The Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church is Eternal and Universal

There are some quotations that just jump out at one upon reading them. Such is the case with a quotation ten years ago from the infamous “Archbishop” Vincenzo Paglia, who is the postulator of the cause of the “canonization” of the “beatified” “Archbishop” Oscar Romero, who was killed by assassins as he was staging the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service in San Salvador, El Salavador, on March 24, 1980:

“He was killed at the altar,” Archbishop Paglia said, instead of when he was an easier target at home or on the street. “Through him, they wanted to strike the Church that flowed from the Second Vatican Council." (Romero To Be "Beatified" Soon.)

Whether or not he realized it, “Archbishop” Vincenzo Paglia made quote a statement a decade ago by stating that his church is one that flowed from the “Second” Vatican Council and not the Wounded Side of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as Blood and Water flowed forth out from His Most Sacred Heart. As a conciliar presbyter noted to me in an e-mail in 2004, the “Second” Vatican Council represented what he termed was an “ecclesiogensis,” that is, the springing forth of a new church that had little to do with the one that preceded it.

This is indeed quite correct. What has flowed forth from the “Second” Vatican Council and the “magisterium” of the conciliar “popes” has been nothing other than a polluted stream of apostasy that originated from the poisoned wells of Modernity and Modernism. Countless hundreds of millions of people have been poisoned by it enough to have had their minds poisoned against any mention of the “old faith,” especially as expressed and protected in the Immemorial Mass of Tradition.

As nothing is really ever entirely “new” under the conciliar sun, it is no surprise that the august lord of conciliarism within the counterfeit church of conciliarism are recycling Vincenzo Paglia’s of “the church that flowed from the Second Vatican Council” by stating in a document about how to implement the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s “synodal path” is intent on creating the foundation for, get this, “being church in a new way.” As Jack Harold Paar would have said, “I kid you not”:

The journey of the entire synodal process has shown how crucial it is to have a method that is appropriate to the issues to be addressed. Indeed, to build a synodal Church, content and method very often coincide: meeting and dialoguing as brothers and sisters in Christ on how to better live the synodal dimension of the Church is an experience of synodal Church that opens up a better understanding of the theme. Therefore, the synodal method is not reduced to a series of techniques for managing meetings, but it is a spiritual and ecclesial experience that involves growing in a new way of being Church, rooted in the faith that the Spirit bestows on all the Baptised with His gifts, beginning with the sensus fidei (cf. FD, no. 81). Since it is not a technique, the methodology does not guarantee the desired result, because this depends on the openness to listening of those who take part in the journey and on their willingness to let themselves be transformed by the Spirit of Christ in communion with their brothers and sisters. This is another dimension of synodal conversion to which the FD invites the whole Church.  (250102---ENG-Pathways-for-the-implementation-phase.pdf.)

Yawn.

Why the big yawn?

Simple.

This is nothing new.

This is what the corrupt protector of perverted clerical abusers Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez said in 2013 just six months after the “election” of his fellow Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionary named Jorge Mario Bergoglio:

"No, that constitution is over," he said in a TV interview. "Now it is something different. We need to write something different,” he added.

“In the past the Vatican has just revised existing rules so this is a rupture after a century of increasing centralisation,” said Gerard O’Connell, a Vatican analyst at the Vatican Insider. (Francis the Apostle of Antichrist to 'rip up and rewrite' Vatican constitution.)

Jorge Mario Bergoglio planned to have a so-called “synodal church” from the first moment he stepped out on the balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on Wednesday, March 13, 2013. He talked about a “God of surprises” a few weeks later, and it was during his address to the Latin America conciliar “bishops” in Rio di Janeiro, Brazil, on Sunday, July 28, 2013:

The Continental Mission is planned along two lines: the programmatic and the paradigmatic. The programmatic mission, as its name indicates, consists in a series of missionary activities. The paradigmatic mission, on the other hand, involves setting in a missionary key all the day-to-day activities of the Particular Churches. Clearly this entails a whole process of reforming ecclesial structures. The “change of structures” (from obsolete ones to new ones) will not be the result of reviewing an organizational flow chart, which would lead to a static reorganization; rather it will result from the very dynamics of mission. What makes obsolete structures pass away, what leads to a change of heart in Christians, is precisely missionary spirit. Hence the importance of the paradigmatic mission. (Meeting with the Coordinating Committee of CELAM at the Sumaré Study Center.)

Remember, that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV has committed himself fully to the pursuit of the “synodal path”:

Hello to all and especially to those of my diocese of Chiclayo in Peru, a loyal, faithful people accompanying the bishop and helping the bishop.

To all you brothers and sisters of Rome, Italy, of all the world, we want to be a synodal church, walking and always seeking peace, charity, closeness, especially to those who are suffering. (Robert Francis Prevost’s first public address.)

Prevost/Leo XIV spoke about the inexorable link between Bergoglo’s synodal path and false ecumenism:

Prevost, 2025: Indeed, unity has always been a constant concern of mine, as witnessed by the motto I chose for my episcopal ministry: In Illo uno unum, an expression of Saint Augustine of Hippo that reminds us how we too, although we are many, “in the One — that is Christ — we are one” (Enarr. in Ps., 127, 3). What is more, our communion is realised to the extent that we meet in the Lord Jesus. The more faithful and obedient we are to him, the more united we are among ourselves. We Christians, then, are all called to pray and work together to reach this goal, step by step, which is and remains the work of the Holy Spirit.

Aware, moreover, that synodality and ecumenism are closely linked, I would like to assure you of my intention to continue Pope Francis’ commitment to promoting the synodal nature of the Catholic Church and developing new and concrete forms for an ever stronger synodality in ecumenical relations.

Our common path can and must also be understood in the broad sense of involving everyone, in the spirit of human fraternity that I mentioned above. Now is the time for dialogue and building bridges. I am therefore pleased and grateful for the presence of representatives of other religious traditions, who share the search for God and his will, which is always and only the will of love and life for men and women and for all creatures.

