and experience those symptoms already? Are those symptoms on the warning label – the vaccine insert? Did you read them? There’s only one “treatment” offered right now for CLL by the Pharma Industrial Complex, and that’s stem cell bone marrow transplantation. Oh, but it’s only recommended if your CLL is “likely” to advance. Do your mRNA vaccines now qualify you as “likely” to advance with CLL?
Sources for this article include: mskcc.org vaccines.news mskcc.org
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
|
| A Short Primer: What you need to know about Fetal Cell Lines and Vaccines |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-15-2021, 10:45 AM - Forum: Health
- No Replies
|
|
What you need to know about fetal cell lines and vaccines
A short primer by Dr. Marissa Brand
March 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — The first vaccine in the United States to use an aborted fetal cell line in its production was the MMR vaccine in 1979. Currently in the United States there are many vaccines that contain aborted fetal DNA in the end product of the vaccine, while others use aborted fetal cells in their research and development.
There are four cell lines that are being used in vaccines currently available, including those expected to be available in the next month or two. These four cell lines are MRC-5, WI-38, PER C6, HEK293.
In addition to these cell lines, abortions were also done to obtain RA27/3 for use in the rubella vaccine. The rubella vaccine alone is the result of at least 99 abortions (32 for WI-38 and 67 for RA27/3). Yes, they came from abortions, not babies who died naturally in the womb.
The baby has to be alive when the tissues are taken. Otherwise, they are unusable.
MRC-6 and Wi-38 are both from the 1960s. PER C6 is from 1985, while HEK293 is from 1972. There are other aborted fetal cell lines that exist, but are not currently being used for vaccines.
The most recent aborted fetal cell line is from 2015 (Walvax2). This particular cell line is the result of 9 abortions.
Of those vaccines that are currently FDA-approved, all of the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella), hepatitis a, and chickenpox vaccines, including any combination vaccines for these illnesses, use aborted fetal cell lines. One of the shingles vaccine brands and one of the rabies vaccines also use aborted fetal cells.
As for experimental COVID injections, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca both use aborted fetal cell lines on which to grow the virus for their vaccines. Pfizer and Moderna, for their COVID-19 injections, used the aborted fetal cell line HEK293 for the research and development of their vaccines.
With the exception of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, the others do contain aborted fetal DNA in the end product. It is next to impossible to remove all of the DNA from the virus grown in the aborted fetal cell lines. In fact, independent research has found levels as high as 142 to 2000 ng per dose, despite the FDA and WHO recommending limits of 10ng per dose.
The aborted fetal DNA contamination present in vaccines that use aborted fetal cell lines in their production come with risks. Specifically a risk of triggering autoimmune disease, as well as the risk of DNA insertion into the vaccine recipient’s DNA.
In addition to these risks, it is particularly interesting — given the current autism spectrum disorder (ASD) epidemic — that research shows that strong change-point correlations exist between rising ASD rates and when the first MMR vaccine with aborted fetal DNA was introduced, when the second dose was introduced, and when the chickenpox vaccine, which also contains aborted fetal DNA, was introduced in the United States.
The use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccine research and production carries the serious moral concerns of abortion, trafficking of these babies, and denial of a proper burial, as well as serious health concerns.
As long as we as a society keep rolling up our sleeves for vaccines and other pharmaceuticals that use aborted fetal cells in their research, development or production, the situation is not going to get better, as there is no motivation for these companies to change their ways.
Dr. Marissa Brand is a board-certified Doctor of Natural Medicine and Doctor of Humanitarian Services, with a PhD in Natural Medicine.
|
|
|
|
| California Teachers To Lead Students In Aztec Chants To God Of Human Sacrifice In New Curriculum |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-15-2021, 10:38 AM - Forum: Against the Children
- No Replies
|
|
California Teachers To Lead Students In Aztec Chants To God Of Human Sacrifice In New Curriculum
Children will soon pray to an Aztec god of human sacrifice in public schools, should the new curriculum be used.
