Look after yourselves, my friends, it’s not selfish. We pray to the saints to come to our aid, we pray for the purgation of faithful departed, and at the same time, we must pray for ourselves to be counted among them. Things are getting weirder by the day. Take care of yourself spiritually, and maintain your bearing.
“Secure your own mask first, before helping others.”
I fly around 120K miles a year for my day job, so I hear that phrase a lot. Maybe that’s why when I heard it referenced by Ann Barnhardt in a podcast earlier this week, it just sort of went right past me. The analogy was referring to the need to make sure your own faith, soul, prayer life, etc is well taken care of as prerequisite to anything else.
That same day, I went off to Confession, as I had already planned to do. The penance was totally focused on the need to pray for my own needs, and really making it a priority. The priest asked me if I had prayed my daily Rosary yet, and I told him I had not (I love that at the FSSP parish, it’s just assumed you’re praying a daily Rosary). He instructed me to go offer my Rosary, entrusting to our Blessed Mother the channeling of all necessary graces for my spiritual benefit.
The podcast and the Confession should both have been a big wake up call. But the full gravity of the situation didn’t really hit me until about halfway through that Rosary when I realized, slap upside the head, I actually could not remember the last time I prayed the Rosary entirely for myself. The Holy Ghost always knows when you need a slap upside the head. Now you already know how much I love the Rosary, so you can imagine how odd this seemed to me. I mean, obviously I’ve prayed a decade or two as a penance, for an increase in this virtue or that, but a whole Rosary just for me? I can’t remember the last time, and that’s a real problem.
In Spiritual Warfare, the Rosary is a weapon of mass destruction. I’ve written about it many times in these pages. It’s a real weapon, not a metaphorical weapon. So much so, it almost seems selfish to offer it entirely for yourself. But it’s never selfish to pray for yourself, so long as your intention is in accord with God’s will. And we need not worry about petitioning something against His will, because He’s not granting that anyway. Of course in the individual prayers of the Rosary, the Our Fathers and Hail Marys, we are praying for ourselves within those prayers. But what I am talking about here are specific, personal, spiritual intentions beyond what is asked in those prayers.
I would be willing to bet that most Catholics who are somewhat secure in their faith, who are honestly trying to live authentic Christian lives, and who have managed by the grace of God to overcome a whole bunch of entrenched wretchedness, don’t pray for themselves nearly enough. We foolishly think we’ve extracted ourselves permanently from said wretchedness and we’re now “saved”. Not in the proddy sense of “once saved always saved”, but rather in the sense of “thanks to my hard conversion/reversion to the one true faith, even though I still fall sometimes, and even though I’m totally unworthy of the honor, I am now on the side of the angels and God will surely grant me final perseverance.”
Oh man, that is so dangerous. It’s for very good reason that Jesus taught us to pray to the Father to deliver us not into temptation, and that we ask Mary to pray for us at the hour of our death. It’s for very good reason that in the Roman Canon itself, during the Hanc Igitur, the priest and faithful pray to be saved from eternal damnation and be counted among the elect. Damnation is a real possibility if we so choose it, and “once saved always saved” is one of the most pernicious lies ever told. If you are truly living an authentic Christian life, Satan views you as a hard target; he knows he needs to deploy extra resources to bring you down, and deploy he will. He’s already won the soft targets without even trying, so he’s got extra munitions reserved for you. Meditate on the blitzkrieg he has planned for the hour of your death. Be terrified by this, and use the terror to build your counterattack.
With everything that’s going on right now, all of the “confusion” surrounding all aspects of the Bergolian antipapacy, Satan is squealing with delight and has launched a huge offensive. Bergoglio himself is a soft target for Satan, easily manipulated and used to destroy souls on a horrific scale. He is a soft target not only because he is an arch-heretic and profoundly stupid, but because he does not have the supernatural protection afforded to the holder of the Petrine office, due to his invalid election. Now, when this is the unmistakable reality of the Catholic Church today, the one true Church founded by God Incarnate, do you think perhaps the effects of this might be rather… widespread? The past nearly
So there is certainly no shortage of things to pray about. And while some of this is about prioritization, it’s also about recognizing your role at the tip of the spear. We need to militantly pursue our own spiritual perfection first and foremost. It might not seem right when it first hits your ear, but if we are too busy praying for everyone else at the expense of praying for ourselves, it does everyone a disservice. This may sound uncharitable or lacking humility, but that’s not the case, because it necessarily means expanding our own prayer life. The mere fact that you are here, reading this tiny, tiny blog right now, means you are probably the tip of the spear. Proper training is essential. By calling down these graces in petition, and cooperating with them, our own increase in holiness in turn makes our prayers for others more efficacious. Everybody wins.
