Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
March 18, 2012


Cologne de Soufre

by Thomas A. Droleskey

You cannot make any of this stuff up. It is impossible. No one could make up the insanity exhibited by the lords of concilairism as they evangelize in behalf of their false doctrines and as they offend God daily with their sacramentally invalid worship services and as they congregation promiscuously with "ministers" of non-Catholic religions, treating those "ministers" as though they have a legitimate mission from God to serve Him and thus to save souls.

The currently reigning false "pontiff," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, is an apostate. As there are a few new readers to this site who have been kind enough to write to me lately, perhaps a brief review of the German priest's defections from the Faith is in order.

To wit, the false "pontiff's" rejection of and contempt for the Scholasticism of Saint Thomas Aquinas makes it possible for him to distort, pervert and misrepresent the lives and work of various Fathers and Doctors and saints, including Saint Robert Bellarmine and Saint Francis de Sales, to make them appear to be precursors of his own revolutionary agenda. He has done this even with Saint Paul the Apostle (see Attempting to Coerce Perjury). He has done this also with various doctrines, including that of Purgatory (see From Sharp Focus to Fuzziness). Indeed, the "pope" started off year 2011 yet another attempt to justify the falsehood of "religious liberty" (see Another Year of the Same Conciliar Apostasy, part one, Another Year of the Same Conciliar Apostasy, part two and Another Year of the Same Conciliar Apostasy, part three), using this as a springboard to announce plans for Assisi III (see Bearing "Fruits" From Hell Itself, part one, Bearing "Fruits" From Hell Itself, part 2 and Not Interested in Assisi III.) He then made good on his Assisi III plans (see Processing Along The Path To Antichrist and Outcome Based Conciliar Math: Assisi I + Assisi II  + Assisi III = A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y).

Longtime readers of this site, few in number though you. may be, know that the work of this site attempts to address root causes of problems. It matters not that he sounds like a Catholic now and again. What matters is that he defected from the Faith in his seminary days and has been a destroyer of Its "bastions" ever since. Please refer to the following articles for a review of just some of the contemporary manifestations of Ratzinger/Benedict's lifelong apostasies that he learned to embrace in his seminary days and has promoted ever since: Impressed With His Own Originality, Accepting "Popes" As Unreliable Teachers, Obeying The Commands of a False Church, Boilerplate Ratzinger, "Cardinals" Burke and Canizares, Meet The Council of Trent, Vesakh, Not Miller, Time at the Vatican, Saint Vincent Ferrer and Anti-Saint Vincent Ferrers, Celebrating Apostasy and Dereliction of Duty, To Be Loved by the Jews, As We Continue To Blaspheme Christ the King and His True Church, which is an updated listing of Ratzinger/Benedict's offenses against the Faith in the past six years, Coloring Everything He Says and Does, part one, Coloring Everything He Says and Does, part two, Perhaps Judas Was the First to Sing "A Kiss is Just a Kiss", Enjoy the Party, George, Enjoy the Party, Anticlimactic "Beatification" for an Antipope, Open Letter to Pretended Catholic Scholars, Scholarship in Conciliarism's Land of Oz, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part one, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part two, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part three, As the Conciliar Fowler Lays More Snares, part four, Peeking into the Old Conciliar Fowler's Lair, part one, Peeking into the Old Conciliar Fowler's Lair, part two, Future Home of the "Reform of the Reform", Quite Right, which contains a summary of some of the false "pope's" warfare against the immutability of dogma and a listing of the major ecclesiological errors of the Society of Saint Pius X that undermines and, indeed, makes a mockery of  the papacy itself and of their priests' defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King, Excuse Me, Father, While I Look For My New Paperwork From Rome, Just A Personal Visit, Conversion of Russia Update, So Much For Charles Martel, So Much for the Crusades, So Much for Pius V and Jan Sobieski, So Much for Catholic Truth and Let's Play The Let's Pretend Game, Can Anyone Spell A-P-O-S-T-A-S-Y?, Rationalists Are Irrational, As The Follies Of Apostasy Resume, When Caiphas Speaks, Benedict Listens, Modernist At Work, part one, Modernist At Work, part two and Modernist At Work, part three, Martyrdom With An Expiration Date, Possessing A Burning Love For That Which God Hates, One Rite To Enshrine All That Is Wrong, Taking Insanity Seriously, Unable To Rest Until He Has Torn Down The Last Bastion, Celebrating Half A Century Of Apostasy, Trying To "Understand" Apostasy, Trying To "Understand" Apostasy, Unable To See The Forest Of Apostasy, Creating Problems That Never Existed Before and Benedict And His Boys Are Far Cries From Saint Patrick.

