Jorge Channels His Inner Stalinist Yet Again

Being near my computer is harmful to my health and overall well-being as plans to write on several topics keep being delayed by Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s daily caricaturing of every standard-issue, boilerplate revolutionary cliché that began to be mouthed in the 1970s, especially by Jesuits and by diocesan priests and presbyters in strongholds of the Jacobin/Bolshevik brand of conciliarism.  Nothing that Bergoglio says is original. Nothing. Everything he says and does is out of Modernism’s central casting office as he is a living, breathing anti-Pascendi Dominici Gregis and anti-The Oath Against Modernism. Indeed, Bergoglio is an antipope because he is anti-Catholic and thus outside the pale of the Catholic Church.

Those of us who are in our sixties and older lived through those revolutionary days during the 1970s and 1980s. I happened to have studied, worked and lived  in a number of places during that period of time, and it is without any exaggeration at all that I can tell those who are younger—and thus prone to bewilderment at what the false “pontiff” says and does—that the Bergoglio “party line” is merely a recycling of the same old revolutionary canards that have emptied the pews of formerly Catholic churches, caused parishes and schools to be merged with others or closed altogether, produced at least two generations of Catholics whose knowledge of the true Faith is either minimal or entirely nonexistent, driven many Catholics into the ranks of Protestant sects and caused others to lose belief in God in order to embrace the ways of the world.

Filled with pride, revolutionaries are incapable of seeing the damage that their beliefs have caused as they scornfully denounce anyone who has the ability to refute their fallacious and who can document the wreckage that is plain for all but the hard-core ideologues to accept as such. Indeed, revolutionaries must live in alternate universes of their own fertile imaginations as they insulate themselves from reality by surrounding themselves with people who share the shame delusions and fantasies.

To wit, Barack Hussein Obama, who believes in a “living constitution,” dismisses any and all critics as nothing other than petty irritants who care about legal niceties rather than “solving” problems that his own programs and policies have created or do not exist at all except in his own circle of arrogant elitists who believe in their own infallibility and invincibility.

Similarly, Jorge Mario Bergoglio (I almost wrote Jorge Barack Obama), who believes that “love,” not doctrine and “elaborate explanations,” is what matters to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, a false belief that provides the false “pope” with the freedom to wax on and on and on about the bad old days and to work with Marxists, environmentalists, feminists, homosexuals, Talmudists and other statists to “save the planet,” produce “income equality,” support the work of supranational governance bodies to eclipse the legitimate sovereignty of nations and to change the demographic composition of the nations of Europe and North America by welcoming in hordes of refugees and other illegal immigrants without regard to the health and safety of native-born and legally naturalized citizens.

Revolutionaries must propagate their delusions as truth, and they believe that their ability to sway the masses rests on the incessant denunciations of their opponents, who must be caricatured at every turn and deemed as mentally deficient, thereby following the path of Joseph Stalin and the use of psychiatry to punish and stigmatize political, religious and social dissidents.

A statement made by then Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs  Charles H. Fairbanks, Jr., on September 20, 1983 before the Subcommittee on Human Rights and International Organizations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the United States House of Representatives and the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe provided documentary evidence of the abuse that was chronicled, of course, by Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, Andrei Sakharov and others, including Dr. Anatoly Koryagin, a Soviet psychiatrist who became a political dissident after examining forcibly hospitalized dissidents and finding them perfectly normal.

Here is a transcript of oral testimony that accompanied the prepared statement of former Deputy Secretary of State Fairbanks that was given in 1983:

Mr. FAIRBANKS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

You have my prepared statement, and we have many experts present, so I will cover only certain issues right now. I am very grateful for this opportunity to testify before the members of the committee on the subject of psychiatric abuse.

Most human rights violations occur around the world, in many diverse countries. Psychiatric abuse is distinctive in that it is centered in the Soviet Union. There have been reports that some dissidents have undergone compulsory hospitalization for mental illness-sane dissidents that is-in a few other countries, but only in the Soviet Union has the misuse of psychiatry become widespread and systematic. For this reason, I would like to explore this afternoon the significance of this appalling human rights violation in the Soviet Union.

By psychiatric abuse, we mean the diagnosis of sane dissenters as mentally ill, and their punishment by incarceration in psychiatric hospitals. This particular human rights violation is a distinctive feature of the current stage of Soviet history. During the 1930's, of, course, the Soviet Union carried out what Leszek Kolakowski called "probably the most massive warlike operation ever conducted by a state against its own citizens."

A modest estimate of Stalin's victims would be 6.5 million, a far more likely estimate is 20 million citizens of the Soviet Union. The overwhelming majority of these victims were either murdered by Soviet security personnel, usually after a nominal trial, or consigned to a slow death in slave labor camps.

After the death of Stalin, and particularly after 1956, conditions became vastly better in the Soviet Union. There was no longer mass terror against the population, and the law began to be administered in a less arbitrary way. A dissident subculture grew up within the Soviet Union which was able to pursue opinions independent of the regime within narrow limits.

But, ironically, it is only in the post-Stalin era, when successive Soviet Governments have sought to convince the rest of the world that they brought an end to the Stalin heritage and were no longer holding political prisoners, that psychiatric abuse became a major instrument of repression.

From the regime's point of view, psychiatric commitment is a very convenient instrument of policy. It enables Soviet authorities to substitute judgments of psychiatrists for sentencing in a trial, or to avoid trial altogether. It enables the government to keep dissidents incarcerated an indefinte length of time and, of course, it enables the regime to claim that Soviet citizens who express dissatisfaction with the system are simply mentally ill.

These advantages of psychiatric abuse for the Soviet leadership are worth somewhat further examination, particularly its effects on the rule of law, which is the last barrier against arbitrary despotism.

The U.S.S.R. has laws against dissidents which the regime can rule rather freely, for instance, the law against anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, but even totalitarian laws are a restriction on autocratic rule. On the other hand, sentences on obviously political charges are an embarrassment to the regime which no longer wishes to appear Stalinist. In these circumstances, a method of dispensing with normal trials is very attractive, and sending dissidents to psychiatric hospitals achieves this end.

Moreover, since confinement in mental hospitals is not limited to a definite term, this technique enables Soviet officials to move into a realm of almost unlimited administrative discretion or whim, to evade the rule of law. Psychiatric abuse is a technique that perverts medicine in order to destroy law.

The diagnoses of dissidents by Soviet official psychiatrists make clear the replacement of legal standards by arbitrary whim. For example, the dissident Edvard Kuznetsov was diagnosed as suffering from "schizophrenia," because "he asserts that there is no such thing as a Communist moral code, and the credit for its creation should go to the Bible."

Similarly, the dissident Vladimir Borisov was diagnosed as suffering from "a disturbed sense of orientation and an incorrect interpretation of his surroundings. Thus, he takes the hospital for a concentration camp and the doctors for sadists."

This overall sequence of events shows the complexity of de-Stalinization in the Soviet Union. Overall conditions are much better than under Stalin, but some Soviet dissidents are subjected to terrors which were not used during the Stalin period, or very little overwhelming majority of these victims were either murdered by Soviet security personnel, usually after a nominal trial, or consigned to a slow death in slave labor camps.

After the death of Stalin, and particularly after 1956, conditions became vastly better in the Soviet Union. There was no longer mass terror against the population, and the law began to be administered in a less arbitrary way. A dissident subculture grew up within the Soviet Union which was able to pursue opinions independent of the regime within narrow limits.

