[For some background on the history of the counterfeit church of conciliarism’s serial sellouts to Communist regimes, please see Red China: Still A Workshop For The New Ecclesiology.]
One of the chief goals of revolutionaries is to control minds. Only the willfully blind—and/or those detached from reality by means of their total immersion in the bread and circuses used to distract the masses—can fail to see that the manipulation of minds, accomplished by the dissemination of falsehoods and the castigation of those who refuse to accept them, is what our minders in the world of naturalism have been using for over three hundred years now to create and sustain themselves in power.
To be sure, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Thomas Cranmer, John Wesley, John Knox and countless other Protestant revolutionaries helped to pave the way for the mind-control that continues to be used by the revolutionaries of naturalism. They did this by disparaging everything about Catholicism, destroying Catholic churches, monasteries, and convents in order to turn them into dens of Protestant iniquity, sacrilege, and blasphemy.
Yes, this is exactly what the conciliar revolutionaries have been doing since the rotund Angelo Roncalli appeared the balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on October 28, 1958, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude, to begin the current masquerade party that now feature the insidious little pest from Argentina named Jorge Mario Bergoglio as its star player. It is no exaggeration to state that Jorge Mario Bergoglio hates everything to do with the true Catholic Faith, and he using all manner of sloganeering to lambaste those who believe in the integrity of the Sacred Deposit of Faith and who will not yield for a second concerning the sacramental barrenness of the sacrilege known as the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service.
Although there are many common threads to the modus operandi of any kind of revolutionary, perhaps the strongest thread that ties the doctrinal, liturgical and moral revolutionaries of concilarism to their counterparts in the realm of naturalism is a strategy that seeks to identify anyone who is opposed to falsehoods as being responsible for disturbing “peace.” That is, the very revolutionaries whose goal it is to upset an existing order want everyone to accept their “new order” of things without complaint, a “new order of things” that the revolutionaries believe could have been implemented more quickly and with more thoroughly results had “counter-revolutionary” “haters” not gotten in the way.
Those of you are old enough to remember might recall that the oligarchs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics accused “free” nations, especially the United States of America, of being opposed to “peace” by resisting the “right” of “the people” in various parts of the world to rise up in revolutions, financed by Soviet funds and frequently equipped with Soviet-manufactured weaponry. The Soviet propaganda machine defined “peace” as agreeing with Soviet policies, including the captivity of the nations of Eastern and Central Europe, without complaint.
To be sure, as has been demonstrated many times on this site, the American propaganda machine has been busy at work since even before July 4, 1776, as anyone who dared to put into question the decisions made at the Second Continental Congress to declare independence from Great Britain was considered to be a “traitor” even though about a third of the colonists did not favor such a break. The intimidation of the “Tories” was such that many of them fled to Canada.
This pattern of intimidation and disparagement of “opposition” has continued throughout the course of the history of the United States of America, and it continues to this very day in Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s North American soulmate, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, who continues to enjoy the support of around fifty percent of the American electorate precisely because his demagogic rhetoric and statists ways meet with their approval. Obama/Soetoro and his claque of apologists have sought to discredit and delegitimize anyone who disagrees with the current administration’s policies. Those who are opposed to the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn “hate women.” Those who are opposed to the sanctioning of the sodomite agenda under cover of the civil law are said to be “homophobes.” Those who criticize Obama/Soetoro’s serial violations of the Constitution of the United States of America and various laws passed by Congress are said to be “racists” and “bigots.” Such a list could go on for a long period of time.
Similarly, the conciliar revolutionaries have worked overtime to disparage Catholics who are opposed to onslaught of Modernism that has devastated so many hundreds of millions of souls since the close of the “Second” Vatican Council on December 8, 1965, the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Most of the conciliar revolutionaries really believe that the Protestant Revolution was the result of doctrinal, liturgical and pastoral “intransigence” on the part of the Catholic Church. Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI implied that this was so when praising Martin Luther at the Augustinian Convent in Erfurt, Germany, on September 24, 2011, the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom, and he had done so in his Letter to the Bishops and Priests of China that was released on June 29, 2007.
Karol Josef Wojtyla/John Paul II was a bit more artful in his castigation of the Catholic past, but he was proactive in treating Protestant clergymen as having a mission from God to sanctify and to save souls. He left no doubt, however, as to his belief concern the kind of “spiritual ecumenism” that had been advanced by a disciple of the arch-heretic Father Pierre Martin Teilhard de Chardin. S.J., Abbe Paul Couturier, and he, prompted by the then Joseph “Cardinal” Ratzinger, used Ut Unum Sint, May 25, 1995, to discuss how the “Petrine Ministry” could be exercised in such a way as to be acceptable to the Protestant “ecclesial communities” and to the Orthodox. Wojtyla/John Paul II also used his egregious “Assisi events” to be a means to break down Catholic belief that false religions are hideous in the sight of the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, of course, has been completely open in his unapologetic embrace of every manner of non-Catholic on the face of this earth. He has even embraced atheistic “journalists” such as the nonagenarian Eugenio Scalfaro, and he has displayed great warmth and personal affection for the mass murdering Castro brothers of Cuba and other assorted Marxists around the world. The false “pope” has uttered not one blessed word against Marxism. Ever. He like it. Marxists are his own kind of revolutionaries who desire to “reach out to the existential peripheries.”
In this, as in so many other ways, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is merely following the revolutionary footsteps of the sodomite demagogue named Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria/Paul VI who began the policy of Ostpolitik in order to make a “reconciliation” with Communist regimes around the world. Bergoglio shares Montini’s belief that it was wrong for Popes Pius XI ad XII to oppose Bolshevism and for Pope Leo XIII to have opposed all forms of socialism. These two bookends, if you will, of the conciliar revolution, have desired to “turn the page” on what they belief has been “Catholic intransigence” against Marxism, and they have sought to use the same revolutionary tactic of “amalgamation” that has been used in the realm of false ecumenism to undercut Catholics who have resisted Communism during the Cold War and in Red China, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, and Cuba today. And make no mistake about it, ladies and gentlemen, Jorge Mario Bergoglio wants to go to Red China, thereby finishing the work of selling out the underground Catholics who have suffered so much there since the forces of the “People’s Liberation Army” captured what was then called Peking on May 1, 1949.
Jorge gave an interview to Asia Times two months ago that revealed yet again his completely sanguine nature about Communist regimes and their mass-murdering, tyrannical ways:
Vatican City, February 2016 (VIS) - To mark the occasion of the upcoming Chinese New Year, the Holy Father Francis has granted an extensive interview to the online daily Asia Times, Hong Kong. The Pope took the opportunity to express his wishes to President Xi Jinping and all the Chinese people, and his high esteem for the Chinese people and their culture, in the hope that the Chinese contribution to dialogue between peoples may contribute to peace and the integral development of the human family.
The original text can be found on the Asia Times website at atimes.com.; an abridged version is published below.
Asia Times: "What is China for you? How did you imagine China to be as a young man, given that China, for Argentina, is not the East but the far West? What does Matteo Ricci mean to you?"
Pope Francis: "For me, China has always been a reference point of greatness. A great country. But more than a country, a great culture, with an inexhaustible wisdom. For me, as a boy, whenever I read anything about China, it had the capacity to inspire my admiration. ... Later I looked into Matteo Ricci’s life and I saw how this man felt the same thing in the exact way I did, admiration, and how he was able to enter into dialogue with this great culture, with this age-old wisdom. He was able to “encounter” it. … Ricci’s experience teaches us that it is necessary to enter into dialogue with China, because it is an accumulation of wisdom and history. It is a land blessed with many things. And the Catholic Church, one of whose duties is to respect all civilisations, before this civilisation, I would say, has the duty to respect it with a capital “R”. The Church has great potential to receive culture".
Asia Times: "China, for the first time in its thousands of years of history, is emerging from its own environment and opening to the world, creating unprecedented challenges for itself and for the world. You have spoken of a third world war that is furtively advancing: what challenges does this present in the quest for peace?"
