Heretics are killers.
Countless numbers of faithful Catholics have been killed by heretics, most notably, of course, during the Protestant Revolution on the European mainland and in the British Isles. It is not exaggeration to state that the Protestant Revolution was the progenitor of the French and Russian Revolutions, providing a roadmap to death and destruction as the foundation to build a “new order” of things.
Even the heretics of yore were no slouches when it came to using violence against believing Catholics. The Albigensians became notorious for killing faithful Catholics and burning their lands in southern France. They even went so far as to murder Pope Innocent III’s own papal legate.
The first thing that heretics must kill, however, is truth, as each heresy is a denial of one or more truths revealed by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ that He has entrusted to His Holy Catholic Church to safeguard and to explicate infallibly until His Second Coming on the Last Day to judge the living and the dead. It is a simple thing to deny even natural truths themselves once one has denied even one truth of the Holy Faith.
As is well-established by now, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, is a world-class killer of truth. Those who kill supernatural truths are killers of souls. Only the willfully blind can deny that the man most people alive in the world today to be “Pope Francis” is such a killer of souls.
Bergoglio refined his practices of spiritual genocide when he served as the conciliar “archbishop” of Buenos Aires, Argentina, between 1998 and the time of his election as the sixth in the current line of antipopes on March 13, 2013. For instance, he made sure that a traditionally-minded community of religious women, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior, in Argentina had their “horizons expanded” by requiring that they watch pornographic films to break down their spiritual resistance to the “joy” of impurity and indecency.
It was at the start of “Pope Francis’s” persecution of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in July of 2013 that an Argentine website compared the “merciful” “pope’s” treatment of this conciliar community with that of the sisters of the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior during “Cardinal” Bergoglio’s reign of terror in Buenos Aires:
"Msgr." Bergoglio is a cold and authoritarian man, in the service of a part of a certain modernist ideology. Now he is a "pope." A change in mentality perhaps, even if our degree of respect for him changes, given the loftiness of his office?
Let us look at the story of the excellent periodical "Página Católica". During the times of his being "archbishop" of Buenos Aires he disbanded the holy Order of nuns that was founded in the 18th century by Mother Antula, María Antonia de Paz y Figueroa, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior, that had various colleges and constructed a House of Exercises in Buenos Aires, a jewel of colonial architecture and a placed blessed with so much graces.
Now, coming from the "Holy See", follows another act of despotism towards another Congregation, the Franciscans of the Immaculata with the same ferocity.
Reading the story demonstrates that there isn't any line added because it is sufficient for any Catholic heart to understand and repudiate such a horrible spectacle of ecclesiastical tyranny against the Faith, to holy vocations, and good customs.
Lamentably, it is not possible to reproduce the interviews given to the nuns thrown out on the streets by "Msgr." Bergoglio. But the can be found by opening the webpage of http://pagina-catolica.blogspot.com/2013/07/frailes-de-la-inmaculada-y-un-drama.html
Cosme Beccar Varela
July 30, 2013
Friars of the Immaculate and a "porteño" drama
The nuns of the Holy House of Exercises, an analogous case with the Franciscans of the Immaculata?
Modernism demands that the poor pay for their own destruction.
Today the walls of the Holy House of Exercises breath in solitude.
"Your preferred option has to be the poor," the Neo-Modernists tell us who are abundantly governing the Church, every time there is a clamor to celebrate the true Catholic Mass.
Thus, they foment an ideological animosity between Traditionalism and Charity, on one hand and an erroneous and automatic identity between Progressive Neo-Modernism and true charity towards the needy.
In effect, as sound Catholic doctrine teaches, Charity firstly corrects the erring and showing them the pathway to salvation. Thus true love is yearns for the good of the beloved; the good which is ultimately nothing other than to merit everlasting life.
By this, those who long for the diffusion of the traditional doctrine and liturgy, are the first who have opted preferentially for the poor, by trying to provide them the Mass that has brought holiness upon millions of Catholics throughout the last 2,000 years; and even in the mere human order, it is a monument of good taste and the most exquisite of human arts; incomparably more splendid than that "witches' sabbath" of the Neo-Modernists of the Novus Ordo that they have accustomed the universal church.