You have witnessed the remarkable efforts made by Pope Francis in favour of interreligious dialogue. Through his words and actions, he opened new avenues of encounter, to promote “the culture of dialogue as the path; mutual collaboration as the code of conduct; reciprocal understanding as the method and standard” (A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, Abu Dhabi, 4 February 2019). I thank the Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue for the essential role it plays in this patient work of encouraging meetings and concrete exchanges aimed at building relationships based on human fraternity. (To Representatives of other Churches and Ecclesial Communities, and Other Religions, 19 May 2025.)

Bergoglio, 2013: Yes, dear brothers and sisters in Christ, let us all feel closely united to the prayer of our Saviour at the Last Supper, to his appeal: ut unum sint. Let us ask the Father of mercies to enable us to live fully the faith graciously bestowed upon us on the day of our Baptism and to bear witness to it freely, joyfully and courageously. This will be the best service we can offer to the cause of Christian unity, a service of hope for a world still torn by divisions, conflicts and rivalries. The more we are faithful to his will, in our thoughts, words and actions, the more we will progress, really and substantially, towards unity.

For my part, I wish to assure you that, in continuity with my predecessors, it is my firm intention to pursue the path of ecumenical dialogue, and I thank the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity for the help that it continues to provide, in my name, in the service of this most noble cause. I ask you, dear brothers and sisters, to bring my cordial greetings and the assurance of my prayerful remembrance in the Lord Jesus to the Christian communities which you represent, and I beg of you the charity of a special prayer for me, that I may be a pastor according to the heart of Christ. (Audience with Representatives of the Churches and Ecclesial Communities, and of the Different Religions, 20 March 2013.)

An Observation:

To call to mind a phrase used frequently by the thirty-seventh President of the United States of America, it is perfectly clear that Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is a man who means what he says. He told us nine weeks, five days ago that he wanted “continuity” with Jorge Mario Bergoglio, and he meant it. His invocations of both the A Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together and Fratelli Tutti, both of which are works of denying Christ the King and His Catholic Faith before men, means that his governance of the counterfeit church of conciliarism will proceed along the same “path” of apostasy ass  that of his predecessor, although I hasten to add in this regard that Prevost/Leo will do so in a more disciplined, structured and effective manner so as to institutionalize the Bergoglian one as a permanent a basis as anything can be in any manifestation of Modernism, which is, of course, inherently unstable.

The so-called synodal path, much of which is derived from the heretical and schismatic Orthodox sects, is opposed to the Divine Constitution of the Catholic Church, which is hierarchical, not synodal.

Pope Leo XIII, writing in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, explained the power of the Sovereign Pontiff is universal and unlimited and that the power of the bishops is local and limited:

Nor does it beget any confusion in the administration that Christians are bound to obey a twofold authority. We are prohibited in the first place by Divine Wisdom from entertaining any such thought, since this form of government was constituted by the counsel of God Himself. In the second place we must note that the due order of things and their mutual relations are disturbed if there be a twofold magistracy of the same rank set over a people, neither of which is amenable to the other. But the authority of the Roman Pontiff is supreme, universal, independent; that of the bishops limited, and dependent. “It is not congruous that two superiors with equal authority should be placed over the same flock; but that two, one of whom is higher than the other, should be placed over the same people is not incongruous. Thus the parish priest, the bishop, and the Pope, are placed immediately over the same people” (St. Thomas in iv Sent. dist. xvii., a. 4, ad q. 4, ad 3). So the Roman Pontiffs, mindful of their duty, wish above all things, that the divine constitution of the Church should be preserved. Therefore, as they defend with all necessary care and vigilance their own authority, so they have always laboured, and will continue to labour, that the authority of the bishops may be upheld. Yea, they look up whatever honour or obedience is given to the bishops as paid to themselves. “My honour is the honour of the Universal Church. My honour is the strength and stability of my brethren. Then am I honoured when due honour is given to everyone” (S. Gregorius M. Epistolarum, lib viii., ep. xxx., ad Eulogium).

16. In what has been said we have faithfully described the exemplar and form of the Church as divinely constituted. We have treated at length of its unity: we have explained sufficiently its nature, and pointed out the way in which the Divine Founder of the Church willed that it should be preserved. There is no reason to doubt that all those, who by Divine Grace and mercy have had the happiness to have been born, as it were, in the bosom of the Catholic Church, and to have lived in it, will listen to Our Apostolic Voice: “My sheep hear my voice” John x., 27), and that they will derive from Our words fuller instruction and a more perfect disposition to keep united with their respective pastors, and through them with the Supreme Pastor, so that they may remain more securely within the one fold, and may derive therefrom a greater abundance of salutary fruit. But We, who, notwithstanding our unfitness for this great dignity and office, govern by virtue of the authority conferred on us by Jesus Christ, as we “look on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith” (Heb. xii., 2) feel Our heart fired by His charity. What Christ has said of Himself We may truly repeat of Ourselves: “Other sheep I have that are not of this fold: them also I must bring and they shall hear my voice” John x., 16). Let all those, therefore, who detest the wide-spread irreligion of our times, and acknowledge and confess Jesus Christ to be the Son of God and the Saviour of the human race, but who have wandered away from the Spouse, listen to Our voice. Let them not refuse to obey Our paternal charity. Those who acknowledge Christ must acknowledge Him wholly and entirely. “The Head and the body are Christ wholly and entirely. The Head is the only-begotten son of God, the body is His Church; the bridegroom and the bride, two in one flesh. All who dissent from the Scriptures concerning Christ, although they may be found in all places in which the Church is found, are not in the Church; and again all those who agree with the Scriptures concerning the Head, and do not communicate in the unity of the Church, are not in the Church” (S. Augustinus, Contra Donatistas Epistola, sive De Unit. Eccl., cap. iv., n. 7). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)

There is no “new way” of “being church,” and even though Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is fond of quoting Saint Augustine of Hippo because he, Prevost/Leo is lay Augustinian, he seems to have overlooked Saint Augustine’s absolute defense of the hierarchical nature of the Catholic Church and his rejection of anyone but Catholics as being members of her.

