No Space Between Ratzinger and Bergoglio
Thomas A. Droleskey
Madness reigns supreme in the insane world in which the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Just complete and utter madness.
The madness is so profound that one traditionally-minded presbyter whose "wisdom" was quoted on a Motu Mania website wrote recently that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI was "the greatest Supreme Pontiff since Benedict XIV." Meaning no disrespect to this unfortunate man, this is complete and total madness.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict was the "greatest Supreme Pontiff since Benedict XIV"?
An apostate who esteemed the symbols of false religions with his own priestly hands was "great" in the eyes of the true God of Divine Revelation, "greater" than Popes Gregory XVI, Pius IX, Leo XIII and St. Pius X?
A man who entered into synagogues and mosques while treating them as "sacred" places and being content to be treated as an inferior by his infidel hosts was as "great" as Pope Benedict XIV, a Supreme Pontiff who wrote the following about Talmudists in his Bull A Quo Primum, June 14, 1751, as he warned against the pernicious influences of Jews living near Catholics in Poland while at the same inveighing against all violence directed against Jews as had been done by Radulph the Monk in the Twelfth Century:
We esteem the glorious memory of Polish martyrs, confessors, virgins and holy
men; their exemplary lives are recorded in the holy annals of the Church. We
also recall the many successful councils and synods which gloriously defeated
the Lutherans who tried tenaciously, using a variety of methods, to establish a
foothold and welcome in this kingdom. At that time indeed the great council of
Piotrkow met under Our great predecessor and fellow citizen Gregory XIII, with
prelate Lippomano, bishop of Verona and Apostolic nuncio, as its president. To
the great glory of God it prohibited the principle of freedom of conscience;
adherents of this principle were seeking to introduce and establish it in
Poland. Another threat to Christians has been the influence of Jewish
faithlessness; this influence was strong because Christians and Jews were living
in the same cities and towns. However their influence was minimized because the
Polish bishops did all they could to aid the Poles in their resistance to the
Jews. What the bishops did is recorded in the large tome which contains the
constitutions of the synods of the province of Gniezno. These facts establish
most clearly and plainly the great glory which the Polish nation has won for its
zeal in preserving the holy religion embraced by its ancestors so many ages
2. In regard to the matter of the Jews We must express our concern, which
causes Us to cry aloud: "the best color has been changed." Our credible experts
in Polish affairs and the citizens of Poland itself who communicated with Us
have informed Us that the number of Jews in that country has greatly increased. In fact, some cities and towns which had been predominantly Christian are now
practically devoid of Christians.
The Jews have so replaced the Christians that some parishes are about to lose
their ministers because their revenue has dwindled so drastically. Because the
Jews control businesses selling liquor and even wine, they are therefore allowed
to supervise the collection of public revenues. They have also gained control of
inns, bankrupt estates, villages and public land by means of which they have
subjugated poor Christian farmers. The Jews are cruel taskmasters, not only
working the farmers harshly and forcing them to carry excessive loads, but also
whipping them for punishment. So it has come about that those poor farmers are
the subjects of the Jews, submissive to their will and power. Furthermore,
although the power to punish lies with the Christian official, he must comply
with the commands of the Jews and inflict the punishments they desire. If he
doesn't, he would lose his post. Therefore the tyrannical orders of the Jews
have to be carried out.
3. In addition to the harm done to Christians in these regards, other
unreasonable matters can result in even greater loss and danger. The most
serious is that some households of the great have employed a Jew as
"Superintendent-of-the-Household"; in this capacity, they not only administer
domestic and economic matters, but they also ceaselessly exhibit and flaunt
authority over the Christians they are living with. It is now even commonplace
for Christians and Jews to intermingle anywhere. But what is even less
comprehensible is that Jews fearlessly keep Christians of both sexes in their
houses as their domestics, bound to their service. Furthermore, by means of
their particular practice of commerce, they amass a great store of money and
then by an exorbitant rate of interest utterly destroy the wealth and
inheritance of Christians. Even if they borrow money from Christians at heavy
and undue interest with their synagogues as surety, it is obvious to anyone who
thinks about it that they do so to employ the money borrowed from Christians in
their commercial dealings; this enables them to make enough profit to pay the
agreed interest and simultaneously increase their own store. At the same time,
they gain as many defenders of their synagogues and themselves as they have
4. The famous monk, Radulph, inspired long ago by an excess of zeal, was so
inflamed against the Jews that he traversed Germany and France in the twelfth
century and, by preaching against the Jews as the enemies of our holy religion,
incited Christians to destroy them. This resulted in the deaths of a very large
number of Jews. What must we think his deeds or thoughts would be if he were now
alive and saw what was happening in Poland? But the great St. Bernard opposed
this immoderate and maddened zeal of Radulph, and wrote to the clergy and people
of eastern France: "The Jews are not to be persecuted: they are not to be
slaughtered: they are not even to be driven out. Examine the divine writings
concerning them. We read in the psalm a new kind of prophecy concerning the
Jews: God has shown me, says the Church, on the subject of my enemies, not to
slay them in case they should ever forget my people. Alive, however, they are
eminent reminders for us of the Lord's suffering. On this account they are
scattered through all lands in order that they may be witnesses to Our
redemption while they pay the just penalties for so great a crime" (epistle
363). And he writes this to Henry, Archbishop of Mainz: "Doesn't the Church
every day triumph more fully over the Jews in convicting or converting them than
if once and for all she destroyed them with the edge of the sword: Surely it is
not in vain that the Church has established the universal prayer which is
offered up for the faithless Jews from the rising of the sun to its setting,
that the Lord God may remove the veil from their hearts, that they may be
rescued from their darkness into the light of truth. For unless it hoped that
those who do not believe would believe, it would obviously be futile and empty
to pray for them." (epistle 365).
