Jorge and Oscar's False Gospel of False Joy
Thomas A. Droleskey, Ph.D.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio addressed the conciliar "bishops" of The Netherlands, long a stronghold of the most ultra-progressive currents of the conciliar revolution that whose predecessors of fifty years ago were responsible for the heretical "Dutch Catechism" that was so rife with heresy that even the conciliar authorities in the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River (see Declaration of the Commission of Cardinals on the Dutch Catechism, passages from which will be cited later in this commentary), during their ad limina apostolorum visit to Rome last week, telling them not to be "sad" over the collapse of what they think is the Catholic Church in their country.
Here is a report as found on the site of the National Catholic Reporter, which, of course, has long championed the agenda of total, undisguised theological, moral and pastoral revolution that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is intent on implementing with great urgency:
Pope Francis told a group of Dutch bishops this week that the Vatican must continue reforms undertaken by the Catholic church in the 1960s and '70s, according to one of the participants in the meeting.
Bishop Jan Hendriks, who attended the meeting Monday, later recounted that the pope said implementation of the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council is only half complete.
"We have been implementing the council only halfway," Hendriks recalled from the pope's words. "Half of the work has still to be done."
Hendriks, the auxiliary bishop of the Haarlem-Amsterdam diocese, was one of 13 Dutch bishops to take part in the meeting with the pope. They are in Rome for their ad limina, a formal visit bishops around the world are required to make to report to the pope on their individual dioceses.
The Dutch visit is one of the first for Francis, who has so far received visits only from bishops from several of the regions that make up the Italian episcopal conference.
Speaking Tuesday night at a small church dedicated to the Dutch community in Rome, Hendriks said Francis' style represented "a different way" of having an ad limina visit compared with his predecessors.
The pontiff and the Dutch bishops, Hendriks said, sat in a circle together. While the pope had a prepared text, the 14 instead spoke for about 90 minutes freely, with the pope answering a range of questions -- including how best to handle clergy sex abuse and how to go forward in closing parishes.
The meeting, Hendriks said, opened with Utrecht Cardinal Willem Eijk reading a report the Dutch bishops had prepared on the state of the church in their country. As part of that report, Eijk mentioned that they are preparing to close about two-thirds of the country's 1,500 parishes by the year 2020.
The pope, Hendriks said, did not reply with specifics regarding the Dutch circumstances, but instead likened their situation to Old Testament scripture readings on how the people of Israel responded to the destruction of the temple, historically the holiest site of the Jewish people.
"They would be very sad, and I think you must be very sad also because of this situation," the pope reportedly said.
"I would like to encourage you not to be sad," Hendriks recounted the pope as saying. "Never be immersed in feelings of sadness, but be hopeful people and look forward to the future."
The Dutch parish-closing plan has garnered controversy in the country, with lay Catholics in several dioceses alleging the scope of the closings is unnecessarily wide and is being undertaken without enough consultation of lay people.
Separate groups of Dutch Catholics launched petitions ahead of the ad limina visit, asking that Francis directly address the situation or even intervene in their bishops' plans.
One group released a 17-page report concluding that the Dutch bishops had "shown a startling indifference toward members of the lay faithful, who have been denied of any voice in the church."
The group calls itself Bezield Verband -- roughly "Inspired Togetherness" in Dutch -- and its report included signatures of about 60 prominent current and retired Dutch theologians.
Hendriks said the pope "did not say whether what we did or wanted to do was right or wrong. But he stressed very much that we should share the sentiments of the people who have had their church closed down."
"He stressed most of all that we should be open and try to be in contact with people and try to use the pastoral opportunities there are to be in contact with the people and to transmit the faith," the bishop said.
The Dutch church has also been dealing in a particular way with the ongoing clergy sex abuse crisis in the Catholic church.
A 2011 report by an inquiry commission created by the Dutch government said church officials had "failed to adequately deal with" abuse affecting as many as 20,000 of the country's children in Catholic institutions between 1945 and 1981.
Hendriks said the pope told the Dutch bishops to "really go on to care for the victims."
"We can't talk half-measures on this," Hendriks recalled the pope saying. "We have to be straight. We owe this to the victims."
In mentioning the reforms of the Second Vatican Council, Hendriks said the pope cited specifically Lumen Gentium, the council's dogmatic constitution on the church.
"His first thought was of the church," Hendriks said. "That means he thinks the reform of the church is only half-way done, that is clear."
At one point during the conversation with the pontiff, Hendriks said he mentioned to the pope how popular he is in the Netherlands, saying, "[You are] many times on the news, which is not something we have had in the last 50 years."
"Let us put aside what we think about this," Hendriks said the pope responded. "But use it. Use it to spread the Gospel."
Overall, Hendriks said, the feeling of the meeting was akin to a spiritual retreat. While tough subjects were addressed, the pope conveyed a "spiritual atmosphere," he said.
"Not so much of structures or of governing or politics or whatever but more spiritual radiance," he said.
Another Dutch bishop said Monday after the meeting that Francis had "strengthened" him and his peers.
"The pope has really strengthened us in the faith and in the way in which the Dutch bishops are working in the Dutch church," said Bishop Theodorus Hoogenboom, an auxiliary bishop of Utrecht, Netherlands' fourth largest city.
"The key word of what the pope said to us is the word speranza, which is hope," said Hoogenboom, who spoke outside St. Peter's Square after leaving the audience.
"The situation in the Netherlands with secularization is rather difficult, but the pope has strengthened us in the faith like St. Peter," he said.
Bishop Gerard de Korte of the northern Dutch diocese of Groningen-Leeuwarden said Monday the pope was most focused on telling the Dutch to be engaged in society.
Speaking to the Dutch Catholic broadcasting network RKK, de Korte said the Dutch bishops had focused in their written report to the pope for their ad limina visit on issues of catechesis, but Francis seemed more interested in issues of charity -- telling them to use charity as a way to attract people to Christianity. (Bergoglio talks openly about reform, sex abuse, Dutch apostate says.)
The previous five parts of this series commenting on selected passages in Jorge Mario Bergoglio's Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013, has noted the false "pontiff"s complete and total unconcern for doctrinal formation. His is a religion of false "charity" designed to "attract" people to his false church and its false doctrines, false, sacramentally invalid liturgical rites and humanistic pastoral practices. His a religion of Antichrist.
Yes, this point has been made so many times in the past nine months now since the Argentine Apostate emerged on the balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter. Indeed, it is tiring to have to be so redundant on this point, a redundancy that has been made necessary by Bergoglio's never-ending repetition of the same revolutionary themes over and over and over again.
It was only on Monday evening, December 9, 2013, however, when doing some preliminary work on this commentary that a thought jumped out at me: If the "implementation" of the "Second" Vatican Council has proceeded only "halfway" and "half of the work still has to be done," could this mean that the devil is telling us that we have another fifty years of this to endure? Could the one hundred year period of the devil's warfare against the Catholic Church that Pope Leo XIII saw in the vision described below have begun in 1962 or in 1965 and is to end in the year 2062 or 2065?
Although some rationalists do not accept it as such because they cannot
find written "proof" to satisfy their disbelief, Pope Leo XIII had a
vision at Holy Mass on October 13, 1884, thirty-three years before Our
Lady's final apparition to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos
Santos in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, wherein he learned
that Satan would be given seventy-five to one hundred years to destroy
Holy Mother Church. Here is an account on the website of Saint Joseph's
Catholic Church in Wayne, Michigan:
Exactly 33 years to the day prior to the great Miracle of the Sun in
Fatima, that is, on October 13, 1884, Pope Leo XIII had a remarkable
vision. When the aged Pontiff had finished celebrating Mass in his
private Vatican Chapel, attended by a few Cardinals and members of the
Vatican staff, he suddenly stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood
there for about 10 minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white.
Then, going immediately from the Chapel to his office, he composed the
prayer to St. Michael, with instructions it be said after all Low Masses
everywhere. When asked what had happened, he explained that, as he was
about to leave the foot of the altar, he suddenly heard voices - two
voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. They seemed
to come from near the tabernacle. As he listened, he heard the following
The guttural voice, the voice of Satan in his pride, boasted to Our Lord: "I can destroy your Church." The gentle voice of Our Lord: "You can? Then go ahead and do so." Satan: "To do so, I need more time and more power." Our Lord: "How much time? How much power? Satan: "75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those who will give themselves over to my service." Our Lord: "You have the time, you will have the power. Do with them what you will. (As found at: The Vision of Pope Leo XIII.)
Now, let me point out that I am no kind of ends time prophet nor do I have any kind of attachment to a particular time frame in which the one hundred years given by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to do what he willed with the Church Militant on earth. I am simply explaining that Bergoglio, who is an agent of the devil whether or not he realizes this himself, raised a question in my mind when reading his comments to the Dutch "bishops," as recalled by "Bishop" Jan Hendriks, about the "work" of the "Second" Vatican Council being done only "halfway" thus far and that "half of the work has still to be done.
Yes, I realize that the year 2017 is important as it is the one hundredth anniversary of Our Lady's apparitions in the Cova da Iria near Fatima, Portugal, to Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos and the five hundredth anniversary of the beginning of Father Martin Luther's revolution against the the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church and the fifty-fifth anniversary of the beginning of the "Second" Vatican Council. However, what if Bergoglio's analysis has a preternatural source as its inspiration? Only at "half time" in the conciliar revolution? That's a statement for you.
The moribund conciliar church in The Netherlands is the fruit of conciliarism's "reconciliation" with the anti-Incarnational principles of Modernity. The Dutch "bishops" have long been in the vanguard of Bergoglio's own wing of conciliarism, merrily recruiting, promoting and protecting men known inclined to the commission of perverse crimes against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments into the ranks of the clergy and hierarchy, winking at the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn and being asleep at the switch as The Netherlands moved into the direct of full scale post-natal infanticide and euthanasia. The conciliar church is dead in The Netherlands precisely because of conciliarism. That which is based on falsehood cannot be "revived" by doing more of what caused it to fail in the first place.
Alas, it is "more" of the what has failed the cause of Christ the King and the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem that Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his chief Commissar, Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez (see Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part one, Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part two, Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part three and Commissar of Antichrist Speaks, part four), believe that more false "charity" and less "doctrine" is what the world needs now. In other words, Bergoglio believes What the world needs now is love sweet love. Who needs al that doctrine stuff anyway?
Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it clear in the past nine months that doctrinal fuddy-duddies are not welcome in the conciliar party. The "new evangelization" is based on feeling, sentiment and human respect, not on fidelity to the Sacred Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted to His true Church, the Catholic Church, for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.
XVII. No Room for the Catholic City Here
Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes in "humanism" with a "Christian face," if you will. This is nothing other than excuse to celebrate man and his passing fads:
68. The Christian substratum of certain peoples – most of all in the West – is a
living reality. Here we find, especially among the most needy, a moral
resource which preserves the values of an authentic Christian humanism. Seeing
reality with the eyes of faith, we cannot fail to acknowledge what the Holy
Spirit is sowing. It would show a lack of trust in his free and unstinting
activity to think that authentic Christian values are absent where great numbers
of people have received baptism and express their faith and solidarity with
others in a variety of ways. This means more than acknowledging occasional
“seeds of the word”, since it has to do with an authentic Christian faith which
has its own expressions and means of showing its relationship to the Church.
The immense importance of a culture marked by faith cannot be overlooked; before
the onslaught of contemporary secularism an evangelized culture, for all its
limits, has many more resources than the mere sum total of believers. .An
evangelized popular culture contains values of faith and solidarity capable of
encouraging the development of a more just and believing society, and possesses
a particular wisdom which ought to be gratefully acknowledged. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's "Christian humanism" makes of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, nothing other than an aimless wanderer Who prompts others to project onto Him the impulses that they receive from the devil and his minions to live as they desire and to invent some new way of speech in order to rationalize these impulses as the "seeds" of "renewal."
This is pure Modernism. It is nothing other than the revenge of The Sillon, whose false beliefs about how to build the "more just and believing society" were condemned and mocked by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910:
To reply to these fallacies is only too easy; for
whom will they make believe that the Catholic Sillonists, the priests
and seminarists enrolled in their ranks have in sight in their social
work, only the temporal interests of the working class? To maintain
this, We think, would be an insult to them. The truth is that the
Sillonist leaders are self-confessed and irrepressible idealists; they claim to regenerate the working class by first elevating the
conscience of Man; they have a social doctrine, and they have religious
and philosophical principles for the reconstruction of society upon new
foundations; they have a particular conception of human dignity,
freedom, justice and brotherhood; and, in an attempt to justify their
social dreams, they put forward the Gospel, but interpreted in their own
way; and what is even more serious, they call to witness Christ, but a
diminished and distorted Christ. Further, they teach these
ideas in their study groups, and inculcate them upon their friends, and
they also introduce them into their working procedures. Therefore they
are really professors of social, civic, and religious morals; and
whatever modifications they may introduce in the organization of the
Sillonist movement, we have the right to say that the aims of the
Sillon, its character and its action belong to the field of morals which
is the proper domain of the Church. In view of all this, the Sillonist
are deceiving themselves when they believe that they are working in a
field that lies outside the limits of Church authority and of its
doctrinal and directive power. . . .
We know well that they flatter themselves with the idea of raising human dignity and the discredited condition of the working class. We know that they
wish to render just and perfect the labor laws and the relations between
employers and employees, thus causing a more complete justice and a
greater measure of charity to prevail upon earth, and causing also a
profound and fruitful transformation in society by which mankind would
make an undreamed-of progress. Certainly, We do not blame these efforts;
they would be excellent in every respect if the Sillonist did not
forget that a person’s progress consists in developing his natural
abilities by fresh motivations; that it consists also in permitting
these motivations to operate within the frame of, and in conformity
with, the laws of human nature. But, on the contrary, by ignoring the
laws governing human nature and by breaking the bounds within which they
operate, the human person is lead, not toward progress, but towards
death. This, nevertheless, is what they want to do with human
society; they dream of changing its natural and traditional foundations;
they dream of a Future City built on different principles, and they
dare to proclaim these more fruitful and more beneficial than the
principles upon which the present Christian City rests.
No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the
utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when
everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the
City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot
be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work;
no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City
to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it
is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)
As a friend of mine just noted to me in an e-mail exchange after I had written to him about the "halfway mark" of the implementation of the "Second" Vatican Council, "God must be very angry with us." Yes, and with good cause as Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the result of the passivity of so many Catholics in the face of the apostasies, blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism. Many of us, this writer included, are culpable for seeing problems while refusing to accept what others told us that they signified. God has good reason to be angry with us.
XVIII. "Popular Piety" as the Replacement for Catholic Tradition
As a revolutionary, Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that everything associated with the "past" must be jettisoned, something that will be discussed in a bit greater detail after the following two paragraphs from Evangelii Gaudium:
69. It is imperative to evangelize cultures in order to inculturate the Gospel.
In countries of Catholic tradition, this means encouraging, fostering and
reinforcing a richness which already exists. In countries of other religious
traditions, or profoundly secularized countries, it will mean sparking new
processes for evangelizing culture, even though these will demand long-term
planning. We must keep in mind, however, that we are constantly being called to
grow. Each culture and social group needs purification and growth. In the case
of the popular cultures of Catholic peoples, we can see deficiencies which need
to be healed by the Gospel: machismo, alcoholism, domestic violence, low Mass
attendance, fatalistic or superstitious notions which lead to sorcery, and the
like. Popular piety itself can be the starting point for healing and liberation
from these deficiencies.
70. It is also true that at times greater emphasis is placed on the outward
expressions and traditions of some groups, or on alleged private revelations
which would replace all else, than on the impulse of Christian piety. There is
a kind of Christianity made up of devotions reflecting an individual and
sentimental faith life which does not in fact correspond to authentic “popular
piety”. Some people promote these expressions while not being in the least
concerned with the advancement of society or the formation of the laity, and in
certain cases they do so in order to obtain economic benefits or some power over
others. Nor can we overlook the fact that in recent decades there has been a
breakdown in the way Catholics pass down the Christian faith to the young. It
is undeniable that many people feel disillusioned and no longer identify with
the Catholic tradition. Growing numbers of parents do not bring their children
for baptism or teach them how to pray. There is also a certain exodus towards
other faith communities. The causes of this breakdown include: a lack of
opportunity for dialogue in families, the influence of the communications media,
a relativistic subjectivism, unbridled consumerism which feeds the market, lack
of pastoral care among the poor, the failure of our institutions to be
welcoming, and our difficulty in restoring a mystical adherence to the faith in
a pluralistic religious landscape. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
It is impossible to restore any kind of adherence to the Catholic Faith on the basis of "popular piety." Jorge Mario Bergoglio praises Protestant sects and their leaders. He praises false ecumenism. Thus it is that he has chosen to accept and to embrace a "pluralistic religious landscape" as something "good" in and of itself, something that is an irreversible fact of human history. What this poor man does not realize, although I am not discounting the possibility that he does realize it, is that he is preparing for the way the amalgamation of all false religions into one, which will be defeated by Antichrist before the final battle with the true Faith. Pluralism will be wiped out by Antichrist. Bergoglio is helping to prepare his coming with very bold strokes.
"Popular piety" has given birth to the various "lay movements" such as the "Catholic" Charismatic Renewal, Opus Dei, Focolare, Cursillo, the
Sant'Egidio Community, the Shalom Catholic Community, the Chemin Neuf
Community, the International Community of Faith and Light, Regnum
Christi, Communion and Liberation, the Emmanuel Community, the Seguimi
Lay Group of Human-Christian Promotion, and, among many, many others,
the Neocatechumenal Way who believe that their particular brand of
apostasy helps to "build up" what they think is the Catholic Church in
"newness" as they follow the "spirit" into the "light" of a transformed
church that goes "out of itself" to create structures of "unity in
As noted just above, one of the foremost goals of all revolutionaries is to wipe out the
truth about the past and to create a "memory" about the past that
justifies their novelties.
The Protestant Revolutionaries were the
pioneers of wiping out the memory of the glories of Christendom,
achieving a measure of success that was no doubt influential in helping
to convince the Freemasons and their kindred spirits in the secular
world that similar efforts could be as successful in social revolutions.
Pamphleteers such as Thomas Paine disparaged the past during the time of the American Revolution. James Madison did so in The Federalist,
Number One, stating that the American Constitution was a decisive break
from the "tyranny" of the past, a period that was meant to include
everything up to 1787, including Christendom. The French Revolutionaries
went so far as to try to change the dating of time, a device copied by
the Bolsheviks and the Maoists and so many others. Contemporary social
engineers in our society have used textbooks and the mass media to
foment false images of the past in order to justify their own nefarious
agendas, relying principally upon sloganeering as the rhetorical weapon
of choice to try to brand as intolerant and bigoted anyone who dares to
contradict their falsehoods.
Flushing the past down the Orwellian "memory hole" has been one
of the principal means by which the theological and liturgical
revolutionaries have attempted to disparage everything associated with
the "preconciliar" era, including the Immemorial Mass of Tradition and the pronouncements of our true popes prior to that dark day on October 28, 1958, when Angelo Roncalli emerged in the guise of "Pope John XXIII.
The conciliar revolutionaries, aping the revolutions of Protestantism and the various social revolutions, have gone beyond the mere wiping out the past down the
memory hole. They have sought to harass and to
persecute those who refuse to have their memories erased, both priests
and laity. The persecution in some dioceses has been especially vicious
against priests, both those who have tried to maintain as much tradition
as they could in the new order of things.
As has been demonstrated on this site endlessly in the past nine months, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has a pathological hatred for anyone who cleaves to Catholic Tradition. In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has a pathological hatred for anything and everything to do with the the unchanging and unchangeable Faith of our Fathers. It is utterly no accident whatsoever that Bergoglio sought to destroy what he saw as a dangerous "counter-revolutionary cell" within the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate very soon after becoming the universal public face of apostasy on Wednesday, March 13, 2013, something that is now an established fact as a report from a website that accepts the false "pontificate" of Jorge Mario Bergoglio attests:
(Rome) The Apostolic Commissioner, the Capuchin Father Fidenzio Volpi OFM Cap from the Congregation of Religious,
with the approval of Pope Francis, instead of the Order leadership,
with sole decision-making power at the head of the Order of the Franciscans of the Immaculate set (FI), has given the real reason for the drastic intervention in the life of the Order for the first time.
