A Betrayal Worthy of the Antichrist
Thomas A. Droleskey
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.
Here are are several important passages contained in the betrayal of Chinese Catholics by a figure of the Antichrist posing as a false "bishop" and a false "pope:"
Given this difficult situation, not a few members of the Catholic community are asking whether recognition from the civil authorities – necessary in order to function publicly – somehow compromises communion with the universal Church. I am fully aware that this problem causes painful disquiet in the hearts of Pastors and faithful. In this regard I maintain, in the first place, that the requisite and courageous safeguarding of the deposit of faith and of sacramental and hierarchical communion is not of itself opposed to dialogue with the authorities concerning those aspects of the life of the ecclesial community that fall within the civil sphere. There would not be any particular difficulties with acceptance of the recognition granted by civil authorities on condition that this does not entail the denial of unrenounceable principles of faith and of ecclesiastical communion. In not a few particular instances, however, indeed almost always, in the process of recognition the intervention of certain bodies obliges the people involved to adopt attitudes, make gestures and undertake commitments that are contrary to the dictates of their conscience as Catholics. I understand, therefore, how in such varied conditions and circumstances it is difficult to determine the correct choice to be made. For this reason the Holy See, after restating the principles, leaves the decision to the individual Bishop who, having consulted his presbyterate, is better able to know the local situation, to weigh the concrete possibilities of choice and to evaluate the possible consequences within the diocesan community. It could be that the final decision does not obtain the consensus of all the priests and faithful. I express the hope, however, that it will be accepted, albeit with suffering, and that the unity of the diocesan community with its own Pastor will be maintained.
It would be good, finally, if Bishops and priests, with truly pastoral hearts, were to take every possible step to avoid giving rise to situations of scandal, seizing opportunities to form the consciences of the faithful, with particular attention to the weakest: all this should be lived out in communion and in fraternal understanding, avoiding judgements and mutual condemnations. In this case too, it must be kept in mind, especially where there is little room for freedom, that in order to evaluate the morality of an act it is necessary to devote particular care to establishing the real intentions of the person concerned, in addition to the objective shortcoming. Every case, then, will have to be pondered individually, taking account of the circumstances. . . .
In not a few situations, then, you have faced the problem of concelebration of the Eucharist. In this regard, I remind you that this presupposes, as conditions, profession of the same faith and hierarchical communion with the Pope and with the universal Church. Therefore it is licit to concelebrate with Bishops and with priests who are in communion with the Pope, even if they are recognized by the civil authorities and maintain a relationship with entities desired by the State and extraneous to the structure of the Church, provided – as was said earlier (cf. section 7 above, paragraph 8) – that this recognition and this relationship do not entail the denial of unrenounceable principles of the faith and of ecclesiastical communion.
The lay faithful too, who are animated by a sincere love for Christ and for the Church, must not hesitate to participate in the Eucharist celebrated by Bishops and by priests who are in full communion with the Successor of Peter and are recognized by the civil authorities. The same applies for all the other sacraments.
Concerning Bishops whose consecrations took place without the pontifical mandate yet respecting the Catholic rite of episcopal ordination, the resulting problems must always be resolved in the light of the principles of Catholic doctrine. Their ordination – as I have already said (cf. section 8 above, paragraph 12) – is illegitimate but valid, just as priestly ordinations conferred by them are valid, and sacraments administered by such Bishops and priests are likewise valid. Therefore the faithful, taking this into account, where the eucharistic celebration and the other sacraments are concerned, must, within the limits of the possible, seek Bishops and priests who are in communion with the Pope: nevertheless, where this cannot be achieved without grave inconvenience, they may, for the sake of their spiritual good, turn also to those who are not in communion with the Pope. (Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red 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
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
Ratzinger's letter specifically revokes a set of directives issued by Karol Wojtyla in 1998 that forbade any cooperation with the bishops and priests of the CPCA, applying once again his belief that something might be true at one point and then become obsolete at a later date (which is his entire Hegelian approach to the very nature of truth, the philosophical underpinning of his own personal Modernism and conciliarism in general):
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. (Letter to Bishops, Priests, Consecrated Persons and Lay Faithful of Red China.)
Positive "developments of the situation of the Church in China"?
This is the sort of rank positivism that leads conciliarists to speak of the "glorious" fruits of the "springtime of the Church" represented by the false "Second" Vatican Council and the whole conciliarist ethos it helped to spawn.
A bishop of the underground church in Red China was imprisoned for seventeen days recently, being released only in the past week.
Well, I guess one who believes that the "inculturation of the Gospel" in the liturgy and that false ideas, both religious and philosophical, can "contribute" to the "betterment" of men and their societies can minimize the ongoing persecution of Catholics in the underground church in Red China by various gratuitous references (contained in various parts of the just released letter) and pretend that the conciliar Vatican's "recognition" of "bishops" appointed first by the Communist authorities represents "progress." Only a positivist, a synthesizer and a Modernist can see something "positive" in silence about Communism and the evils that a Communist regime promotes in civil society.
The revocation of the 1998 directives that forbade cooperation with the bishops and priests of the CPCA demonstrates once again the complete and utter absurdity of trying to oppose various evils, whether civil or ecclesiastical, with the "tools" provided by the authorities of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, who do to the Catholic Faith what Communism does to order in the civil state. That is, today's "directives" from conciliar officials can be revoked tomorrow, leaving those who have relied upon them to fight this or that evil completely bereft of any defenses once said "directives" are revised or revoked.
This is what has happened now in the case of Catholics in the underground church in China and their supporters in this country who have relied most tenaciously on the 1998 directives.
It is what happened to many of us in 1994 who had been using conciliar documents to oppose "altar girls" before Karol Wojtyla "permitted" them, thereby making complete monkeys out of those of us who had been fighting what turned out to be a completely meaningless battle in a counterfeit church.
The revocation of the 1998 directives also reveals that their very issuance was a smokescreen designed to falsely "reassure" underground Catholics in Red China while the Vatican was supporting in the 1990s the training of seminarians for the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association in American seminaries, including Saint Joseph's Seminary, Dunwoodie, Yonkers, New York, which is the seminary of the Archdiocese of New York.
A former friend, Father Benedict Groeschel, C.F.R., told me in the late-1990s that this was all "hush, hush," as he termed it, and that the situation in Red China was very complex, full of double and triple agents. Father Groeschel said that the training of the CPCA priests at Saint Joseph's had the approval, at some level or another, of the Vatican. The hope was to "integrate" CPCA priests, who had to support the government's anti-life policies, into the life of the underground Church when a "reconciliation" could occur at some point in the future.