But, ironically, it is only in the post-Stalin era, when successive Soviet Governments have sought to convince the rest of the world that they brought an end to the Stalin heritage and were no longer holding political prisoners, that psychiatric abuse became a major instrument of repression.

From the regime's point of view, psychiatric commitment is a very convenient instrument of policy. It enables Soviet authorities to substitute judgments of psychiatrists for sentencing in a trial, or to avoid trial altogether. It enables the government to keep dissidents incarcerated an indefinte length of time and, of course, it enables the regime to claim that Soviet citizens who express dissatisfaction with the system are simply mentally ill.

These advantages of psychiatric abuse for the Soviet leadership are worth somewhat further examination, particularly its effects on the rule of law, which is the last barrier against arbitrary despotism.

The U.S.S.R. has laws against dissidents which the regime can rule rather freely, for instance, the law against anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, but even totalitarian laws are a restriction on autocratic rule.

On the other hand, sentences on obviously political charges are an embarrassment to the regime which no longer wishes to appear Stalinist. In these circumstances, a method of dispensing with normal trials is very attractive, and sending dissidents to psychiatric hospitals achieves this end.

Moreover, since confinement in mental hospitals is not limited to a definite term, this technique enables Soviet officials to move into a realm of almost unlimited administrative discretion or whim, to evade the rule of law. Psychiatric abuse is a technique that perverts medicine in order to destroy law.

The diagnoses of dissidents by Soviet official psychiatrists make clear the replacement of legal standards by arbitrary whim. For example, the dissident Edvard Kuznetsov was diagnosed as suffering from "schizophrenia," because "he asserts that there is no such thing as a Communist moral code, and the credit for its creation should go to the Bible."

Similarly, the dissident Vladimir Borisov was diagnosed as suffering from "a disturbed sense of orientation and an incorrect interpretation of his surroundings. Thus, he takes the hospital for a concentration camp and the doctors for sadists."

This overall sequence of events shows the complexity of de-Stalinization in the Soviet Union. Overall conditions are much better than under Stalin, but some Soviet dissidents are subjected to terrors which were not used during the Stalin period, or very little deemed this flagrant human rights abuse in the Madrid CSCE (Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe) Review Conference, in the U.N. Human Rights Commission, and the U.N. General Assembly.

We will continue to work in every appropriate way to alleviate the plight of Soviet citizens deprived of their liberty and subjected to cruel and inhumane punishment for merely seeking to exercise their elementary human rights in a totalitarian society.

Thank you. (Abuse of Psychiatry in the Soviet Union.)

It was four years later, that is, in 1987, that Dr. Anatoly Koryagin, a Soviet psychiatrist who experienced the horrors of psychiatric abuse after he had diagnosed the dissidents examined to be perfectly sane and normal, found exile in Switzerland and was able to speak freely of his experience:

CHICAGO, May 13— Dr. Anatoly Koryagin, the Russian dissident psychiatrist, today called for the creation of an international tribunal to investigate and to combat the use of psychiatric treatment as punishment for political dissidents in repressive countries.

Dr. Koryagin, who was allowed to emigrate from the Soviet Union last month, also gave new details of his own imprisonment there and said he had been force-fed powerful psychiatric drugs while on a hunger strike.

''During the last few years we hear of more and more doctors being employed by political powers in repression,'' he said through a translator at a news conference. ''Crimes take place that compromise medicine at large. People cannot tell apart those who heal and those who torture. Therefore world medicine is in need of a broad movement to reconfirm ethical standards.''

Dr. Koryagin called for the formation of a ''humanitarian internationale,'' with branches in all countries, to oppose such abuses and investigate and condemn the actions of Soviet psychiatrists. ''I think it is possible the political abuse of psychiatry might stop in the Soviet Union,'' he said, ''but not on their own - only under pressure from the rest of the world.'' Focus on Chile and Soviet

One of the American psychiatrists who vigorously protested Dr. Koryagin's incarceration, Lester Grinspoon of Harvard Medical School, said today in a telephone interview that he and others had organized a group called Physicians for Human Rights to monitor abuses by physicians worldwide. Their present focus is on Chile and the Soviet Union, places where he said physicians were directly involved in torture or political repression.

Dr. Koryagin held the news conference before delivering a speech to a meeting of the American Psychiatric Association here. He and his family are now living near Lucerne, Switzerland, where he has been granted political asylum.

Dr. Koryagin was first arrested in 1981, after he had examined dissidents confined to Soviet mental hospitals and pronounced them perfectly normal. In April of that year he published a report of his findings in The Lancet, a British medical journal, denouncing the Soviet practice of confining dissidents to mental hospitals.

Dr. Koryagin said he personally knew of 183 such ''psychiatric prisoners,'' and suspected there were many more in the Soviet Union whose identities were unknown. And he said there were now 16 special hospitals for the incarceration of such dissidents, although some dissidents were held in normal psychiatric hospitals.

''It is particularly important to meet you here, where I can meet with my colleagues, the American psychiatrists who were so active in securing my freedom and in the fight against the abuse of psychiatry,'' he said. ''As a psychiatrist and former inmate of the Soviet penal system, I hope my contacts will lead to help for those who suffer, hope and wait for freedom.''

Dr. Koryagin said he was administered neuroleptics, powerful drugs used to quiet the more flamboyant symptoms of schizophrenia. He said the drugs were mixed with a nutritional substance that was force-fed to him through a tube in his nose while he was on hunger strikes, one for 6 months and the other for 15 months. He said he became aware that he had been drugged after the second strike ended, he said, when he ''had to suffer through the symptoms of withdrawal from the drugs.''

He said he was handcuffed while the tube was inserted through his nose, and, instead of ointment on the tube, a corrosive coating was used that ''caused excruciating pain'' in his esophagus. He added that the prison authorities also subtly tortured him by timing his feeding ''so that I was always craving food.''

Dr. Koryagin credited the support he received from outside the Soviet Union with giving him the courage to continue his protests, even in prison. When his wife told him he had been made an honorary member of the American Psychiatric Association, he said, ''it gave me enormous strength.''

He said the authorities also harassed his eldest son and demanded that the boy, who was 13 years old when Dr. Koryagin was first jailed, denounce his father. ''My son refused categorically,'' he said.

But he said the boy was persecuted in many other ways, and finally dropped out of school.

''He became streetwise, got into the wrong company on the streets,'' Dr. Koryagin said. One day, when he was drunk, the son got into a fist fight, for which he was sent to prison for three years. Dr. Koryagin's son was released from prison on March 26, about a month after his father was released.

On April 24 Dr. Koryagin and his wife, Galina, arrived in Switzerland with their three sons, Ivan, now 19, Alexander, 15, and Dimitri, 9. They are staying in a villa on a lake near Lucerne.

Dr. Koryagin said that after he was released from prison on Feb. 18, he found that ''nothing much had changed in my country,'' despite the Government's well-publicized attempts at openness.

He said he knew of several political dissidents who had been sent to psychiatric hospitals in recent months. None of those confined to the special psychiatric hospitals have been released, he said.  (Psychiatric Abuse in the Soviet Union Assailed. Another interesting resource describes the use of psychiatric terror upon members of the heretical and schismatic Russian Orthodox Church under both Joseph Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev can be found at: Psychiatric "Treatment" of Christians.)

A qualification is necessary at this point before “connecting the dots” to Senor Jorge at the Casa Santa Marta.

