Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 292
» Latest member: juliagooglet1798
» Forum threads: 6,785
» Forum posts: 12,688

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 151 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 149 Guest(s)
Bing, Google

Latest Threads
The Catholic Trumpet: Tru...
Forum: The Catholic Trumpet
Last Post: SAguide
33 minutes ago
» Replies: 1
» Views: 44
Holy Mass in Kansas [St. ...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 11:19 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 37
Holy Mass in Kansas [St. ...
Forum: April 2025
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 11:15 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 35
St. Athanasius: On the In...
Forum: Fathers of the Church
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:07 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 6,420
In Memoriam - Anniversary...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:06 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 13,916
Archbishop Lefebvre 1979:...
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:01 AM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 3,712
Feast of the Annunciation
Forum: Our Lady
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 07:00 AM
» Replies: 7
» Views: 18,133
Apologia pro Marcel Lefeb...
Forum: Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:52 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 320
Oratory Conference: "Boyh...
Forum: Fr. Hewko's Sermons, Catechisms, & Conferences
Last Post: SAguide
03-24-2025, 08:08 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 36
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: The ...
Forum: March 2025
Last Post: SAguide
03-24-2025, 04:33 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 49

 
  The Catholic Trumpet: True vs. False Resistance - Update, Public Silence & +ABL’s Legacy
Posted by: Stone - 9 hours ago - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - Replies (1)

True vs. False Resistance –Update, Public Silence & +ABL’s Legacy

[Image: rs=w:1280]


The Catholic Trumpet | March 25, 2025


Today, on the anniversary of +Archbishop Lefebvre’s death, we publish what may be our most necessary episode to date.

It’s not a condemnation.

It’s not a reaction.

It’s a call for clarity.

Doctrinal clarity.

Moral clarity.

Catholic clarity.

For over a decade, confusion and compromise have clouded the Resistance. Errors have been tolerated. Grave silence has endured. But +Archbishop Lefebvre gave us a clear standard—and the line continues.

We let the documents speak.

We let the audio speak.

We let the facts speak.

We ask only one thing: listen carefully.


“So let us be confident… so that we may remain Catholics.”  +Archbishop Lefebvre



Reference Link:

The Recusant (Issue 31, 2015) – PDF with Greg Taylor’s exposé



Print this item

  Holy Mass in Kansas [St. Mary's area] - April 6, 2025
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 11:19 AM - Forum: April 2025 - No Replies

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Passion Sunday

[Image: ?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pravoslavie.ru%2Fsas...ipo=images]



Date: Sunday, April 6, 2025


Time: Confessions - 9:30 AM
            Holy Mass - 10:00 AM


Location: St. Mary's area - contact coordinator below for details
                   

Contact: prwhite65@protonmail.com

Print this item

  Holy Mass in Kansas [St. Mary's area] - April 5, 2025
Posted by: Stone - Yesterday, 11:15 AM - Forum: April 2025 - No Replies

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Feast of St. Vincent Ferrer

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-Q-...ipo=images]



Date: Saturday, April 5, 2025


Time: Confessions - 5:30 PM
            Holy Mass - 6:30 PM


Location: St. Mary's area - contact coordinator below for details
                   

Contact: prwhite65@protonmail.com

Print this item

Photo Oratory Conference: "Boyhood of St Peter" March 24, 2025
Posted by: SAguide - 03-24-2025, 08:08 PM - Forum: Fr. Hewko's Sermons, Catechisms, & Conferences - No Replies

  "Boyhood of St Peter"
March 24, 2025 (NH)


Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary March 25, 2025
Posted by: SAguide - 03-24-2025, 04:33 PM - Forum: March 2025 - No Replies

The Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary
March 25, 2025  (NH) 





Audio

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: St. Gabriel the Archangel March 24, 2025
Posted by: SAguide - 03-24-2025, 04:24 PM - Forum: March 2025 - No Replies

St. Gabriel the Archangel 
March 24, 2025  (NH)

Print this item

  Holy Mass in Pennsylvania [Philadelphia area] - March 30, 2025
Posted by: Stone - 03-24-2025, 02:04 PM - Forum: March 2025 - No Replies

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Fourth Sunday of Lent

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...ipo=images]


Date: Sunday, March 30, 2025


Time: Confessions - 4:30 PM
             Holy Mass - 5:00 PM


Location: Clarion Hotel
                     76 Industrial Highway
                     Essington, PA 19029


Contact: rosamystica3329@gmail.com

Print this item

  Holy Mass in Pennsylvania [Tannersville area] - March 30, 2025
Posted by: Stone - 03-24-2025, 01:59 PM - Forum: March 2025 - No Replies

Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - Fourth Sunday of Lent

[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3...ipo=images]