But those who proclaim themselves advanced in the solicitude of the poor, many times drop their mask without them knowing it.
We know that "pope" Francis has taken that name in order to demonstrate a life developed in poverty. Therefore we must suppose that the Friars of the Immaculata are truly poor.
Not withstanding, the decree signed in July 11 by which was intervened upon the Congregation by means of a Pontifical Commissary, that includes only three established conditions:
1. Designate Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, OFM Cap, Apostolic Commissar ad nuntum Santae Sedis of the Congregation, with all the applicable powers.
2. Dispose "that it corresponds upon the Institute of Franciscan Friars of the Immaculata, to reimburse all the expenditure incurred by the Commissary and the personnel that will be eventually designated, as honorary for their services."
3. Besides what has been mentioned, the "Holy" Father Francis has disposed that everyone of the religious of the Congregation of the Friars of the Immaculata are obliged to celebrate the liturgy according to the "ordinary" form and that eventually, the use of the "extraordinary" form (Vetus Ordo) has to be explicitly authorized by the corresponding authorities, for every religious and/or community that asks for it."
Thus, we see the knavishness as it manifests itself. Then, in the end, some poor monks will be bereft of the greatest of all treasures, the Traditional Liturgy of the Church. They have to pay for such a great price!
Those who might have doubts as to what this intervention can possibly mean should consider the following: the decree that we have analyzed can only have two dispositions: rob the Tridentine Mass and determine who will pay for the cost of such operation.
Go forth, standard bearers of the poor knowing that God will repay you abundantly and immediately for your great generosity!
The situation that has been raised has had a similarity with a dramatic case that occurred in Buenos Aires under the "archbishopric" of "Cardinal" Bergoglio. We have spoken for some time about this lamentable subject matter, but let us allow ourselves to return to it even if it be succinctly, then we can illustrate to ourselves about what to expect from the Institute of the Friars of the Immaculata.
Founded in the 18th century by Mother Antula and Maria Antonia de Paz y Figueroa, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior has reached a degree of prosperity that, in our time, it has been possessor of various Catholic Colleges with thousands of students, one located in the exclusive Avenue of the Liberator in San Isidro, over all, of the terrain where they erected the Sanctuary of St. Cayetan in Liniers (a lot of money in alms) whose revenue was administered by the nuns.
At an opportune moment, "Cardinal" Bergoglio asked of the Mother Superior to transfer the property of the Sanctuary to the Archbishopric of Buenos Aires. Days later, after consulting her councilor Mother Hilda Ledesma responded to the Cardinal in the negative.
Having had a crystal ball maybe would have avoided the catastrophe of ceding to the disposal of the now "pope" Francis, in order to avoid the despoliation of all the goods and the near extinction of the order, as later accounted.
Because, in no time, he designated an apostolic visitor in the person of a Jesuit friend of Bergoglio: the current bishop Hugo Salaberry de Azul, in the province of Buenos Aires. The excuse: that close to 30 nuns lived in the Holy House of Exercises, some young women who in the majority are from Paraguay won for Christ by the zeal of one nun of that nationality, were there detained against their wills and isolated from society.
The isolation is concluded by the fact that these sisters were instructed in the same convent by professors designated as ad hoc, that which was made to avoid excessive contact with the world in which many nuns are used to nowadays.
A little later, in the first hours of the morning, when some nuns haven't yet groomed themselves, an unfolding of unusual Curial functions informed them that the "Holy See," with the signature of "Cardinal" Re, has designated as Apostolic Commissar on "Msgr." Horacio Garcia, Pro Vicar General of the Archdiocese. The lettered "priest" that was supposed to accompany him excused himself for not being in agreement. In his place came "Fr." Alejandro Russo, current Rector of the Cathedral of Buenos Aires (a favor in return for a favor?)
"Cardinal" Re reigned over the Congregation of the Religious and Institutes of Consecrated Life, who lived here and had one relative in the Archbishopric Curia. A man very close to Bergoglio, who was the one who earned for him the ring of the Fisherman is being flaunted by Francis and that he inherited from a secretary of Paul VI.