5. Peter, abbot of Cluny, likewise wrote against Radulph to King Louis of
France, and urged him not to allow the destruction of the Jews. But at the same
time he encouraged him to punish their excesses and to strip them of the
property they had taken from Christians or had acquired by usury; he should then
devote the value of this to the use and benefit of holy religion, as may be seen
in the Annals of Venerable Cardinal Baronius (1146). In this matter, as in all
others, We adopt the same norm of action as did the Roman Pontiffs who were Our
venerable predecessors. Alexander III forbade Christians under heavy penalties
to accept permanent domestic service under Jews. "Let them not continually
devote themselves to the service of Jews for a wage." He sets out the reason for
this in the decretal Ad haec, de Judaeis. "Because Jewish ways do not
harmonize in any way with ours and they could easily turn the minds of the
simple to their own superstitions and faithlessness through continual
intercourse and unceasing acquaintance." Innocent III, after saying that Jews
were being received by Christians into their cities, warns that the method and
condition of this reception should guard against their repaying the benefit with
evildoing. "They on being admitted to our acquaintance in a spirit of mercy,
repay us, the popular proverb says, as the mouse in the wallet, the snake in the
lap and fire in the bosom usually repay their host." The same Pope stated that
it was fitting for Jews to serve Christians rather than vice versa and added:
"Let not the sons of the free woman be servants of the sons of the handmaid; but
as servants rejected by their lord for whose death they evilly conspired, let
them realize that the result of this deed is to make them servants of those whom
Christ's death made free," as we read in his decretal Etsi Judaeos.
Likewise in the decretal Cum sit nimis under the same heading de
Judaeis, et Saracenis, he forbids the promotion of Jews to public office:
"forbidding Jews to be promoted to public offices since in such circumstances
they may be very dangerous to Christians." Innocent IV, also, in writing to St.
Louis, King of France, who intended to drive the Jews beyond the boundaries of
his kingdom, approves of this plan since the Jews gave very little heed to the
regulations made by the Apostolic See in their regard: "Since We strive with all
Our heart for the salvation of souls, We grant you full power by the authority
of this letter to expel the Jews, particularly since We have learned that they
do not obey the said statutes issued by this See against them" (Raynaldus,
Annals, A.D. 1253, no. 34).
6. But if it is asked what matters the Apostolic See forbids to Jews living
in the same cities as Christians, We will say that all those activities which
are now allowed in Poland are forbidden; these We recounted above. There is no
need of much reading to understand that this is the clear truth of the matter.
It is enough to peruse decretals with the heading de Judaeis, et Saracenis;
the constitutions of Our predecessors, the Roman Pontiffs Nicholas IV, Paul IV,
St. Pius V, Gregory XIII and Clement VIII are readily available in the Roman
Bullarium. To understand these matters most clearly, Venerable Brothers, you do
not even need to read those. You will recall the statutes and prescripts of the
synods of your predecessors; they always entered in their constitutions every
measure concerning the Jews which was sanctioned and ordained by the Roman
7. The essence of the difficulty, however, is that either the sanctions of
the synods are forgotten or they are not put into effect. To you then, Venerable
Brothers, passes the task of renewing those sanctions. The nature of your office
requires that you carefully encourage their implementation. In this matter begin
with the clergy, as is fair and reasonable. These will have to show others the
right way to act, and light the way for the rest by their example. For in God's
mercy, We hope that the good example of the clergy will lead the straying laity
back to the straight path. You will be able to give these orders and commands
easily and confidently, in that neither your property nor your privileges are
hired to Jews; furthermore you do no business with them and you neither lend
them money nor borrow from them. Thus, you will be free from and unaffected by
all dealings with them.
