Author: admin

Sermon of Bishop Gerardo Zendejas in Avrillé – February 9, 2019

admin FEATURED POSTS - Articles and Texts section, Our seminary, Spirituality ,


Sermon of Bishop Gerardo Zendejas in Avrillé for taking of Cassocks, Tonsures, First and Second Minor Orders for Saint-Louis Grignion-de-Montfort Seminary and the Dominicans

Saturday February 9, 2019

+ In the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost

Dear Bishop Faure, Father Prior, Priests, Brothers, Sister, my dear Brethren….

+

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, our venerable Founder, has always encouraged us with his 1974 doctrinal declaration, like a testament for preserving Catholic Tradition as essential element in Catholicism. Here are some exerts of his words…

“Even though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.” (Gal. 1;8)…

“… The lex orandi cannot be profoundly changed without changing the lex credendi. The New Mass is in line with the new catechism, the new priesthood, new seminaries, new universities, and the charismatic or Pentecostal church, all of which are in opposition to orthodoxy and to the all time Magisterium.

This reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and Modernism, entirely is corrupt. It comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the reform.

It is for this reason that, without any rebellion, bitterness or resentment, we pursue our work of the formation of priests under the star of all times Magisterium, in the conviction that we can thus do no greater service to the holy Catholic Church, to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to future generations….”

My dear brethren, let us give thanks to Our Lord Jesus Christ, Lord of Lords and King of Kings, Who allows us to meet here once again at Avrillé to participate together in this ceremony of Tonsure and Minor Orders, which are ascending steps for the continuation of the Catholic Priesthood according to the Traditional Roman Rite of Ordination, as Archbishop Lefebvre has transmitted to us the Deposit of the Faith so that we should continue to do likewise for future generations.

Dear Seminarians and Dominican Brothers, God willing, you might be future priests; and you, dear faithful, should pray for religious vocations to come out from your young families. Therefore, let’s summarize, as it seems to me, in two points these words “for future generations.”

1) The preservation of the Catholic Priesthood

2) The Royalty of Our Lord Jesus Christ professed by Episcopal Ministry

+

1) The Catholic Priesthood

As Archbishop Lefebvre constantly insisted, the raison d’être for a Catholic priest is the Cross of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and the continuation of His Cross on Calvary through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The priest must necessarily live the precepts of the Gospel, namely, poverty-obedience-chastity through prayer and abnegation, in order to preserve his raison d’être. If a priest neglects the Cross of Jesus Christ, he is certainly losing the essential element for the eternal salvation of his soul and of many others.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should certainly keep up that grace which we have received at our baptism. When our godparents have said we renounce Satan, his works and allurements, the priest has also said to us “serva mandata; Keep the Commandments of God.” Then he put the white veil on our head, and in giving out a candle to us through the intermediary of our godparents he has said – “Keep intact the purity of your soul as this linen with which you are covered, and then you shall have eternal life.” We must therefore fulfill our baptismal promises so that we could enter in the Kingdom of heaven.

For those who have entered in religious life, they have pronounced their religious vows, engaging in a solemn way themselves even more than any faithful, devoting themselves not only to almighty God but also the whole Church. That’s why pronouncing their vows of religion, they have engaged themselves in a public and official way, acknowledged by the Church, practicing the vows of poverty, obedience and chastity. This is the raison d’être for a religious – he has made his profession to tend to perfection, and to strive for holiness.

And you, who are going to be tonsured – my dear Levites, as Archbishop Lefebvre used to called us – you are going to receive the cassock and the tonsure; but these two things are very distinct: One can receive the religious habit, yet without receiving Tonsure.

One enters into the clergy by the tonsure; this is the Tradition in the Catholic Church. In receiving the tonsure, there is already a promise to go to the Altar – to ascend to the altar. A Tonsured can be promoted by his superiors to receive Minor Orders, and in preparation to receive the Major Orders: a Sub-Deacon commits himself to his vow of chastity forever; a deacon approach closer to the altar by preaching, baptizing and giving holy communion; and then comes the priesthood – a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

As Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, there are two signs which determine someone’s vocation, this is to say – the inclination of the person who wants to pursue a religious vocation, and the acceptation or calling from the bishop to receive step-by-step the holy Orders. As a matter of fact, many people are willing to follow their vocation but very few of them are promoted by the calling of the bishop.

To those who are receiving Minor Orders, the Bishop is about to warn you saying: “You must give example by your life; you must sanctify the faithful by the example of your life, not only by words, not only by performing your functions, but also by the example of your life.”

In fact, in every admonition he gives to the Order of Lector or Porter, as well as to the Order of Exorcist or Acolyte; the bishop reminds the exigency to engage oneself in following Our Lord Jesus Christ in order to perform the most important act, which Our Lord did – His sacrifice.

Doubtless to say that throughout the history of the church, all the disasters and misfortunes have come in general from the lukewarm clerics and religious. Why?

For clerics have befallen into sins of the flesh, or have chosen some comfort in sharing the world, or have indulged some Satan’s pride alike. Many of them have abandoned the royal way of the Holy Cross, which is scandal for the Jews and foolishness for the pagans…. Unfortunately, there are many religious souls practicing a double standard in life, in one hand a worldly private life and on the other a public tepid life.

What to do about that? The Archbishop reminds us once again that…

“…This is not a human battle. We are in close fight with Satan. It is a struggle that demands all the supernatural forces which we need, in order to fight against him who wants to radically destroy the Church; he wanted to do so since Our Lord has born; and he wants to continue on abolishing and destroying the Mystical Body, wiping out His reign and all His institutions whatever they may be.

We have to be conscious of this dramatic, apocalyptic struggle in which we live, and not minimize it. To the extent of, if we minimize it, our eagerness in the battle grows less. We then become weaker and dare no more to proclaim the Truth….” (Archbishop June 29, 1987)

+

2) The Royalty of Our Lord Jesus Christ professed by Episcopal ministry.

We have received the means to instruct formally with Catholic doctrine the future priests, in order to administer to them, the Sacrament of the Holy Orders according to Traditional Roman Rite. You well know that there can be no priest without a bishop. Thus, bishops by divine institution are shepherds of souls, directed for their eternal salvation through the means of the Sacred Magisterium, and of the legislative and judicial power. They are responsible to Christ for their divine commission. At their Episcopal consecration, the power of Order endows them in particular to sanctify souls by the administration of the sacrament of Confirmation and of the Holy Orders.

Indeed, Archbishop Lefebvre by consecrating bishops has formally continued the constitution of the Catholic Church in order to keep Tradition alive. In providing the Episcopal ministry descending in direct line from the Apostolic succession without doubt, the marks of One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church are being preserve through today’s crisis of the Faith and of the world.

More than ever, there is a major conflict between Faith and authority. The normal and ordinary situation of the Catholic Church certainly is that the pope, bishops and priests must lead an orientation according to the Catholic tenets of our Faith, which have divinely revealed to us and are exteriorly commissioned to the hierarchy, or at least they should not contradict them. At the contrary, we are in the deepest of an extraordinary crisis within the Church. It is evident for us that the New Evangelization of today’s Pope, coming as consequence of the Vatican II reforms, is diametrical opposed to the Catholic Magisterium of all time; it is a “New Gospel,” which Saint Paul has warned us to let it be an ANATHEMA!

In fact, last few years papal interventions, which are leading the dramatic crisis to desecrate the Catholic Faith, such interventions have rejected the Royalty of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Thus, the Roman authorities have proclaimed Liberalism as the ruling principle of Religious Liberty in individual consciences and in public laws of institutions and Governments. The Vatican II document on Religious Liberty declares that no Government of any Country is competent in religious matter; therefore they cannot decide what religion is true, or what religion is false. State Laws must consequently let all religious errors – whatever they are – be spread out in their autonomous social domain, because Man is free to have his own Religion, with his own moral decisions and own ways of worship, including those ones done against nature.

For Tradition, Jesus Christ is true God and true Man, as well as a true King in all domains – yesterday, today and forever. Pontius Pilate asked to him, then are you a King? Yes, yourself have said: I am a King, for that I have born. I have come to the world in order to give testimony of the Truth…

So, instead of preaching about the Royalty of our Lord Jesus Christ the modern Roman authorities have constantly uncrowned and humiliated our King of Kings and our Lord of Lords. In the same token a large number of Traditional priests, including bishops, have been compromising the Universal Kingship of Our Lord by progressive public omission and by silent commission. It is precisely what Liberalism has silently engaged in the SSPX leadership in working for an agreement with today’s Roman authorities, promoters of Pope Francis New Evangelization. Here is a mystery of iniquity!

That’s why we should remind ourselves these words of the Archbishop Lefebvre:

“It is for this reason that, without any rebellion, bitterness or resentment, we pursue our work of the formation of priests under the star of all times Magisterium, in the conviction that we can thus do no greater service to the holy Catholic Church, to the Sovereign Pontiff, and to future generations….”