Pope Francis: "Being afraid is never a good counsellor. … And it is obvious that so much culture and so much wisdom, and in addition, so much technical knowledge – we have only to think of age-old medicinal techniques – cannot remain enclosed within a country; they tend to expand, to spread, to communicate. Man tends to communicate, a civilisation tends to communicate. It is evident that when communication happens in an aggressive tone to defend oneself, then wars result. But I would not be fearful. It is a great challenge to keep the balance of peace. … The Western world, the Eastern world and China all have the capacity to maintain the balance of peace and the strength to do so. We must find the way, always through dialogue; there is no other way. Encounter is achieved through dialogue. The true balance of peace is realised through dialogue. Dialogue does not mean that we end up with a compromise, half the cake for you and the other half for me. This is what happened in Yalta and we saw the results. No, dialogue means: look, we have got to this point, I may or may not agree, but let us walk together; this is what it means to build. And the cake stays whole, walking together. The cake belongs to everyone, it is humanity, culture. Carving up the cake, as in Yalta, means dividing humanity and culture into small pieces. And culture and humanity cannot be carved into small pieces". (Jorge Wishes A Happy Year of the Monkey to the Red Chinese.)
Interection Number One:
Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that the dividing up of Europe at the Yalta Conference, which was held in the Crimean port city between February 4, 1945, and February 11, 1945, could have been avoided if “honest dialogue” had taken place in a spirit of “encounter.” This means that he thinks that the mass-murdering tyrant Joseph Stalin was interested in any kind of “peace” other than getting a “piece” of everything in Europe, East and West.
Lost in this delusion about “encounter” and “dialogue” is the simple fact that there would have been no “Yalta Conference” seventy-one years ago if the thirty-third degree Freemasons named Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Spencer Churchill had not come to the rescue of Stalin after the forces of Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich invaded the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic on June 22, 1941, in violation of the terms of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact that was signed on August 24, 1939, as German National Socialists agreed to divide Poland (and to create “spheres of influence” in Romania, The Baltic States, and Finland) with their one-time adversaries, the Bolsheviks.
Although the Yalta Accords were evil (see the appendix below for some lesser known facts about the Freemasonic-Communist conference), the root of this evil was the fact that the “Allies” came to Stalin’s rescue, thereby giving him military and economic assistance and the legitimacy that he craved from the Western powers he meant to crush over the course of time. Bergoglio is very free to condemn Donald Trump’s proposal to build a wall on the border of the United States of America with the United Mexican States, a matter that falls into the realm of prudential judgment as to how a nation may be able to protect the integrity of its national borders, but he has never once criticized any Communist leader for anything, up to and including the way that Hitler and Stalin divided up much of Eastern Europe in 1939.
Few in number were the voices of Americans who opposed providing the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with military and economic assistance in 1941. This assistance helped to prop up the Soviet regime, and it was offered precisely because many Western intellectuals and politicians, including then Vice President Henry Agard Wallace (D-Iowa) and numerous officials within the United States Department of State looked upon “international socialism” with great fondness and admiration.
The Western sympathy for Bolshevism was noted and denounced by Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn in the commencement address that he gave at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, on June 8, 1978:
I have had occasion already to say that in the 20th century democracy has not won any major war without help and protection from a powerful continental ally whose philosophy and ideology it did not question. In World War II against Hitler, instead of winning that war with its own forces, which would certainly have been sufficient, Western democracy grew and cultivated another enemy who would prove worse and more powerful yet, as Hitler never had so many resources and so many people, nor did he offer any attractive ideas, or have such a large number of supporters in the West -- a potential fifth column -- as the Soviet Union. At present, some Western voices already have spoken of obtaining protection from a third power against aggression in the next world conflict, if there is one; in this case the shield would be China. But I would not wish such an outcome to any country in the world. First of all, it is again a doomed alliance with Evil; also, it would grant the United States a respite, but when at a later date China with its billion people would turn around armed with American weapons, America itself would fall prey to a genocide similar to the one perpetrated in Cambodia in our days. (A World Split Apart.)
As noted in part one of this commentary, this is precisely what has happened since the Shanghai Accord on February 27, 1972. The American desire to use the “China card” against the Soviet Union resulted in the “opening” of Red China to American businesses, which have profited handsomely from a labor force paid a pittance while toiling in substandard conditions.
Who cares about the innocent preborn or the fact that over seventy million human beings have been murdered by the Chicoms for daring to oppose the evil that is Communism under its Maoist mask?
Not Jorge Mario Bergoglio, that’s for sure, which is why Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s description of the love that some Western figures have long had for socialism of all kinds, including the Marxist-Leninist form, describes the Argentine Apostate’s desire to make “nice” with the Red Chinese oligarchs:
As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation at first by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say in 1844 that "communism is naturalized humanism."
This statement turned out not to be entirely senseless. One does see the same stones in the foundations of a despiritualized humanism and of any type of socialism: endless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility, which under communist regimes reach the stage of anti-religious dictatorship; concentration on social structures with a seemingly scientific approach. (This is typical of the Enlightenment in the Eighteenth Century and of Marxism). Not by coincidence all of communism's meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.
The interrelationship is such, too, that the current of materialism which is most to the left always ends up by being stronger, more attractive and victorious, because it is more consistent. Humanism without its Christian heritage cannot resist such competition. We watch this process in the past centuries and especially in the past decades, on a world scale as the situation becomes increasingly dramatic. Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism and socialism could never resist communism. The communist regime in the East could stand and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who felt a kinship and refused to see communism's crimes. When they no longer could do so, they tried to justify them. In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East. (A World Split Apart.)
Bergoglio does not admit that Communist regimes have been guilty of any crimes, and he could not bring himself in the interview he gave to Asia Timesto refer to Red China’s one-child-per-family and forced abortion and sterilization policies when referring to the aging of the mostly pagan population of China in its Communist captivity:
Asia Times: "China has experienced over the last few decades tragedies without comparison. Since 1980 the Chinese have sacrificed that which has always been most dear to them, their children. For the Chinese these are very serious wounds. Among other things, this has left enormous emptiness in their consciences and somehow an extremely deep need to be reconciled with themselves and to forgive themselves. In the Year of Mercy what message can you offer the Chinese people?"
Pope Francis: "The aging of a population ... is happening in many places. … Perhaps behind this there is the fear you are alluding to, the mistaken perception, not that we will simply fall behind, but that we will fall into misery, so therefore, let’s not have children. There are other societies that have opted for the contrary. For example, during my trip to Albania, I was astonished to discover that the average age of the population is approximately 40 years. … Countries that have suffered and opt for youth. Then there is the problem of work. Something that China does not have, because it has the capacity to offer work both in the countryside and in the city. And it is true, the problem for China of not having children must be very painful; because the pyramid is then inverted and a child has to bear the burden of his father, mother, grandfather and grandmother. And this is exhausting, demanding, disorientating. It is not the natural way. I understand that China has opened up possibilities on this front". (Jorge Wishes A Happy Year of the Monkey to the Red Chinese.)
Interection Number Two:
Bergoglio’s desire to appease the murdering Chicoms is reprehensible. He refuses to call evil by its proper name and to denounce the Communist authorities for imposing their evil policies upon parents. This is because he does not want to jeopardize the possibility of a state visit to Red China, and it is also because he has shown himself averse to mentioning any kind of direct criticism of a Communist regime at any time for any reason. This is the same “Pope Francis” who has had no problem denouncing those who deny “global warming” or who support the imposition of the death penalty upon those convicted of heinous crimes in accord with the due process of law or those he holds responsible for “income inequality.” As noted earlier in this commentary, the false “pontiff” had no compunction about denouncing Donald Trump as “not a Christian” because of the latter’s desire to build a wall to protect the integrity of this country’s border with Mexico and to provide for the national security.
Once again, of course, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a hypocrite.
Some might argue that he was being “diplomatic” in the interview with Asia Times.
All right, why the lack of “diplomacy” in the instances cited just above.
Bergoglio is a communist sympathizer and an agent of One World Governance. It is simply not in his personal make-up to denounce politicians who support the execution of the innocent preborn by chemical and/or surgical means.
For a trip to Red China?
Indeed, far from pulling back on its genocide of its own innocent preborn, authorities in Red China have even been so bold to release statistics to document the horrific fact that they have presided over the executions of 336,000,000 innocent children in the forty year period between 1971 and 2011. Bergoglio can cites fake evidence about "global warming" with precision. He is unfamiliar with the horror of the worldwide war on the preborn, which is a frontal assault against the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, because he chooses to do so.
Back to the interview:
Asia Times: "How should these challenges of families in China be faced, given that they find themselves in a process of profound change and no longer correspond to the traditional Chinese model of the family?"
