Having More Integrity Than Catholics
Thomas A. Droleskey
Writers put a memorial line into the mouth of the fictional character by the name of John Ross Ewing, Jr., who was played by the late Larry Hagman (see Someone Was Killed To Keep "J.R." Alive), in a episode of the television series Dallas entitled "And the Winner Is, which was aired on March 2, 1984 (see Internet Media Data Base) that summarizes what happens to those who learn to make compromises with what they know to be true:
Once you lose your integrity, the rest is easy.
Yes, it is easy for those who have learned how to compromise once to keep doing so perpetually.
This is what has happened with many Catholics as the conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" have advanced once condemned proposition after another (see Preparing To Spend All Eternity With His Allegorical Figure) without a word of protest from those Catholics who know what is being said and done is contrary to the Deposit of Faith and thus to the good of the souls for whom Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross.
Catholics have become used to the sight of "popes" and "bishops" engaging in sacrilegious and blasphemous acts of "inter-religious prayer services" as though the following condemnations of such grave offenses given to the honor, majesty and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity do not matter. After all, of course, it is good for Catholics to "get along" with non-Catholics as we all worship the "one God:"
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. (Bishop George Hay, The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)
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) (Bishop George Hay, ,who served as the Vicar Apostolic of the Lowland District of Scotland, mind you, my friends, from December 3, 1778, to August 24, 1805: The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)
This being so, it is clear that the Apostolic See cannot on any
terms take part in their assemblies, nor is it anyway lawful for
Catholics either to support or to work for such enterprises; for if they
do so they will be giving countenance to a false Christianity, quite
alien to the one Church of Christ. Shall We suffer, what would indeed be
iniquitous, the truth, and a truth divinely revealed, to be made a
subject for compromise? For here there is question of defending
revealed truth. Jesus Christ sent His Apostles into the whole world in
order that they might permeate all nations with the Gospel faith, and,
lest they should err, He willed beforehand that they should be taught by
the Holy Ghost: has then this doctrine of the Apostles completely
vanished away, or sometimes been obscured, in the Church, whose ruler
and defense is God Himself? If our Redeemer plainly said that His Gospel
was to continue not only during the times of the Apostles, but also
till future ages, is it possible that the object of faith should
in the process of time become so obscure and uncertain, that it would
be necessary to-day to tolerate opinions which are even incompatible one
with another? If this were true, we should have to confess
that the coming of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, and the perpetual
indwelling of the same Spirit in the Church, and the very preaching of
Jesus Christ, have several centuries ago, lost all their efficacy and
use, to affirm which would be blasphemy. But the Only-begotten Son of
God, when He commanded His representatives to teach all nations, obliged
all men to give credence to whatever was made known to them by
"witnesses preordained by God," and also confirmed His command with this
sanction: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he
that believeth not shall be condemned." These two commands of Christ,
which must be fulfilled, the one, namely, to teach, and the other to
believe, cannot even be understood, unless the Church proposes a
complete and easily understood teaching, and is immune when it thus
teaches from all danger of erring. In this matter,
those also turn aside from the right path, who think that the deposit of
truth such laborious trouble, and with such lengthy study and
discussion, that a man's life would hardly suffice to find and take
possession of it; as if the most merciful God had spoken
through the prophets and His Only-begotten Son merely in order that a
few, and those stricken in years, should learn what He had revealed
through them, and not that He might inculcate a doctrine of faith and
morals, by which man should be guided through the whole course of his
moral life. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Nearly fifty years of flagrant violations of these condemnations have so eclipsed the authentic sensus Catholicus in the souls of most Catholics who are as of yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism that they are steeped in one sentimentally based notion about the Holy Faith after another, having become convinced that everything about the Holy Mother Church's Faith, Worship, Morals and pastoral practice is subject to change in the name of "progress."
Many of those who do know that the conciliar revolutionaries have and continue to offend God and scandalize souls believe that a "prudent silence" on these matter is necessary in order to have access to an ever increasing modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, staged for the most part by presbyters who are not truly ordained priests.
