Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
               October 21, 2008

Fearing Not to Offend God Himself

by Thomas A. Droleskey

For Fear of the Jews, which was published ten months ago today, discussed reports that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI was holding back on a conciliar "beatification" of the late Pope Pius XII, who died fifty years ago, on October 9, 1958, for fear of offending adherents of the Talmud and thus "injuring" the counterfeit church of conciliarism's "relations" with them.

Ratzinger/Benedict praised Pope Pius XII in a Protestant and Novus Ordo service on October 9, 2008, just three days after a Talmudic rabbi, Shear-Yashuv Cohen, who had been invited personally b Ratzinger/Benedict to speak at the ongoing "world synod of bishops" at the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside-the-Walls in Rome, Italy, defamed the memory of the late pontiff by implication when he said:

“We cannot forget the sad and painful fact of how many, including great religious leaders, didn’t raise a voice in the effort to save our brethren, but chose to keep silent and help secretly,” said Cohen, the Chief Rabbi of Haifa in Israel.

“We cannot forgive and forget, and we hope you understand our pain, our sorrow,” Cohen said, speaking in English to an audience of some 253 cardinals, archbishops and bishops, as well as Benedict XVI. (John Allen: Rabbi says Jews cannot 'forgive and forget' Pius XII.)


It appears, however, that Ratzinger/Benedict lives in a world of fear, the fear that drove him to comply with a command to join the Hitler Youth as a teenager and to refuse to serve in the Nazi army in the last days of World War II, and is still concerned, at least to some extent, that the conciliar "beatification" of Pope Pius XII will offend the adherents of the Talmud, whose protestations in July of 2007 caused him to "revise" the Good Friday Prayer for the Jews that is in the Missal of Angelo Roncalli/John XXXIII used by the Motu communities.

Here are two reports:

ROME, Italy – Pope Benedict XVI has held off taking the first steps towards the canonization of one of his predecessors in order to maintain good relations with Jews, a backer of sainthood for Pius XII said Saturday.

Jewish groups accuse Pius, pontiff from 1939 to 1958, of having failed to protest the Holocaust and having been passive towards persecution of Jews.

Father Peter Gumpel, the promoter of the case for sainthood for Pius, told the Italian news agency ANSA that the procedure for beatification, the first step towards canonization, has been completed.

But Benedict had not signed the decree "because he wants good relations with the Jews."

"The pope has not yet signed the decree, considering a time of reflection opportune," the Vatican spokesman said.

For Pius to be canonized, Benedict first has to sign a decree attesting to the exercise of the candidate's "heroic virtues" and then a miracle has to be attributed to him.

Earlier this month Benedict defended the memory of Pius, baptized Eugenio Pacelli, at a mess to mark the 50th anniversary of his death and said he wanted him to be beatified soon.

He regretted that the record of Pius had been overshadowed by a historical debate that had not "always been calm".

Gumpel said that Benedict "would like to go to Israel as soon as possible" but cannot do so until a caption to a picture of Pius XII, accusing him of remaining silent, in the Holocaust memorial at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, had been removed.

The caption was "an obvious falsification of history," Gumpel said.

As long as the caption remained, a trip to Israel by the pontiff would be "a scandal for Catholics," he said.

"The Catholic church does what it can to have good relations with Israel but friendly relations can only be built on reciprocity," he said.

"We see that the pope with a great sense of hospitality invited a rabbi to our (recent) synod and he abused our kindness by attacking on three occasions Pius XII," said Gumpel.

"Of course the rabbi can say what he wants but if he is our guest and he talks like that he doesn't help improve our relations.

"We oppose the beatification of Pius XII. We cannot forget his silence on the Holocaust," Shear-Yashuv Cohen, the grand rabbi of Haifa, told an Italian newspaper earlier this month.

"He should not be seen as a model and he should not be beatified because he did not raise his voice against the Holocaust. He didn't speak

because he was afraid or for other personal reasons," the rabbi, who became the first Jew to address a synod of Catholic bishops, said.

But Gumpel claimed that Jews were divided on the beatification issue.

"Some continue to attack the Catholic Church saying that Christ was the son of a soldier and a prostitute while others say nobody saved as many Jews as Pius XII."

Some Catholics would prefer see John XXIII, successor to Pius, made a saint before his predecessor. (Ratzinger holds off Pius XII beatification)

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican has asked those supporting and opposing the beatification of Pope Pius XII to stop pressuring Pope Benedict XVI on the issue.

The Vatican statement came after the latest public clash over whether Pope Pius did enough to help Jews during World War II.

Jesuit Father Peter Gumpel, one of the promoters of Pope Pius' sainthood cause, said in an interview Oct. 18 that Pope Benedict could not possibly travel to Israel until curators of the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial in Jerusalem removed a photo caption stating that Pope Pius did nothing to condemn the Nazis and their slaughter of the Jews.

Father Gumpel, speaking to the Italian news agency ANSA, said the caption was "an obvious historical falsification" and that as long as it remained, a papal visit to Israel "would be a scandal for Catholics."

A few hours after the interview appeared, the Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, reiterated the Vatican's objections to the Yad Vashem display, but said it was not a decisive obstacle to a papal trip.

Pope Benedict wants to travel to the Holy Land, but for now nothing has been planned, the spokesman said.

Father Lombardi emphasized that Pope Benedict has not signed the decree of heroic virtues of Pope Pius, the next step necessary for his sainthood cause to advance.

"That is the subject of study and reflection on (the pope's) part, and in this situation it is not appropriate to exercise pressure on him in one direction or the other," Father Lombardi said.

In recent months, many Catholic experts have expressed their strong hope that the sainthood cause for Pope Pius would be moved forward, after the Vatican Congregation for Saints' Causes completed its documentation work and unanimously recommended beatification.

At the same time, Jewish groups have reiterated their strong opposition to beatification of Pope Pius, saying it would set back Catholic-Jewish dialogue.

At the Yad Vashem memorial in Jerusalem, the controversy surfaced in 2007, when the Vatican's nuncio to Israel, Archbishop Antonio Franco, threatened to skip a ceremony there because of the offending photo caption.

In his latest statement, Father Lombardi noted the Vatican's previous objections.