Thus, let me reprise the following quote from Saint Augustine contained in Pope Leo XIII’s Satis Cognitum:

“The Head and the body are Christ wholly and entirely. The Head is the only-begotten son of God, the body is His Church; the bridegroom and the bride, two in one flesh. All who dissent from the Scriptures concerning Christ, although they may be found in all places in which the Church is found, are not in the Church; and again all those who agree with the Scriptures concerning the Head, and do not communicate in the unity of the Church, are not in the Church”.

Protestants not only dissent from the Sacred Scriptures, of course, they reject entirely the Divine Constitution of the Catholic Church as they consider themselves members of the Church of Christ, a falsehood refuted many times by our true popes, including Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943:

Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. "For in one spirit" says the Apostle, "were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free." As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)

Night and day.

Black and white.

The Modernist program to which Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV is fully committed was foreseen, analyzed, and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Domini Gregis, September 8, 1907 (now it is your turn to yawn, although the reprise that follows is necessary as the conciliar revolutionaries keep saying the same things repeatedly):

It remains for Us now to say a few words about the Modernist as reformer. From all that has preceded, it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for innovation. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head. They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified. The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit. With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the Americanists, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice. They ask that the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism; and there are some who, gladly listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters, would desire the suppression of the celibacy of the clergy. What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles?  (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

The list of "reforms" that Pope Saint Pius X knew that the Modernists wanted to implement stands out as a prophetic warning as to the agenda that was formed by Modernist theologians in the years before the "Second" Vatican Council and became the fundamental basis for the whole ethos of conciliarism. Consider the prophetic nature of Pope Saint Pius X's list of "reforms" that the Modernists wanted to implement:

1) The passion for innovation. Innovation, which the Church has always eschewed, has become the very foundation of conciliarism. Indeed, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI praised novelty and innovation repeatedly, doing so during his now infamous December 22, 2005, Christmas address to his conciliar curia. Since when has this been the case in the history of the Catholic Church? It is standard practice in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

2) "They wish the scholastic philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live." This is a cogent summary of the belief of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI himself, which he outlined in Principles of Catholic Theology and in his own autobiography, Milestones.

3) "Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to harmonized with science and history." Thus it is, of course, that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI told us, both before and during his false "pontificate," that such things as Pope Pius IX's The Syllabus of Errors and even Pope Saint Pius X's Pascendi Dominci Gregis, among other encyclical letters and papal pronouncements (see Witness Against Benedict XVI: The Oath Against Modernism) itself served a useful purpose at one point in history but lose their binding force over time. In other words, we must harmonize Catholicism with the events of history (the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King, the institutionalization of Protestant "churches," the rise of the secular state) and not be "tied down" by a "time-centered" view of the Faith. As repetition is the mother of learning, perhaps it is good to repeat once again that this Modernist view of dogma was specifically condemned by the [First] Vatican Council. No Catholic is free to ignore these binding words and remain a Catholic in good standing:

For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward

• not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
• but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
• Hence, too, that meaning of the sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.

God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.

The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .

3. If anyone says that it is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands: let him be anathema.

And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of the light of the pure faith.

But since it is not enough to avoid the contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions, though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III, Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1.)

4) "Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to be reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head." This describes the liturgical thrust of conciliarism quite accurately. Indeed, the last sentence in this sentence has particular application to the late Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who was somewhat disposed to be "indulgent" to the symbolism of the liturgy but was nevertheless committed to "reforming" the conciliar "reform"

Obviously, the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio came from a more "liberated" background than his predecessor. The modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition can have its place, according to the falsehoods he published in Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007, for those who are "attached" to it. Bergoglio made sure, of course, that there was to be no turning back on the "reform" itself, including the reduction of the saints commemorated on conciliarism's universal calendar. Indeed, then “Cardinal” Ratzinger wrote the following in Principles of Catholic Theology in 1982:

Among the more obvious phenomena of the last years must be counted the increasing number of integralist groups in which the desire for piety, for the sense of mystery, is finding satisfaction. We must be on our guard against minimizing these movements. Without a doubt, they represent a sectarian zealotry that is the antithesis of Catholicity. We cannot resist them too firmly. (Joseph Alois “Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 389-390) 

5) "They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified." The conciliarists have summarized Pope Saint Pius X's description of their Modernist view of Church governance very succinctly: Collegiality. It is no accident that Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI gave away the Papal Tiara, which is on display in the crypt of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., and that Albino Luciani/John Paul I and Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio each refused to be crowned. Ratzinger/Benedict XVI went so far as to remove the tiara from his coat-of-arms, which is reflective of episcopal collegiality with his own bishops and a gesture in the direction of those steeped in the heresies of Photius, the Orthodox.