This issue of double and triple agents amongst Catholics in Red China raises the whole specter of the infiltration of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church universally by the forces of Judeo-Masonry and Communism in the century and the decades before the false "Second" Vatican Council. The revelation by conciliar officials in Poland a few days ago that about ten percent of the "bishops," some legitimate and some not, obviously, in that country had been agents of the secret police while Poland was under overt Communist rule from 1945 to 1989 cannot begin to address how many bishops and priests in other countries, including in the United States of America, were paid and trained infiltrators designed to corrupt doctrine and worship. That this demonic mixture in Red China is being openly endorsed should convince a few people of good will that Ratzinger sees no danger in the mixture of truth and error, all of his protestations about the importance of maintaining doctrinal fidelity to the contrary notwithstanding.
Indeed, Ratzinger's letter to the Catholics in Red China restates and reiterates the Modernist heresy that the Catholic Church does not wish to "change" structures of civil governance. While the specific forms of civil governance are indeed beyond the competency of the Church and is left, as Pope Leo XIII noted in Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, and Libertas, June 20, 1888, to individual men in individual circumstances to devise and administer, the Catholic Church does indeed seek the conversion of men and their nations to her maternal bosom, a conversion that will result in the subordination of the policies of the civil state in all that pertains to the good of souls to her divinely-appointed exercise of the Social Reign of Christ the King. Joseph Ratzinger has no intention of even acknowledging, no less making his own, the perennial teaching of the Catholic Church contained in Pope Saint Pius X's Vehementer Nos, February 6, 1906:
That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. Our illustrious predecessor, Leo XIII, especially, has frequently and magnificently expounded Catholic teaching on the relations which should subsist between the two societies. "Between them," he says, "there must necessarily be a suitable union, which may not improperly be compared with that existing between body and soul.-"Quaedam intercedat necesse est ordinata colligatio (inter illas) quae quidem conjunctioni non immerito comparatur, per quam anima et corpus in homine copulantur." He proceeds: "Human societies cannot, without becoming criminal, act as if God did not exist or refuse to concern themselves with religion, as though it were something foreign to them, or of no purpose to them.... As for the Church, which has God Himself for its author, to exclude her from the active life of the nation, from the laws, the education of the young, the family, is to commit a great and pernicious error. -- "Civitates non possunt, citra scellus, gerere se tamquam si Deus omnino non esset, aut curam religionis velut alienam nihilque profuturam abjicere.... Ecclesiam vero, quam Deus ipse constituit, ab actione vitae excludere, a legibus, ab institutione adolescentium, a societate domestica, magnus et perniciousus est error."
Moreover, unlike the counterfeit church of conciliarism, the Catholic Church has denounced Communism as evil and prohibited any and all cooperation with Communist authorities. There is no way to reconcile Ratzinger's blithe acceptance of the "legitimacy" of the Red Chinese Communist government and the belief that some "good" for the Catholic Faith can be accomplished by according to it some degree of authority over religious matters with this direct prohibition against all such quisling actions issued by Pope Pius XI in Divini Redemptoris, March 19, 1937:
In this renewal the Catholic Press can play a prominent part. Its foremost duty is to foster in various attractive ways an ever better understanding of social doctrine. It should, too, supply accurate and complete information on the activity of the enemy and the means of resistance which have been found most effective in various quarters. It should offer useful suggestions and warn against the insidious deceits with which Communists endeavor, all too successfully, to attract even men of good faith.
On this point We have already insisted in Our Allocution of May 12th of last year, but We believe it to be a duty of special urgency, Venerable Brethren, to call your attention to it once again. In the beginning Communism showed itself for what it was in all its perversity; but very soon it realized that it was thus alienating the people. It has therefore changed its tactics, and strives to entice the multitudes by trickery of various forms, hiding its real designs behind ideas that in themselves are good and attractive. Thus, aware of the universal desire for peace, the leaders of Communism pretend to be the most zealous promoters and propagandists in the movement for world amity. Yet at the same time they stir up a class-warfare which causes rivers of blood to flow, and, realizing that their system offers no internal guarantee of peace, they have recourse to unlimited armaments. Under various names which do not suggest Communism, they establish organizations and periodicals with the sole purpose of carrying their ideas into quarters otherwise inaccessible. They try perfidiously to worm their way even into professedly Catholic and religious organizations. Again, without receding an inch from their subversive principles, they invite Catholics to collaborate with them in the realm of so-called humanitarianism and charity; and at times even make proposals that are in perfect harmony with the Christian spirit and the doctrine of the Church. Elsewhere they carry their hypocrisy so far as to encourage the belief that Communism, in countries where faith and culture are more strongly entrenched, will assume another and much milder form. It will not interfere with the practice of religion. It will respect liberty of conscience. There are some even who refer to certain changes recently introduced into soviet legislation as a proof that Communism is about to abandon its program of war against God.
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.
But "unless the Lord keep the city, he watcheth in vain that keepeth it." And so, as a final and most efficacious remedy, We recommend, Venerable Brethren, that in your dioceses you use the most practical means to foster and intensify the spirit of prayer joined with Christian penance. When the Apostles asked the Savior why they had been unable to drive the evil spirit from a demoniac, Our Lord answered: "This kind is not cast out but by prayer and fasting." So, too, the evil which today torments humanity can be conquered only by a world-wide crusade of prayer and penance. We ask especially the Contemplative Orders, men and women, to redouble their prayers and sacrifices to obtain from heaven efficacious aid for the Church in the present struggle. Let them implore also the powerful intercession of the Immaculate Virgin who, having crushed the head of the serpent of old, remains the sure protectress and invincible "Help of Christians."
Is there any discussion in Joseph Ratzinger's letter to the Catholics of Red China that "Communism is intrinsically wrong"? Indeed not. He rejects Pope Pius XI's categorical statement that "no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever." Yes, the Catholic Church wants to see Communist governments overthrown by the force of Our Lady's Heavenly intercession and the efforts of courageous Catholics to convert individual Communists in countries where its pernicious evil holds civil power unjustly and illegitimately. This is not on Ratzinger's "to do" list, shall we say. The great synthesizer wants everyone to "love" one another without stating clearly that authentic Charity is premised on a love of the truth and a hatred of error.
Conciliarism, however, contends that error not only has rights but can redound to the good of man. This is what Angelo Roncalli wrote in Pacem in Terris, April 11, 1963:
It is, therefore, especially to the point to make a clear distinction between false philosophical teachings regarding the nature, origin, and destiny of the universe and of man, and movements which have a direct bearing either on economic and social questions, or cultural matters or on the organization of the state, even if these movements owe their origin and inspiration to these false tenets. While the teaching once it has been clearly set forth is no longer subject to change, the movements, precisely because they take place in the midst of changing conditions, are readily susceptible of change. Besides, who can deny that those movements, in so far as they conform to the dictates of right reason and are interpreters of the lawful aspirations of the human person, contain elements that are positive and deserving of approval?