Pope Francis: "The history of a people is always a path. A people at times walks more quickly, at times more slowly, at times it pauses, at times it makes a mistake and goes backwards a little, or takes the wrong path and has to retrace its steps to follow the right way. But when a people moves forward, this does not worry me because it means they are making history. And I believe that the Chinese people are moving forward and this is their greatness. … And I would go further: do not be bitter, but be at peace with your own path, even if you have made mistakes. I cannot say my history was bad, that I hate my history.
No, every people must be reconciled with its history as its own path, with its successes and its mistakes. And this reconciliation with one’s own history brings much maturity, much growth. … When one takes responsibility for one’s own path, accepting it for what it was, this allows one’s historical and cultural richness to emerge, even in difficult moments. And how can it be allowed to emerge? Here we return to the first question: in dialogue with today’s world. To dialogue does not mean that I surrender myself, because at times there is the danger, in the dialogue between different countries, of hidden agendas, namely, cultural colonisations. It is necessary to recognise the greatness of the Chinese people, who have always maintained their culture. And their culture – I am not speaking about ideologies that there may have been in the past – their culture was not imposed". (Jorge Wishes A Happy Year of the Monkey to the Red Chinese.)
Interjection Number Three:
“I cannot say that my history is bad, that I hate my history.”
In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was saying that it is not necessary to view any period of history with particular revulsion, something that he believes is applicable, albeit with a few prominent exceptions to be noted momentarily, to nations and to individuals.
Bergoglio only applies this false principle, however, to Communist nations as he has indeed denounced the history of Nazi Germany and its monstrous crimes (relying upon Zionist propaganda after the extent of such crimes, which is not to minimize the evils of the Nazi regime—see Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part one and Meet Some Catholics Truly Worth Admiring, part two.)
Jorge can, however, denounce the authentic history, doctrine, tradition and liturgy of the Catholic by issuing “apologies” to non-Catholics for how Catholics “persecuted” them by defending the truths of the Holy Faith, sometimes with their very lives, and by urging those non-Catholics to convert to the true Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order, which is what he did on January 25, 2016, the Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul the Apostle, during his "homily" at the annual ecumaniacal vespers service at the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls:
In this Extraordinary Jubilee Year of Mercy, we must always keep in mind that there cannot be an authentic search for Christian unity without trusting fully in the Father’s mercy. We ask first of all for forgiveness for the sins of our divisions, which are an open wound in the Body of Christ. As Bishop of Rome and pastor of the Catholic Church, I want to ask for mercy and forgiveness for the behavior of Catholics towards Christians of other Churches which has not reflected Gospel values. At the same time, I invite all Catholic brothers and sisters to forgive if they, today or in the past, have been offended by other Christians. We cannot cancel out what has happened, but we do not want to let the weight of past faults continue to contaminate our relationships. God’s mercy will renew our relationships. (Jorge Ask Forgiveness for How Catholics Have Treated Protestants.)
How can a man who, in essence, tells the suffering Catholics in Red China to be "reconciled" to their "history" hate the history of the Catholic Church, no less defame the matyrdom of Catholics killed by Protestants in Germany, the Low Countries, and, of course, England and Ireland in the first two centuries after the Protestant Revolution?
Should Saints Thomas More and John Fisher accommodated themselves to the "new order" of things after King Henry VIII had divorced his true wife, Catherine of Aragon, to "marry" his mistress, Anne Boleyn?
Should Saint Fidelis of Sigmarigen and the Martyrs of Gorkhum not have defend the Catholic Faith against Calvinism with their very lives?
Should Saint Josaphat not have sought convert those in the heretical and schismatic Russian Orthodox Church?
Well, yes, Jorge Mario Bergoglio does believe those things, which is why he is going to Sweden later this year to help commence the year of celebrations leading up to the quincentennial of Father Martin Luther's posting those ninety-five theses on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, on October 31, 1517 (Jorge to travel to Sweden for joint celebration of Protesant Revolution).
When it comes to error, you see, Jorge Mario Bergoglio falls all over himself to reassure those steeped in this or that error that their “history” of error is worth admiring despite whatever little “bumps” in the road might have occurred in the way of what he believes to be history’s dialectical movement, a belief that is at the cornerstone of Hegelianism and of Marxism—and thus of Modernism itself.
The currently reigning universal public face of apostasy is thus in complete continuity with his Hegelian predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who said the following in the letter to Catholics in Red China on July 29, 2007, that was itself a betrayal worthy of Antichrist:
History remains indecipherable, incomprehensible. No one can read it. (Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China, June 30, 2007.)
If this expression of Kantian immanentism is correct, then true pope after true pope who referred to the lessons of history dared to venture into the realm of the "indecipherable," the "incomprehensible." How can one claim to learn any lessons from history when it is alleged to be "indecipherable" and "incomprehensible"?
For the lies of Bergoglio and Ratzinger/Benedict to be correct, therefore, Pope Gregory XVI, writing in Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832, had to be wrong when he taught us the lessons of history about the effects produced by "liberty of conscience" that is one of the prime constituent elements of Modernism and thus of the lords of the counterfeit church of conciliarism:
This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error," as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit" is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
Pope Pius IX himself must have been wrong when he used history in Quanta Cura, December 8, 1862, to condemn the falsehood that is "religious liberty:"
For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."
And, since where religion has been removed from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some, utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound reason, dare to proclaim that "the people's will, manifested by what is called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law, free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are accomplished, have the force of right." But who, does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests? For this reason, men of the kind pursue with bitter hatred the Religious Orders, although these have deserved extremely well of Christendom, civilization and literature, and cry out that the same have no legitimate reason for being permitted to exist; and thus (these evil men) applaud the calumnies of heretics. For, as Pius VI, Our Predecessor, taught most wisely, "the abolition of regulars is injurious to that state in which the Evangelical counsels are openly professed; it is injurious to a method of life praised in the Church as agreeable to Apostolic doctrine; it is injurious to the illustrious founders, themselves, whom we venerate on our altars, who did not establish these societies but by God's inspiration." And (these wretches) also impiously declare that permission should be refused to citizens and to the Church, "whereby they may openly give alms for the sake of Christian charity"; and that the law should be abrogated "whereby on certain fixed days servile works are prohibited because of God's worship;" and on the most deceptive pretext that the said permission and law are opposed to the principles of the best public economy. Moreover, not content with removing religion from public society, they wish to banish it also from private families. For, teaching and professing the most fatal error of "Communism and Socialism," they assert that "domestic society or the family derives the whole principle of its existence from the civil law alone; and, consequently, that on civil law alone depend all rights of parents over their children, and especially that of providing for education." By which impious opinions and machinations these most deceitful men chiefly aim at this result, viz., that the salutary teaching and influence of the Catholic Church may be entirely banished from the instruction and education of youth, and that the tender and flexible minds of young men may be infected and depraved by every most pernicious error and vice. For all who have endeavored to throw into confusion things both sacred and secular, and to subvert the right order of society, and to abolish all rights, human and divine, have always (as we above hinted) devoted all their nefarious schemes, devices and efforts, to deceiving and depraving incautious youth and have placed all their hope in its corruption. For which reason they never cease by every wicked method to assail the clergy, both secular and regular, from whom (as the surest monuments of history conspicuously attest), so many great advantages have abundantly flowed to Christianity, civilization and literature, and to proclaim that "the clergy, as being hostile to the true and beneficial advance of science and civilization, should be removed from the whole charge and duty of instructing and educating youth." (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)
Moreover, if history is "indecipherable" and "incomprehensible," as Ratzinger/Benedict contended in his Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China of June 30, 2007, what business did have a week later trying to "teach" us about alleged "missed opportunities" to prevent or heal schisms in the past?
Looking back over the past, to the divisions which in the course of the centuries have rent the Body of Christ, one continually has the impression that, at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the Church's leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity. One has the impression that omissions on the part of the Church have had their share of blame for the fact that these divisions were able to harden. This glance at the past imposes an obligation on us today: to make every effort to unable for all those who truly desire unity to remain in that unity or to attain it anew. I think of a sentence in the Second Letter to the Corinthians, where Paul writes: "Our mouth is open to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your own affections. In return … widen your hearts also!" (2 Corinthians 6:11-13). Paul was certainly speaking in another context, but his exhortation can and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows. (Explanatory Letter on "Summorum Pontificum")
If history is "indecipherable" and "incomprehensible, as Ratzinger/Benedict contended in his Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China on June 30, 2007, then how was it possible on July 7, 2007, to "decipher" that "not enough was done by the Church's leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity?"