6) "The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit." This is of the essence of Gaudium et Spes, December 7, 1965. And it is of he essence of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's belief that the "Second" Vatican Council represented an "official reconciliation" with the principles of 1789. Just as a little reminder so that readers with short memories do not think that I am misrepresenting the thought of the man who does not believe it to be the mission of the Catholic Church to seek with urgency the conversion of Protestants and Jews and the Orthodox and all others who are outside her maternal bosom: 

Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. Only from this perspective can we understand, on the one hand, the ghetto-mentality, of which we have spoken above; only from this perspective can we understand, on the other hand, the meaning of the remarkable meeting of the Church and the world. Basically, the word "world" means the spirit of the modern era, in contrast to which the Church's group-consciousness saw itself as a separate subject that now, after a war that had been in turn both hot and cold, was intent on dialogue and cooperation. From this perspective, too, we can understand the different emphases with which the individual parts of the Church entered into the discussion of the text. While German theologians were satisfied that their exegetical and ecumenical concepts had been incorporated, representatives of Latin American countries, in particular, felt that their concerns, too, had been addressed, topics proposed by Anglo-Saxon theologians likewise found strong expression, and representatives of Third World countries saw, in the emphasis on social questions, a consideration of their particular problems. (Joseph Alois “Cardinal” Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, pp. 381-382)

Pope Saint Pius X wrote the following in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, about those who would dare to contend that the Church had to "reconcile" herself to the separation of Church and State, which the Catholic Church condemned repeatedly and vigorously throughout her history prior to the "Second" Vatican Council:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)

Pope Saint Pius X condemned as "absolutely false" the thesis that the State must be separated from the Church. Absolutely false. The conciliar "popes," including Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, have accepted as true and good that which a canonized pope, repeating the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church, which no one has any authority to contradict, condemned as absolutely false. Are you beginning to see, possibly, that there is a problem with the conciliarism in its entirety? Are you beginning to see, possibly, that there is no reconciling the unprecedented heresies, sacrileges, apostasies, blasphemies of novelties of conciliarism and conciliarists,  with the consistent teaching of the Catholic Church?

In addition to the above-noted paragraph in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Pope Saint Pius X went on to note the arrogance of the Modernists in their desire for novelty and in their contempt for scholastic theology and their efforts to view the Fathers in light of their own Modernist predilections:

Would that they had but displayed less zeal and energy in propagating it! But such is their activity and such their unwearying labor on behalf of their cause, that one cannot but be pained to see them waste such energy in endeavoring to ruin the Church when they might have been of such service to her had their efforts been better directed. Their artifices to delude men's minds are of two kinds, the first to remove obstacles from their path, the second to devise and apply actively and patiently every resource that can serve their purpose. They recognize that the three chief difficulties which stand in their way are the scholastic method of philosophy, the authority and tradition of the Fathers, and the magisterium of the Church, and on these they wage unrelenting war. Against scholastic philosophy and theology they use the weapons of ridicule and contempt. Whether it is ignorance or fear, or both, that inspires this conduct in them, certain it is that the passion for novelty is always united in them with hatred of scholasticism, and there is no surer sign that a man is tending to Modernism than when he begins to show his dislike for the scholastic method. Let the Modernists and their admirers remember the proposition condemned by Pius IX: "The method and principles which have served the ancient doctors of scholasticism when treating of theology no longer correspond with the exigencies of our time or the progress of science." They exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all its weight and authority. But for Catholics nothing will remove the authority of the second Council of Nicea, where it condemns those "who dare, after the impious fashion of heretics, to deride the ecclesiastical traditions, to invent novelties of some kind...or endeavor by malice or craft to overthrow any one of the legitimate traditions of the Catholic Church"; nor that of the declaration of the fourth Council of Constantinople: "We therefore profess to preserve and guard the rules bequeathed to the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, by the Holy and most illustrious Apostles, by the orthodox Councils, both general and local, and by everyone of those divine interpreters, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church." Wherefore the Roman Pontiffs, Pius IV and Pius IX, ordered the insertion in the profession of faith of the following declaration: "I most firmly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and other observances and constitutions of the Church.''  (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907, No. 42)

This paragraph is a ringing condemnation of the work of conciliarism and of its progenitors, the so-called "new theologians" (Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Karl Rahner, Joseph Ratzinger, et al.).

Look at how Pope Saint Pius X zeroed in on the three things that Joseph Ratzinger spent nearly four hundred pages trying to deconstruct and explain away in Principles of Catholic Theology: (1) The Scholastic Method of Philosophy; (2) The Authority and Tradition of the Fathers; and (3) the Magisterium of the Church  The then "Cardinal" Ratzinger had to rely upon his Hegelian view of the world to explain away dogmatic pronouncements and articles contained in the Deposit of Faith that constituted part of the Church's Ordinary Magisterium. The Syllabus of Errors? Well, right for its time perhaps, Ratzinger and other conciliarists say, but we can see now that it was a "hasty" and "superficial" overreaction to events of the day.  The late Jorge Mario Bergoglio's solution to all of this? Simple. Don't even making a passing reference five years ago to the centenary of Pope Saint Pius X's death on August 20, 1914.

As Pope Saint Pius X noted; "They exercise all their ingenuity in an effort to weaken the force and falsify the character of tradition, so as to rob it of all of its weight and authority." This is very important. The conciliar popes have not used the word "tradition" to mean what Holy Mother Church has always taught it to mean. They have sought to "weaken the force" and to "falsify the character of tradition" precisely so as to "rob it of all its weight and authority," considering the word "tradition" to be an empty vessel into which he can pour whatever meaning these apostates have believed is appropriate for "modern man."

The synodal path and ecumenism have nothing to do with the Divine Constitution of the Catholic Church:

Father Demetriys Gallitzin's Defence of Catholic Principles in A Letter to A Protestant Minister was a rebuke not only to a Protestant minister in his own day, but also to those in our own day during the reign of the late Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI who contended then and are still contending under Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV, that not all of the teaching given us by true popes is protected by the charism of infallibility, thereby conceding the belief of Protestants that the Catholic Church can give us errors:

If the church could possibly teach damnable errors, then the gates of hell could prevail against her, contrary to the above promise. "Go ye therefore and teach all nations -- baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost --teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" -- Matt. xxviii, 19, 20. Christ addressing his twelve apostles on the present occasion, evidently speaks to all his ministers, successors of the apostles to the end of time; which sound logic will find correct. Christ promises that he himself will be with his apostles, baptizing, preaching and teaching all nations until the consummation of time: now Christ cannot tell a lie; therefore it is evident that Christ has fulfilled his promise; and that during these 1815 years past, Christ has always been with his ministers, the pastors of the holy catholic church, and that he will continue to be with them to the end of time; and that he will accompany and guide them, when they preach his word and administer his sacraments.

Is it possible for the Catholic Church to teach damnable errors?

Of course not!

Father Gallitzin knew that which is being denied by “defenders” of Catholic orthodoxy against the heretical “Pope Francis.” Such defenders know Jorge to be a heretic while making it appear that a true pope can believe in, no less profess, heresy and error and that he can be ignored at their say so. Holy Mother Church is indefectible, and Saint Robert Bellarmine reminded us that the there has never been a single pope who has erred in matters of the Faith.

"And I will ask the Father, and he shall give you another paraclete, that he may abide with you forever, the spirit of truth" -- John xiv, 16, 17. It appears that Christ asked his heavenly Father to bless his ministers, the pastors of his church, with the spirit of truth forever: Pray sir, did Christ offer up any prayer in vain? And if his prayer was heard, how could the pastors of the church ever preach false doctrine?

The conciliar “popes” have believed that the Catholic Church has preached false doctrine and has “persecuted” heretical sects (Waldensians, Hussites, Protestants, the Orthodox) by insisting on the conversion of all non-Catholics to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order. The conciliar "popes" have been the antithesis of Father Demetrius Gallitzin, who reminded Protestants that God the Holy Ghost always directs the Catholic Church in “the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”:

"But when he, the spirit of truth, shall come, he will teach you all truth," John xvi, 13; "the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth," 1 Tim. iii, 15. If the church itself, as it comes out of the hands of God, is the very ground and pillar of truth, it will hardly want the reforming hand of corrupted man to put it right; it will always teach the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and instead of attempting to reform this the most precious of all the works and institutions of God, you and I must be reformed by it. To quote all the texts that prove the holy church of Jesus Christ to be infallible, or invested by Christ with a supreme and unerring authority in matters of faith, would be endless. I said this unerring authority even in the dictates of common sense. Yes, sir; common sense tells us that the works of God are perfect in their kind. Now the church being most emphatically the work of God, it most assuredly must be perfect: the church however, must be very imperfect indeed, if it wants the main perfection, which as our guide and director to Heaven it must have, that of always teaching truth, that of always supplying the wants of our limited and corrupted reason, that of always carrying before our eyes the bright and divine light of revelation.

Shew us a church which is not infallible, which owns itself fallible, wanting of course the main perfection which the church of Christ must have, and you shew us a church of corrupted man, not the church of Christ. Common sense tell us, that, without an infallible tribunal, unanimity in faith is a thing impossible. Without a centre unity, a fixed standard, and absolute and infallible tribunal, a living oracle to determine the mind, it is absolutely impossible, that men framed as they are, should ever come to one and the same way of thinking. Whoever renounces this infallible authority of the church, has no longer any sure means to secure him against uncertainties, and to settle his doubts: he is in a sad and perplexed situation, tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. (Defence of Catholic Principles in A Letter to A Protestant Minister.)

This applies to the entire agenda of conciliarism in general and, of course, to Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s pledge to continue the late Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s synodal path and the agenda of false ecumenism to which each of the conciliar “popes” have committed themselves.

Consider how the following passage from Father Gallitzin’s apologia in defense of the Catholic Faith describes the true teaching on the nature of Holy Mother Church’s Divine Constitution:

We are confirmed in the above suggestions of common sense, by our observation. Unity in faith we find no where but in the catholic church. Above a hundred millions of catholics, scattered over the face of the earth, are perfectly once in matters of faith, -- We meet from the most distant parts of the globe, ignorant of one another’s language, manners, customs, &c. yet our thoughts and principles about religious and its mysteries are exactly alike. Pray, sir, is that unity to be found among those who have shaken off the authority of the church? Since they have presumed to reform (as they call it) the catholic church, what do we see but one reformation or another -- hundreds and hundreds of different churches, one rising on the ruins of another, all widely differing from one another; each styling itself the church of Christ; each appealing to the gospel for the orthodoxy of her doctrine; each calling her ministers, ministers of Christ; each calling the sermons of her ministers, the word of God, &c. &c. (Gallitzin, Demetrius A.  1816.  Defence of Catholic Principles in A Letter to A Protestant Minister.) 

Consider, once again, this sentence from Defense of Catholic Principles in a Letter to A Protestant Minister:

And if his prayer was heard, how could the pastors of the church ever preach false doctrine? 

Only the willfully deluded or those steeped in rank intellectual dishonesty can say that the conciliar “popes,” including Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli/John XXIII, Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VU, Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio never preached any false doctrine. The conciliar “popes” have been ceaseless in their teaching of false doctrines (see Jorge Keeps Moving the Goal Posts).

As Pope Leo XIII noted in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, no one who knowingly believes, no less preachesm any doctrine that has been condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church can remain in good standing as a member of the Catholic Church:

The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88). (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.) 

Father Gallitzin was decidedly opposed to the errors of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry upon which the counterfeit church of conciliarism is built and takes its daily sustenance. He was very much opposed to the Protestant spirit of egalitarianism that is enshrined in the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service, especially as people stand to receive what they believe, albeit falsely, to be the Real Presence of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in that service:

Anything that he [Father Gallitzin] thought that someone was being the least bit irreverent in church brought an immediate correction from him regardless of who was the guilty party. One day a Protestant of the district decided to attend the Sunday Mass. For some time he stood watching curiously the kneeling Catholics. Then he felt an arm on his shoulder and heard someone saying, "Everyone kneels here." He was on in his knees in an instant. The pastor of Loretto was not be trifled with.