The end of this long story, that would give an argument by its vicissitudes to a drama that will be a sure best seller in book stores, ended with the Mother Superior confined to in Cordoba, the sisters returned to the world in such a manner that it can be said that the congregation ceased to exist, and the money and properties in the hands of the "Apostolic Commissariate" whose intervention is prolonged sine die.
An eminent example if how these Pharisees care for the poor, is the case of Mirna, a young Paraguayan woman who had been in the convent since 14 years of age and was bidden farewell by "Msgr." Garcia who put her in the streets without informing her parents, and without even giving her a single cent to look after her needs.
We put on video all of her declarations and we invite our readers to reread an old post of this blog where she tells her story.
At this point of the story our readers allow us to vent with a phrase that is quite irreverent: to those who want to cheat, are good for nothing losers. You who call yourselves progressive, not only do you put souls in grave danger, neither do you know how to look after the needs of the body.
According to the very victims, the Apostolic Commissary disposed that the nuns and novices find out their true vocation, with a method that we can call an immersion in the world: psychoanalysis and including exposure to eroticism. About this, it has already been written in this blog. (Translation provided by Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta.)
This persecution of anyone who is in least bit devoted to the immutable truths of the Catholic Faith and to the Immemorial Mass of Tradition represents a total rejection of everything to do with the "no church" that he believes had shackled him. Those he denounces as Pelagians and Pharisees and restorationists and as "rigid" and "dead" and "cold-hearted" and "corrupt" are reproaches to his conscience and a reminder to him of all that he despised in his youth, all that kept "Bergoglio from being Bergoglio" prior to March 13, 2013.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio considers it a “crime” to adhere to believe and to worship as Catholics have always believed and worshipped. However, he is never at a loss to indemnify hardened sinners or to say that there is “no evidence” to support charges against members of his false church’s hierarchy or clergy who are accused of committing and/or covering-up clerical abuse. This is what he did with “Monsignor” Battista Ricca in 2013, and this is what he did recently with “Bishop” Juan Barros as he insisted yet again that no one had ever presented him with a shred of proof that Barros knew about the clerical abuse committed by his mentor, “Father Fernando Karadima:
SANTIAGO, Chile — A number of Chilean Catholics reacted with disappointment and anger on Friday, a day after Pope Francis spoke in defense of a bishop who they say protected a pedophile priest. The remarks, made on Thursday just before Francis left Chile for Peru, upended his efforts to rehabilitate the Catholic Church’s reputation while visiting South America.
Francis told reporters Thursday there was not a shred of evidence against Bishop Juan Barros Madrid, who victims of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, Chile’s most notorious priest, have accused of being complicit in his crimes.
“The day someone brings me proof against Bishop Barros, then I will talk,” Francis said before celebrating Mass outside the northern Chilean city of Iquique. “But there is not one single piece of evidence. It is all slander. Is that clear?”
The pope’s comments set off a storm in Chile, raising questions about his commitment to repairing the damage from sexual abuse scandals and improving the decline in the church’s image and following in the traditionally devout country.
Benito Baranda, coordinator of the pope’s visit to Chile, told a radio station in Santiago that Bishop Barros “should have ceased to be bishop a long time ago.” He added: “The damage he is inflicting on the church is big.”
Mr. Baranda, a psychologist, said that the church “never believed Karadima’s victims from the start” and that the pope’s support for the bishop “reignites the feeling of not being believed, or that they are exaggerating or being deceitful. It’s like when children say they suffer abuse but no one believes them because they are children.”
However, the president of the Chilean bishops’ conference, Msgr. Santiago Silva, said the organization would “unconditionally support” the pope’s position on Bishop Barros. “The pope told us what he wants, and he wants Monsignor Barros to continue,” Monsignor Silva said.
Alejandro Goic, the bishop of Rancagua, said that what “the pope says has extraordinary value,” but he added that “the church’s main priority should be the victims.”
Anne Barrett Doyle, a co-director of BishopAccountability.org, a group that monitors abuse cases, called the pope’s remarks “a stunning setback.”
She added: “He has just turned back the clock to the darkest days of this crisis. Who knows how many victims now will decide to stay hidden, for fear they will not be believed?”
And the government’s spokeswoman, Paula Narváez, said on her Twitter account: “Respecting, believing and supporting victims of sexual abuse is an ethical imperative. No institutional defense can override this basic principle for a fair society, one that is empathetic with those who most need it.”
Father Karadima was convicted by the Vatican in 2011 of abusing teenage boys beginning in the 1980s, and he was ordered to lead a “life of prayer and penitence.” That year, a judge found the allegations “truthful and reliable” but dismissed a criminal case because the statute of limitations had expired.
Bishop Barros, a former military chaplain, was part of Father Karadima’s inner circle and, according to one of the victims, witnessed the priest’s advances on him.
“As if I could have taken a selfie or picture while Karadima abused me or others and Juan Barros stood there watching it all,” one of Father Karadima’s victims, Juan Carlos Cruz, wrote on Twitter.
The pope told a group of tourists visiting Vatican City in 2015 that people in Orsono who protested the appointment were “dumb.”
“The Osorno community is suffering because it’s dumb,” he said, according to video recorded by one of the tourists. The city had “let its head be filled with what politicians say, judging a bishop without any proof.”
This week, lay and religious groups from Osorno and Santiago, the capital, protested throughout the pope’s visit and called for action against the bishop.
But Bishop Barros has continued to enjoy the support of the Vatican, and there was no public indication that Francis was reconsidering his position. Bishop Barros participated in the pope’s ceremonies in Santiago, Iquique and the southern city of Temuco. In Iquique, Bishop Barros told reporters that Francis had offered him “words of support and affection.”
The Associated Press reported this week that Francis had acknowledged the furor over the legacy of Father Karadima in a 2015 letter to the Chilean bishop’s conference. The letter said the pope proposed Bishop Barros and two other bishops go on sabbatical before taking up any new positions, a plan that ultimately fell apart.
Francis began his visit to Chile on Tuesday morning by publicly apologizing for the sexual abuse involving the clergy, saying he felt “pained and ashamed” over the “irreparable damage” done to their victims. But he refused to meet with victims of Father Karadima.
“What the pope has done today is offensive and painful, and not only against us, but against everyone seeking to end the abuses,” James Hamilton, one of the victims, said during a news conference Thursday.
The archbishop of Santiago, Francisco Javier Errázuriz, who has been harshly criticized by Father Karadima’s victims for failing to protect them or investigate their accusations at the time, said the controversy over Bishop Barros was an “invention.” (Jorge Says Critics of Barros are Slanderers.)
Even one of Jorge’s “Commissars,” Sean “Cardinal” O’Malley, the hideous conciliar “archbishop” of Boston, Massachusetts, found his “pope’s” remarks to be “offensive,” which prompted a line of questioning during the “papal” press conference on the plane carrying the antipope back to Rome from Peru last month.
Bergoglio gave a lengthy defense of how he says he has handled clerical abuse cases before digging his heels in yet again in defense of Juan Barros:
Ihe case of Bishop Barros, I had it studied, I had it investigated, I had it worked on a lot. And truly there is no evidence. I use the word evidence. Then I will speak about proof. There is no evidence of culpability, it seems that it will not be found. There is a coherence in another sense. I am waiting for evidence to change position, but I apply the judicial principle basic in any tribunal: “nemo malus nisi provetur” — no one is guilty until it is proven.
I used the word "proof" and I believe that gave me a hard time. I said it in Spanish, as I remember, I was entering and a journalist from Iquique asked me: ‘In Chile we have a big problem with Bishop Barros, what do you think?' I think that the words I said were these. First I thought about whether to respond or not, and I said yes [I would], because he had been bishop of Iquique, and a parishioner is asking me. I said, the day that I have proof I will speak. I think I said, ‘I don’t have proof,’ but it is recorded, you can find it.
The answer was: the day that I have proof, I will speak. The word 'proof' is what caused [concern]. No one is bad “sino probetur.” I would speak about evidence and, of course, I know that there are a lot of people who have been abused and that they cannot show proof, they do not have it. They cannot [show it] or sometimes they have it, but they are ashamed and hide it, and suffer in silence. The drama of those who have been abused is tremendous. Terrible. Two [months] ago I tended to a woman who was abused 40 years ago — 40, married with three children. This woman hadn’t received Communion from that time, because in the hand of the priest she saw the hand of the abuser. She couldn't go near. And she was a believer. She was Catholic. Sorry to continue in Spanish, but I want to be precise with the Chileans. The word “proof” wasn’t the best [word to use] in order to be near to a sorrowful heart. I would say evidence.