"It is hoped, therefore, that this be the subject of a new, objective and thoughtful reflection by those responsible for the museum," Father Lombardi said.

The photo of Pope Pius and its accompanying caption were placed at Yad Vashem in 2005. The text states that Pope Pius shelved a letter against anti-Semitism, did nothing to protest mass murder of Jews, refused to sign a 1942 Allied condemnation of the massacre of the Jews, and failed to intervene when Jews were deported from Rome to the Auschwitz death camp.

"His silence and the absence of guidelines obliged churchmen throughout Europe to decide on their own how to react," the caption says.

Vatican and other church officials, supported by some Jewish experts, have made recent highly publicized efforts to defend Pope Pius and his wartime record, saying that his behind-the-scenes efforts saved thousands of Jewish lives.

They have said Pope Pius was ultimately responsible for establishing a clandestine network of safe houses for people escaping Nazi persecution, utilizing the church's religious orders, communities, convents and seminaries -- and even the pope's own summer residence outside Rome.

At a Mass Oct. 9 marking the 50th anniversary of the death of Pope Pius, Pope Benedict said the late pope had done all he could to help Jews, working quietly and in secret because he knew that was the only way "he could avoid the worst and save the greatest possible number of Jews."  (Vatican: Stop pressuring Benedict Pope Pius XII's Beatification.)


Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI may very well wind up "beatifying" Pope Pius XII in another of the counterfeit church of conciliarism's illicit exercises of the authority that belongs solely the Catholic Church. It is understandable for a man who believes himself to be the Vicar of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on earth to want to make it known that he does not want to be pressured by anyone, including adherents of the Talmud, concerning a decision to "beatify" a candidate whose cause for beatification is before him. What is most telling, however, is that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI does seem to have a genuine fear of offending the Jews and that this fear is indeed slowing down the process for the conciliar church's "beatification of Pope Pius XII. After all, why do adherents of the Talmud believe that they can have any influence on a putative Roman Pontiff? It is because the conciliar "pontiffs" have given them cause to believe that they do have influence over them, that's why.

Each of us is a weak vessel of clay. Human respect, which is the fear offending others and losing their respect and/or friendship. can get the better of any one of us at any time. We are supposed to overcome human respect over the course of our lifetimes, especially as we grow older, as we cooperate with the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces. We must fear to offend God before we offend any man,, especially those who are His sworn enemies.

It appears to be the case with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI that he fears not to offend God as he seeks the favor of unbelievers and heretics almost without cease. This creates a vicious cycle as many, especially "priests" in the Motu communities and some of the younger "conservative" bloggers who are promoting Ratzinger/Benedict as a "restorer of tradition," desire to please Ratzinger/Benedict rather than to defend the honor and glory and majesty of God as He is offended time and time again by the false "pontiff."

Putting aside, without minimizing for a nanosecond, the many ways in which Ratzinger/Benedict offends God by his lifelong warfare against the nature of dogmatic truth as defined solemnly by the teaching authority of the Catholic Church and by his other defections from the Catholic Faith, all one needs to do is to review the following few actions that have occurred under his false "pontificate" to understand how the Ratzinger/Benedict has offended God greatly and without even seeming to know that he has done so, which is in and of itself a clear sign that he has lost the Catholic Faith:

  1. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI rejected the "ecumenism of the return" in an address to Protestant and Orthodox representatives at an ecumenical gathering in Cologne, Germany, on August 19, 2005. This offends God greatly as He desires the unconditional conversion of every non-Catholic on the face of the earth to the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation.
  2. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI visited a synagogue in Cologne, Germany, on August 19, 2005, in full violation of the authentic Canon Law of the Catholic Church and without exhorting his listeners to convert from their false religion to the true Faith
  3. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI personally approved the use of the "Paul VI" Audience Hall for the "world premiere" of The Nativity Story on Sunday, November 26, 2006, although the movie, produced by a Protestant, blaspheme the ever-sinless Mother of God by portraying her as a sulky, mood, rebellious teenager, thereby denying the doctrinal effects of her Immaculate Conception and also denigrating the doctrine of her Divine Maternity as declared by the Council of Ephesus in in the year 431 A.D. and the miraculous Nativity of her Divine Son. God is not pleased as a motion picture blaspheming his Most Blessed Mother and his foster-father, Saint Joseph, is promoted by putative "Catholics" inside the walls of the Vatican itself.
  4. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI entered into the Blue Mosque in Istanbul, Turkey, on November 30, 2006, taking off his shoes so as to symbolize that he was in a "holy place" and then turned in the direction of Mecca at the behest of his Mohammedan "host," who instructed him to assume the Mohammedan prayer position as they "prayed" together. God is offended by honor being given to such a false religion as the souls of His faithful Catholics are scandalized and bewildered and confused as a consequence.
  5. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI appeared as an equal with "Patriarch" Bartholomew I in Istanbul, Turkey, on November 30, 2006, issuing a joint statement which included the following statement, "This commitment comes from the Lord’s will and from our responsibility as Pastors in the Church of Christ" (Common Declaration by Benedict XVI and Patriarch Bartholomew I). Bartholomew I, who "prayed" with Ratzinger/Benedict in the Sistine Chapel on Saturday, October 18, 2008, for an end to "fundamentalism" and for "religious tolerance, is not a "pastor" in the Church of Christ. The only Church of Christ is the Catholic Church, from which the heretic Bartholomew I is in schism. He is not a "pastor" in the Church of Christ. Of course, neither is Ratzinger/Benedict.
  6. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI sent a letter on August 4, 2007, to an interreligious conference being held on Mount Hiei in Japan, terming Mount Hiei, upon which the Tendei sect of the false religion of Buddhism established its first "stronghold," as "sacred," thereby blaspheming God and reaffirming devil worshipers in their false religion.
  7. As has been noted on this site many times in the past six months, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI personally esteemed the symbols of five false religions at the John Paul Cultural Center on Thursday, April 17, 2008, offending God grievously as he violated the First Commandment's absolute and unwavering injunction to have no strange gods before me. How many people rose to defend the honor and majesty and glory of God? Not many. Not many at all.
  8. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI walked into a Jewish synagogue in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, New York, on Friday, April 18, 2008, to be treated as an inferior and as the choir sang a "hymn" about how they were "awaiting" the Messiah.
  9. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI participated in several travesties during "World Youth Day" in Sydney, Australia, including a horrific display of pagan rituals during a Novus Ordo service at Randwick Racecourse on Sunday, July 20, 2008.
  10. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI permitted the non-"archbishop" of Canterbury to deliver the "homily" at a Novus Ordo service in Lourdes, France, on Sunday, September 14, 2008, treating the non-cleric as a validly ordained clergyman, which he is not.


This list is hardly exhaustive. It does not include many of the matters covered in Singing the Old Songs and Calling Poison Health Food Doesn't Make It So, among many other articles. This list has been provided to demonstrate that grave offenses, objectively speaking, against God have been committed on a regular basis by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI even as he tries to please Jews and Buddhists and Protestants and Mohammedans and other adherents of false religions. A man who can act as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has done to esteem false religions and to treat their "ministers" as valid in the eyes of God has defected from the Catholic Faith.

Then again, my friends, one who denies the nature of dogmatic truth as defined solemnly by the teaching authority of the Catholic Church does not really believe in God as He has revealed Himself through His true Church. Ratzinger/Benedict's conception of God is that of the murkiness of the "New Theology" in which he was trained as a seminarian and to which he has been devoted throughout the course of his priesthood. This is why it is easy for Ratzinger/Benedict to do things that millions upon millions of Catholics gave up their lives to do. He, Ratzinger/Benedict, does not really believe in the God of Revelation as they did. They understood what needed to be done to defend the honor and glory and majesty of God. Ratzinger/Benedict does not.

Mr. James Larson, a Catholic writer who is very much opposed to sedevacantism, has written some devastating critiques of Ratzinger/Benedict's "New Theology," focusing in one of his essays on Ratzinger's erroneous notion of the Supernatural Virtue of Hope:

Hope, in other words, is totally rooted in Faith as its substance, and Faith is rooted in the content of what God has revealed to us. This is why in order to possess Catholic faith, submission to all the defined doctrines of our faith is necessary. Faith is constituted by a submission of both intellect and will to the Sacred Deposit of Faith which God has revealed to us through His Church. Because all doctrine is not, and cannot, be fully understood does not mean that this submission is, or should be, or may be, any less. Faith is not, therefore, equivalent to hope, but rather its requisite. And contrary to what Fr. Ratzinger said in regard to a man remaining a Christian despite the fact that he may "find many of the details of faith obscure and impracticable” (read: cannot be used, accepted or practiced), the absolute obligation to accept the entire Deposit of Faith in order to retain Catholic Faith is still imperative. St. Thomas writes:

"Just as mortal sin is contrary to charity, so is disbelief in one article of faith contrary to faith. Now charity does not remain in a man after one mortal sin. Therefore neither does faith, after a man disbelieves one article." (Ibid, II-II, Q.5, A.3).

In the entire length of Spe Salvi [Ratzinger's second encyclical letter as "Benedict XVI], not a single reference is made to Revealed Truth, the Deposit of Faith, Doctrine, or Dogma as having any relation whatsoever to our Hope.

Having sundered both hope and faith from the absolutely objective content of the Deposit of Faith, Joseph Ratzinger is left merely with the existential choice of continuing to believe in the "You" of Jesus Christ, but not the "something" of this Divine Deposit. And since (Christ's) claim to be both man and God is just as absurd from the positivistic viewpoint as transubstantiation or original sin, then this choice, this hope, this trust, this faith becomes essentially an existential choice with no objective foundation. As such, it can make no claims to exclusivity, and therefore demand no conversion. It must, in other words, adjust itself to pluralism and ecumenism. Again, from [Father Joseph Ratzinger's] Faith and the Future:

"As things are, faith cannot count on a bundle of philosophical certainties [thus Thomism is sent entirely packing) which lead up to faith and support it. It will be compelled, rather, to prove its own legitimacy in advance by reflecting on its own inner reasonableness and by presenting itself as a reasonable whole, which can be offered to men as a possible and responsible choice. To say this is to imply that faith must clearly adjust itself to an intellectual pluralism that cannot ever be reversed, and within this intellectual climate must present itself as a comprehensible offer of meaning, even if it can find no prolegomena in a commonly accepted philosophical system. That means, in the end, that the meaning which man needs becomes accessible in any case only through a decision for a meaningful structure. It may not be proved, but can be seen as meaningful." (p. 74-75)


Imagine trying to teach such a faith to all the little children who Our Lord instructed us to "suffer" to come unto Him. The victim in all this is not only the Truth. It is also the Innocent. (James Larson, Article 12: The Quintessential Evolutionist.)


Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger had no answer for the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre when the latter confronted him, Ratzinger, with the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church on the Social Reign of Christ the King. Ratzinger had made up his mind long ago that the confessionally Catholic civil state was a thing of the past, and was probably a "bad thing" even in the era of Christendom. Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais recounted the meeting, which took place on July 14, 1987, in The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre:

Under pressure, Rome gave in. On July 14, Cardinal Ratzinger received Archbishop Lefebvre at the Holy Office. At first the Cardinal persisted in arguing that "the State is competent in religious matters."

"But the State must have an ultimate and eternal end," replied the Archbishop.

"Your Grace, that is the case for the Church, not the State. By itself the State does not know."

Archbishop Lefebvre was distraught: a Cardinal and Prefect of the Holy Office wanted to show him that the State can have no religion and cannot prevent the spread of error. However, before talking about concessions, the Cardinal made a threat: the consequence of an illicit episcopal consecration would be "schism and excommunication."

"Schism?" retorted the Archbishop. "If there is a schism, it is because of what the Vatican did at Assisi and how you replied to our Dubiae: the Church is breaking with the traditional Magisterium. But the Church against her past and her Tradition is not the Catholic Church; this is why being excommunicated by a liberal, ecumenical, and revolutionary Church is a matter of indifference to us."

As this tirade ended, Joseph Ratzinger gave in: "Let us find a practical solution. Make a moderate declaration on the Council and the new missal a bit like the one that Jean Guitton has suggested to you. Then, we would give you a bishop for ordinations, we could work out an arrangement with the diocesan bishops, and you could continue as you are doing. As for a Cardinal Protector, and make your suggestions."