Another time the Protestant wife of one of his parishioners decided to come to Mass with her husband. She had made up her mind, however, that nothing was going to make her kneel in a Catholic church. She stood up boldly in the middle of the Church, and when the pastor turned around during the Mass, there was no missing her. The parishioners began to grow uncomfortable and wish they were somewhere else. They were well aware than an explosion was coming, and it was going to be painful.

Demetrius didn't say anything to her, however, until it was time to give Holy Communion. Then he turned around and said in a low voice, "Kneel down, women; kneel down." Nothing happened. The woman had made up her mind that nothing was going to make her kneel, and she stuck to her decision. Demetrius looked at her for half a moment, and then the fire was kindled. "Woman, kneel down!" he roared in a voice that shook the windows. This time she dropped to her knees in a hurry. Even if she wished to stand longer, her trembling knees would not support her. The pastor looked quite capable of calling down fire from heaven to strike her dead.

Strangely enough, six months later the same woman came to Demetrius asking to be baptized. His insistence on reverence for the Blessed Sacrament had convinced her that the Catholic religion is the true faith. His tremendous faith was simply contagious. He would never spare human feelings when the honor of God was at stake. (Brother Bernard Donahue, C.S.C., The Voice That Shook Windows: A Story of Prince-Father Gallitzin. Notre Dame, Indiana: Dujarie Press, 1961, pp. 83-85.) 

Father Demetrius Gallitzin had his share of battles with his parishioners. He fought those battles because he wanted to get them home to Heaven as members of the true Church. We should always understand, my friends, that, we can never associate with the spiritual robber barons of the counterfeit church of conciliarism who believe in the exact opposite of what Father Gallitzin defended so forcefully throughout the forty-five years of his priesthood, the spotless, virginal integrity of the Catholic Faith. 

Consider how Father Francis Solano, O.F,M., whose feast is celebrated in some places within the United States of America on Thursday, July 24, 2025, the Vigil of Saint James the Apostle and the Commemoration of Saint Christina, preached to the Catholics of Lima, Peru, about their impending doom if they did not reform their lives. He was not interested in listening to the “people.” He was concerned about those entrusted to his pastoral care obeying God as He has revealed Himself to us through His true Church:

By the time Francis had reached the market, the theme of his sermon was clear. God was love, yet man was constantly thwarting that love. Many times this was because of thoughtlessness, but there were also countless times when it was because of sheer selfishness, and even malice. Well, atonement for sin must be made by means of penance.

"Unless you do penance, you shall likewise," Our Lord had said to his disciples.

"I will say these words, too," Francis thought. "Oh, Heavenly Father, may they help some souls tonight to turn away from sin!"

Naturally many at the market were astonished when they saw the Father Guardian of Saint Mary of the Angels making his way through their midst. Since his return from Trujillo he had appeared in the streets only rarely, and certainly never in the evenings. Then in a little while there was even more astonishment. Father Francis had come not to buy for his friars, or even to beg. He had come to preach!

At first, however, since business was brisk, not much heed was paid to his words. Merchants vied with one another in calling out the merits of their wares while customers argued noisily for a lower price. Beggars whined for alms. Babies cried. Dogs barked. Donkeys brayed. Older children ran in and out of the crowd intent upon their games. Music was everywhere--weird tunes played by Indian musicians on their wooden flutes, gay Spanish rhythms played on guitar and tambourine. At the various food students succulent rounds of meat sizzled and sputtered as they turned over slow fires. Then suddenly a thunderous voice rang about above the noisy and carefree scene:

"For all that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the Father but is in the world."

It was as though a bombshell had fallen. At once the hubbub died away, and hundreds of Lima's startled citizens turned to where a grey-clad friar, cross in hand, had mounted an elevation in the center of the marketplace and now stood gazing down upon them with eyes of burning coals. But before anyone could wonder about the text from Saint John's first epistle, Francis began to explain the meaning of concupiscence: that, because of Original Sin, it is the tendency within each person to do evil instead of good; that this hidden warfare will end only when we have drawn our last breath.

"If we were to die tonight, would good or evil be the victor within our hearts" he cried. "Oh, my friends! Think about this question. Think hard!

Within just a few minutes Lima's marketplace was as hushed and solemn as a cathedral. All eyes were riveted upon the Father Guardian and all ears were filled with his words as he described God's destruction of the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrha because of the sins committed within them.

"Who is to say that here in Lima we do not deserve a like fate?" he demanded in ringing tones. "Look into your hearts now, my children. Are they clean? Are they pure? Are they filled with love of God?"

As the minutes passed and twilight deepened into darkness, the giant torches of the marketplace cast their flickering radiance over a moving scene. As usual, crowds of people were on hand, but now no one was interested in buying or selling. Instead, faces were bewildered, agonized and fearful. Tears were streaming from many eyes as Francis' words continued to pour out in torrents, urging repentance while there was still time.

"Can we say that we shall ever see tomorrow?" he cried, fervently brandishing his missionary cross. "Can we say that this night is not the last we shall have in which to return to God's friendship?"

As these and still more terrifying thoughts struck home one after another, the speaker stretched out both arms, bowed his head, and in heartrending tones began the Fifth Psalm. At once the crowd was filled with fresh sorrow and made the contrite phrases their own:

"Have mercy on me, O God, according to Thy great mercy.

"And according to the multitude of Thy tender mercies, blot out my iniquity.

"Wash me yet more from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

"For I know my iniquity, and my sins is always before me.

"To Thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before Thee: that Thou mayest be justified in Thy words, and mayest overcome when Thou art judged . . ."

Soon wave upon wave of sound was filling the torch lit marketplace as priest and people prayed together. Then Francis preached again, doing his est to implant a greater sorrow for sin and an even firmer purpose of amendment in the hearts of his hearers. Finally, looking neither to right nor left, he prepared to depart for Saint Mary of the Angels. But on all sides men and women pressed about him, sobbing and begging for his blessing.