8. The sacred canons, prescribe that in the most important cases, such as the
present, censures should be imposed upon the recalcitrant; and that those cases
which bode danger and ruin to religion should be reckoned as reserved cases in
which only the bishop can give absolution. The Council of Trent considered your
jurisdiction when it affirmed your right to reserve cases. It did not restrict
such cases to public crimes only, but extended them to include more notorious
and serious cases, provided they were not purely internal. But we have often
said that some cases should be considered more notorious and serious. These are
cases, to which men are more prone, which are a danger both to ecclesiastical
discipline and to the salvation of the souls which have been entrusted to your
episcopal care. We have discussed these at length in Our treatise On the
diocesan synod, Book 5, 5.
9. In this matter We will help as much as possible. If you have to proceed
against ecclesiastics exempt from your jurisdiction, you will doubtless
encounter additional difficulties. Therefore We are giving Our Venerable Brother
Archbishop Nicaenus, Our Nuncio there, a mandate appropriate for this business,
in order that he may supply for you the necessary means from the powers
entrusted to him. At the same time We promise you that when the situation
arises, We will cooperate energetically and effectively with those whose
combined authority and power are appropriate to remove this stain of shame from
Poland. But first Venerable Brothers, ask aid from God, the source of all
things. From Him beg help for Us and this Apostolic See. And while We embrace
you in the fullness of charity, We lovingly impart to you, Our brothers, and to
the flocks entrusted to your care, Our Apostolic Blessing. (Pope Benedict XIV, A Quo Primum, June 14, 1751.)
This is just a little different spirit than that exhibited by the supposedly "greatest Supreme Pontiff" since Pope Benedict XIV.
Imagine the hubris that it takes for a man who thinks himself to be a priest of the Holy Catholic Church to contend that a man who heralded the text of Gaudium et Spes, December 7, 1965, as a "countersyllabus" to Pope Pius IX's The Syllabus of Errors, December 8, 1864, and who endorsed, albeit by his own slogan, the Modernist principle of the "evolution of dogma" that had been condemned by the same Pope Pius IX at the [First] Vatican Council on April 24, 1870, and by Pope Saint Pius X in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907, and The Oath Against Modernism, September 1, 1910, and by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950 (see the appendix in No Space Between Ratzinger and Bergoglio, part one).
Yes, madness reigns supreme in the minds of those who seek to reconcile the work of Antichrist himself, conciliarism, with Catholicism. Complete and utter madness.
There is, of course, absolutely no space between the supposedly "greatest Supreme Pontiff since Benedict XIV" and his supposedly more revolutionary successor, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, on matters of theological substance, including that of false ecumenism itself.
Although there is much evidence to support the Siamese Twin nature of the two-headed "pope" monster's closeness in all that pertains to false ecumenism, all one needs to do is to compare "Pope Francis's" address to an "ecumenical group" from Finland with one given by "Pope Benedict XVI" three years ago now:
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Friday, January 17, 2014, the Feast of Saint Antony of the Desert:
“Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ”
(Rom 1:7). I offer you a very warm welcome, as my Predecessors, Blessed
John Paul II and Benedict XVI, have done for over twenty-five years, as I
receive your ecumenical delegations on the occasion of the Feast of Saint Henry,
Patron of Finland.
Writing to the members of the community of Corinth, marked by
divisions, Saint Paul asked: “Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor 1:13). This
question has been chosen as the theme for the Week of Prayer for Christian
Unity, which we begin tomorrow. Today that same question is being asked of us.
Ignoring voices which no longer recognize the full and visible unity of the
Church as an achievable goal, we are urged not to grow weary of our ecumenical
efforts, but to remain faithful to the petition which the Lord Jesus made to the
Father: that “all may be one” (Jn 17:21).
In our day, ecumenism and relationships between Christians are changing
significantly. This is due above all to the fact that we profess our faith
within a society and a culture increasingly less concerned with God and all that
involves the transcendental dimension of life. We see this especially in
Europe, but not only here.
For this reason, our witness has to be centred on the core of our
faith: the proclamation of God’s love made known in Christ his Son. This gives
us a great opportunity to grow in communion and unity by promoting that
spiritual ecumenism which flows directly from the commandment of love given by
Jesus to his disciples. The Second Vatican Council itself alluded to it in
these words: “Change of heart and holiness of life, along with public and
private prayer for the unity of Christians, should be regarded as the soul of
the whole ecumenical movement, and can rightly be called spiritual ecumenism” (Unitatis
Redintegratio, 8). Ecumenism is a spiritual process, one which takes place
in faithful obedience to the Father, in fulfilment of the will of Christ and
under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
So let us constantly implore the help of God’s grace and the
enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, who leads us to the fullness of truth, the
source of reconciliation and communion.