How did Marcel Lefebvre not jump for joy? Rome was giving in! But his penetrating faith went to the very heart of the Cardinal's rejection of doctrine. He said to himself: "So, must Jesus no longer reign? Is Jesus no longer God? Rome has lost the Faith. Rome is in apostasy. We can no longer trust this lot!" To the Cardinal, he said:

"Eminence, even if you give us everything--a bishop, some autonomy from the bishops, the 1962 liturgy, allow us to continue our seminaries--we cannot work together because we are going in different directions. You are working to dechristianize society and the Church, and we are working to Christianize them.

"For us, our Lord Jesus Christ is everything. He is our life. The Church is our Lord Jesus Christ; the priest is another Christ; the Mass is the triumph of Jesus Christ on the cross; in our seminaries everything tends towards the reign of our Lord Jesus Christ. But you! You are doing the opposite: you have just wanted to prove to me that our Lord Jesus Christ cannot, and must not, reign over society.

Recounting this incident, the Archbishop described the Cardinal's attitude" "Motionless, he looked at me, his eyes expressionless, as if I had just suggested something incomprehensible or unheard of." Then Ratzinger tried to argue that "the Church can still say whatever she wants to the State," while Lefebvre, the intuitive master of Catholic metaphysics, did not lose sight of the true end of human societies: the Reign of Christ." Fr. de Tinguy hit the nail on the head when he said of Marcel Lefebvre: "His faith defies those who love theological quibbles." (His Excellency Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre, Kansas City, Missouri: Angelus Press, 2004, pp. 547-548.)


The Catholic teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King is so foreign to the mind of Joseph Ratzinger that he sat "motionless" with "expressionless" eyes as the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre defended the rights of Our King to reign over men and their nations. There would be a similar reaction if any one of us tried to explain to him that he has offended God greatly by many of his words and actions. You see, he, Ratzinger/Benedict, does not believe that God hates false religions. He believes that God the Holy Ghost works in and through these false religions. And although he has been quite careful not to embrace openly the theology of universal salvation that was advanced by one of his chief mentors, the late Father Hans Urs von Balthasar, his actions and his words have certainly given the impression that those who adhere to false religions are not in any jeopardy whatsoever of losing their immortal souls for all eternity.

In other words, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI does not really believe in God as He has revealed Himself through His true Church. He does not really believe that the particular expressions of dogmatic truth in one era are binding in another, does not really believe that Catholics are bound in the present by the Catholic Church's constant prohibitions against inter-religious "prayer" services as summarized by the late Bishop George Hay:

Seeing, therefore, that the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of this holy apostle, has so often, and in such strong terms, forbidden all manner of fellowship in religion with those who are out of His holy Church, let us not be deceived by the specious but vain sophistry of cunning men, who lie in wait to deceive; let us not offend our God, by transgressing these His express commands, by joining in the prayers or going to the meetings of such as are separated from His holy Church, lest He should withdraw His holy grace from US, and as we expose ourselves to the danger, leave us to perish in it.

Let us hear and follow the advice and command of the same holy apostle: "As therefore ye have received Jesus Christ the Lord, walk ye in Him; rooted and built up in Him, and confirmed in the faith; as also ye have learned, abounding in Him in thanksgiving. Beware lest any man impose upon you by philosophy and vain deceit according to the tradition of men, according to the rudiments of the world, and not according to Christ." (Col. 2:6) Wherefore, to all those arguments which may be brought from human, worldly, or interested motives, to induce us to join in or to partake of any religious duty with those of a false religion, though in appearance only, we ought to oppose this one, — "God has expressly forbidden it, therefore no human power can make it lawful."


Q. What are the particular laws on this subject?

A. In the three general commands above mentioned, God Almighty speaks, by the mouth of His holy apostle, as Lord and Master, and lays His orders upon us absolutely. In what follows, He unites the merciful Savior to the Sovereign; and whilst He no less strictly commands us to avoid all religious communication with those who are separated from His holy Faith and Church, He at the same time condescends to engage our obedience, by showing us the strongest reasons for it.

(1) "Beware of false prophets", says our blessed Master, "who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves". (Mat. 7:5) Here Jesus Christ commands His followers to "beware of false prophets" — that is, to flee from them, to be on their guard against them; and He adds this powerful motive, "Lest ye be seduced and ruined by them"; for, whatever appearance of godliness they may put on, though they come to you in the clothing of sheep, yet within they are ravenous wolves, and seek only to slay and to destroy.

To the same purpose He says in another place, "Take heed that no man seduce you; for many will come in My name, saying, I am Christ, and they will seduce many." (Mat. 24:4) "And many false prophets shall arise and seduce many." (ver. 2) Here He foretells the cunning of false teachers, and the danger of being seduced by them, and commands us to take care of ourselves, that such be not our fate.

But how shall we escape from them? He afterwards tells us how: do not believe them, have nothing to do with them, have no communication, with them. "Then", He says, "if any man shall say, to you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, do not believe him. For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive even the elect. Behold. I have told it you beforehand. If therefore, they shall say to you, Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out; behold he is in the closet, believe it not." (Mat. 24:23)

Can there be a more powerful reason to enforce the observance of His command, or a stronger motive to induce His followers to have no religious communication with such false teachers? Many will be certainly seduced by them; and so will you, if you expose yourself to the danger.