Remember, Ratzinger/Benedict wrote the following in his Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China:
History remains indecipherable, incomprehensible. No one can read it. (Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China, June 30, 2007.)
If "no one can read" history, then how can Ratzinger/Benedict claim to know that "not enough was done by the Church's leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity"?
Obviously, the contention made on June 30, 2007, is completely contradictory of his statement seven days later. Ratzinger/Benedict's statement about the "incomprehensible" and "indecipherable" nature of a history that "no one can read" also makes it impossible for him to "know" the alleged "historical circumstances" that he contends, contrary to right reason and Catholic dogma, that make specific dogma formulae and papal pronouncement "obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their proper time." The same is true of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio
Ratzinger/Benedict, a disciple of the late Father Hans Urs von Balthasar, an Hegelian who believed in the heresy of "universal salvation" that contradicts the plain words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, daring to impute "ignorance" to Our Lord on the matter of the time of His Second Coming to judge the living and the dead on the Last Day (see Father Regis Scanlon, O.F.M., Cap., The Inflated Reputation of Hans Urs von Balthasar), is as blithe to his contradictions as he blithe to the fact that errors can in no way serve as the foundation of personal sanctity or of social order.
The same is true of what Jorge Mario Bergoglio said in his answer to Asia Times. He is as little interested in the truth about history as is about the truth about anything, starting and perhaps ending with everything contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith.
Well, it is back to the final part of Bergoglio's interview with Asia Times:
Asia Times: "The country’s economic growth proceeded at an overwhelming pace but this has also brought with it human and environmental disasters which Beijing is striving to confront and resolve. At the same time, the pursuit of work efficiency is burdening families with new costs: sometimes children and parents are separated due to the demands of work. What message can you give them?"
Pope Francis: "I would suggest a healthy realism; reality must be accepted from wherever it comes. … First, I must be reconciled with reality. I don’t like it, I am against it, it makes me suffer, but if I don’t come to terms with it, I won’t be able to do anything. The second step is to work to improve reality and to change its direction. … If this happens to a company which has worked for twenty years and there is a business crisis, then there are few avenues of creativity to improve it. On the contrary, when it happens in an age-old country, with its age-old history, its age-old wisdom, its age-old creativity, then tension is created between the present problem and this past of ancient richness. And this tension brings fruitfulness as it looks to the future. I believe that the great richness of China today lies in looking to the future from a present that is sustained by the memory of its cultural past".
Asia Times: "On the occasion of the upcoming Chinese New Year of the Monkey, would you like to send a greeting to the Chinese people, to the Authorities and to President Xi Jinping?"
Pope Francis: "On the eve of the New Year, I wish to convey my best wishes and greetings to President Xi Jinping and to all the Chinese people. And I wish to express my hope that they never lose their historical awareness of being a great people, with a great history of wisdom, and that they have much to offer to the world. The world looks to this great wisdom of yours. In this New Year, with this awareness, may you continue to go forward in order to help and cooperate with everyone in caring for our common home and our common peoples". (Jorge Wishes A Happy Year of the Monkey to the Red Chinese.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is communicating to dictator Xi Jinping his fervent desire to visit Red China to be an apostle of his feel-good version of naturalism. It does not matter to this horrific human being that Red China remains a prison camp that kills the innocent preborn, imprison and persecute political prisoners, suppress dissent, monitor its citizens and foreign visitors, engages in cyberwarfare against other nations, and that continues to persecute Catholics in the underground. He has been busy "regularizing" the so-called Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association by looking the other way as the Chicoms nominate men to be bishops and by urging he suffering Catholics in Red China to simply "forget" about a past that is also very much they way they suffer in the present.
Things in Red China are not exactly rosy as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, ever the friend of Communists (and other assorted socialists and statists), pro-aborts and members of the homosexual collective, wants them to be. One of Jorge’s own “cardinals,” Joseph Zen Ze-kiun of Hong Kong, recognizes this fact, and has written very courageously about it
Hong Kong (AsiaNews) – I have not spoken about the Church in China on my blog for some time now. Certainly not because I am too busy to do so (busy as I may be, I will never lose interest of our Church in China), not because I fear criticism of my ideas (at my age I have nothing to gain or lose).
No, the problem is that I'd like to give some good news, but, as you will note, my fate is that of the prophet Jeremiah. I have searched at length for some good news, but have found none. I realise that during this season of Christmas and the New Year, my complaints are somewhat “extra chorum", but I cannot be a dog without a bark.
I remember that at the beginning of last year the newspaper Wen Wei Po announced jubilantly that "relations between China and the Vatican will soon have a good development." Soon after, the Vatican Secretary of State said that "the prospects are promising, there is a desire for dialogue on both sides." I had my doubts about this unexpected wave of optimism, I saw no basis for this optimism. More than a thousand crosses were removed from the top of the churches (in some cases the churches themselves have been destroyed). After so long, we can no longer delude ourselves that this was anything beyond an episode of some local official’s exaggerated zeal. Several seminaries have been closed. Students of the National Seminary in Beijing were forced to sign a declaration of loyalty to the Independent Church, promising also to concelebrate with illegitimate bishops (otherwise they would not receive a diploma at the end of their studies). The Government is continuously strengthening a church that now objectively is already separated from the universal Catholic Church; with enticements and threats they induce the clergy to perform acts contrary to the doctrine and discipline of the Church, denying their conscience and their dignity.
In the latter half of 2015, there were some promising events which however failed to live up to expectations. Bishop Wu Qin-jing of Zhouzhi, ten years after his episcopal ordination, was finally installed as bishop, but has yet to pay the price of a compromise (see my blog of 14 July 2015).
Shortly after, Bishop Zhang Yinlin of Anyang was ordained. Even some usually cautious Catholic media rejoiced saying that everything had gone well. They pointed out that this ordination is the first after the last three years of contacts between Rome and Beijing, and also the first in Pope Francis’ pontificate, presenting the event as a good start.
It is this last statement that scares me, because the process included a "democratic election", the reading of a "decree of appointment by the (so-called) Episcopal Conference of China" and the canonically un-clear position of a co-consecrating bishop . A similarly abnormal process took place three years ago, does it deserve our rejoicing? (See my blog of 7 September 2015).
In October comes the big news: A Vatican delegation was in Beijing, there was a meeting. The Holy See gave no news of it. Father Heyndrickx Jeroom broke the news (of course he knows everything). He says: "They did not discuss sensitive issues like Bishop Su Zhimin of Baoding still in detention, or such as Bishop Ma Daqin of Shanghai to house arrest for more than three years (but these problems should not be resolved before any negotiations? Otherwise Obviously there is no goodwill on the part of Beijing). They focused on the issue of appointing bishops (of which model? Like with Anyang?). After the meeting, the delegation paid a visit to Bishop Li Shan of Beijing and the National Seminary where they met with Ma Ying Lin (Father Heyndrickx said that these are signs of goodwill on the part of Beijing, I think instead that they were acts of homage imposed by Beijing)".
Later the Vatican Secretary of State also confirmed that there was a meeting and that it was "very positive" and this "would be part of a process that will hopefully end with an agreement." Pressed by some journalists as to whether there was real progress, Cardinal Parolin responded: "The fact that we speak is already positive." It seems that there is no agreement in sight as of yet.
So what is the formula now under discussion for the appointment of bishops? As an old Cardinal out on the peripheries, I have no way of knowing, let alone guessing.
A recent article "A winter of darkness for religions in China" by Bernardo Cervellera on AsiaNews, says: "From information that has arrived from China it would seem that Beijing’s proposal is...: Vatican approval of the government recognized Council of Bishops,... [and] approval of the competency of this Council (and not the Pope) in the appointment of new candidates to the episcopacy who will be "democratically" elected (in short according to the suggestions of the Patriotic Association). The Holy See must approve the Council’s appointment and has a weak veto only in "severe" cases, which must be justified if used. If the Holy See’s justifications are considered "insufficient", the Council of Bishops may decide to proceed anyway".
If this information is accurate, can the Holy See accept the claims of the Chinese counterpart? Does this approach still respect the true authority of the Pope to appoint bishops? Can the Pope sign such an agreement? (Pope Benedict said: "The authority of the Pope to appoint bishops is given to the church by its founder Jesus Christ, it is not the property of the Pope, neither can the Pope give it to others").