Date: Sunday, March 30, 2025


Time: Confessions - 8:30 AM
             Holy Mass - 9:30 AM


Location: 128 Gravatts Way
                    Tannersville, PA 18372


Contact: holyfamilymissionnj@gmail.com

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko Catechism: Uplifting Effects of the Incarnation - March 24, 2025 (NH)
Posted by: SAguide - 03-24-2025, 12:03 PM - Forum: Catechisms - No Replies

Uplifting Effects of the Incarnation
March 24, 2025  (NH)

Print this item

  Fr. Ruiz:SAN JOSÉ PROTECTOR DE LA SAGRADA FAMILIA Y DE LA TRADICIÓN 2025 03 23 m3er Dom de Cuaresma
Posted by: SAguide - 03-24-2025, 11:23 AM - Forum: Fr. Ruiz's Sermons March 2025 - No Replies

SAN JOSÉ PROTECTOR DE LA SAGRADA FAMILIA Y DE LA TRADICIÓN
2025 03 23  - 3er Dom de Cuaresma


Print this item

  Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Saturday of 2nd Week of Lent "Jacob & Esau" March 22, 2025
Posted by: SAguide - 03-23-2025, 08:51 PM - Forum: March 2025 - No Replies

Saturday of 2nd Week of Lent "Jacob & Esau"
March 22, 2025 (NC) 


Print this item

  The Catholic Trumpet: The Forgotten Foundation: God is Man’s End—and Society’s, Too
Posted by: Stone - 03-23-2025, 06:51 AM - Forum: The Catholic Trumpet - No Replies

The Forgotten Foundation: God is Man’s End—and Society’s, Too

[Image: rs=w:1280]


THE☩TRUMPET | March 22, 2025


Every man is ordered to God—not merely as creature, but as his final and supreme end. To deny this is to annihilate the very purpose of man.

Man does not depend on God solely because he is a creature, but also because God is his supreme and final end.” (Fr. Fahey, The Social Rights of Our Divine Lord Jesus Christ the King)

This truth demolishes the foundational error of the modern world and the conciliar church alike. The New World Order denies it. Vatican II obscures it. But it remains the cornerstone of all reality—personal and social.

The first consequence is the necessary, absolute and complete dependence on God of every society—of every established social order.” (Fr. Fahey)

If man is made for God, then all society must be subject to Him. Families, nations, governments—and yes, even the visible Church—must submit to the Kingship of Christ. This is where the Resistance stands while the Neo-SSPX retreats.

+Archbishop Lefebvre saw it with piercing clarity: “They have uncrowned Him!” To accept the Revolution, to make peace with Vatican II, is to reject Christ as King.

This is why we resist: not to preserve tradition as artifact, but to restore the divine order shattered by revolution and betrayal.

Christ must reign—over man, over society, over His Church.

Print this item

  Vatican II and the Hermeneutic of God Allowing Us to Learn Painful Lessons
Posted by: Stone - 03-23-2025, 06:37 AM - Forum: Articles by Catholic authors - No Replies

Vatican II and the Hermeneutic of God Allowing Us to Learn Painful Lessons

[Image: 6350b1f814e14958d83406d08d15448e_L.jpg]


Robert Morrison, Remnant Columnist |  March 21, 2025

If we simply look at these three realities from the first days of the Council — abandoning the practice of condemning errors; appointing heterodox theologians as experts; and allowing the progressives to hijack the Council — it should be obvious that Vatican II began by betraying God and His truth.

“The Holy Spirit does not always prevent the necessary consequences of our negligence.” (Fr. Alvaro Calderon, Prometheus: The Religion of Man)

Among faithful Catholics who truly seek to understand the ongoing crisis in the Church, serious disagreements frequently arise regarding the best way to interpret Vatican II. On the one hand, many Traditional Catholics interpret the teachings of the Council to be a radical departure from what the Church has always taught — this framework of interpretation is often referred to as the “hermeneutic of rupture.” Conversely, many Catholics reject the hermeneutic of rupture because they believe that Vatican II, as an Ecumenical Council of the Church, could never actually break from the Church’s Tradition. These Catholics instead follow Benedict XVI in favoring the “hermeneutic of continuity,” whereby the Council is interpreted as being in continuity with what the Church has always taught.

As important as the debate over these two interpretive frameworks is, it fails to address two far more important questions: why did God permit the Council to create such problems, and what does He want us to learn from those problems? Indeed, if we focus on these questions we can better interpret not only what happened at Vatican II but also what has transpired for the past sixty years.

While the questions about why God permitted Vatican II to create such problems necessarily involves some speculation, we can get a solid foothold on the analysis if we recognize that the Council began with a few egregious betrayals of the Catholic Faith from John XXIII and the progressive Council Fathers. No serious Christian familiar with salvation history can possibly overlook this reality that the Council began by insulting God through the betrayals considered below. If God were to have rewarded such betrayals, or even allowed them to go unpunished, it surely would have been the first such occurrence in the history of mankind.