This should keep those who have not read these articles busy for a time! And, of course, this is only a partial listing of the articles that have appeared on this site dealing with Ratzinger/Benedict's apostasies.

It is also the case that Ratzinger/Benedict's personal tastes betray a worldliness, an attachment to the "finer" things of life to display that he is a "man of the times." Designer sunglasses. Designer shoes. Specially designed baseball caps. True, members of the "paper" entourage have denied that their boss wears Gucci sunglasses and Prada shoes. They also assert that he knew nothing about the reassignment of a known pederast, "Father" Peter Hullermann, when he was the conciliar "Archbishop" of Cologne, Germany, on January 15, 1980, even though he was at the meeting and personally approved the move.

There is talk now that "Pope" Benedict XVI has "discreetly" ordered a custom-made cologne to be made for him by a woman who has designed scents for the likes of Madonna Louise Ciccone. No, I am not making this up. I am not making this up at all.




Italian celebrity perfume-maker Silvana Casoli, has created her most heavenly scent yet for a very special client, Pope Benedict XVI.

Known for creating a number of perfumes that can be used by both men and women with names like Chocolat Bambola (Chocolate doll) and Vanilla Bourbon, Casoli has designed unique fragrances for famous personalities like Madonna and Sting.

Speaking to Rome's daily paper, Il Messaggero, Casoli said that the name of the pope's specially-commissioned scent is top secret and she is not allowed to divulge all its ingredients. She did, however, reveal that she was inspired by the pope's love of "nature" and used a blend of fragrances from lime-wood, verbena and grass.

"I love speaking of my work," said Casoli, "but this time I can't. I am very devoted to the Holy Father." She promises his special cologne will never be reproduced for anyone else.

Casoli said she nearly fainted when she received the phone call from the Vatican and took months working on the commission in her small laboratory in northern Italy. At times she thought she would abandon it, but then she said she got inspired.

"I realized that an essence like this had to have at its core something pure and clean, recalling the idea of peace," she said. "I thought of the smells the pope would smell when praying at the Grotto of Lourdes" and about "his love for music, animals, green Bavarian forests."

Casoli is not new to "spiritually-inspired" scents. She created two perfumes for pilgrims on pilgrimages to Santiago de Compostela in Spain. They were called "Water of Faith" and "Water of Hope" and were so popular that priests presented samples to the pope, which gave him the idea that he would like his very own.

Pope Benedict XVI, who is 85 and was once the archbishop of Cologne, Germany, is known for his elegance in both speech and attire. His attention to detail and color in his papal clothing has often been commented on and he has reintroduced a number of items to papal attire during his papacy, like his fur-lined, short, deep-red cape. Shortly after his election it was said that he wore Prada shoes and Gucci sunglasses, all quietly denied by the pope's entourage.

The Vatican does not comment on products used by the pope and the pope's image is carefully protected from inappropriate commercial exploitation, but until someone comes forward to deny this, Casoli will probably get a rush of snooping, sniffing fans wanting to smell that oh so special fragrance.

Although the more than 2.5 million people who see the pope at the Vatican annually do not all come into close contact with him, those who are lucky enough to shake his hand at private and public audiences, or receive communion from him during mass, may possibly now also get a whiff of the papal eau. (Benedict Has Custom-Designed Cologne. See also Apostate Pretender to Papal Throne commissions custom-blended eau de cologne.)

Why can't Ratzinger/Benedict use a good after-shave and be done with it? I mean, if Aqua Velva was good enough for Clayton Moore and Jay Silverheels fifteen years after their last appearance as The Lone Ranger and Tonto in The Lone Ranger and the Lost City of Gold (1958), why can't it be good enough for the false "pope" from Bavaria? Why does an eighty-five year-old man have to emit the scent of lime tree, verbena and grass? This is insanity.