The progressive Vaticanist Mario Tosatti had published a few days ago in the daily newspaper La Stampa a
letter from a member of the Third Order of the Franciscans of the
Immaculate, in which the radical approach of the Commissioner has been
criticized (see separate report "Unrestricted War" against the Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception? The Unspeakable "Blemish" ). The
interventions affect not only the male religious branch, but also the
Third Order, which was completely paralyzed by Father Volpi.
The Apostolic Commissioner responded with a letter to Tosatti's publication. In it, he explained for the first time the actual reason for the actions of the Vatican against the Order and its founder. The Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception is alleged to have "drifted" in a "Crypto-Lefebvrian, anyways traditionalist" direction. Even Tosatti reads from the extensive letter, in addition to several minor matters, what "the real problem" is.
The Commissioner stated thus confirming what was immediately clear to observers by the prohibition of the traditional rite and in the decree made by the Religious Congregation. The tough measures are directed against the rediscovery of the traditional rite and against the defense of the Church's tradition. Commissioner Father Volpi does not distinguish between "Lefebvrian" and "traditionalist", and thus, not even between the canonically unrecognized Priestly Society of St. Pius X and the canonically recognized Ecclesia Dei communities. Obviously, an attachment to tradition is for the Commissioner basically a "problem". A direction that is not only displeasing to the Capuchin, but must be fought. And he has done so with great zeal since last August. Obviously, it was this aversion that qualified him for the task of the Apostolic Commissioner. ( Attack Against Franciscans of the Immaculate Because "Crypto-Lefebvrian, Anyways Traditional")
The report just cited attempts to save the word "traditionalist" by distinguishing it from Father Fidenzio Volpi's "Crypto-Lefebvrian" phrase. As well meaning and courageous as the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI) and their defenders are, however, the simple fact remains that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is responsible for the Volpi appointment. He chose to "isolate" and "freeze" his target, which is why the petition to remove Volpi as the commissioner in charge of the FFI started by Italian historian Roberto de Mattei is misguided as Bergoglio and his false church are the problem, not "Father" Volpi.
As misguided as Professor de Mattei is, though, he does delineate the demands made by "Father" Volpi of the members of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate who are considered to comprise that "counter-revolutionary cell" against "false charity first, doctrine never!" agenda of Jorge Mario Bergoglio:
We ask for the dismissal of Fr. Fidenzio Volpi from his duty as political commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate. In the space of five months, Fr. Volpi has destroyed the Institute, provoking chaos and suffering within, scandal amongst the faithful, criticism from the press, uneasiness and perplexity in the ecclesiastical world. It is of little importance to know whether Fr. Volpi is the artifice or the executor of the plan of destruction.
What is certain is that if the plan is not brought to a halt, the consequences will be disastrous and it is to avoid one disaster being added to another that Fr. Volpi must be dismissed.
After the decree commissioning the Institute, dated 11th July last, Fr. Volpi, with the help of a maniple of unrestrained sub-commissioners, amongst whom are Fr. Alfonso Bruno and prof. Mario Castellano, started to bring down his hatchet upon the institute.
He prohibited the celebration of the holy Mass and of the liturgy of the hours in the extraordinary form, provided for by the Motu proprio Summorum pontificum; he deposed the entire general government of the order, starting from its founder, Fr. Stefano Maria Manelli, who finds himself under house arrest without even knowing the reasons why; he has deprived of authority and transferred, one after the other, the most faithful collaborators of Fr. Manelli, all people of intellectual and moral standing, giving their duties to dissident Friars, often uncultured and deprived of experience in governing; he has threatened and punished the Friars who sent a petition to the Holy See and who refused to withdraw it; lastly, with a diktak dated 8th December 2013, he has closed the seminary, suspended the priestly and diaconal ordinations; struck the publications of the Casa Mariana with an interdict, prohibiting their distribution in churches and sanctuaries entrusted to the religious; he has extended his personal war to the tertiaries and laity who sustain the Institute, suspending all the activities of the MIM (Mission of the Immaculate Mediatrix) and of the TOFI (Third Order Franciscans of the Immaculate); he has threatened to have the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate commissioned and removed from them and from the Poor Clares of the Immaculate the spiritual assistance of the Friars; finally he wants to impose upon the Friars a “modernistic vow” of faithfulness to the Novus Ordo Missae and to the II Vatican Council (to read the letter click here).
Fr. Volpi accuses all those who criticise him of being against the Pope, but this tyrannical regime, apart from being unknown in the history of the Church, is it not in complete contrast to Pope Francis, who has recommended the avoidance of every kind of authoritarianism and the use of mercy and tenderness towards friends and enemies? An objective expert on Vatican affairs, Mark Tosatti, also took note of this, asking himself in La Stampa dated 4th December “But what have these poor religious done? Have they gambled, abused minors, led an immoral life? They have done none of these things.”
The truth is that Fr. Volpi, on his own initiative, or through a third party, wants to normalize the Franciscans of the Immaculate, making them similar to the other religious orders who are going astray. To achieve this, it is necessary to transform their spiritual and moral doctrine, destroy the internal discipline, put an end to the regaining of the traditional liturgy and for them to become open to the corruption of the world, just as he and his Capuchin order have done, with disastrous results.
Paul VI in his Apostolic Exhortation, Evangelica testificatio, of 29th June 1971, addressed to religious, reminds that one must obey their superiors, “with the exception of an order that is manifestly contrary to the laws of God or to the constitutions of the institute, or that would implicate a grave and certain evil – in which case, in fact, the obligation to obey does not exist.” ( We ask for the resignation of Fr. Volpi, commissioner of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.)
Professor de Mattei does not realize that "Father" Volpi is doing precisely what the "pope" wants do as this type of ecclesiastical tyranny is what he himself personally ordered and supervised in order to break and destroy a group of traditionally-minded consecrated religious women in the Archdiocese of Argentina. Once again, we turn to a report that was translated by Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta:
"Msgr." Bergoglio is a cold and authoritarian man, in the service of a
part of a certain modernist ideology. Now he is a "pope." A change in
mentality perhaps, even if our degree of respect for him changes, given
the loftiness of his office?
Let us look at the story of the excellent periodical "Página Católica".
During the times of his being "archbishop" of Buenos Aires he disbanded
the holy Order of nuns that was founded in the 18th century by Mother
Antula, María Antonia de Paz y Figueroa, the Congregation of the
Daughters of the Divine Savior, that had various colleges and
constructed a House of Exercises in Buenos Aires, a jewel of colonial
architecture and a placed blessed with so much graces.
Now, coming from the "Holy See", follows another act of despotism
towards another Congregation, the Franciscans of the Immaculata with the
Reading the story demonstrates that there isn't any line added because
it is sufficient for any Catholic heart to understand and repudiate such
a horrible spectacle of ecclesiastical tyranny against the Faith, to
holy vocations, and good customs.
Lamentably, it is not possible to reproduce the interviews given to the
nuns thrown out on the streets by "Msgr." Bergoglio. But the can be
found by opening the webpage of http://www.paginacatolica.blogspot.com.ar/2013/07/frailes-de-la-inmaculada-y-un-drama.html. [Droleskey
note: This page no longer works. There is thus no need to write to me
about this as I do not know where it can
be found now. Thank you.]
Cosme Beccar Varela
July 30, 2013
Friars of the Immaculate and a "porteño" drama
The nuns of the Holy House of Exercises, an analogous case with the Franciscans of the Immaculata?
Modernism demands that the poor pay for their own destruction.
Today the walls of the Holy House of Exercises breath in solitude.
"Your preferred option has to be the poor," the Neo-Modernists tell us
who are abundantly governing the Church, every time there is a clamor to
celebrate the true Catholic Mass.
Thus, they foment an ideological animosity between Traditionalism and
Charity, on one hand and an erroneous and automatic identity between
Progressive Neo-Modernism and true charity towards the needy.
In effect, as sound Catholic doctrine teaches, Charity firstly corrects
the erring and showing them the pathway to salvation. Thus true love is
yearns for the good of the beloved; the good which is ultimately nothing
other than to merit everlasting life.
By this, those who long for the diffusion of the traditional doctrine
and liturgy, are the first who have opted preferentially for the poor,
by trying to provide them the Mass that has brought holiness upon
millions of Catholics throughout the last 2,000 years; and even in the
mere human order, it is a monument of good taste and the most exquisite
of human arts; incomparably more splendid than that "witches' sabbath"
of the Neo-Modernists of the Novus Ordo that they have accustomed the
But those who proclaim themselves advanced in the solicitude
of the poor, many times drop their mask without them knowing it.
We know that "pope" Francis has taken that name in order to demonstrate a
life developed in poverty. Therefore we must suppose that the Friars of
the Immaculata are truly poor.
Not withstanding, the decree signed in July 11 by which was intervened upon the Congregation by means of a Pontifical
Commissary, that includes only three established conditions:
1. Designate Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, OFM Cap, Apostolic Commissar ad nuntum
Santae Sedis of the Congregation, with all the applicable powers.
2. Dispose "that it corresponds upon the Institute of Franciscan Friars
of the Immaculata, to reimburse all the expenditure incurred by the
Commissary and the personnel that will be eventually designated, as
honorary for their services."
3. Besides what has been mentioned, the "Holy" Father Francis has
disposed that everyone of the religious of the Congregation of the
Friars of the Immaculata are obliged to celebrate the liturgy according
to the "ordinary" form and that eventually, the use of the
"extraordinary" form (Vetus Ordo) has to be explicitly authorized by the
corresponding authorities, for every religious and/or community that
asks for it."
Thus, we see the knavishness as it manifests itself. Then, in the end,
some poor monks will be bereft of the greatest of all treasures, the
Traditional Liturgy of the Church. They have to pay for such a great
Those who might have doubts as to what this intervention can possibly
mean should consider the following: the decree that we have analyzed can
only have two dispositions: rob the Tridentine Mass and determine who
will pay for the cost of such operation.
Go forth, standard bearers of the poor knowing that God will
repay you abundantly and immediately for your great generosity!
The situation that has been raised has had a similarity with a dramatic
case that occurred in Buenos Aires under the "archbishopric" of
"Cardinal" Bergoglio. We have spoken for some time about this lamentable
subject matter, but let us allow ourselves to return to it even if it
be succinctly, then we can illustrate to ourselves about what to expect
from the Institute of the Friars of the Immaculata.