The case of Barros was studied, it was re-studied, and there is no evidence. That is what I wanted to say. I have no evidence to condemn. And if I were to condemn without evidence or without moral certainty, I would commit the crime of a bad judge. (Jorge's 8,000th Inflight Pres Conference.)
No, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has committed the moral crime of lying:
Things keep getting worse for Pope Francis.
Late last month, the pope reiterated his defense of a Chilean bishop, contending that he had never received any complaints that the prelate knew of abuse by the country’s most notorious pedophile priest.
But on Monday, The Associated Press reported that the pope personally received an eight-page letter in 2015 from one of the victims. The letter explicitly detailed abuses the victim said were witnessed by other clerics, including Juan Barros Madrid, who was appointed bishop of Osorno, Chile, that year.
The report that one of the pope’s top advisers had personally handed him the letter has revived accusations by advocates for abuse victims that the 81-year-old pontiff cannot, or will not, understand an issue that has long roiled the Roman Catholic Church.
“There is what you might call a willful blindness,” said Peter Saunders, a former member of the pope’s Commission for the Protection of Minors, whose mandate expired in December. “It’s almost angry unwillingness to accept what’s in front of him, because to acknowledge it is to acknowledge that the church still has to clean up its act. He’s been behaving like a spouse who is told that their spouse is abusing their kids, and can’t believe it.”
A copy of the letter was provided to The New York Times by its author, Juan Carlos Cruz, who has accused the Rev. Fernando Karadima, once one of Chile’s most prominent Catholic priests, of abuse. The church has found Father Karadima guilty of abusing minors from 1980 to 1995 and penalized him in 2011.
In the letter, Mr. Cruz wrote that Bishop Barros, who was a priest at the time, witnessed the abuse.
Pope Francis has repeatedly discounted the accusations against Bishop Barros as slander, and his defense of him cast a shadow over a trip he made to Chile in January. Last week, facing mounting criticism for siding with clergy members over victims, the pope sent the Vatican’s top sex crimes investigator to Chile to hear their accusations.
The disclosure of the letter has raised difficult questions for the pope.
Did he read the letter and decide not to tell reporters about it? Did he choose to believe Bishop Barros over Mr. Cruz? Or did he never read the letter, or perhaps read it but forget about it?
For Mr. Cruz, the pope has become “just like the others.”
“He covers up and doesn’t listen to the victims,” he said.
Some veteran Vatican analysts said that perhaps the pope had information not available to other people.
Marco Politi, a Vatican expert and the author of the book “Pope Francis Among the Wolves,” said the pope’s continued belief in the innocence of Bishop Barros must have been based on an internal investigation. If the pope erred, Mr. Politi said, “it was that he did not send Bishop Charles Scicluna earlier.” Bishop Scicluna is the investigator the pope sent to Chile.
The case against Bishop Barros erupted in 2015 when the pope named him, a former chaplain in the Chilean armed forces, to lead the Osorno diocese amid widespread protest. Bishop Barros has denied knowing about the abuse until 2010, when accounts emerged in the news media.
Concerned by the accusations against the Chilean bishop, members of the Commission for the Protection of Minors traveled to Rome so that they could deliver Mr. Cruz’s letter to the pope.
We all felt that the Barros appointment had been a mistake, and when Juan Carlos told me he had been trying to be heard, we thought that this was an opportunity to get the details directly to the pope,” said Marie Collins, a survivor of abuse who resigned from the commission last year in frustration over its inaction. “If Barros hadn’t recognized abuse when it had happened under his eyes, it was difficult to see how those in his diocese would be properly protected,” she said.
In April 2015, four members of the commission met with Cardinal Sean O’Malley, who led the commission, in the Casa Santa Marta, where the pope lives. Ms. Collins asked him to personally deliver the letter to Francis.
They commemorated the moment when they delivered Mr. Cruz’s letter with a photograph. “We thought it would be nice for the survivors of abuse to know that we were doing the best that we could do for them,” Ms. Collins said.
The working group issued a statement at the time saying that it was essential for a bishop to enact effective policies and monitor compliance, “in the light that sexual abuse is so common,” but did not mention Mr. Cruz’s letter.
At the commission’s next meeting several weeks later, Cardinal O’Malley confirmed that he had delivered the letter to the pope, Ms. Collins said. Mr. Cruz said Cardinal O’Malley had told him that he delivered the letter himself.
Last month, after the pope’s remarks dismissing allegations against Bishop Barros as “slander,” Cardinal O’Malley issued a remarkable defense of the victims.
Delivering the letter was the only time, as far as Ms. Collins knows, that members of the commission tried to speak to the pope about a specific case, she said. But she also said that while she is convinced that the letter was given to the pope, she cannot be sure if he read it.
“I have no idea because he has continued to support Barros over three years, and never met with the survivors,” she said. “I can’t judge. The pope is a good man. I have no idea why he wouldn’t have considered the concerns of the members of his commission.”
The new commission for the protection of minors — whose members have not been announced — is expected to hold its first plenary session in April.
Mr. Saunders, who was dismissed from the commission in 2016 for being too outspoken, was also present at the April 2015 meeting. The commission members had hoped to speak directly with the pope, but instead met with Cardinal O’Malley, he recalled.
“O’Malley said the letter would be handed to Francis, who I think was literally in the next room,” he said. (Bergoglio Knew What He Said He Did Not Know. See Key Dates in "Pope's" Defending "Bishop" Accused of Cover-Up for a timeline of events relating to Juan Barros and Fernando Karadima.)
The names change. The defense of perverted clergymen and their enablers remains the same. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is as much of a calculated deceiver as, say, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton, James Brien Comey, Bruce Ohr, Andrew McCabe, et al.
In this regard, however, the Jacobin/Bolshevik conciliar revolutionary, Bergoglio, has protected “his own” just as much as the Girondist/Menshevik conciliar revolutionary whose princely style of life in Rome (see Our Man in Rome) was abhorrent to his revolutionary “street priest” persona, namely, Bernard “Cardinal” Law, who died on December 20, 2017, at the age of eighty-six. For all their differences, you see, the two men had two things in common with each other: a common commitment to most of the major heresies of conciliarism and an unyielding refusal to admit that any priest/presbyter who is in the least bit inclined to commit the sin of Sodom and its related perverse vices is unfit to serve as an alter Christus, whether truly ordained or not.
Although of decidedly different ecclesiastical styles and personal temperatures, Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Bernard Francis “Cardinal” Law shared a commitment to false ecumenism and to a “gender-inclusive liturgy.
Law, who was thought be to be a “conservative” by many secular commentators, saw everything about the Catholic Faith through the prism of “nuance.” This led him, a true progenitor of conciliarism and the conciliar spirit who pioneered “ecumenical” meetings in Mississippi in the 1960s as a young priest, to corrupt the Faith throughout the course of his fifty-six years of priesthood, most of which were spent as a willing apostle of a false church. He was a man who was just as much concerned about pleasing various constituencies as is the man who presided over his so-called “Mass of Christian Burial” on December 21, 2017, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
To wit, one of the first signs of Law’s “inclusiveness” was given when he acceded to the demands of nuns that they be allowed to serve as so-called “extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist” during his Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo “installation” service as the conciliar “archbishop” of Boston, on March 25, 1984. This was in violation of what then passed for the “norm” in the conciliar church as every priest/presbyter of Archdiocese of Boston, scores of “bishops” from around the nation and the putative papal nuncio, the then “Archbishop” Pio Laghi, were to be “concelebrants” at the Novus Ordo travesty thirty-four years ago. at the Mass. There was no need for the use of “extraordinary ministers” when “scads” of “ordinary ministers” were present.
Law wanted to appear "sensitive" to the needs of women. As the late Father Vincent Miceli noted to me at the time, “It's over. He's a loser. He'll never recover from this. He'll give the feminists anything they want from now on.” Father Miceli was right on the money, wasn't he? “Cardinal” Law was later to be in the vanguard of pushing for a "gender inclusive" English translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and in the English translation of the texts of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical abomination.
