Leading The Post-Vatican II Battle For Catholic Schools, Daphne McLeod, RIP … 

The sad news of the death of Daphne McLeod [left] has just arrived in my inbox, emailed by a mutual friend who has written to say that she first went into hospital about a month ago.  Then, yesterday morning she had “taken a turn for the worse” and passed away yesterday evening, Sunday 3rd January, at about 7 p.m.  I’m not sure of Daphne’s exact age but she was somewhere in her nineties. 

Daphne was one of the first people to realise the damage being done to Catholic education, following Vatican II.  She had been the Head of an infants’ school and was possessed of a strong Catholic sense, which included realising the importance of sound teaching in the Faith.  

After she retired, Daphne worked voluntarily in her parish, schooling the Confirmation class.  Once, on a visit to her home for a few days’ holiday, I had the pleasure of attending one of her lessons after Sunday Mass.  Having been trained in the days before the insistence on the importance of “modern methods” of teaching, I was astonished to see the way in which Daphne wove every imaginable technique into that one lesson;  as they indulged in some juice and biscuits, the pupils listened closely to her suitably short introductory talk, volunteered to read a parable, dramatized it (working together as a group), were set to do a related drawing, discussed the meaning of said parable and engaged in a lively Question and Answer session, so that Daphne could gauge their learning.  It was a classic A1 performance by any standards. She’d have flown through any Ofsted Inspection.  

Daphne was so convinced of the dangers posed to Catholic families by the modernist books being used in religion lessons post Vatican II that she set about studying the diocesan approved textbooks and then alerted bishops, priests, parents and teachers to the dangerous content.  To this end, Daphne worked through an organisation called Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice (For Church and Pope), in time taking a leading position (Chairman) within the group.  In this way, Daphne was able to organise meetings and larger conferences in and around London, as well as accepting invitations to address audiences elsewhere – happily including a Catholic Truth audience in Glasgow!  

As well as being a first class teacher-model, a true Catholic educationalist, Daphne was a good personal friend, as I know myself; when I was fighting modernism in my own neck of the educational woods, Daphne offered sound advice and proved to be a kind and faithful friend.  It’s a while since we spoke on the phone now, but I feel a real sense of loss, as will everyone who knew Daphne, I have no doubt.  May she rest in peace. 

Daphne McLeod, Surrey,  may she rest in peace…

                                                          .  

Archbishop Viganò: Is Pope Francis Preparing Us To Accept The Antichrist?

December 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò (left), in a new interview with LifeSite, comments on LifeSite’s report that since the first coronavirus lockdown in March, Pope Francis is not anymore using the papal altar in St. Peter’s Basilica for his public Masses, an altar which is situated on top of St. Peter’s tomb. Instead, the Pope is using another altar at the basilica. For Viganò, this papal act is symbolic in light of the fact that Pope Francis himself ordered during the closing Mass of the October 2019 Amazon Synod that a bowl of plants dedicated to the false goddess Pachamama be placed on that very papal altar at St. Peter’s. Not long after that act, the Pope also decided that he would no longer use the title “Vicar of Christ” in the 2020 Vatican Yearbook.

The Italian prelate here finds strong words about the recent developments at St. Peter’s and the Vatican.

“In my opinion,” Viganò writes, “what we are witnessing represents the general rehearsal for the establishment of the kingdom of the Antichrist, which will be preceded by the preaching of the False Prophet, the Precursor of the one who will carry out the final persecution against the Church before Our Lord’s definitive and crushing victory.”

The Italian prelate compares the placing of a Pachamama bowl on the altar with the enthronement of the “Goddess Reason” at Notre Dame de Paris Cathedral during the Terror of the French Revolution in 1793. However, he explains, this time, the profanation of an altar came from within, committed by the highest levels of the hierarchy. “The Bergoglian church is giving itself an increasingly more disconcerting image, in which the negation of Catholic truths is accompanied by the explicit affirmation of an intrinsically anti-Catholic and antichristic ideology, in which the idolatrous cult of pagan divinities – that is, of demons – is no longer hidden, who are propitiated with sacrilegious acts and profanations of holy things.”