How the Council Began by Betraying God and His Truth

As discussed in a previous article, John XXIII’s opening address of Vatican II fundamentally rejected the Catholic Church’s approach to condemning errors:
Quote:“The Church has always opposed these errors. Frequently she has condemned them with the greatest severity. Nowadays, however, the spouse of Christ prefers to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than that of severity. She considers that she meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations. Not, certainly, that there is a lack of fallacious teaching, opinions and dangerous concepts to be guarded against and dissipated.”

As we know in our own spiritual lives, it is generally a sin of presumption to needlessly cast aside the precautions that God wants us to take to avoid evils. John XXIII’s sin was immeasurably worse because it exposed the entire Catholic Church to the greatest possible dangers.

John XXIII exacerbated this betrayal of God’s truth when he named several heterodox theologians as influential experts for his Council, including Fathers Yves Congar, Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, and Hans Kung. These men had been held under suspicion of heresy during Pius XII’s pontificate and yet they were given free rein to spread their errors during the Council.

Finally, we can also consider how the progressive theologians hijacked the Council during its opening session with an act of open rebellion, described by Fr. Ralph M. Wiltgen in his Rhine Flows Into the Tiber: A History of Vatican II:
Quote:“Archbishop Pericle Felici, Secretary General of the Council, was explaining the election procedures to the assembled Fathers in his fluent Latin when Cardinal Liénart, who served as one of the ten Council Presidents, seated at a long table at the front of the Council hall, rose in his place and asked to speak. He expressed his conviction that the Council Fathers needed more time to study the qualifications of the various candidates. After consultations among the national episcopal conferences, he explained, everyone would know who were the most qualified candidates, and it would be possible to vote intelligently. He requested a few days’ delay in the balloting. The suggestion was greeted with applause, and, after a moment’s silence, Cardinal Frings rose to second the motion. He, too, was applauded. After hurried consultation with Eugène Cardinal Tisserant, who as first of the Council Presidents was conducting the meeting, Archbishop Felici announced that the Council Presidency had acceded to the request of the two cardinals. The meeting was adjourned until 9 A.M. on Tuesday, October 16.”

While this may sound rather ordinary, here is how the coup was described by leading theologians:

Cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens. “This was indeed a brilliant and dramatic turn of events an audacious infringement of existing regulations! . . . To a large extent, the future of the Council was decided at that moment. John XXIII was very pleased.” (Suenens, Memories and Hopes)

Fr. Yves Congar. “This little point was important. To begin with, all points of procedure are important: they involve the work of a group. In this case, the principal importance rests in the fact that THIS IS THE FIRST CONCILIAR ACT, a refusal to accept even the possibility of a prefabrication.” (Congar, My Journal of the Council)

Fr. Joseph Ratzinger. “The Council had shown its resolve to act independently and autonomously, rather than be degraded to the status of a mere executive organ of the preparatory commissions.” (Benedict XVI, Theological Highlights of Vatican II)

Fr. Henri de Lubac. “This dramatic little episode is spoken of as a victory of the bishops over the Holy Office. Other victories will no doubt be more difficult.” (de Lubac, Vatican Council Notebooks Volume One)

As a result of this unholy coup, almost all of the preparatory work for Vatican II was abandoned and the heterodox theologians were permitted to play the most important roles in drafting the Council’s documents. For this reason, the initial drafts of the Council documents included the most liberal ideas that the heterodox theologians thought they could advance; and the final versions of those documents reflect the ways in which orthodox theologians and Council Fathers attempted to counteract the liberal ideas. This is why the Council documents juxtapose liberal and conservative ideas, without any real attempt to harmonize the contradictions — and this pathetic reality lends support to both the “hermeneutic of rupture” and the “hermeneutic of continuity.”

If we simply look at these three realities from the first days of the Council — abandoning the practice of condemning errors; appointing heterodox theologians as experts; and allowing the progressives to hijack the Council — it should be obvious that Vatican II began by betraying God and His truth. Moreover, these betrayals formed the foundation for the Council. Despite the best efforts of orthodox Council Fathers such as Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, there was no way to recover from the fact the entire Council was built on a betrayal of God’s truth.


The Theological Experiment

If Pius XII and his predecessors were correct, then these betrayals would constitute a tremendous offense against God. These offenses would naturally deserve God’s punishment, and we know that God’s punishments and corrections often consist of Him permitting us to experience the folly of our misdeeds so that we will abandon evil and return to Him.