The fact that American psychiatrists came to the aid of Dr. Anatoly Koryagin is a little hypocritical in that most of their number do indeed believe that religious belief, especially is carried to what they consider to be “fanatical zealotry” (praying the Rosary every day, caring about modesty, refusing to be distracted by what an elderly traditional Catholic bishop once called “hellovision,” namely, the television, etc.), is proof of mental illness. While it is commendable that American psychiatrists helped Anatoly Koryagin, they did so because he was being persecuted for his declaring supposedly diseased prisoners to be sane, not because he believed in a particular religion.

What is the connection between this and Jorge Mario Bergoglio?

The answer is very simple, and I thank you for your patience.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that candidates for the conciliar presbyterate must be rejected if they exhibit signs of “rigidity,” that is, a refusal to accept even one of the many false precepts of the “Second” Vatican Council and of the magisterium of the conciliar “popes” as this “rigidity” is a sign of “mental deficiencies,” a phrase used by a Vatican Insider report on an address that the Argentine Apostate gave on Friday, November 20, 2015, the Feast of Saint Felix of Valois, to a congress that met on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of Optatam Totius and Presbyterorum Ordinis, which was issued by the “Second” Vatican Council on December 7, 1965, the Feast or Saint Ambrose and the Vigil of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary:

Be careful of who you admit to the seminary,” because there could be people with mental deficiencies among the candidates to the priesthood. Pope Francis said this in an audience with participants of a Conference sponsored by the Congregation for the Clergy marking the fiftieth anniversary of the proclamation of the Vatican II decrees “Presbyterorum ordinis” (Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests) and “Optatam Totius” (Decree on Priestly Training) (Pontifical Urbaniana University, 19-20).

Speaking off the cuff, Francis told a story about when he taught the novices of the Society of Jesus. A “good” boy didn’t pass the psychiatrist’s test and she said to Bergoglio: “These boys are fine until they have settled, until they feel completely secure. Then the problems start. Father, have you ever asked yourself why there are policemen who are torturers,” the doctor apparently asked Francis. The Pope told clergy that they must think twice when a young man “is too confident, rigid and fundamentalist”. Hence, his invitation to them to beware when admitting candidates to the seminary: “There are mentally ill boys who seek strong structures that can protect them”, such as “the police, the army and the clergy”.

In his speech, the Pope remembered the reform Benedict XVI wanted to introduce. He put the Congregation for the Clergy, now headed by Cardinal Beniamino Stella, in charge of the seminaries so the dicastery “can start dealing with the life and ministry of the presbyteries  from the moment candidates enter the seminary, working to ensure vocations are promoted and nurtured and can lead to priests living saintly lives. A priest’s path towards sainthood being in the seminary!”

A priest, the Pope said, “is a man who is born in a particular human context” and there, staring from the family, “he learns his first values, absorbs the people’s spirituality, he gets used to relations. Even priests have a life story “and are not ‘mushrooms’ which sprout up suddenly at the Cathedral on their day of ordination,” said the Holy Father. “It is important for formators and the priests themselves to remember this, and know how to take this personal history into account along the formation path.”

“A good priest is first of all a man with his own humanity, who knows his own history – with its treasures and wounds – and has learned to make peace with it, gaining a profound serenity, characteristic of a disciple of the Lord,” he said. “Human formation is therefore needed for priests, so they may learn not to be dominated by their limits, but rather to put their talents to use.” The Pope said a priest is “a man of peace” who surrounds himself with serenity, even during hardships. “It is not normal for a priest to be often sad, nervous, or of a hard character; it is not good, and does no good, neither for the priest nor for his people,” he said.

Knowing and remembering that priests exist for the people, helps the them not to be self-centered but authoritative, not authoritarian, firm but not harsh, joyous but not superficial. Basically, pastors, not officials. The priestly mission is for the people of God and the whole of humanity. A priest, Francis said, “is always surrounded by other people”, he is not a pastoral care professional or an evangelisation professional who come and does what he has to do – he may even do a good job but it is still like a job – and then goes away and lives a separate life. One becomes a priest in order to be among the people. The amount of good priests can do depends above all on their closeness and tender love for people. They are not philanthropists or officials, but fathers and brothers. Closeness, a deep sense of mercy and a loving gaze: this is what we need in order to evangelise, to pass on the beauty of a life lived according to the Gospel and the love of God which becomes concrete also through his ministers.”

Francis reminded bishops that the decree on residence is still in force: “If you don’t feel like staying in your diocese you should resign,” Francis says referring to bishops who travel too much and are not close enough o their flock. “How often do we hear priests complaining.” Addressing the bishops he said: “If someone calls you and you can’t answer at that moment, at least pick up the phone and call them.”  (Bergoglio: Be careful of who you admit to the seminary.)

The Vatican Insider report has the benefit of being a coherent summary of the following passages from the actual text of Bergoglio’s remarks three days ago, which reflect the disorder of a disordered, unruly mind that operates on the basis of stream of consciousness, not rationality:

These are the three images we must look at, thinking of the ministry of priests, sent to serve men, to have them attain God’s mercy and to proclaim His Word of life. We are not priests for ourselves and our sanctification is closely connected to that of our people, our unction to their unction: you were anointed for your people.  To know and to remember that you are “ordained for the people” – holy people, People of God --  helps priests not to think of themselves, to be authoritative and not authoritarian, firm but not harsh, joyful but not superficial, in sum, Pastors not functionaries. Today in both Readings of the Mass one sees clearly the capacity to enjoy that the people have, when the Temple is repaired and purified and, instead, the incapacity for joy that the heads of the priests and the scribes have in face of the expulsion of the merchants from the Temple by Jesus. A priest must learn to rejoice, he must never lose, even better, the capacity for joy: if he loses it, there is something that is not right. And I tell you sincerely, I am afraid of stiffening, I am afraid. From rigid priests ... stay far away! They bite you! And there comes to mind that expression of Saint Ambrose, 4th century: “Where there is mercy there is the spirit of the Lord, where there is rigidity, there are only His ministers.” Without the Lord the minister becomes rigid, and this is a danger for the People of God – be Pastors, not functionaries. . . .

One thing I would like to add to the text – forgive me! – is vocational discernment, admission to the Seminary. Look for the health of a boy, his spiritual health, material, physical and psychic health. Once, just appointed Novice Master, in the year ’72, I went to take to the psychologist the results of the personality tests, a simple test that was done as one of the elements of discernment. She was a good woman, and also a good doctor. She said to me: “This one has this problem but he can enter if he goes this way ...” She was also a good Christian, but in some cases she was inflexible: “This one can’t” – “But, Doctor, this boy is so good.” “Now he is good, but know that there are youths that know unconsciously, they are not that aware of it, but feel unconsciously that they are psychically sick and they look in their life for strong structures that will defend them, so that they can go forward. And they do all right until the moment they feel well established and then the problems begin” – “It seems a bit strange to me ...” And I shall never forget her answer, the same as that of the Lord to Ezekiel: “Father, have you never thought why there are so many police torturers? They enter young, seem to be healthy but when they feel secure, the illness begins to come out. These are the strong institutions that look for these unconscious sick: the police, the army, the clergy ... And then so many illnesses we know come out.” It’s curious. When I realize that a youth is too rigid, too fundamentalist, I have no confidence; there is something behind that he himself does not know. But when he feels secure ... Ezekiel 16, I don’t remember the verse but it is when the Lord says to His people all that He has done for it: found it when just born, and then clothed it, espoused it ... “ And then, when you felt secure, you prostituted yourself.” It is a rule, a rule of life. Open eyes on the mission in Seminaries. Open eyes. (Address on Mission, Formation of Priests.)