Pagan Ceremony in Vatican at opening of the Amazon Synod

He goes on to say that this “presence of an idol of ‘mother earth’ is a direct offense against God and the Most Holy Virgin” and “a tangible sign that explains in a certain sense Bergoglio’s many irreverent utterances with regard to the Blessed Mother.”

Here, the Italian archbishop sees a link to the warnings of Our Lady of Salette from the 19th century. For him it is not surprising “that those who want to demolish the Church of Christ and the Roman Papacy do so from the highest Throne, according to the prophecy of Our Lady at La Salette: ‘Rome will lose the Faith and will become the seat of the Antichrist.’”

Hideous nativity scene in Vatican, 2020

Commenting on the fact that Pope Francis removed from his entry in the 2020 Vatican Yearbook the title “Vicar of Christ” – he merely placed it at the end of his entry, under “historic titles” – Viganò states that “whoever refuses to be called Vicar of Christ apparently has the perception that this title does not suit him, or even looks with contempt at the possibility of being the Vicar of the One whom by his words and actions Bergoglio shows that he does not wish to recognize and adore as God.”

All these papal acts taken together are seen by Archbishop Viganò as a development toward apostasy and sacrilege, that is, demon worship. And for him, this development has its beginning at the Second Vatican Council. “I believe,” he explains, “that the premises that have been laid down up to this point – which in good part go back to Vatican II, but also to later events such as the Interreligious Prayer Meeting in Assisi – will inexorably lead in an ever more explicit way towards a ‘profession of apostasy’ by the leaders of the Bergoglian church.”

But Archbishop Viganò also gives us encouragement and strength. He recalls that “the Church does not belong to the Pope, and even less does she belong to a clique of heretics and fornicators that has succeeded in coming to power by deception and fraud.” He continues, by saying:

Therefore, we ought to unite our supernatural faith in the constant action of God in the midst of His people with a work of resistance, as counseled by the Fathers of the Church: Catholics have the duty of opposing the infidelity of their Shepherds, because the obedience that they owe them is aimed at the glory of God and the salvation of souls. We therefore denounce everything that represents a betrayal of the mission of the Shepherds, imploring the Lord to shorten these times of trial. And if one day we are told by Bergoglio that, in order to remain in communion with him, we must perform an act that offends God, we will have further confirmation that he is an impostor, and that as such he has no authority.                         

It is the archbishop’s hope that this crisis in the Church will open the eyes of many a lukewarm Catholic. He hopes that it will “permit us to see that where Christ the King does not reign, the tyranny of Satan is inevitably established; where Grace does not reign, sin and vice spread; where the Truth is not loved, people end up embracing error and heresy.” Perhaps, he hopes, this crisis will make many people who have difficulty adoring God realize “perhaps they can now understand that without God our life becomes hell.”

Archbishop Viganò concludes this interview with the hopeful words: “And let us pray that we will see the day on which a Pope will return to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice on the Altar of the Confession of Saint Peter, in the rite that Our Lord taught the Apostles and that they handed down intact through the centuries. This will also be a symbol of the restoration of the Papacy and of the Church of Christ.”  Source – Lifesitenews…

A bowl with symbols and flowers associated with the demon Pachamama was placed, at the explicit direction of Francis, on the altar of St. Peter’s Basilica, at the offertory during the closing (of the Amazon Synod) Mass. 

Comment:

Is Archbishop Vigano’s interpretation of Pope Francis’ actions correct – IS Francis preparing us to accept the Antichrist?    

Why Question Only Vatican II And Not Trent Or Vatican I? Archbishop Viganò…

Below, extracts from a June 2020 interview about Vatican II with Archbishop Vigano – From Catholic Culture

Archbishop Vigano: I do not think that it is necessary to demonstrate that the Council represents a problem: the simple fact that we are raising this question about Vatican II and not about Trent or Vatican I seems to me to confirm a fact that is obvious and recognized by everyone. In reality, even those who defend the Council with swords drawn find themselves doing so apart from all the other previous ecumenical councils, of which not even one was ever said to be a pastoral council. And note that they call it “the Council” par excellence, as if it was the one and only council in the entire history of the Church, or at least considering it as an unicum whether because of the formulation of its doctrine or for the authority of its magisterium. It is a council that, differently from all those that preceded it, called itself a pastoral council, declaring that it did not want to propose any new doctrine, but which in fact created a distinction between before and after, between a dogmatic council and a pastoral council, between unequivocal canons and empty talk, between anathema sit and winking at the world…

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

You ask me: “How were all the Council fathers deceived?” I reply by drawing on my experience of those years and the words of my brothers with whom I engaged in discussion at that time. No one could have imagined that right in the heart of the ecclesial body there were hostile forces so powerful and organized that they could succeed in rejecting the perfectly orthodox preparatory schemas that had been prepared by Cardinals and Prelates with a reliable fidelity to the Church, replacing them with a bundle of cleverly disguised errors behind long-winded and deliberately equivocal speeches.

