Month: October 2023
Updated: Please pray for Fr. Nix and Jesse Romero, on the ground in Israel
Update 1800 MST:
Our Lady of Victory: “Do thou, who art the powerful vanquisher of all heresies, hasten the hour of mercy”
Four years ago today, Feast of our Lady of Victory, our Lady of the Rosary, antipope Bergoglio enshrined the Pachamama demon at St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome. Thus began the tumult which would soon see churches abandoned and Sacraments halted. And don’t think the two aren’t related. It is speculated that, based on replication rates and regression analysis, the bioweapon was released/escaped the very same day. Isn’t that interesting? Nevermind that it turned out the bioweapon only killed sickly people. I’m pretty sure it was just the opening act. Pray the Rosary every day, and stay confessed.
Please join me in Pope Leo XIII’s prayer:
QUEEN of the most holy Rosary, in these times of such brazen impiety, manifest thy power with the signs of thine ancient victories, and from thy throne, whence thou dost dispense pardon and graces, mercifully regard the Church of thy Son, His Vicar on earth, and every order of clergy and laity, who are sore oppressed in the mighty conflict. Do thou, who art the powerful vanquisher of all heresies, hasten the hour of mercy, even though the hour of God’s justice is every day provoked by the countless sins of men. For me who am the least of men, kneeling before thee in supplication, do thou obtain the grace I need to live righteously upon earth and to reign among the just in heaven, the while in company with all faithful Christians throughout the world, I salute thee and acclaim thee as Queen of the most holy Rosary: Queen of the most holy Rosary, pray for us.
Cindy McCain gifts antipope Bergoglio a murderous Hopi demon idol for the synod
I guess she just knows he’s into demons, amiright? At the 0:08 mark:
Pope Francis meets with Ms. Cindy H. McCain, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme (WFP) and widow of the late US Senator John McCain. pic.twitter.com/3VYhK84hSv
— Vatican News (@VaticanNews) October 5, 2023
St. Catherine of Siena, laywoman, excoriates the Cardinals over their universal acceptance of an antipope
“What shows me that you are ungrateful, coarse, and mercenary? The persecution which you, together with others, are inflicting on that sweet Bride, at a time when you ought to be shields, to ward off the blows of heresy. In spite of which, you clearly know the truth, that Pope Urban VI is truly pope…”
She got the job done, too.
Saint Catherine of Siena, pray for us.
https://archive.org/details/saintcatherineof0000vida/page/278/mode/2up?view=theater
Again, praying for the conversion of the “pope” is a supreme violation of the law of non-contradiction. A non-Catholic cannot be the pope!
OF COURSE we should pray for the conversion of Jorge Bergoglio. We owe that to him, and all our apostate brethren. But praying for an apostate while confirming him as pope at the same time? That’s impossible.
O Queen of the Most Holy Rosary, help us discern the spirit of satanic heresy and false synodality
If anyone proclaims the Commandments are merely ideals, and impossible for man to achieve, show them this:
Today is the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi, and on this feast in 2023 “Pope Francis” kicks off his sinnod on sin. Expect lots of accompaniment, false mercy, and snuggling with sodomy. All of it grounded in a totally false notion of an evolving human nature, in an evolving culture, which demands evolving doctrine. Not just evolving doctrine, but the reversing of doctrine, as has already been inserted into the catechism on the death penalty, as if that were possible. You will hear that the Commandments were meant as mere ideals, that man can’t possibly achieve. You will hear that you can be your own judge, and decide for yourself that your lifestyle is pleasing to God, even if you choose to live in objective mortal sin. You will hear things like “nowadays,” and “it can no longer be said that…” As if God can change. “I AM the LORD, and I change not” -Malachi 3:6.
Take heart, it is NOT a true pope attempting to do this, it is an enemy. A usurper antipope, and raging apostate from the faith. Hope and pray that the outcome of the sinnod helps more people correct their base premise.
I wrote the following (or rather, I merely cut and paste) seven years ago in the wake of the release of Amoris, which was ghostwritten by Tucho, now Cardinal prefect of the DDF (CDF), who also wrote the so called response to the recent dubia, and who will also write whatever comes out of the sinnod (it is probably already written). There is nothing new under the sun. All of this has already been condemned. Enjoy.