Gone from the minds of most Catholics, therefore, is this stern admonition about those who remain silent in the face of blasphemies given to God:
But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they
do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can
listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59 )
How sad it is that the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran sect in the United States of America has reprimanded the "Reverend" Rob Morris of Christ the King Church in Newtown, Connecticut, for having engaged in that hideous "interfaith" service at Newton High School on Sunday, December 16, 2012, two days after the slaughter of children and teachers at Sandy Hook Elementary School (see Cultural Liberalism Leads To Death and On Full Display: Every Americanist Error Imaginable):
A Lutheran pastor in Newtown, Conn., has apologized after being
reprimanded for participating in an interfaith vigil following the
shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
The Rev. Rob Morris, pastor of Christ the King Lutheran Church,
prayed at the vigil the Sunday following the Dec. 14 shootings alongside
other Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Baha’i clergy.
Morris’ church is a member of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, and
the denomination’s constitution prohibits ministers from participating
in services with members of different faiths.
It’s not the first time a Missouri Synod pastor has been reprimanded for joining an interfaith prayer service; a New York pastor also was suspended for participating in an interfaith service after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
LCMS president Matthew Harrison wrote in a letter to the Synod that “the presence of prayers and religious readings” made the Newtown vigil joint worship, and therefore off-limits to Missouri Synod ministers. Harrison said Morris’ participation also offended members of the denomination.
“After consultation with my supervisors and others, I made my own decision,” Morris wrote in his apology letter. “I believed my participation to be, not an act of joint worship, but an act of community chaplaincy.”
The Newtown Interfaith Clergy Association hosted the Dec. 16 vigil, which was attended by Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy and President Obama.
In his opening statements at the vigil, the Rev. Matt Crebbin of the Newtown Congregational Church made clear that the participating religious leaders were not endorsing one another.
“We are not here to ignore our differences or to diminish the core beliefs which define our many different faith traditions,” Crebbin said, according to a CNN transcript of the event.
Following the 9/11 attacks, Missouri Synod pastor David Benke participated in the Prayer for America interfaith service at Yankee Stadium. Although had the approval of then-LCMS president Gerald Kieshnick, the Synod’s Dispute Resolution Panel suspended Benke.
He was reinstated in 2003 by Kieshnick and returned to his post as president of the denomination’s Atlantic District.
Harrison wrote in his letter that despite his reprimand of Morris, the Missouri Synod does not unanimously agree on what joint worship is. The denomination is still attempting to define it.
“I am looking forward to working together with (Morris) and others in the Synod to strive for greater unity and consensus among us,” Harrison wrote.
The St. Louis-based Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod is the smaller of the two largest branches of Lutheranism in the U.S., with almost 2.3 million members. The more liberal Evangelical Lutheran Church of America has 4 million members.
Harrison was unavailable for comment, and Morris declined to comment. (Lutheran pastor apologizes for praying at Newtown vigil. See also Pastor Apologizes to His Denomination for Role in Sandy Hook Interfaith Service.)
This evokes memories of the time a Mohammedan imam walked out of an event staged at the Notre Dame Pontifical Institute in Jerusalem on March 23, 2000, as Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and the grand rabbi of Jerusalem shared the same stage with the imam during an "interreligious meeting." The imam had the personal integrity to leave
during the ceremony as he recognized that he was giving public
credibility to what he considered to be two false religions, something
that Wojtyla/John Paul II did consistently throughout his false
"pontificate." It is now wonder that a believing Mohammedan would walk out at a meeting when the man who believed himself to be the Vicar of Christ on earth could utter the following words:
Drawing upon the riches of our respective religious traditions, we must
spread awareness that today's problems will not be solved if we remain
ignorant of one another and isolated from one another. We are all aware of
past misunderstandings and conflicts, and these still weigh heavily upon
relationships between Jews, Christians and Muslims. We must do all we can
to turn awareness of past offences and sins into a firm resolve to build a
new future in which there will be nothing but respectful and fruitful
cooperation between us.
The Catholic Church wishes to pursue a sincere and fruitful
interreligious dialogue with the members of the Jewish faith and the
followers of Islam. Such a dialogue is not an attempt to impose our views
upon others. What it demands of all of us is that, holding to what we
believe, we listen respectfully to one another, seek to discern all that
is good and holy in each other’s teachings, and cooperate in
supporting everything that favours mutual understanding and peace. (Interreligious meeting at Notre Dame Pontifical Institute, Jerusalem, March 23, 2000.)