Founded in the 18th century by Mother Antula and Maria Antonia de Paz y
Figueroa, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior has
reached a degree of prosperity that, in our time, it has been possessor
of various Catholic Colleges with thousands of students, one located in
the exclusive Avenue of the Liberator in San Isidro, over all, of the
terrain where they erected the Sanctuary of St. Cayetan in Liniers (a
lot of money in alms) whose revenue was administered by the nuns.
At an opportune moment, "Cardinal" Bergoglio asked of the Mother
Superior to transfer the property of the Sanctuary to the Archbishopric
of Buenos Aires. Days later, after consulting her councilor Mother Hilda
Ledesma responded to the Cardinal in the negative.
Having had a crystal ball maybe would have avoided the catastrophe of
ceding to the disposal of the now "pope" Francis, in order to avoid the
despoliation of all the goods and the near extinction of the order, as
Because, in no time, he designated an apostolic visitor in the person of
a Jesuit friend of Bergoglio: the current bishop Hugo Salaberry de
Azul, in the province of Buenos Aires. The excuse: that close to 30 nuns
lived in the Holy House of Exercises, some young women who in the
majority are from Paraguay won for Christ by the zeal of one nun of that
nationality, were there detained against their wills and isolated from
The isolation is concluded by the fact that these sisters were
instructed in the same convent by professors designated as ad hoc, that
which was made to avoid excessive contact with the world in which many
nuns are used to nowadays.
A little later, in the first hours of the morning, when some nuns
haven't yet groomed themselves, an unfolding of unusual Curial functions
informed them that the "Holy See," with the signature of "Cardinal" Re,
has designated as Apostolic Commissar on "Msgr." Horacio Garcia, Pro
Vicar General of the Archdiocese. The lettered "priest" that was
supposed to accompany him excused himself for not being in agreement. In
his place came "Fr." Alejandro Russo, current Rector of the Cathedral
of Buenos Aires (a favor in return for a favor?)
"Cardinal" Re reigned over the Congregation of the Religious and
Institutes of Consecrated Life, who lived here and had one relative in
the Archbishopric Curia. A man very close to Bergoglio, who was the one
who earned for him the ring of the Fisherman is being flaunted by
Francis and that he inherited from a secretary of Paul VI.
The end of this long story, that would give an argument by its
vicissitudes to a drama that will be a sure best seller in book stores,
ended with the Mother Superior confined to in Cordoba, the sisters
returned to the world in such a manner that it can be said that the
congregation ceased to exist, and the money and properties in the hands
of the "Apostolic Commissariate" whose intervention is prolonged sine
An eminent example if how these Pharisees care for the poor, is the case
of Mirna, a young Paraguayan woman who had been in the convent since 14
years of age and was bidden farewell by "Msgr." Garcia who put her in
the streets without informing her parents, and without even giving her a
single cent to look after her needs.
We put on video all of her declarations and we invite our
readers to reread an old post of this blog where she tells her story.
The drama of Mirna (video can be seen in the cited reference above).
At this point of the story our readers allow us to vent with a phrase
that is quite irreverent: to those who want to cheat, are good for
nothing losers. You who call yourselves progressive, not only do you put
souls in grave danger, neither do you know how to look after the needs
of the body.
According to the very victims, the Apostolic Commissary disposed that
the nuns and novices find out their true vocation, with a method that we
can call an immersion in the world: psychoanalysis and including
exposure to eroticism. About this, it has already been written in this
blog. (Translation provided by Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta.)
Bergoglio's goal is to break by whatever means necessary, including sheer tyranny and psychological terrorism, any and all "counter-revolutionary cells" such as the one his obsessed, pathological mind that seethes with hatred for the true Catholic Faith believes the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate. to represent. He is using "Father" Volpi to send a clear, unmistakable signal that this will happen to every other community in the Motu world if their clergy dare to utter word one about the "Second" Vatican Council and the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service. He is only waiting until his predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, dies before picking off every center of "counter-revolutionary" activity, whether real or imagined, he believes is an impediment to popular piety.
Although largely anecdotal and not as of yet
recounted in a systematic manner in any one place, many of us know
numerous instances in which priests and religious have been sent to
psychiatric reprogramming centers because they resisted the first wave
of the conciliar "reforms" in the middle to latter part of the 1960s.
This persecution of those deemed to be "conservative" or "rigid" has
continued in many dioceses and religious communities to this very day.
We were told some six years ago now of some very
compelling stories by a consecrated religious woman who had worked as a
nurse prior to entering the religious life, one of which involved a
religious in the 1960s who was told by her superiors to report to a
psychiatrist for "evaluation" because she would not give up her
community's traditional habit.
The psychiatrist knew the consecrated religious
because she had worked in the same hospital for a while as a nurse. He
told to get out of the hospital immediately, that there was nothing was
with her, but that she should not return to her community as there was
an effort to imprison those priests and religious who resisted the
conciliar changes. The psychiatrist led the religious woman, who told
the story to our narrator, herself in traditional religious life, to
a door where she could exit without being noticed, although she had seen
many of her "disappeared" sisters sitting in wheelchairs in a doped-up
state on her way into the psychiatrist's office.
This particular story has credibility as I know of men who have been candidates for the conciliar presbyterate who have been
screened out in many dioceses and religious communities because they
have been deemed to suffer from "rigidity."
As I have recounted on other
occasions, the secular Talmudic psychologist who screened candidates
for the Diocese of Rockville Centre for many years, Dr. Leonard
Krinsky, came to some interesting conclusions following about me in May
of 1979 following a psychological evaluation of me. Dr. Krinsky, now
deceased, wrote that my concept of the priesthood as the sacerdos was preconciliar and
that my desire to live a priestly life of prayer, penance, self-denial
and mortification were "possible signs of masochism. Dr. Krinsky’s report
concluded by saying that while I was “intelligent, creative, and
had the capacity for rich, interpersonal relationships,” I “lacked
the sufficient flexibility needed to adapt to the changing circumstances
of a postconciliar vocation.”'
One is, after al,
supposed be "flexible" enough to adapt with ease to the changes wrought
by the doctrinal, liturgical, moral and pastoral revolutions of
conciliarism, including the radical "simplification" of the liturgical
calendar that changed well established feast days in direct
contravention of Pope Pius XII's admonition contained in Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947:
The Church is without question a living organism,
and as an organism, in respect of the sacred liturgy also, she grows,
matures, develops, adapts and accommodates herself to temporal needs and
circumstances, provided only that the integrity of her doctrine be
safeguarded. This notwithstanding, the temerity and daring of
those who introduce novel liturgical practices, or call for the revival
of obsolete rites out of harmony with prevailing laws and rubrics,
deserve severe reproof. It has pained Us grievously to note, Venerable
Brethren, that such innovations are actually being introduced, not
merely in minor details but in matters of major importance as well. We
instance, in point of fact, those who make use of the vernacular in the
celebration of the august eucharistic sacrifice; those who transfer
certain feast-days -- which have been appointed and established after
mature deliberation -- to other dates; those, finally, who delete from
the prayer books approved for public use the sacred texts of the Old
Testament, deeming them little suited and inopportune for modern times.
The use of the Latin language, customary in a
considerable portion of the Church, is a manifest and beautiful sign of
unity, as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrinal
truth. In spite of this, the use of the mother tongue in connection with
several of the rites may be of much advantage to the people. But the
Apostolic See alone is empowered to grant this permission. It is
forbidden, therefore, to take any action whatever of this nature without
having requested and obtained such consent, since the sacred liturgy,
as We have said, is entirely subject to the discretion and approval of
the Holy See.
The same reasoning holds in the case of
some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites
and ceremonies indiscriminately. The liturgy of the early ages is most
certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be
esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its
significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground
that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent
liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They,
too, owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, who assists the Church in
every age even to the consummation of the world. They are equally the
resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and
procure the sanctity of man.
Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to
return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For
research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins,
contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful
investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of
the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is
neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every
possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be
straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to
its primitive table form; were he to want black excluded as a color for
the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and
statues in Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the
divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and
lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in
parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See.
Clearly no sincere
Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more
recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church, under the
inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for
souls, because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas. No more
can any Catholic in his right senses repudiate existing legislation of
the Church to revert to prescriptions based on the earliest sources of
canon law. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who
in matters liturgical would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity,
discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of divine
Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.
This way of acting
bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to
which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to
reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of
that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm
to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the
"deposit of faith" committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had
every right and reason to condemn. For perverse designs and ventures of
this sort tend to paralyze and weaken that process of sanctification by
which the sacred liturgy directs the sons of adoption to their Heavenly
Father of their souls' salvation. (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the very living personification of everything condemned by Pope Pius XII.
Although Jorge Mario Bergoglio disparaged the devotional piety of Catholic life in Evangelii Gaudium, Pope Pius XII praised it in Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947, as he condemned the Liturgical Movement's attack on any kind of devotions that are not connected with the the liturgy, a crusade that has been championed by the conciliar revolutionaries, including Bergoglio himself, since the end of the "Second" Vatican Council:
28. In this connection, Venerable Brethren, We desire to direct your
attention to certain recent theories touching a so-called "objective" piety.
While these theories attempt, it is true, to throw light on the mystery of the
Mystical Body, on the effective reality of sanctifying grace, on the action of
God in the sacraments and in the Mass, it is nonetheless apparent that they tend
to belittle, or pass over in silence, what they call "subjective," or "personal"
piety. (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947.)
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio's belief that "popular piety" can build the "better and more just society" is Pelagianism writ large as it is a more or less open admission that human being can stir up graces within themselves as they respond to the promptings of the "spirit."