Also, although considered to be a “pro-life “bishop,” Bernard Francis Law curried favor with the powerful even if they were fully pro-abortion public officials. This was amply demonstrated when Law lavished great praise great praise upon a man who used his public career to promote abortion "rights" and to support the Communist Sandinistas of Nicaragua on the late Thomas P. “Tip” O'Neil, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1977-87, and when he praised the Kennedys a few months later for their defense of innocent human life as he preached at the funeral service for Rose Fitzgerald Kennedy. Talk about killing truth.
The “pro-life” “Cardinal Law” also killed truth, albeit by means of his penchant for “nuance,” at the end of 1994 after the killing of an abortionist and his assistant by a deranged man, who later committed suicide in prison. Law called for a "moratorium" on "protests" in front of abortuaries, including those involving the praying of the Rosary without any signs or photographs. Pro-lifers were outraged by the implication that their peaceful, prayerful presence in front of the killing centers was being equated with the actions of a deranged man and with the killing taking place inside of the abortuaries. Law further enraged pro-lifers by a series of fruitless meetings with representatives of Planned Parenthood to seek "common ground" with them. Although, as noted earlier, Cardinal Law is pro-life, his actions have undermined the pro-life movement time and time again.
The then conciliar “bishop” of Rapid City, South Dakota, Charles H. Chaput, O.F.M., Cap., wrote to me following a recitation of these (and other) facts that appeared in The Wanderer in early 1995. He said that while I had been truthful in what I reported, he believed that it was counterproductive to have reported the facts. “Cardinal” Law, he said, had done so much good that it was not right to put into question his judgment as strongly as I had. As it turned out, however, the facts I recited were simply the tip of the iceberg concerning the late ecumenist’s poor judgment, influenced as it is by a bent in the direction of nuance, as he himself indicated to me in a letter in the Fall of 1980 while he was the conciliar “bishop” of Springfield-Cape Girardeau, Missouri.
Bernard Francis Law’s own career of truth-killing did not stop with the call for a "moratorium" on pro-life "protests" in front of killing centers. No, he indicated in 2001 that he would not require teachers of theology to receive a mandatum from him to teach theology in Catholic colleges and universities under conciliar control in his archdiocese as specified in Karol Josef Wojtyla’s 1990 document, Ex corde ecclesiae. He thus refused to demand fidelity to what was thought to be the Catholic Faith in supposedly Catholic educational institutions that had been producing future generations of pro-aborts and apostates for over thirty years at that point.
A similar indifference to the integrity of the Faith led Cardinal Law to an Islamic mosque in Boston shortly before Thanksgiving in 2002. He knelt down in that mosque and prayed to Allah as a means of demonstrating his “solidarity” with Mohammedans in the aftermath of the events of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. Again, you see, despite his decidedly “princely” style of living, Bernard Francis Law was one mind with the vulgar Jacobin/Bolshevik Bergolgio when it came to praying to false gods and to violating the First Commandment.
More the point of how Jorge Mario Bergoglio is killing truth about his knowledge of the Juan Barros case even after he has been more or less to reopen an investigation into his comrade because of public pressure, Bernard “Cardinal” Law’s penchant for “nuance” led to have a benign attitude toward priests and presbyters he knew to have engaged serially in perverted abuses against children and young adults.
Remember, the likes of "Bishops" Thomas Daily and William Murphy and Robert Banks and Richard Lennon, among others, in the nest of moral cowards in the chancery office of the Archdiocese of Boston under the thoroughly corrupt and "nuanced" world of Bernard "Cardinal" Law did not believe that Father Paul Shanley's help to cofound an organization promoting a dreadful form of perversity between men and boys was all that very serious. Shanley was shipped off to California, where he opened up a "bed and breakfast" to cater to those steeped in perverse sins against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Over one hundred priests/presbyters were protected by the "bishops" and the chancery factotums in Boston under Law’s supervision and with his approval. The same has been true elsewhere, something that has been discussed on this site scores upon scores of times.
Heretics kill, starting with all truth, supernatural and natural.
It is a terrible, terrible thing to reckon with the fact that one might be responsible for the loss of a single soul. It is thus the case that that while decrying the insensitivity to the loss of souls demonstrated by the conciliar “popes” and their “bishops” and others, we must never lose sight of how we might have demonstrated this insensitivity in our own lives.