And so the opening days of Vatican II set up a theological experiment of sorts: would God allow the Council Fathers and the Church to experience the consequences of the betrayals, or would He instead reward evil behavior by blessing those betrayals? Would the bad actions of John XXIII and the progressive Council Fathers bear good fruits, or would they bear bad fruits?


The Lessons from the Experiment

The world did not need to wait too long to see the results from the experiment. Paul VI announced the results in the decade following the Council:
Quote:“The Church, today, is going through a moment of disquiet. Some indulge in self-criticism, one would say even self-destruction. It is like an acute and complex inner upheaval, which no one would have expected after the Council. One thought of a flourishing, a serene expansion of the concepts matured in the great conciliar assembly. There is also this aspect in the Church, there is the flourishing, but . . . for the most part one comes to notice the painful aspect. The Church is hit also by he who is part of it.” (December 7, 1968)

“Through some cracks the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: there is doubt, uncertainty, problematic, anxiety, confrontation. One does not trust the Church anymore; one trusts the first prophet that comes to talk to us from some newspapers or some social movement, and then rush after him and ask him if he held the formula of real life. And we fail to perceive, instead, that we are the masters of life already. Doubt has entered our conscience, and it has entered through windows that were supposed to be opened to the light instead. . . Even in the Church this state of uncertainty rules. One thought that after the Council there would come a shiny day for the history of the Church. A cloudy day came instead, a day of tempest, gloom, quest, and uncertainty. We preach ecumenism and drift farther and farther from the others. We attempt to dig abysses instead of filling them.” (June 29, 1972)

Those who sought to defend the Church ought to have recognized that the crisis meant that they needed to reject the innovations of Vatican II. But two considerations prevented most otherwise serious Catholics from doing so: they blindly obeyed the hierarchy, and they believed that criticizing the Council would necessarily call into question the indefectibility of the Church. As a result, many Catholics who truly loved the Church were persuaded to defend what was destroying it.

And so, it seems, God permitted the evils to grow even worse so that souls would eventually wake up. Tragically, it has not been the wicked enemies of the Church who have prevented this awakening but the conservative Catholics who so vehemently oppose any real criticism of Vatican II. Were it not for the conservative Catholic defense of Vatican II, far more souls would have rejected the errors fueling the current crisis and worked to repair the damage that has been done.

Nonetheless, Francis’s hostile occupation of the papacy has afforded many faithful Catholics the occasion to realize that the conservative Catholic defense of Vatican II was always ill-conceived. Still other serious Catholics have sadly adopted the nonsensical belief that the crisis in the Church began with Francis — as though Paul VI was just imagining that the crisis existed when he made his alarming statements in 1968 and 1972. This polarization is among the least appreciated, but most monumental, effects of Francis’s reign.

Regardless of how many Catholics awaken to the reality of Vatican II, God has allowed the Council and its aftermath to teach the following painful lessons:
  • The pre-Vatican II popes were right in the condemning errors that presently plague the Church
  • Just a small amount of theological error is fatal
  • Blind obedience can be catastrophic
  • The Church’s enemies are aided by the compromises of good Catholics
  • God preserves those who do not compromise with error
  • The world suffers when the Church’s truth is obscured
  • God will not be mocked

If, instead of promoting false ecumenism and religious liberty, Vatican II had emphasized these lessons, it would have been a tremendously useful Council. However, no matter how eloquently and emphatically the Council would have been able to speak on these matters, it never could have approached the value of seeing these lessons concretely demonstrated for over sixty years. We are, in this limited sense, better off for having suffered the evils brought about by the Council. In all other respects, the Council has been an unmitigated disaster for the Church and world because it was built on a foundation of betraying God and His truth.

Is this the best way of interpreting Vatican II — the hermeneutic of God allowing us to learn painful lessons? It depends. If we are content to suffer through this crisis without a satisfactory explanation for why God is permitting it, then we will have little interest in seeing the Council in light of the lessons we should learn from it. If, however, we are inclined to fit the plainly observable realities of Vatican II and its aftermath within the framework of what we know about God’s Providence, then it is arguably the most reasonable way to interpret the Council.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

Print this item

  Fr. Hewko Catechism: Actual Grace [Bp. Ballini & Bp. Morgan Called To Act Now] March 21, 2025
Posted by: SAguide - 03-22-2025, 09:34 AM - Forum: Catechisms - No Replies

 Catechism: Actual Grace
[Bp. Ballini & Bp. Morgan Called To Act Now]
March 21, 2025  (NH)

Print this item

  Oratory Conference: Introduction to St. Peter's Life March 21, 2025)
Posted by: SAguide - 03-22-2025, 09:24 AM - Forum: Fr. Hewko's Sermons, Catechisms, & Conferences - No Replies

 Introduction to St. Peter's Life
 March 21, 2025 (NH)



Print this item