XIX. No "Sourpusses" in Bergoglio's False Church
There is no room for serious discussion of Mortal Sins in Jorge Mario Bergoglio's false church as the only real sin is to ignore the poor. This why he used Evangelii Gaudium to once again flail away at his "sourpuss" straw men, who are, of course, those nasty "restorationists" and "triumphalists" whose opposition to his revolutionary ways must be caricatured at every turn:
84. The joy of the Gospel is such that it cannot be taken away from us by anyone or anything (cf. Jn 16:22). The evils of our world – and those of the Church – must not be excuses for diminishing our commitment and our fervour. Let us look upon them as challenges which can help us to grow. With the eyes of faith, we can see the light which the Holy Spirit always radiates in the midst of darkness, never forgetting that “where sin increased, grace has abounded all the more” (Rom 5:20). Our faith is challenged to discern how wine can come from water and how wheat can grow in the midst of weeds. Fifty years after the Second Vatican Council, we are distressed by the troubles of our age and far from naive optimism; yet the fact that we are more realistic must not mean that we are any less trusting in the Spirit or less generous. In this sense, we can once again listen to the words of Blessed John XXIII on the memorable day of 11 October 1962: “At times we have to listen, much to our regret, to the voices of people who, though burning with zeal, lack a sense of discretion and measure. In this modern age they can see nothing but prevarication and ruin … We feel that we must disagree with those prophets of doom who are always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were at hand. In our times, divine Providence is leading us to a new order of human relations which, by human effort and even beyond all expectations, are directed to the fulfilment of God’s superior and inscrutable designs, in which everything, even human setbacks, leads to the greater good of the Church”.
85. One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, “sourpusses”. Nobody can go off to battle unless he is fully convinced of victory beforehand. If we start without confidence, we have already lost half the battle and we bury our talents. While painfully aware of our own frailties, we have to march on without giving in, keeping in mind what the Lord said to Saint Paul: “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor 12:9). Christian triumph is always a cross, yet a cross which is at the same time a victorious banner borne with aggressive tenderness against the assaults of evil. The evil spirit of defeatism is brother to the temptation to separate, before its time, the wheat from the weeds; it is the fruit of an anxious and self-centred lack of trust. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
It is because Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII (see Two For The Price Of One, part one and Francis: The Latest In A Long Line Of Ecclesiastical Tyrants) had the same spirit of false "joy" as possessed by Jorge Mario Bergoglio that the first false claimant to the papacy after the death of Pope Pius XII on October 9, 1958, did not want to promulgate the Third Secret of Fatima after he had read it in 1960. According to what Silvio Cardinal Oddi, who was with Roncalli/John XXIII at the time the Third Secret was read and opened, the obese antipope said, "This is just nonsense. This is not for our time." Roncalli/John XXIII thus refused to obey Our Lady's request that the the Third Secret be promulgated in 1960.
Not for our time?
Prophets of doom?
The last five decades have been seen an unparalleled decline of men and their nations into the deepest reaches of the abyss. All sense of reverence and piety have abandoned by what most people think is the Catholic Church. Over 20,000 innocent preborn children are killed every day under cover of law throughout the world, millions more are killed by chemical abortifacients and devices. Impurity, indecency, vulgarity and actual pornography pollute the souls of billions worldwide. Human beings are vivisected alive in hospitals for their vital body members in the name of the myth of "brain death" and under the mindless slogan of "giving the gift of life." Men are killed randomly for no reason at all while others are the objects of "knock out" assaults that are captured on video devices and then uploaded to You Tube.
Sure, everything was looking so rosy back on October 11, 1962, right?
Pope after pope warned of of any kind of "reconciliation" with the revolutions of Modernity and Modernism, explaining to us what would happen if Catholics permitted themselves to be influenced by them. Only two examples will be given for the present purposes:
3. Although God may console Us with you, We are nonetheless sad. This is due
to the numberless errors and the teachings of perverse doctrines which, no
longer secretly and clandestinely but openly and vigorously, attack the Catholic
faith. You know how evil men have raised the standard of revolt against religion
through philosophy (of which they proclaim themselves doctors) and through empty
fallacies devised according to natural reason. In the first place, the Roman See
is assailed and the bonds of unity are, every day, being severed. The authority
of the Church is weakened and the protectors of things sacred are snatched away
and held in contempt. The holy precepts are despised, the celebration of divine
offices is ridiculed, and the worship of God is cursed by the sinner. All
things which concern religion are relegated to the fables of old women and the
superstitions of priests. Truly lions have roared in Israel. With tears We
say: "Truly they have conspired against the Lord and against His Christ." Truly
the impious have said: "Raze it, raze it down to its foundations."
4. Among these heresies belongs that foul contrivance of the sophists of this
age who do not admit any difference among the different professions of faith and
who think that the portal of eternal salvation opens for all from any religion.
They, therefore, label with the stigma of levity and stupidity those who, having
abandoned the religion which they learned, embrace another of any kind, even
Catholicism. This is certainly a monstrous impiety which assigns the same praise
and the mark of the just and upright man to truth and to error, to virtue and to
vice, to goodness and to turpitude. Indeed this deadly idea concerning the lack
of difference among religions is refuted even by the light of natural reason. We
are assured of this because the various religions do not often agree among
themselves. If one is true, the other must be false; there can be no society of
darkness with light. Against these experienced sophists the people must be
taught that the profession of the Catholic faith is uniquely true, as the
apostle proclaims: one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Jerome used to say it
this way: he who eats the lamb outside this house will perish as did those
during the flood who were not with Noah in the ark. Indeed, no other name
than the name of Jesus is given to men, by which they may be saved. He who
believes shall be saved; he who does not believe shall be condemned. (Pope Pius VIII, Traditii Humiliati Nostrae, May 24, 1829.)
This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to
that absurd and erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of
conscience must be maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred
and civil affairs, though some repeat over and over again with the
greatest impudence that some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,"
as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which
men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already
inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit"
is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and
out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence
comes transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred
things and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the
state than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that
cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of
this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free
speech, and desire for novelty.
Here We must include that harmful and never
sufficiently denounced freedom to publish any writings whatever and
disseminate them to the people, which some dare to demand and promote
with so great a clamor. We are horrified to see what monstrous doctrines
and prodigious errors are disseminated far and wide in countless books,
pamphlets, and other writings which, though small in weight, are very
great in malice. We are in tears at the abuse which proceeds from them
over the face of the earth. Some are so carried away that they
contentiously assert that the flock of errors arising from them is
sufficiently compensated by the publication of some book which defends
religion and truth. Every law condemns deliberately doing evil simply
because there is some hope that good may result. Is there any sane man
who would say poison ought to be distributed, sold publicly, stored, and
even drunk because some antidote is available and those who use it may
be snatched from death again and again? (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
Catholics are not "pessimists."
Catholics are not "sourpusses."
Believing Catholics use their sensus Catholicus to understand the realities that confront them, trusting always in Our Lady's graces to plant the seeds for the defeat of revolutionaries such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio and Oscar Andres Maradiaga Rodriguez and the revolutionary confederates, and that defeat will come in God's good time as the fruit of Our Lady's Immaculate Heart.
The days of Jorge and Oscar's false gospel of false joy are numbered, yes, no what how many times Bergoglio is named TIME Magazine's "Person of the Year."
You see, Jorge, God the Holy Ghost had a little something to say about men as you, a veritable figure of Antichrist, who are thought well of by men:
 Woe to you when men shall bless you: for according to these things did their fathers to the false prophets. (Luke 6: 26.)
XX. Power to the People
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's egalitarianism is on display every day at the Casa Santa Marta. It is on display in how he dresses and comports himself. It is on display when he speaks. The Argentine Apostate is an egalitarian revolutionary.
To him, there is really no distinction between the priesthood of the ordained priest and the common priesthood of the lay faithful that is conferred during the Sacrament of Baptism, which is why he puts the word hierarchical in quotation marks:
102. Lay people are, put simply, the vast majority of the people of God. The minority – ordained ministers – are at their service. There has been a growing awareness of the identity and mission of the laity in the Church. We can count on many lay persons, although still not nearly enough, who have a deeply-rooted sense of community and great fidelity to the tasks of charity, catechesis and the celebration of the faith. At the same time, a clear awareness of this responsibility of the laity, grounded in their baptism and confirmation, does not appear in the same way in all places. In some cases, it is because lay persons have not been given the formation needed to take on important responsibilities. In others, it is because in their particular Churches room has not been made for them to speak and to act, due to an excessive clericalism which keeps them away from decision-making. Even if many are now involved in the lay ministries, this involvement is not reflected in a greater penetration of Christian values in the social, political and economic sectors. It often remains tied to tasks within the Church, without a real commitment to applying the Gospel to the transformation of society. The formation of the laity and the evangelization of professional and intellectual life represent a significant pastoral challenge.
103. The Church acknowledges the indispensable contribution which women make to society through the sensitivity, intuition and other distinctive skill sets which they, more than men, tend to possess. I think, for example, of the special concern which women show to others, which finds a particular, even if not exclusive, expression in motherhood. I readily acknowledge that many women share pastoral responsibilities with priests, helping to guide people, families and groups and offering new contributions to theological reflection. But we need to create still broader opportunities for a more incisive female presence in the Church. Because “the feminine genius is needed in all expressions in the life of society, the presence of women must also be guaranteed in the workplace” and in the various other settings where important decisions are made, both in the Church and in social structures.
104. Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected, based on the firm conviction that men and women are equal in dignity, present the Church with profound and challenging questions which cannot be lightly evaded. The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general. It must be remembered that when we speak of sacramental power “we are in the realm of function, not that of dignity or holiness”. The ministerial priesthood is one means employed by Jesus for the service of his people, yet our great dignity derives from baptism, which is accessible to all. The configuration of the priest to Christ the head – namely, as the principal source of grace – does not imply an exaltation which would set him above others. In the Church, functions “do not favour the superiority of some vis-à-vis the others”. Indeed, a woman, Mary, is more important than the bishops. Even when the function of ministerial priesthood is considered “hierarchical”, it must be remembered that “it is totally ordered to the holiness of Christ’s members”. Its key and axis is not power understood as domination, but the power to administer the sacrament of the Eucharist; this is the origin of its authority, which is always a service to God’s people. This presents a great challenge for pastors and theologians, who are in a position to recognize more fully what this entails with regard to the possible role of women in decision-making in different areas of the Church’s life. (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
Note how Jorge Mario Bergoglio referred to the "ministerial," not the sacerdotal (sacrificing), priesthood.
Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio had the temerity to disparage the power that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, He Who is the Chief Priest and Victim of every Mass, our High Priest Who governs us in all things, has given to his ordained priests to teach, rule and sanctify in His Holy Name. Bergoglio also dared to claim the priesthood is but a mere "function" that is not in the "realm" of "dignity" and holiness."
This man is a blaspheming heretic, one who makes a liar of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and of the teaching He gave to Holy Mother Church that has been guided infallibly by God the Holy Ghost.