With integrity and fidelity to the Traditional doctrines and practices of the Catholic Church, we resist the “novelties” preached since the Second Vatican Council, those novelties were wanted, both encouraged and imposed by the highest Roman authorities. Even though, we believe against any human appearance, and hope against any human hope, that Tradition must restore all things in Christ, and rather sooner than later, today’s chaos will go away, because the gates of Hell will not prevail against the Church.

There is no question for us of separating ourselves from Rome, either of putting ourselves under any foreign government, or of establishing a sort of parallel church as the Bishops of Palmar of Troya [Bp. Din-Thuc consecrations line] have done in Spain. They have even elected a pope, have formed a college of cardinals… It is out of the question for us to do such things. Far from us to be this miserable thought of separating ourselves from Rome! (Archbishop June 30, 1988)

God alone knows how far this apostasy can go. Indeed, we have some duties of state to keep up, as Our Lady of Fatima told us to do, if we want to remain Catholic and if we want to continue the Church. Within the Episcopal ministry, we have serious obligations urging us, primarily, to multiply the priests who believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ, and in His royalty, and in His Social Kingship according to the doctrine of the Church.

After thirty years of the 1988 Episcopal Consecrations, we really appreciate Archbishop Lefebvre’s operation survival in keeping the mark of Apostolicity in the Holy Catholic Church, conferring Episcopal consecrations with legitimate validity for the continuation of the Apostolic Traditions.

Let’s us renew our consecration to the Mother of God, as Saint Cyril of Alexandria called her Theotokos, preaching that all Our Lady’s privileges derive from her Maternity. She can only have perfect faith in the divinity of her Divine Son. And we should ask from Our Lord such faith that she had in Her King and our King, in Her Lord and Our Lord. Therefore, we should believe the incredible so that we could do even the impossible – in restoring all things in Christ.

Viva Cristo Rey!

Letter from the Dominicans of Avrillé No. 30: January 2019

admin Letters to Friends and Benefactors ,


Letter from the Dominicans of Avrillé

No. 30: January 2019

Midnight Christmas Mass

Protestantism: born of insanity, leading to insanity (II)

Anabaptist Fanaticism

Immediately following the Protestant revolt against the authority of the Church, Germany is inundated with blood. Mathias Harlem, an Anabaptist Protestant, takes charge of a ferocious mob, ordering the pillage of Churches, the destruction of sacred vestments and art, and the burning of all books, except for the Bible.

Setting himself up at Münster, which he names “Mount Zion,” he commands the habitants to bring him all the gold, silver and jewels they possess. He has it all placed in a common treasury, and appoints deacons in charge of the distribution. All his disciples are obligated to eat in common, live in perfect equality, and… prepare themselves for imminent war, because, as he informed them, “they will soon have to leave Mount Zion, and conquer all the nations of the Earth.” He perishes in a foolish enterprise, wanting to exterminate an entire army with a handful of men, as a “new Gideon.”

The delirium of John of Leyden

Becold, better known under the name of John of Leyden, is the heir of Mathias’ fanaticism. A tailor by profession, one day he starts running in the streets, naked, shouting, “Behold the king of Zion cometh!” Returning to his house, he locks himself up for three days, and pretends to be mute when anyone tries to speak with him. Like a new Zachary, he asks (using signs) that he be brought a writing tablet. He then writes that he has received a divine revelation: after the manner of the ancient Hebrews, the people must be governed by “judges”. Twelve men amongst his most faithful disciples are chosen, to whom he leaves the task of taking control of the city. As soon as their power is unquestioned, his authority as a new prophet is assured. However, his ambition doesn’t stop there: he must be proclaimed king, with all the pomp and majesty suited to such a dignity. So blind was the fanaticism of his partisans that the goal is easily attained. He initiates to the art of prophecy a common goldsmith, who then presents himself to the judges, declaring: “Behold the will of the Eternal Lord God: just as in the days of old I established Saul over Israel, and after him, David, who was only a simple shepherd, today I establish Becold, my prophet, as the king of Zion.”

After a bit of haggling with the judges – who at first refuse to abdicate – and the help of yet another “prophet” who presents him with an unsheathed sword, representing his “power of justice” to extend the reign of Zion to the four corners of the earth, Becold is solemnly crowned on June 24th, 1534.

Becold had espoused the wife of his predecessor. He raises her to the dignity of queen, but without giving up his 17 other wives, in keeping with the holy liberty that he decreed concerning marriage. 16 months of reign will be nothing but an uninterrupted series of crimes, orgies, murders, atrocities and deliria of all sorts.

The Protestants condemn these horrors, but do they have the right? Who rejected the authority of the Church and delivered the Bible over to the whims of the people? The Anabaptists saw this very clearly; when Luther condemned them, they were filled with indignation. What right did he who established the principle of free examination have to limit its consequences?

Luther found in the Bible that the Pope was the Antichrist, and gave himself the mission to destroy his authority. Why couldn’t the Anabaptists rebel against Luther?

Epidemic of Protestant fanaticism

Herman preaches the massacre of priests and all the magistrates of the world. – David George claims to bring a new and perfect doctrine, because that of the Bible was faulty: he is “the true son of God.” – Nicolas rejects the virtue of Faith and any form of worship as useless; he also demolishes all morals by teaching that we must persevere in sin so that “grace may abound.” – Hacket claims that “the spirit of the Messiah is upon him,” and sends two of his disciples to run through the streets of London, crying out: “Behold the Christ cometh, a vessel in his hand!”

All these deplorable spectacles, and a hundred others that we could cite, are proof enough that Protestantism nourishes and exacerbates fanaticism. It would take volumes to describe all the extravagances and crimes of the likes of Venner, Fox, William Sympson, J. Naylor, the Count Zinzendorf, Wesley, the Baron of Swedenborg et alii.

This is no exaggeration. All you have to do is to consult the history books written not only by Catholics, but by the Protestants themselves. You’ll find a multitude of facts witnessing to this truth: public actions, perpetrated in the light of day, in populous cities, at times not very distant from ours.

And don’t think that this source of fanaticism is close to drying up; it seems on the contrary to be going strong…

after Jacques Balmès Le Protestantisme comparé au Catholicisme

Community Chronicle

September 9th: Parent-Teacher meeting and start of a new school year for Saint Philomena Primary School, Saint Thomas Boys’ High School… and Saint Rose of Lima Girls’ Middle School. With four students in sixth grade (the same number as Saint Thomas High School in its first year), this new girls’ school has opened its doors just down the road from the Friary. Run by a Dominican teaching sister formerly from the Congregation of Saint Pré, under the direction of the Friary, this new establishment hopes to complete the educational possibilities for the many families installed in the area (who up until now were lacking a secondary school for their girls). Please keep this in your prayers!

September 15th: Fr. Angelico is in Ambérieux (near Lyons) where he blesses the marriage of two of our tertiaries. After which he flies off to England to replace Fr. King for Mass in Southport.

September 22nd: On the feast of St. Maurice and companions, soldiers of the Theban legion martyred in 286, and patrons of the diocese of Angers, Bishop Williamson confers the sub-deaconate on our Brother Alan (from Quebec). On the same day, arrival of Fr. N’Dong Ondo from Gabon, who will spend a few weeks at the Friary to rest up before returning to his busy apostolate in Africa.

October 8th: Fr. Prior gives a conference in Paris presenting the Little Catechism on Vatican II. “The result of this Council is much worse than the French Revolution. The seminaries, novitiates and churches have been emptied. Preaching has become ecumenical and liberal; the catechisms have been changed and are no longer Catholic.” (Archbp. Lefebvre, Spiritual Journey) For this reason alone, the false “canonization” on October 14th of Pope Paul VI (who presided the council) is a tremendous scandal, demanding reparation.

This Little Catechism on Vatican II is available in English on our website.

October 29th: Fr. Louis-Marie gives a conference in Paris on “Protestant Terrorism.” It is too little known that Protestantism was only able to impose itself upon half of Europe by violence, pillage, tyranny and massacres.

First station of the All Souls’ Day procession

November 2nd: Fr. Angelico blesses a roadside Calvary restored by a parishioner and his Association for the Safeguard of Religious Heritage.

November 4th: Fr. Rémi Picot, who exercises his apostolate in Asia and Australia, comes to spend two weeks on retreat at the Friary.

November 11th: Fr. Terence accompanies a group of students from Saint Thomas Boys’ School for a ceremony organized by the Mayor of Avrillé in commemoration of the Armistice of 1918. Let us pray for the patriots fallen on the battlefield, but without forgetting that the horrible bloodbath of WWI served to destroy the last Catholic empire (Austro-Hungarian Empire), permitted communism to take control of Russia, and ended in a false, masonic “peace,” which prepared the way for WWII.

November 16th: Ceremony of “Inauguration” for the 15 seniors of the class of 2019 at the Boys’ School. This year, the boys chose Charles and Zita of Hapsburg (the last Catholic Emperor and Empress) as their patrons. Fr. Morgan, who preached a retreat to the boys focusing on the lives of these exemplary Christians, is present.