![[Image: California-Aztec-Human-Sacrifice-Chant-1024x538.jpg]](https://nationalfile.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/California-Aztec-Human-Sacrifice-Chant-1024x538.jpg)
National File | March 13, 2021
California is set to vote on a new curriculum for K-12 students, even as it faces criticism for promoting the belief that Europeans destroyed native religions with Christianity,
and for one particularly troubling lesson: Teachers will lead students in an Aztec chant meant to please a god of human sacrifice.
In its reading materials about the new K-12 curriculum’s focus on “ethnic studies,” the California Department of Education makes a series of confusing and troubling remarks about race. For example, it declares that while Mexican American students may be descended from Native Americans, they should not be included in this ethnicity, because “While Mexican Americans and Latina/o/x Americans have native ancestry, their indigenous histories are addressed in the Chicana/o/x and Latina/o/x course outline.”
They also suggest the use of Latinx, because even though Spanish is a gendered language with different endings for male, -o, or female, -a, names, it, “The recent use of “x” is done for two purposes. The first “x” in Xicanx replaces the “ch” because the sound produced by “x” is much more in line with the Náhuatl language and indigenous etymologies. The second “x” renders the term gender-neutral and more inclusive of all identities.”
Again, this is written as the California Department of Education would also seemingly argue that the Náhuatl language should not matter when teaching about “Latinx” culture, because Náhuatl would be covered under Native American studies.
The document also suggests that teachers bring elements of these ethnic studies to seemingly unrelated classes. “For example, a geography teacher might develop a unit or lesson around urban geography, where students can delve into key concepts like environmental racism and ecological justice, and focus on the experiences of people of color in those spaces.”
However, the most troubling element would seem to be the veneration of an Aztec god of human sacrifice. The Epoch Times reported:
Quote:In the community chant of “In Lak Ech,” which translates to “You Are My Other Me,” teachers are instructed to first lead the group of students in chanting and clapping to Tezkatlipoka, a cannibalistic wizard-god who, according to the Aztec tradition, brought the downfall to the Toltec civilization in favor of the human-sacrificing Aztecs.
The students then chant to other deities including Huitzilopochtli, the Aztec sun god, seeking “healing epistemologies” and a “revolutionary spirit.” Seeing themselves as people of the sun, the Aztecs believed that Huitzilopochtli needed daily nourishment of human blood and hearts, and brutally sacrificed hundreds of thousands of people in offering to him.
The chant ends with a request for “liberation, transformation, decolonization,” after which students shout “Panche beh! Panche beh!” which translates to “seeking the roots of the truth” or “think critically.”
[...] Christopher Rufo, the journalist who first exposed the most troubling elements of the proposed K-12 curriculum, says the curriculum is inspired by “calls for the ‘decolonization’ of American society,” and that colonization must be countered by “a ‘countergenocide’ against white Christians.”
“The chants have a clear implication: the displacement of the Christian god, which is said to be an extension of white supremacist oppression, and the restoration of the indigenous gods to their rightful place in the social justice cosmology. It is, in a philosophical sense, a revenge of the gods,” wrote Rufo. “The religious element of the ethnic studies curriculum, with direct appeals to Aztec gods, is almost certainly a violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. Public schools are prohibited from leading state-sanctioned Christian prayers; they would presumably be similarly prohibited from leading state-sanctioned chants to the Aztec god of human sacrifice.”
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
|
| Viganò: Pope Benedict ‘surrounded himself with inadequate, unreliable or even corrupt collaborators’ |
|
Posted by: Stone - 03-15-2021, 10:20 AM - Forum: Archbishop Viganò
- No Replies
|
|
Viganò: Pope Benedict ‘surrounded himself with inadequate, unreliable or even corrupt collaborators’
Archbishop Viganò in a wide-ranging interview speaks of Pope Benedict's collaborators and the situation of the Church under Pope Francis
INTERVIEW WITH ARCHBISHOP CARLO MARIA VIGANÒ BY RADIO SPADA
(Translation and Notes on square brackets by Dr. Robert Moynihan. Printed by LifeSiteNews.com with permission of Archbishop Viganò.)