No one could have believed that, right under the vaults of the Vatican Basilica, the estates-general could be convoked that would decree the abdication of the Catholic Church and the inauguration of the Revolution…

The Council Fathers were the object of a sensational deception, of a fraud that was cleverly perpetrated by having recourse to the most subtle means: they found themselves in the minority in the linguistic groups, excluded from meetings convened at the last moment, pressured into giving their placet by making them believe that the Holy Father wanted it. And what the innovators did not succeed in obtaining in the Conciliar Aula, they achieved in the Commissions and Committees, thanks also to the activism of theologians and periti who were accredited and acclaimed by a powerful media machine. There is a vast array of studies and documents that testify to this systematic malicious mens [mentality] of some of the Council Fathers on the one hand, and the naïve optimism or carelessness of other well-intentioned Council Fathers on the other. The activity of the Coetus Internationalis Patrum [opposing the innovators] could do little or nothing, when the violations of the rules by the progressives were ratified at the Sacred Table itself [by the Pope].  Click here to read entire interview

Comments invited…   

Priest on Scandal of Denying The One True Religion: Outstanding Interview

Comment: 

Fr David Sherry is an Irish priest of the Society of St Pius X (SSPX) who served in Scotland for a year before he was re-assigned to Canada.  We have very happy memories of him in Glasgow – indeed, one of my Great-Nephews received his First Holy Communion from Fr Sherry, with a photograph on their fridge as a permanent reminder! 

Topics for discussion in the above lengthy interview with Fr Sherry of the SSPX, include: 

1. What is the SSPX
2. Who was [Archbishop] Lefebvre
3. Was he guilty of a schismatic act when he ordained 4 bishops or was it necessary due to a state of emergency?
4. Does the Vatican allow Catholics to attend SSPX masses to fulfil their Sunday obligation?
5. Is the status of the SSPX currently canonically irregular or schismatic?
6. Will there be an agreement with the Vatican soon, in your estimation?
7. What are some of the problems with Vatican II?
8. What are your thoughts on the Pachamama ceremony in the Vatican Gardens?
9. Is the Novus Ordo valid?
10. What should a Catholic do if an SSPX chapel is not available near them?

Share your thoughts on Father’s very clear explanation of the work of the Society in the context of the current unprecedented crisis in the Church.  What possible reason can anyone offer for continuing to avoid the SSPX Masses/Sacraments in this worsening time of trial within the Church? 

For more conferences, visit the St Peter’s Hamburg blog

Archbishop of Glasgow: Most Catholics Faithless, But No Return To Tradition…

Archbishop Philip Tartaglia, Glasgow

A Lent challenge: Do I really believe? (From March 2020 edition of Flourish)

I believe in miracles … do you? That’s the powerful question asked by Archbishop Tartaglia this month as Lent begins in earnest. In a powerful interview with Flourish, Glasgow’s Archbishop calls for a new effort at fostering devotion to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist and a renewed sense of the sacred.
Editor:  Why’s that, then?  Why the need for “a new effort… devotion… Real Presence… sense of the sacred…”?  Whatever happened to the “old” devotion and sense of the sacred? Could it be that the “success” of the ecumenical and inter-faith focus of the Church has led to practical indifferentism among the faithful who now believe that one religion / denomination is as good as another, that we’re all going to Heaven, no need to be “dogmatic” about anything? Jesus loves us and we don’t need “organised religion” any more.  Just a thought.

The Archbishop spoke after a recent survey in the US showed only 30 per cent of Catholics fully accepted the doctrine of transubstantiation, namely the bread and wine offered at Mass truly become the body and blood of Christ at the moment of consecration.
Editor:  Which means that 70% do NOT believe in transubstantiation… How did that happen, then?