For these reasons it can at times happen that meetings for the attainment of some practical results which previously seemed completely useless now are either actually useful or may be looked upon as profitable for the future. But to decide whether this moment has arrived, and also to lay down the ways and degrees in which work in common might be possible for the achievement of economic, social, cultural, and political ends which are honorable and useful: these are the problems which can only be solved with the virtue of prudence, which is the guiding light of the virtues that regulate the moral life, both individual and social. Therefore, as far as Catholics are concerned, this decision rests primarily with those who live and work in the specific sectors of human society in which those problems arise, always, however, in accordance with the principles of the natural law, with the social doctrine of the church, and with the directives of ecclesiastical authorities. For it must not be forgotten that the Church has the right and the duty not only to safeguard the principles of ethics and religion, but also to intervene authoritatively with Her children in the temporal sphere, when there is a question of judging the application of those principles to concrete cases.
This is almost identical to the passage from Ratzinger's letter to the Catholics of Red China in which he leaves to the "recognized" bishops" of Red China to determine what degree of cooperation will take place within their dioceses with governmental authorities and/or with the "unapproved" "bishops" of the CPCA. There is no need to denounce error and to oppose it. A false, Modernist conception of "Charity" will conquer all. Go tell that to Saint Dominic, who opposed the Albigenses, who were, by the way, killing Catholics and burning the homes and the cattle of Catholics and destroying Catholic churches and shrines much like the Red Chinese have done and are continuing to do, by the power of his preaching and by the use of the Heavenly weapon that Our Lady herself specifically gave him, namely, her Most Holy Rosary.
Roncalli's belief that movements that were organized according to false principles was his backhanded way of reviving the philosophy of the Sillon, which mixed truth and error, that was condemned so decisively by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:
There was a time when the Sillon, as such, was truly Catholic. It recognized but one moral force - Catholicism; and the Sillonists were wont to proclaim that Democracy would have to be Catholic or would not exist at all. A time came when they changed their minds. They left to each one his religion or his philosophy. They ceased to call themselves Catholics and, for the formula "Democracy will be Catholic" they substituted "Democracy will not be anti-Catholic", any more than it will be anti-Jewish or anti-Buddhist. This was the time of "the Greater Sillon". For the construction of the Future City they appealed to the workers of all religions and all sects. These were asked but one thing: to share the same social ideal, to respect all creeds, and to bring with them a certain supply of moral force. Admittedly: they declared that “The leaders of the Sillon place their religious faith above everything. But can they deny others the right to draw their moral energy from whence they can? In return, they expect others to respect their right to draw their own moral energy from the Catholic Faith. Accordingly they ask all those who want to change today's society in the direction of Democracy, not to oppose each other on account of the philosophical or religious convictions which may separate them, but to march hand in hand, not renouncing their convictions, but trying to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions. Perhaps a union will be effected on this ground of emulation between souls holding different religious or philosophical convictions.” And they added at the same time (but how could this be accomplished?) that “the Little Catholic Sillon will be the soul of the Greater Cosmopolitan Sillon.”
Recently, the term “Greater Sillon” was discarded and a new organization was born without modifying, quite the contrary, the spirit and the substratum of things: “In order to organize in an orderly manner the different forces of activity, the Sillon still remains as a Soul, a Spirit, which will pervade the groups and inspire their work.” Thus, a host of new groups, Catholic, Protestant, Free-Thinking, now apparently autonomous, are invited to set to work: “Catholic comrades will work between themselves in a special organization and will learn and educate themselves. Protestant and Free-Thinking Democrats will do likewise on their own side. But all of us, Catholics, Protestants and Free-Thinkers will have at heart to arm young people, not in view of the fratricidal struggle, but in view of a disinterested emulation in the field of social and civic virtues.”
These declarations and this new organization of the Sillonist action call for very serious remarks.
Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. The new Sillonists cannot pretend that they are merely working on “the ground of practical realities” where differences of belief do not matter. Their leader is so conscious of the influence which the convictions of the mind have upon the result of the action, that he invites them, whatever religion they may belong to, “to provide on the ground of practical realities, the proof of the excellence of their personal convictions.” And with good reason: indeed, all practical results reflect the nature of one’s religious convictions, just as the limbs of a man down to his finger-tips, owe their very shape to the principle of life that dwells in his body.
This being said, what must be thought of the promiscuity in which young Catholics will be caught up with heterodox and unbelieving folk in a work of this nature? Is it not a thousand-fold more dangerous for them than a neutral association? What are we to think of this appeal to all the heterodox, and to all the unbelievers, to prove the excellence of their convictions in the social sphere in a sort of apologetic contest? Has not this contest lasted for nineteen centuries in conditions less dangerous for the faith of Catholics? And was it not all to the credit of the Catholic Church? What are we to think of this respect for all errors, and of this strange invitation made by a Catholic to all the dissidents to strengthen their convictions through study so that they may have more and more abundant sources of fresh forces? What are we to think of an association in which all religions and even Free-Thought may express themselves openly and in complete freedom? For the Sillonists who, in public lectures and elsewhere, proudly proclaim their personal faith, certainly do not intend to silence others nor do they intend to prevent a Protestant from asserting his Protestantism, and the skeptic from affirming his skepticism. Finally, what are we to think of a Catholic who, on entering his study group, leaves his Catholicism outside the door so as not to alarm his comrades who, “dreaming of disinterested social action, are not inclined to make it serve the triumph of interests, coteries and even convictions whatever they may be”? Such is the profession of faith of the New Democratic Committee for Social Action which has taken over the main objective of the previous organization and which, they say, “breaking the double meaning which surround the Greater Sillon both in reactionary and anti-clerical circles”, is now open to all men “who respect moral and religious forces and who are convinced that no genuine social emancipation is possible without the leaven of generous idealism.”