You are part of a very small, elite, specialized unit. This is the greatest battle ever fought, because the results of this battle are eternal. You need to be on your game.
St Michael the Archangel, pray for us
St Joan of Arc, pray for us
St Martin of Tours, pray for us
St Ignatius of Loyola, pray for us
Christ, have mercy on us
29 thoughts on “All Saints and All Souls: Take great care to be counted among them”
Very good. Pray for yourself first because you need and you are an example to others. What’s the point of praying if it doesn’t make you better. And pray the rosary daily by all means.
My daily prayer, said several times daily, is: Lord, help to know, love and serve you. To love others. serve others, do your will always, and be apostolic.
What confirmation this is for me today. As I received Holy Communion today, I asked our Lord to help me; how can a wretched, weak sinner like me be of any use to others without Your Help?
It hit me almost two years ago how my prayers were 99.99% for others and their conversion….such wicked pride.
Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to Thee.
I’ve been seeing God’s Providence is so, so, many things lately.
Just love this blog.
Le Roi Soleil
I don’t know if you noticed that you mentioned very French saints. Saint Michael the Archangel also? Yes, since the Prince of the angelic hosts himself appeared in 708A.D. for Bishop Saint Aubert and ordered to build a sanctuary dedicated to him on a rock above the sea abyss in Normandy. Blessed emperor Charlemagne made a pilgrimage there and chose Saint Archangel Michael as ‘the Patron and Prince of the Gaul Empire’.
Saint Martin, a Roman soldier and citizen, settled freely in Gaul and Gauls made him their bishop in Tours.
Saint Michael the Archangel again made known his fondness for the Gauls when he led the Virgin of Orleans, Saint Joan d’Arc, in her war campaign to regain the throne of France for Charles VII de Valois, the rightful heir.
Finally Saint Ignatius of Loyola: He founded the Society of Jesus on August 15, 1534A.D. not elsewhere, just in Paris, France.
Why did this galaxy of French saints just appear in your prayer calls today? For the sake of the great monarch of the end times! How is that? Well, at night on November 3, 1637A.D. the Blessed Virgin appeared in Paris during the matins in the presence of the Augustinian Fiacre de Sainte-Marguerite carrying a baby in her arms and said to him: “Have no fear, I am the Mother of God, and the child you see is the Dauphin God wants to give France.” That Dauphin was not even conceived yet. Only after making three novena to Notre Dame de Grâces (in Cotignac, Provence) did the royal couple, Louis XIII de Bourbon and Anne of Austria, beget this Dauphin, whom we know as the Sun King.
In all his splendor, King Louis XIV, undoubtedly the greatest ruler of France, was only a prefiguration of the great monrachy of the end times, identical with the Fire (=Sun), which the Lord Jesus wanted to cast upon earth. With the disclosure of his person, the real Kingdom of God will be inaugurated on earth. Stay tuned!
Nov. 2, 2019 on the feast of All Souls (also remember the souls of the French monarchs)
This is a great point, and I’ve thought about it in the past. Probably like so many others I have loved ones who are either unchurched or Protestants. These are my nearest and dearest, and it worries me to no end to consider their state in life. Probably 99% of my prayers are for them, or others whose needs come to my attention. I chalked it up to God’s mercy. If there’s one thing I feel hopeful about, it’s that God knows my intention is to be His friend. I am relying on God’s mercy completely. He knows I’m a rotten sinner, I’m going to trust Him. But we shouldn’t be presumptuous, this is very true, and assume we are just “in”.
I would clarify that the reason it was a “failed partial resignation of Pope Benedict” is because of the way in which those in the “BiP-with error” camp insist on framing the narrative. They seem to refuse, at least publicly, to consider within the bounds of the Law of Charity that in declaring his intent to renounce “administering the Petrine Munus”, Pope Benedict declared and did exactly what he intended to do without error, without bifurcating, without 4-D chess playing: He spoke the words of his intention, to renounce administering the Petrine Munus while at the same time doing THAT ministry which the mutineers could not subvert and which he continues to do in this day: praying and fasting and making reparation.
Islam_Is Islam says:
November 3, 2019 at 9:18 am
And we believe that ” praying and fasting and making reparation” will win the day vs our heretical pope.