Renewing my warm welcome, I gladly invoke God’s blessings on you, on
all the Christians of Finland and on the nation. (To an ecumenical delegation from
Finland for the Feast of Saint
Henry, 17 January
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, January 15, 2011, the Feast of Saint Paul the Hermit and Saint Maurus the Abbot:
I welcome you with great joy on the occasion of your
annual ecumenical pilgrimage to Rome to celebrate the Feast of St Henry,
Patron of your beloved land. Every year, during this period, your
traditional pilgrimage testifies to the sincere, friendly and helpful
relations which have been established between Lutherans and Catholics,
as well as in general between all the Christians in your Country.
Even though we have not yet achieved the
objective of the ecumenical movement, namely full unity of faith,
through dialogue many elements of agreement and closeness have matured
which strengthen our general desire to do the will of our Lord Jesus
Christ: “that they may all be one” (Jn 17:21). One result
recently obtained that deserves attention was the conclusive report on
the theme of justification in the life of the Church. This report was
prepared by a group centred on Nordic Catholic-Lutheran dialogue in
Finland and Sweden, that met last year.
In theology and in faith everything is linked
together, and thus a common deeper understanding of the justification
will help us to understand together the nature of the Church better and,
as you mentioned, the episcopal ministry. Thus it will also help us to
find the unity of the Church in a concrete form and thereby to be more
capable, as you observed, to explain the faith to all people of today
who ask each other about it and to make it more comprehensible to them
so that they see that he is the answer, that Christ is the Redeemer for
us all. Thus our hope remains alive that, under the guidance of
the Holy Spirit, many people involved in the ecumenical field, competent
and aware, will contribute to the realization of this important
ecumenical task and, always guided by the Holy Spirit, will be able to
Having said this, it is implied that the efficacy
of our efforts cannot come solely from study and discussion, but above
all depend on our constant prayer, on our life in conformity with the
will of God, because ecumenicism is not our work but rather a fruit of God’s action.
At the same time, we are all conscience of the fact
that in recent years the ecumenical path, from certain points of view,
has become more difficult and certainly more demanding. Questions will
be asked concerning the ecumenical method and the breakthroughs of past
years will be mentioned, as well as the uncertainty of the future, and
the problems of our time with faith in general. In this light, your
annual pilgrimage to Rome for the Feast of St Henry is an important
event, a sign and an encouragement for our ecumenical efforts, for our
certainty that we must walk together and that Christ is the way for
Your pilgrimage helps us to look back with joy at
what has been achieved so far and to look to the future with the desire
to take on a task full of faith and responsibility. On the
occasion of your visit, we all wish to reinforce our certainty of the
fact that the Holy Spirit, who reawakens us, accompanies us and to this
day has made the ecumenical movement fruitful, may continue in this way
also in the future.
I firmly hope that your visit to Rome will
strengthen the future collaboration of Lutherans and Catholics, yes,
between all the Christians in Finland. Looking forward to the upcoming Week of Prayer for Christian Unity let us pray that the spirit of truth will lead us to even greater love
and brotherhood. May God grant you his rich Blessing in newly begun
year. (To an Ecumenical Delegation from Finland on the occasion of the feast of Saint Henry, Patron of Finland, January 15, 2011.)
Where is the "space" between Ratzinger and Bergoglio here?
Obviously, there is no "space" as each man's blasphemy against the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, and heresy against the Divine Constitution of Holy Mother Church stand naked for all who have the intellectual honesty to see and to accept. The conciliarist doctrine to which each of the conciliar "popes," including Ratzinger and Bergoglio, has subscribed, comes from one source only: the devil himself, he who is the author of each and every false religion on the face of this earth.
Pope Pius XI had this to say about Ratzinger's and Bergoglio's misuse of the prayer of Our
Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ at the Last Supper, "that they may
all be one:"
And here it seems opportune to expound and to refute a certain false
opinion, on which this whole question, as well as that complex movement
by which non-Catholics seek to bring about the union of the Christian
churches depends. For authors who favor this view are accustomed, times
almost without number, to bring forward these words of Christ: "That they all may be one.... And there shall be one fold and one shepherd," with
this signification however: that Christ Jesus merely expressed a desire
and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment. For they are of the
opinion that the unity of faith and government, which is a note
of the one true Church of Christ, has hardly up to the present time
existed, and does not to-day exist. They consider that this unity may
indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the
instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it
can only be regarded as mere ideal. They add that the Church in itself,
or of its nature, is divided into sections; that is to say, that it is
made up of several churches or distinct communities, which still remain
separate, and although having certain articles of doctrine in common,
nevertheless disagree concerning the remainder; that these all enjoy the
same rights; and that the Church was one and unique from, at the most,
the apostolic age until the first Ecumenical Councils. Controversies
therefore, they say, and longstanding differences of opinion which keep
asunder till the present day the members of the Christian family, must
be entirely put aside, and from the remaining doctrines a common form of
faith drawn up and proposed for belief, and in the profession of which
all may not only know but feel that they are brothers. The
manifold churches or communities, if united in some kind of universal
federation, would then be in a position to oppose strongly and with
success the progress of irreligion. This, Venerable Brethren, is what is
commonly said. There are some, indeed, who recognize and affirm that
Protestantism, as they call it, has rejected, with a great lack of
consideration, certain articles of faith and some external ceremonies,
which are, in fact, pleasing and useful, and which the Roman Church
still retains. They soon, however, go on to say that that
Church also has erred, and corrupted the original religion by adding and
proposing for belief certain doctrines which are not only alien to the
Gospel, but even repugnant to it. Among the chief of these they number
that which concerns the primacy of jurisdiction, which was granted to
Peter and to his successors in the See of Rome. Among them there indeed
are some, though few, who grant to the Roman Pontiff a primacy of honor
or even a certain jurisdiction or power, but this, however, they
consider not to arise from the divine law but from the consent of the
faithful. Others again, even go so far as to wish the Pontiff Himself to
preside over their motley, so to say, assemblies. But, all the same,
although many non-Catholics may be found who loudly preach fraternal
communion in Christ Jesus, yet you will find none at all to whom it ever
occurs to submit to and obey the Vicar of Jesus Christ either in His
capacity as a teacher or as a governor. Meanwhile they affirm that they
would willingly treat with the Church of Rome, but on equal terms, that
is as equals with an equal: but even if they could so act. it does not
seem open to doubt that any pact into which they might enter would not
compel them to turn from those opinions which are still the reason why
they err and stray from the one fold of Christ. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
There is only one path for those outside of the Catholic Church to
convert unconditionally to the her maternal bosom. Period. There is no
need for "dialogue" and to offer up blasphemous prayers to God the Holy
Ghost for a "unity" that exists entirely in the Catholic Church. Those
who do not belong to the Catholic Church do not have a "share" in some
kind of mythical "ecclesial communion" with her. Pope Pius XII made this
very clear in Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29, 1943:
Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church
who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been
so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or
been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed.
"For in one spirit" says the Apostle, "were we all baptized into one
Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free." As therefore in
the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one
Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And
therefore, if a man refuse to hear the Church, let him be considered -
so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. It follows that
those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the
unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine
Spirit. (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, June 29, 1943.)
Those who are not members of the Catholic Faith have absolutely no mission from the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Blessed Trinity, to serve Him, no less to serve Him as instruments of "evangelization" and "sanctification." Adherents of heretical and schismatic Protestant sects do not have true sacraments and they--along with the heretical and schismatic Orthodox, who have true sacraments--do not have the Catholic Faith to teach, meaning that they are agents of Antichrist, not of Christ the King.
Pope Leo XIII made it clear in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, that unity exists whole and entire in the Catholic Church, which unites her members with agreement of minds and wills on all that pertains to Faith and Morals:
Agreement and union of minds is the necessary foundation of this
perfect concord amongst men, from which concurrence of wills and
similarity of action are the natural results. Wherefore, in His
divine wisdom, He ordained in His Church Unity of Faith; a virtue which
is the first of those bonds which unite man to God, and whence we
receive the name of the faithful - "one Lord, one faith, one baptism"
(Eph. iv., 5). That is, as there is one Lord and one baptism, so should
all Christians, without exception, have but one faith. And so the
Apostle St. Paul not merely begs, but entreats and implores
Christians to be all of the same mind, and to avoid difference of
opinions: "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms
amongst you, and that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same
judgment" (I Cor. i., 10). Such passages certainly need no interpreter; they speak clearly enough for themselves. Besides, all who profess Christianity allow that there can be but one faith. It
is of the greatest importance and indeed of absolute necessity, as to
which many are deceived, that the nature and character of this unity
should be recognized. And, as We have already stated, this is not to be
ascertained by conjecture, but by the certain knowledge of what was
done; that is by seeking for and ascertaining what kind of unity in
faith has been commanded by Jesus Christ. (Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896.)
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis are absolutely united in the heresy that it is necessary to "search" for a unity that exists solely in the Catholic Church. The soon-to-be eighty-seven year-old Modernist from Bavaria and the recent-turned seventy-seven year old from Buenos Aires, Argentina, are blood brothers in heresy by rejecting the necessity of seeking with urgency the unconditional conversion of non-Catholics to the bosom of Holy Mother Church, meaning that they both believe that those outside of the Catholic Church are not in peril of eternal loss.
Rather than being agents of "mercy" and "tolerance" as they suppose themselves to be, both Ratzinger and Bergoglio are actually the worst enemies of non-Catholics as are content to leave them in false religions that have no power to save their souls and by reaffirming them that they have a "mission" to combat a secularism that is the direct and inevitable result of the revolution began when Father Martin Luther posted his ninety-five theses on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, on October 31, 1517.
Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/"Francis" are also as one when it comes to the praise of "spiritual ecumenism" that was near and dear to the Modernist heart of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II. Here is just a sampling of what Ratzinger/Benedict has said about spiritual ecumenism and its chief proponent, the late Abbe Paul Couturier of the Order of Saint Irenaeus:
Thank you, dear Brother Alois, for your warm words, full of affection.
Dear young people, dear pilgrims of trust, welcome to Rome!You
have come in great numbers, from all over Europe and from other
continents, to pray at the tombs of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul. In
fact, in this city both shed their blood for Christ. The faith that
motivated these two great apostles of Christ is the same that compelled
you to start out on this journey. During the year that is about to
begin, you are proposing to uncover the well springs of trust in God in
order to live it in your everyday life. It gladdens me that in this way,
you have embraced the aims of the Year of Faith which began in October.
is the fourth European meeting to be held in Rome. On this occasion, I
would like to repeat the words my predecessor, John Paul II to young
people during your third Meeting in Rome: "The Pope feels deeply
committed together with you all on this pilgrimage of trust on earth ...
I too am called to be a pilgrim of trust in the name of Christ". (30
Just over seventy years ago, Brother Roger established the Taizé
Community. Thousands of young people from all over the world continue
to go there to seek meaning for their lives. The Brothers welcome them
to share in their prayer and provide them with an opportunity to
experience a personal relationship with God. It was to support these
young people on their journey to Christ that Brother Roger had the idea
of starting a “pilgrimage of trust on earth”. A tireless witness to the
Gospel of peace and reconciliation, ardently committed to an ecumenism
of holiness, Brother Roger encouraged all those who passed through Taizé
to become seekers of communion. We should listen in our hearts to his
spiritually lived ecumenism, and let ourselves be guided by his witness
towards an ecumenism which is truly interiorized and spiritualized.
Following his example, may all of you be bearers of this message of
unity. I assure you of the irrevocable commitment of the Catholic
Church to continue seeking the paths of reconciliation leading to the
visible unity of Christians. And so this evening I greet with special
affection those among you who are Orthodox or Protestants. (Ratzinger to Taizé youth: Be bearers of Christian unity.)
The father of spiritual ecumenism, Paul Couturier,
spoke in this regard of an "invisible cloister" which unites within its
walls those souls inflamed with love for Christ and his Church. I am
convinced that if more and more people unite themselves interiorly to
the Lord's prayer "that all may be one" (Jn 17: 21), then this prayer,
made in the Name of Jesus, will not go unheard (cf. Jn 14: 13; 15: 7,
With the help that comes from on high, we will also
find practical solutions to the different questions which remain open,
and in the end our desire for unity will come to fulfilment, whenever
and however the Lord wills.
Now let us all go along this path in the awareness
that walking together is a form of unity. Let us thank God for this and
pray that he will continue to guide us all. (Ecumenical meeting at the Archbishopric of Cologne: Address, August 19, 2005.)
The "father" of "spiritual ecumenism," Abbe Paul Couturier, was a disciple of the quintessential theological evolutionist himself, the late Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J., something that a website devoted to his nefarious work, condemned by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, makes very clear:
A third influence on Couturier was Teilhard
de Chardin. Both men were scientists, and Teilhard's vision of the unity
of creation and humanity expressed in the unity of Christ and the life
of the Church appealed both scientifically and spiritually to Couturier.
A reasoned consequence for him was that the unity of Christians was the
sign for the unity of humanity, and that praying for the sanctification
of Jews, Muslims and Hindus, among many others, could not fail but to
lead to a new spiritual understanding of God where Christ could at last
be recognised and understood. Couturier felt this keenly as he was
partly Jewish and had been raised among Muslims in North Africa. It is
worth noting that among Couturier's voluminous correspondents were Jews,
Muslims, and Hindus, as well as every kind of Christian, all caught up
in the Abbé's spirit of prayer, realising the significance and
dimensions of prayer for the unity of Christians. Coincidentally, years
later Mother Theresa spoke of the considerable number of Muslims who
volunteered and worked at her house in Calcutta: 'If you are a
Christian, I want to make you a better Christian - if you are a Muslim, I
want to make you a better Muslim'. It cannot be denied that what those
Muslims were seeing in Mother Theresa was Jesus Christ himself, just as
the Abbe attracted so many to prayer across previously unbridgeable
divides by his humility, penitence, and joyful charity in the peace of
2003-2004 also marks the
50th Anniversary of the launch of the Week of Prayer in Morocco as an
act of charity and prayer among the people of Islam, a significant
milestone in the experiences of today as much as then. (The Abbé Paul Couturier and Spiritual Ecumenism)
No, there is no "space" between Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis on any matter of false ecumenism.