Fr. Aloïs Brühwiler comes for a week-long retreat at the Friary, before resuming his apostolate in the Valais (Switzerland).

November 25th: The annual winter market to raise money for the Primary School is a happy success, thanks to the hard-working volunteers. It was also an opportunity for some of the newer families to integrate themselves into the parish.

December 8th: Procession through the streets of Angers in honor of the Immaculate Conception.

December 26th – January 2nd: Fr. Marie-Dominique joins Fr. Reginald to preach a Christmas retreat for the faithful at St. Joseph’s Mission in Emmet, KS: 3 days of conferences, Masses, confessions, Stations of the Cross…

News from our worksites

The land behind the Boys’ School has been transformed into a level, well-drained playing field to be used for various athletic activities (once the new turf grows in).

Playing field in construction

For the new parish hall, we have finally come to an agreement with Bâtiments de France (the commission whose authorization is necessary for construction), and the architect is putting the last touches on the blue prints. As soon as the construction permit is officially granted, the work will get started.

Crisis in the Church

“[At Bethlehem,] Our Lady and Saint Joseph […] are ‘overflowing’ with holiness and therefore with joy. And you will tell me: of course! They are Our Lady and Saint Joseph! Yes, but let us not think it was easy for them: saints are not born, they become thus, and this is true for them too.”

(Pope Francis – Christmas greetings to Vatican employees; 21 Dec. 2018)

This last sentence is false and insulting toward the Blessed Virgin Mary. She was born a saint, and was even a saint from the very moment of Her Conception.

For timely articles and spiritual reading, please go to our website:

www.dominicansavrille.us

To send a donation:

YOU MAY USE PAYPAL (ON OUR WEBSITE), OR SEND TO:

— In the U.S.:

Dominicans of Avrillé, Inc.
P.O. Box 23, Newman Lake, WA. 99025

— In Canada:

Association of St. Dominic

C I B C, 201-21 Street East

Saskatoon (SK) S7K OB8 Canada

Please include a note, and specify:

acc. #40-91531

— In the U.K.:

Association of St. Dominic

R B S Edinburgh, 17 Comiston Road, Edinburgh EH10 6AA

Please specify: acc. # 00105564

For more information :

Couvent de la Haye-aux-Bonshommes

49240 Avrillé, France

Practical Devotion to our dear Guardian Angel

admin Spirituality


Practical Devotion to our dear Guardian Angel

by Rev. Fr Pius. CP.

Choose one day of each month to honour your own good Angel Guardian; receive Holy Communion in his honour on that day, and hav­ing employed at least one quarter-of-an-hour after Communion in thanksgiving, reflect upon the great goodness of God, Whom you possess within you.  Who knowing your weakness and the danger to which you are exposed both in soul and body and the difficulty you have of defending yourself against your enemies, has appointed over you one of His Angels, who are the princes of His Heavenly Court, and has given him orders to assist and defend you and never to leave you as long as your soul dwells in your body.  Return His Divine Majesty most humble thanks for so great a favour, and admire the value he sets on your soul since He thus employs an angel in your service.  Then with much piety address yourself to your own dear Angel Guardian.  Thank him for accepting the charge of you, and since on his part he promises you four things and faithfully per­forms them, do you be as faithful in your performance as he is in his.

  1. He promises never to abandon you.
  2. To cherish and love you as a child of God, bought with His Precious Blood, and designed for the same glory he enjoys.
  3. To guard both your body and soul, and to procure what is best for both.
  4. To continue his care of you at all times and places until your soul is separated from your body.

 

On your part promise him also four things, and beg his assistance in performing them.

  1. A great reverence for him, and neither to think, say, or do anything deliberately that may displease him.
  2. A tender devotion to him loving him as your brother and best of friends, and endeavouring to increase his accidental joy in Heaven by the holiness of your life upon earth.
  3. A great confidence in his protection over you, and to have recourse to him as a child goes to the arms of its mother, in all difficulties, imploring his help frequently.
  4. To persevere in these duties till our last breath.

 

This contract being made between your good Angel and you, beg our dear Lord, Whom you have received, to bestow His benediction upon it.  Then retire in company of your most faithful Angel, and in time to time enter­tain yourself with him during the rest of the day. Sometimes thank him for all the good services he has done you from the day of your birth, when he first began to take care of you until this present moment, reflecting on the chief ones, and next to God, attributing them to him.

Sometimes ask his pardon for having passed so many years of your life without thinking of him, for having so often saddened him by your imperfections, and for so sel­dom having recourse to him in your necessities, or thanking him for his benefits.

At other times open your heart to him, declaring openly your wants and begging him to solicit God on your behalf.  Ask him to give you light in your doubts, help in dangers, comfort in your afflictions, victory over your enemies, and his particular assistance at the hour of your death.

Moreover during the day address yourself to him by aspirations; and, if time will permit, perform some devotion in his honour, or say his Office, Litanies, or some colloquies or other prayers, etc.

Is it not a duty to seek official recognition from the Pope?

admin The Fight for the Faith ,


Is it not a duty to seek official recognition from the Pope?

By Maubert

published in Le Sel de la Terre 102

1. Reasons for a Positive Response

Yes, it seems that it is a duty to seek official recognition by the pope.

* First reason

Indeed, if the Roman authorities, and especially the pope himself, call us to join our efforts to re-christianize society, we cannot do anything but rejoice in it, while ensuring that we remain as we are.  Or, with good reason, the pope sees in the SSPX a force that can have a part in the new evangelization demanded from all corners.  He appreciates that we are moving towards the “existential peripheries,” that is to say, that we help souls wherever they are, which goes in the direction of his program.  Finally, he sees that everything falls apart, while we on the contrary represent a living force for the Church.  Do we have the right, therefore, to refuse a recognition and to keep for ourselves all these treasures?

* Second reason

Among the conservatives, we have sympathizers – even some cardinals – some of whom need our help.  This could counterbalance the influence of the progressives.

* Third reason

Any abnormal situation leads in itself to normalization. It is in the very nature of things.  We must go in this direction and look to restore us to a normal situation.

* Fourth reason

In the coming years, we will urgently need new bishops.  It is certainly possible to consecrate without a pontifical mandate, in case of emergency, but if it is possible to consecrate bishops with Rome, this permission must be sought.

* Fifth reason

It is not through ecumenism that the Pope comes to us, but as Catholics.  He tells to whoever wants to hear that we are Catholics.  Moreover, the discussions that we have with our Roman counterparts or with those mandated by the Holy See, are discussions between Catholics.  What’s more normal than being officially recognized as Catholics?

* Sixth reason

Our canonical recognition would cause a healthy disturbance within the Church: the good would be encouraged, the malicious would suffer a defeat.

* Seventh reason

Moreover, with reason, our enemies (the modernists and others) oppose it: this is a sign that it would be a good thing.

* Eighth reason

St. Pius X himself shows us the example.  Indeed, the anti-clerical forces, taking advantage of the disunity of their opponents, had seized power in Venice.  In the following elections, Cardinal Sarto resolved to change the situation. “He laid the foundation for an honorable alliance,” says his biographer (Fr Dal Gal), “between the members most representative of the Catholic party and those of a moderate party, an alliance contracted under the sign of the most ample trust.”  There was total victory.  Thus, the popes of the late 19th and early 20th century gave the example of appeasement with secular countries to reinvigorate an influence of the Church.  And on this road of pragmatism, with his back to isolation, one of the pioneers is St. Pius X, as famous for his reforms as for his attachment to principles.

Likewise in the crisis of the Church: after the Council, it was important to distance oneself, as Archbishop Lefebvre did, to show our disapproval of certain novelties.  Now the danger is isolationism.  It is necessary to reach a peace with the moderates, to reinvigorate in the Church the principles of Tradition, and that happens necessarily with a canonical solution.

* Ninth reason

Archbishop Lefebvre, moreover, has always sought a canonical solution for the SSPX.  He continued his efforts even after the consecrations, although, in his realism he had little hope of success.

* Tenth reason

Today, we are not the only ones to criticize the excesses.  At Rome itself, voices are heard.  This freedom that is left to them is the guarantee of the one left to us, after the canonical recognition.

2. Opinions on the other side

Against the preceding reasons, let us note what follows:

* On July 14, 1987, Archbishop Lefebvre said to Cardinal Ratzinger:

“Eminence, see, even if you grant us a bishop, even if you give us a certain autonomy relative to the bishops, even if you grant us all of the liturgy of 1962, if you grant us to continue the seminaries and the Society, as we are doing now, we will not be able to not collaborate, it is impossible, impossible, because we work in two diametrically opposed directions: you, you are working on the dechristianization of society, of the human person and of the Church ; yet us, we work for their christianization. We can not get along.” (Le Sel de la Terre 31, p. 194).

* In December 1988, he said again:

“When we are asked when there will be an agreement with Rome, my answer is simple: when Rome shall recognize our Lord Jesus Christ.  We cannot agree with those who dethrone Our Lord.  The day when they will recognize again Our Lord, King of all peoples and nations, it is not we who will have joined them, but the Catholic Church in which we remain.” (Fideliter 68, p.16).

* Finally, in his Spiritual Journey, which is like his testament, he writes:

“As long as this Secretariat [for Promoting Christian Unity] will keep false ecumenism as their orientation, and as long as the Roman and ecclesiastical authorities approve of it, we can say that they will remain in an open and official rupture from all of the past of the Church.  It is therefore a strict duty for priests wanting to remain Catholic to separate from this conciliar Church, as long as it does not find the Tradition of the Magisterium and the Catholic faith.”

3. Answers to the objections

– To the first objection: the pope calls us to the new evangelization

The pope, being the authority, is the efficient cause for this society which is the Church.  If he calls us, we must carefully examine whichever final cause he intends to lead us to.  What is this “new evangelization”?  Does this term mean the same thing for him and for us?  Is Francis looking for the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? (We have seen otherwise).  If it’s not the case, we cannot answer his call; that would be to endorse his program, falsely suggesting that we agree on the terms.  Now, as we have seen, since the Council, the men of the Church lead to an end quite opposed to that set in place by Our Lord.

As for the “existential peripheries”, he is not afraid to look into divorced remarriages, homosexuals, etc., with a complacent look on their moral disorders.  Is this what this term also means for us?

– To the second objection: with the conservatives, we could act as a counterbalance

More than ever, we must help these sympathizers.  But is canonical recognition the right way?  In fact, what they need to do is open their eyes to the errors of the Council.  At this time, they do not see its errors.  Indeed, according to them, the thing that we lack is canonical recognition: said another way, they have not understood that the problem is not with us, but with them.

Our real way of helping them is to provide them with all the materials that will enable them to understand the crisis we are experiencing, and to pray for the Holy Ghost to enlighten them. This is what some priests did about Bishop Lazo, bishop emeritus of San Fernando de la Union in the Philippines.  What a magnificent conversion they obtained!  It was not only signs of sympathy they got on part of the prelate, but also he became a confessor of the faith.  “Why did you become a traditionalist?” they asked him.  “Well, here [is why],” he answered, “it’s because I rejected the new Mass!” (Le Sel de la terre 21, p.163).  But it is not only the Mass; the fight for the faith is even more important.  In 1998, he sent to John Paul II a Declaration of Faith, in which he denounced conciliar errors.  “I am for Catholic Rome,” he said, “the Rome of Saints Peter and Paul. […] I am not for Rome controlled by freemasons who are the agents of Lucifer, the prince of demons.” (Le Sel de la terre 26, p.166; extended text on pp. 162-167).  And he himself became an apostle to other bishops, sending them documents.  “I have given this you as I think it is up to this level of ideas in which we must engage in this battle.” (Le Sel de la terre 21, p. 167, see his autobiography in issue 34, pp. 89-112)

– To the third objection: any abnormal situation leads to normalization

The expression is ambiguous.  It can mean that any abnormal situation must be made normal again.  For example, after the Eastern schism, the Church has made every effort, for centuries, to bring the dissidents back to the fold.

However, the obvious meaning seems to be that, ineluctably, things must move in the right direction.  Now, our poor human nature, delivered to itself, can only roll from abyss to abyss, if no one comes to help her.  To use the example of schismatics, despite the numerous efforts of the popes, very few of them have returned to the Church for a thousand years.

In addition, the expression used implies that we are in an abnormal situation.  What is actually abnormal is that the authorities spread modernism.  To make a comparison, if a father forces his children to steal, under the threat of grave punishment, they are bound to disobey him and resist him; certainly it is abnormal that children resist their father; but the first disorder is indeed that of the father; and if it becomes untenable and dangerous for their virtue, it is prudent for them to get away from him.  As this disorder remains, the children are forced to resist, or to stand aside.  It would be incomprehensible for the children to resume normal relations with their father, because they know that he is obstinate in his vice.

In our case, we keep our distance from modernist Rome for the reasons mentioned above, and for others we will see in the following articles.  As these reasons remain, we are obliged to stay in the situation we find ourselves in and to be qualified “abnormal” by the objector.

– To the fourth objection: the urgent need for new bishops

One must distinguish the two questions: the canonical solution and the consecration of a bishop.  Each is resolved by its own principles.  (Note that, in 1987-88, the occurrence of these two problems confused the matter.  All was clearer in 1991, for the consecration of Bishop Rangel, where only the question of the consecration was in play.)

For the first (the canonical solution), we will number the principles in the next issue.  As for the second (the consecration of a bishop), it is resolved by the principle of the state of necessity.  Let’s hear how Archbishop Lefebvre spoke about it shortly before his death.

In 1990, having learned that the health of Archbishop de Castro Mayer was declining, Archbishop Lefebvre sent him a letter proposing to him the consecration of a successor in the episcopate.  “Why consider such a succession,” he asked, “outside the usual canonical norms?”

1) “Because the priests and faithful have a strict right to have pastors who profess in their integrity the Catholic faith, essential for the salvation of their souls, and priests who are true Catholic pastors.

2) “Because the conciliar Church is now universally spreading errors contrary to the Catholic faith and, because of these mistakes, has corrupted the sources of grace that are the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the sacraments. This false church is in ever deepening rupture with the Catholic Church.  The absolute necessity of continuing the Catholic episcopate to continue the Catholic Church results from these principles and facts. […].

That is my opinion; I think it’s based on the fundamental laws of ecclesiastical law and on Tradition.” (Fideliter 82, pp. 13-14).

It can be added that Archbishop Lefebvre had made contact with the Roman authorities for all the steps of the episcopal consecrations for the Society before 1988.  He had concluded that “recourse to Rome, always physically possible, is rendered morally impossible by the spirit which has penetrated the Holy Father: communion with false religions, the spirit of adultery which is [alive and] breathing in the Church; this spirit is not Catholic.  For twenty years, we have strived with patience and firmness to make the Roman authorities understand this need for a return to sound doctrine and tradition for the renewal of the Church, the salvation of souls and glory of God.  But they remain deaf to our pleas, and furthermore they ask us to recognize the legitimacy of the whole Council and the reforms which ruin the Church.” (Quoted in Mgr. Tissier de Mallerais, Marcel Lefebvre, a life, Clovis, Étampes, 2002, p. 570).

If, therefore, the need for episcopal consecrations is felt, it suffices to retake these principles and apply them: the faithful always have the right to true doctrine and the true sacraments; the conciliar Church is still in rupture – even more than in 1990 – with the Catholic Church; finally, the Holy See does not seem to have questioned the legitimacy of the Council and cannot stand being attacked on this question.  By this we can easily see “if it is possible to consecrate bishops with the permission from Rome.”  As for knowing when to consecrate bishops, this falls within the “royal prudence,” that of the leader.  It is up to him to apply the principles to the reality of the moment.

– To the fifth objection: it is not ecumenism

Truly, relations between the Holy See and those faithful to Tradition is not ecumenism.  Indeed, ecumenism is the search for a certain union between Christians (Catholics and non-Catholics) without conversions.  But here, both sides are Catholic, so it is not ecumenism.

However, the principle that is at the root of ecumenism is pluralism: indeed, in ecumenical relations, everyone respects the convictions of the other, accepting them as valid.

However, this is the same principle that the Holy See wants to impose for their relations between us.  Hence, it does not suffice to say that it is not through ecumenism that the pope comes to us – which is true – yet it should not be in a pluralist perspective, which is not the case.

– To the sixth objection: the healthy disorder which will lead to our recognition within the Church

Everything that is of traditional tendency gathers sympathizers and opponents (some more or less virulent).  For example, some show their discontent with the founding of the Good Shepherd Institute, saying that “these people should have stayed out“; others showed their support, seeing it as a step towards “reconciliation“.  In the same way, the Franciscans of the Immaculate were appreciated by many and hated by others.  Yet it does not suffice to say that Institute of the Good Shepherd was right and that the doctrinal position of the Franciscans is irreproachable.  It is not on the reaction of others that we must judge an act, but on its intimate nature.  We examine the moral nature of a canonical recognition with the neo-modernist authorities.  That’s enough to judge its merits.

– To the seventh objection: our enemies oppose this recognition

The reason we have just given suffices to answer the present objection.  Let us add simply that it is not enough that an effect be good to justify the act which produced it; in other words, the end does not justify the means.  It is not permitted to steal money to build a church.  Here, likewise, the good effect (besides being very limited) would proceed from a bad means: adding to conciliar pluralism.

– To the eighth objection: St. Pius X has given us the example of union with the liberals

Certainly, there was a meeting with the liberals to expel the Freemasons.  Yet, as Father Dal Gal says, let us observe, moreover, that in this alliance between Catholics and moderate liberals, it was not these who had drafted the program of common action to conduct in the election period and after the elections.  It was not the Catholics who had attenuated their principles to adhere to the moderates, but the moderates who had adhered to the program of the Catholics.  Now, in our case, it is the neo-modernists who intend for us impose their principles.

Let us note that in the case of the separation of the Church and the State, St. Pius X resisted the French government which wanted to impose the cultural associations, which would have led the Church of France to schism.  His firmness pushed back the sectarians.  It is therefore wrong to say that the pontificate of Saint Pius X is part of an inescapable logic of reconciliation and appeasement.  That is reading events in the light of the sense of history.

In addition, isolation is not an evil in itself: God had even prescribed it to the people of Israel.  If Archbishop Lefebvre distanced himself, it was to preserve his priests from modernist influences.  It is not clear why, by the mere fact that thirty years have passed, it is necessary to go through a canonical solution to reintroduce the principles of Tradition to Rome.

– To the ninth objection: Archbishop Lefebvre had always sought a canonical solution

Let us begin by pointing out that Archbishop Lefebvre had long sought a canonical solution.  But it is absolutely clear that after the consecrations, Archbishop Lefebvre until his death no longer sought a canonical solution.

Yet it is not useless to say why Archbishop Lefebvre first sought a solution on the canonical level.  It is because he has long hoped and believed that the authorities were capable of sincerely desiring the good of Tradition. “I have hoped until the last minute”, he said, “that in Rome there would be a little loyalty.” ( Fideliter 79, p. 11).  This will to favor Tradition was undeniably the same as that of Bishop CharriÀre when he approved the SSPX.  But later, Archbishop Lefebvre had to realize that it was not at all that of the Roman authorities.  “They want to have us under their heels directly,” he said, “and to be able to impose on us precisely this anti-Tradition policy of which they are imbued. {…] I realized that Rome wanted to impose their ideas and ways of seeing. “( Fideliter 66, pp. 28-30).  “We quickly realized that we were dealing with people who are not honest. […]  We, we wanted recognition [the will to help Tradition], Rome wanted reconciliation (that each one make concessions) and we recognized our mistakes.” (Fideliter 70).

Cardinal Gagnon himself said to L’Avvenire of June 17, 1988:  “We have, on our side, always talked of reconciliation, Archbishop Lefebvre, on the other hand, of recognition.  The difference is not small.  Reconciliation presupposes that both parties make an effort, that past mistakes are reconciled.  Archbishop Lefebvre only hears that it is said that he has always been right, and that is impossible.”  (Quoted in La Tradition excommunique , a publication of the Courrier of Rome , Versailles, 1989, pp. 40-41).  “The desire of Rome of not helping Tradition”, said again Archbishop Lefebvre, “and of not trusting it, is evident.”  ( Fideliter 68, p. 9 – see pages 4 and 7).  Finally, he writes to John Paul II that “the moment of frank and effective collaboration had not yet arrived because the purpose of this reconciliation is not at all the same for the Holy See as it is for us “. ( Le Sel de la terre 25, p 153).

Also, for him, there is no question of entering the pluralist system: “For them, all this [Catholic doctrine] evolves and has evolved with Vatican II.  The latest term of evolution, that is from Vatican II.  That’s why we can not bond with Rome.”  ( Fideliter 66, 30).  “We should not be surprised that we cannot arrive to an understanding with Rome.  This will not be possible as long as Rome does not return to faith in the reign of our Lord Jesus Christ, and as long as she gives the impression that all religions are good.”  ( L’Eglise infiltr»e par le modernisme [ The Church Infiltrated by Modernism ], p. 71).

– To the tenth objection: the freedom of conservative prelates is the guarantee of our freedom

As we have seen, none of the conservative prelates questions the Council and its principles.  Only if we accept, in one way or another, these principles, will Rome tolerate criticism on our part, which is obviously unacceptable.

Translation by J.F

.

The miraculous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe

admin Apologetics, Spirituality


The miraculous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe

Empress of America

Feast: December 12th

“It is through the Blessed Virgin Mary that Jesus-Christ came into the world; and it is also through her that He must reign in the world.”

(Saint Louis Marie-de-Montfort, True Devotion to Mary, Introduction.)

A striking example : The history of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico

**

In Mexico of the 16th century, the native-Indians living in the country were reduced to semi-slavery by the Aztecs that used them for their human sacrifices .

For example, in 1487, for the dedication of a temple in Mexico, the Aztec wizards massacred 80,000 young Indians: one person was killed every fifteen seconds on one of the four stone altars at the top of a pyramid, 45 m high: they cut open their ribcage to tear their hearts still palpitating.

On April 22, 1519, Good Friday, Hernando Cortez landed on the Mexican coast, from Cuba with a small fleet of ships with black cross sails, bringing 550 men including two priests.  As soon as the victory was over, he destroyed the statue of the Aztec god Huitzilopochtli, replaced it with an image of Our Lady, cleansed the human blood of the temple, and buried the 100,000 human skulls impaled at the foot of the pyramid of Mexico.

Despite the arrival of the Franciscans in 1524 and the first bishop of Mexico, Msgr de Zumarraga, conversions and baptisms were very rare. The Indians believed that Catholicism was a religion for white people only, and their pagan beliefs persisted in their souls.

But the course of things would change radically when the Mother of God, Our Lady of Guadalupe, appeared in person, in December 1531, in Tépeyac, a hill near Mexico, to an Indian named Juan Diego.  Juan Diego was born in 1474 near Mexico City. He had been one of the first to ask the Franciscan Brothers to educate him, and he was baptized in 1525.

On December 9, the Blessed Virgin had appeared to Juan Diego, asking him to build a Chapel on Tepeyac hill, with the permission of the bishop of Mexico, so that all his children would come to her.

After various vicissitudes, the bishop finally asked for a sign to be sure of the divine origin of the apparition.    As a miraculous sign, the Virgin Mary made Castilian roses grow on the hill, and asked Juan Diego to pick them. “All these flowers will be the sign that you will bear to the bishop“, she said to him!  Juan took the roses in his tilma (Indian poncho); then went to see the bishop.  When he unfolded his tilma before the bishop, the miraculous image of the Virgin was printed on the fabric.  All fell prostrate on their knees to contemplate this image from Heaven.

***************************************************************

Marvelous properties of the image

This miraculous image gradually revealed its marvelous properties.

– Miracle of conversions

Firstly, the image provoked the conversion of Mexico.  On December 26, 1531, there was a procession to Mount Tepeyac, where many Chichimecian Indians met; they played with their bow and arrow and danced according to their customs.  On this occasion, an arrow shot at random pierced the throat of an Indian who accompanied the “Mantle”.   He died instantly.  The arrow was removed in front of the image, a scar was immediately formed, and the Indian resuscitated.  Nine million Indians converted to Catholicism.

– The image is scientifically inexplicable

Various scientific analyses have been performed.  In one, in 1979, two NASA scientists members proved that there is no painting in the original poncho and that it is not a photograph that would have printed the fabric.

Two angels were later painted by the image of Our Lady outside the rays, but thirty days later they disappeared and today, thanks to highly specialized and sophisticated tools we can find the trace.

NASA scientists also discovered that by passing a laser beam laterally on the canvas, the ray passes without touching the paint or the canvas so that the image is suspended in the air at three tenths of a millimeter above the fabric.

– The image is miraculously protected

The tilma measures 1.71 high on 1.05 wide. It is made of plant fibers of cactus (maguey).  In the eighteenth century, a very similar copy of the original was made with the same name: some fifteen years later, the copy was reduced to dust, while the original has already lasted nearly 500 years.

In 1791, Muriatic acid fell on the upper right side with a proportion of 50% nitric acid and 50% hydrochloric acid, making a hole 10 cm in diameter. Thirty days after, the tissue was restored without anyone intervening to repair the accident.  Even today, it remains a mark of the task and only by means of a precision instrument can one observe traces of burning.

On November 14, 1921, a stonemason Lucien Perez, an anarchist, laid a bouquet of flowers at the foot of the tilma, in which he had put a load of dynamite which destroyed all around, but left intact the poncho as well as the window pane.

– The image reacts like a living person

In 1956, the ophthalmologist doctor Bueno discovered that by approaching a light nearer to the eyes of the image, the pupils closed; and by removing the light, the pupils dilated again as if they were living human eyes.

In July 1956, Dr. Lavoignet, after eight months of intensive work, discovered the optical phenomenon of the triple image of Purkinge-Samson, which corresponds to what the human eye perceives, that is to say, the three refractions of the object seen.

In 1979, it was found that the tilma keeps without any explanation the temperature of the human body oscillating around 36.6 ° -37 °.

Finally. a gynecologist, by putting his stethoscope upon the image, on the belt of the Holy Virgin Mary who is pregnant, heard the heartbeat and noted that they came to 115-120 heartbeats in minute, what corresponds to the cardiac-beating of the heart of the Child Jesus, just as those of the foetus in the breast of his mother!

Saint Paul VI ?

admin The Fight for the Faith


Saint Paul VI ?

By Dominicus

After the recognition of the the “heroic virtues” of Pope Paul VI by Benedict XVI on December 20, 2012, and the pretend beatification by Pope Francis on Sunday, October 19, 2014, his pretend canonization took place on Sunday, October 14, 2018.  A new false canonization, after that of popes John XXIII and John-Paul II.

To be beatified or canonized, a pope must have exercised heroic Christian virtues not only as a Christian, but also as pope.  But, far from having exercised exemplary virtues, Pope Paul VI is among those who have contributed the most, along with the Popes John XXIII and John Paul II, to the self-destruction of the Church.

Let us begin by recalling some facts regarding his pontificate, then we will give some documentation.

List of facts regarding Paul VI

1. The first list of facts is found in the book by Msgr. Lefebvre, Le coup de maître de Satan [The Masterstroke of Satan]1 :

A list of facts that, taken separately, can seem insignificant, but which, seen in the light of the new humanism, take on an astonishing meaning :

– Visit to the UN and support of this Masonic organization and enemy of all that is Catholic.  [October 4, 1965, with a humanistic speech ( “What you are proclaiming here are the basic rights and duties of man, his dignity, his liberty and above all his religious liberty.  We feel that you are spokesmen for what is loftiest in human wisdom.”) and pacifistic (  “never again war, never again war !” ) ]

– Visit to the worship hall of the UN, a true Masonic temple. [The same day Paul VI entered the « meditation room », a Masonic sanctuary in the center of which there is  “an altar for a faceless God”.]

– Renunciation of the tiara, sign of the power of the pontificate. [November 13, 1964, Paul VI placed the tiara on the altar, in full council before all the bishops of the entire world, giving it up definitively.]

– Refusal to condemn communism at the Council.

– Embarrassing presence of observers of all religions at the sessions of the Council.

– Nomination of four moderators.

– Intervention by a woman at the Council.

– Trip to the State of Israel.  Contact with the Chief Rabbi.

– Hugging Athenagoras, the Orthodox patriarch, with the lifting of his excommunication.  Athenagoras had a Masonic funeral.  [During his trip in the Holy Land on January 6, 1964, on the Mount of Olives, Paul VI hugged Athenagoras I, a 33rd degree Mason.  This was the first meeting between a pope and a patriarch since the Council of Florence (1439).  At the pope’s initiative, he and the patriarch together blessed the audience.]

– Intervention against the CÅ“tus Internationalis Patrum [group of conservative bishops, among them : Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro-Mayer], but support of the liberal cardinals.

– At St. Paul Outside the Walls, the handing over of the the papal ring to Ramsey, Anglican “archbishop” of Canterbury – in fact, a layman2, Mason, and heretic.   Blessing given with the Pope to the whole present Church : cardinals, bishops, clergy, etc. [This took place March 23, 1966.]

– Visit to Bogotà to support the claims of the “camperinos” and indirectly of the “guerillas”.

– Visit to the Philippines to arrive at Hong Kong where a pro-communist speech was to be given, but it was forbidden by the governor of Hong Kong.

– Decree for mixed marriages, without a requirement for Catholic baptism of the children.

– Nomination of a commission for the birth control pill, expecting it to take two years to decide !

– Decree on “Eucharistic hospitality” permitting Protestants to receive the Eucharist.

– Secretariat for unity with pro-Lutheran declarations.

– Secretariat for non-Christians.

– Suppression of holy days of obligation.

– Suppression of the Eucharistic fast.

– Suppression of abstinence.

– Permission of Saturday Masses for Sunday.

– Permission of cremation.

– Concelebration of Anglican pastors in the Vatican.

– Blessing of dancing and screaming Pentecostals at St. Peter’s.

– Kissing the feet of the Orthodox.

– Sending the flag of Lepanto back to the Muslims.

– Sending the head of St. James to the Orthodox.

And all the big reforms :

– Liturgical reforms.

– Reform of the seminaries.

– Democratization of the institutions : synod of bishops at Rome ;

– episcopal conferences without a precise delimiting of power ; diocesan priestly councils.

– Reform of the Roman Curia and especially of the Holy Office.

– Reform of the nomination of bishops.

– Revision and modernization of all the Constitutions of religious societies.

– Obligatory resignation of bishops at 75 years of age.

– Ousting of cardinals from the Conclave at 80 years of age3.”

2. To this impressive list, one can add other acts.

a) First, some facts taken from the book by Albert Briault and Pierre Fautrad, Le Ralliement de Rome à la Révolution4 [Rallying Rome to the Revolution]:

– Gift of the cross and ring to the Buddhist U’Thant [Secretary General of the UN].

– Wearing of the Ephod of the Jewish high priest alongside the pectoral cross.

– Communal prayer at the C.O.E. at Geneva.

– Participation in an ecumenical celebration in Sydney.

– Abolition of the minor orders and the subdiaconate.

– Systematic replacement of faithful bishops with progressive, even communist ones.

– Replacement of curacies and vicarages with “priestly teams“.

– Suppression of the Anti-Modernist Oath.

– Heretical, ecumenical translations of Holy Scripture.

– Heretical Dutch catechism circulated everywhere.

– Catholic universities and major seminaries become homes of heresy.

– Almost complete liberty left to the perverters (both clergy and laity) of the children and youth, in the schools and even churches.

b) Let us add some facts taken from the prolific, but not always well-referenced studies of Fr. Luigi Villa 5:

– On March 20, 1965, Paul VI received an audience of the directors of the Rotary Club, a Masonic organization, and said that the motto (“friendship and culture“) of this para-Masonic group was good, that their method (periodic festive meetings) was good, and finally that the ends (professional needs, progress of the culture, friendly relations between men and the nations) were good 6

– Paul VI wanted Giordano Gamberini (1915-2003) 7 to be part of the steering committee of the Bibbia Concordata 8.   Gamberini was grandmaster of the Grand Orient of Italy, one of the founders and “bishop”, under the name of Tau Julianus, of the Italian Gnostic Church.   Gamberini was responsible for the translation of the Gospel of St. John. He later wrote the funeral eulogy of Paul VI in La Rivista Massonica9:

To us, it is the death of him who made the condemnation [of Freemasonry] of Clement XII and of his successors fall.  That is, it is the first time – in the history of modern Freemasonry – that the Head of the greatest Western religion dies not in a state of hostility with the Freemasons. […] F or the first time in history, the Freemasons can pay respect to the tomb of a Pope, without ambiguities or contradiction 10.

– On June 2, 1971, Paul VI received a public audience, at the Vatican, of the members of the “Masonic Lodge” of the B’nai B’rith, and he addressed them thus:

Dear friends, it is with joy that we welcome to St. Peters your distinguished group of leaders of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith 11

– Under Paul VI the suppression of the excommunication of the Freemasons was prepared.  In August 1972 Cardinal Seper, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, communicated to Fr. Riquet S.J.:

“The interpretation of Canon 2335 restricting the excommunication to members of the associations that act against the Church can be admitted.”

Two years later Cardinal Seper addressed a letter to Msgr. Krol, president of the episcopal conference of the United States.  Due to the large diversity of situations from country to country, the cardinal explained, the Holy See did not change the general legislation in force “until the new Code of Canon Law be published by the competent pontifical commission“.  For particular cases the penal law “should always be interpreted restrictively” ; but, he continues :

“One can thus surely teach and apply the opinion of the authors saying that Canon 2335 concerns only the Catholics who are part of associations that act against the Church 12.”

c) Regarding the relations of Paul VI with Freemasonry:

Here is an excerpt from number 197 of the Lettres politiques by Jacques Ploncard d’Assac (reproduced in Itinéraires 305, pp. 166 ff.):

« Paris, June 1986 – The Italian Catholic review Chiesa Viva, in April 1986, published a letter by Fr. Rosario F. Esposito that plays an important role in the collusion with the Masonic lodges under the pontificate of Paul VI.  This letter is addressed to the grand-master Gamberini and was published in Rivista massonica of August 6, 1978:

“My dear Gamberini,” Fr. Esposito very amicably begins. He reports to his correspondent that a Dominican, Fr. Felix A. Morlion, founder of the International University “Pro Deo“, confided to him that, speaking one day with then-monsignor Montini, regarding the relations between the Church and Freemasonry, Montini had told him:  “In less than a generation, peace will be made between the two societies” (the Church and Freemasonry).

“Now that the Pontiff is deceased,” Fr. Esposito continued, “there is no reason to continue to keep the secret.  And the prediction – I would say almost the decision – is fully verified:  the meeting with Morlion must not have taken place before 1948-1950, the letter of the Holy Office to Cardinal Krol dated July 19, 1974, thus the terms of a generation were perfectly respected.