Mr. Dowd, absolutely pray and fast. Absolutely. However, it seems to me that to use the phrase ‘heretical pope’ borders on an admission that Jesus cannot keep His promises to His Bride and to us. Is this perhaps an example of despair or even blasphemy? At the minimum I believe that this phrase is an affront to the Theological Virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity. Moreover, faithful Catholics who know about the evidence surrounding BiP should think long and hard before using it.
It seems quite simple to me: Either FiP and Jesus lied OR BiP and Jesus has used the cooperation of a weak creature to keep his promises to His Bride and to us. We laity simply need to continue to storm heaven with our prayers and fasting and speak, write, and question when presented the opportunities. Much of what you have already spent your own adult life doing. Thank you for that, Mr. Dowd.
We have had bad Pope’s in the past even those preaching heresy. I do not buy your argument except the praying part. I support Ann Barnhardt’s thesis that Bergoglio is both illegitimate and a heretic. Many Catholics agree. Christ cannot communicate with a Pope who will not listen. Bergoglio has got to go.
Mr. Dowd, You say you support Miss Barnhardt’s “thesis that Bergoglio is both illegitimate and a heretic”. With this I do not disagree and that is exactly why I do not address him as pope and why I have taken you to task for referring to him as ‘heretic pope’. Miss Barnhardt is also clear that “we have to get this right”. In other words, since he is NOT and never has been anything but an anti-pope and a usurper to the Chair of Peter, he can NOT resign or be deposed. Either of those options suggest that he is and has been pope and will thus lead to the ‘election’ of another anti-pope! You do see that “we have to get this right”? Right?
And this is my point, just as Miss Barnhardt also firmly declares that Kaitlin Jenner is a man; so too must we pronounce clearly and without hesitation that Bergoglio has NEVER been pope and has always been an anti-pope. Any man ‘elected’ in that cardinals’ retreat of March 2013 would be an anti-pope.
My point of divergence with the Barnhardt thesis is the continued and perhaps harmful-to-unity assertion of intent based on hearsay and speculation, especially in light of Ratzinger/Benedict Derangement Syndrome (R/BDS). As Cam and others here and elsewhere clearly show, we can not know and thus we should not assert intent–good or bad.
If you do not think that R/BDS is a real thing, here is an example that seems to me to be TOTALLY devoid of even a hint of the Law of Charity so hate filled does it appear to me. (Please note that this person with the best of intentions addresses former Cdl Bergoglio as Pope Francis while they rant in typical R/BDS-style about our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.) From the CathInfo site: “Pope Francis’ current levels of apostasy and open idolatry would not have been possible but for the prolonged and consistent efforts of his VII predecessors. After all, it wasn’t Bergog-Magog in plain clothes during that council. But let us consider for just one moment that Benedict is still Pope, does that make things better or worse? Well, if the singing rat does nothing but sing the praises of his parasite anti-pope who then goes on to spread the same black death that the host-Pope himself spread with only comparative tepidity, then how can he be held blameless? He can’t! The Benedict option is really Francis in Benedict’s zucchetto, which is to say a dire wolf in a wolf mask wearing sheep’s clothing. At every single opportunity, Benedict has poured public adulation upon Francis’ actions and after everything we’ve seen Benedict capable of, why should anyone start assuming now that he is secretly being held against his will? It’s not consistent with his personality, but it is completely understandable that he is fully in cooperation with the powers that be, coming from a Vatican that has long since adopted Hegelian tactics to further its goals.”
From this comment does there appear room for the action of grace to conversion of heart and mind in this person’s thinking? Where is the charity, the room for non-judgment of heart and mind–intent which only God alone knows? Yet this is the R/BDS that is prevalent in some groups of TLM adherents of which I’ve only recently become aware. Who else knows about R/BDS?
This type of invective is what I suspect Miss Barnhart’s “BiP-with error” and ‘worst. pope. ever.’ unintentionally (I hope) feeds. It is true that we are not responsible for the words and actions of others, but we can direct others toward the Law of Charity and perhaps Miss B has attempted to do this for those who suffer from R/BDS. So I could be mistaken that her thesis contributes to this vileness, but in all honesty I ask, how does the refrain ‘worst. pope. ever.’ and interpretive speculation on ‘intent to create diarchy’ aid in bringing about Catholic unity around the only DULY elected Pope, Benedict? My conclusion? “BiP-with error” does not bring unity. Perhaps neither does my favorite “BiP-without error” bring unity. Be that as it may, why don’t we simply rely on the black-and-white evidence of BiP from February 11th and 28th, 2013 itself and stop impugning an intent that we cannot know? Apparently in Canon Law, bestowing an office, like giving a bequest, does not require the establishment of intent unlike a contractual agreement like a marriage.
slam_Is Islam says:
November 5, 2019 at 8:26 am
Mr. Dowd, You say you support Miss Barnhardt’s “thesis that Bergoglio is both
Thanks you your comprehensive answer. I agree we should all treat others with charity. This is most often been observed in the breach regarding, well, just about everything associated with Vatican II. “Pope” Francis is a product of Vatican II and is doing nothing more than extending it’s buried axioms to their ultimate conclusion which is the dilution and eventual elimination of Catholicism.
God will, of course, not permit this to happen. But in the meantime being prudent, wise and charitable as this battle is contested will be a supreme challenge for all concerned. Many failures are to be expected. Jesus said he was not bringing peace but a sword–the sword of Truth. In other words the Church is now in civil war and a war with the world. We should not expect it to be without the display of many shortcomings.
Agreed that “shortcomings” will be difficult to avoid especially without relying on grace and remembering the Law of Charity. The difficulty in harking back to VII as the source of all problems and saying that anti-pope Francis is just like all the other post V-II Modernist Popes makes it seem reasonable to NOT look at BiP and merely endure this anti-pope and his regime “since he’s exactly what we all deserve” which seems to be the strategy of those who insist on FiP and either have masochistic tendencies or suffer from R/BDS being of the opinion that Jesus has lied regarding His promises to His Bride and to us. While an examination of the evidence might indicate that God has, of course, not permitted the Gates of Hell to prevail by using a weak instrument with which to safeguard His promises.
BiP is the sword of Truth and BiP divides us and causes us to choose.
Francis is worse than a mere heretical pope. Francis is in fact heretical of course. Every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
But that of course does in nowise make him pope.
Nor does the “we have had bad popes before” hold water. We’ve had antipopes before too, yet unlike Francis at least they were all Catholic.
IisI is absoultely right–a discerning Catholic man ought to know better than to dignify Francis with the charge of heretical pope. That’s a half-truth (hence very dangerous) and misnomer.
And like most deceptions the more effective for being mixed with a little truth. Of course you are not using the term deceptively yourself, my dear Mr. Dowd–but nonetheless the professional trad to semi- Trad Inc.-sters have to know better, and appear to be using it intentionally to LEGITIMIZE Francis, especially among the wavering and confused members of the flock, as evidently yourself. Beware. They have all admitted Francis is GREEEEEE-ate for business. More folks are coming to the Old Mass, etc. But fidelity to money is their chief goal. So obvious in the case of poor, clearly Barnhardt-obsessed, fund-chasing Mr. Skojec, and to some extent I daresay Mr Matt. How does one go from leading ultra-montane (JP-2 we luv u) to Rousseauvian hatred of the office of the papacy in like two years, anyhow.
There is not only nothing Catholic about Francis–there is nothing papal about him either. The man is a complete fraud.
The best you could say of him is he is a false pope. I’d suggest revisiting the history and text of Fatima’s Third Secret. Speaking of Fatima–how is it that no one in “semi-Trad Inc.” Land is paying one whit of attention to the great work of Peter Chojnowski–proving–and I asy that as a lawyer–PROVING that the later Sr. Lucy –post 1967–is a different person that our beloved seer of Fatima. Not. One. Word.
It’s a blind spot. Like saying “Francis is antipope.”
Yet Our Lady of Fatima predicted the apostasy in the church at the highest levels. This is the unanimous testimony of all the eyewitness present at John XIII’s reading of the Third Secret, including Cardinals Ciappi, Oddi, Ottaviani, and the late great Loris Cardinal Capovilla. Please y’all, get a copy of Socci’s Fourth Secret. And Zavala wrote a book rehashing the Socci thesis in2017, but adding one interesting fact, videlicet:
The letter of Sr. Lucia from 1944–the one pager of 23 or 24 lines that Socci proved existed and was squelched first by John XIII (‘saint’ my petoot), and later by Bertone and Sodano (with the aid sadly of Benedict qua Ratzinger and John Paul II in 2000–describing the apostasy in the Church and a “false pope” with “an evil gaze” leading people “into a Church of Hell”–was beyond a reasonable doubt in her own hand. This was proven by the leading forensic handwriting expert of the Madrid courts, and is the chief merit of Zavala’s book..
Ann’s argument presupposes Bergoglio is a false pope, but goes farther and can be distilled down to one thing: Francis is an antipope. The evidence amply supports this claim.