Here is an account of that famous walkout as provided by Wojtyla hagiographer and "neoconservative" war hawk George Weigel:
Later that afternoon, a tripartite interreligious meeting, on which John
Paul had insisted, illustrated just how difficult "the dialogue" is, in
and around Jerusalem. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem had refused to
participate; Chairman Arafat had delegated Sheik Taysir Tamimi, an
Islamic judge from the PA [Palestinian Authority], to be the Muslim spokesman. Tamimi and Rabbi
Lau flanked the Pope on a dais at the Pontifical Notre Dame Institute.
Lau began by speaking of the need for peace and dialogue in everyday
life; then, as the New York Times’ Alessandra Stanley wrote, he "put an
abrupt end to both by thanking John Paul for ‘your recognition of
Jerusalem as [Israel’s] united, eternal capital city.’" The Pope had not
done that—the Holy See, which takes no position on the question of
sovereignty in Jerusalem, nevertheless insists that access to the city’s
holy places and their integrity be secured by an "international
statute"—and someone in the audience shouted, "The Pope did not
recognize Jerusalem." Things got more volatile when Tamimi welcomed the
Pope, in Arabic, as "the guest of the Palestinian people on the land of
Palestine, in the city of holy Jerusalem, eternal capital of Palestine,"
and was met by loud applause by the audience. He went on to insist, in a
rather frenzied rhetorical style, that there could be no peace in the
region until all of "Palestine" was united under "President Yassir
Arafat"; more applause followed. The moderator, Rabbi Alon
Goshen-Gottstein, tried to save the meeting by reminding those present
that they were supposed to have come "as religious people who can put
aside our politics." John Paul spoke briefly and pointedly of religion
as "the enemy of exclusion and discrimination, of hatred and rivalry, of
violence and conflict," but shortly after he finished, Sheik Tamimi
abruptly got up and left the meeting. It was later explained by a
Vatican official that the sheik had leaned over to the Pope before
departing and explained that he had a "previous engagement." One had to
wonder precisely what engagement trumped the Pope in the sheik’s mind. (Holy Land Pilgrimage: A Diary.)
It is a very telling commentary on the state of conciliar revolution that there at least some times when members of non-Catholic religions show more concern for the "integrity" of their false religions, each of which is from the devil, than most Catholics alive today have for the integrity of the one and only true religion, Catholicism.
In all of this, of course, we are supposed to believe that there has been no "rupture" with the past, that everything can be "explained" by the so-called "hermeneutic of continuity" that was dissected for the umpteenth thousandth time in yesterday's article
Mr. Frank Rega, the author of many books, including Saint Francis of Assisi and the Conversion of the Muslims, sent out the following comment to his e-mail list concerning Gerhard Ludwig Muller's contention that Protestant sects are part of the one "visible church::"
In 1566 the Council of Trent taught that Protestant churches were under the spirit of the devil. In 2011 the future Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine for the Faith taught that protestants are united with the Catholic Church as part of the one people and house of God. as reported here. The contemporary Vatican II Church might justify such opposed teachings by applying the so-called hermeneutic of continuity. However, this appears to be more of a rupture than any sort of continuity. Judge for yourself.
From the Catechism of the Council of Trent's instruction on the part of the Creed stating "I believe in the Holy Catholic Church:"
"That all therefore might know which was the Catholic Church, the Fathers, guided by the Spirit of God, added to the creed the word Apostolic. For the Holy Ghost, who presides over the Church, governs her by no other ministers than those of Apostolic succession. This Spirit, first imparted to the Apostles, has by the infinite goodness of God always continued in the Church. And just as this one Church cannot err in faith or morals, since it is guided by the Holy Ghost; so, on the contrary, all other societies arrogating to themselves the name of church, must necessarily, because guided by the spirit of the devil, be sunk in the most pernicious errors, both doctrinal and moral." (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, TAN Books. Issued by order of St. Pius V, edited by St. Charles Borromeo, p, 109.)
Archbishop) Gerhard Müller in 2011:
"Baptism is the fundamental sign that we are sacramentally united in Christ, and that presents us as the one visible Church before the world. Thus, we as Catholic and Protestant Christians, are already united even in what we call the visible Church. Strictly speaking, there are not several churches, one beside the other, but these are rather separations and divisions within the one people and the one house of God..." (Gerhard Ludwig Müller, Oct. 11, 2011, later chosen to be Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.)