“Besides, Paul VI had, before even 1970, the occasion to bring other blows to the wall of Christian-Masonic enmity. The ‘acquiescence’ of the Vatican to the decision of the bishops of Scandinavia and Finland, according to which, converts from Protestantism, eventually enrolled in Masonry, would not be obliged to renounce it, but would be permitted to keep the two qualifications, Catholic and Masonic, dates from 1966 or 1968.  For him who knew the total intransigence, always professed by the Church, of the absolute rejection of Masonry, the acceptance of the Scandinavian-Baltic thesis could not but appear in all its revolutionary character.

“Furthermore, regarding the behavior of Paul VI  toward institutions that, in any manner, are linked to Masonry, one sees the same thing.  Receiving the members of the “Rotary Club,” object of distrust and rejection on the part of the Vatican, Paul VI did not fear to recognize that the Church had fallen into an excessive mistrust: now the way of dialogue and mutual trust has been found.” »

Some documents concerning Paul VI

1. Letter from Msgr. Lefebvre to Paul VI

This letter has a preliminary remark:

“In response to that of Cardinal Baggio, prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops, received July 10, 1976, ordering him to manifest to the Holy Father his regret for the ordinations done June 29.  He gave him a deadline of ten days.”

« Most Holy Father,

All the means of access permitting me to come to Your Holiness being forbidden, may God make that this letter arrive and express our sentiments of profound veneration, and at the same time formulate with an instant plea the object of our most ardent desires that, alas! seem to be subject to dispute between the Holy See and numerous faithful Catholics.

Most Holy Father,

deign to manifest your will to see the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ extend in this world by:

– restoring the public rights of the Church,

– rendering to the liturgy all its dogmatic value and its hierarchical expression,

– according to the Roman Latin Rite consecrated by many centuries of use,

– reestablishing the honor of the Vulgate, and

– restoring the catechisms to their true model, that of the Council of Trent.

Doing this, Your Holiness will restore the Catholic priesthood and the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ over the people, families, and civil societies.

According to the example of your predecessors, it will render the correct conception of the false ideas that have become the idols of modern man: liberty, equality, fraternity, democracy.

May Your Holiness abandon the harmful enterprise of compromise with the ideas of modern man, an enterprise that originates from a secret agreement between the dignitaries of the Church and those of the Masonic lodges, since before the Council.

To maintain this orientation is to continue the destruction of the Church.  Your Holiness will easily understand that we cannot collaborate in such a disastrous design, which we would do if we were to consent to closing our seminaries.

May the Holy Ghost deign to give Your Holiness the graces of the gift of strength, such that it manifests by unequivocal acts that you are truly and authentically the successor- of Peter proclaiming that there is salvation only in Jesus Christ and in His mystical spouse, the holy Roman Catholic Church.

And may God… ”

Marcel Lefebvre,

former Archbishop of Tulle.

Albano, July 17, 1976.

2. Msgr. Lefebvre’s assessment of Humanæ Vitæ of Paul VI

”

When one sees the time that Pope Paul VI allocated to solve the question of contraception, well! it is to despair of morality.  It is finished, because there is no longer morality.

He appointed a commission for it, and this commission took more than two years (two and a half years 13) before responding to a question that the Christians, the poor Christians in the pew, could answer right away: they knew well that it was forbidden.  You well know that one cannot have relations which prevent the conception of a child.  They knew it well.

So it needed to wait two and a half years to have a response.  During this time, well! evidently, the pill is spread everywhere.  One asked himself: “Since no one has said anything, it is because he is free.  What could be free, the pope could leave free.”

And then, behold, it is accomplished.  There is no way back.  Now look, the priests leave it entirely: “It is of no importance, you being free; one must judge according to his convictions.” 14

“

3. Excerpts from the Liber Accusationis of Abbé de Nantes

  • “To believe in man, build the world, liberate the people, knock down tyrants, develop culture, and restore democracy.  Paul is the prophet of this new age where all the religions, ceasing to oppose each other, comprise the Mouvement d’Animation Spirituelle de la Démocratie Universelle [Spiritual Animating Movement of Universal Democracy], the MASDU of Paul VI! […]”
  • “I feel [this paternity] flowing out from me in concentric circles, and beyond the visible borders of the Church.  I feel I am the father of the entire human family.” […]
  • “So that the world goes well, Paul VI clearly conceived that he must be Pope, as De Gaulle saw that he must be Chairman.”

4. Declaration of Paul VI to the bishops assembled at the closing of the Council, December 7, 1965

“The religion of the God who became man has met the religion (for such it is) of man who makes himself God.  And what happened?  Was there a clash, a battle, a condemnation?  There could have been, but there was none.  The old story of the Samaritan has been the model of the spirituality of the council.  A feeling of boundless sympathy has permeated the whole of it.  The attention of our council has been absorbed by the discovery of human needs (and these needs grow in proportion to the greatness which the son of the earth claims for himself).  But we call upon those who term themselves modern humanists, and who have renounced the transcendent value of the highest realities, to give the Council credit at least for one quality and to recognize our own new type of humanism: we, too, in fact, we more than any others, honor mankind 15.”

One can compare this declaration with the instructions St. Pius X gave in his first encyclical:

“We must use every means and exert all our energy to bring about the utter disappearance of the enormous and detestable wickedness, so characteristic of our time – the substitution of man for God 16.”

Freemasonry, whose goal is the destruction of the Catholic Church, promotes the worship of man.  Hearing Paul VI, the Freemasons must have enjoyed their triumph.  Is this not the actualization of the plans that they forged in the 19th century?

Upcoming Dominican Mission, St. Marys, Kansas Dec. 27- 29, 2018

admin Retreats, Spirituality


DOMINICAN MISSION IN SAINT-MARY’S, KANSAS

ADDRESS:   St. Joseph’s Mission,   100 KS-63, Emmett, KS  66422

Dec. 27- 29, 2018

Dominican Fathers Marie-Dominique   and   Reginald

Thursday, December 27

9:00 am Mass

10;15 am Conference: Our vocation here-below in the bosom of the Blessed Trinity and hereafter in eternity 

11:30 Stations of the Cross

Lunch (reading)

1:30 pm Conference: The obstacle – SIN

2:45 pm     C O N F E S S I O N S 

3:30 pm Rosary

4:15 pm Conference: The spirit of mortification and the sacrament of Penance

5:30 pm Mass (Sermon)

Friday, December 28

9:00 am Mass

10;15 am Conference: The Cross, the Mass, and the Holy Eucharist

11:30 Stations of the Cross

Lunch (reading)

1:30 pm Conference: Our life of prayer

2:45 pm     C O N F E S S I O N S

3:30 pm Rosary

4:15 pm Conference : Our life with the Holy Ghost; His Gifts

5:30 pm Mass (Sermon)

Saturday, December 29

9:00 am Mass (Sermon)

10;15 am Conference: Devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary

11:30 Rosary (Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament)

         Closing 

Pot Luck

Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council (Part Twelve) – CONCLUSION

admin The Fight for the Faith


Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council (Part Twelve) – CONCLUSION

by Fr. Pierre-Marie, O.P.

Dominican in Avrillé

From Le Sel de la terre 93, Summer 2015

(continued, number 12)

CONCLUSION

One could object that we have not cited the numerous passages that can have an acceptable meaning.  It is true that, in this brief study, we have especially noted the defective points of the conciliar texts.  But it suffices, for a text, to contain one error in order to be bad, as the scholastic dictum says: bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocumque defectu (something is good when it is entirely so; the least defect renders it bad).

We have desired to make a sort of synthesis for understanding the principle defects of the conciliar documents.  We think that this study, in particular, shows that these texts convey a new doctrine, which today permits the conciliar Church to collaborate with the establishment of globalism.

One can also ask why there was not a more lively reaction, during the Council, to reject this new teaching.  It was doubtless necessary to await the application of the Council and the progressive implementation of globalism after 50 years, to better judge these texts and their influence.  The professor Johannes Dörmann began his studies on the new conciliar theology when he understood that the Assisi interreligious meeting in 1986 was a consequence of the Council.17

Today, in retrospect, one can ask if the plans of the High Lodge, devised one and a half centuries ago, are actually being realized:

You wish to establish the reign of the elect upon the throne of the prostitute of Babylon?  Let the clergy march under your banner in the belief always that they march under the banner of the Apostolic Keys. […] Lay your nets like Simon Barjona.  Lay them in the depths of sacristies, seminaries, and convents […].  You will have fished up a Revolution in Tiara and Cope, marching with Cross and banner – a Revolution which needs only to be spurred on a little to put the four quarters of the world on fire. […]  [The dream] of the secret societies will be accomplished for the most simple of reasons, because it is based on the passions of man. […] our plans will succeed one day above even our most improbable calculations18.

We have put a heavy burden on your shoulders, dear Volpe.  We must work for the immoral education of the Church and come to it, by little means in a gradual manner, to the triumph of the revolutionary idea by a Pope. In this project which has always seemed a superhuman calculation, we walk still groping19.