(2) St. Peter, considering the great mercy bestowed upon us by the grace of our vocation to the true faith of Christ, says, that it is our duty to "declare the praises and virtues of Him who hath called us out of darkness into His admirable light". (1 Pet. 2:9) St. Paul also exhorts us to "give thanks to God the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His beloved Son." (Col. 1:12) Where it is manifest that as the true Faith of Jesus Christ is the only light that conducts to salvation, and that it is only in His Kingdom — that is, in His Church — where that heavenly light is to be found, so all false religions are darkness; and that to be separated from the Kingdom of Christ is to be in darkness as to the great affair of eternity. And indeed what greater or more miserable darkness can a soul be in than to be led away by seducing spirits, and "departing from the faith of Christ, give heed to the doctrine of devils". (1 Tim. 4:1) St. Paul, deploring the state of such souls, says that they "have their understandings darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance: that is in them, because of the blindness of their hearts". (Eph. 4:18)

On this account the same holy apostle exhorts us in the most pressing manner to take care not to be seduced from the light of our holy Faith by the vain words and seducing speeches of false teachers, by which we would certainly incur the anger of God; and, to prevent so great a misery, He not only exhorts us to walk as children of the light in the practice of all holy virtues, but expressly commands us to avoid all communication in religion with those who walk in the darkness of error. "Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of unbelief; be ye not, therefore, partakers with them. For ye were theretofore darkness; but now light in the Lord; walk ye as the children of the light, . . . and have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness". (Eph. 5:6)

Here, then, we have an express command, not only not to partake with the unfruitful works of darkness — that is, not to join in any false religion, or partake of its rites or sacraments — but also, not to have any fellowship with its professors, not to be present at their meetings or sermons, or any other of their religious offices, lest we be deceived by them, and incur the anger of the Almighty, provoke Him to withdraw His assistance from us, and leave us to ourselves, in punishment of our disobedience.

(3) St. Paul, full of zeal for the good of souls, and solicitous to preserve us from all danger of losing our holy Faith, the groundwork of our salvation, renews the same command in his Epistle to the Romans, by way of entreaty, beseeching us to avoid all such communication with those of a false religion. He also shows us by what sign we should discover them, and points out the source of our danger from them: "Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who cause dissensions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and to avoid them; for they that are such serve not Our Lord Christ, but their own belly, and by pleasing speeches and good words seduce the hearts of the innocent". (Rom. 16:17)

See here whom we are to avoid — "those that cause dissensions contrary to the ancient doctrine"; all those who, hating, left the true Faith and doctrine which they had learned, and which has been handed down to us from the beginning by the Church of Christ, follow strange doctrines, and make divisions and dissensions in the Christian world. And why are we to avoid them? Because they are not servants of Christ, but slaves to their own belly, whose hearts are placed upon the enjoyments of this world, and who, by "pleasing speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent" — that is, do not bring good reasons or solid arguments to seduce people to their evil ways, so as to convince the understanding, for that is impossible; but practice upon their hearts and passions, relaxing the laws of the gospel, granting liberties to the inclinations of flesh and blood, laying aside the sacred rules of mortification of the passions and of self-denial, promising worldly wealth, and ease, and honors, and, by pleasing speeches of this kind, seducing the heart, and engaging people to their ways.

(4) The same argument and command the apostle repeats in his epistle to his beloved disciple Timothy, where he gives a sad picture, indeed, of all false teachers, telling us that they put on an outward show of piety the better to deceive, "having an appearance, indeed, of godliness, but denying the power thereof;" then he immediately gives this command: "Now these avoid: for of this sort are they that creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, who are led away with divers desires"; and adds this sign by which they may be known, that, not having the true Faith of Christ, and being out of His holy Church — the only sure rule for knowing the truth — they are never settled, but are always altering and changing their opinions, "ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth"; because, as he adds, "they resist the truth, being corrupted in their mind, and reprobate concerning the Faith". (2 Tim. 3:5)

Here it is to be observed that, though the apostle says that silly weak people, and especially women, are most apt to be deceived by such false teachers, yet he gives the command of avoiding all communication with them in their evil ways, to all without exception, even to Timothy himself; for the epistle is directed particularly to him, and to him he says, as well as to all others, "Now these avoid", though he was a pastor of the church, and fully instructed by the apostle himself in all the truths of religion; because, besides the danger of seduction, which none can escape who voluntarily expose themselves to it, all such communication is evil in itself, and therefore to be avoided by all, and especially by pastors, whose example would be more prejudicial to others.

(5) Lastly, the beloved disciple St. John renews the same command in the strongest terms, and adds another reason, which regards all without exception, and especially those who are best instructed in their duty: "Look to yourselves", says he, "that ye lose not the things that ye have wrought, but that you may receive a full reward. Whosoever revolteth, and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that continueth in the doctrine the same hath both the Father and the Son. If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, nor say to him, God speed you: for he that saith to him, God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works". (2 John, ver. 8)

Here, then, it is manifest, that all fellowship with those who have not the doctrine of Jesus Christ, which is "a communication in their evil works" — that is, in their false tenets, or worship, or in any act of religion — is strictly forbidden, under pain of losing the "things we have wrought, the reward of our labors, the salvation of our souls". And if this holy apostle declares that the very saying God speed to such people is a communication with their wicked works, what would he have said of going to their places of worship, of hearing their sermons, joining in their prayers, or the like?

From this passage the learned translators of the Rheims New Testament, in their note, justly observe, "That, in matters of religion, in praying, hearing their sermons, presence at their service, partaking of their sacraments, and all other communicating with them in spiritual things, it is a great and damnable sin to deal with them." And if this be the case with all in general, how much more with those who are well instructed and better versed in their religion than others? For their doing any of these things must be a much greater crime than in ignorant people, because they know their duty better.

Q. These laws are very clear and strong; but has the Christian church always observed and enforced the observance of them?

A. The spirit of Christ, which dictated the Holy Scriptures, and the spirit which animates and guides the Church of Christ, and teaches her all truth, is the same; and therefore in all ages her conduct on this point has been uniformly the same as what the Holy Scripture teaches. She has constantly forbidden her children to hold any communication, in religious matters, with those who are separated from her communion; and this she has sometimes done under the most severe penalties. In the apostolical canons, which are of very ancient standing, and for the most part handed down from the apostolical age, it is thus decreed: "If any bishop, or priest, or deacon, shall join in prayers with heretics, let him be suspended from Communion". (Can. 44)

Also, "If any clergyman or laic shall go into the synagogue of the Jews, or the meetings of heretics, to join in prayer with them, let him be deposed, and deprived of communion". (Can. 63)

So also, in one of her most respected councils, held in the year 398, at which the great St. Augustine was present, she speaks thus: "None must either pray or sing psalms with heretics; and whosoever shall communicate with those who are cut off from the Communion of the Church, whether clergyman or laic, let him be excommunicated". (Coun. Carth. iv. 72 and 73)

The same is her language in all ages; and in this she shows herself to be the true mother, who will not suffer her children to be divided. She knows her heavenly spouse has declared that "no man can serve two masters; we cannot serve God and Mammon;" and therefore she must either have them to be hers entirely, or she cannot acknowledge them as such. She knows His holy apostle has protested that there can be no "participation, no fellowship, no concord, no pact, no agreement between the faithful and the unbeliever;" and therefore she never can allow any of her faithful children to have any religious communication with those of a false religion and corrupted Faith. (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)


Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his band of conciliar revolutionaries believe in none of this. None of this at all, which is why it is easy for him and them to offend God, objectively speaking, so regularly and so gravely while fearing to offend even slightly those who adhere to false religions that are from the devil and lead souls to Hell for all eternity.