Radio Spada: Good morning, Your Excellency, we thank you for the dialogue we will have. Let’s begin with Galleria neovaticana [the book title may be translated as “The Neo-Vatican Gallery”], a new book by Marco Tosatti for which you wrote the Preface. Allow us to tell you an anecdote: only a few hours after the news that the book was going to press, a Twitter post appeared, based only on the book’s cover and title, obviously, asking how much in keeping with the Gospel it was to print a volume dedicated to scabrous accusations and facts that are not always edifying. What would you answer to this objection?
Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò: Allow me to recall here that Benedict XVI, in the months preceding his decision to assume the singular title of “pope emeritus”, instituted a Commission of Cardinals, chaired by Cardinal [Julian] Herranz, and composed of Cardinals [Jozef] Tomko and [Salvatore] De Giorgi, with the task of carrying out a thorough investigation into the confidential information disseminated in the “Vatileaks” affair [in 2011]. On that occasion, I had to request of Cardinal Herranz more than once that I be allowed to add my testimony, since it was not his intention to question me even though I had been personally involved as the author of confidential documents intended for the Pontiff which were stolen and delivered to the press. I gave them a substantial dossier in which I set forth all of the dysfunctions [of the Roman Curia] and described the network of corruption that I had come to know about and that I had to face as Secretary-General of the Vatican’ Governorate. I accompanied that dossier of mine with a cover letter in which, among other things, I wrote as follows.
Quote:“I am very saddened by the serious damage caused to the Church and to the Holy See by the leaking of so many confidential documents... If there are some who are responsible for such rash acts, far graver is the fault of those who have been responsible for so much corruption and moral degradation in the Holy See and in the Vatican City State, and far graver is the fault of some cardinals, prelates and lay people who, despite knowing (of these things), preferred to live with so much filth, putting their consciences to sleep in order to please the powerful superior and make an ecclesial career. I hope that at least this Commission of Cardinals, out of love for the Church, will be faithful to the Holy Father and will carry out all the necessary cleaning desired by him and will not allow this initiative of his to be covered up once again... Numerous journalists from various countries have sought to contact me... I remained silent, out of love for the Church and the Holy Father. The power of truth must flow from within the Church and not from the media… I pray for you Cardinals, that you may have the courage to tell the truth to the Holy Father; and I pray for the Holy Father, that he may have the strength to make the truth come to light in the Church.”
[Note: It seems fitting to note that this critique of Church corruption was made by Viganò in about 2011, under Pope Benedict; this puts what Viganò wrote about in his August 25, 2018 Testimony in a new light. The 2018 Testimony was, clearly, not the first time Viganò attempted to shed light on internal Church corruption; he had tried to shed that light in an internal investigation seven years earlier... RM]
That mass of information, together with the other evidence collected by the three Cardinals, would have allowed a cleansing operation: everything has been covered up! And it can only constitute a further element of blackmail for the names contained therein and, for the past eight years now, an occasion for discrediting those who, on the other hand, have faithfully served the Church and the Holy See.
“Necesse est enim ut veniant scandala; verumtamen væ homini per quem scandalum venit (Mt 18:7). [For it must happen that scandals come; but woe unto those through whom the scandals come.]” Denouncing the corruption of clerics and prelates has imposed itself as a gesture of charity towards the faithful and an act of justice towards the tormented Church, because on the one hand it warns the people of God against wolves disguised as lambs and shows them for what they are, and on the other hand it shows that the Bride of Christ is the victim of a little group of conspirators [“conventicola” in the original Italian] of lustful men greedy for power, a group which, once removed [from positions of power in the Church], the Church can return to preaching the Gospel. It is not the one who brings to light the scandals who sins against evangelical charity, but the one who carries out those scandals and covers them up. The words of the Lord are very clear on this point.