Msgr. Lefebvre comments on this last phrase:

“Superhuman calculation,” Nubius said; he means a diabolical calculation!  Because it is to calculate the subversion of the Church by its head himself, which Msgr. Delassus20 calls the supreme attack, because one cannot imagine anything more subversive for the Church than a pope won over to liberal ideas, than a pope utilizing the keys of St. Peter in the service of the counter-Church!  But, is not this what we see currently, since Vatican II, since the new Canon Law?  With the false ecumenism and false religious liberty promulgated at Vatican II and applied by the popes with a cold perseverance despite all the wreckage it provokes after more than twenty years21.

Thus, has the supreme attack been committed?  Has the “famous” Masonic dream22 been realized?

Regardless of the–necessarily occult–influence of Freemasonry on the unfolding of the Council, one cannot deny, by simply analyzing the texts, that the doctrine of the Church was modified such that Catholics could collaborate in the construction of the Temple, viz., in the unification of mankind such as the “sons of the widow23” understand it?

Translation by A. A.

Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council (Part Eleven) – The Three Declarations (second and third of three): ‘Nostra ætate’ and ‘Gravissimum educationis’

admin conciliar Church, The Fight for the Faith , ,


Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council (Part Eleven) – The Three Declarations (second and third of three):  ‘Nostra ætate’  and  ‘Gravissimum educationis’

by Fr. Pierre-Marie, O.P.

Dominican in Avrillé

From Le Sel de la terre 93, Summer 2015

(continued, number 11)

The three Declarations (continued)

2. Nostra ætate (NA): Non-Christian Religions

What is the significance of Nostra ætate (NA) on the relations with non-Christian religions?

Like DH, it is a declaration, a text of little importance in principle.  And yet, it too, is one of the most important documents of the Council. 24    In favoring the unity of the human race, it does not suffice to promote ecumenism among Christians; it is also necessary to inaugurate inter-religious dialogue.

How does NA give a new teaching?

Never has the Church praised other “religions”.  She presented herself as the only true religion, the only one that really merits this name because she alone binds [religa] man to God.

But this document describes the false religions positively, ignoring the negative aspects (of jihad of the Muslims, human sacrifices in several “religions”, terrible idolatry, moral infamies, etc.25). Here are some examples:

In Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. […] Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. […] The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings […]

The Church regards with esteem also the Moslems. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in Himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men […] In addition, they await the day of judgment when God will render their deserts to all those who have been raised up from the dead. Finally, they value the moral life and worship God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting. […]

God holds the Jews most dear for the sake of their Fathers; He does not repent of the gifts He makes or of the calls He issues–such is the witness of the Apostle. […] True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. […]

The Church reproves, as foreign to the mind of Christ, any discrimination against men or harassment of them because of their race, color, condition of life, or religion.

Could you point out a sophism of this new teaching?

For example, the statement: “The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions.”

There surely are truths in these false religions, otherwise they would not attract anyone.  But, as Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange O.P. correctly said, truth is captive to error.  But these religions use these partial truths to distance men from the Catholic Church, the only ark of salvation.  What good is it to know these truths if one loses his soul?26

What are the consequences of this new teaching?

NA contains the seed for all the inter-religious gatherings that mushroomed after that which John Paul II convoked at Assisi in October 1986.  The different religions are presented as good and able to save their adherents.  The prayers performed in these religions are considered as agreeable to God.

In what concerns Judaism in particular, NA was the beginning of an engagement.27   The Church is no longer presented as the new elect people come to replace the old.28   The old Covenant would still be valid for the Jews, and they would not need to become Christians to be saved.

What does the Church become in this concert of religions?

The Conciliar Church becomes, according to the happy expression of Abbé de Nantes, the MASDU: the Spiritual Animating Movement of Universal Democracy.  Using the moral prestige accumulated by 2000 years of Catholic Tradition, the authorities of the Church contributed to establishing the spiritual nave of the Masonic Temple described by Msgr. Delassus in La Conjuration antichrétienne29.

3. Gravissimum educationis (GE): Christian Education

What do you say about Gravissimum educationis momentum (GE) on Christian education?

Even if it is a document of minor importance, one finds the same usual errors in it:

– a liberal ideology, with references to the declarations of the Rights of Man of 1948 and the rights of the child of 1959 (preamble)–the word “right” occurring 28 times in the text;

– the recommendation of ecumenism–one of the roles of the faculties being to promote “the dialogue with our separated brethren and with non-Christians” (§ 11) in view of the decree on ecumenism and with the method of Ecclesiam Suam;

– the recommendation of the right to religious liberty (§ 7).

We remark that the Council does not state that the purpose of a Catholic school is to transmit the Faith, but instead, that  « its proper function is to create for the school community a special atmosphere animated by the Gospel spirit of freedom and charity, to help youth grow according to the new creatures they were made through baptism » (§ 8).

(To be continued)

Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council (Part Ten) – The Three Declarations (first of three: Dignitatis Humanæ: on religious liberty)

admin The Fight for the Faith ,


Little catechism of the Second Vatican Council

by Fr. Pierre-Marie, O.P.

Dominican in Avrillé

From Le Sel de la terre 93, Summer 2015

(continued, number 10)

The three Declarations

1. Dignitatis Humanæ (DH) : religious liberty

What is the significance of Dignitatis humanæ (DH) on religious liberty?

Although DH is only a Declaration, thus in principle a minor text, it has a very great importance30. Cardinal Bea, following his secret visit with the secretary general of the Ecumenical Council of Churches, prepared a schema on this theme, which provoked a serious incident during the last session of the central preparatory commission: Msgr. Lefebvre often spoke of the confrontation between Cardinal Bea and Cardinal Ottaviani, because it can be seen as a prelude of the confrontation between the “two Romes”31.

By adopting the “essential principle of the modern State”32, the Council accepted one of the fundamental claims of Freemasonry: “Christians should not forget that all routes [i.e., all religions] lead to God and sustain this courageous notion of liberty of thought that–and one can truly speak in this regard of a revolution coming out of our Masonic lodges–is marvelously spread over the dome of St. Peter’s33.”

What is the fundamental teaching of DH?

DH (§ 2) teaches that “the human person has a right to religious freedom.  This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.”  This right “has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person“; it “is to be recognized in the constitutional law…and thus it is to become a civil right“; and it “continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.”

Is this teaching opposed to the traditional teaching of the Church?6

Yes, this teaching is opposed to numerous magisterial texts, e.g.,

– to Mirari vos (15 August 1832)34 by Gregory XVI :

“This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. ‘But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,’ as Augustine was wont to say.”

– to Quanta Cura (8 December 1864) by Pius IX :

“And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that ‘that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.’ From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an insanity, viz., that ‘liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society…’ But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching liberty of perdition”.

– and above all to the condemnation of the propositions of the Syllabus of Pius IX (8 December 1864):

77. « In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship. »

Allocution “Nemo Vestrum,”July 26, 1855.

78. « Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship. »

Allocution “Acerbissimum,” Sept. 27, 1852.

79. « Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship, and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. »

Allocution “Nunquam Fore,” Dec. 15, 1856.

Is this teaching opposed to the traditional practice of the Church?35

Indeed, from Constantine to Vatican II, the Church has always asked Christian princes to prohibit false cults, “except for real necessity of tolerance“36.  It has never considered that “not disturbing the public order” is a necessary motive of tolerance, except to give this expression a meaning different from that of Vatican II.

But, as St. Thomas Aquinas said: “The custom of the Church has very great authority and ought to be jealously observed in all things…  Hence we ought to abide by the authority of the Church rather than by that of an Augustine or a Jerome or of any doctor whatever.” (II-II, q. 10, a. 12).

It is thus certain that the declaration DH gives a false teaching.

Does the Conciliar Church not realize the contradiction?

The Conciliar Church does realize the difficulty in reconciling the teachings.  It has authoritatively affirmed that the reconciliation is possible (because, to them, Vatican II cannot be mistaken) and it has spawned many studies to try to reconcile the two teachings, but without success, each study developing a new argument for how the previous one does not suffice37.  Finally, during the doctrinal discussions, the Conciliar Church invited the Society of St. Pius X to “enter into the Church” to help it find a solution!

In fact, the simplest and most honest solution is that of the future Benedict XVI who admitted: « there are magisterial decisions which cannot be the final word on a given matter as such but, despite the permanent value of their principles, are chiefly also a signal for pastoral prudence, a sort of provisional policy.  Their kernel remains valid, but the particulars determined by circumstances can stand in need of correction.  In this connection, one will probably call to mind […] the pontifical statements of the last century regarding freedom of religion »38.

Is DH based on a false philosophy?

Yes, DH is based on a personalist philosophy in considering that the common good “chiefly consists in the protection of the rights, and in the performance of the duties, of the human person” (§ 6).

Without speaking of the Masonic origin of the doctrine of the Rights of Man, it is at least paradoxical to define the common good as the protection of the rights of particular persons. The particular good is ordered to the common good, not vice versa.  Personalist philosophy, placing the person above society, is the source of a spirit of protest, egoism, and subversion.

(To be continued)