"Father, please pray for me!" cried one young girl. "I've deserved to go to Hell a thousand times!"

"Last year, I robbed a poor widow of ten pounds of gold!" declared a swarthy-faced Spaniard. "May God forgive me!"

"'I'm worse than anyone," moaned a wild-eyed black man. "Tonight, I was going to kill a man . . . and for money!"

So it was that first one, then another, cried out his fault and expressed a desire to go to Confession at once. But Francis had to refuse all such requests. Yes, he was a priest. It was his privilege and duty to administer the Sacraments. But he was also a religious, and bound by rule to various observances. One of them was that he must be in his cell at Saint Mary of the Angels by a certain hour each night.

"There are other priests in the city who can help you, though," he said kindly. "Go them now, my children. And may the Holy Virgin bring you back to her Son without delay." (Mary Fabyan Windeatt, Saint Francis of Solano: Wonderworker of the New World and Apostle of Argentina and Peru, published originally by Sheed and Ward in 1946 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers in 1994, pp. 167-172.)

Perhaps it would be good by way of bringing this commentary to a conclusion to include the following vignette about the solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by the council fathers at the [First] Vatican Council on July 18, 1870, to demonstrate that God Himself ratified the truth of the doctrine with lightning, thunderclaps, and then brilliant sunshine when Pope Pius IX intoned the Te Deum:

It may have been merely a coincidence. But there can be no doubt that grandus was added to a scene, in itself sufficiently imposing, when, as on Sinai of old, lightning flashed and thunder pealed as the Fathers of the Council solemnly rose to give their final vote. "the placets of the Fathers," writes the correspondent of the London Times (August 5,1870), "struggled through the storm while the thunder pealed above, and the lightning flashed in at every window, and down through the dome and every smaller cupola. 'Placet!' shouted his Eminence or his Grace, and a loud clap of thunder followed in response, and then the lightning darted about the Baldacchino and every part of the church and council-hall, as if announcing the response. So it continued for nearly one hour and a half, during which time the roll was being called, and a more effective scene I never witnessed. Had all the decorators and all the getters-up of ceremonies in Rome been employed, nothing approaching to the solemn grandeur of the storm could have been prepared, and never will those who saw it and felt it forget the promulgation of the first dogma of the church" Less friendly critics beheld, in this magnificent thunder-storm, a distinct voice of Divine anger, condemning the important act of the assembled Fathers. Had they forgotten Sinai and the Ten Commandments? All of a sudden, as the last words were uttered, the tempest ceased; and, at the moment when Pius IX, intoned the Te Deum, a sun-ray lighted up his noble and expressive countenance. The voices of the Sixtine choristers, who continued chanting the hymn, could not be heard. They were lost in the united concert of the venerable Fathers and the vast assemblage.  (The Rev. Æneas MacDonell Dawson, Pius IX. And His Time, London: Thos. Coffey, Catholic Record Printing House. 1880, pp. 337-338.)

As horrible as things appear to be at this time, good readers, we know that this is the time from all eternity in which Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has ordained for us to be alive and thus to give Him honor and glory as His consecrated slaves through His Blessed Mother’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart. We must simply pray to Our Lady to send us the graces we need to persevere in these times of confusion in the world and apostasy within the counterfeit church of conciliarism as we remember that anything, including the conciliar sect, that is “of, by, and for the people” shall indeed perish from the face of the earth.

We should take heart from the following story about the prodigies of Our Lady of Rome and Ancona, found on a Spanish language website, Miles Christi Resistens, that emphasizes the fact that Our Lady herself always knows the troubles that afflict her children in the Church Militant here on earth and that she stands by us at all times:

July 9th is the feast of the Miracles of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in memory of the “animation” phenomenon that involved several Marian images in the streets and churches of Rome in 1796. The phenomenon, which is not only Roman, is part of a broader historical and theological context, as can be seen in the following article (source: MariadiNazareth.it , via RADIO SPADA ):

THE PRODIGY OF THE “STREET VIRGINS” THAT AMAZED NAPOLEON   

The year 1796 was a tragic year for Italy: Napoleon's armies had invaded the entire north of the peninsula and threatened the Papal States. With a series of lightning victories, the twenty-seven-year-old Bonaparte had defeated the Piedmontese and the Austrians, occupying everything within reach. Looting, robbery, and bloody repression followed one another at an impressive pace. In France, Jacobinism had carried out a veritable massacre of priests, nuns, and religious figures; the king and queen had been beheaded, and de-Christianization was advancing with the grim blow of the guillotine. In our peninsula too, invaders were gutting churches and desecrating altars; those who rebelled were savagely massacred. It seems no one can stop these demons who have already troubled the "most Christian" realm and make no secret of their desire to eradicate religion forever, attacking its heart, Rome. In places at risk, people are dismayed; the people are multiplying their processions and invocations to Heaven for protection.    

In Ancona, the main papal port on the Adriatic and tempting to the French, the cathedral is filled. The Mother of God is implored with the ancient prayer "Hail Regina," to deign to turn her merciful eyes toward those who pray to her. And on June 25, just as the invaders were at the gates of the city, the painting of the Virgin in the Cathedral begins to move its eyes, leading them toward the kneeling people. News spreads immediately. Everyone rushes from everywhere. The miracle lasts for months, uninterrupted. The authorities are forced to launch an official investigation, with notaries taking notes, scientific expert reports, and interrogating thousands of witnesses. This mass of documents is still in the archives. The local Jacobins warn Napoleon that the Ancona clergy are deceiving the people to rise up against the invaders. As soon as he enters the city, the general orders the painting to be brought to him, takes it away, and threatens to destroy it. He is in the presence of the entire municipality, the canons, and his staff: everyone is looking at him, holding the painting. Suddenly, he pales, Napoleon hesitates, and is speechless. Then he shakes himself and returns the image, ordering it to be kept covered. Some swear that Napoleon saw the miracle and was shocked. The truth is, he changed his mind for no apparent reason, and that's not like him. 