The loss of the Faith in a single soul is indeed very much a very serious matter to God, and thus it must be for us. This is true for all us, especially for a priest, something that Saint Anthony Mary Claret observed after difficult sea voyage from Navarre to Rome caused him to eat salt-water soaked bread while he gave away gold coins that had been given to him by a benefactor onboard the ship with him to Benedictines, who then used the coins to buy money at the ship's store:
"Perhaps, had they [his fellow shipmates] seen me sitting at table partaking o rich meals, they might have criticized and depreciated me, as I have seen done to others. Virtue, then, is vitally needful to the priest, whom even evil men expect to be good. (Fanchon Royer, The Life of St. Anthony Mary Claret, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, p. 48.)
In this world of such evil in which we have played our own roles on so many occasions, may we continue to live as penitentially as possible as we seek to make reparation for our sins and those of the whole world, including the sins of the conciliarists against the Faith. We cannot minimize sin, including the sin of heresy, and get home to Heaven, which we must pray the following prayer every day.
Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, thou alone hast put down all heresies in the whole world. (As found in The Raccolta: A Manual of Indulgences, Prayers and Devotions Enriched with Indulgences: approved by Pope Pius XII, May 30, 1951, and published in English by Benziger Brothers, New York, 1957, p. 215.)
Today is the Feast of Saint Romuald, to whom God granted one hundred twenty years of life, which our saint used to glorify God and to live penitentially to win souls for Him through His true Church:
The holy Abbot Romuald was the son of one Sergius, of a noble family of Ravenna. While he was still very young, he went to a neighbouring monastery at Classis to do penance. While he was there he heard a discourse by a monk, which stirred him up strongly to aim at godliness of living; and he had afterwards in the Church by night two visions in which the blessed servant of God Apollinaris foretold to him that he should become a monk himself. He accordingly did so; and soon afterwards betook himself to one Marinus, whose holy life and strict discipline were then much noised about in all the coasts of the Venetians, that he might by his teaching and guidance attain towards the hard and lofty point of perfection.
The more he was assailed by the wiles of Satan and the unkindness of men, the more did he exercise himself in lowliness, with continual fasting and prayer, and rejoice in thinking of heavenly things, with abundance of tears. And all the while he bore so bright a face as gladdened all who looked on him. He was held in great honour by princes and kings, and his counsel moved many to leave the blandishments of the world and withdraw to the desert. He had such a burning desire to obtain the crown of martyrdom that he set out for Pannonia on purpose to seek it, but, falling into sickness whenever he went forward though growing strong again whenever he drew back, he behoved to return home.
God worked miracles by him both during his life and after his death, and likewise gave him the gift of prophecy. Like the Patriarch Jacob, he saw a ladder reaching from earth to heaven, and men in white garments ascending and descending upon it, in whom he marvellously knew were represented the monks of the Camaldolese Institute, of which he was the founder. At the age of 120 years, of which he had spent 100 in serving God in great hardness, he passed into His Presence, in the year of Salvation 1027. Five years after his death his body was found incorrupt, and laid in a magnificent grave in the Church of his order at Fabriano. (Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Romuald.)
Most of us are not going to have Saint Romuald's length of years, but we can pray to Our Lady to send us the graces to love penance, including those of being brought low in the sight of men by enduring humiliation and calumny with serene acceptance of the path by which God may seek to chastise and purify us, so as to be able desire to die to self for love of her Divine Son and His true Church, yes, up to and including the point of actual martyrdom for the Holy Faith.
Entrusting ourselves as ever to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, remembering to pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits, may we remain steadfast in our refusal to have anything to do with even the whiff of heresy that emanates from the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Heaven cannot be obtained by making compromises with error or by being silent about it. We must call error by its proper name, not seeking to "tolerate" it in ordert to "understand" it better, no less than disparaging those who seek keep what Pope Pius XI called the "conscientious observation" of the Ten Commandments.
The conciliarists lose in the end. Christ the King will emerge triumphant once again as the fruit of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of His Mother and our Queen, Mary Immaculate. The Church Militant will rise again from her mystical death and burial.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
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 Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Romuald, pray for us.