Notice how Müller tries to skirt around the teaching of Trent, by stating that Protestant churches are not really separate churches, but are part of the one visible church. Logically he would then have to assert that the Protestant churches also operate through Apostolic succession in order to try to conclusively prove that they are part of the one Church of God, and not guided by the spirit of the devil. (Comments of Mr. Frank Rega, February 4, 2013. See also Crushed By The Weight Of Error, part two.)
There is no way to reconcile conciliarism with Catholicism. None whatsoever.
Once again, let us turn to Pope Saint Pius X, who warned us as Patriarch of Venice about men such as Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and his band of conciliar revolutionaries:
"How necessary it is to stir up again the spirit of faith, at a time when there is a growth of that malignant fever which would discredit everything and deny every dogma of revealed religion! How necessary it is at this present time when people are trying to dismiss the mysteries of our faith, when people are claiming to explain them--while Christ has demanded the submission of the intellect--when they are casting doubt on the most established prophecies, when they are denying the most manifest miracles, whey they are rejecting the sacraments, deriding pious practices, and discrediting the magisterium of the Church and her ministers!
Cardinal Sarto, clearly, had in mind not only the rationalists outside the Church, but also those who, inside the Church, were beginning to dismiss her dogmas because of their own historical presuppositions and their erroneous philosophies. Even if the name Modernism does not appear in this pastoral letter [dated May 21, 1895], Cardinal Sarto had identified its initial symptoms, as he had in Mantua. It was during this period, moreover, that he began to take notice of the works of [notorious Modernist] Alfred Loisy, "forcefully reproving the affirmations contrary to the faith," which they contained, as a witness in the beatification process tells us." (Yves Chiron, Saint Pius X: Restorer of the Church. Translated by Graham Harrison. Angelus Press, 2002, p. 95.)
Who has described himself as "much too much of a rationalist"?
You got it. Good for you.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
This is how he sought to dismiss his refusal to believe that Our Lady of Fatima meant that there would be a miraculous triumph of her Immaculate Heart:
[Interviewer:] . . . Does this mean that the Pope . . . considers it possible that, in the next seven years, the holy Mother of God will appear in a manner that would be akin to a triumph?
[Benedict XVI:] I said the “triumph” would come closer. That is essentially the same as praying that God’s kingdom come. This term was not to be understood – perhaps I am too much of a rationalist [!] in this regard – as though I expected a great turning point now and that history will suddenly take a completely different course, but that the forces of evil are hindered again and again; that the strength of God shows itself in the strength of the Mother again and again and keeps it alive.
The Church is always called to do that which Abraham asked of God, namely, to ensure that there would always be enough righteous people to ward off evil and destruction. I understood it in such a way that the forces of good would once more thrive anew. In this sense, the triumphs of God, the triumphs of Mary, are low-key, but still quite real. (Benedict XVI, Licht der Welt, pp. 194-195. See No Friend of Fatima.)
Such a man is the embodiment of the spirit condemned by Pope Saint Pius X both before and during his years on the Throne of Saint Peter. Such is the spirit of Antichrist.
When will Catholics who have yet to see this is so realize that they cannot to quote Bishop Robert McKenna, O.P., who said the following to me about six years ago now, "have their pope and eat him, to?" when making reference to false ecclesiology employed by the Society of Saint Pius X and others in the "resist but recognize" movement to believe that a true pope can do and say things contrary to the authentic patrimony of Holy Mother Church?
With Pope Saint Pius X, we reject those who reject and mock the integrity of the Holy Faith no matter how many times a putative "pope" does and says things that have been condemned repeatedly by Holy Mother Church.
We must always cling to the
spiritual weapons given us by Our Lady to fight the forces of the world,
the flesh and the devil, the forces, that is, of Modernity in the world
and Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, especially by
praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.
Our Lady will help us to be ever ready to defend
the honor and the glory of the Blessed Trinity to Whom she is Daughter,
Mother, and Spouse. She will lead us to be ever mindful of making
reparation for our own many sins by offering our daily penances to the
Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through her own Sorrowful and Immaculate
Heart, ever desirous of spending time with her at Holy Mass and in front
of her Divine Son's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament as a
foretaste of the Heavenly glories that will await us if we die in a
state of Sanctifying Grace as members of the Catholic Church.
The possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision
in Heaven is our goal. And that goal cannot be achieved by a
participation in or even silence about the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and the hour of our death Amen
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Cyril of Alexandria, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints