Commissar of Antichrist Speaks
Thomas A. Droleskey
From the left: Unidentified Soviet military official (possibly Defense Minister Andrei Grechko), Soviet President Nikolai Podgorny, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) Leonid Brezhnev, Soviet Premier Alexi Kosygin, Future CPSU Party Leader Konstantin Chernenko. May 1, 1973.
Yes, you saw this photograph six months ago in Francis And The Commissars, which dealt with the appointment of eight notorious apostates who live a perpetual masquerade party by pretending to give Catholics and non-Catholics alike "treats" that serve the god of their bellies and soothes them as they glory publicly in their shame. This masquerade party, however, is a cruel trick of the devil designed to deceive souls so that he can take them to Hell for all eternity to suffer there in eternal hellfire and to separated forever from the the glory of Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost in the company of the Blessed Mother, Saint Joseph and all the angels and saints.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the cruelest trickster of all by "treating" Catholics to the "joys" of supposedly "simple" version of Catholicism that is nothing other than a very simple, "sound bite" and "photo-op"-friendly version of Modernism.
Obviously, this is something that many of us have been saying on a consistent basis for the past seven months, eighteen days now as Jorge Mario Bergoglio has simply jettisoned the complexity and contradictions by which Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's "hermeneutic of continuity" sought to "reconcile" the authentic, immutable teaching of the Catholic Church with the apostasies, blasphemies, sacrileges, heresies and abominations of the "Second" Vatican Council and the "magisterium" of the conciliar "popes."
"Pope" Francis does not care about "reconciling" what the Catholic Church has taught from time immemorial as he believes most of that teaching was erroneous and based upon outdated "suppositions" that reflected a "triumphalist" church that was "closed-in-on-itself" and unable to be "open" to the real needs of the "suffering" of the "people of God."
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's chief Commissar, Oscar Andrés Maradiaga Rodríguez, the conciliar "cardinal" "archbishop" of of Tegucigalpa, Honduras, who told us a month ago today that the counterfeit church of conciliarism's constitution had to be "rewritten," that something "different" had to written to take its place. This prompted me to write They Have Been Doing Something Different For Fifty-Five Years, which was posted on October 1, 2013, a time that seems in the distant past with all that has transpired this month.
Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez is no renegade. His no "maverick." His "thinking," such as it is, is perfectly reflective of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, which is why the false "pontiff" chose him to head the "council of cardinals" in the first place.
This is why an address that Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez gave at Irving, Texas, Convention Center on Friday, October 25, 2013, under the sponsorship of the University of Dallas "Ministry Conference," is very important as it contains a completely open and frank admission that the "Second" Vatican Council represented an "end" to the "war of Modernism" and thus the dogmatic decrees of the [First] Vatican Council that were guided infallibly the the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, and that were proclaimed solemnly by Pope Pius IX
A few passages from "Cardinal" Maradiaga Rodriguez's address will be highlighted for comment as they contain direct admissions that vindicate each of us who has been saying that the "Second" Vatican Council represented an "ecclesiogenesis," that is, the "birth" of a "new church," and that it was founded upon the very Modernist principles condemned by Pope Pius IX and the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council, by Pope Saint Pius X, especially in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and in The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, and that later resurfaced as the "new theology" that was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950.
The "Oscar Mayer" hot dog of conciliarism did not waste any time at the Irving Convention Center six days ago to explain that the "war against modernism" was ended at the "Second" Vatican Council:
The Second Vatican Council was the main event in the Church in the 20th Century. In principle, it meant an end to the hostilities between the Church and modernism, which was condemned in the First Vatican Council. On the contrary: neither the world is the realm of evil and sin –these are conclusions clearly achieved in Vatican II—nor is the Church the sole refuge of good and virtue. Modernism was, most of the time, a reaction against injustices and abuses that disparaged the dignity and the rights of the person.
The Vatican II Council officially acknowledged that things had changed, and captured the need for such a change in its Documents, which emphasized truths such as these: (The Council's "Unfinished Business," The Church's "Return to Jesus"... and Dreams of "The Next Pope" – A Southern Weekend with Francis' "Discovery Channel".)
"An end to the hostilities between the Church and modernism"?
In other words, God the Holy Ghost failed Pope Pius IX and the Fathers of the [First] Vatican Council.
Sure, Joseph Ratzinger said the same thing in 1971, 1990 and 2005 (see Appendix A below). However, the current antipope emeritus always tried to couch his disregard for the anti-Modernist condemnations by explaining that were "necessary" for their "time" but that they had become "obsolete in the particulars they contain" because of changed circumstances. Granted.
Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez is simply making it plain for all the world to see that Modernism was done an "injustice" as it was a "reaction against injustices and abuses and that disparaged the dignity of the rights of the person."
Here is how Pope Saint Pius defined Modernism in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907:
39. It may, perhaps, seem to some, Venerable Brethren, that We have dealt at
too great length on this exposition of the doctrines of the Modernists. But it
was necessary that We should do so, both in order to meet their customary charge
that We do not understand their ideas, and to show that their system does not
consist in scattered and unconnected theories, but, as it were, in a closely
connected whole, so that it is not possible to admit one without admitting all.
For this reason, too, We have had to give to this exposition a somewhat didactic
form, and not to shrink from employing certain unwonted terms which the
Modernists have brought into use. And now with Our eyes fixed upon the whole
system, no one will be surprised that We should define it to be the synthesis of
all heresies. Undoubtedly, were anyone to attempt the task of collecting
together all the errors that have been broached against the faith and to
concentrate into one the sap and substance of them all, he could not succeed in
doing so better than the Modernists have done. Nay, they have gone farther than
this, for, as We have already intimated, their system means the destruction not
of the Catholic religion alone, but of all religion. Hence the rationalists are
not wanting in their applause, and the most frank and sincere among them
congratulate themselves on having found in the Modernists the most valuable of
all allies. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
Some injustice to Modernism, huh?
As it is no injustice at all, of course, the conciliar revolutionaries have tried to use two different phrases ("living tradition" and "hermeneutic of continuity" to describe the same philosophically absurd principle according to the order of reason that was condemned dogmatically by the [First] Vatican Council and by Pope Saint Pius X throughout his Pontificate and by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis. (See Appendix B below.)
Having conditioned three generations of Catholics born after the "Second" Vatican Council to believe the Modernist precepts of conciliarism are indeed orthodox Catholicism while having brainwashed older generations to believe that things were "bad in the past," Bergoglio and his band of balloon boys, about whom a separate article is being written, believe it is "safe" now to "come out of the closet," so to speak, and to proclaim boldly to the world what many of had come to realize: the "Second" Vatican Council was an effort to start a new religion, based upon a "new" understanding of dogma and hence a "new ecclesiology" to redefine Holy Mother Church herself.
Pope Saint Pius X understood Modernism perfectly as the "synthesis of all heresies."
Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez is a heretic. So is is friend, fellow Latin American and theological compadre, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.
Pope Pius IX condemned the following propositions in The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864, that are among the most foundational building blocks of the gigantic erector set that is the counterfeit church of conciliarism:
77. In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion
should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other
forms of worship. -- Allocution "Nemo vestrum," July 26, 1855.
78. Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that
persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own
peculiar worship. -- Allocution "Acerbissimum," Sept. 27, 1852.
79. Moreover, it is false that the civil liberty of every form of worship,
and the full power, given to all, of overtly and publicly manifesting any
opinions whatsoever and thoughts, conduce more easily to corrupt the morals and
minds of the people, and to propagate the pest of indifferentism. -- Allocution
"Nunquam fore," Dec. 15, 1856.
80. The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself, and come to terms
with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.- -Allocution "Jamdudum
cernimus," March 18, 1861. (Pope Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864.)
According to the likes of Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez and his patron, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, God the Holy Ghost permitted a true Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius IX, to err.
Moreover, Maradiaga Rodriguez said in Irving, Texas, six days ago that "neither the world is the realm of evil and sin –these are conclusions clearly achieved in Vatican II—nor is the Church the sole refuge of good and virtue," which is one of the boldest, most plain and brutally honest statements of the heretical and blasphemous Modernist belief system that has been made in the past fifty-five years, although there are many, including Bergoglio in the past seven months, eighteen days, who have used words less precise and clear than these to assert that this is so.
Although Holy Mother Church is composed of sinful men, she is by her very Divine Constitution the sole repository of Divine Revelation, which consists both of Sacred Scripture and Apostolic (Sacred) Tradition, and has been given the authority by her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Spouse, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to teach infallibly in His Holy Name all that she has received from Him. She alone has the teaching and the supernatural helps, the sacraments, to instruct and to sanctify and save men. She is without spot or error of any kind.
By speaking so blasphemously and heretically as he has, Maradiaga Rodriguez is saying once again that Holy Mother Church's true popes and true councils taught error prior to the "Second" Vatican Council:
These firings, therefore, with all diligence and care having been formulated by us, we
define that it be permitted to no one to bring forward, or to write, or
to compose, or to think, or to teach a different faith. Whosoever shall
presume to compose a different faith, or to propose, or teach, or hand
to those wishing to be converted to the knowledge of the truth, from the
Gentiles or Jews, or from any heresy, any different Creed; or to
introduce a new voice or invention of speech to subvert these things
which now have been determined by us, all these, if they be Bishops or
clerics let them be deposed, the Bishops from the Episcopate, the
clerics from the clergy; but if they be monks or laymen: let them be
anathematized. (Constantinople III).
These and many other serious things, which at
present would take too long to list, but which you know well, cause Our
intense grief. It is not enough for Us to deplore these innumerable
evils unless We strive to uproot them. We take refuge
in your faith and call upon your concern for the salvation of the
Catholic flock. Your singular prudence and diligent spirit give Us
courage and console Us, afflicted as We are with so many trials. We must
raise Our voice and attempt all things lest a wild boar from the woods
should destroy the vineyard or wolves kill the flock. It is Our duty to lead the flock only to the food which is healthful. In
these evil and dangerous times, the shepherds must never neglect their
duty; they must never be so overcome by fear that they abandon the sheep.
Let them never neglect the flock and become sluggish from idleness and
apathy. Therefore, united in spirit, let us promote our common cause, or
more truly the cause of God; let our vigilance be one and our effort
united against the common enemies.
Indeed you will accomplish this perfectly
if, as the duty of your office demands, you attend to yourselves and to
doctrine and meditate on these words: "the universal Church is
affected by any and every novelty" and the admonition of Pope Agatho:
"nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing
changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards
expression and meaning." Therefore may the unity which is built upon the
See of Peter as on a sure foundation stand firm. May it be for all a
wall and a security, a safe port, and a treasury of countless blessings. To check the audacity of those who attempt to infringe upon the rights
of this Holy See or to sever the union of the churches with the See of
Peter, instill in your people a zealous confidence in the papacy and
sincere veneration for it. As St. Cyprian wrote: "He who abandons the
See of Peter on which the Church was founded, falsely believes himself
to be a part of the Church . . . .
But for the other painful causes We
are concerned about, you should recall that certain societies and
assemblages seem to draw up a battle line together with the followers of
every false religion and cult. They feign piety for religion; but they
are driven by a passion for promoting novelties and sedition
everywhere. They preach liberty of every sort; they stir up disturbances
in sacred and civil affairs, and pluck authority to pieces.(Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
7. It is with no less deceit, venerable brothers, that other enemies of
divine revelation, with reckless and sacrilegious effrontery, want to import the
doctrine of human progress into the Catholic religion. They extol it with the
highest praise, as if religion itself were not of God but the work of men, or a
philosophical discovery which can be perfected by human means. The charge which
Tertullian justly made against the philosophers of his own time "who brought
forward a Stoic and a Platonic and a Dialectical Christianity" can very aptly
apply to those men who rave so pitiably. Our holy religion was not invented by
human reason, but was most mercifully revealed by God; therefore, one can quite
easily understand that religion itself acquires all its power from the authority
of God who made the revelation, and that it can never be arrived at or perfected
by human reason. In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such
great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of
divine revelation. Having done this, one would be definitely convinced that God
has spoken and therefore would show Him rational obedience, as the Apostle very
wisely teaches. For who can possibly not know that all faith should be given
to the words of God and that it is in the fullest agreement with reason itself
to accept and strongly support doctrines which it has determined to have been
revealed by God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived? (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)
As for the rest, We greatly deplore the fact that,
where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies
new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the
advice of the apostle. There you will find someone who is
overconfident in seeking the truth outside the Catholic Church, in which
it can be found without even a light tarnish of error.
Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation
of truth. You correctly understand, venerable brothers, that We speak
here also of that erroneous philosophical system which was recently
brought in and is clearly to be condemned. This system, which
comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does
not seek truth where it stands in the received and holy apostolic
inheritance. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain
doctrines not approved by the Church, are adopted. Only the most
conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can sustain and support
that truth. (Pope Gregory XVI, Singulari Nos, May 25, 1834.)