Archbishop Tartaglia speaks frankly in the interview about the liturgical and catechetical mistakes which followed Vatican II and acknowledges that “the Church has gone through testing times in the post-conciliar period, much of it self-inflicted. There has been bad catechesis and bad theology around the Eucharist, with the result that many people cannot articulate the Church’s faith in the Eucharist even in simple terms.”
Editor:  well, Glory Hallelujah! That is some admission. Every word a jewel.  At long last, Archbishop. Still, a wee apology after the spirit of the age would be good. It’s called “taking responsibility”.  And then let’s see some action! Sacking the entire staff at the Scottish Catholic Education Service  plus reinstating Thomism in seminaries would be a start:  producing theologically literate priests and teachers can only help…

He adds starkly: “Many supportive elements of our practice, like fasting and genuflection and kneeling, and devotional prayers and practices, have been neglected. None of this has helped to nourish the faith of the People of God in the Most Holy Eucharist.”
Editor:  “genuflection and kneeling” don’t come naturally to those who think of Our Lord as merely their “brother” and who –  as the Archbishop now acknowledges  – lack belief in His Real Presence.  Who, after all, ordered the tabernacles to be placed out of sight (and thus out of mind, as the saying goes), along with the removal of altar rails and kneelers, because it is that person who bears massive responsibility before God for causing and maintaining the apostasy which Pope John Paul II once described as “silent”, but which is now screaming from the rooftops. 

But the Archbishop is clear that the answer is not a return to the past or a rejection of the liturgical changes of Vatican II.
Editor: WRONG!  How on earth does the Archbishop think we got to the stage where the vast majority of Catholics, by his own admission, do not believe in a central dogma of the Faith – the Real Presence – if not as a result of  “the liturgical changes of Vatican II”?   This has to be a rhetorical question because the answer is so painfully obvious. 
­­

He says: “The Novus Ordo, the ‘new’ Mass, is not a defective form of the Mass. Its structure is based soundly on the great liturgical tradition. Its theology is orthodox. Like any other form of the Mass, when celebrated well, it more fully achieves God’s purpose. When celebrated poorly, it obscures God’s purpose.”
Editor:  So the poor faithful are to be left at the mercy of the priest, hoping he does not “obscure God’s purpose”… What?!  The new Mass is definitely defective.  Its structure is totally contradictory to “the great liturgical tradition”: for example, never before in the entire history of the Church has the priest faced the congregation at Mass throughout. This is but one, highly distracting, innovation, one departure from Catholic Tradition which totally “obscures  God’s purpose” in the Mass and turns it into an entertainment platform, and in some cases, a circus.  So seriously did certain Cardinals regard this novel Mass, recognising that it was truly defective, that they wrote to Pope Paul VI, arguing that “…the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.” To read the entire letter/critique, click here

And he reminds readers that the teaching of the Church has been clear and unchanging in recent decades: “There has been good and faithful catechesis and teaching on the Eucharist during the post-Vatican II era, starting from Pope St Paul VI. His successors Pope St John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI taught firmly and beautifully on the Mass and on the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Eucharist.
Editor:  So, how come the majority of Catholics have lost the Faith – a fact which the Archbishop acknowledges?

“Pope Francis summed up the Church’s teaching simply and powerfully last year on the feast of Corpus Christi: ‘Whenever we approach the altar to receive the Eucharist, we must truly renew our ‘amen’ to the Body of Christ… It is Jesus, it is Jesus who saved me, it is Jesus who comes to give me the strength to live. It is Jesus alive.’”
Editor:  is that it?  Hardly an explanation, let alone a ringing endorsement, of transubstantiation – but merely a vague pious statement to which any Protestant could subscribe.  Protestants who believe that they receive Christ “spiritually” in their bread and wine, could pray those words.