AL vs Trent – compare and contrast
The Canons And Decrees Of The Council Of Trent
SESSION THE SIXTH
13 January 1547
DECREE CONCERNING JUSTIFICATION
CHAPTER IX–AGAINST THE VAIN CONFIDENCE OF HERETICS
But, although it be necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted, nor ever have been remitted, save freely, by the divine mercy for Christ’s sake; yet is it not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins, and rests on that alone; since it may exist, yea, does in our time exist, among heretics and schismatics; and with great earnestness is this confidence, vain, and remote from all piety, preached up in opposition to the Catholic Church…
CHAPTER XI–ON THE KEEPING OF THE COMMANDMENTS, AND ON THE NECESSITY AND POSSIBILITY THEREOF.
But no one, how much soever justified, ought to think himself free from the observance of the commandments; no one ought to make use of that rash saying, prohibited by the fathers under an anathema; that the commandments of God are impossible for one that is justified to observe. For God commands not impossibilities, but, by commanding, admonishes thee both to do what thou art able, and to pray for what thou art not able, and aids thee that thou mayest be able; whose commandments are not grievous; whose yoke is sweet and whose burden light…
CHAPTER XV –THAT, BY EVERY MORTAL SIN, GRACE IS LOST, BUT NOT FAITH
In opposition also to the cunning wits of certain men, who, by good works and fair speeches, deceive the hearts of the innocent, it is to be maintained, that the received grace of justification is lost, not only by infidelity, in which even faith itself is lost, but also by any other mortal sin soever, though faith be not lost; thereby defending the doctrine of the divine law, which excludes from the kingdom of God not only the unbelieving, but also the faithful who are fornicators, adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners, and all others who commit deadly sins; from which, with the help of divine grace, they are able to refrain, and on account of which they are separated from the grace of Christ.
ON JUSTIFICATION
CANON XII. If any one shall say, that justifying faith is nought else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ’s sake; or that it is this confidence alone by which we are justified; let him be anathema.
CANON XIV. If any one shall say, that man is absolved from his sins and justified, because he assuredly believed himself to be absolved and justified… let him be anathema.
CANON XVIII. If any one shall say, that the commandments of God are, even for a man that is justified and constituted in grace, impossible to keep; let him be anathema.
CANON XIX. If any one shall say that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments in nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.
CANON XX. If any one shall say, that a man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if, forsooth, the Gospel were a bore and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observation of the commandments; let him be anathema.
CANON XXI. If any one shall say, that Christ Jesus was given of God unto men, as a redeemer, in whom they should I trust, and not also as a legislator, whom they should obey; let him be anathema.
Time for choosing, boys and girls. Which Church do YOU belong to? This one here was founded by Jesus Christ.
It’s worth fighting for.
51 year old US Bishop dies suddenly
“Auxiliary Chicago Bishop Kevin Birmingham, USA, died suddenly in his sleep on the night to October 2, just days before his 52nd birthday. He was the seventh of ten children, and his mother is still alive. Birmingham first studied computer science but then decided to become a priest in Chicago (ordained in 1997). He quickly rose through the ranks of the Church, becoming secretary to Chicago’s homosexualist Blase Cupich. In 2020, Birmingham was consecrated a bishop.”
Adhering to immutable doctrine is now “Dissent”
Big news day, eh? All of it long in the making. I originally posted this on
Diabolical inversion of truth: Adhering to immutable doctrine is now “Dissent”
Jesus, the Second Person of the Triune God, wants a do-over. He messed up on the whole adultery thing. It’s a different era now, gotta roll with the changes. It’s what God wants, by golly. Deus Vult! Turns out, God isn’t perfect, the Truth isn’t immutable, and the Church isn’t indefectible.
Dear Stephen, if your argument were valid, both God and His Church would be a sham.
Certainly by now you’ve read his most recent piece of antipope apologetics over at Vatican Insider HERE. I’ll admit I’m pretty jaded about the entire Roman situation right now, and there isn’t much that I’m surprised by any more. I mean, with gay cocaine parties, gay nativity, and gay sex rumored to take place below the dome of St Peter’s itself, the bar for surprises has been set pretty high. But I must confess, I found this article to be breathtaking on a number of levels.
In charity, I do need to say this: Stephen seems sincere. He doesn’t come off as the Spadaro/Rosica type. We are living in a time of unprecedented diabolical disorientation, and if you sit back for a moment and consider everything that’s going on, it’s understandable for people to be confused. I’m trying to give him the benefit of the doubt, and I pray he reads this and sees the light.
He doesn’t waste any time. Here is the first sentence:
“If loyal Catholics around the world had hoped that the news of Pope Francis’ decision to raise the Buenos Aires Bishops’ Amoris Laetitia guidelines to the level of “authentic magisterium” would bring to an end the dissent, then they were sadly mistaken. If anything, the dissenters have dug their heels in even more.”