In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate.
It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own
order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and
which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the
Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the
Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached
the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in
the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised
it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the
commands which it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ
to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to
protect it in its inviolable integrity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)
Not least among the blessings
which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed
Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from
error and heresy. We may well admire in this the admirable wisdom of the
Providence of God, who, ever bringing good out of evil, has from time to time
suffered the faith and piety of men to grow weak, and allowed Catholic truth to
be attacked by false doctrines, but always with the result that truth has
afterwards shone out with greater splendor, and that men's faith, aroused from
its lethargy, has shown itself more vigorous than before. ( Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)
For the teaching authority of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in
order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that
they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men,
and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops
who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it
sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is
necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or
more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful
with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. (Pope
Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
86. For some there are who neglect the fact that the
Apostle Paul has used metaphorical language in speaking of this doctrine, and
failing to distinguish as they should the precise and proper meaning of the
terms the physical body, the social body, and the mystical Body, arrive at a
distorted idea of unity. They make the Divine Redeemer and the members of the
Church coalesce in one physical person, and while they bestow divine attributes
on man, they make Christ our Lord subject to error and to human inclination to
evil. But Catholic faith and the writings of the holy Fathers reject such false
teaching as impious and sacrilegious; and of the mind of the Apostle of the
Gentiles it is equally abhorrent, for although he brings Christ and His Mystical
Body into a wonderfully intimate union, he nevertheless distinguishes one from
the other as Bridegroom from Bride. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
Pope Pius XII also explained in Mystici Corporis the exact kind of "church" in which Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez believe:
63. Hence, this word in its correct signification gives us to understand that the Church, a perfect society of its kind, is not made up of merely moral and juridical elements and principles. It is far superior to all other human societies;  it surpasses them as grace surpasses nature, as things immortal are above all those that perish.  Such human societies, and in the first place civil Society, are by no means to be despised or belittled, but the Church in its entirely is not found within this natural order, any more than the whole of man is encompassed within the organism of our mortal body.  Although the juridical principles, on which the Church rests and is established, derive from the divine constitution given to it by Christ and contribute to the attaining of its supernatural end, nevertheless that which lifts the Society of Christians far above the whole natural order is the Spirit of our Redeemer who penetrates and fills every part of the Church's being and is active within it until the end of time as the source of every grace and every gift and every miraculous power. just as our composite mortal body, although it is a marvelous work of the Creator, falls far short of the eminent dignity of our soul, so the social structure of the Christian community, though it proclaims the wisdom of its divine Architect, still remains something inferior when compared to the spiritual gifts which give it beauty and life, and to the divine source whence they flow.
64. From what We have thus far written and explained, Venerable Brethren, it is clear, We think, how grievously they err who arbitrarily claim that the Church is something hidden and invisible, as they also do who look upon her as a mere human institution possessing a certain disciplinary code and external ritual, but lacking power to communicate supernatural life.  On the contrary, as Christ, Head and Exemplar of the Church "is not complete, if only His visible human nature is considered. . ., or if only His divine, invisible nature. . ., but He is one through the union of both and one in both . . . so is it with His Mystical Body"  since the Word of God took unto Himself a human nature liable to sufferings, so that He might consecrate in His blood the visible Society founded by Him and "lead man back to things invisible under a visible rule." 
65. For this reason We deplore and condemn the pernicious error of those who dream of an imaginary Church, a kind of society that finds its origin and growth in charity, to which, somewhat contemptuously, they oppose another, which they call juridical. But this distinction which they introduce is false: for they fail to understand that the reason which led our Divine Redeemer to give to the community of man He founded the constitution of a Society, perfect of its kind and containing all the juridical and social elements -namely, that He might perpetuate on earth the saving work of Redemption  -- was also the reason why He willed it to be enriched with the heavenly gifts of the Paraclete. The Eternal Father indeed willed it to be the "kingdom of the Son of his predilection;"  but it was to be a real kingdom, in which all believers should make Him the entire offering of their intellect and will,  and humbly and obediently model themselves on Him, Who for our sake "was made obedient unto death."  There can, then, be no real opposition or conflict between the invisible mission of the Holy Spirit and the juridical commission of Ruler and Teacher received from Christ, since they mutually complement and perfect each other -- as do the body and soul in man -- and proceed from our one Redeemer who not only said as He breathed on the Apostles "Receive ye the Holy Spirit,"  but also clearly commanded: "As the Father hath sent me, I also send you";  and again: "He that heareth you heareth me." 