Pope Pius XII's Mediator Dei refuted Bergoglio's reduction of the Holy Priesthood to but a mere function and not one that is separate and distinct from that of the common priesthood shared by each baptized Catholic:
83. For there are today, Venerable Brethren, those who, approximating to
errors long since condemned teach that in the New Testament by the word
"priesthood" is meant only that priesthood which applies to all who have been
baptized; and hold that the command by which Christ gave power to His apostles
at the Last Supper to do what He Himself had done, applies directly to the
entire Christian Church, and that thence, and thence only, arises the
hierarchical priesthood. Hence they assert that the people are possessed of a
true priestly power, while the priest only acts in virtue of an office committed
to him by the community. Wherefore, they look on the eucharistic sacrifice as a
"concelebration," in the literal meaning of that term, and consider it more
fitting that priests should "concelebrate" with the people present than that
they should offer the sacrifice privately when the people are absent.
84. It is superfluous to explain how captious errors of this sort completely
contradict the truths which we have just stated above, when treating of the
place of the priest in the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. But we deem it
necessary to recall that the priest acts for the people only because he
represents Jesus Christ, who is Head of all His members and offers Himself in
their stead. Hence, he goes to the altar as the minister of Christ, inferior to
Christ but superior to the people. The people, on the other hand, since they
in no sense represent the divine Redeemer and are not mediator between
themselves and God, can in no way possess the sacerdotal power. (Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947.)
That is pretty clear, is it not?
The priest his superior to the people by the virtue of the indelible seal that was impressed upon His immortal soul at his ordination when he his soul was conformed to the Priesthood and Victimhood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ for all eternity. He is to be treated with dignity and respect as befits the ineffable powers given unto him to utter mere words over the mere elements of the earth, thus calling down Christ the King from Heaven!
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's concept of a mere sacramental functionary whose "function" possesses no inherent dignity or holiness blasphemes Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself Who instituted His Holy Priesthood at the Last Supper with His own royal dignity, holiness and power.
Although Jorge Mario Bergoglio explained that the ordained priest "administers the Eucharist," he omitted what Pope Pius XI, writing in Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935, explained at great length: the power to remit sins:
20. But among all these powers of the priest over the Mystical Body of Christ
for the benefit of the faithful, there is one of which the simple mention made
above will not content Us. This is that power which, as St. John Chrysostom
says: "God gave neither to Angels nor Archangels" -- the power to remit sins.
"Whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall
retain they are retained"; a tremendous power, so peculiar to God that even
human pride could not make the mind conceive that it could be given to man. "Who
can forgive sins but God alone?" And, when we see it exercised by a mere man
there is reason to ask ourselves, not, indeed, with pharisaical scandal, but
with reverent surprise at such a dignity: "Who is this that forgiveth sins
also?" But it is so: the God-Man who possessed the "power on earth to forgive
sins" willed to hand it on to His priests; to relieve, in His divine generosity
and mercy, the need of moral purification which is rooted in the human heart.
21. What a comfort to the guilty, when, stung with remorse and repenting of
his sins, he hears the word of the priest who says to him in God's name: "I
absolve thee from thy sins!" These words fall, it is true, from the lips of one
who, in his turn, must needs beg the same absolution from another priest. This
does not debase the merciful gift; but makes it, rather, appear greater; since
beyond the weak creature is seen more clearly the hand of God through whose
power is wrought this wonder. As an illustrious layman has written, treating
with rare competence of spiritual things: ". . . when a priest, groaning in
spirit at his own unworthiness and at the loftiness of his office, places his
consecrated hands upon our heads; when, humiliated at finding himself the
dispenser of the Blood of the Covenant; each time amazed as he pronounces the
words that give life; when a sinner has absolved a sinner; we, who rise from our
knees before him, feel we have done nothing debasing. . . We have been at the
feet of a man who represented Jesus Christ, . . . we have been there to receive
the dignity of free men and of sons of God."
22. These august powers are conferred upon the priest in a special Sacrament
designed to this end: they are not merely passing or temporary in the priest,
but are stable and perpetual, united as they are with the indelible character
imprinted on his soul whereby he becomes "a priest forever"; whereby he becomes
like unto Him in whose eternal priesthood he has been made a sharer. Even the
most lamentable downfall, which, through human frailty, is possible to a priest,
can never blot out from his soul the priestly character. But along with this
character and these powers, the priest through the Sacrament of Orders receives
new and special grace with special helps. Thereby, if only he will loyally
further, by his free and personal cooperation, the divinely powerful action of
the grace itself, he will be able worthily to fulfill all the duties, however
arduous, of his lofty calling. He will not be overborne, but will be able to
bear the tremendous responsibilities inherent to his priestly duty;
responsibilities which have made fearful even the stoutest champions of the
Christian priesthood, men like St. John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory the
Great, St. Charles and many others. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935.)
Pope Pius XI also wrote of the inherent dignity and holiness of the priesthood, which is why a priest must remember his sacerdotal dignity and strive for a greater holiness of life than that of the lay faithful:
31. Most sublime, then, Venerable Brethren, is the dignity of the priesthood.
Even the falling away of the few unworthy in the priesthood, however deplorable
and distressing it may be, cannot dim the splendor of so lofty a dignity. Much
less can the unworthiness of a few cause the worth and merit of so many to be
overlooked; and how many have been, and are, in the priesthood, preeminent in
holiness, in learning, in works of zeal, nay, even in martyrdom.
32. Nor must it be forgotten that personal unworthiness does not hinder the
efficacy of a priest's ministry. For the unworthiness of the minister does not
make void the Sacraments he administers; since the Sacraments derive their
efficacy from the Blood of Christ, independently of the sanctity of the
instrument, or, as scholastic language expresses it, the Sacraments work their
effect ex opere operato.
33. Nevertheless, it is quite true that so holy an office demands holiness in
him who holds it. A priest should have a loftiness of spirit, a purity of heart
and a sanctity of life befitting the solemnity and holiness of the office he
holds. For this, as We have said, makes the priest a mediator between God and
man; a mediator in the place, and by the command of Him who is "the one mediator
of God and men, the man Jesus Christ." The priest must, therefore, approach as
close as possible to the perfection of Him whose vicar he is, and render himself
ever more and more pleasing to God, by the sanctity of his life and of his
deeds; because more than the scent of incense, or the beauty of churches and
altars, God loves and accepts holiness. "They who are the intermediaries between
God and His people," says St. Thomas, "must bear a good conscience before God,
and a good name among men." On the contrary, whosoever handles and administers
holy things, while blameworthy in his life, profanes them and is guilty of
sacrilege: "They who are not holy ought not to handle holy things."
34. For this reason even in the Old Testament God commanded His priests and
levites: "Let them therefore be holy because I am also holy: the Lord who
sanctify them." In his canticle for the dedication of the temple, Solomon the
Wise made this same request to the Lord in favor of the sons of Aaron: "Let Thy
priests be clothed with justice: and let Thy saints rejoice." So, Venerable
Brethren, may we not ask with St. Robert Bellarmine: "If so great uprightness,
holiness and lively devotion was required of priests who offered sheep and oxen,
and praised God for the moral blessings; what, I ask, is required of those
priests who sacrifice the Divine Lamb and give thanks for eternal blessings?" "A
great dignity," exclaims St. Lawrence Justinian, "but great too is the
responsibility; placed high in the eyes of men they must also be lifted up to
the peak of virtue before the eye of Him who seeth all; otherwise their
elevation will be not to their merit but to their damnation."
35. And surely every reason We have urged in showing the dignity of the
Catholic priesthood does but reinforce its obligation of singular holiness; for
as the Angelic Doctor teaches: "To fulfill the duties of Holy Orders, common
goodness does not suffice; but excelling goodness is required; that they who
receive Orders and are thereby higher in rank than the people, may also be
higher in holiness." The Eucharistic Sacrifice in which the Immaculate Victim
who taketh away the sins of the world is immolated, requires in a special way
that the priest, by a holy and spotless life, should make himself as far as he
can, less unworthy of God, to whom he daily offers that adorable Victim, the
very Word of God incarnate for love of us. Agnoscite quod agitis, imitamini quod
tractatis, "realize what you are doing, and imitate what you handle," says the
Church through the Bishop to the deacons as they are about to be consecrated
priests. The priest is also the almoner of God's graces of which the Sacraments
are the channels; how grave a reproach would it be, for one who dispenses these
most precious graces were he himself without them, or were he even to esteem
them lightly and guard them with little care. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935.)
Pope Pius XI also condemned Bergoglio's oft-stated belief, expressed also in Evangelii Gaudium, that his presbyters must be involved actively with the poor, that they need to get themselves out of their sacristies and into the "muck" of the streets:
37. It would be a grave error fraught with many dangers should the priest,
carried away by false zeal, neglect his own sanctification, and become over
immersed in the external works, however holy, of the priestly ministry. Thereby,
he would run a double risk. In the first place he endangers his own salvation,
as the great Apostle of the Gentiles feared for himself: "But I chastise my
body, and bring it into subjection: lest perhaps, when I have preached to
others, I myself should become a castaway." In the second place he might lose,
if not divine grace, certainly that unction of the Holy Spirit which gives such
a marvelous force and efficacy to the external apostolate. (Pope Pius XI, Ad Catholici Sacerdotii, December 30, 1935.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio's concept of the Holy Priesthood came into its own in the 1970s, and I had heard it many times from vocation directors in various dioceses and of religious communities. One vocation director told me the following on June 22, 1979: "A man is actually ordained to the priesthood when the people applaud following the imposition of hands. This ratifies the conferral of the order." Yes, those are exact words.
Even the official teaching of the conciliar church used to insist that there was a distinction, both in degree and in kind, between the Holy Priesthood and that of the lay faithful, a point was made by a "commission of cardinals" who had reviewed the infamous "Dutch Catechism" that was mentioned earlier in this very long commentary:
8. The Ministerial or Hierarchical Priesthood and the Power of
Teaching and Ruling in the Church. — Care must be taken not to minimize the excellence of the ministerial
priesthood, that in its participation of the priesthood of Christ,
differs from the common priesthood of the faithful, not only in degree,
but in essence (Cf.: Conc. Vat. II, Const. Lumen Gentium, n. 10); Instructio de Cultu Mysterii eucharistici, AAS, 59  n. 11,
Care should be taken that in describing the priestly ministry there
is brought out more clearly the mediation between God and men which they
exercise not only in preaching the word of God, in forming the Christian
Community and in administering the Sacraments, but also and chiefly in
offering the Eucharistic sacrifice in the name of the whole Church (cf.