Notice the term “loyal Catholics”. Counting himself among them, these are those remaining loyal to Antipope Bergoglio at the expense of abandoning the perennial teaching of the Church. He also changes the meaning of the word “dissent,” referring not to those who refuse assent to perennial Church teaching, but rather those who refuse to follow a heretic antipope.
Get used to this. This is the diabolical inversion of truth, and it is the central theme of the revolution. Up is down, black is white, 2+2=5.
“The most poisonous aspect of this dissent– causing us to question where exactly it originates from– is that it chooses to ignore what the Pope has clearly taught and seeks to create confusion by making claims that are without any foundation. It also appears to be moving the goalposts on what constitutes the ordinary magisterium, Tradition and the dogma of the indefectible nature of the Church.”
“…causing us to question where exactly it comes from”… Clearly, he is insinuating the “dissenters” are under demonic influence. Follow that claim to its logical end, and you will understand what a rough ride we are in for. But then he throws out a gleaming nugget of truth, with the phrase “what the pope has clearly taught…” I couldn’t agree more! There is no confusion whatsoever about what “the pope” has taught, and has now enshrined in the AAS as “Authentic Magisterium.” The only confusion is the muddled, varying, and largely non-existent response from orthodox Catholics, both clerics and laymen.
“If we look at various examples of this dissent, a clear picture emerges that does not seem interested in the entire Truth of what the Church teaches. Take for instance the correctio filialis. The signatories claimed the Pope (through words deeds or omissions) denied Trent’s teaching that God always offers sufficient grace to keep the Commandments. Of course the Pope never said any such thing…”
False. Antipope Bergoglio directly contradicted Trent when he taught heresy in Chapter Eight of Amoris, claiming that people in “concrete situations” are incapable of keeping the commandments. In terms of exposing the how and why Church teaching is being “changed”, he is actually bold enough to come right out and say it. This is what has now become enshrined in the ACTA APOSTOLICAE SEDIS as “authentic magisterium” by way of the letter from the Argentinian bishops and the subsequent positive response from Antipope Bergoglio. It appears in AL#301:
…The Church possesses a solid body of reflection concerning mitigating factors and situations. Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values”, or be in a concrete situation which does not allow him or her to act differently and decide otherwise without further sin…
AL goes on to say that the “discernment of situations” can lead to the opposite conclusion of what JPII taught in FC#84, therefore Church teaching is being changed, and serial adulterers can indeed be admitted to Holy Communion, because their culpability has been mitigated to zero by their circumstances (aka Situational Ethics). It couldn’t be any more clear.
Now back to Walford:
“Another of the false accusations or insinuations and one used by the dubia cardinals, the correctio signatories and most recently the three bishops of Kazakstan is that Pope Francis’ magisterium is now “approving or legitimizing” divorce and promoting adultery as a good option in some cases. Of course these dissenters cannot find one quote from the Holy Father to prove their contemptible claim…”
False. In AL#298 and its Footnote #329, Antipope Bergoglio explicitly taught about “legitimizing divorce and promoting adultery as a good option in some cases.”
298. The divorced who have entered a new union, for example, can find themselves in a variety of situations, which should not be pigeonholed or fit into overly rigid classifications leaving no room for a suitable personal and pastoral discernment. One thing is a second union consolidated over time, with new children, proven fidelity (sic), generous self giving, Christian commitment, a consciousness of its irregularity and of the great difficulty of going back without feeling in conscience that one would fall into new sins. The Church acknowledges situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate. 329
So already we have the conflating of adultery with “proven fidelity,” which is outrageous. Maybe someone can come up with a reading of Matt 19:9 that isn’t as pigeonholed nor as overly rigid as our Lord laid it out. Please let me know. But let’s have a look at footnote 329:
329 John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio (22 November 1981), 84: AAS 74 (1982), 186. In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living “as brothers and sisters” which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, “it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers” (Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes, 51).
This entire footnote is a lie. See HERE. The first reference is to FC#84, which forbids Communion under the very circumstances which Antipope Bergoglio is now permitting it. The second reference is to GS#51, which refers to a totally different situation. Click the link for a broader explanation.
It also helps to understand that all of this is grounded in the fact that Antipope Bergoglio believes that “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null.” HERE Which would mean second “marriages” aren’t really second marriages, right? Couple that line of reasoning with his “I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage, they have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity” HERE. The astounding implication of this is that Antipope Bergoglio believes that public fornication is full of grace and is a real marriage, but chances are your sacramental marriage, full of fidelity, commitment, honor and sacrificial love… is not real. This is straight from the pit of Hell.
I could write another thousand words, but please go read the Walford piece; it’s very instructive. Lots of commentary already out there on the innerweebs for sure.