Do our officials in Rome know what an election is in China? Do they know that the so-called Episcopal Conference is not only illegitimate, but simply does not exist? What exists is an organism that is called "One Association and One Conference", namely the Patriotic Association and the Bishops' Conference always work together as one body, which is always chaired by government officials (there are pictures to prove it, the Government does not even try more to keep up appearances, it starkly flaunts the fact that they now manage religion!). Signing such an agreement means delivering the authority to appoint bishops into the hands of an atheist government.
This scheme is often compared to a (poorly defined) Vietnamese Model, but it is much worse. The Vietnamese model is based on an initiative that began with the Church in Vietnam, the true Catholic Church in Vietnam. In China on the other hand, the so-called Association and Conference hide the reality that it is the Government calling the shots.
Even in Eastern Europe of the past, such as in Poland and Czechoslovakia, it was the Church that took the initiative and then gave the Government veto power. In doing so, even if the government vetos a proposal for the hundredth time, it is still the Church that presents a candidate and makes the appointment. If the Government insists on a veto, it will only prolong the impasse, and it will still allow the Church time to look for a suitable candidate. But it is unthinkable to leave the initial proposal in the hands of an atheist Government who cannot possibly judge the suitability of a candidate to be a bishop. Obviously, if the Church gives in to pressure from the government, the only result – despite proclamations to the contrary – is that it will have sold out the pontifical right to appoint bishops. Can this happen? According to an article written by a certain András Fejerdy: "For pastoral reasons - that is, because the full administration of the sacraments requires completely consecrated bishops - the Holy See believed that the completion of the Hungarian Bishops' Conference was so urgent that it accepted a solution that formally did not upset the canonical principle of free appointment, but that in practice gave the regime a decisive influence in choosing the candidates”.
UCAN News reports recent news from Chengdu (Sichuan): "Shortly after the visit of the Vatican delegation to Beijing, the Holy See approved the episcopal candidate elected in May 2014". Is this not exactly a case of "not upsetting the canonical principle of free appointment, but …in practice giving the regime a decisive influence in choosing the candidates "?
It is said that dialogue focused on the issue of the appointment of bishops, but there are many other pending problems, when and how will they be resolved?
The aforementioned AsiaNews article stated, again based on information received from China: "Beijing (demands) the Holy See’s recognition of all the official bishops, even the illegitimate and excommunicated ones." I wonder: is it only the government that makes these demands, without repentance of those concerned? Will the excommunicated only be released from excommunication or even recognized as bishops? Even without any act of repentance? Has the mercy of God come to this? Will the faithful be forced to obey these bishops?
So much remains to be resolved.
Illegitimate, even excommunicated bishops have abused the sacramental power (including ordination of deacons and priests) and judicial (assigning offices) and the Holy See seems to be without rebuke for them.
Legitimate bishops who participated in illegitimate episcopal ordinations, one, two, even three, four times, without ever having asked for forgiveness, or having received forgiveness from the Holy Father. Also those who took part in the so-called Assembly of Representatives of Chinese Catholics (the clearest symbol of a schismatic church).
Shortly after the Vatican delegation left Beijing, the government organized a large gathering of Church leaders, forcing on that occasion a celebration of all the bishops, legitimate, illegitimate and excommunicated. These are all objectively schismatic acts. The government now can string along a large number of bishops, resulting in an irrecoverable loss of dignity. If the Holy See signed some agreement with the Government without clarifying all these things, it will cause a severe wound to the conscience of the faithful.
Obviously our underground communities are non-existent for the Government. But now is even the Vatican ignoring them in negotiations, to appease their Chinese counterparts? To "save the day" will we abandon our brothers and sisters? But they are the healthy limbs of the Church! (Of course, they too have their problems, especially when dioceses remain without bishops, which can only lead to disorder). Is silencing the underground community to please the government not a form of suicide?
In the recent negotiations there has been no mention of the case of Msgr. James Su Zhimin in prison for 20 years, nor of Msgr. Thaddeus Ma Daqin of Shanghai under house arrest for more than three years, because these issues have been deemed "too sensitive" !?
In early September, some of the Shanghai faithful who were in prison for a long time, along with their relatives, went on a pilgrimage to Rome to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the outbreak of the great persecution on September 8, 1955. They were told: "Do not make any noise, the past is past, we have to look forward"!?
On a diplomatic level, the underground communities are the ace in the Holy See’s deck; if we amputate these limbs, what have we left in diplomatic standings to induce the other party to agree to our terms? By now, the government controls nearly all the official communities, while the underground communities are kept at bay by the Holy See. What do they still need to come to terms? They only need the signature of the Holy Father, a blessing, for this "Chinese Church." Beijing has no intention of negotiating, only making demands. After such a signature they will force the faithful of the underground community to come out and surrender to those who were illegitimate bishops for a long time, maybe even excommunicated, but now, with a clean slate, without even showing any repentance, leaning only on the Government for their legitimacy, have become bishops in their own right.
What makes me restless is the sight of our Eminent Secretary of State still intoxicated by the miracles of Ostpolitik. In a speech last year, at a Memorial for Card. Casaroli, he praised the success of its predecessor in having secured the existence of the Church hierarchy in the communist countries of Eastern Europe. He says: "In choosing candidates for the episcopate, we choose shepherds and not people who systematically oppose the regime, people who behave like gladiators, people who love to grandstand on the political stage." I wonder: Who had he in mind while making this description? I fear that he was thinking of a Cardinal Wyszynski, a Cardinal Mindszenty, a Cardinal Beran. But these are the heroes who bravely defended the faith of their people! It terrifies me to realize this mindset and I sincerely hope that I am wrong.
On the day that an agreement is signed with China there will be peace and joy, but do not expect me to participate in the celebrations of the beginning of this new Church. I disappear, I will start a monastic life to pray and do penance. I will ask the forgiveness of Pope Benedict for not being able to do what he was hoping that I could do. I will ask Pope Francis to forgive this old Cardinal from the peripheries for disturbing him with so many inappropriate letters.
The innocent children were killed, the angel told Joseph to take Mary and the Child and flee to safety. But today would our diplomats advise Joseph to go and humbly beg for dialogue with Herod !?
Please let it not be said that I believe the only line of distinction is that of “official and underground”. The vast majority of the clergy and lay people who belong to the official community are faithful to the authority of the Holy Father. Many are suffering enormously because of the abnormal situation of their Church, they are saddened by the weakness or lack of rectitude of their pastors, sometimes they even try to prevent them from falling further. In many cases a united clergy and a faithful people can defend their pastor from further bullying from the Authorities. (What Will 2016 Bring the Church in Red China.)
One will note that "Cardinal" Zen gave Ratzinger/Benedict a pass, if you will, by attempting to excuse his naievite about the real situation afflicting faithful Catholics in Red China. Pass or no, however, "Cardinal" Zen made it very clear that any and all accommodation made to the Red Chinese winds up with the imprisonment, if not execution, of faithful Catholics.
Alas, Bergoglio does not want reality to impinge upon his ideologically sustained delusions that leave no place for Christ the King and His Holy Church as the one and foundation for men to be holy and thus provided the basis for well-ordered nations that respect and adhere to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law.
Make no mistake about it, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI helped to pave the way for Jorge Mario Bergoglio to just wave his hand and pretend that all is well in Red China as the long-suffering and still-suffering Catholics as the precepts of the “new ecclesiology’s” “partial communion” serve as the path of accommodating Communists and other assorted statists just as much as it has prepared the way for the One World Ecumenical Church and for the “theological” justification to admit unrepentant sinners to the Sacraments without demanding them to reform their lives or even to make a complete and integral Confession of their Mortal Sins (see Year of Condemnation Update).
Remember, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is completely sanguine about Communism, and he is willing to help complete the structures of the One World Governance by selling the rope with which the Red Chinese still hang Catholics in Red China who attempt to be faithful to what they think is the Catholic Church. Yet it is that the Catholic Church condemns any and all cooperation with Communism and/or Communist regimes.
Writing in Divini Redemptoris, which was issued on March 19, 1937, two days after he had issued his firm denunciation of Nazism, Mit Brennender Sorge, Pope Pius XI forbade Catholics to provide any kind of cooperation with Communism at any time for any reason:
See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless. (Pope Pius XI, Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937.)