After occupying Ancona and defeating the popes, the French dispersed: Rome had no more hope. Pope Pius VI ordered prayers, fasting, and propitiatory ceremonies; above all, the Virgin was invoked and venerated in the capital of Christianity in a special way through the thousands of street Madonnas that transformed the city into a veritable open-air Marian shrine.

And on July 9th, here too, the Queen "turns her merciful eyes" toward those who supplicate her. The Madonna of the Arch is the first: it is located in the Trevi district, one of the most popular. Almost at the same time, other Marian images follow. In short, there are dozens of them. People run from one side to the other to see the miraculous movements of the eyes; the police have to intervene to control access.

Meanwhile, similar events also occur in the provinces. There are two epicenters: Ancona and Rome. Rome, above all. At a certain point, 122 miraculous images are counted throughout the Papal States . An official investigation is also opened in Rome, the reports of which are still preserved. Since the phenomena continue to unfold before the judges and the secretaries of record, and in some cases last for more than a year, the process is limited to only 26 miraculous images, considered sufficient to determine the authenticity of the prodigies. Cardinal Vicar Giulio Della Somaglia (an eyewitness) must issue a decree officially certifying what happened; the Pope announces a series of missions to be preached in the main squares (one of the preachers in charge is Saint Vincent Maria Strambi); a liturgical feast is authorized in memory of the events. The prodigies occur in churches, private homes, and convents, but mostly in the open air, where people are almost obliged to see them. The testimonies are unanimous: the images (paintings, drawings, statues, bas-reliefs) direct their gaze toward the crowd, envelop those present with a maternal gaze, and then rise toward heaven, as if collecting prayers and offering them to the Lord. Sometimes it is Christ or saints, but the Mother of God is the true protagonist. The testimonies, preserved in the archives, come from all social classes: cardinals, commoners, artisans, nobles, foreigners, even atheists and infidels. The sworn testimony of Giuseppe Valadier, the most important architect of the time (who later became a supporter of Napoleon), is impressive. With the mastery of an expert, he describes the miracles movingly in six images.    

In those days, urban life changed; there were no more arguments, blasphemies, fights, or disputes; at the feet of miraculous icons, piles of returned stolen objects formed, confessionals overflowed, and churches had to remain open even at night. Such a "wave of miracles" is unparalleled in the entire history of Christianity; and yet, historiography fails to record them. An unlikely historian, the very secular Renzo De Felice, was the only one to address it in a study in 1965. He didn't believe in it, of course, but he couldn't help but express his astonishment at the silence that, even from the Catholic side, had enveloped this extremely important part of history. The provocation launched by De Felice was taken up very recently by a scholar, also secular, of the anti-Napoleonic uprisings (another forgotten historical phenomenon, although it affected all of Italy, with 300,000 men taking up arms against the invaders in the name of religion). This is Massimo Cattaneo, who in his studio continued De Felice's research, admitting that such a widespread and long-lasting phenomenon cannot be hastily classified as a scam: having hundreds of images miraculously produced over a vast territory, for months and months in front of myriads of witnesses (many of whom were scientists equipped with the most sophisticated instruments of the time), without anyone noticing the trick (and many of the testimonies coming from notorious doubters) is an impossible thing.

But why did this happen? Why exactly there? Why not before or after? This is what Vittorio Messori and Rino Cammilleri asked in their book, Gli occhi di Maria (Rizzoli); in it, the two authors, after a detailed reconstruction of the events, question their Catholic significance. We know that the worst thing that could have happened happened: Rome was invaded and its treasures plundered; even the Vatican Archives, the historical memory of the West, were confiscated; the center of Christianity was transformed into a Jacobin Republic, and two popes were deported; one of them, Pius VI, died in prison in France.    

The Mother of God probably wanted to reassure her children: they should not worry, for what was happening had been divinely foreseen and was destined to happen, but Mary's protection would not fail. Digging into the past, we discover that since the 15th century, astrologers had predicted a colossal social and political upheaval that began in France in 1789. Impressive prophecies, even from saints like Benedict Joseph Labre (whose canonical recognition with a view to beatification, not coincidentally, took place the day before the first Roman miracle), had warned of this.  

Why did God allow His Church to enter His Calvary at that very moment? Indeed, it is from there that modernity as we know it begins; it is from there that the West's armed struggle against its religion begins.    

Here we enter the theology of history and can only make assumptions. The comparison that comes to mind is that of Gethsemane, with Christ pleading with the Father to save him from what is about to happen to him. But it happens anyway, because it must. Humans lack the awareness of the Man-God nor his full trust in what the Father has decreed. Perhaps that is why the Mother intervened in person to console and reassure. 

 It is no coincidence that, in both Ancona and Rome, the miracles of 1796 began on a Saturday, a day traditionally dedicated to the cult of Mary. She addresses her children, who ask for "those merciful eyes," a gesture perfectly understood by all witnesses: official documents attest to this.   

Even today, in Rome and Ancona (but also elsewhere), tombstones and inscriptions recall the miracles of that extraordinary year.    

In Rome, one of the most visible is located on Via delle Cellare Oscura, near what was the historic headquarters of the Italian Communist Party. The image of the Virgin Mary remains there, surrounded, now as then, by votive offerings for graces received. (MILES CHRISTI RESISTS: THE WONDERS OF OUR LADY IN ROME AND ANCONA.)

Similarly, we must not be worried about events in the world or those within the counterfeit church of conciliarism as we are called to trust in Our Lady with childlike confidence as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.

We know the end of the story: Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate triumphs in the end.

We must simply do our part as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through that same Sorrowful and Immaculate Heat without looking for results as we await the day when everyone will exclaim:

Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthazar, pray for us.

Saint Bonaventure, pray for us.