Unfortunately for them, both now and at the time when each must face the Particular Judgment, there is a wide gulf between them and the teaching of the Catholic Church as enunciated clearly by our true popes:
It is for this reason that so many who do not share
'the communion and the truth of the Catholic Church' must make use of
the occasion of the Council, by the means of the Catholic Church, which
received in Her bosom their ancestors, proposes [further] demonstration
of profound unity and of firm vital force; hear the requirements
[demands] of her heart, they must engage themselves to leave this state
that does not guarantee for them the security of salvation. She
does not hesitate to raise to the Lord of mercy most fervent prayers to
tear down of the walls of division, to dissipate the haze of errors, and
lead them back within holy Mother Church, where their Ancestors found
salutary pastures of life; where, in an exclusive way, is conserved and
transmitted whole the doctrine of Jesus Christ and wherein is dispensed
the mysteries of heavenly grace.
It is therefore by force of the right of Our
supreme Apostolic ministry, entrusted to us by the same Christ the Lord,
which, having to carry out with [supreme] participation all the duties
of the good Shepherd and to follow and embrace with paternal love all
the men of the world, we send this Letter of Ours to all the Christians
from whom We are separated, with which we exhort them warmly and
beseech them with insistence to hasten to return to the one fold of
Christ; we desire in fact from the depths of the heart their salvation
in Christ Jesus, and we fear having to render an account
one day to Him, Our Judge, if, through some possibility, we have not
pointed out and prepared the way for them to attain eternal salvation.
In all Our prayers and supplications, with thankfulness, day and night
we never omit to ask for them, with humble insistence, from the eternal
Shepherd of souls the abundance of goods and heavenly graces. And
since, if also, we fulfill in the earth the office of vicar, with all
our heart we await with open arms the return of the wayward sons to the
Catholic Church, in order to receive them with infinite fondness into
the house of the Heavenly Father and to enrich them with its
inexhaustible treasures. By our greatest wish for the return to the
truth and the communion with the Catholic Church, upon which depends not
only the salvation of all of them, but above all also of the whole
Christian society: the entire world in fact cannot enjoy true peace if
it is not of one fold and one shepherd. (Pope Pius IX, Iam Vos Omnes, September 13, 1868.)
Weigh carefully in your minds and before God the
nature of Our request. It is not for any human motive, but impelled by
Divine Charity and a desire for the salvation of all, that We advise the
reconciliation and union with the Church of Rome; and We mean a
perfect and complete union, such as could not subsist in any way if
nothing else was brought about but a certain kind of agreement in the
Tenets of Belief and an intercourse of Fraternal love. The True Union
between Christians is that which Jesus Christ, the Author of the Church,
instituted and desired, and which consists in a Unity of Faith and
Unity of Government. (Pope Leo XIII, Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae, June 20, 1894.)
So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this
Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the
assemblies of non-Catholics: for the union of Christians can
only be promoted by promoting the return to the one true Church of
Christ of those who are separated from it, for in the past they have
unhappily left it. To the one true Church of Christ, we say, which is
visible to all, and which is to remain, according to the will of its
Author, exactly the same as He instituted it. During the lapse of
centuries, the mystical Spouse of Christ has never been contaminated,
nor can she ever in the future be contaminated, as Cyprian bears
witness: "The Bride of Christ cannot be made false to her Spouse: she is
incorrupt and modest. She knows but one dwelling, she guards the
sanctity of the nuptial chamber chastely and modestly."The same
holy Martyr with good reason marveled exceedingly that anyone could
believe that "this unity in the Church which arises from a divine
foundation, and which is knit together by heavenly sacraments, could be
rent and torn asunder by the force of contrary wills." For since the
mystical body of Christ, in the same manner as His physical body, is
one, compacted and fitly joined together, it were foolish and out of
place to say that the mystical body is made up of members which are
disunited and scattered abroad: whosoever therefore is not united with
the body is no member of it, neither is he in communion with Christ its
head. (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928.)
Quite a gulf between the two headed "pope" monster and Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII and Pius XI. Quite a gulf.
The examples provided above have indeed shown the public face of what most people in the world think is Catholicism, thereby deceiving the souls of Catholics and non-Catholics alike, reaffirming billions of souls outside of the bosom of Holy Mother Church into believing that there is absolutely no need for them to even consider converting to the Catholic Faith before they die. Did not Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem these poor people?
How is it any act of fidelity to Him, Christ the King, to make it appear to them that God is pleased with their false religions and their false liturgies?
Where is the precedent for this in the history of the Catholic Church.
Where is this callous disregard for the salvation of souls to be found prior to October 28, 1958?