Actually, the conciliar revolutionaries have been quite good at being careful who they have admitted to their seminaries of conciliar indoctrination as many have been using the "too rigid" label since the 1970s to screen out those deemed have a "preconciliar mentality." I know this not only from the literature that has documented this fact, of course, but also from my own personal experience as well as the experiences of those I had met at Mount Saint Mary's Seminary in Emmitsburg, Maryland, and Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut. The stories are legion.

Liberals are worried about those who dissent from their own ideological "orthodoxy" because they are fascists.

Liberals wax on and on about mercy while showing mercilessness to those who disagree with their revolutionary schemes.

Liberals speak of humility while being arrogant and dismissive of those they view with contempt.

Liberals say they eschew those who “judge” others while judging “counter-revolutionaries” with great harshness.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is now what he has always been, a fascist, a man who uses insults, invectives and methods of active persecution to marginalize, humiliate and punish those he believes must be excluded from his plans of inclusiveness.

As noted at the beginning of this commentary, however, the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio have been a dime a dozen from the very earliest days of the conciliar revolution.

Bergoglio and his fellow fiends have used some of the same methods as employed by Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev and Mikhail Gorbachev to stigmatize those guilty of “thought crimes” with diagnoses of “mental illness” in order to break down their resistance to ideological “truth” by means of psychiatric reprogramming, which is why he sought to persecute the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate by placing them under the supervision of the late "Father" Fidenzio Volpi, O.F.M., and why he is still persecuting the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate. It is also why he was merciless and scandalous in his treatment of a group of traditional religious sisters in Argentina when he was Joge Mario "Cardinal" Bergoglio:


"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 

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. The man who is now having the time of his life, and he is "humbly" letting the world know that this is so.

There is no longer any "conservative" Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II or "traditional" Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI (who is only nine years older than Bergoglio/Francis even though the latter refers to his "the dear old man") to control his wildest impulses to speak his mind without concern for those things he believes "do not matter" to God, you know, such little things as "doctrine," integrity of worship," "purity of morals" and fealty to pastoral duties.

With all of the myriad problems within the counterfeit church of conciliarism, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis sees fit to engage in a daily screed against traditionally-minded Catholics, who comprise but a tiny fraction of his false church's membership, and to consider as "divisive" those within it who are opposed to the revolutionary agenda of conciliarism, including, of course, the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.

Bergoglio's goal is to break by whatever means necessary, including sheer tyranny and psychological terrorism, any and all "counter-revolutionary cells" such as the one his obsessed, pathological mind that seethes with hatred for the true Catholic Faith believed that the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate represented. He used the late "Father" Volpi to send a clear, unmistakable signal that this will happen to every other community in the Motu world if their clergy dare to utter word one about the "Second" Vatican Council and the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo service. He is only waiting until his predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, dies before picking off every center of "counter-revolutionary" activity, whether real or imagined, he believes is an impediment to his vision of the conciliar revolution.

Although largely anecdotal and not as of yet recounted in a systematic manner in any one place, many of us know numerous instances in which priests and religious have been sent to psychiatric reprogramming centers because they resisted the first wave of the conciliar "reforms" in the middle to latter part of the 1960s. This persecution of those deemed to be "conservative" or "rigid" has continued in many dioceses and religious communities to this very day.  

We were told some six years ago now of some very compelling stories by a consecrated religious woman who had worked as a nurse prior to entering the religious life, one of which involved a religious in the 1960s who was told by her superiors to report to a psychiatrist for "evaluation" because she would not give up her community's traditional habit.

The psychiatrist knew the consecrated religious because she had worked in the same hospital for a while as a nurse. He told to get out of the hospital immediately, that there was nothing was with her, but that she should not return to her community as there was an effort to imprison those priests and religious who resisted the conciliar changes. The psychiatrist led the religious woman, who told the story to our narrator, herself in traditional religious life, to a door where she could exit without being noticed, although she had seen many of her "disappeared" sisters sitting in wheelchairs in a doped-up state on her way into the psychiatrist's office.

This particular story has credibility as I know of men who have been candidates for the conciliar presbyterate who have been screened out in many dioceses and religious communities because they have been deemed to suffer from "rigidity."

As I have recounted on other occasions, the secular Talmudic psychologist who screened candidates for the Diocese of Rockville Centre for many years, the late Dr. Leonard Krinsky, came to some interesting conclusions following about me in May of 1979 following a psychological evaluation of me. Dr. Krinsky, now deceased, wrote that my concept of the priesthood as the sacerdos was preconciliar and self-centered, noting that that my desire to live a priestly life of prayer, penance, self-denial and mortification were "possible signs of masochism." Dr. Krinsky’s report concluded by saying that while I was “intelligent, creative, and had the capacity for rich, interpersonal relationships,” I “lacked the sufficient flexibility needed to adapt to the changing circumstances of a postconciliar vocation.”' In other words, I was "too rigid" in my beliefs, something that many other vocations directors, both for dioceses and religious communities told me in the 1970s and 1980s.

I know of scores of men who were persecuted for their "conservatism" after their installation as presbyters in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

One man, the late Reverend Anthony Dandry, who was a seminarian with me at Holy Apostles Seminary during the 1983-1984 academic year, told me that he had been ordered to seek a psychological evaluation because he wore a biretta and preached about the reality of hell “too much.” Tony Dandry may not have been a true priest. However, he was very devoted to Our Lady, believing that he had been “ordained” as a priest to save souls, not to make his parishioners feel comfortable. After seeking the advice of a true priest within the conciliar structures, though, he arranged to get an evaluation from a psychologist not associated with his diocese, obtaining a clean bill of mental health thereafter.

Yes, good readers, the stories of the abuse of psychiatry and psychology in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, are very relevant to what has been happening and what continues to happen to men and to women in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who are deemed to be “rigid” and thus “mentally deficient” by the “merciful” and “non-judgmental” agents of Antichrist.


Bergoglio has done this consistently for the past thirty-two months, ten days now. Consistently. Obsessively. Compulsively. Even though he will turn seventy-nine years of age in twenty-three days, on Wednesday, December 16, 2015, the Feast of Saint Eusebius and the Commemoration of the Third Sunday of Advent, the man is a complete juvenile delinquent who is unceasingly relentless in his quest to tear down and “make a mess” of whatever remaining vestiges of Catholicism exist in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.

Today, however, is the feast of a fully rigid Successor of Saint Peter, Pope Saint Clement I, who taught the doctrine of Papal Primacy in the last decade of the First Century A.D. Pope Saint Clement's commitment to the truths of the Holy Faith, including the immutable truth of Papal Primacy and the full authority of a true pope over all men everywhere on everything that pertains to the sanctification and salvation of their sous as the infallible teacher and guardian of the Holy Faith, stands in vast contrast to that of the conciliar "popes," including Jorge Mario Bergoglio, whose repetoire of insults and invectives is pretty dated at this point.