Conc. Vat. II, Const. Lumen Gentium, n. 28; Decr. Presbyterorum
ordinis, nn. 2, 13).
Furthermore, the Cardinals asked that the new Catechism clearly
recognize that the teaching authority and the power of ruling in the
Church is given directly to the Holy Father and to the Bishops joined
with him in hierarchical communion, and that it is not given first of
all to the people of God to be communicated to others. The office of
Bishops, therefore, is not a mandate given them by the people of God but
is a mandate received from God Himself for the good of the whole
It is to be brought out more clearly that the Holy Father and the
Bishops in their teaching office do not only assemble and approve what
the whole community of the faithful believes. The people of God are so
moved and sustained by the spirit of truth that they cling to the word
of God with unswerving loyalty and freedom from error under the
leadership of the Magisterium to whom it belongs authentically to guard,
explain and defend the deposit of faith. Thus it has come about that in
understanding the faith that has been handed down, in professing that
faith and in manifesting it in deed, there is a unique collaboration
between Bishops and the faithful (Cf. Conc. Vat. II, Lumen Gentium,
n. 11, and Dei Verbum, n. 10). Sacred Tradition and the Sacred
Scripture—which constitute the one
and only holy deposit of the word of God—and
the magisterium of the Church are so joined that one cannot stand
without the other (Cf. Conc. Vat. II, Const. Dei Verbum, n. 10). (Declaration of the Commission of Cardinals on the Dutch Catechism.)
Alas, basing the teaching authority of the Catholic Church on the documents of the "Second" Vatican Council can never prevent the rise of those who reject what was considered official in the "past" with impunity. A false foundation, no matter if used to try to reiterate Catholic teaching, can never provide a bulwark against error and heresy.
The Council of Trent condemned Bergoglio's revolutionary beliefs as follows:
any one affirm, that all Christians indiscrimately are priests of the New
Testament, or that they are all mutually endowed with an equal spiritual
power, he clearly does nothing but confound the ecclesiastical hierarchy,
which is as an army set in array; as if, contrary to the doctrine of
blessed Paul, all were apostles, all prophets, all evangelists, all
pastors, all doctors. (Council of Trent, Twenty-fourth Session, Chapter 4, July 15, 1563.)
This all began with Father Martin Luther. It ends with Antichrist himself. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is just a "middle man," if you will, to serve as a very important bridge until then.
Finally, all that needs to be said about Jorge Mario Bergoglio's call for women to be given more "responsibility" in the Catholic Church is simply a repetion of all that he has said throughout his long career of tyrannical Modernist destruction. It is why he has appointed feminist "bishops" to key positions. It denigrates the essential differences between men and women that exist in the Order of Nature (Creation) and the Order of Redemption (Grace), differences which even the Mother of God herself respected as she submitted herself duly to the authority of Saint Joseph, her Most Chaste Spouse and the Patron of the Universal Chuch and the Protector of the Faithful, and as she received the very Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in Holy Communion from the episcopal hands of Saint John the Evangelist.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio distorts history and truth, fearing not to blaspheme God and His Most Blessed Mother. Then again, he thinks that both the Particular Judgment and the General Judgment of the living and the dead are nothing to fear, something that will be discussed yet again in the concluding part of this series tomorrow, Friday, Decmber 13, 2013, the Feast of Saint Lucy within the Octave of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
XXI. Leave 'Em Laughin'
Jorge Mario Bergoglio also used the text of Evangelii Gaudium to repeat his oft-expressed desire to avoid "negativity" in preaching, essentially telling presbyters in his false church to preach as he does. Yes, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is indeed TIME Magazine's "Person of the Year:"
156. Some people think they can be good preachers because they know what ought to be said, but they pay no attention to how it should be said, that is, the concrete way of constructing a sermon. They complain when people do not listen to or appreciate them, but perhaps they have never taken the trouble to find the proper way of presenting their message. Let us remember that “the obvious importance of the content of evangelization must not overshadow the importance of its ways and means”. Concern for the way we preach is likewise a profoundly spiritual concern. It entails responding to the love of God by putting all our talents and creativity at the service of the mission which he has given us; at the same time, it shows a fine, active love of neighbour by refusing to offer others a product of poor quality. In the Bible, for example, we can find advice on how to prepare a homily so as to best to reach people: “Speak concisely, say much in few words” (Sir 32:8).
157. Simply using a few examples, let us recall some practical resources which can enrich our preaching and make it more attractive. One of the most important things is to learn how to use images in preaching, how to appeal to imagery. Sometimes examples are used to clarify a certain point, but these examples usually appeal only to the mind; images, on the other hand, help people better to appreciate and accept the message we wish to communicate. An attractive image makes the message seem familiar, close to home, practical and related to everyday life. A successful image can make people savour the message, awaken a desire and move the will towards the Gospel. A good homily, an old teacher once told me, should have “an idea, a sentiment, an image.”
158. Paul VI said that “the faithful… expect much from preaching, and will greatly benefit from it, provided that it is simple, clear, direct, well-adapted”. Simplicity has to do with the language we use. It must be one that people understand, lest we risk speaking to a void. Preachers often use words learned during their studies and in specialized settings which are not part of the ordinary language of their hearers. These are words that are suitable in theology or catechesis, but whose meaning is incomprehensible to the majority of Christians. The greatest risk for a preacher is that he becomes so accustomed to his own language that he thinks that everyone else naturally understands and uses it. If we wish to adapt to people’s language and to reach them with God’s word, we need to share in their lives and pay loving attention to them. Simplicity and clarity are two different things. Our language may be simple but our preaching not very clear. It can end up being incomprehensible because it is disorganized, lacks logical progression or tries to deal with too many things at one time. We need to ensure, then, that the homily has thematic unity, clear order and correlation between sentences, so that people can follow the preacher easily and grasp his line of argument.
159. Another feature of a good homily is that it is positive. It is not so much concerned with pointing out what shouldn’t be done, but with suggesting what we can do better. In any case, if it does draw attention to something negative, it will also attempt to point to a positive and attractive value, lest it remain mired in complaints, laments, criticisms and reproaches. Positive preaching always offers hope, points to the future, does not leave us trapped in negativity. How good it is when priests, deacons and the laity gather periodically to discover resources which can make preaching more attractive! (Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Evangelii Gaudium, November 26, 2013.)
Jorge Mario Bergoglio was taking a swipe at his predecessor, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, when he wrote of those men "use words learned during their studies and in specialized settings which are not part of the ordinary language of their hearers." The subtle warfare between the two-headed "pope" monster, a warfare that is a matter of style and not at all of substance, something that an article to be published in a few days will demonstrate yet again, continues unabated.
On balance, however, Bergoglio's comments in the first two paragraphs cited above are gratuitous as they would have readers believe that most priests in the past and/or presbyters now use scholarly language from the pulpit. This is a straw man argument on two counts.
First, the Angelic Doctor himself, deliberately put away the style of his lectures when he preached to ordinary Catholics in the churches of Naples, Italy. Indeed, some of his students were shocked to hear their beloved teacher and mentor, Saint Thomas Aquinas, use the language that they thought was beneath him when he preached to the Neapolitans, which is why those of their number who transcribed the sermons decided to clean them up for the sake of posterity. Saint Thomas Aquinas, one of the most learned men in the history of the Catholic Church, knew how to approaching people as he relied upon the graces of his priestly ordination and the gifts of communication he had been given by God to command the attention of budding scholars in the classroom and illiterate Catholics in the pews.
Second, very few conciliar presbyters use any kind of studious language when preaching. Many are as a vulgar and self-congratulatory as Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself. Studiousness in preaching is not one of the overriding problems in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Many discuss the latest motion picture or television program they had seen. Some even go so far as to praise motion pictures that promote rank immorality.
Insofar as being "positive" is concerned, Jorge Mario Bergoglio's false gospel of false joy demands nothing that can be construed as "negativity," which means that the likes of Saint Vincent Ferrer, Saint Leonard of Port Maurice, Saint Francis Solano, Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, Saint Anthony Mary Claret and Saint John Mary Vianney, among hundreds of others, need not apply.
Perhaps an example from the preaching of Saint John Mary Vianney will suffice:
Why am I up in the pulpit today, my dear brethren?
What am I going to say to you? Ah! I come on behalf of God Himself. I
come on behalf of your poor parents, to awaken in you that love and
gratitude which you owe them. I come to bring before your minds again
all those kindnesses and all the love which they gave you while they
were on earth. I come to tell you that they suffer in Purgatory, that
they weep, and that they demand with urgent cries the help of your
prayers and your good works. I seem to hear them crying from the depths
of those fires which devour them: "Tell our beloved ones, tell our
children, tell all our relatives how great the evils are which they are
making us suffer. We throw ourselves at their feet to implore the help
of their prayers. Ah! Tell them that since we have been separated from
them, we have been here burning in the flames! Oh! Who would be so
indifferent to such sufferings as we are enduring?"
Do you see, my dear brethren, do you hear that
tender mother, that devoted father, and all those relatives who helped
and tended you? "My friends," they cry, "free us from these pains; you
can do it." Consider then, my dear brethren: (1) the magnitude of these
sufferings which the souls in Purgatory endure; and (2) the means which
we have of mitigating them: our prayers, our good works, and, above all,
the holy sacrifice of the Mass.
I do not wish to stop at this stage to prove to you
the existence of Purgatory. That would be a waste of time. No one among
you has the slightest doubt on that score. The Church, to which Jesus
Christ promised the guidance of the Holy Ghost and which, consequently,
can neither be mistaken herself nor mislead us, teaches us about
Purgatory in a very clear and positive manner. It is certain, very
certain, that there is a place where the souls of the just complete the
expiation of their sins before being admitted to the glory of Paradise,
which is assured them. Yes, my dear brethren, and it is an article of
faith: if we have not done penance proportionate to the greatness and
enormity of our sins, even though forgiven in the holy tribunal of
Penance, we shall be compelled to expiate them. . . . In Holy Scripture
there are many texts which show clearly that although our sins may be
forgiven, God still imposes on us the obligation to suffer in this world
by temporal hardships or in the next by the flames of Purgatory.