Radio Spada: As we know, going beyond the moral theme, it is impossible not to identify in the doctrinal collapse the very hinge of the present crisis in the Church. In regard to this, on a number of occasions, you have expressed sharp criticism of Vatican II. On this point, we would ask you for a further specification. Speaking with [veteran Italian Vaticanist] Sandro Magister, you said: “The beautiful fable of hermeneutics – albeit authoritative for its Author – nevertheless remains an attempt to give the dignity of a Council to a real ambush against the Church.” May we, therefore, clarify that the problem is not identifiable only since Vatican II but in Vatican II? In other words: did the revolutionary process have a turning point in the “Council” and not only after the “Council”? So to place under accusation not simply with the postconciliar “Spirit of Vatican II,” but also the letter of the Council documents themselves?
Archbishop Viganò: I don’t see how one can maintain that there is a presumed orthodox Vatican II that no one has talked about for years, betrayed by a spirit of the Council that everyone also praised. The spirit of the Council is what animates it, what determines its nature, particularity, characteristics. And if the spirit is heterodox while the conciliar texts do not seem to be doctrinally heretical, this is to be attributed to a shrewd move by the conspirators, to the naiveté of the Council Fathers, and to the complicity of those who preferred to look elsewhere, from the beginning, rather than take a stand with a clear condemnation of doctrinal, moral and liturgical deviations.
The first to be perfectly well aware of the importance of putting their hand to the conciliar texts in order to be able to use them for their own purposes were progressive cardinals and bishops, particularly the Germans and the Dutch, with their experts [periti]. It was no coincidence that they managed to reject the Preparatory Schemas prepared by the Holy Office and ignored the desiderata [the requests] of the world’s bishops, including the condemnation of modern errors, especially of atheistic communism; they also succeeded in preventing the proclamation of a Marian dogma, seeing in it an “obstacle” to ecumenical dialogue. The new leadership of Vatican II was possible thanks to a real coup d’état, the pre-eminent role of the Jesuit (Augustin) Bea [1881-1968], and the support of Roncalli [Pope John XXIII, Pope from 1959 to 1963]. If the Schemas had been kept [as the basis for the Council’s documents; but they were put aside just after the Council began, in the fall of 1962, and not kept] nothing that came out of the Commissions [which were set up in the fall of 1962 to draft the Council’s documents, once the Council decided to set aside the prepared Schemas] would have been possible, because the Schemas were constructed on an Aristotelian-Thomistic model that did not permit equivocal formulations.
The letter itself of the Council [i.e., the text of the Council documents] must therefore be placed under accusation [the Italian is “messo sotto accusa”], because it is from this that the revolution started. On the other hand: could you give me a case in the history of the Church in which an Ecumenical Council was deliberately formulated in an equivocal way to ensure that what it taught in its official acts was then subverted and contradicted in practice? Look: this alone [i.e., the fact that ambiguity and equivocation were deliberately woven into certain passages in the conciliar texts] is enough to catalogue Vatican II as a unique case, an hapax [hapax is a Greek word meaning once, one time, a unique case] on which scholars can try their hand, but which will have to find a solution through the Supreme Authority of the Church.
Radio Spada: How did you become aware of this crisis? A gradual process? A sudden insight developed only recently?
Archbishop Viganò: My awareness was progressive, and it started relatively early. But understanding, or beginning to suspect, that what was presented to us as the fruit of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit was actually suggested by the inimicus homo [“the enemy of man,” i.e., the devil] was not enough to collapse that sense of dutiful obedience to the Hierarchy, even in the presence of multiple proofs of the bad faith and the malice of some of its members. As I have already had occasion to declare, what we saw then materialize – I speak, for example, of some novelties like episcopal collegiality or ecumenism or the Novus Ordo Missae – could appear as attempts to meet the common desire for renewal, in the wake of post-war reconstruction. Faced with the economic boom and major political events, the Church seemed to have to somehow rejuvenate herself, or so everyone was telling us, starting with the Holy Father. Those accustomed to pre-conciliar discipline, to the respect for Authority, to the veneration of the Roman Pontiff, did not even dare to think that what was surreptitiously shown to us as a means to spread the Faith and convert many souls to the Catholic Church was actually a vehicle, a deception behind which was hidden, in the minds of some, the intention to progressively cancel the Faith and leave souls in error and sin. Those “novelties” pleased almost no one, least of all the lay people, but they were presented to us as a sort of penance to accept, having in exchange a greater spread of the Gospel, and the moral and spiritual rebirth of a West prostrate due to the Second World War and threatened by materialism.