The readings for Matins in today’s Divine Office speak of the life and the work of our fourth pope, who had been a disciple of both Saint Peter and our third pope, Saint Cletus:

Clement, the son of Faustinus, was a Roman, from the quarter of the Coelian Mount. He was a disciple of the blessed Peter, and is the same concerning whom Paul saith, writing to the Philippians And I entreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the Gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow-labourers, whose names are written in the book of life. iv. 3. (He succeeded Cletus as Bishop of Rome.) He it was who divided the seven quarters of the city among seven scribes, one to each, whose duty it was to search out most carefully, and record in writing the sufferings and acts of the Martyrs. He himself also wrote much, and that most orthodox and healthy, whereby he clearly explained the Christian Religion.

His teaching and the holiness of his life brought many to believe in Christ, and he was therefore exiled by the Emperor Trajan to Kherson, in the Crimea, where he found two thousand Christians, who had been condemned by the same Trajan. There they all worked in the marble quarries. During their labour they suffered for want of water, and Clement prayed, and then went up an hill hard by, on the top whereof he saw a Lamb standing, touching with its right foot a flowing spring of sweet waters. Therewith they all quenched their thirst, and by this miracle many unbelievers were brought to believe in Christ, and began to honour the holiness of Clement.

These things moved Trajan to send a messenger to the Crimea, who tied an anchor about Clement's neck, and cast him into the deep of the sea. After it had been done, while the Christians were praying on the shore, the sea went back three miles, and when they followed it, they found a grotto of marble, in form like a temple, and therein a stone coffin wherein was laid the body of the Martyr, and, hard by, the anchor wherewith he had been sunk. Then were the country people moved to receive the faith of Christ. The body of Clement was afterwards brought to Rome, in the time of Pope Nicholas I., and buried in his own Church. A Church was also built in the Crimea, in the place where God had made the water to break forth. Clement lived as Pope nine years, six months, and six days. He held two Ordinations in the month of December, wherein he made ten Priests, two Deacons, and fifteen Bishops for divers places. (As found in Matins, Divine Office, Feast of Pope Saint Clement, November 23.)

Another reading found in the Matins from today’s Divine Office is taken from a homily by Pope Saint Leo the Great, who teaches us that the likes of heretical teaching of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his predecessors in the age of conciliarism can never come from the Catholic Church:

When the Lord, as we read in the Gospel, asked his disciples who did men, amid their divers speculations, believe him the Son of Man to be, blessed Peter answered and said: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And the Lord answered and said unto him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father, which is in heaven: and I say also unto thee: That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. But the dispensation of truth perdures, and blessed Peter, persevering in the strength of the rock which he hath received, hath not relinquished the position he assumed at the helm of the Church.

In the universal Church it is as if Peter were still saying every day: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. For every tongue which confesseth the Lord is taught that confession by the teaching of Peter. This is the Faith that overcometh the devil and looseth the bonds of his prisoners. This is the Faith which maketh men free of the world and bringeth them to heaven, and the gates of hell are impotent to prevail against it. This is the rock which God hath fortified with such ramparts of salvation, that the contagion of heresy will never be able to infect it, nor idolatry and unbelief to overcome it. And therefore, dearly beloved, we celebrate today's festival with reasonable obedience, that in my humble person he may be acknowledged and honoured who doth continue to care for all the shepherds as well as sheep entrusted unto him, and who doth lose none of his dignity even in an unworthy successor. (As found in Matins, Divine Office, Feast of Pope Saint Clement, November 23.)

The contagion of heresy will never be able to infect the Catholic Church. Only the willfully blind or the intellectually dishonest can refuse to admit that heresy has not been taught by the conciliar “popes,” who had expelled themselves from the bosom of Holy Mother Church long before their apparent “elections” by virtue of adhering to these heresies.


Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., wrote the following about Pope Saint Clement I in The Liturgical Year:

The memory of St. Clement has been surrounded with a peculiar glory from the very beginning of the Roman Church. After the death of the apostles, he seems to eclipse Linus and Cletus, although these preceded him in the pontificate. We pass, as it were, naturally from Peter to Clement; and the East celebrates his memory with no less honour than the West. He was in truth the universal pontiff, and his acts as well as his writings are renowned throughout the entire Church. This widespread reputation caused numbers of apocryphal writings to be attributed to him, which, however, it is easy to distinguish from his own. But it is remarkable that all the falsifiers who have thought fit to put his name to their own works, or to invent stories concerning him, agree in declaring that he was of imperial descent.

With only one exception, all of the documents which attest Clement's intervention in the affairs of distant churches have perished with time; but the one that remains shows us in full action the monarchical power of the bishop of Rome at that primitive epoch. The church of Corinth was disturbed with intestine quarrels caused by jealously against certain pastors. These divisions, the germ of which had appeared even in St. Paul's time, had destroyed all peace, and were causing scandal to the very pagans. The Corinthians at last felt the necessity of putting an end to a disorder which might be prejudicial to the extension of the Christian faith; and for this purpose it was requisite to seek assistance from outside. The apostle had all departed this life, except St. John, who was still the light of the Church. It was not great distance from Corinth to Ephesus where the apostle resided: yet it was not to Ephesus but to Rome that the church of Corinth turned. Clement examined the case referred to his judgment by that church, and sent to Corinth five commissaries to represent the Apostolic See. They were bearers of a letter, which St. Irenaeus calls potentissimas litteras. It was considered at the time so beautiful and so apostolic, that it was long read in many churches as a sort of continuation of the canonical Scriptures. Its tone is dignified but paternal, according to St. Peter's advice to pastors. There is nothing in it of a domineering spirit; but the grave and solemn language bespeaks the universal pastor, whom none can disobey without disobeying God Himself. These words so solemn and so firm wrought the desired effect: peace was re-established in the church of Corinth, and the messengers of the Roman Pontiff soon brought back the happy news. A century later, St. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, expressed to Pope St. Soter the gratitude still felt by his flock towards Clement for the service he had rendered.

Brought up in the school of the apostles, Clement had retained their style and manner. These are visible in his two 'Letters to Virgins,' which are mentioned St. Epiphanius and St. Jerome, and were found in the eighteenth century translated into Syriac, in a manuscript brought from Aleppo. As St. Caecilia reminded us yesterday, the principles of vowing chastity to God was, from the very beginning, one of the bases of Christianity, and one of the most effectual means for the transformation of the world. Christ Himself had praised the superior merit of this sacrifice; and St. Paul, comparing the two states of life, taught that the virgin is wholly taken up with our Lord, while the married women, whatever her dignity, is divided. Clement had to develop this doctrine, and he did so in these two letters. Anticipating those great doctors of Christian virginity, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome, St. John Chrysostom, St. Augustin, he developed the teachings of St. Peter and St. Paul on this important subject. 'He or she,' he says, 'who aspires to this higher life, must lead like the angels an existence all divine and heavenly. The virgin cuts herself off from the allurements of the senses; not only does she renounce the right to their even lawful use, but she aspires to that hope which God, who can never deceive, encourages by His promise, and which far surpasses the natural hope of posterity. In return for her generous sacrifice, her portion in heaven is the very happiness of the angels.'

Thus spoke the disciple chosen by St. Peter to get his hand to the task of renovating Rome. It needed no less than this strong doctrine in order to combat the depraved manners of the Empire. Had Christianity been satisfied with inviting men to honour, as the philosophers had done, its efforts would have been to no purpose. Stoicism, by exciting great pride, could bring some men even to despise death; but it was utterly powerless against sensuality, which we must own to have been the strongest auxiliary to the tyranny of the Caesars. The ideal of chastity, thrown into the midst of that dissolute society, could alone arrest the ignominious torrent that threatened to submerge all human dignity. Happily for the world, Christian morals succeeded in gaining ground; and its maxims being followed up by striking examples, it at length forced itself upon the public notice. Roman corruption was amazed to hear of virginity being held in honour and practised by a great many followers of the new religion; and that at a time when the greatest privileges and the most terrible chastisements could scarcely keep to their duty the six vestals upon whose fidelity depended the honour and the safety of the city. Vespasian and Titus were aware of the infringements upon their primary duty committed by these guardians of the Palladium; but they considered that the low level at which morals then stood forbade them to inflict the ancient penalties upon these traitresses.

The time, however, was at hand, when the emperors, the senate, and all Rome, were to learn from the first Apology of St. Justin the marvels of purity concealed within that Babylon of iniquity. 'Among us, in this city,' said the apologist, 'there are many men and women who have reached the age of sixty or seventy years; brought up from infancy under the law of Christ, they have preserved to this day in the state of virginity; and there is not a country where I could not point out many such.' Athenagoras, in a memorial presented a few years later to Marcus Aurelius, was able to say in like manner: 'You will find among us a multitude of persons, both men and women, who have passed their life up to old age in the state of virginity, having no ambition but to unite themselves more intimately to God.'

Clement was predestined to the glory of martyrdom; he was banished to the Chersonesus, on the Black Sea. The Acts, which relate the details of his sufferings, are of very great antiquity; we shall not here enter into discussions concerning them. They tell us how Clement found in the peninsula a considerable number of Christians already transported there, and employed at working the rich and abundant marble quarries. The joy of these Christians on seeing Clement is easily conceived; his zeal in propagating the faith in this far-off country, and the success of his apostolate, are not matter for surprise. The miracle of a fountain springing up from the rock at Clement's word, to quench the thirst of the confessors, is a fact analogous to hundreds of others relate din the most authentic Acts of the saints. Lastly, the apparition of the mysterious lamb upon the mountain, marking with his foot the spot whence the water was to flow, carries back the mind to the earliest Christian mosaics, on which may still be seen the symbol of the lamb standing on a green hillock.

There are some very interesting lessons to be learn from this passage in Dom Prosper Gueranger's The Liturgical Year.

First, there is a reminder of the monarchical power of the Roman Pontiff.

Who gave away the symbol of that monarchical power?

Wasn't it Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonoi Maria/Paul VI?

Who refused to be crowned with the Papal Tiara?

Wasn't it Albino Luciani/John Paul I, Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio? Who took the Papal Tiara off of his coat of arms?

Wasn't it Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

Yes, conciliarism wants nothing to do with papal monarchical power, having embraced the heretical novelty of episcopal collegiality. Pope Saint Clement I knew otherwise. Deo gratias!

Second, the lie of episcopal collegiality is disproved by the fact that the Catholics in Corinth looked to Rome, that is, to the Successor of Saint Peter, Pope Clement, and not to the beloved evangelist, Saint John, who had taken care of Our Lady until she died and was assumed body and soul into Heaven. The Catholics of Corinth knew that it was not their "local churches" but Rome that was the seat of the Holy Faith. Deo gratias!

Third, Dom Prosper reminds us that the authority of the Vicar of Christ is absolute, that the pope is one "whom none can disobey without disobeying God Himself." Indeed. Although I was  late to have my own eyes opened to the ramifications of this truth, suffice it to say that a legitimate pontiff commands our obedience in all things that do not pertain to sin, in all things that pertain to faith and morals. No one can oppose a legitimate pontiff without opposing Our Lord Himself. And no legitimate pontiff can give us bad doctrine or defective worship. He cannot express in his capacity as a private theologian things contrary to the defined teaching of the Catholic Church.

Fourth, in contradistinction to Bergoglio's reaffirmations of those steeped in unrepentant sins, Pope Saint Clement knew that it was possible with God's grace for men and women who loved God to persevere in virginity throughout their lives. There was no need of a study to be conducted by social scientists, only an effort to be made to cooperate with the graces won for us on Calvary by the shedding of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood and that flow into our souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces. There was a simple acceptance of the truths of the Catholic Faith. Deo gratias!

Fifth, quite similar to our own day today, the secular leaders of Rome believed in the pursuit of "honor" by their own strength. Catholics know that it is only by a reliance upon the merits won for us in the Sacrifice of the Cross, which is re-presented in an unbloody manner on altars of sacrifice by Catholic priests, men who act in persona Christi, that sanctity, not prideful "personal honor," is pursued to the point of one's dying breath--and that it is sanctity that builds right order in societies, not "civic virtue" or "personal honor."


Yesterday, Sunday, November 23, 2015, was the Last Sunday after Penteocst and the Commemoration of the Feast of Saint Cecilia. The reflection offered by Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., on the time in which this Saint Cecilia lived and offered herself up for Christ the King has great relevance to the situation of statism facing us today under the reign of the caesars who are kindred spirit of the caesars of yore:

Caecilia united in her veins the blood of kings with that of Rome's greatest heroes. At the time of the first preaching of the Gospel, more than one ancient patrician family had seen its direct line become extinct. But the adoptions and alliances, which under the Republic had knot more closely the great families by linking them all to the most illustrious among them, formed as it were a common fund of glory, which, even in the days of decline, was passed on intact to the survivors of the aristocracy.

It has now been demonstrated by the undeniable witness of monuments that Christianity from the very beginning took possession of that glory, by adopting its heirs; and that by a wonderful disposition of divine Providence, the founders of the Rome of the Pontiffs were these last representatives of the Republic, thus preserved in order to give to the two phases of Roman history that powerful unity which is the distinguishing note of divine works. Heretofore bound together by the same patriotism, the Cornelii and the AEmilii, alike heirs of the Fabii, the Caecili, Valerii, Sergeii, Furii, Claudii, Pomponii, Plautii, and Acilli, eldest sons of the Gentile Church, strengthened the connections formed during the Republic and firmly established, even in the first and second centuries of Christianity, the new Roman society. In the same centuries, and under the influence of the religion preached by St. Peter and St. Paul, there came to be grated on the ever vigorous trunk of the old aristocracy the best members of the new imperial and consular families, worthy by their truly Roman virtues, practised amid the general depravity, to reinforce the thinned ranks of Rome's founders, and to fill up, without too sudden a transition, the voids made by time in the true patrician houses. Thus was Rome working out her destiny; thus was accomplished the building up of the eternal city being accomplished by the very men who had formerly, by their blood or by their genius, established her strong and mighty on the seven hills.

Caecilia, the lawful representative of the unparalleled aristocracy, the fairest flower of the old stem, was also the last. The second century was passing away, the third, which was to see the empire fall from the hands of Septimus Severus first to the Orientals and then to the barbarians from the banks of the Danube, offered small chance of preservation for the remnants of the ancient nobility. The true Roman society was henceforth at an end; for, save a few individual exceptions, there remained nothing more of Roman but the name: the vain adornment of freedmen and upstarts, who, under the princes worthy of them, indulged their passions at the expense of those around them.

Caecilia therefore appeared at the right moment, personifying with the utmost dignity the society that was about to disappear because its work was accomplished. In her strength and her beauty, adorned with the royal purple of martyrdom, she represents ancient Rome rising proud and glorious to the skies, before the upstart Caesars who, by immolating her in their jealousy, unconsciously executed the divine plan. The blood of kings and heroes, flowing from her triple wound, is the libation of the old nobility to Christ the conqueror, to the Blessed Trinity the Rule of nations it is the final consecration, which reveals in its full extent the sublime vocation of the valiant races called to found the eternal Rome.