66. And if at times there appears in the Church something that indicates the weakness of our human nature, it should not be attributed to her juridical constitution, but rather to that regrettable inclination to evil found in each individual, which its Divine Founder permits even at times in the most exalted members of His Mystical Body, for the purpose of testing the virtue of the shepherds no less than of the flocks, and that all may increase the merit of their Christian faith. For, as We said above, Christ did not wish to exclude sinners from His Church; hence if some of her members are suffering from spiritual maladies, that is no reason why we should lessen our love for the Church, but rather a reason why we should increase our devotion to her members. Certainly the loving Mother is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity,  she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors. But it cannot be laid to her charge if some members fall, weak or wounded. In their name she prays to God daily: "Forgive us our trespasses"; and with the brave heart of a mother she applies herself at once to the work of nursing them back to spiritual health. When therefore we call the Body of Jesus Christ "mystical," the very meaning of the word conveys a solemn warning. It is a warning that echoes in these words of St. Leo: "Recognize, O Christian, your dignity, and being made a sharer of the divine nature go not back to your former worthlessness along the way of unseemly conduct. Keep in mind of what Head and of what Body you are a member."  (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez are apostates, heretics and blasphemers of the highest order. Maradiaga Rodriguez is merely serving the of role of Soviet chief ideologist Mikhail Suslov to Bergoglio's Leonid Brezhnev. Maradiaga Rodriguez, in other orders, is the fellow with the the "brains" who gives pseudo-scholarly "muscle" to Bergoglio's visceral beliefs.
To contend that "neither the world is the realm of evil and sin –these are conclusions clearly achieved in Vatican II—nor is the Church the sole refuge of good and virtue" is to blaspheme the Third Person of the the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, Who inspired Saint John the Evangelist to write as follows of the world as the realm of evil and sin:
 Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him.
all that is in the world, is the concupiscence of the flesh, and the
concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of the
Father, but is of the world.  And the world passeth away, and the concupiscence thereof: but he that doth the will of God, abideth for ever. (1 John 2: 15-17.)
Writing in Creator and Creature, Father Frederick William Faber noted the enmity that we must have for the world and its attractions:
Well then might St. James come to his energetic conclusion, Whosoever
therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God. It
is remarkable also that St. John, the chosen friend of the Incarnate
Word, and the Evangelist of His Divinity, should be the one of the
inspired writers who speaks most often and most emphatically about the
world, as if the spirit of Jesus found something especially revolting to
it in the spirit of the world.
It is this world which we have to fight
against throughout the whole of our Christian course. Our salvation
depends upon our unforgiving enmity against it. It is not so much that
it is a sin, as that it is the capability of all sins, the air sin
breathes, the light by which it sees to do its work, the hotbed which
propagates and forces it, the instinct which guides it, the power which
animates it. For a Christian to look at, it is dishearteningly complete.
It is a sort of catholic church of the powers of the darkness. It is
laws of its own, and tastes the principles of its own, literature of its
own, a missionary spirit, a compact system, and it is a consistent
whole. It is a counterfeit of the Church of God, and in the most
implacable antagonism to it. The doctrines of the faith, the practices
and devotions of pious persons, the system of the interior life, the
mystical and contemplative world of the Saints, with all these it is at
deadly war. And so it must be. The view which the Church takes of the
world is distinct and clear, and far from flattering to its pride. It
considers the friendship of the world as enmity with God. It puts all
the world's affairs under its feet, either as of no consequence, or at
least of very secondary importance. It has great faults to find with the
effeminacy of the literary character, with the churlishness of the
mercantile character, with the servility of the political character, and
even with the inordinateness of the domestic character. It provokes the
world by looking in progress doubtingly, and with what appears a very
inadequate interest, and there is a quiet faith in its contempt for the
world extremely irritating to this latter power.
The world on the contrary thinks that it is
going to last for ever. It is almost assumes that there are no other
interests but its own, or that if there are, they are either of no
consequence, or troublesome and in the way. It thinks that there is
nothing like itself anywhere, that religion was made for its
convenience, merely to satisfy a want, and must not forget itself, or if
it claims more, must be put down as a rebel, or chased away as a
grumbling beggar; and finally it is of opinion, that of all contemptible
things spirituality is the most contemptible, cowardly, and little.
Thus the Church and the world are incompatible, and must remain so to
We cannot have a better instance of the
uncongeniality of the world with the spirit of the Gospel, than their
difference in the estimate of prosperity. All those mysterious woes
which our Lord denounced against wealth, have their explanation in the
dangers of worldliness. It is the peculiar aptitude of wealth and pomp,
and power, to harbor the unholy spirit of the world, to combine with it,
and transform themselves into it, which called forth the thrilling
malediction of our Lord. Prosperity may be a blessing from God, but it
may easily become the triumph of the world. And for the most
part the absence of chastisement is anything but a token of God's love.
When prosperity is a blessing, it is generally a condescension to our
weakness. Those are fearful words, Thou has already received thy reward;
yet how many prosperous men there are, the rest of whose lives will
keep reminding us of them; the tendency of prosperity in itself is to
wean the heart from God, and fix it on creatures. It gives us a most
unsupernatural habit of esteeming others according to their success. As
it increases, so anxiety to keep it increases also, and makes men
restless, selfish, and irreligious; and at length it superinduces a kind
of effeminacy of character, which unfits them for the higher and more
heroic virtues of the Christian character. This is but a sample of the
different way which the Church and the world reason.
Now it is this world which, far more than
the devil, far more than the flesh, yet in union with both, makes the
difficulty we find in obeying God 's commandments, or following His
counsels. It is this which makes earth such a place of struggle and of
exile. Proud, exclusive, anxious, hurried, fond of comforts, coveting
popularity, with an offensive orientation of prudence, it is this
worldliness which hardens the hearts of men, stops their ears, blinds
their eyes, vitiates their taste, and ties their hands, so far as the
things of God are concerned. Let it be true that salvation is
easy, and that by far the greater number of catholics are saved, it is
still unhappily true that that the relations of the Creator and the
creature, as put forward in this treatise, are not so universally or so
practically acknowledged as they ought to be. Why is this? Sin is a
partial answer. The devil is another partial answer. But I believe
worldliness has got to answer for a great deal of sin, and for a great
deal of devil, besides a whole deluge of iniquity of its own, which is
perpetually debasing good works, assisting the devil in his assaults,
and working with execrable assiduity against the sacraments and grace.
The world is for ever lowering the heavenly life of the Church. If there
ever was an age in which this was true, it is the present. One of the
most frightening features of our condition is, that we are so little
frightened of the world. The world itself has brought this about. Even
spiritual books are chiefly occupied with the devil and the flesh; and
certain of the capital sins, such as envy and sloth, no loner hold the
prominent places which they held of the systems of the elder ascetics;
and yet they are just those vices which contain most of the ungodly
spirit of the world. The very essence of worldliness seems to consist in
its making us forget that we are creatures; and the more this view is
reflected upon, the more correct will it appear. . . .
Worldliness then is a life of secret sins.
It is such an irresistible tendency to sin, such a successful
encouragement of it, such a genial climate, such a collection of
favourable circumstances, such an amazing capability of sin, that it
breeds actual sins, regularly formed and with all the theological
requirements, by millions and millions. It we read what the catechism of
the Council of Trent says of sins of thought, we shall see how
marvellously prolific sins can be, and what a pre-eminently devastating
power sins of thought in particular exercise within the soul. In
numberless cases open and crying sins must come at last. Still we must
remember that on the whole there are two characteristics which always
distinguish sins of worldliness from sins of the passions, or sins of
direct diabolical temptation. The respectability which worldliness
affects leads it rather to satisfy itself in secret sins. Indeed its
worship of self, its predilection for an easy life, would hinder its
embarking in sins which take trouble, time, and forethought, or which
run risks of disagreeable consequences, and therefore would keep it
confined within a sphere of secret sins. And in the next place its love
of comfort makes it so habitually disinclined to listen to the
reproaches of conscience, or the teasing solicitations of grace, that it
passes into the state of a seared conscience, a dreaded moral sense,
with a speed which is unknown even to cruelty or sensuality. (Father Frederick Faber, The Creator and Creature, written 1856 and republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 314-328.)
Oscar Andres Rodríguez Maradiaga and his friend from Argentina, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, do the work of Antichrist by believing an speaking and acting as they do. And a figure of Antichrist cannot be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter. It is that simple.