Alas! yes, the double meaning has been broken: the social action of the Sillon is no longer Catholic. The Sillonist, as such, does not work for a coterie, and “the Church”, he says, “cannot in any sense benefit from the sympathies that his action may stimulate.” A strange situation, indeed! They fear lest the Church should profit for a selfish and interested end by the social action of the Sillon, as if everything that benefited the Church did not benefit the whole human race! A curious reversal of notions! The Church might benefit from social action! As if the greatest economists had not recognized and proved that it is social action alone which, if serious and fruitful, must benefit the Church! But stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, "the reign of love and justice" with workers coming from everywhere, of all religions and of no religion, with or without beliefs, so long as they forego what might divide them - their religious and philosophical convictions, and so long as they share what unites them - a "generous idealism and moral forces drawn from whence they can" When we consider the forces, knowledge, and supernatural virtues which are necessary to establish the Christian City, and the sufferings of millions of martyrs, and the light given by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, and the self-sacrifice of all the heroes of charity, and a powerful hierarchy ordained in heaven, and the streams of Divine Grace - the whole having been built up, bound together, and impregnated by the life and spirit of Jesus Christ, the Wisdom of God, the Word made man - when we think, I say, of all this, it is frightening to behold new apostles eagerly attempting to do better by a common interchange of vague idealism and civic virtues. What are they going to produce? What is to come of this collaboration? A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.
We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion (for Sillonism, so the leaders have said, is a religion) more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the "Kingdom of God". - "We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind."
And now, overwhelmed with the deepest sadness, We ask Ourselves, Venerable Brethren, what has become of the Catholicism of the Sillon? Alas! this organization which formerly afforded such promising expectations, this limpid and impetuous stream, has been harnessed in its course by the modern enemies of the Church, and is now no more than a miserable affluent of the great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force, and the oppression of the weak, and of all those who toil and suffer.
We know only too well the dark workshops in which are elaborated these mischievous doctrines which ought not to seduce clear-thinking minds. The leaders of the Sillon have not been able to guard against these doctrines. The exaltation of their sentiments, the undiscriminating good-will of their hearts, their philosophical mysticism, mixed with a measure of illuminism, have carried them away towards another Gospel which they thought was the true Gospel of Our Savior. To such an extent that they speak of Our Lord Jesus Christ with a familiarity supremely disrespectful, and that - their ideal being akin to that of the Revolution - they fear not to draw between the Gospel and the Revolution blasphemous comparisons for which the excuse cannot be made that they are due to some confused and over-hasty composition.
We wish to draw your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this distortion of the Gospel and to the sacred character of Our Lord Jesus Christ, God and man, prevailing within the Sillon and elsewhere. As soon as the social question is being approached, it is the fashion in some quarters to first put aside the divinity of Jesus Christ, and then to mention only His unlimited clemency, His compassion for all human miseries, and His pressing exhortations to the love of our neighbor and to the brotherhood of men. True, Jesus has loved us with an immense, infinite love, and He came on earth to suffer and die so that, gathered around Him in justice and love, motivated by the same sentiments of mutual charity, all men might live in peace and happiness. But for the realization of this temporal and eternal happiness, He has laid down with supreme authority the condition that we must belong to His Flock, that we must accept His doctrine, that we must practice virtue, and that we must accept the teaching and guidance of Peter and his successors. Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross. These are teachings that it would be wrong to apply only to one's personal life in order to win eternal salvation; these are eminently social teachings, and they show in Our Lord Jesus Christ something quite different from an inconsistent and impotent humanitarianism.
As for you, Venerable Brethren, carry on diligently with the work of the Saviour of men by emulating His gentleness and His strength. Minister to every misery; let no sorrow escape your pastoral solicitude; let no lament find you indifferent. But, on the other hand, preach fearlessly their duties to the powerful and to the lowly; it is your function to form the conscience of the people and of the public authorities. The social question will be much nearer a solution when all those concerned, less demanding as regards their respective rights, shall fulfill their duties more exactingly.
Moreover, since in the clash of interests, and especially in the struggle against dishonest forces, the virtue of man, and even his holiness are not always sufficient to guarantee him his daily bread, and since social structures, through their natural interplay, ought to be devised to thwart the efforts of the unscrupulous and enable all men of good will to attain their legitimate share of temporal happiness, We earnestly desire that you should take an active part in the organization of society with this objective in mind. And, to this end, whilst your priests will zealously devote efforts to the sanctification of souls, to the defense of the Church, and also to works of charity in the strict sense, you shall select a few of them, level-headed and of active disposition, holders of Doctors’ degrees in philosophy and theology, thoroughly acquainted with the history of ancient and modern civilizations, and you shall set them to the not-so-lofty but more practical study of the social science so that you may place them at the opportune time at the helm of your works of Catholic action. However, let not these priests be misled, in the maze of current opinions, by the miracles of a false Democracy. Let them not borrow from the Rhetoric of the worst enemies of the Church and of the people, the high-flown phrases, full of promises; which are as high-sounding as unattainable. Let them be convinced that the social question and social science did not arise only yesterday; that the Church and the State, at all times and in happy concert, have raised up fruitful organizations to this end; that the Church, which has never betrayed the happiness of the people by consenting to dubious alliances, does not have to free herself from the past; that all that is needed is to take up again, with the help of the true workers for a social restoration, the organisms which the Revolution shattered, and to adapt them, in the same Christian spirit that inspired them, to the new environment arising from the material development of today’s society. Indeed, the true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries, nor innovators: they are traditionalists.
We desire that the Sillonist youth, freed from their errors, far from impeding this work which is eminently worthy of your pastoral care, should bring to it their loyal and effective contribution in an orderly manner and with befitting submission.
The Catholic Church has never accorded error any rights, no less sought an accommodation with it by simply "letting it be" to die off on its own without being directly confronted and openly opposed and denounced. Consider Pope Gregory XVI's Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832:
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.
Here We must include that harmful and never sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books, pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may be snatched from death again and again?
Pope Pius VI had stated quite specifically in Inscrutabile, December 25, 1775, that the bishops of the Catholic Church must oppose error and denounce it openly:
When they have spread this darkness abroad and torn religion out of men's hearts, these accursed philosophers proceed to destroy the bonds of union among men, both those which unite them to their rulers, and those which urge them to their duty. They keep proclaiming that man is born free and subject to no one, that society accordingly is a crowd of foolish men who stupidly yield to priests who deceive them and to kings who oppress them, so that the harmony of priest and ruler is only a monstrous conspiracy against the innate liberty of man.
Everyone must understand that such ravings and others like them, concealed in many deceitful guises, cause greater ruin to public calm the longer their impious originators are unrestrained. They cause a serious loss of souls redeemed by Christ's blood wherever their teaching spreads, like a cancer; it forces its way into public academies, into the houses of the great, into the palaces of kings, and even enters the sanctuary, shocking as it is to say so.