Radical changes began with Paul VI, with the liturgical reform and the drastic prohibition of the Tridentine Mass. I felt personally wounded and helpless when, as a young secretary to the then Apostolic Delegation of London [in the 1970s], the Holy See forbid the Una Voce Association to celebrate even one Mass according to the Ancient Rite in the crypt of Westminster Cathedral.
During the pontificate of John Paul II, some of the more extreme trends of the Council found a propulsive push in the pantheon of Assisi [1986], in the encounters in mosques and synagogues, in the requests for forgiveness for the Crusades and Inquisition, in the so-called “purification of memory.” The possibly subversive power of Dignitatis humanae and of Nostra aetate were evident in those years.
Then came Benedict XVI and his liberalization of the traditional liturgy, up until then ostentatiously opposed, despite the papal concessions following the Episcopal consecrations of Ecône [in 1988]. Unfortunately, the ecumenical exaggerations did not cease even with Ratzinger, and with them the conciliar ideology that justified them. The resignation of Benedict and the coming of Bergoglio continue to open the eyes of many people, especially of lay faithful.
Radio Spada: A distinct but connected theme is that relating to the protagonists of the conciliar and post-conciliar season. Let’s stop for a moment on the figure of Ratzinger: the role of the Bavarian theologian both at Vatican II and after is undeniable, albeit with different nuances (we recall that, from 1981 to 2005, he was Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, from 2005 to 2013 he reigned on the Throne of Peter, since 2013 he is “Pope Emeritus”). For our part, the judgment on the significance of Ratzingerism is certainly negative: under his administration at the CDF, the same deviations that today we see explicitly “flourishing” flourished; as soon as he was elected to the Chair of Peter he removed the tiara from the papal coat-of-arms; he continued on the path of indifferentist ecumenism by renewing the scandalous celebrations in Assisi; he wrote that “Luther’s thought, his entire spirituality, was entirely Christocentric”; in the Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum [July 7, 2007] he defined the Mass of all time and the Novus Ordo as two forms of the same rite (when on the contrary they imply two totally different theologies); he then created this unlikely hybrid of the “Pope Emeritus dressed in white” who – leaving aside intentions, which we do not judge – seems to be not only a dangerous misunderstanding but an almost necessary cog in the dualism that animates the current dynamic of ecclesial dissolution. These few examples, which could be followed by many others, are in our opinion revealing of the fact that Ratzinger has always been on the “other side of the fence,” albeit with roles and positions that are not identical. We have already seen your statement on the “beautiful tale of hermeneutics,” but also on other occasions, you have pointed out some problematic aspects of Ratzinger’s thought. We refer in particular to a recent statement on LifeSiteNews in which you argued: “However, it would be desirable that, especially in consideration of the Divine Judgment that awaits him, he definitively distances himself from those theologically incorrect positions – I am referring in particular to those of the Introduction to Christianity – which are still widespread today in universities and seminaries that pride themselves on calling themselves Catholic.” We, therefore, ask you: if you were to summarize your judgment on the thought of the Bavarian theologian, what would you say to our readers? Furthermore: You have had the opportunity to work closely with Benedict XVI, what can you tell us about him on the human level? It is not, mind you, a question about private things, but about the personality that he was able to get to know closely.
Archbishop Viganò: The points you have listed, albeit with some nuances, unfortunately, find me in agreement, not without considerable pain. Many acts of the government of Benedict XVI are in line with the conciliar ideology, of which the theologian Ratzinger was always a staunch and convinced supporter. His Hegelian philosophical approach led him to apply the thesis-antithesis-synthesis scheme in the Catholic context, for example, by considering the documents of Vatican II (thesis) and the excesses of the post-conciliar period (antithesis) things to be reconciled in his famous “hermeneutics of continuity” (synthesis); nor is the invention of the Emeritus Papacy an exception, where between being Pope (thesis) and no longer being Pope (antithesis), the compromise was chosen to remain Pope only in part (synthesis). The same mens [mind, mentality] lay behind the decision to liberalize the traditional liturgy, while flanking it with its conciliar counterpart in an attempt not to upset either the proponents of the liturgical revolution or the defenders of the venerable Tridentine rite.