Saint John the Evangelist explained very clearly who is responsible for seeking a "reconciliation" with the world and its concupiscences:
 Little children, it is the last hour;
and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become
many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last hour.  They went out from us, but they were not of us.
For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us;
but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.  But you have the unction from the Holy One, and know all things. (1 John 2: 18-20.)
The hour is later than I wanted it to be. Indeed, figuratively speaking, it is very late for each of us. We live in the time of figures of Antichrist. Of this there can be no doubt whatsoever.
Remember, today is a day of fast and partial abstinence.
Prepare well for the Feast of All Saints tomorrow, making sure to pray some extra Rosaries today in reparation for the sins of these current conciliar revolutionaries that have been committed in this month that has been dedicated to this weapon that Our Lady gave to Saint Dominic de Guzman to fight the Albigensian heresy.
Avoid all contact with "Halloween" as it has become celebrated as a seven billion dollar industry to propagate demonic images and messages, avoiding contact as well with the conciliar revolutionaries who dress up every day in costumes to masquerade as officials of the Catholic Church whose immutable teachings they dare to reverse and mock.
Part two tomorrow, God willing and Our Lady interceding.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, 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 Andrew the Apostle, 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.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Joseph Ratzinger's Condemned Views on Dogmatic Evolution
1971: "In theses 10-12, the
difficult problem of the relationship between language and thought is
debated, which in post-conciliar discussions was the immediate departure
point of the dispute.
The identity of the Christian substance as such, the
Christian 'thing' was not directly ... censured, but it was pointed out
that no formula, no matter how valid and indispensable it may have been
in its time, can fully express the thought mentioned in it and declare
it unequivocally forever, since language is constantly in movement and
the content of its meaning changes. (Fr. Ratzinger: Dogmatic formulas must always change.)
The text [of the document Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial
Vocation] also presents the various types of bonds that rise from the
different degrees of magisterial teaching. It affirms - perhaps
for the first time with this clarity - that there are decisions of the
magisterium that cannot be the last word on the matter as such, but are,
in a substantial fixation of the problem, above all an expression of
pastoral prudence, a kind of provisional disposition. The nucleus
remains valid, but the particulars, which the circumstances of the times
influenced, may need further correction.
In this regard, one may think of the declarations of Popes in the last
century [19th century] about religious liberty, as well as the
anti-Modernist decisions at the beginning of this century, above all,
the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the time [on evolutionism].
As a cry of alarm in the face of hasty and superficial adaptations, they
will remain fully justified. A personage such as Johann Baptist Metz
said, for example, that the Church's anti-Modernist decisions render the
great service of preserving her from falling into the liberal-bourgeois
world. But in the details of the determinations they contain, they
became obsolete after having fulfilled their pastoral mission at their
(Joseph Ratzinger, "Instruction on the Theologian's Ecclesial Vocation,"
published with the title "Rinnovato dialogo fra Magistero e Teologia,"
in L'Osservatore Romano, June 27, 1990, p. 6, cited at Card. Ratzinger: The teachings of the Popes against Modernism are obsolete)
It is precisely in this
combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels that
the very nature of true reform consists. In this process of
innovation in continuity we must learn to understand more practically
than before that the Church's decisions on contingent matters - for
example, certain practical forms of liberalism or a free interpretation
of the Bible - should necessarily be contingent themselves, precisely
because they refer to a specific reality that is changeable in itself. It was necessary to learn to
recognize that in these decisions it is only the principles that
express the permanent aspect, since they remain as an undercurrent,
motivating decisions from within.
On the other hand, not so permanent are the practical forms that
depend on the historical situation and are therefore subject to change. (Christmas greetings to the Members of the Roman Curia and Prelature, December 22, 2005.)
The Catholic Church's Condemnations of the Beliefs Held by Ratzinger, Bergoglio and Maradiaga Rodriguez
For the doctrine of the faith which God has revealed is put forward
- not as some philosophical discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence,
- but as a divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully protected and infallibly promulgated.
Hence, too, that meaning of the
sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by
holy mother church, and there must never be any abandonment of this
sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth.
The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either: the
dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the
mind of the church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions
Therefore we define that every assertion contrary to the truth of enlightened faith is totally false. . . .