Look at what happened to Adam. Because he was
repentant after committing his sin, God assured him that He had pardoned
him, and yet He condemned him to do penance for nine hundred years,
penance which surpasses anything we can imagine. See again: David
ordered, contrary to the wish of God, the census of his subjects, but,
stricken with remorse of conscience, he recognized his sin and, throwing
himself upon the ground, begged the Lord to pardon him. God, touched by
his repentance, forgave him indeed. But despite that, He sent Gad to
tell David that he would have to choose between three scourges which He
had prepared for him as punishment for iniquity: the plague, war, or
famine. David said: "It is better that I should fall into the hands of
the Lord (for his mercies are many) than into the hands of men." He
chose the pestilence, which lasted three days and killed seventy
thousand of his subjects. If the Lord had not stayed the hand of the
Angel, which was stretched out over the city, all Jerusalem would have
been depopulated! David, seeing so many evils caused by his sin, begged
the grace of God to punish him alone and to spare his people, who were
Alas, my dear brethren, what, then, will be the
number of years which we shall have to suffer in Purgatory, we who have
so many sins, we who, under the pretext that we have confessed them, do
no penance and shed no tears? How many years of suffering shall we have
to expect in the next life?
But how, then the holy Fathers tell us that the
torments they suffer in this pale seem equal the sufferings which our
Lord Jesus Christ endured during His sorrowful Passion, shall I paint
for you a heart-rending picture of the sufferings which these poor souls
endure? However, it is certain that if the slightest torment that our
Lord suffered had been shared by all mankind, they would all be dead
through the violence of such suffering. The fire of Purgatory is the
same as the fire of Hell, the difference between them is that the fire
of Purgatory is not everlasting. Oh! Should God in His great mercy
permit one of these poor souls, who burn in these flames, to appear here
in my place, all surrounded by the fires which consume him, and should
he give you himself a recital of the sufferings he is enduring, this
church, my dear brethren, would reverberate with his cries and his sobs,
and perhaps that might finally soften your hearts.
Oh! How we suffer! they cry to us. Oh! You, our
brethren, deliver us from these torments! You can do it! Ah, if you only
experienced the sorrow of being separated from God! . . . Cruel
separation! To burn in the fire kindled by the justice of God! . . . To
suffer sorrows, incomprehensible to mortal man! . . . To be devoured by
regret, knowing that we could so easily have avoided such sorrows! . .
.Oh! My children, cry the fathers and the mother, can you thus so
readily abandon us, we who loved you so much? Can you then sleep in
comfort and leave us stretched upon a bed of fire? Will you have the
courage to give yourselves up to pleasure and joy while we are here
suffering and weeping night and day? You have our wealth, our homes, you
are enjoying the fruit of our labors, and you abandon us here in this
place of torments, where we are suffering such frightful evils for so
many years! . . . And not a single almsgiving, not a single Mass which
would help to deliver us! . . . You can relieve our sufferings, you can
open our prison, and your abandon us. Oh! How cruel these sufferings
are! . . .
Yes, my dear brethren, people judge very
differently, when in the flames of Purgatory, of all those light faults,
if indeed it is possible to call anything light which makes us endure
such rigorous sorrows. What woe would there be to man, the Royal Prophet
cries, even the more just of men, if God were to judge him without
mercy. If God has found spots in the sun and malice in the angels, what,
then, is this sinful man? And for us, who have committed so many mortal
sins and who have done practically nothing to satisfy the justice of
God, how many years of Purgatory!. . .
"My God," said St. Teresa, "what soul will be pure
enough to enter into heaven without passing through the vengeful
flames?" In her last illness, she cried suddenly: "O justice and power
of my God, how terrible you are!" During her agony, God allowed her to
see His holiness as the angels and the saints see Him in heaven, which
caused her so much dread that her sisters, seeing her trembling and
extraordinarily agitated, spoke to her, weeping: "Ah! Mother, what has
happened to you; surely you do not fear death after so many penances and
such abundant and bitter tears?"
"No, my children," St. Teresa replied, "I do not
fear death; on the contrary, I desire it so that I may be united forever
with my God."
"It is your sins, then, which terrify you, after so much mortification?"
"Yes, my children," she told them. "I do fear my sins, but I fear still another thing even more."
"Is it the judgment then?"
"Yes, I tremble at the formidable account that it
will be necessary to render to God, Who, in that moment, will be without
mercy, but there is still something else of which the very thought
alone makes me die with terror."
The poor sisters were deeply distressed.
"Alas! Can it be Hell then?"
"No, she told them, "Hell, thank God, is not for
me. Oh! My sisters, it is the holiness of God. My God, have pity upon
me! My life must be brought face to face with that of Jesus Christ
Himself! Woe to me if I have the least blemish or stain! Woe to me if I
am even in the very shadow of sin!"
"Alas, cried these poor sisters. "What will our deaths be like!"
What will ours be like, then, my dear brethren, we
who, perhaps in all our penances and our good works, have never yet
satisfied for one single sin forgiven in the tribunal of Penance? Ah!
What years and centuries of torment to punish us! . . . How dearly we
shall pay for all those faults that we look upon as nothing at all, like
those little lies that we tell to amuse ourselves, those little
scandals, the despising of the graces which God gives us at every
moment, those little murmurings in the difficulties that He sends us!
No, my dear brethren, we would never have the courage to commit the
least sin if we could understand how much it outrages God and how
greatly it deserves to be rigorously punished, even in this world.
God is just, my dear brethren, in all that He does.
When He recompenses us for the smallest good action, He does so over
and above all that we could desire. A good thought, a good desire, that
is to say, the desire to do some good work even when we are not able to
do it, He never leaves without a reward. But also, when it is a matter
of punishing us, it id done with rigor, and though we should have only a
light fault, we shall be sent into Purgatory. This is true, for we see
it in the lives of the saints that many of them did not go to Heaven
without having first passed through the flames of Purgatory. St. Peter
Damien tells us that his sister remained several years in Purgatory
because she had listened to an evil song with some little pleasure. It
is told that two religious promised each other that the first to die
would come to tell the survivor in what state he was. God permitted the
one who died first to appear to his friend. He told him that he was
remaining fifteen years in Purgatory for having liked his own way too
much. And as his friend was complimenting him on remaining there for so
short a time, the dead man replied: "I would have much preferred to be
flayed alive for ten thousand years continuously, for that suffering
could not even be compared with what I am suffering in the flames."
A priest told one of his friends that God had
condemned him to remain in Purgatory for several months for having held
back the execution of a will designed for the doing of good works. Alas,
my dear brethren, how many among those who hear me have a similar fault
with which to reproach themselves? How many are there, perhaps, who
during the course of eight or ten years have received from their parents
or their friends the work of having Masses said and alms given and have
allowed the whole thing to slide! How many are there who, for fear of
find in that certain good works should be done, have not wanted to go to
the trouble of looking at the will that their parents or their friends
have made in their favor? Alas, these poor souls are still detained in
the flames because no one has desired to fulfill their last wishes! Poor
fathers and mothers, you are being sacrificed for the happiness of your
children and your heirs! You perhaps have neglected your own salvation
to augment their fortune. You are being cheated of the good works which
you left behind in your wills! . . . Poor parents! How blind you were to
forget yourselves! . . .
You will tell me, perhaps: "Our parents lived good
lives; they were very good people." Ah! They needed little to go into
these flames! See what Albert the Great, a man whose virtues shone in
such an extraordinary way, said on this matter. He revealed one day to
one of his friends that God had taken him into Purgatory for having
entertained a slightly self-satisfied thought about his own knowledge.
The most astonishing thing was that there were actually saints there,
even ones who were canonized, who were passing through Purgatory. St.
Severius, Archbishop of Cologne, appeared to one of his friends a long
time after his death and told him that he had been in Purgatory for
having deferred to the evening the prayers he should have said in the
morning. Oh! What years of Purgatory will there be for those Christians
who have no difficulty at all in deferring their prayers to another time
on the excuse of having to do some pressing work! If we really desired
the happiness of possessing God, we should avoid the little faults as
well as the big ones, since separation from God is so frightful a
torment to all these poor souls! (Sermons of Saint John Mary Vianney.)
Sober preaching is a means of awakening souls from sloth, lukewarmness, venial vaults and Mortal Sins to reform their lives.
Finally, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a self-satisfied hypocrite when noting that a good "homily" must be well-organized.
What does he know about being well-organized?
What does he know about brevity?
Even Evangelii Gaudium is a collection of the same kind of random thoughts he admitted three months ago just pop into his skull full of Modernist mush:
“Our reconciliation with the Lord end in the dialogue ‘You, me and the
priest who gives me pardon’; it ends when He restores us to our mother.
There ends reconciliation, because there is no path of life, there is no
forgiveness, there is no reconciliation outside of Mother Church. So,
seeing this poor widow, all these things come to me somewhat randomly -
But I see in this widow the icon of the widowhood of the Church who is
on a journey to find her Bridegroom. I get the urge to ask the Lord for
the grace to be always confident of this “mommy” who defends us, teaches
us, helps us grow and [teaches] us to speak the dialect.” (Reflecting on our Mother Church. See Jorge And His "Widowed Church".)
Well, there will be a part seven in this series after all, although it will be very brief. The spirit is willing. Unfortunately, this has just taken far too long to complete. I might as well post this installment as it may take a while for readers to complete reading it.
Today is the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe (companion articles are linked on the home page).
The miraculous image left by Our Lady on the tilma of Juan Diego converted over nine million indigenous people in the Americas to the true Faith as they abandoned their pagan ways, some of which involve human sacrifice.
We are living in age of neo-Paganism today, of which Jorge The Pagan is an active participant.
We just have to be as simple and trusting as was Juan Diego, knowing that we are in the crossing of Our Lady's arms and in the folds of her mantle. What else is there that we need?
We have a Blessed Mother. We know that her Immaculate Heart will triumph in the end.
Let us pray more Rosaries today, the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe within the Octave of the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, in gratitude for being given so great a mother, who means to convert us away from our own sins and tepidity and all disordered attachment to the world and to creatures in order to be worthy of knowing her mother protection and intercession now and at the hour of our death.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
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 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?