This condemnation of any kind of cooperation with Communism was reinterred by the Holy Office on July 1, 1949, the Feast of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, under the pontificate of our last true pope, Pope Pius XII:
This Sacred Supreme Congregation has been asked:
1. whether it is lawful to join Communist Parties or to favour them;
2. whether it is lawful to publish, disseminate, or read books, periodicals, newspapers or leaflets which support the teaching or action of Communists, or to write in them;
3. whether the faithful who knowingly and freely perform the acts specified in questions 1 and 2 may be admitted to the Sacraments;
4. whether the faithful who profess the materialistic and anti-Christian doctrine of the Communists, and particularly those who defend or propagate this doctrine, contract ipso facto excommunication specially reserved to the Apostolic See as apostates from the Catholic faith.
The Most Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers entrusted with the supervision of matters concerning the safeguarding of Faith and morals, having previously heard the opinion of the Reverend Lords Consultors, decreed in the plenary session held on Tuesday (instead of Wednesday), June 28, 1949, that the answers should be as follows:
To 1. in the negative: because Communism is materialistic and anti-Christian; and the leaders of the Communists, although they sometimes profess in words that they do not oppose religion, do in fact show themselves, both in their teaching and in their actions, to be the enemies of God, of the true religion and of the Church of Christ; to 2. in the negative: they are prohibited ipso iure (cf. Can. 1399 of the Codex Iuris Canonici); to 3. in the negative, in accordance with the ordinary principles concerning the refusal of the Sacraments to those who are not disposed; to 4. in the affirmative.
And the following Thursday, on the 30th day of the same month and year, Our Most Holy Lord Pius XII, Pope by the Divine Providence, in the ordinary audience, granted to the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Assessor of the Sacred Office, approved of the decision of the Most Eminent Fathers which had been reported to Him, and ordered the same to be promulgated officially in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis.
Given at Rome, on July 1st, 1949. (As found at Decree Against Communism.)
One may remember that Jorge Mario Bergoglio said "the past must be forgotten" when he "congratulated" the Marxist-Leninist in the White House, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, and the Marxist-Leninist in Havana, Raul Castro, on the rapprochment that he, Bergoglio, helped to broker fifteen months, ago now, meaning that it was necessary to forget about thes images of the wonderful Castro brothers and their guerillas at work to terrorize those they deemed guilty of various anti-revolutionary activities or thoughts just as it is necessary now to "forget" about the ongoing brutality of the Red Chinese oligarchs.
Unlike Jorge Mario Bergoglio, our last true pope thus far, Pope Pius XII, explained in his last encyclical letter, Ad Apostolorum Princeps, June 29, 1958, that there could be no accommdating the so-called "Patriotic Association" in Red China:
49. What then is to be the opinion concerning the excuse added by members of the association promoting false patriotism, that they had to act as they alleged because of the need to tend to the souls in those dioceses which were then without a bishop?
50. It is obvious that no thought is being taken of the spiritual good of the faithful if the Church's laws are being violated, and further, there is no question of vacant sees, as they wish to argue in defense, but of episcopal sees whose legitimate rulers have been driven out or now languish in prison or are being obstructed in various ways from the free exercise of their power of jurisdiction. It must likewise be added that those clerics have been cast into prison, exiled, or removed by other means, whom the lawful ecclesiastical superiors had designated in accordance with canon law and the special powers received from the Apostolic See to act in their place in the government of the dioceses.
51. It is surely a matter for grief that while holy bishops noted for their zeal for souls are enduring so many trials, advantage is taken of their difficulties to establish false shepherds in their place so that the hierarchical order of the Church is overthrown and the authority of the Roman Pontiff is treacherously resisted.
52. And some have even become so arrogant that they blame the Apostolic See for these terrible and tragic events (which have certainly been deliberate accomplishments of the Church's persecutors) even though everyone knows that the Church has been unable, in the past and at present, when such information has been needed, to obtain requisite data about qualified candidates for the episcopacy simply because she was prevented from communicating freely and safely with the dioceses of China.
53. Venerable brethren and dear children, thus far We have told you of the anxiety with which we are moved by the errors which certain men are trying to sow among you, and by the dissensions which are being aroused. Our intention is that, enlightened and strengthened by the encouragement of your common father, you may remain steadfast and without blemish in that faith by which We are united and by which alone We shall obtain salvation.
54. But now, following the ardent dictates of Our heart, We must tell you of the close and particular feelings of intimacy which draw Us near to you. To Our mind come those torments which rend asunder your bodies or your minds, particularly those which the most valiant witnesses of Christ are enduring, among whose number are several of Our Venerable Brethren in the episcopate. Daily at the altar We offer to the Divine Redeemer the trials of all of them, together with the prayers and sufferings of the whole Church.
55. Be constant then and put your trust in Him according to the words: "Cast all your anxiety upon Him, because He cares for you."
56. He sees clearly your anguish and your torments. He particularly finds acceptable the grief of soul and the tears which many of you, bishops and priests, religious and laymen, pour forth in secret when they behold the efforts of those who are striving to subvert the Christians among you. These tears, these bodily pains and tortures, the blood of the martyrs of past and present -- all will bring it about that, through the powerful intervention of Mary, the Virgin Mother of God, Queen of China, the Church in your native land will at long last regain its strength and in a calmer age, happier days will shine upon it. (Pope Pius XII, Ad Apostolorum Princeps, June 29, 1958.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio would have us believe that Pope Pius XII was wrong, that conditions are “different” now, repeating the same delusional belief that had been assert by Ratzinger/Benedict in 2007, namely, that we have to “move on” in order to “move forward.”
Pope Pius XII urged the suffering Catholics in Red China to maintain the Holy Faith unblemished, and what he wrote to them fifty-eight years ago applies to us now. We must maintain the Holy Faith unblemished and without making any compromise with the nonexistent legitimacy of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his false religious sect, the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
The passage from the Gospel according to Saint John that is read at Holy Mass today concerns Our Lord’s raising of Lazarus from the dead. The readings for Matins in today’s Divine Office contain an explication given by Saint Augustine of Hippo about this great miracle:
Ye remember that in our last reading we learnt how that the Lord escaped out of the hands of them which took up stones to stone Him, and went away again beyond Jordan, into the place where John at first baptized. John x. 31, 39, 40- While, then, the Lord still tarried there, Lazarus was sick at Bethany, which was a town near to Jerusalem. It was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped His Feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus was sick. Therefore his sisters sent unto Him. We know already whither it was that they sent, for we know where Jesus was He was gone away again beyond Jordan. His sisters sent unto Him, saying: Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick, in order that, if He so pleased, He might come and free him from his sickness. But Jesus healed not, that He might afterward quicken.
What therefore sent his sisters to say? Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick and no more. They said not: Come, for Jesus loved him; and to tell Him that he was sick was enough. They dared not to say: Come, and heal him, they dared not to say: Speak the word where Thou art, and it shall be done here. And wherefore should they not have said this if they had the faith which won the Centurion so much praise? He had said: Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldest come under my roof; but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed. Matth. viii. 8. But they said none of these things, only: Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick. It is enough that Thou shouldest know it. Thou art not one that lovest and leavest.
But some man will say: How shall Lazarus be a type of the sinner, and yet the Lord so love him? Let such a one hear the words of the same Lord, which He said: I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners. Matth. ix. 13. For if God had not loved sinners, He had not come down from heaven to earth. When Jesus heard that, He said: This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby. Such a glorification is no increase of majesty for Him, but of profit for us. He therefore meaneth to say: This sickness is not unto death, but for the working of a miracle, the which being wrought, if men will thereby believe in Christ, they shall escape the real death. Note especially how the Lord doth in this place declare Himself to be God, as it were by implication, for the sake of some which say that He is not the Son of God. (Saint Augustine of Hippo, as found in Matins, Divine Office, Friday of the Fourth Week of Lent.)
We must continue to pray to Our Lady as we finish the final two days of the Fourth Week of Lent before moving into Passiontide with First Vespers for Passion Sunday tomorrow, Saturday, March 12, 2016, the Feast of Pope Saint Gregory the Great and the Commemoration of Saturday of the Fourth Week of Lent so that we will persevere until the moment of our last breaths in order to benefit from the saving merits of the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
Our Lord raised us up from the death of Original Sin in the Baptismal font, and He raises up from the death of Mortal Sins, if any, and the sicknesses of our Venial Sins in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. We must beseech Him through the intercession of His Most Blessed Mother and His foster-father, our Good Saint Joseph, to be kept spotless in this life so that we will indeed know a resurrection of our bodies at the General Judgment of the living and the dead on the Last Day for them to be reunited with our souls so as to give the Most Blessed Trinity all glory, honor and praise forever in Paradise.