It is not for nothing that Pope Saint Pius X wrote the following of Modernists such as Ratzinger/Benedict:




The Modernists completely invert the parts, and of them may be applied the words which another of Our predecessors Gregory IX, addressed to some theologians of his time: "Some among you, puffed up like bladders with the spirit of vanity strive by profane novelties to cross the boundaries fixed by the Fathers, twisting the meaning of the sacred text...to the philosophical teaching of the rationalists, not for the profit of their hearer but to make a show of science...these men, led away by various and strange doctrines, turn the head into the tail and force the queen to serve the handmaid." (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)


Joseph Ratzinger does not think like a Catholic. He speaks with the forked tongue of a Modernist. And he does not behave as a Catholic. There is nothing but worldliness and effeminacy involved in a man, no less one who will turn eighty-five years of age next month, going to the trouble and expense of having a cologne designed especially for him.

Lots of names can be suggested for Ratzinger/Benedict's specially commissioned cologne. I have a suggestion of my own with an assist from my dear wife: Cologne de Soufre (Cologne of Sulphur), although L'Eau de Soufre would work just as well. Why? It's very simple. The doctrines and liturgies and pastoral praxis of the counterfeit church of conciliarism come from Hell. They reek of sulphur. Can anyone imagine Saint Vincent Ferrer or Saint Vincent de Paul or Saint Francis of Assisi or Saint Francis de Sales or Saint Joseph Cupertino or Saint Anthony of Padua or Saint Alphonsus de Liguori or Pope Saint Pius X concerned about a specially made perfume?

Sulfuric acid aplenty was to be found at the Basilica di San Gregorio al Celio on Saturday, March 10, 2012, as Ratzinger/Benedict gave a "homily" at a "vespers" service held in the presence of the soon-to-be tired non-"archbishop" of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, who is just seventeen months older than me (he was born on June 14, 1950), who also preached at a sort of "interreligious" prayer ceremony that is strictly forbidden by the authentic Canon Law of the Catholic Church. Here is a pertinent excerpt:




The Monastery of San Gregorio al Celio is the Roman setting for our celebration of the millennium of Camaldoli in company with His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury who, together with us, recognizes this Monastery as the birthplace of the link between Christianity in Britain and the Church of Rome. Today’s celebration is therefore marked by a profoundly ecumenical character which, as we know, is part and parcel of the modern Camaldolese spirit. This Roman Camaldolese Monastery has developed with Canterbury and the Anglican Communion, especially since the Second Vatican Council, links that now qualify as traditional. Today, for the third time, the Bishop of Rome is meeting the Archbishop of Canterbury in the home of Saint Gregory the Great. And it is right that it should be so, because it was from this Monastery that Pope Gregory chose Augustine and his forty monks and sent them to bring the Gospel to the Angles, a little over 1,400 years ago. The constant presence of monks in this place, over such a long period, is already in itself a testimony of God’s faithfulness to his Church, which we are happy to be able to proclaim to the whole world. We hope that the sign of our presence here together in front of the holy altar, where Gregory himself celebrated the eucharistic sacrifice, will remain not only as a reminder of our fraternal encounter, but also as a stimulus for all the faithful – both Catholic and Anglican – encouraging them, as they visit the glorious tombs of the holy Apostles and Martyrs in Rome, to renew their commitment to pray constantly and to work for unity, and to live fully in accordance with the “ut unum sint” that Jesus addressed to the Father. (10 March 2012: Vespers on the occasion of the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury (Video).


This is apostasy and this is blasphemy. It is from Hell.

It is apostasy as Ratzinger/Benedict, who is a true priest even though he is not a true bishop, believes that the Anglican "church," which was created as a result of the lecherous, adulterous, bigamous and murderous King Henry VIII's break with the Catholic Church in 1534, continues the work begun by Saint Augustine of Canterbury, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, who was sent to England by Pope Saint Gregory the Great to convert the Angles.

It is apostasy as Ratzinger/Benedict treats Anglicans as part of the "Christian community" even though Pope Pius XII wrote the following in Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943:

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


Ratzinger/Benedict believes in a concept of "unity" that is not premised on an absolute and unswerving adherence to everything taught by the Catholic Church as true, which is one of the reasons he seeks to make the dogmatic pronouncements of the Catholic Church's legitimate councils and of her true popes contingent upon the historical circumstances in which they were made. Ratzinger/Benedict reasons that it is possible to overlook and/or to deconstruct those past pronouncements in order to accommodate what he himself has called, both as Father and "Cardinal' Ratzinger and as "Benedict XVI," the "search for unity." This effort, which, of course, blasphemes the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, by denying that the language used by the Fathers of the Catholic Church's dogmatic councils and by her true popes such as Pope Pius XII was the result of the infallible guidance of the same God the Holy Ghost. Ratzinger/Benedict feels free, therefore, to deconstruct Catholic teaching, in effect saying that he does not believe that God himself directed true popes and Council Fathers to speak and to write as they did.

Ratzinger/Benedict also ignores the clear teaching of Pope Pius XI that condemned the "spiritual ecumenism" championed first by Protestants at the "Word Missionary Conference in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1910, a conference that he has praised several times (see Getting Bolder In His Apostasy and Still In Defiance of the Truth):



Is it not right, it is often repeated, indeed, even consonant with duty, that all who invoke the name of Christ should abstain from mutual reproaches and at long last be united in mutual charity? Who would dare to say that he loved Christ, unless he worked with all his might to carry out the desires of Him, Who asked His Father that His disciples might be "one." And did not the same Christ will that His disciples should be marked out and distinguished from others by this characteristic, namely that they loved one another: "By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, if you have love one for another"? All Christians, they add, should be as "one": for then they would be much more powerful in driving out the pest of irreligion, which like a serpent daily creeps further and becomes more widely spread, and prepares to rob the Gospel of its strength. These things and others that class of men who are known as pan-Christians continually repeat and amplify; and these men, so far from being quite few and scattered, have increased to the dimensions of an entire class, and have grouped themselves into widely spread societies, most of which are directed by non-Catholics, although they are imbued with varying doctrines concerning the things of faith. This undertaking is so actively promoted as in many places to win for itself the adhesion of a number of citizens, and it even takes possession of the minds of very many Catholics and allures them with the hope of bringing about such a union as would be agreeable to the desires of Holy Mother Church, who has indeed nothing more at heart than to recall her erring sons and to lead them back to her bosom. But in reality beneath these enticing words and blandishments lies hid a most grave error, by which the foundations of the Catholic faith are completely destroyed.

Admonished, therefore, by the consciousness of Our Apostolic office that We should not permit the flock of the Lord to be cheated by dangerous fallacies, We invoke, Venerable Brethren, your zeal in avoiding this evil; for We are confident that by the writings and words of each one of you the people will more easily get to know and understand those principles and arguments which We are about to set forth, and from which Catholics will learn how they are to think and act when there is question of those undertakings which have for their end the union in one body, whatsoever be the manner, of all who call themselves Christians. . . .

And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian churches depends. For authors who favor this view are accustomed, times almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: "That they all may be one.... And there shall be one fold and one shepherd," with this signification however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment. For they are of the opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal. They add that the Church in itself, or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common, nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder; that these all enjoy the same rights; and that the Church was one and unique from, at the most, the apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils. Controversies therefore, they say, and longstanding differences of opinion which keep asunder till the present day the members of the Christian family, must be entirely put aside, and from the remaining doctrines a common form of faith drawn up and proposed for belief, and in the profession of which all may not only know but feel that they are brothers. The manifold churches or communities, if united in some kind of universal federation, would then be in a position to oppose strongly and with success the progress of irreligion. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)


Ratzinger/Benedict is not a Catholic.

Furthermore, what makes Ratzinger/Benedict's praise of the "Anglican Communion" and his treatment of Rowan Williams as a legitimate successor of Saint Augustine of Canterbury blasphemous is that Rowan Williams is not a bishop, something that they share in common, of course, and he has no "mission" from God to convert unconditionally to the Catholic Church before he dies. The liturgical books and orders of the Anglican sect are invalid and have been condemned by our true popes:




Prohibiting with a strong hand the use of the true religion, which after its earlier overthrow by Henry VIII (a deserter therefrom) Mary, the lawful queen of famous memory, had with the help of this See restored, she has followed and embraced the errors of the heretics. She has removed the royal Council, composed of the nobility of England, and has filled it with obscure men, being heretics; oppressed the followers of the Catholic faith; instituted false preachers and ministers of impiety; abolished the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, fasts, choice of meats, celibacy, and Catholic ceremonies; and has ordered that books of manifestly heretical content be propounded to the whole realm and that impious rites and institutions after the rule of Calvin, entertained and observed by herself, be also observed by her subjects. She has dared to eject bishops, rectors of churches and other Catholic priests from their churches and benefices, to bestow these and other things ecclesiastical upon heretics, and to determine spiritual causes; has forbidden the prelates, clergy and people to acknowledge the Church of Rome or obey its precepts and canonical sanctions; has forced most of them to come to terms with her wicked laws, to abjure the authority and obedience of the pope of Rome, and to accept her, on oath, as their only lady in matters temporal and spiritual; has imposed penalties and punishments on those who would not agree to this and has exacted then of those who persevered in the unity of the faith and the aforesaid obedience; has thrown the Catholic prelates and parsons into prison where many, worn out by long languishing and sorrow, have miserably ended their lives. All these matter and manifest and notorious among all the nations; they are so well proven by the weighty witness of many men that there remains no place for excuse, defense or evasion. (Regnans in Excelsis, the decree issued by Pope Saint Pius V on March 5, 1570, excommunicating Queen Elizabeth I.)

Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the decrees of the pontiffs, our predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by our authority, of our own initiative and certain knowledge, we pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void. . . .

We decree that these letters and all things contained therein shall not be liable at any time to be impugned or objected to by reason of fault or any other defect whatsoever of subreption or obreption of our intention, but are and shall be always valid and in force and shall be inviolably observed both juridically and otherwise, by all of whatsoever degree and preeminence, declaring null and void anything which, in these matters, may happen to be contrariwise attempted, whether wittingly or unwittingly, by any person whatsoever, by whatsoever authority or pretext, all things to the contrary notwithstanding. (Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, September 15, 1886.)

To treat Rowan Williams as a legitimate successor of Saint Augustine of Canterbury is discard with a mere wave of the "papal" hand solemn decrees of our true popes and to slap the work of Saint Augustine and the trample upon the blood of the English martyrs who were put to death by the founder of the false Anglican sect.

Yes, Cologne d' Soufre would is a very apt name for the Modernist's specially designed cologne.

With all of this happening, therefore, is now very telling that Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, has been given an ultimatum from William "Cardinal" Levada, the conciliar prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the president of "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei, to "clarify" the Society's response to the so-called "Doctrinal Preamble" that was given to Bishop Fellay on September 14, 2011. It is not, as was erroneously reported by Reuters on printed in the original version of this article, an "ultimatum." The conciliar Vatican continues to try to find a way to "pacify the spirits" of the Society of Saint Pius X so that it can take its own place in the One World Ecumenical Church:


During the meeting on September 14, 2011, between His Eminence Cardinal William Levada, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and President of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, and His Excellency Bishop Bernard Fellay, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, a Doctrinal Preamble, accompanied by a Preliminary Note, was delivered to the latter, as the fundamental basis for achieving full reconciliation with the Apostolic See. This Preamble spelled out certain doctrinal principles and criteria for interpreting Catholic doctrine that are necessary to ensure fidelity to the Church’s Magisterium and sentire cum Ecclesia.

The response of the Society of St. Pius X to this Doctrinal Preamble that arrived in January 2012 was submitted to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for their review and was then forwarded to the Holy Father for his judgment. In compliance with the decision by Pope Benedict XVI, the evaluation of the response of His Excellency Bishop Fellay was communicated to him by a letter delivered to him today. This evaluation notes that the position that he expressed is not sufficient to overcome the doctrinal problems that are at the basis of the rift between the Holy See and the aforesaid Society.

At the conclusion of today’s meeting, out of a concern for avoiding an ecclesial rupture with painful and incalculable consequences, the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X was invited to be so kind as to clarify his position so as to heal the existing rift, as Pope Benedict XVI wished. (Communique Concerning the Meeting on March 16, 2012,  Between William "Cardinal" Levada and Bishop Bernard Fellay, as found translated on Rorate Caeli, scroll down to find the text.)

Although a full commentary on this will be made after Bishop Fellay gives his response to request for a "clarification," which once again shows the conciliar mania for "clarification" after "clarification. suffice it to say for the moment that the communique demonstrates that all Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who is a very, very methodical man, meant what he has said about the need to seek a "pacification of spirits" of those who have not as of yet come to accept the "wisdom" and "truth" of the "Second" Vatican Council and the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes."


Leading men and women to God, to the God Who speaks in the Bible: this is the supreme and fundamental priority of the Church and of the Successor of Peter at the present time. A logical consequence of this is that we must have at heart the unity of all believers. Their disunity, their disagreement among themselves, calls into question the credibility of their talk of God. Hence the effort to promote a common witness by Christians to their faith - ecumenism - is part of the supreme priority. Added to this is the need for all those who believe in God to join in seeking peace, to attempt to draw closer to one another, and to journey together, even with their differing images of God, towards the source of Light - this is inter-religious dialogue. Whoever proclaims that God is Love 'to the end' has to bear witness to love: in loving devotion to the suffering, in the rejection of hatred and enmity - this is the social dimension of the Christian faith, of which I spoke in the Encyclical 'Deus caritas est'.

"So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church's real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who 'has something against you' and to seek reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents - to the extent possible - in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole. Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim Him and, with Him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?

"Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things - arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them - in this case the Pope - he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint. (Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church concerning the remission of the excommunication of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre, March 10, 2009.)

Fr Federico Lombardi, S.J., Director of the Holy See Press Office: What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the "Motu proprio' Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?

Benedict XVI: Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu Proprio' is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy. They form a small group, because this presupposes a schooling in Latin, a training in a certain culture. Yet for these people, to have the love and tolerance to let them live with this liturgy seems to me a normal requirement of the faith and pastoral concern of any Bishop of our Church. There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy.

On each day [of the Council], the Council Fathers celebrated Mass in accordance with the ancient rite and, at the same time, they conceived of a natural development for the liturgy within the whole of this century, for the liturgy is a living reality that develops but, in its development, retains its identity. Thus, there are certainly different accents, but nevertheless [there remains] a fundamental identity that excludes a contradiction, an opposition between the renewed liturgy and the previous liturgy. In any case, I believe that there is an opportunity for the enrichment of both parties. On the one hand the friends of the old liturgy can and must know the new saints, the new prefaces of the liturgy, etc.... On the other, the new liturgy places greater emphasis on common participation, but it is not merely an assembly of a certain community, but rather always an act of the universal Church in communion with all believers of all times, and an act of worship. In this sense, it seems to me that there is a mutual enrichment, and it is clear that the renewed liturgy is the ordinary liturgy of our time. (Interview of the Holy Father during the flight to France, September 12, 2008.)

Liturgical worship is the supreme expression of priestly and episcopal life, just as it is of catechetical teaching. Your duty to sanctify the faithful people, dear Brothers, is indispensable for the growth of the Church. In the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum”, I was led to set out the conditions in which this duty is to be exercised, with regard to the possibility of using the missal of Blessed John XXIII (1962) in addition to that of Pope Paul VI (1970). Some fruits of these new arrangements have already been seen, and I hope that, thanks be to God, the necessary pacification of spirits is already taking place. I am aware of your difficulties, but I do not doubt that, within a reasonable time, you can find solutions satisfactory for all, lest the seamless tunic of Christ be further torn. Everyone has a place in the Church. Every person, without exception, should be able to feel at home, and never rejected. God, who loves all men and women and wishes none to be lost, entrusts us with this mission by appointing us shepherds of his sheep. We can only thank him for the honour and the trust that he has placed in us. Let us therefore strive always to be servants of unity! (Meeting with the French Bishops in the Hemicycle Sainte-Bernadette, Lourdes, 14 September 2008.)

This is why, contrary to what was written in the initial version of this commentary, I believe that there will be some kind of agreement that permits the Society of Saint Pius X to function as a full member of the conciliar church as Ratzinger/Benedict knows that the same thing will happen over the course of time in the Society as happened with the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter and the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest, and in those diocesan venues were true Masses are offered by priests and simulations of same are staged by presbyters in accord with Summorum Pontificum, July 7, 2007. The laity will be content to just have a modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition before it and the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service are replaced with One Rite To Enshrine All That Is Wrong.

Alas, the "doctrinal discussions" have been a waste of time as there is nothing to discuss with apostates other than to seek their full acceptance of the true Faith. 


How can one seek to "reconcile" truth with error?

What is there to clarify?


The "doctrinal discussions" have permitted the Vatican to demonstrate "patience" with wayward children. Other than that, however, it has been a fruitless exercise from its inception and redolent of the Society's false, condemned Gallicanist view of the papacy.

In the now unlikely event that no agreement is reached between the conciliar Vatican the Society of Saint Pius X, one wonders whether the photograph of the false "pope" will continue to hang in the Society's chapels if the "incalculable consequences" referred to in the Communique include the excommunication of everyone associated with the Society (bishops, priests, religious sisters and brothers, members of the laity), replete with a stern warning given to anyone even thinking of assisting at Holy Mass at a Society chapel. How would continue to make a mockery of the papacy? How can one say that he is in "communion" with the "pope" who has "excommunicated" him. Talk about twisted logic?

Ah, but this is not going to happen. There will be an agreement. Everyone will live happily forever, save for those who take the Catholic Faith seriously and realize that truth can never be mixed with errors.

The Modernists who populate the offices of the Vatican now never wanted to yield any "doctrinal" ground to the Society of Saint Pius X. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict does indeed have tremendous zeal for his false religion. He wants everyone in the conciliar church to be of one mind and heart with him, considering those who dissent from concilairism to be apostates. "Doctrinal discussions" with the likes of this. One does not need to smell Ratzinger/Benedict's new cologne to get a whiff of the sulphur that is in the conciliar structures.

There will be those who get indignant over the demand made by Levada for "clarification," most likely about the religious liberty and false ecumenism, saying that he makes no similar demands of Protestants, whose "salvation" is pretty much taken for granted by conciliar officials as can be seen from Ratzinger/Benedict's recent "vespers" service with Mr. Rowan Williams. Don't get indignant. Levada does not have to make any such demands of Protestants as those made upon the Society of Saint Pius X as they, the Protestants, accept the new ecclesiology, false ecumenism, episcopal collegiality, religious liberty, separation of Church and State and vernacular liturgies. Indeed, these conciliar innovations come straight from Protestantism and the Masonic lodge. In other words they come from Hell, which is why they reek of Cologne de Soufre.

This will all unfold in its own good time. I apologize, however, for using the Reuters report. It was only late yesterday evening, after a very busy day when I was off of the computer, that I was able to find the text of the communique, which does change one's perspective considerably.

The conciliarists, of course, are intent on showing their "respect" for the errors of Protestantism as they promote their own multiple and most manifest errors (Refusing To Take Ratzinger At His Word). It cannot be that way with us. We must show forth our love for God and to the truth, of which He is the Author and Protector, even this means estrangement, at least temporarily, from the creatures of this passing, mortal vale of tears, remembering that we are not one whit better than anyone else (indeed, we are, if we are honest with ourselves, far, far worst than most--something that is certainly true in my own case as I hope to live long enough to make reparation for each of my many sins).

We must also must pray for a happy reconciliation at the Last Day at the General Judgment of the Living and the Dead if the difficulties, including those in the various sedevacantist camps where so many people are oblivious to Ratzinger/Benedict's activities, as they seek to continue intern ice ne battles long after they have run their course, of the present time are not resolved neatly in this life. The truth of the state of the Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal and of the circumstances and events of all lives and the intentions of all human hearts will be revealed only on that Last Day. We may have to be content to suffer estrangement and humiliation in this life without any vindication at all in order to faithful to what we know is true without seeking to justify ourselves before men.

Oh, my friends, how we must pray and make sacrifices to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, spending time on our knees in earnest and humble prayer before His Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament and praying as many Rosaries each day as the duties of our states-in-life permit. The traps that are being laid to ensnare souls are truly preternatural in origin. We must take refuge in the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as we beg to be the beneficiaries of the Mercy that flows forth from the Most Sacred heart of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in order to make reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world.

The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We can help to bring about this victory by our daily fidelity to Our Lady's Fatima Message. What are we waiting for?

Viva Cristo Rey!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now

Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

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

Saint Cyril of Jerusalem, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints


© Copyright 2012, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.