Ah, there is a conditioning program to get Catholics used to offending God and to fear offending those who are not of the household of Faith. That conditioning program is called the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, which is an offense to honor and glory and majesty of God in se and is thus irredeemable and irreformable. From the elimination of the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar to the elimination of collects that mentioned the reality of a God Who is our judge and the necessity of making reparation for our own sins to the elimination of the Offertory and the alteration of the Roman Canon and the addition of new "Eucharistic prayers" to the architectural, artistic and musical "novelties" that have accompanied this falsified form of "worship, the Novus Ordo is from beginning to end an act of mortal warfare against the honor and glory and majesty of God and thus of the temporal and eternal good for Whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross.

Leaving aside the invalidity of the Novus Ordo and the other liturgical "rites" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, the Novus Ordo service has gutted an understanding and a belief in the sacerdotal nature of the Catholic priesthood and the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, convincing many of the laity yet attached to the structures of that conciliar church that the "priest" is merely the "presider," a sacramental functionary, and that the Mass is principally a community "meal" of "fellowship." The removal of altar rails and the wreckovation of Catholic churches has resulted in a spirit of Protestant and Masonic egalitarianism as members of the laity have invaded the sanctuary during what purports to be Holy Mass and as they touch with their unconsecrated hands what purports to be the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Even absent the various travesties, some approved and some unapproved by the "official" organs of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, committed during some well-publicized Novus Ordo services, the Novus Ordo itself is--from beginning to end--an offense against the honor and majesty and glory of God. Those who accept blithely the sacrilege that is the Novus Ordo will have few problems accepting their "pope's" esteeming of the symbols of false religions and will sympathize greatly with is agonizing over whether to "beatify" Pope Pius XII for fear of offending the ancient enemies of the Catholic Faith who remain at one and the same time the contemporary enemies of the common temporal good undertaken in light of man's Last End, people for whose conversion we should pray while we oppose their radical and manic Christophobia as a true Spiritual Work of Mercy.

Indeed, the recent stories that have been e-mailed to me by various readers about three new forms of ending the Novus Ordo service are laughable.Why? Because like almost everything else in the Novus Ordo, unapproved liturgical innovations and novelties at the parish and diocesan levels often precede "official" sanction for them from conciliar officials in Rome. "Communion" in the hand and altar girls are just two examples of how "unapproved" innovations at the "local" level were later approved by conciliar officials in Rome as various conciliar "bishops," in effect, said, "See, Holy Father, this practice is now accepted in our country. We can't stop it. We need your approval."

This is what has happened with the supposedly "new" ways to end the Novus Ordo service that have been approved by the clueless Francis "Cardinal" Arinze, the conciliar prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship. The new formulae, listed below, are not new at all. They--and a gazillion variations of them--have been floating around the blasphemous world of the Novus Ordo for decades.

To the Zenit report that announced this "news" of three "new" ways of ending the Novus Ordo travesty:

VATICAN CITY, OCT. 14, 2008 (Zenit.org).- The Holy See has approved three alternatives to "Ite, missa est," the final words said by the priest at Mass. Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, today notified the participants in the synod of bishops on the word of God about the new alternatives. The final message is currently rendered in English: "The Mass is ended, go in peace."

Benedict XVI has approved the alternatives, which were requested at the 2005 synod on the Eucharist to express the missionary spirit that should follow from the celebration of Mass.

According to Cardinal Arinze, the Pope had asked for suggestions to be presented. The congregation received 72, from which they prepared nine proposals. The Holy Father has chosen three.

The alternatives are in the revised third "editio typica" of the Roman Missal, which was printed last week, the cardinal said.

The alternatives are:

--"Ite ad Evangelium Domini nuntiandum" --"Ite in pace, glorificando vita vestra Dominum" --"Ite in pace" with "alleluia, alleluia" added during Easter season. In English, these could be rendered along the lines of "go to announce the Gospel of the Lord"; "go in peace, glorifying the Lord with your lives"; and simply, "go in peace (alleluia, alleluia)."

The original Latin final message, "Ite, missa est," has not been modified.


This is new? Take it from a Novus Ordo veteran who did not quit the weekday offerings of this travesty until early-2002 (being a good little "indulterer" on the weekends and whenever an opportunity presented itself to get to Ecclesia Dei "approved" venues for the modernized version of the Mass of Tradition on weekdays between 1989 and 2002): these endings are not "new." They are simply a conciliar "codification" of a thousand different variations on a theme.

Here, good readers, are just some of the closings I heard in the three decades during which I permitted myself to be angered by the offense to God that is the Novus Ordo service (Holy Mass should never make one angry!--duh!, I wasn't too bright on this one, I am afraid):

  1. Our liturgy has ended. Go to serve each other with joy.
  2. Go, our celebration has ended. Have a great day now.
  3. Our time together has come to an end. Serve the community with love.
  4. Go in peace to love and to serve the Lord and each other.
  5. The Mass is ended. Let us rejoice and be glad.
  6. Go, the Mass has just begun. Live it well in your lives.
  7. Our service is over. Be at peace with humankind and the earth.
  8. Thanks for coming to church today. See you tomorrow!
  9. Go, the community fellowship has ended. Continue the fellowship now and forever.
  10. Our meal is ended. Let us give thanks to God and to ourselves.
  11. Go, the liturgy is over. Remember that you are church.
  12. Make the most of the day. Our liturgy is ended.
  13. Go, the Mass is ended. Announce the Gospel with joy to all.
  14. Go in peace and be good to each other.
  15. We have given praise to the Lord. Let us continue the praise with our lives.