But we must not think that to-day's feast is meant to excite us in a merely theoretical and fruitless admiration. The Church recognizes and honours in Saint Caecilia three characteristics, which, united together, distinguish her among all the blessed in heaven, and are a source of grace and an example to men. These three characteristics are, virginity, apostolic zeal, and the super-human courage which enabled her to bear torture and death. Such is the threefold teaching conveyed by this one Christian life.

In an age so blindly abandoned as ours to the worship of the senses, is it not time to protest by the strong lessons of our faith, against a fascination which even the children of the promise can hardly resist? Never since the fall of the Roman Empire have morals, and with them the family and society, been so seriously threatened. For long years literature, the arts, the comforts of life, have had but one aim: to propose physical enjoyment as the only end of man's destiny. Society already counts an immense number of members who live entirely a life of the senses. Alas for the day when it will expect to save itself by relying on their energy! The Roman Empire thus attempted several times to shake off the yoke of invasion: it fell, never to rise again. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year.)

The same be written one day of the lords counterfeit church of conciliarism and of the lords of Modernity.

Dom Prosper Gueranger's description of ancient Rome, especially in the last paragraph quoted above, could be a description of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and of the supposed "civilized" West as each has degenerated more and more over the decades as a result of its false premises that stem from the heresies of the Protestant Revolt and the anti-Incarnational naturalism of Modernity, so exemplified by the contemporary civil state, and the doctrinal heresies and sacramental sterility of the conciliar revolution.

Today, Monday, November 23, 2015 is also the eighty-eighth anniversary of the martyrdom of Father Miguel Agustin Pro, S.J., at the hands of the Masonic revolutionaries in Mexico.

Dr. Michael Kenny provided a poignant testimony to how Dwight Morrow made it a point to travel with Plutarco Elias Calles the day after the execution of Father Miguel Augustin, Pro, the great champion of Christ the King, in Mexico City that outraged the citizenry of the country and that, quite sadly, was ignored entirely by the producers of For Greater Glory: The True Story of Cristiada (other than a filmed reenactment of the event during the end credits that was not identified specifically whatsoever):

Coincident with Mr. Morrow's arrival in Mexico, the reign of terror was at its height, and continued unabated. I have pictures before me of hundreds of young men and priests and even girls, who were seized without charge and executed without trial, often with prolonged and excruciating tortures. In the summer and fall of 1927 indiscriminate shootings and hangings and torturings of suspected friends of the Cristeros were multiplied, with the view of terrorizing the armed forces of revolt. These and the murder of scores of the worthiest priests, and the barbarous torturing of Fathers Batiz and Reyes and other widely venerated pastors had the contrary effect, of inflaming and swelling the ranks of the Cristeros.

But there was one young priest whose assassination stirred public feeling most and who is is now venerated as the "Martyr of Mexico." This was Father Miguel Augustin Pro, a young Jesuit whose cheerful sanctity and zeal and his adeptness in reaching all classes with his ministry and evading the pursuivants on his track made him universally beloved as a saint and a hero.

But his marvelous feat in foiling the suppressors of Catholic worship had marked him for government vengeance. Seized on the obviously false pretext of connection with an assault upon Obregon, he was shot down November 23, 1927 without charge or trial; he died as he had lived with a smile upon his face, forgiving cheerfully and praying heartily for the executioners of himself and his brother and fellow victims.

His sisters and his aged father dipped their kerchiefs in his blood and departed joyously; and despite the Calles soldiery, hundreds of thousands crowded to his obsequies, struggling for a relic of the martyr. The gathering masses on the streets obstructed the passage of the presidential automobile, in which, beside Plutarco Calles, the American Ambassador was seated.

Failing even to acknowledge a legal protest submitted to him by a lawyer's committee, Mr. Morrow hastened to tour the country with Calles, who gaily played Toreador to amuse his friend. He thus impressed the world that all was well with Mexico, and made it clear to his own people and the Cristeros that even in the savagest excesses of persecution, the United States Government stood back of him. It is precisely the same despairing realization that oppresses then now when they see our Ambassador Daniels also go out of his way to show friendliest courtesies to the same or the like persecutors today and to eulogize the same Plutarco Calles, after the latter had forged and wielded a deadlier weapon to assassinate the souls of their children.

While Mr. Morrow's friendly services were securing arms and countenance from our government for Calles, and holding strict embargo against the League of [Religious] Liberty, the Cristeros, as we have seen, managed somehow to make headway, though with slight ecclesiastical encouragement. It was only in the face of relentless universal persecution, after millions of petitions had been scouted and thirty thousand injunction protests had been overruled en masse, that reluctantly the bishops tolerated recourse to arms. But Archbishop [Jose] Mora, the Mexican Primate, was exiled for defending manfully before Calles the fighters for liberty; and Archbishop Gonzales Valencia of Durango, who still stands by the fighters for liberty, had heartened the belligerents by his Pastoral form Rome, February 11, 1927, "having ascertained the heart of the Pope"; and recalling his many brave priests abused, imprisoned, deported as criminals and who, like Fathers Batiz and Lopez, gave up their lives for their flock, he glorifies God for giving him sons "who will not succumb before the persecutors nor abdicate the dignity of Christians and of men." (Dr. Michael Kenny, (Dr. Michael Kenny, No God Next Door: Red Rule in Mexico and Our Responsibility, William J. Hirten Company, Inc., New York, 1935, republished by CSG and Associates Publishers, pp. 130-132.)

It was not only Dwight Morrow who gave public support to Plutarco Elias Calles in the immediate aftermath of the martyrdom of Father Miguel Augustin Pro, who cried out Viva Cristo Rey! as the bullets were fired at him. The folksy American humorist, columnist and actor named Will Rogers, a Freemason, of course, did so as well:

Strong hands, quick to become doubled fists, a hard jaw, and a heavy scowl have sometimes been called the typical externals of President Plutarco Elias Calles. The fact that he once publicly alluded to "the grunts of the Pope" caused some to fear that his mind might resemble his fists. Last week such mistaken impressions were given the lie when Senor Calles proved himself not only supple of body but adept at mellow geniality. Scene: the $375,000 private train of the President of Mexico which puffed all week, from one hospitable ranch in northern Mexican states to another. On board were the new U. S. Ambassador to Mexico, Dwight Whitney Morrow (onetime Morgan partner), and tart-witted cowboy-clown Will Rogers. They, and other guests of the President, were privileged to see him in playful mood. At Pabellon Ranch, State of Aguascalientes, Senor Calles seated his guests around a bull ring. He had a surprise for them, he said. Quietly picking up a matador's red cape, he entered the arena.

At a flirt of the red, a small but purposeful bull charged, horns down, to gore the President of Mexico. Swirling the cape through a classic "pass," he pivoted and dodged—his chunky body suddenly achieving grace. While guests Morrow and Rogers gripped their seats, President Calles brought off three more hazardous "passes." Then, having shown his guests the dexterous and dangerous phase of bull-baiting, he strode from the ring. No bull was killed, or even pinked, lest U. S. gorges rise.

Came luncheon, provided on the scale of a local fiesta. Peasants and the local gentry mingled. President Calles, beamingly in his element, led hearty singing of mellow Spanish songs. What did the U. S. guests think?