Obviously, we must, as always, spend time in prayer, if at all possible, which it is not for many Catholics around the world today in this time of apostasy and betrayal, before Our Lord's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament and pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, using the shield of Our Lady's Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel and the weapon of her Rosary to protect us from the contagion of apostasy and betrayal that is all around us. We must also, of course, make reparation for our own many sins by offering up all of our prayers and sufferings and sacrifices and humiliations and penances and mortifications and fastings to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must pray to her so that we can be instruments, unworthy though we may be, of planting the seeds for the restoration of Holy Mother Church and of the Social Reign of Christ the King so that everyone in the whole will exclaim with hearts consecrated to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
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.
Material Excerpted from "Red Army Inside the Vatican," February 23, 2012
[The text below was taken from “Red Army Inside of the Vatican, which was published on February 23, 2012. The text demonstrates that Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s policy of appeasing the Red Chinese and its puppet church, the so-called Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, is simply a continuation of what he inherited from his predecessor, Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
[The text is republished below as written four years ago. The apostasy is vast. The cooperation with evil is unimaginably grotesque. We must make no compromise with conciliarism at any time for any reason.]
The great synthesizer, Joseph Ratzinger, has released his long awaited letter to Chinese Catholics. The letter is a textbook example of Ratzinger's deeply held and intransigent belief in seeking a "synthesis" in the midst of conflicts, applying this belief in the case of the Catholic Church in Red China to a plea for those in the underground church there to "purify" their memories and to collaborate both with the bishops of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association (CPCA) who have been "recognized" the conciliar Vatican and even with those bishops and priests of the CPCA who have not been so recognized if their "spiritual good" demands such collaboration. In other words, Joseph Ratzinger is telling those Catholics who have suffered so much at the hands of the Communist authorities there that their struggle is over, that Catholicism means to pose no threat to the "legitimate" authority of the People's Republic of China. . . .
In other words, ladies and gentlemen, it is truly regrettable that the Red Chinese government promotes forced abortion and forced sterilization and limits families to have but one child, policies that are referred to implicitly in Ratzinger's letter when he writes, albeit obliquely and thus without any specificity whatsoever, of the "denial of unrenounceable principles of the faith," a statement that, quite ironically, ignores the simple fact that Communism itself is a "denial of unrenounceable principles of the faith." It is further regrettable that the bishops and the priests of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association have given their support to such policies by means or another since the creation of their schismatic and heretical sect in 1958 by the Red Chinese government.
How to resolve this?
Ah, collegiality and consultation, that's how! Each "bishop" recognized by the conciliar Vatican will have to "weigh the concrete possibilities of choice and to evaluate the possible consequences with the diocesan community," a process that will demand forming the "consciences of the faithful, with particular attention to the weakest: all this should be lived out in community and fraternal understanding, avoiding judgments and mutual condemnations." That is, those who want to oppose, quite rightly, all possible cooperation with Communism and the "bishops" and the "priests" who have been associated with the Red Chinese authorities are considered the "weakest" and and every effort must be made to form their consciences (by means of conciliarist brainwashing, you understand) in accord with Ratzinger's desire for a synthesis of the underground Church in Red China with the bishops of the CPCA who have been "recognized" by the conciliar Vatican.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's June 30, 2007, sellout of the underground Catholic Church in Red China so bewildered and confused the suffering Catholics there that the conciliar Vatican had to issue one of its infamous "clarifications" in what was condemned to be from the beginning yet another futile effort to bring order to the chaos of conciliar decisions. The "clarification," which was issued as a Compendium, prompted me to publishRed China: Workshop for the New Ecclesiology on May 29, 2009, which is a lengthy analysis of how Ratzinger/Benedict was using Red China and its Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association as a laboratory or a worship to effect "mergers" between persecuted Catholics and the very genuine schismatics and heretics who have been persecuting them while supporting every manner of evil promoted by the wicked Communist authorities.
The Compendium, of course, settled nothing. Indeed, I reiterated questions about it that I had raised in an earlier article, published in 2005, before I came to accept the plausibility of the doctrine of sedevacantism and that it applies to our circumstances today, to indicate that a "merger" between the state-sponsored rump church that was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Ad Apostolorum Principis on June 29, 1958, and the underground church in Red China would result in nothing other than a vicious persecution of any Catholic, whether bishop, priest or layman, who did not "accommodate" himself to the dictates of the "new ecclesiology." Perhaps it is useful to review to questions, stated in 2005 and reiterated in 2009, once again:
1) Have the schismatic bishops been forced to abjure their support of the Red Chinese government's anti-life population policies?
2) Will the "reconciled" bishops who have served in the rump church be able to publicly oppose the evils of the Red Chinese government?
3) Will the Vatican demand the complete dissolution of the entire structure of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association?
4) If not, will "underground" bishops and priests be required to register with the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association?
5) Is the Vatican going to require a cessation of the persecution and arrest of underground Catholics (bishops, priests, consecrated religious laity) in order to continue its "discussions" about the establishment of "diplomatic relations" with the "People's Republic" of China?
6) Will the Vatican require the marriages officiated by the bishops and the priests of the schismatic church in Red China to be regularized?
7) What will the Vatican do about the confessions heard by priests who were ordained by and associated with schismatic bishops nominated by the pro-abortion, pro-contraception, pro-sterilization, pro-torture, pro-slave-labor Red Chinese communist government?
8) Will the Red Chinese authorities be required by the Vatican to apologize for its torture, imprisonment, execution, and harassment of Catholics faithful to Rome? Will those authorities be forced by the Vatican to clear the names of all persons, living and deceased, who have been branded as "criminals" for adhering to an "illegal" religion?
9) Or will the the Vatican simply wave its bureaucratic hand and pretend, positivistically, that there has "always been one church in China" and seek to "educate" the Catholics who have been suffering in the underground church that they must accommodate themselves to the "actual reality" of the situation in their country and thus silence themselves about the evils being promoted by the government?(See There is Schism and Then There is Schism, 2005)
Question number nine has been answered very clearly in the affirmative by Ratzinger/Benedict's Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China and the recently-released Compendium. If you want a nutshell summary of the meaning of Ratzinger/Benedict's Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China and the recently-released Compendium, good readers, just read question nine and you will understand everything you need to know about their contents without having to wade through all of the contradictions and errors.
Even those conditions, whose letter and spirit were violated most knowingly by the lords of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, that had been imposed in 1988 and 1998 by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II concerning contacts between members of the underground Church in Red China were swept away by Ratzinger/Benedict in one fell swoop in his Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China:
Considering in the first place some positive developments of the situation of the Church in China, and in the second place the increased opportunities and greater ease in communication, and finally the requests sent to Rome by various Bishops and priests, I hereby revoke all the faculties previously granted in order to address particular pastoral necessities that emerged in truly difficult times.
Let the same be applied to all directives of a pastoral nature, past and recent. The doctrinal principles that inspired them now find a new application in the directives contained herein. (Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China, June 29, 2007.)
There has been positivism in the mind of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, reflected in the body of his Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China. Positive developments? Joseph Ratzinger's Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China is a surrender of the faithful Catholics in the underground Church in Red China in an pathetic effort to advance the false premises of his "new ecclesiology." All of the verbiage in Ratzinger/Benedict's Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China is simply a smokescreen to sweep away the "restrictions" of the past and to place the burden of "reconciliation" in Red China upon the very Catholics who have suffered so much and for so long.
Behold the "Fruit" of "Reconciliation" in Red China
Those who have followed events in Red China since the issuance of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's Letter five years ago and the conciliar Vatican'sCompendium three years ago now know that the persecution of the long suffering Catholics in the underground, people who believe that they are being "loyal" to a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter, has continued. The very man for whose Papal Primary they have suffered for so long has betrayed them because he is not the Vicar of Christ. He is but a figure of Antichrist. Those who desire "reconciliation" or "official recognition" ought to learn that the "pope" who is going to "restore" what is believed to be the Catholic Church is single-minded in amalgamating those who have disparate beliefs into his One World Ecumenical Church as long as they learn to be "silent" and accept his nonexistent "authority" to surrender them to all manner of wolves after first having refused to see him as wolf in his own right who is dressed in the clothing of a shepherd.