Consequently, you who are the salt of the earth, guardians and shepherds of the Lord's flock, whose business it is to fight the battles of the Lord, arise and gird on your sword, which is the word of God, and expel this foul contagion from your lands. How long are we to ignore the common insult to faith and Church? Let the words of Bernard arouse us like a lament of the spouse of Christ: "Of old was it foretold and the time of fulfillment is now at hand: Behold, in peace is my sorrow most sorrowful. It was sorrowful first when the martyrs died; afterwards it was more sorrowful in the fight with the heretics and now it is most sorrowful in the conduct of the members of the household.... The Church is struck within and so in peace is my sorrow most sorrowful. But what peace? There is peace and there is no peace. There is peace from the pagans and peace from the heretics, but no peace from the children. At that time the voice will lament: Sons did I rear and exalt, but they despised me. They despised me and defiled me by a bad life, base gain, evil traffic, and business conducted in the dark." Who can hear these tearful complaints of our most holy mother without feeling a strong urge to devote all his energy and effort to the Church, as he has promised? Therefore cast out the old leaven, remove the evil from your midst. Forcefully and carefully banish poisonous books from the eyes of your flock, and at once courageously set apart those who have been infected, to prevent them harming the rest. The holy Pope Leo used to say, "We can rule those entrusted to us only by pursuing with zeal for the Lord's faith those who destroy and those who are destroyed and by cutting them off from sound minds with the utmost severity to prevent the plague spreading." In doing this We exhort and advise you to be all of one mind and in harmony as you strive for the same object, just as the Church has one faith, one baptism, and one spirit. As you are joined together in the hierarchy, so you should unite equally with virtue and desire.
The affair is of the greatest importance since it concerns the Catholic faith, the purity of the Church, the teaching of the saints, the peace of the empire, and the safety of nations. Since it concerns the entire body of the Church, it is a special concern of yours because you are called to share in Our pastoral concern, and the purity of the faith is particularly entrusted to your watchfulness. "Now therefore, Brothers, since you are overseers among God's people and their soul depends on you, raise their hearts to your utterance," that they may stand fast in faith and achieve the rest which is prepared for believers only. Beseech, accuse, correct, rebuke and fear not: for ill-judged silence leaves in their error those who could be taught, and this is most harmful both to them and to you who should have dispelled the error. The holy Church is powerfully refreshed in the truth as it struggles zealously for the truth. In this divine work you should not fear either the force or favor of your enemies. The bishop should not fear since the anointing of the Holy Spirit has strengthened him: the shepherd should not be afraid since the prince of pastors has taught him by his own example to despise life itself for the safety of his flock: the cowardice and depression of the hireling should not dwell in a bishop's heart. Our great predecessor Gregory, in instructing the heads of the churches, said with his usual excellence: "Often imprudent guides in their fear of losing human favor are afraid to speak the right freely. As the word of truth has it, they guard their flock not with a shepherd's zeal but as hirelings do, since they flee when the wolf approaches by hiding themselves in silence.... A shepherd fearing to speak the right is simply a man retreating by keeping silent." But if the wicked enemy of the human race, the better to frustrate your efforts, ever brings it about that a plague of epidemic proportions is hidden from the religious powers of the world, please do not be terrified but walk in God's house in harmony, with prayer, and in truth, the three arms of our service. Remember that when the people of Juda were defiled, the best means of purification was the public reading to all, from the least to the greatest, of the book of the law lately found by the priest Helcias in the Lord's temple; at once the whole people agreed to destroy the abominations and seal a covenant in the Lord's presence to follow after the Lord and observe His precepts, testimonies and ceremonies with their whole heart and soul." For the same reason Josaphat sent priests and Levites to bring the book of the law throughout the cities of Juda and to teach the people. The proclamation of the divine word has been entrusted to your faith by divine, not human, authority. So assemble your people and preach to them the gospel of Jesus Christ. From that divine source and heavenly teaching draw draughts of true philosophy for your flock. Persuade them that subjects ought to keep faith and show obedience to those who by God's ordering lead and rule them. To those who are devoted to the ministry of the Church, give proofs of faith, continence, sobriety, knowledge, and liberality, that they may please Him to whom they have proved themselves and boast only of what is serious, moderate, and religious. But above all kindle in the minds of everyone that love for one another which Christ the Lord so often and so specifically praised. For this is the one sign of Christians and the bond of perfection.
Pope Pius XI, writing in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, specifically any and all notion that the Catholic Church would for a single moment tolerate the error of heretics and schismatics:
Let, therefore, the separated children draw nigh to the Apostolic See, set up in the City which Peter and Paul, the Princes of the Apostles, consecrated by their blood; to that See, We repeat, which is "the root and womb whence the Church of God springs," not with the intention and the hope that "the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" will cast aside the integrity of the faith and tolerate their errors, but, on the contrary, that they themselves submit to its teaching and government. Would that it were Our happy lot to do that which so many of Our predecessors could not, to embrace with fatherly affection those children, whose unhappy separation from Us We now bewail. Would that God our Savior, "Who will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth," would hear us when We humbly beg that He would deign to recall all who stray to the unity of the Church! In this most important undertaking We ask and wish that others should ask the prayers of Blessed Mary the Virgin, Mother of divine grace, victorious over all heresies and Help of Christians, that She may implore for Us the speedy coming of the much hoped-for day, when all men shall hear the voice of Her divine Son, and shall be "careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."
Ratzinger's "one Church in China" policy accepts the Communist Red Chinese government as "legitimate," overlooking how it came to power in 1949 (by means of a bloody revolution) and how it has sustained itself in power over the course of forty-eighty years (by the use of brute repression).
Oh, well, what can we expect from one who does not hold ecclesiastical power legitimately, from one who is the inheritor of a conciliar office that was once held by a man, Giovanni Montini, who betrayed Catholic priests behind the Iron Curtain to Soviet agents in order that his own perversity would not be exposed, from one who is the inheritor of a conciliar office that was once held by a man, Angelo Roncalli, who agreed to silence about Communism at the false "Second" Vatican Council in exchange for the presence of "representative" from the schismatic and heretical Russian Orthodox Church? Joseph Ratzinger, therefore, is doing nothing really new. Angelo Roncalli and Giovanni Montini, who sold out the late Josef Cardinal Mindszenty, repeatedly collaborated with Communist regimes with their policy of Ostpolitik.
Yes, the Communist government of Red China exercises civil power at the present moment. It does so illegitimately, however, and, as Pope Pius XI noted in Divini Redemptoris, it must not be accorded any degree of cooperation whatsoever.
Alas, what's the big deal about selling out faithful Catholics of the underground church in Red China when one has written the following about Catholicism's relationship to the false religion of Talmudic Judaism, that Catholics can "learn" from a "Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament," making a mockery of the magisterial authority given by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ exclusively and infallibly to the Catholic Church He founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope?
In its work, the Biblical Commission could not ignore the contemporary context, where the shock of the Shoah has put the whole question under a new light. Two main problems are posed: Can Christians, after all that has happened, still claim in good conscience to be the legitimate heirs of Israel's Bible? Have they the right to propose a Christian interpretation of this Bible, or should they not instead, respectfully and humbly, renounce any claim that, in the light of what has happened, must look like a usurpation? The second question follows from the first: In its presentation of the Jews and the Jewish people, has not the New Testament itself contributed to creating a hostility towards the Jewish people that provided a support for the ideology of those who wished to destroy Israel? The Commission set about addressing those two questions. It is clear that a Christian rejection of the Old Testament would not only put an end to Christianity itself as indicated above, but, in addition, would prevent the fostering of positive relations between Christians and Jews, precisely because they would lack common ground. In the light of what has happened, what ought to emerge now is a new respect for the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament. On this subject, the Document says two things. First it declares that “the Jewish reading of the Bible is a possible one, in continuity with the Jewish Scriptures of the Second Temple period, a reading analogous to the Christian reading, which developed in parallel fashion” (no. 22). It adds that Christians can learn a great deal from a Jewish exegesis practised for more than 2000 years; in return, Christians may hope that Jews can profit from Christian exegetical research (ibid.). I think this analysis will prove useful for the pursuit of Judeo-Christian dialogue, as well as for the interior formation of Christian consciousness. (Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Bible, published by the "Pontifical" Biblical Commission, May 31, 2001.)
A "Jewish reading of the Bible" is not possible. Such is a denial of the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity in Our Lady's Virginal and Immaculate Womb. This is heretical, not merely a proposition offensive to pious ears.
The man who wrote these words, Joseph Ratzinger, is the man who does not believe in seeking with urgency the unconditional conversion of all men, including Jews and Protestants and the Orthodox to the true Faith, thinking that "dialogue" will help to forge some kind of "synthesis" among people of divergent beliefs.
It is this belief in "synthesis" and his refusal to reject Communism in Red China openly.
It is this belief in "synthesis" that has led Ratzinger to accord the mantle of "legitimacy" on the leaders of those who oppress the Red Chinese people.
It is this belief in "synthesis," therefore, that has caused Ratzinger to sell out those Catholics in Red China who have been attacked and repressed by the Communists in civil power and who have been the unknowing victims of deceit from the conciliar Vatican, which has now told them to "kiss and make up" with heretics and schismatics without demanding an end to the errors of Communism and the evils it promotes in Red China at the present time.
Joseph Ratzinger's sellout of Catholics in the underground Church in Red China involves also a "purification of memory." While paying lip service to the suffering of faithful Catholics in Red China and their loyalty to the men they have believed to be true popes over the past six decades, calling them martyrs of the Faith and saying that their loyalty to the "pope" will have a reward in Heaven, he mentions no one by name, including the late Bishop of Shanghai, Ignatius Kung, who was imprisoned for over thirty years by the Red Chinese authorities, thus signifying, it is reasonable to conclude, that there will be no conciliar "canonization" process for this great witness of the Catholic Faith, who wrote out the Ordinary of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition in his own hand in Latin in a booklet while he was imprisoned. (Prison books confiscated one page after another for a long time. Having the patience of a saint, Bishop Kung, who was made a cardinal by Karol Wojtyla while imprisoned, just continued this project until his jailers gave up and let him write the Ordinary of the Mass in its entirety. Joseph Kung, the President of the Cardinal Kung Foundation, showed us this booklet in 2002 in Stamford, Connecticut.) Forgetting about past injustices to Catholics in Red China means also forgetting about past Catholic heroes from this point forward.
The concept "Purification of memory" comes straight from Communism, popularized by George Orwell in 1984. It has been used by Karol Wojtyla to "apologize"for much of the history of the Catholic Church, including the Crusades and even for much of the Catholic Church's missionary work, including her work in China itself that was led by Father Matthew Ricci, S.J. It is no accident that Modernist revolutionaries would seek to popularize such a demonic phrase in what passes for the life of the "Catholic" Church as part of a preternatural effort to seek accommodations between Catholics and a system of government that will never change without active efforts to denounce its evils and to work openly for its conversion. One must forgive one's persecutors. One most also oppose those who persist in a system of belief and action that is evil of its nature and is thus opposed to the pursuit of the common temporal good in light of the pursuit of man's Last End.
The "purification of memory" extends not only to Ratzinger's plea to put aside enmities in Red China that he deems to be part of the past, ignoring that the Red Chinese government has no desire to change any of its ways about anything and that Western "trade" with it has done nothing but further embolden its repressive rule as its poisonous products, manufactured by virtual slave labor, are exported by profiteers around the world, but to the actual "memory" of the Catholic Church of which he claims to be the visible head on earth. Ratzinger's letter to the Catholics of Red China contains fifty-six footnotes, not one of which predates the conciliar era. Not one. No reference to Pope Pius XI's Divini Redemptoris. No reference to Pope Pius XII's two encyclical letters on the situation of the Catholics in Red China,
Ad Sinarum Gentem, October 7, 1954, and
Ad Apostolorum Principis, June 29, 1958, and Pope Pius XII's plea for prayers for the Church in Red China,
Meminisse Iuvat, June 14, 1958.
Who are the true sedevacantists? Why, the conciliarists, of course! They act as though there is nothing that occurred before their usurpation of ecclesiastical power that matters or binds their consciences if they choose to find some Hegelian means to ignore statements that contradict their nefarious agenda, which is at odds much of the time with the perennial teaching and the pastoral praxis of the Catholic Church.
There is a signal lesson here for those waiting for the next "motu" to be released, that is, the one dealing with the "liberation" of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition: Joseph Ratzinger remains what he has always been: a Modernist synthesizer of the first order. It is no accident that "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei ordered in 2005 religious communities operating under the "indult" to offer their "conventual" Mass according the rubrics of the 1965 Ordo Missae, which omits Psalm 42 and the Last Gospel and features the "priest" and the reading of the Epistle and Gospel facing the people, among other novelties designed to lead to the invalid Protestant-Masonic service known as the Novus Ordo Missae. "Synthesis" is the order of the day for conciliarists and conciliarism. The same sort of ceaseless, "incremental" changes that continue to take place in the offering of the Novus Ordo, constituting in and of itself a revolutionary departure from the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, will "creep" up over the years in the mostly invalid offerings of the "liberated" indult Mass. No one will say a word as they are "synthesized" right back into the Novus Ordo world of novelty and innovation as part and parcel of everyday pastoral life in the counterfeit church of conciliarism.
Two motus, one for China and one for traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures, but with one result: synthesis into that which is not from God. And these syntheses are to be had at the cost of silence about truth and a refusal to confront error and to call it by its proper name.
Maybe someone out there who is eagerly awaiting the next "motu" will realize that he has been placed in position of Jimmy Stewart's George Bailey in It's a Wonderful Life just as he is about to make a deal with Lionel Barrymore's Mr. Henry F. Potter, with Ratzinger playing the role of Mister Potter this time around. Maybe. Perhaps.
The Venerable Anne Katherine Emmerich, writing about the Passion and Death of Our Lord in The Dolorous Passion of the Christ, provides us with a description of our own times as His Mystical Body is Scourged and Crucified anew by the betrayals of false popes and false bishops:
The malicious enemies of our Saviour led him through the most public part of the town to take him before Pilate. The procession wended its way slowly down the north side of the mountain of Sion, then passed through that section on the eastern side of the Temple, called Acre, towards the palace and tribunal of Pilate, which were seated on the north-west side of the Temple, facing a large square. Caiphas, Annas, and many others of the Chief Council, walked first in festival attire; they were followed by a multitude of scribes and many other Jews, among whom were the false witnesses, and the wicked Pharisees who had taken the most prominent part in accusing Jesus. Our Lord followed at a short distance; he was surrounded by a band of soldiers, and led by the archers. The multitude thronged on all sides and followed the procession, thundering forth the most fearful oaths and imprecations, while groups of persons were hurrying to and fro, pushing and jostling one another. Jesus was stripped of all save his under garment, which was stained and soiled by the filth which had been flung upon it; a long chain was hanging round his neck. which struck his knees as he walked; his hands were pinioned as on the previous day, and the archers dragged him by the ropes which were fastened round his waist. He tottered rather than walked, and was almost unrecognisable from the effects of his sufferings during the night;--he was colourless, haggard, his face swollen and even bleeding, and his merciless persecutors continued to torment him each moment more and more. They had gathered together a large body of the dregs of the people, in order to make his present disgraceful entrance into the city a parody on his triumphal entrance on Palm Sunday. They mocked, and with derisive gestures called him king, and tossed in his path stones, bits of wood, and filthy rags; they made game of, and by a thousand taunting speeches mocked him, during this pretended triumphal entry.
In the corner of a building, not far from the house of Caiphas, the afflicted Mother of Jesus, with John and Magdalen, stood watching for him. Her soul was ever united to his; but propelled by her love, she left no means untried which could enable her really to approach him. She remained at the Cenacle for some time after her midnight visit to the tribunal of Caiphas, powerless and speechless from grief; but when Jesus was dragged forth from his prison, to be again brought before his judges, she arose, cast her veil and cloak about her, and said to Magdalen and John: 'Let us follow my Son to Pilate's court; I must again look upon him.' They went to a place through which the procession must pass, and waited for it. The Mother of Jesus knew that her Son was suffering dreadfully, but never could she have conceived the deplorable, the heartrending condition to which he was reduced by the brutality of his enemies. Her imagination had depicted him to her as suffering fearfully, but yet supported and illuminated by sanctity, love, and patience. Now, however, the sad reality burst upon her. First in the procession appeared the priests, those most bitter enemies of her Divine Son. They were decked in flowing robes; but ah, terrible to say, instead of appearing resplendent in their character of priests of the Most High, they were transformed into priests of Satan, for no one could look upon their wicked countenances without beholding there, portrayed in vivid colours, the evil passions with which their souls were filled--deceit, infernal cunning, and a raging anxiety to carry out that most tremendous of crimes, the death of their Lord and Saviour, the only Son of God. Next followed the false witnesses, his perfidious accusers, surrounded by the vociferating populace; and last of all--himself--her Son--Jesus, the Son of God, the Son of Man, loaded with chains, scarcely able to support himself, but pitilessly dragged on by his infernal enemies, receiving blows from some, buffets from others, and from the whole assembled rabble curses, abuse, and the most scurrilous language. He would have been perfectly unrecognisable even to her maternal eyes, stripped as he was of all save a torn remnant of his garment, had she not instantly marked the contrast between his behaviour and that of his vile tormentors. He alone in the midst of persecution and suffering looked calm and resigned, and far from returning blow for blow, never raised his hands but in acts of supplication to his Eternal Father for the pardon of his enemies. As he approached, she was unable to restrain herself any longer, but exclaimed in thrilling accents: 'Alas! is that my Son? Ah, yes! I see that it is my beloved Son. O, Jesus, my Jesus!' When the procession was almost opposite, Jesus looked upon her with an expression of the greatest love and compassion; this look was too much for the heartbroken mother: she became for the moment totally unconscious, and John and Magdalen endeavoured to carry her home, but she quickly roused herself, and accompanied the beloved disciple to Pilate's palace.
The inhabitants of the town of Ophel were all gathered together in an open space to meet Jesus, but far from administering comfort, they added a fresh ingredient to his cup of sorrow; they inflicted upon him that sharp pang which must ever be felt by those who see their friends abandon them in the hour of adversity. Jesus had done much for the inhabitants of Ophel, but no sooner did they see him reduced to such a state of misery and degradation, than their faith was shaken; they could no longer believe him to be a king, a prophet, the Messiah, and the Son of God. The Pharisees jeered and made game of them, on account of the admiration they had formerly expressed for Jesus. 'Look at your king now,' they exclaimed; 'do homage to him; have you no congratulations to offer him now that he is about to be crowned, and seated on his throne? All his boasted miracles are at an end; the High Priest has put an end to his tricks and witchcraft.'
Notwithstanding the remembrance which these poor people had of the miracles and wonderful cures which had been performed under their very eyes by Jesus; notwithstanding the great benefits he had bestowed upon them their faith was shaken by beholding him thus derided and pointed out as an object of contempt by the High Priest and the members of the Sanhedrin, who were regarded in Jerusalem with the greatest veneration. Some went away doubting, while others remained and endeavoured to join the rabble, but they wore prevented by the guards, who had been sent by the Pharisees, to prevent riots and confusion. (Anne Katherine Emmerich, The Dolorous Passion of the Christ, pp. 185-189.)
In the midst of this monstrous betrayal of the Faith, which is satirized very well by in a commentary written by someone writing under a false name, evidently, of "George Clowney" that is pasted after the Litany of the Saints, we must have recourse to Our Lady of Perpetual Help to provide us with all of the graces necessary to flee from conciliarism and everything to do with its false shepherds. We are living through a terrible chastisement, produced in no small measure by our own sins and indifference and ingratitude. We must redouble our time in prayer before Our Lord's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament and attempt to pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, offering all of our prayers and actions and sufferings and humiliations to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. This day will pass. There will be the victory of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must, however, do our part to bring this about as the consecrated slaves of Jesus through Mary.
Perhaps we can console the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary by pondering these words and by replicating the practice of Saint Gertrude the Great, herein described:
On the Sunday Reminiscere, St. Gertrude, being favored with singular marks of the love and tenderness of her Spouse, such as no human being could describe, besought Our Lord to indicate some practice which might be profitable during this week [the Second Week in Lent]. Our Lord replied: "Bring Me two good kids--I mean the souls and bodies of all mankind."
The Saint understood from this that she was required to make satisfaction for all mankind; and then impelled by the Holy Ghost, she said the Pater noster five times, in honor of the Five Wounds of Our Lord, in satisfaction for all the sins which men had committed against the five senses; and three times for the sins committed by the three powers of the souls--namely, by reason, by temper, and concupiscence; and for all omissions or commissions: offering this prayer with the same intention, and for the same end, as Our Lord had formed it in His sweetest Heart; that is to say, in satisfaction for all the sins of frailty, ignorance, or malice which man had opposed to His omnipotent power, His inscrutable wisdom and His overflowing and gratuitous goodness.
When Gertrude offered this prayer, Our Lord appeared to take an incredible pleasure therein, and made the Sign of the Cross on her from her head to her feet; blessing her, and then embracing her, He lead her to His Father to receive His benediction also. God the Father also received her in so ineffable a manner, that He gave her as many benedictions as He would have given to the whole world if it had been prepared to receive this favor and grace.
This prayer may be offered to God during this week to obtain the pardon of our sins and omissions, and in satisfaction for the sins of the Church, that we may obtain the effect of so salutary a benediction through the merits of Jesus Christ, Who with such condescension and goodness has deigned to be the Spouse and Head of His Church.
Cor Jesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Jesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Cor Jesu Sacratissimum, miserere nobis.
Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Perpetual Help, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Bede the Venerable, pray for us.
Pope Saint John I, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Blowing Wind Press
Pope: Chinese Faithful Should Convert Or Be Executed
Saturday, Jun. 30, 2007 By George Clowney
(VATICAN CITY) — Antipope Benedict-Arnold invited all Traditionalists in China to unite under his and the government's jurisdiction Saturday and urged Beijing to restore overt diplomatic ties and permit religious freedom under the banner of the Novus Ordo sect.
He called the Traditional Catholic Church "incompatible" with Novus Ordo doctrine and civil authority and set a trap by using the false concept of "unity" with their fellow man as the bait.
China forced its Roman Catholics to cut ties with the Vatican in 1951, shortly after the officially atheist Communist Party took power. False worship is allowed in the government-controlled churches, which coordinate in secret with the Anti-Pope and appoint their own priests and bishops.
Many Chinese, however, belong to underground congregations that remained loyal to the Traditional faith.
In an eagerly awaited 55-page letter to the faithful in China, Benedict-Arnold insisted Saturday on his right to appoint bishops, but said he trusted that an agreement could be reached with the Beijing authorities on nominations, thus unmasking the hidden agenda between Communists and Novus Ordos.
Significantly, Benedict-Arnold revoked previous Vatican-issued restrictions on contacts with the clergy of the official communist church, and in fact recognized that some Chinese faithful have no choice but to attend officially recognized odious masses, or risk their lives as they have been doing. He encouraged them to come out of the catacombs, stop risking their lives, and attend the odious masses, implicitly encouraging the government to further crack down on dissent.
The Vatican said in a note that accompanied the letter that it was prepared to move its diplomatic representation from Taiwan to Beijing "at any time" as soon as an agreement with the government was reached.
The letter — translated from Szechuan into Kung Pau, Wonton and Beef with Broccoli, and posted on the Vatican's Home Delivery Menu Web site — marked the most significant effort by Benedict-Arnold toward deception of the faithful in China who are persecuted by an official church, the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, and an underground church that is not registered with the authorities in Rome.
Benedict-Arnold praised those Catholics who resisted pressure to join the official church and paid a price for it "with the shedding of their blood." But he urged them to forgive and reconcile with the false church, and for the sake of unification, come out in the open and identify themselves.
"Indeed, the purification of memory, the pardoning of wrongdoers, the forgetting of injustices suffered and the loving restoration to serenity of troubled hearts ... can require moving beyond reality and theology, born of painful or difficult experiences," he wrote.
Tellingly, Benedict-Arnold referred repeatedly to the "Catholic Church in China," without distinguishing between the divisions — an indication of his aim to see the two united and in communion with Rome.
But on several occasions, he also called the Patriotic Association "incompatible with Novus Ordo doctrine" because it named its own bishops and sought to guide the life of the church. This may seem out of place in the document with regards to unification, unless China is to understand that unification must only be on Novus Ordo terms. Perhaps it points to the hidden power plays between the two false churches.
At the same time, however, Benedict-Arnold made an unprecedented gesture: He revoked 1988 guidelines issued by the Vatican's evangelization office that sought to limit contacts with the official church and declared that any bishop ordained by the official church of China or the Traditional Catholic Church would incur an automatic excommunication.
Vatican analysts have said that a revocation of the 1988 guidelines would represent a clear indication of the pope's desire to move beyond the conflicts of the past in a bid to bring all Chinese Communists and Traditional faithful under Rome's wing.
The letter does cite the canon law which provides for excommunication for either an illicitly ordained bishop in China or a licitly ordained bishop of Tradition, but the Anti-Pope also welcomed the fact that most bishops in the official church had now reconciled with the Holy See and that only a few remain "illegitimate" Traditionalists.
The Vatican band leader, Rev. Guy Lombardi, said the revocation of the 1988 norms was "significant."
"It means, that today the Church in China can and must follow the norms that are common in the novus ordo church. There is great need in China for Novus Ordo formation. We merely want to fine tune what the Chinese government calls 'rehabilitation' for these Traditional Catholics", he said.
In a message directed to the Beijing authorities, Benedict-Arnold insisted that the Church had no spiritual aims in China. At the same time, however, he said the state can cooperate with Rome's interference "in matters regarding the faith and discipline of the church."
"It is likewise clear that she (the church?) asks the state to guarantee to those same Catholic citizens the full exercise of their faith, with respect for authentic novus ordo practices," he wrote.
Benedict-Arnold stressed that he alone must appoint bishops to ensure apostolic succession. He said he was willing to compromise with the communist government as long as they guarantee their hostility towards the Traditional Catholic faith.
"I trust that an accord can be reached with the communists so as to resolve certain questions regarding the choice of candidates for the episcopate," he wrote.
The Vatican would like to have a formula as they have with Vietnam, another communist country, whereby the Vatican proposes a few communists and the government selects a one. Commenting on the overall intention, communist General Tsao stated, "In this way we can synthesize the Novus Ordo Church and Communism into a New World Order."