3. If anyone says that it is possible that
at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be
assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from
that which the church has understood and understands: let him be
And so in the performance of our supreme pastoral
office, we beseech for the love of Jesus Christ and we command, by the
authority of him who is also our God and saviour, all faithful
Christians, especially those in authority or who have the duty of
teaching, that they contribute their zeal and labour to the warding off
and elimination of these errors from the church and to the spreading of
the light of the pure faith.
But since it is not enough to avoid the
contamination of heresy unless those errors are carefully shunned which
approach it in greater or less degree, we warn all of their duty to
observe the constitutions and decrees in which such wrong opinions,
though not expressly mentioned in this document, have been banned and
forbidden by this holy see. (Pope Pius IX, Vatican Council, Session III,
Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Chapter 4, On Faith and
Reason, April 24, 1870. SESSION 3 : 24 April 1.)
Hence it is quite impossible [the Modernists assert] to maintain that they [dogmatic statements] absolutely contain the truth: for, in so far as they are symbols, they
are the images of truth, and so must be adapted to the religious sense
in its relation to man; and as instruments, they are the vehicles of
truth, and must therefore in their turn be adapted to man in his
relation to the religious sense. But the object of the
religious sense, as something contained in the absolute, possesses an
infinite variety of aspects, of which now one, now another, may present
itself. In like manner he who believes can avail himself of varying
conditions. Consequently, the formulas which we call dogma must
be subject to these vicissitudes, and are, therefore, liable to change.
Thus the way is open to the intrinsic evolution of dogma. Here we have
an immense structure of sophisms which ruin and wreck all religion.
It is thus, Venerable Brethren, that for the
Modernists, whether as authors or propagandists, there is to be nothing
stable, nothing immutable in the Church. Nor, indeed, are they without
forerunners in their doctrines, for it was of these that Our predecessor
Pius IX wrote: 'These enemies of divine revelation extol human progress
to the skies, and with rash and sacrilegious daring would have it
introduced into the Catholic religion as if this religion were not the
work of God but of man, or some kind of philosophical discovery
susceptible of perfection by human efforts.' On the subject of
revelation and dogma in particular, the doctrine of the Modernists
offers nothing new. We find it condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX,
where it is enunciated in these terms: ''Divine revelation is imperfect,
and therefore subject to continual and indefinite progress,
corresponding with the progress of human reason'; and condemned still
more solemnly in the Vatican Council: ''The doctrine of the
faith which God has revealed has not been proposed to human
intelligences to be perfected by them as if it were a philosophical
system, but as a divine deposit entrusted to the Spouse of Christ to be
faithfully guarded and infallibly interpreted. Hence also that sense of
the sacred dogmas is to be perpetually retained which our Holy Mother
the Church has once declared, nor is this sense ever to be abandoned on
plea or pretext of a more profound comprehension of the truth.'
Nor is the development of our knowledge, even concerning the faith,
barred by this pronouncement; on the contrary, it is supported and
maintained. For the same Council continues: 'Let intelligence and
science and wisdom, therefore, increase and progress abundantly and
vigorously in individuals, and in the mass, in the believer and in the
whole Church, throughout the ages and the centuries -- but only in its own kind, that is, according to the same dogma, the same sense, the same acceptation.' (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)
sincerely hold that the doctrine of faith was handed down to us from the
apostles through the orthodox Fathers in exactly the same meaning and
always in the same purport. Therefore, I entirely reject the heretical'
misrepresentation that dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to
another different from the one which the Church held previously. . . .
Finally, I declare that I am completely opposed to the error of the
modernists who hold that there is nothing divine in sacred tradition; or
what is far worse, say that there is, but in a pantheistic sense, with
the result that there would remain nothing but this plain simple
fact-one to be put on a par with the ordinary facts of history-the fact,
namely, that a group of men by their own labor, skill, and talent have
continued through subsequent ages a school begun by Christ and his
apostles. I firmly hold, then, and shall hold to my dying breath the
belief of the Fathers in the charism of truth, which certainly is, was,
and always will be in the succession of the episcopacy from the
apostles. The purpose of this is, then, not that dogma may be
tailored according to what seems better and more suited to the culture
of each age; rather, that the absolute and immutable truth preached by
the apostles from the beginning may never be believed to be different,
may never be understood in any other way.
I promise that I shall keep all these articles
faithfully, entirely, and sincerely, and guard them inviolate, in no way
deviating from them in teaching or in any way in word or in writing.
Thus I promise, this I swear, so help me God. (The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910.)