Mind you, those are some some of the novel, improvised "endings" that I heard in various venues across the United States of America. And don't thin for a moment that the three supposedly "new" endings will put an end to the likes of the variations I have just listed. One who gets used to a steady dose of such profane talk in Mass stands a pretty decent chance of being impervious to other offenses given to God by the conciliar "pontiffs" and their conciliar "bishops."

It cannot be that way with us. Not all. While we must make reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world, including the sins of the conciliarists, for whose conversion back to the true Faith we must pray daily, we must also take proactive measure to protect our immortal souls and those of our family members from the contagion of conciliarism, making sure to have nothing at all to do with any bishop or priest who makes any concessions to conciliarism or who recognizes the nonexistent "legitimacy" of its false shepherds. We cannot be "una cum" (one with) those who offend God, as Bishop George Hay made clear over two hundred years ago. What applies to Protestants and Jews and Mohammedans and Buddhists and Hindus applies to the conciliar revolutionaries, men who offend God as a matter of routine, as well.

As we live in a world of sappy sentimentality and emotionalism, many people recoil when they read what appears to them to be "harsh" language concerning offenses committed against God by the conciliarists. Although I have quoted from Father Frederick Faber's The Dolors of Mary/The Foot of the Cross, quite a lot, perhaps it would be useful to do so once again to remind those who are a bit on the squeamish side that Catholics are supposed to hate what God hates, and God hates heresy. We are not supposed to mince words or to sugarcoat the harm of heresy and blasphemy and sacrilege and offenses given to the honor and glory and majesty of God. And we are not supposed to fear who might be offended as we defend the truths of the Catholic Faith:

The love of God brings many new instincts into the heart. Heavenly and noble as they are, they bear no resemblance to what men would call the finer and more heroic developments of character. A spiritual discernment is necessary to their right appreciation. They are so unlike the growth of earth, that they must expect to meet on earth with only suspicion, misunderstanding, and dislike. It is not easy to defend them from a controversial point of view; for our controversy is obliged to begin by begging the question, or else it would be unable so much as to state its case. The axioms of the world pass current in the world, the axioms of the gospel do not. Hence the world has its own way. It talks us down. It tries us before tribunals where our condemnation is secured beforehand. It appeals to principles which are fundamental with most men but are heresies with us. Hence its audience takes part with it against us. We are foreigners, and must pay the penalty of being so. If we are misunderstood, we had no right to reckon on any thing else, being as we are, out of our own country. We are made to be laughed at. We shall be understood in heaven. Woe to those easy-going Christians whom the world can understand, and will tolerate because it sees they have a mind to compromise!

The love of souls is one of these instincts which the love of Jesus brings into our hearts. To the world it is proselytism, the mere wish to add to a faction, one of the selfish developments of party spirit. One while the stain of lax morality is affixed to it, another while the reproach of pharisaic strictness! For what the world seems to suspect least of all in religion is consistency. But the love of souls, however apostolic, is always subordinate to love of Jesus. We love souls because of Jesus, not Jesus because of souls. Thus there are times and places when we pass from the instinct of divine love to another, from the love of souls to the hatred of heresy. This last is particularly offensive to the world. So especially opposed is it to the spirit of the world, that, even in good, believing hearts, every remnant of worldliness rises in arms against this hatred of heresy, embittering the very gentlest of characters and spoiling many a glorious work of grace. Many a convert, in whose soul God would have done grand things, goes to his grave a spiritual failure, because he would not hate heresy. The heart which feels the slightest suspicion against the hatred of heresy is not yet converted. God is far from reigning over it yet with an undivided sovereignty. The paths of higher sanctity are absolutely barred against it. In the judgment of the world, and of worldly Christians, this hatred of heresy is exaggerated, bitter, contrary to moderation, indiscreet, unreasonable, aiming at too much, bigoted, intolerant, narrow, stupid, and immoral. What can we say to defend it? Nothing which they can understand. We had, therefore, better hold our peace. If we understand God, and He understands us, it is not so very hard to go through life suspected, misunderstood and unpopular. The mild self-opinionatedness of the gentle, undiscerning good will also take the world's view and condemn us; for there is a meek-loving positiveness about timid goodness which is far from God, and the instincts of whose charity is more toward those who are less for God, while its timidity is searing enough for harsh judgment. There are conversions where three-quarters of the heart stop outside the Church and only a quarter enters, and heresy can only be hated by an undivided heart. But if it is hard, it has to be borne. A man can hardly have the full use of his senses who is bent on proving to the world, God's enemy, that a thorough-going Catholic hatred of heresy is a right frame of man. We might as well force a blind man to judge a question of color. Divine love inspheres in us a different circle of life, motive, and principle, which is not only not that of the world, but in direct enmity with it. From a worldly point of view, the craters in the moon are more explicable things than we Christians with our supernatural instincts. From the hatred of heresy we get to another of these instincts, the horror of sacrilege. The distress caused by profane words seems to the world but an exaggerated sentimentality. The penitential spirit of reparation which pervades the whole Church is, on its view, either a superstition or an unreality. The perfect misery which an unhallowed touch of the Blessed Sacrament causes to the servants of God provokes either the world's anger or its derision. Men consider it either altogether absurd in itself, or at any rate out of all proportion; and, if otherwise they have proofs of our common sense, they are inclined to put down our unhappiness to sheer hypocrisy. The very fact that they do not believe as we believe removes us still further beyond the reach even of their charitable comprehension. If they do not believe in the very existence our sacred things, how they shall they judge the excesses of a soul to which these sacred things are far dearer than itself?