Signs abound to tell you, Mr. Dowd, and me, and the octogenarian twin sisters down the road, and my 97 year old Aunt Jenny in Atlanta (who recently told me Christoher, I don’t like this Francis very much…. Do you think God minds?), who Bergoglio truly is. Our Lord charged us with reading those signs.
Islam is Islam makes the perfectly legitimate point, also raised by Miss Barnhardt and our host and many others including Brother Bugnolo whose arguments like those of Aqua may help resolve IisI’s query (What if Benedict did it on purpose to preserve the papacy from unclean and idolatrous hands….)–that there is no way Christ–our Lord and Brother and the Founder of our Faith–would break his word to St Peter.
And to us.
brotherbeowulf says: November 4, 2019 at 7:32 pm
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. I am on board with you 100%.
Interesting point you make about Traditional blogs like One Peter 5, Remnant that they have decided to zip the criticism of Francis. You think it’s all about money. Maybe. If so that would be a bad thing and undermine their credibility. I’m sticking with Ann.
My little mission is mainly to comment on Conservative blogs like Crisis and the Catholic Thing. There the folks are much less hip to what’s happening in the Church. I am trying to educate them.
By the way, did you read Fred Martinez in the Catholic Monitor on “Pope” Francis?
Blessings to you.
Thank you for acknowledging Prof Chojnowski’s team’s findings. Keep in mind that along with them, we also have Fr. Schweigle’s statement made in 1952 regarding his interviews with the real Sr. Lucy. He observed that a future pope would make a ‘difficult yet triumphant’ decision’. Again from the memoirs of the real Sr. Lucy, we have the vision of Jacinta retold by her cousin which in light of R/BDS seems to describe Pope Benedict’s situation (the following insert is taken from the anonymous priest’s complete Apologia, a summary of which was published on Sept 14th at Bp. Gracida’s blog):
“The Vision of Jacinta
Since Pope Benedict’s renunciation, I have been greatly disturbed by the almost immediate change of attitude concerning Benedict, especially by those who consider themselves traditional, which continues to this day. While he was Pope, Benedict was commended and praised for the various moves he made to tradition. But with his renunciation, there was a sudden about-face. Benedict was considered a coward, a traitor, a liberal, a modernist among so many other things. I couldn’t help but imagine him to be the one in the scene described by Sr. Lucia in her 3rd Memoir–taking it figuratively and even literally.
“One day we spent our siesta down by my parents’ well. Jacinta sat on the stone slabs on top of the well. Francisco and I climbed up a steep bank in search of wild honey among the brambles in a nearby thicket. After a little while, Jacinta called out to me:
“Didn’t you see the Holy Father?’
“‘I don’t know how it was but I saw the Holy Father in a very big house, kneeling by a table, with his head buried in his hands, and he was weeping. Outside the house, there were many people. Some of them were throwing stones, others were cursing him and using bad language. Poor Holy Father, we must pray very much for him.” …
There seems to be no situation in the last hundred years which could come even close in reality to what is depicted in the vision–except, except for Benedict’s presence and spiritual ministry in that convent in the Vatican, remodeled to house him.
Hopefully, what has been provided herein will be sufficient to establish the possibility that Pope Benedict’s renunciation is tied to the 3rd Secret of Fatima. Thus, to say that he did it under duress, out of fear, as a compromise or, as some would insinuate, as a traitor to Christ and His Church and flock would not be in any way accurate, and could even be a defamation of a loyal and courageous Pope of the Church.
For, those who say or intimate such things offer no concrete evidence to support their charge except the standard parroted charge “He’s a modernist from way back.” Admittedly, there could have been a threat demanding that he cease and desist from his effort to bring back the traditions of the Church. However, that in no way had an influence on what he ultimately did, namely, to retain the Petrine Office, by his renunciation of the Papal Ministry only and keep it (the Papal Office), as will become more and more clear shortly, out of the control of the demonic forces that were determined to destroy the Church. In this way, God is using Benedict as a secondary cause in making good on His promise to be with His Church until the end of time.”
Source: This information comes from tape #4 of an 11 tape recording of a series of talks by Guido Del Rose (RIP) entitled Fatima and the Last Times Apostasy. A former Custodian of the National Pilgrim Statue for the U.S., Mr. Del Rose was attending conferences on Our Lady’s message by Fatima experts in Europe during the ‘60’s & ‘70’s and can also be found Vol. 3 of Frere Michel’s excellent trilogy: The Whole Truth About Fatima on page 252 Footnote #39.
What does R/BDS mean? Thanks.
Ratzinger/Benedict Derangement Syndrome (R/BDS) which seems reasonable since the truism “As the Church goes, so goes the world” would indicate that there had to have been some kind of predecessor in the Church to Trump Derangement Syndrome.
IslamisIslam, according to you: “There seems to be no situation in the last hundred years which could come even close in reality to what is depicted in the vision–except, except for Benedict’s presence and spiritual ministry in that convent in the Vatican, remodeled to house him.” … IN THE LAST HUNDRED YEARS??? This is a misconception. The apparitions at Fatima and the public presence of the siblings Francisco and Jacinta Marto closed during the Benedict XV pontificate (September 3, 1914 – January 22, 1922). He was a powerless witness to the murderous struggle between Christians during the Great War that claimed millions of victims. And under the windows of the Apostolic Palace in Rome, the Italian freemasons (carbonari) organized wild anti-papal manifestations and chanted: “We don’t want Christ! We want Lucifer!” Do you think that Benedict XV, as a good shepherd, did not cry seeing the spiritual decline of his countrymen? Shaken by this view, Maximilian Maria Kolbe (then studying in Rome) founded October 16, 1917 the Militia Immaculatae to counter the freemasons and save their souls. Everything indicates that Blessed Jacinta had a vision of Pope Benedict XV, who was ruling at that time!
Did anyone throw stones at Benedict XVI, as it did during the pontificate of Benedict XV?! “Pope emeritus” gives the impression of a satisfied old man who eagerly chatts over beer with his equally satisfied countrymen Bavarians.
MyronM, thank you for your reply. If I understand your timeline correctly, however your citation of the tragedy involving Pope Benedict XV and St. Maximillian Kolbe’s founding of the Knights of the Immaculata all happened before Jacinta’s vision that is recorded in the real Sr. Lucy’s memoirs.
In regards to stone throwing at Pope Benedict XVI, have you never heard the saying, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me”? Calling names is in line with “throwing stones”.
With your comment about the impression you get from a satisfied old man, I wonder, is it possible that you, Myron, suffer from R/BDS and are thus one of those unfortunates who are immune to the Law of Charity?
What do semi-trad media and radtradthomist-dr Chojnowski have in common? They all ignore the 3rd Secret of Fatima since it appeared on the web in April 2010!
How can you get lost in guesses, since the 3rd Secret (written down on one sheet of paper on April 1, 1944, Saturday before Palm Sunday) was published over 9 years ago. At that time, no one thought that Benedict XVI could abdicate without saying already about the fact that he will destroy the Office of Saint Peter. I am including the entire document here https://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B352_Secret.html:
Apart from the declaration of authenticity of this document by a forensic graphologist, Begoña Slocker de Arce (see Jose Maria Zavala’s book “The Best Kept Secret of Fatima”), the very course of events in the Vatican confirms its veracity. This secret was not published by the Vatican either after Pius XII or before 1960 as requested by the Holy Virgin, or at any later time. Rome did not turn away from its abominations, on the contrary it is sinking in spiritual and moral dirt more and more, the supposed Pope Benedict he looks at it all up close with a nice smile! Rome has lost faith and Antichrist will soon install there. Rome sealed its fate: 69 Holy Weeks (= 69 years) passed April 1, 2013. 70 Holy Week (April 24 – 31, 2013) was already celebrated under the leadership of Jorge the Apostate, the destroyer of Rome as we knew it. The execution of God’s judgment on this city is happening right before our very eyes.
What after destroying Rome?
Imperio do Divino Espirito Santo! The Holy Virgin wanted to appear in Portugal in 1917 because of the devotion to the Holy Spirit that ruled over the nations perpetuated in this land by Saint Elizabeth the Queen (+ July 4, 1336). Imperio do Divino Espirito Santo is equivalent to the Kingdom of God on earth, for which the whole Church has prayed persistently for almost 2,000 years.
We are not dealing with any crisis in the Church, it is a transition to a whole new era. When you set out in a large group of people on a long journey there is always a commotion. [Apocalypse, 18 : 4b-5] “Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.”
Oct. 13, 2019, Madonna della Schiavonea, Corigliano Calabro, Cosenza, Calabria, Italy
Until the daily Sacrifice ceases, receive Holy Communion (and other sacraments) even though the Roman Catholic Church is turning into the Great Whore*. The Lord Jesus will let us know when the Holy Sacrifice ceased.
*If you question this possibility, then remember the Temple of Jerusalem and how it turned into a synagogue of Satan.
Tradition in Action (TIA) is one of those sites wherein sufferers of R/BDS abound. The same anonymous priest (whose Apologia summary was published by Bp Gracida on Sept. 14th) after his own attempts to present the black-and-white evidence of BiP to the owners of TIA charitably observed that:
“TIA is radically opposed to Benedict, basically because they consider him a modernist… It is hard to blame them, however, because Dr. Guimaraes has been immersed in the errors of VCII–writing books, and very good ones, in order to expose them–and cannot conceive of a conversion for any of them–it is a sad state of affairs. Furthermore, most people just cannot understand the operation of the demonic in the Vatican, in the Church or in the world… However, [Fr. N] shows a great lack of knowledge about Benedict’s renunciation and what he does know is superficial. I really doubt if he really sat down to study the matter; he most likely just read a few documents and listened to what others were saying, including TIA, and took the ball from there.”
My point, Myron, is that you have some theories about how Jesus is keeping His promises to His Bride and to us, but they are much more convoluted and tend to lead toward Sedevacantism than the straight forward BiP-position indicated by the evidence from February 2013. For this reason, while I appreciate your contributions and I was very happy to practice my Russian (and VERY glad of the translator option) and to discover the possible apparition that took place in the Ukraine during Pope Pius XII’s reign, I reject your theories on the grounds that they tend toward Sedevacantism.
IslamisIslam, I gave the link to “traditioninaction” because they published both the Portuguese original (photocopy) and a careful translations into English. Their web page cultivates Catholic tradition well, while their understanding of the fate of the Church and the world does not differ significantly from the standard of other trads circles. I don’t get inspiration from any of these Catholic societies. In my analysis, I rely on the Holy Scripture, apparitions, the liturgical calendar and of the saints, including the astronomical calendar, so it would be better if you took up the subject of 3rd Secret of Fatima instead of “traditoninaction”.
I don’t theorize. I read the signs of the times. Sedevacantism? From February 28, 2013 (8 p.m. CET) – pointless position, because this date marks the irrevocable end of the papacy in Rome. Saint Malachy of Armagh prophesied about it, and the Blessed Virgin confirmed it in Fatima (3rd Secret), and the course of events in the Vatican materializes both prophecies.
You rely on prophecy, well and good. What do you do with Canon Law?
RadTrad Thomist (Dr. Peter Chojnowski’s blog) had this to say about Tradition in Action’s “Third Secret”:
RadTrad Thomist Withdraws Tradition in Action’s “Third Secret” From Handwriting Analysis Investigation.
Shakin’ My Head. Tradition in Action’s “Third Secret” Traceable to Bizarre Mariolators Website. After investigation, Sister Lucy Truth has halted the Investigation into the Handwriting Analysis of the “Third Secret” Advertised by Tradition in Action. Everything about the origin of this letter and source website is dubious and offensive to a Catholic and totally self-serving. If TIA wants to run with this letter, I will let them. As for Sister Lucy Truth, we have another objective and an attempted analysis of the Vatican-released “Third Secret” along with a letter from “Sister Lucy” dating from 1969 fits that objective. Since all of it costs a substantial amount of money, I will focus on what we are sure of with regard to origin.
Why I did not Submit the Tradition in Action “Third Secret” for a Costly Professional Analysis. The More You Look at it, the More Bizarre it Seems to Be.
There are many reasons why I decided to not go ahead with commissioning an official analysis of the TIA “Third Secret.”
1) I have only received one donation to Sister Lucy Truth from someone interested in the TIA Third Secret. The donation was a tax-deductible donation to “Sister Lucy Truth” for $200. When discussing the cost of the analysis and of writing up the results for this document, I found out that the cost was going to be $500. The document itself, with its obvious problems, did not warrant the expenditure of the extra money when we have so little to spend. Every dime donated to “Sister Lucy Truth” goes to either the investigations themselves, maintaining the website, or paying the fees to the bank for upkeep of the various accounts.
2) The document itself had a very questionable origin, we discovered this when we had 3 different people at Sister Lucy Truth actually look at the document, check it using computer programs, and look up the scriptural references that are made in the document. a) computer analysis seems to show that many of the words of the text were cut and pasted on to it. b) this document has an unknown origin — coming from “someone in Portugal” and being advertised, other than on TIA, on a website whose address is “Our Lady is God.” c) the “letter” is from a fax of a copy of the letter.
3) The date is truly odd. If you turn over the letter the year appears as 666. When has a year ever been written with 3 numbers? Also it is dated April 1st, which seems to indicate that it could very well be an “April fools” joke meant to discredit those who are genuinely interested in the actual content of the Third Secret.
4) The thumb mark, supposedly meant to prove that this is Sister Lucy’s writing, was smudged. Why have a thumb print when it is smudged? How would that prove anything? Sister Lucy NEVER used a thumb print in any of her other authentic writings.
5) The biblical references, supposedly given by Our Lady in this Secret, are clearly and traditionally meant to refer to Christ and not to the Church or to the Church in our time.
6) The text is heretical since it clearly indicates that the origin of authority in the Church shall be transferred from Rome to Fatima. Rome is the Apostolic See of Peter and it would be heretical to say that that can be transferred to any other place. The pope could live in another place, as has been the case, but he is pope because he is bishop of Rome.
7) The “cathedral of Rome” is clearly misidentified as St. Peter’s rather than St. John Lateran — which is the true cathedral church of Rome. Our Lady would not misidentify this church in such a way.
8) By a description of the “church” entered into by the “pope of the evil eyes” which exactly describes the new church built at Fatima, along with mentioning the name of John Paul II, I think those who produced this document were creating foresight from hindsight.
9) Also, just as an aside, I have never received one bit of help or cooperation from any one at Tradition in Action, even though I have asked for it.
After looking at this text intensely over the course of days, I can tell you that I believe that it is a joke, meant to discredit those who are interested in finding out the full message of the Third Secret and who have doubts about the completeness of what was released by the Vatican in 2000.
Thank you, Charmaine. I hope that at least MyronM takes a look at this information.
IslamisIslam: “You rely on prophecy, well and good. What do you do with Canon Law?”
Prophecies contained in the Holy Bible and given by the Most Holy Virgin and saints serve the understanding of God’s revealed Catholic religion and events in the course of salvation history. I rely on prophecies, not on the opinions of well-meaning people. I prefer Saint Malachi’s prophecy of the popes over all discussions on the issue of Bergoglio versus Raztinger. Benedict XVI was the last pope of the Roman Catholic church. This chapter of salvation history is now closed.
The Canon Law? The last pope trotted Canon Law with his own feet. The Lord Jesus founded His Church on a divine and not human basis and conducts the Congregation of Saints in a divine and not human way.
Old Testament Jews also had their canon law: where did it disappear? When the Savior died on the cross, the building of the Mosaic religion collapsed along with all this canon law. The Old Testament cult operated by inertia for 37 years until the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70A.D.
The Temple has turned into a synagogue of Satan – similarly, the Roman Catholic church turns into the Great Harlot, which was foretold in the Apocalypse of Saint John.
Jerusalem was later destroyed. Likewise, Rome, due to contempt for the Savior and a return to hideous idolatry will be torn down (see the oryginal 3rd Secret of Fatima). Do you think it’s impossible?
Just as the chosen rest from the falling Mosaic religion entered the Church of Christ, similarly the elect ones from the falling Church will enter the Kingdom of God on the earth. God watches over the Congregation of Saints – Sancta Ecclesia – at all times.
@MyronM: A couple of things. You say, “The Lord Jesus founded His Church on a divine and not human basis and conducts the Congregation of Saints in a divine and not human way.” What do you mean precisely? Surely you are not saying that Peter and his successors are divine?
Second, from whence does your authority come to interpret Scripture and prophecies?
Third, which original 3rd Secret of Fatima am I to refer to–the possible forgery that TIA tried to pass off as the original or what?
Would you agree that God watches over ALL His creatures made in His image and likeness ALL the time–whether Saints or sinners?
RadTradThomist has dropped out of the 3rd secret due to a lack of funding! I wrote a comment to the post you provided, i.e. http://radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2018/12/radtrad-thomist-withdraws-tradition-in.html, but dr. Chojnowski rejected my text.
If the 3rd Scret of Fatima available on the web were a scam, then counterfeiters:
1. they would write the date correctly, preferably in American style: April 1, 1944. However, the date is in the European style: day, month, year (in practice often shortened to two characters, e.g. not 1984, but 84).
2. they would publish this secret not on a suspicious site of a sect, but on a reputable one, for example RorateCoeli, FatimaCenter, TheRemnant (I do not know if Nonvenipacem already existed in 2010) or would directly send to Michael Voris.
These are preliminary remarks. Dr. Chojnowski did not bother to analyze the content of the 3rd Secret, and to justify his omission, he quickly depreciates the document.
I will gladly undertake a substantive discussion of the 3rd Secret if I notice the interlocutor’s desire to learn the meaning of this message of the Blessed Virgin.