And he ended his interview with a cry of hope … “There is no pastoral plan that can fix this situation without insisting upon a renewed and profound faithfulness to Christ and to his Gospel. The answer will depend on much more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels which will lay out for the faithful the truth, beauty and wonder of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist so that they may receive him in Holy Communion with faith and devotion for the salvation of their souls.
Editor:  can’t argue with that – but how is this “more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels…”  to be achieved? There’s plenty of piously “hopeful” rhetoric coming from the Archbishop in this interview, but precious little in the way of concrete planning to put right the indiscipline, errors, liturgical and catechetical abuses of the past 50 plus years. And the check list below, really doesn’t offer any of that pious “hope”.  Apparently this “more faithful preaching and teaching at all levels” will be achieved as follows:

• It will be expressed in more obedient and authentic liturgy.
Editor:  that can only mean the traditional Latin Mass, offered in every parish in the archdiocese – a solution rejected by the Archbishop. 

• It will be accompanied by a much greater response to Vatican II’s universal call to holiness from all sectors of the Church.
Editor:  if “Vatican II’s universal call to holiness” is different from the perennial call to holiness of the Church since apostolic times, let’s hear it. It is, in fact, this heresy – that the Church only really began at Vatican II, with the arrival of the Holy Ghost at the Council – that has led to the current decline.

• It will demand a true conversion to the moral and social teaching of the Church.
Editor:  true.  Which will require priests and bishops to openly preach true morals, deny pro-abortion politicians Holy Communion and refuse to permit scandalous funerals, such as the very public funerals of partnered homosexuals which have taken place in Glasgow in recent years.  And in terms of the social teaching of the Church – that means priests and bishops preaching that, at the heart of Catholic Social Teaching is the belief that Christ must be at the head of every nation under Heaven. The Church is not an arm of the Social Work Department. She cannot support immoral national laws, in the name of Catholic Social Teaching.

• It will be based on a much more frequent and respectful practice around Mass, the Sacraments and an increased sensitivity to the sphere of the sacred.
Editor: that brings us full circle back to the need to restore that which has been lost – the traditional Latin Mass, and, in the meantime, an end to the various liturgical abuses now normalised – such as Communion in the hand, drinking from the Chalice and lay people playing at being priests.  We want rid of Extraordinay Ministers of Holy Communion:  when do we want it? NOW! 

• It will be supported by much more prayer, devotion and penance.
Editor:  once the traditional liturgy has been restored, “all these other things will be given to you”, to (kinda) quote the Gospel.

Its source and outcome will be a greater faith, hope and charity. It may well take a miracle of grace and conversion to restore our Eucharistic faith … but thankfully, I believe in miracles.”
Editor: yes, it will take a miracle, which is why we, at Catholic Truth, never lose sight of the need for the Pope and all the Bishops of the world to unite in consecrating Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, as Our Lady requested.  Until then, as we can see from the above interview (notwithstanding his honest admission of the dire state of the Church on his watch)  Archbishop Tartaglia is still in denial as to the only way to put matters right, which is the restoration of all things in Christ; in other words, he must give us back what modernist churchmen have taken from us in the past half-century – our Catholic heritage.  The spiritual blindness which we are witnessing in the post-Vatican II churchmen from the top down, continues to display itself in interviews such as this, where the Archbishop just cannot see that it is only when the Traditional Faith in its theological and liturgical purity is restored, that his “miracle” will be achieved. Source – March 2020 edition of Flourishofficial publication of the Archdiocese of Glasgow.

Comments invited…

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

1st Sunday in Advent, 2019: 50th Anniversary of the Imposition of the New Mass… Is Anybody Celebrating?

From Rorate Caeli

Fifty years ago this weekend, the Catholic Church debuted a new version of Mass following reforms made by the 1960s’ Second Vatican Council. From the use of vernacular language instead of Latin, to the priest facing the people instead of the tabernacle, the changes became mandatory at all parishes on the First Sunday of Advent 1969.

There was high-level resistance to replacing the traditional Latin Mass with a new version. Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, who headed and served for 32 years in the highest doctrinal office at the Vatican (later succeeded by Joseph Ratzinger, who would become Pope Benedict XVI), wrote an intervention in 1969 entitled “Short Critical Study on the New Order of Mass.” In it, he, joined by another cardinal and several liturgical experts, warned “fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful.” [link to Ottaviani Intervention added – Editor CT]

The Pope at the time was convinced radical liturgical innovation was needed. Addressing his Mass alterations in November 1969, Pope Paul VI stated: “The results expected, or rather desired, are that the faithful will participate in the liturgical mystery with more understanding, in a more practical, a more enjoyable and a more sanctifying way.”