Now, it is important to bear all this in mind while we are considering the sixth dolor. Mary's heart was furnished, as never heart of saint was yet, yet with these three instincts regarding souls, heresy, and sacrilege. They were in her heart three grand abysses of grace, out of which arose perpetually new capabilities of suffering. Ordinarily speaking, the Passion tires us. It is a fatiguing devotion. It is necessarily so because of the strain of soul which it is every moment eliciting. So when our Lord dies a feeling of repose comes over us. For a moment we are tempted to think that our Lady's dolors ought to have ended there, and that the sixth dolor and the seventh are almost of our own creation, and that we tax our imagination in order to fill up the picture with the requisite dark shading of sorrow. But this is only one of the ways in which devotion to the dolors heightens and deepens our devotion to the Passion. It is not our imagination that we tax but our spiritual discernment. In these two last dolors we are led into greater refinements of woe, into the more abstruse delicacies of grief, because we have got to deal with a soul rendered even more wonderful than it was before by the elevations of the sorrows which have gone before. Thus, the piercing of our Lord with the spear as to our Blessed Lady by far the most awful sacrilege which it was then in man's power to perpetrate upon the earth. To break violently into the Holy of Holies in the temple, and pollute its dread sanctity with all manner of heathen defilement, would have been as nothing compared to the outrage of the adorable Body of God. It is in vain that we try to lift ourselves to a true appreciation of this horror in Mary's heart. Our love of God is wanting in keenness, our perceptions of divine things in fineness. We cannot do more than make approaches and they are terrible enough. (Father Frederick Faber, The Foot of the Cross, published originally in England in 1857 under the title of The Dolors of Mary, republished by TAN Books and Publishers, pp. 291-295.)


We must defend the honor and glory and majesty of God as we denounce the actions of those who dare to offend God grievously and thus give grave public scandal. No one who esteems the symbols of false religions is a friend of God. And a person who does this, even though he may not recognize that he has offended God greatly, will find himself being more and more paralyzed by the fear of offending man because he lost any sense at all as to what it is to offend God.

Saint Alphonsus de Liguori noted the following in his Sixth Sunday After Easter: On Human Respect. We would do well to put these words into practice as we flee from the conciliarists as we recognize them to be enemies of God, praying, of course, that they will convert and repent and publicly abjure their hideous errors and offenses before they die:

Be attentive. Brethern, if we wish to save our souls, we must overcome human respect, and bear the little confusion which may arise from the scoffs of the enemies of the cross of Jesus Christ. "For there is a shame that bringeth sin, and there is a shame that bringeth glory and grace"-Eccl., iv. 25. If we do not suffer this confusion with patience, it will lead us into the pit of sin; but, if we submit to it for God's sake, it will obtain for us the divine grace here, and great glory hereafter. "As," says St. Gregory, "bashfulness is laudable in evil, so it is reprehensible in good"--hom. x., in  Ezech.

But some of you will say: I attend to my own affairs; I wish to save my soul; why should I be persecuted? But there is no remedy; it is impossible to serve God, and not be persecuted. "The wicked loathe them that are in the right way"--Prov., xxix. 27. Sinners cannot bear the sight of the man who lives according to the Gospel, because his life is a continual censure on their disorderly conduct; and therefore they say: "Let us lie in wait for the just; because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law"--Wis., ii. 12. The proud man, who seeks revenge for every insult he receives, would wish that all should avenge the offences that may be offered to him. The avaricious, who grow rich by injustice, wish that all should imitate their fraudulent practices. The drunkard wishes to see others indulge like himself, in intoxication. The immoral, who boast of their impurities, and can scarcely utter a word which does not savour of  obscenity, desire that all should act and speak as they do; and those who do not imitate their conduct, they regard as mean, clownish, and intractable--as men without honour and without education. "They are of the world; therefore of the world they speak"--I. John., iv. 5. Worldlings can speak no other language than that of the world. Oh! how great is their poverty and blindness! Sin has blinded them, and therefore they speak profanely. "These things they thought, and were deceived; for their own malice blinded them"--Wis., ii, 21. . . .

Wicked friends come to you and say: "What extravagancies are those in which you indulge? Why do you not act like others? Say to them in answer: My conduct is not opposed to that of all men; there are others who lead a holy life. They are indeed few; but I will follow their example; for the Gospel says: "Many are called, but few are chosen"--Matt., xx. 16. "If", says St. John Climacus, "you wish to be saved with the few, live like the few". But, they will add, do you not see that all murmur against you. and condemn your manner of living? Let your answer be: It is enough for me, that God does not censure my conduct. Is it not better to obey God than to obey men? Such was the answer of St. Peter and St. John to the Jewish priests: "If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge yet"--Acts, iv. 19. If they ask you how you can bear an insult? or who, after submitting to it, can you appear among your equals? answer them by saying, that you are a Christian, and that it is enough for you to appear well in the eyes of God. Such should be your answer to all these satellites of Satan: you must despise all their maxims and reproaches. And when it is necessary to reprove those who make little of God's law, you must take courage and correct them publicly. "Then that sin, reprove before all"--I. Tim., v. 20. And when there is question of the divine honour, we should not be frightened by the dignity of the man who offends God; let us say to him openly: This is sinful; it cannot be done. Let us imitate the Baptist, who reproved King Herod for living his brother's wife and said to him: "It is not lawful for thee to have her"--Matt., xiv. 4. Men indeed shall regard us as fools, and turn us into derision; but, on the day of judgment they shall acknowledge that they have been foolish, and we have shall have the glory of being numbered among the saints. They shall say: "These are they whom we had some time in derision. . . . . We fools esteemed their life madness, and their end without honour. Behold how they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints"--Wis., v. 3, 4, 5. (Sixth Sunday After Easter: On Human Respect.)


Pretty good advice, wouldn't you say? You can see that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI does indeed care very much for human respect and, objectively speaking, very little for the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity.

Apart from fleeing from the conciliarists, what are we to do? Get to a true offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass on a daily basis offered by a true bishop or a true priest who has nothing to do with conciliarism whatsoever. Receive Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in Holy Communion worthily. Spend time in fervent prayer before Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament. Get to Confession weekly. Pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit. Make reparation for our own sins and those of the world world to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Practice the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy. Distribute blessed Green Scapulars and Miraculous Medals and Rosaries (and Rosary instruction booklets) to those whom God's Holy Providence places in our paths each day. Never look for earthly results. Never be discouraged. Just keep planting seeds, entrusting all to Our Lord through His Most Blessed Mother's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

This time of apostasy and betrayal will pass. This is the time that God has ordained from all eternity for us to be alive. There is work for us to do as His consecrated slaves through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Let us do it well as His Most Blessed Mother sends us His graces through her loving hands.

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, 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 Hilarion, pray for us.

Saint Ursula and her Companions, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

© Copyright 2008, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.