Mr. Morrow, rising to a toast, said something in English which was apparently not understood. Mr. Rogers then quoted Mr. Morrow in Spanish as having said: "... how could the United States ever enter into armed conflict with people like these? ..." Amid shouted cheers President Calles sprang up and clasped the Ambassador's hand. Later Mr. Morrow said to U. S. correspondents: "All this is very interesting." (President at Play - TIME.)

The same afternoon, Calles demanded that [General Roberto] Cruz make an example of the Pros. In a battle worthy of wits worthy of Pontius Pilate and the Sanhedrin, Cruz tried to called Calles into allowing some legal cover. But Calles told him "to hell with" legalities and reminded him that he had his orders and only had to obey. Cruz appeared before reporters and explained that evidence had been accumulated showing all the parties guilty in the attempted assassination of [Alvaro Obregon]. Apparently, Calles had ordered that these executions were to have a high profile. So journalists and photographers from all over Mexico and the whole world were invited.

Even so the game was not entirely over. the morning of the execution, an enterprising lawyer, Luis MacGregor, had convinced a quite brave judge, Julio Lopez Masse, to sign an amparo, a stay of execution. It is doubtful that Cruz and Calles would have paid any attention to this paper obstacle. But they did not have to. MacGregor was locked outside of the proceedings at the police station, and the executions--quite odd for such widely advertised events--were carried out a half-hour earlier than scheduled. A last-minute request from the Argentine delegation to Mexico earned Roberto, the youngest of the [Pro] brothers, a reprieve.

When Miguel's body and the body his brother Humberto arrived at the family house, old Miguel, Sr., ordered no one to mourn, for there was nothing sorrowful in such heroic deaths. Don Miguel opened the door later that night and found a half-dozen government agents outside. They came in, knelt, and prayed. A steady stream of workers, women, and professional people arrived. The Rosary was recited; other prayers were said. When the bodies were ready for transport to the Dolores Cemetery, there was an enormous crowd in the streets, even though President Calles had forbidden public demonstrations in support of the martyred brothers. But the crowd was much larger than the police could do anything about, somewhere between ten thousand and thirty thousand, according to some accounts larger than any ever seen in Mexico, at a funeral. Around five hundred cars took part in the funeral cortege. As the caskets came out, someone shouted, "Make way for the martyrs!" The crowd fell silent. But as the coffins went through the streets "Viva Cristo Rey!" was shouted everywhere.

The day after Fr. Pro's execution, the American Ambassador Dwight Morrow (Charles Lindbergh's future father-in-law) and the humorist Will Rogers, who had become famous as a common-sense mocker of U.S. government foolishness, took a trip with President Calles through Mexico on the presidential train. Calles had deliberately set up the trip as propaganda intended to convince Mexican Catholics that the United States would not help them. Morrow is reported to have known this, but believed he could use the influence thus gained over Calles to turn his government in a different direction. In the next few years, the government killed 250,000 to 300,000 people, many Catholic, even after a compromise had been worked out. (Robert Royal, The Catholic Martyrs of the Twentieth Century, Crossroad Publishing Company, New York, 2000, pp. 39-40.)

Father Pro, who donned various disguises to provide the Sacraments to Catholics in Mexico after Calles had proscribed their administration that evokes memories of Father William Joseph Chaminade, S.M., during the French Revolution and was a foreshadowing of the heroics of the "Scarlet Pimpernel of the Vatican," Monsignor Hugh O'Flaherty, during the Nazi occupation of Rome as World War II was raging, knew that he might face death for his work. In a letter to his Jesuit superiors in Rome, he, demonstrating that he was a true son of Saint Ignatius of Loyola, said that a priest cannot live in fear of any kind:

You know very well that I am not especially inclined to anything in particular, although it is rather hard to lose the chance of going straight to heaven or of becoming a chaplain of the Marias Islands [where the government deported its prisoners].

I prefer to obey, being quite convinced that I will be of more use to those to whim I wish dedicate my work and life. I have no desire to influence your desire to influence your decision, but I would like to follow the advice that Father Crivelli sent us from Rome: please let me remain at my post until the end of the persecution.

Fear withdraws the priests from their abandoned flocks. Now, as you know, fear is not my predominant fault. I might die? What they might do or what they might do to me--all that is in the hands of God.

Would that I might be found worthy of suffering persecution for the holy name of Jesus. Do I not belong to his army? But let us repeat as in the Our Father: "Thy will be done!" (Gerald F. Muller, C.S.C., With Life and Laughter: The Life of Father Pro, published originally in 1969 by Dujarie Press and republished in 1996 by the Daughters of Saint Paul, p. 122.)

No one, least of all a priest, should live in fear of any kind at any time. Christ the King is our Divine Judge. No one else, no matter how many rationalizations they might use, has any justification before God to excuse silence in the face or social or moral or doctrinal or liturgical evils as a "virtuous" and "prudent" exercise of "self-restraint."

As Pope Leo XIII noted in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890:

14. But in this same matter, touching Christian faith, there are other duties whose exact and religious observance, necessary at all times in the interests of eternal salvation, become more especially so in these our days. Amid such reckless and widespread folly of opinion, it is, as We have said, the office of the Church to undertake the defense of truth and uproot errors from the mind, and this charge has to be at all times sacredly observed by her, seeing that the honor of God and the salvation of men are confided to her keeping. But, when necessity compels, not those only who are invested with power of rule are bound to safeguard the integrity of faith, but, as St. Thomas maintains: "Each one is under obligation to show forth his faith, either to instruct and encourage others of the faithful, or to repel the attacks of unbelievers.''[12] To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth, is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind. This kind of conduct is profitable only to the enemies of the faith, for nothing emboldens the wicked so greatly as the lack of courage on the part of the good. Moreover, want of vigor on the part of Christians is so much the more blameworthy, as not seldom little would be needed on their part to bring to naught false charges and refute erroneous opinions, and by always exerting themselves more strenuously they might reckon upon being successful. After all, no one can be prevented from putting forth that strength of soul which is the characteristic of true Christians, and very frequently by such display of courage our enemies lose heart and their designs are thwarted. Christians are, moreover, born for combat, whereof the greater the vehemence, the more assured, God aiding, the triumph: "Have confidence; I have overcome the world."[13] Nor is there any ground for alleging that Jesus Christ, the Guardian and Champion of the Church, needs not in any manner the help of men. Power certainly is not wanting to Him, but in His loving kindness He would assign to us a share in obtaining and applying the fruits of salvation procured through His grace.

15. The chief elements of this duty consist in professing openly and unflinchingly the Catholic doctrine, and in propagating it to the utmost of our power. For, as is often said, with the greatest truth, there is nothing so hurtful to Christian wisdom as that it should not be known, since it possesses, when loyally received, inherent power to drive away error. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)

We must remember that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order. Nothing else. And we must never be afraid to proclaim this truth no matter what it might cost us in terms of worldly respect and financial security.

The statists of Modernity and the heretics of Modernism will be vanquished by the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Why do we live in fear, agitated by all of the rush of current event, when we have the protection of Our Blessed Mother, of Saint Joseph, and the likes of Pope Saint Clement I, Saint Cecilia, Saint Felicity, Father Miguel Agustin Pro and the other Mexican martyrs?

May we, by praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits, lift high the Cross of the Divine Redeemer as we exclaim with Father Pro and the Mexican martyrs:

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 Balthasar, pray for us.

Pope Saint Clement I, pray for us.

Saint Cecilia, pray for us.

Saint Felicity, pray for us.