Pope Paul VI with the six Protestant Ministers who actively contributed to the creation of the new Mass…


The results were the opposite. Since the 1960s, Mass attendance has plummeted, from around 70% of U.S. Catholics every Sunday and Holy Day

before the liturgical changes, to 21% of U.S. Catholics currently attending weekly Mass. In other countries, including much of Western Europe, the number can be in the single digits.

But after five decades of experiments and decline, there is some growth to be observed within the Catholic Church. Ironically, it is with traditionalists joining the priesthood, entering convents and attending parishes that offer the very Latin Mass that was replaced 50 years ago.  

One such society of clergy, the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, has seen growth even in the otherwise turbulent past year, including a doubling of

attendance at its Los Angeles parish, with new churches being established each year that quickly fill up with hundreds of families attending the old Mass. Its seminaries, completely full, often turn away applicants — a challenge shared by almost no diocese or religious order in 2019.

Interestingly, this growth in tradition — particularly among young Catholics — has occurred while Pope Francis has moved in the completely opposite direction during his nearly seven years in Rome. The Jesuit pope has chastised traditionally minded Catholics numerous times, including saying: “I always try to understand what is behind those individuals who are too young to have lived the pre-Conciliar liturgy, and who want it nonetheless.

“I have at times found myself in front of people who are too rigid, an attitude of rigidity. And I ask myself: how come so much rigidity? You dig, you dig, this rigidity always hides something: insecurity, at times perhaps something else.” This was said by the same Francis who, when asked about homosexual priests, replied “Who am I to judge?”

The resurgence of the traditional Latin Mass started before Francis, but has seen unprecedented growth during his papacy, a counterrevolution of sorts that some (both admirably and critically) call an alternative Francis effect. Even bishops and priests who were not ordinarily interested in the traditional Latin Mass have been much more generous and vocal in offering additional such liturgies. Two distinct wings of the Catholic Church have emerged. Often, the new versus the old Mass is a defining characteristic of the opposing coalitions.

The past 50 years have not been good ones for the Catholic Church. Pope Benedict saw this when he wrote, of the new form of Mass, “we abandoned the organic, living process of growth and development over centuries, and replaced it — as in a manufacturing process — with a fabrication, a banal on-the-spot product.”

How the hierarchy of the Church deals with “those individuals who are too young to have lived the pre-Conciliar liturgy, and who want it nonetheless” is a question they have not yet begun to answer.  Source – Rorate Caeli

Comment: 

We’d dearly love to hear from those of you who are still attending the new Mass, despite the manifest evidence that it cannot possibly be pleasing to God.  Those involved in creating this new Mass made clear that their aim was to remove everything that would be an obstacle to Protestants (like, for example, the very idea that the Mass is a re-presentation of the Sacrifice of Calvary). Having made the Mass palatable to Protestants, then, nobody should be surprised at the prospect of making  it pleasing to pagans as well, by including the pagan rituals dear to the indigenous population in the Amazon region. What’s the bet that you will see the fruits of this latest blasphemy in a parish near you, Scotland, England, Wales, Ireland, USA – you name it – before you’ve had time to Google “Amazon Synod”… 

On this terrible anniversary, the book Open Letter to Confused Catholics, written by Archbishop Lefebvre, one of the few prelates at the Second Vatican  Council who acted to protect the traditional Mass, is well worth reading. Events have shown his analysis to be truly prophetic and it is to this Archbishop that we owe the growth of the movement to restore the ancient Mass and Faith.  Click on the image to reach an online copy which you really ought to add to your “must-read” list immediately, if not sooner 😀 

Finally… well… is anybody celebrating the anniversary of the imposition of the new Mass?  If so, we’re jes dyin’ to hear from you…  

Francis: Pope of Deceit & Lies…

From Lifesitenews…

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

Abp Vigano: Pope is subjecting Church to ‘powerful forces’ that want world government

November 21, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) – For twenty centuries, the Catholic Church has professed faith in Jesus Christ, the only Savior, which has come down to us intact, as she received it from the Apostles and Fathers of the Church at the price of the blood of the Martyrs, and by the witness of the Confessors of the faith and of innumerable Saints of every people and language. This faith has been handed down by parents to their children, by priests and religious; it has been spread by zealous missionaries to every continent in the world, under the guidance of the successors of the Apostle Peter who have guaranteed the unity of Christ’s Bride by confirming the brethren in the faith.