Here is a very graphic case in point, as found on the anti-sedevacantist Tradition in Action website, concerning an underground priest in Red China who was relased from prison two years ago and then arrested again as soon as soon as he had left the prison where had been incarcerated unjustly. So much for Ratzinger/Benedict's "reconciliation" plans:
Fr Peter Wang, a priest of the Underground Catholic Church in the Diocese of Xiwanzi, China was a free man for a few minutes. The Communist State released him on July 24, 2010, then immediately arrested him again as he left the prison where he spent the last three years.
Some relatives and fellow Catholics were waiting to welcome him. He had taken only a few steps when four policemen pushed him into a car and took him off again to the Communist authorities. Originally, he had been sentenced on trumped-up allegations of organizing an illegal meeting to discuss plans for the establishing another underground parish and for using an official parish seal without government permission. The real reason, everyone knows, is that he refuses to join the Communist-run “Catholic Church,” the Chinese Patriotic Association (CPA). The release and re-arrest appears to be just a psychological stratagem to coerce him to do so.
It is bad enough that a faithful priest of the underground Catholic Church is facing intense pressure from the CPA to join the Communist organization. I believe that Fr. Wang, like so many heroic priests who have suffered persecution and even death in the underground Church, would hold out against government coercion. The arrests and re-arrest only serve to confirm his resolve to remain faithful to the Holy Father and Catholic Faith. Until some years ago, the tragedy ended there.
But now there is a new, appalling tool of compulsion that has been added to the picture. Today he is being pressured by the Vicar of Christ to make concessions to the Patriotic Association. I am not certain he will hold out against that kind of pressure.
Three years ago, Benedict XVI sent a Letter to the Chinese Catholics urging reconciliation. The ones being urged to reconcile were not, however, the members of the above-ground CPA, who enjoy the full favor of the Communist government, which officially and in practice heads it. No, it was the members of the persecuted underground Catholic Church, faithful to our Holy Faith and the Pontiff, who were being urged to get “reconciled ” with the Patriotic Association, and through it, with Communism.
Many Catholics simply could not believe the Pope was asking for such a concession to Communism. So the Vatican issued another document, a Letter of Clarification, stating that it is exactly such submission to Communism that Rome is urging. Since then, many in the underground Church – pressured by the Vatican and the Chinese Communist government – have joined the Patriotic Association. For example, Bishop Francis An Shuxin, who had long resisted force by the Communist government to join the CPA, succumbed under Vatican pressures. He admits being “torn” about making the decision, “I refused to join the CPA at first after I was released in 2006,” he said. “I changed my mind after reading the Pope’s letter.” (2) In that Letter, Benedict XVI told underground bishops to join the State agencies for the sake of "unity.”
This has raised confusion in the ranks of China’s underground Catholic Church. But little by little what was almost inevitable is taking place: The underground communities are joining the government-sanctioned churches. A merger is taking place.
A good example is Rev. Zhang Liang of Tianjin, a member of the CPA who makes overtures to underground Catholics by showing them a framed certificate from Pope Benedict XVI, which he displays to justify his position. “The Pope approves me, so you should accept me,” is what he insinuates. What he tells the press is this, “Pope Benedict issued a papal letter, and now we (the underground Church and the Communist-run church) in Tianjin have reconciled.”
It was, in fact, the underground Bishop of Tianjin, Stephen Li Side, who urged his flock to worship in state-sanctioned churches. After the papal letter, resistance seemed futile. For him and many others, the papal letter was the “turning point.”
This policy of ‘union’ received another strong spur forward this month from a letter to Chinese Bishops and priests bearing the signatures of Cardinal Ivan Dias and Archbishop Robert Sarah, respectively prefect and secretary of the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. The letter is another Vatican support for the submission of underground Catholics to the CPA.
The text stresses the “duty of union” with all the members of the “ecclesial community.” It is this lack of unity – not Communism or unorthodox teaching – that is the “greatest danger” to the Church. This new Vatican letter concludes: “Let us praise the Lord for your efforts, accomplished and ongoing, for unity within the Church, in faithful response to the indications given by the Holy Father in the Letter he addressed to you on 27 May 2007, and for the results already obtained. May God bless your initiatives so that unity of ministers among themselves and between them and their flock may be ever stronger in Christ and in His Church ‘ad majorem Dei gloriam.’” (4)
So, now to compromise with Communism adds to the greater glory of God…
The Xiwanzi underground Catholic Diocese to which Fr. Wang belongs has 15,000 faithful, who to date have continued to resist ‘reconciliation.’ For the past few years local police, incited by the CPA, have carried out a strong campaign of intimidation against its faithful priests and Bishops.
I can’t help but wonder how long Fr. Wang – and others like him – will hold out when it is the Vatican and Pope himself who are urging the priests and Bishops to compromise with Communism. Surely they need our prayers. ( Pope Benedict + CPA = Prison for Fr. Wang.)
Growing the One World Ecumenical Church by Amalgamation
Yes, you see, one of the many ways by which Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has been growing the One World Ecumenical Church is by amalgamating different groups together without demanding any abjuration of past errors. He demanded nothing from the Red Chinese authorities five years ago. Nothing. It is was total surrender of the suffering Catholics in the underground church.
To refuse require any abjuration of errors, well, at least in most cases, is perfectly reasonably to the false "pontiff's" mind as he has not abjured of hispast errors that are the foundation of his current apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges. Ratzinger/Benedict believes that certain Protestant "theologians" who deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ "continue believing in a Christian manner" (see Cardinal Ratzinger). One who can assert this falsehood, you see, is not going to bother too terribly much with forcing others to abjure errors as what matters most to Ratzinger/Benedict is the very appearance of "unity" without doctrinal agreement that was condemned vigorously by Pope Pius XI inMortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.
Although there are many instances of individuals being received into the counterfeit church of conciliarism without making any abjuration of error whatsoever (see, for example, Not Such a Triumph After All), Ratzinger/Benedict has used four groups as the principal models of making the falsehood of the "new ecclesiology" for what can be called "unity devoid of the Catholic Faith."
This is what Ratzinger/Benedict has been attempting to forge with the Orthodox, especially by means of The Ravenna Document's assertion of Ratzinger's own false view of how the "Petrine ministry" was exercised and understood in the First Millennium, but also by refusing to demand that the Orthodox accept dogmatic pronouncements made by Holy Mother Church under the infallible guidance of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, in the Second Millennium. "Little" matters such as the doctrines on Original Sin, Purgatory, Papal Infallibility the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary as defined by the authority of the Catholic Church, the indissolubility of marriage, and the prohibition of all forms of contraception, to name just a few, can be pretty much just swept under the rug for the sake of the bear hug of ecumaniacal "unity." (See Anti-Apostles All.)
Ratzinger/Benedict also has been attempting to use the example of the disaffected "Anglo-Catholics" of the "worldwide Anglican Communion" to demonstrate how "open" the counterfeit church of conciliarism is to the "traditions" of Protestantism, including liturgical books deemed heretical by Pope Saint Pius V in Regnans in Excelsis, March 5, 1570. Abjuration of error? Ah, not necessary for the Orthodox or for the Anglicans. (See Defaming The English Martyrs, Apostasy: A Model of Reconciliation, and Still Defaming The English Martyrs.)
Thus, one of the most insidious examples of Ratzinger/Benedict's quest for "unity devoid of the Catholic Faith" involves his monstrous sellout of the underground Catholics in Red China, long suffering souls who have placed their hope in the "pope" after decades of persecution only to find themselves having been told, in effect, to shut up and join up with the Communist rump church, the so-called Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association. Ratzinger/Benedict has stated in so many words that what he asserts in the Catholic Church has no interest in undermining the structures of the Red Chinese government, meaning that he is not only perfectly willing to accept the legitimacy of that government (as opposed to accepting the actual fact of its existence without conceding its nonexistent legitimacy) but to urge the long suffering Catholics of the underground to cooperate with the Communist authorities in full violation of Pope Pius XI's specific prohibition stated in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937, against any such cooperation.
Then again, there has long been a veritable "red army" inside of the Vatican that has held it captive for over half a century now. For examples of how the conciliar "popes" have collaborated with Communist regimes, see Rebels in Rerun Season, part one.