The problem is therefore of an intellectual, ideological matrix: it emerges every time the Bavarian theologian wanted to give a solution to the crisis that afflicts the Church: on all these occasions his academic formation influenced by the thought of Hegel believed he could put opposites together. I have no reason to doubt that Benedict XVI desired, in his own way, to make a gesture of reconciliation with the hopes of Catholic traditionalism; nor that he is not aware of the disastrous situation in which the ecclesial body finds itself. But the only way to restore the Church is by following the Gospel, with a supernatural gaze and with the awareness that Good and Evil, by God’s decree, cannot be put together in an unreal juste milieu [happy medium] but that they are and remain irreconcilable and opposed, and that serving two masters ends up making them both unhappy.
As for my direct acquaintance with Benedict XVI, I can say that in the years of his Pontificate, in which I served the Church in the Secretariat of State, in the Governorate, and as Nuncio in the United States, I got the idea that he surrounded himself with inadequate, unreliable or even corrupt collaborators, who have largely taken advantage of the “meekness” of his character and of what could be considered as a certain “Stockholm syndrome” [i.e., a syndrome in which a prisoner, in a certain sense, comes to love those who have imprisoned him] especially towards Cardinal Bertone and towards his own personal secretary [G.G.].
Radio Spada: In some articles that appeared on CatholicFamilyNews.com it was noted that your position on the situation of the Church is close to that of Archbishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, one of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre. From the same source was reported a sentence by you according to which Archbishop Lefevbre himself would be an exemplary confessor of the Faith. Also, in the light of your firm criticism of Vatican II and, on the other hand, of your non-adherence to sedevacantism, it would seem that the approach you promote is very close to that of the Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X. Can you tell us something about it?
Archbishop Viganò: From many parts of the Catholic world, especially in the conservative milieux, we hear it said that Benedict XVI is the “true Pope” and that Bergoglio is an “antipope.” This opinion is based, on the one hand, on the belief that his Renunciation is invalid (due to the way it was formulated, due to pressure exerted by external forces or the distinction between munus [office] and papal ministerium [ministry]) and, on the other hand, on the fact that a group of progressive Cardinals is said to have tried to have their own candidate elected at the Conclave of 2013, in violation of the norms of the Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis of John Paul II. Beyond the plausibility of these arguments, which if confirmed could invalidate Bergoglio's election, this problem can only be solved by the Supreme Authority of the Church, when Providence deigns to put an end to this situation of very serious confusion.
Radio Spada: Let’s talk about the future. In these stormy years, you have intended to serve the Church with written interventions, with videos, participating in initiatives, and with all the activities that those who follow you know well. For the future, do you see the possibility that your episcopal mission will take different forms? Are you thinking of any specific activities? Of a greater public presence?
Archbishop Viganò: My age, the vicissitudes of recent years, and the situation of the Church do not allow me to make plans, as I have never made plans in my entire life. I let Providence dispose of me as it sees fit, showing me from time to time the path I must take. I sincerely hope that my testimony, especially as regards the understanding of the deception that is taking place in the Church, may allow the Cardinals, and my Brothers in the Episcopate and in the Priesthood, to open their eyes, in a gesture of humility, courage and confidence in the power of God. We cannot continue to defend the cause and origin of our present crisis just because we do not want to acknowledge that we have been misled: this obstinacy in error would be a worse fault than the error itself.
Radio Spada: We thank you for having answered our questions: we hope there will be opportunities for future comparisons.
March 11, 2021
Feria Quinta infra Hebdomadam III in Quadragesima
[Emphasis mine.]
|
|
|
|
|
![[Image: Greg_Hunt_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg]](https://assets.lifesitenews.com/images/made/images/remote/https_www.lifesitenews.com/images/local/Getty_Images/Greg_Hunt_810_500_75_s_c1.jpg)