For almost seven years now, the successor of the Prince of the Apostles, who was entrusted with the mandate Christ conferred on Peter after his profession of faith — “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:18) — has abdicated his ministry to confirm the brethren in the faith. Pope Francis has never confirmed anyone. We painfully acknowledge how divisive and destructive his ministry has been.

With the declaration he signed in Abu Dhabi, in which he states that “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, color, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom,” and by his constant deviant condemnations of so-called “proselytism,” Francis has not only mortified every missionary impulse but has indeed rejected the mandate given by Christ to all the Apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Mt 28:18-20).

The strategy of the current pontiff is camouflaged by deceit and lies, and concealed by silence, when it is discovered in his deviant intentions what great confusion among the faithful, while they are astutely praised by the enemies of the Church.

The Synod on the Amazon is also part of a much larger and hidden design. It is nothing but an element, albeit a disruptive one, of a vast project, developed under the aegis of the United Nations and supported by the great financial and Masonic powers. How can we explain that the Pachamama idol is already present, through a UN initiative, in texts designed for the ideological indoctrination of children?   Click here to read more and here to read Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò’s denunciation of plans approved by Pope Francis to erect a monument to “Human Fraternity” uniting Islam, Judaism and Catholicism, calling it “a Babylonic enterprise, designed by the enemies of God.”  

Comment:

While it is good that Archbishop Viganò continues to speak out and be reported in orthodox Catholic publications, it would be better if he spoke directly to the Pope in public – to say to him, face to face, what he is acknowledging in the above two linked Lifesitenews reports. Then we would see the mainstream media picking up what they would regard as a really good “story” – so why doesn’t he do this?  It’s action long overdue, frankly.   Same goes for Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider.  Speak directly to the Pope in public – there must be opportunities and if not, surely you have the contacts to create them…  

Priest: Fatima Warnings Fulfilled in Amazon Synod – Worst Fears Realised…

Comment: 

As the priest interviewed in the video indicates, silence is not an option at this late stage in the crisis. We must all speak out now, in every way possible, to highlight the “new pathways” being pursued by Pope Francis, to create what is, in fact, a new Church, opposed to the Church founded by Christ, true God and true Man.   It is difficult to see how anyone, priest, religious or lay person, can remain silent at this point and still be confident of salvation.  Or is this a case of “the lady doth protest too much?”

If Pope Francis Doubts Divinity of Christ, Can We Trust The Church? 

Comment:

The priest’s sermon in the above video is a much needed reminder of the basics of the Faith; the 20 minutes required to hear the sermon/watch the video is well worth spending to remind ourselves that – notwithstanding the scandals we are witnessing, not least through the words and actions of this shocking pontiff – God is with His Church, and it is the ONLY Church which has been given to us for our salvation.  It is worth reminding ourselves of just who and what is infallible, and when; and to check out the teaching of the Church that Scripture is true, entire and whole: there is no error in Scripture, as the Church herself is indefectable –  in relation to which, you may wish to comment on the police raid on the Vatican, to which Father refers. Oh,  and you may want to let us know what you think about the Amazon Synod recommendation that we begin now to confess our “sins against ecology”…  Laugh? I thought I’d never start…

Did Pope Deny the Divinity of Christ?

From Rorate Caeli…

We cannot remain silent about this unbelievable episode, which many of you are certainly aware of. The following:

Eugenio Scalfari, former director of La Repubblica published an article last Tuesday in which he writes: “Those who have had the fortune of meeting and conversing with him in utmost cultural confidence, the way I have several times, know that Pope Francis conceives the Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, man, not God incarnate. Once incarnated, Jesus ceases to be God and becomes man until His death on the cross.”

So a very well-known journalist asserts in one of the most widely-read Italian newspapers that Pope Francis does not believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ. If this was true, Pope Francis would be a formal heretic, like the Arians, the Ebionites and the Socinians.  Click here to read more…
And click here to read Archbishop Viganò’s plea to the Pope to affirm his belief in Christ’s divinity. 

Comments invited…