This is all--every single last bit of it--without any precedent in the history of the Catholic Church. Although anti-sedevacantists like to disparage the canonical teaching of the Church, reiterated by a conciliar "cardinal," Mario Francesco Pompedda, shortly before John Paul II's death on April 1 or 2, 2005, by noting that a papal vacancy of half a century is without precedent and that it is to defy the teaching of the [First] Vatican Council that Saint Peter has perpetual successors to assert that this is so (see An Objection to Sedevacantism: 'Perpetual Successors' to Peter). Well, my friends, none of what has been documented above is without any kind of precedent in the history of the Church. And to continue to indemnify the conciliar "popes" as legitimate successors of Saint Peter is to assert that the Catholic Church can give us defective liturgies or liturgies that can can give rise to unprecedented acts of impiety and sacrilege and that popes can teach error when they are not defining a doctrine ex cathedra. This is simply not so.
No one can be forced to "see" the truth of our situation for what it is, that the conciliar revolutionaries are not Catholic and that they belong to a counterfeit church bereft of Holy Orders and of the graces that flow therefrom. That any of our true bishops and priests, among so many others, who have seen things clearly in the past forty years, right in the midst of a most diabolically clever use of the media to convey images of Catholicism and Catholicity, is the working of the graces won for us by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and that flowed into their hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces. We must remember that it is very easy to go "back," to refuse to "kick against the goad," to "conform" to what the "mainstream" believes is "respectable" and "prudent."
No one has anything to gain, humanly speaking by recognizing that the conciliar "popes" are apostates and their liturgical rites are sacramentally barren and offensive to God and their doctrines have been condemned repeatedly by the authority of the Catholic Church. Yes, it is good to suffer for one's sins. It is necessary to do so in order to save one's soul. One does not embrace the truth in order to suffer, though, as that suffering will find him in due course.
Sedevacantists compose only a handful of mostly warring tribes. They are not the problem facing Holy Mother Church in this time of apostasy and betrayal. Just take a look at the evidence presented above if you believe that I am mistaken.
All the more
reason, of course, to flee from everything to do with conciliarism and
its false shepherds. If we can't see that the public esteeming of the
symbols and places of "worship" of false religions is offensive to God
and can in no way lead to any kind of authentic restoration of the
"Catholic" Church, then it is perhaps necessary to recall these words of
Saint Teresa of Avila in her Foundations:
"Know this: it is by very
little breaches of regularity that the devil succeeds in introducing the
greatest abuses. May you never end up saying: 'This is nothing, this is
an exaggeration.'" (Saint Teresa of Avila, Foundations, Chapter Twenty-nine)
We turn, as always to Our Lady, who holds us in the crossing of her arms and in the folds of her mantle. We must, as the consecrated slaves of her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, trusting that we might be able to plant a few seeds for the Triumph of that same Immaculate Heart.
We may not see until eternity, please God and by the graces He sends to us through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, the fruit of the seeds we plant by means of our prayers and penances and sacrifices, given unto the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. We must remain confident, however, that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ wants to us, as unworthy as we are, to try to plant a few seeds so that more and more Catholics in the conciliar structures, both "priests" and laity alike, will recognize that it is indeed a sin to stand by He is blasphemed by Modernists, that He--and His true priesthood--are to be found in the catacombs where no concessions at all are made to conciliarism or its wolves in shepherds' clothing.
Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Marius and His Companions, pray for us.
Saint Canute, King of Denmark, pray for us.
Reminding Catholics That They Cannot "Resist" The Teaching of A Man They Consider to be the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ on Earth
Mr. Michael Creighton's List of the Errors of the Society of Saint Pius X
Mr. Michael Creighton has catalogued the principle
errors of the Society of Saint Pius X and the ways in which those who
assist at Society chapels justify these errors by way of responding to
an article that appeared a few years ago on the Tradition in Action website:
To briefly enumerate some of the problems in the SSPX, they are:
1 A rejection of the of the ordinary magisterium
(Vatican I; Session III - Dz1792) which must be divinely revealed. For
instance Paul VI claimed that the new mass and Vatican II were his
“Supreme Ordinary Magisterium” and John Paul II promulgated his
catechism which contains heresies and errors in Fide Depositum by his
“apostolic authority” as “the sure norm of faith and doctrine” and bound
everyone by saying who believes what was contained therein is in
“ecclesial communion”, that is in the Church.
2 A rejection of the divinely revealed teaching
expressed in Vatican I , Session IV, that the faith of Peter [the Pope]
cannot fail. Three ancient councils are quoted to support this claim.
(2nd Lyons, 4th Constantinople & Florence). Pope Paul IV’s bull Cum
Ex Apostolatus Officio teaches the same in the negative sense of this
3 A distortion of canon law opposed to virtually
all the canonists of the Church prior to Vatican II which tell us a
heretical pope ipso facto loses his office by the operation of the law
itself and without any declaration. This is expressed in Canon 188.4
which deals with the divine law and footnotes Pope Paul IV’s bull, Cum
ex Apostolatus Officio. The SSPX pretends that sections of the code on
penalties somehow apply to the pope which flatly contradicted by the law
itself. The SSPX pretends that jurisdiction remains in force when the
code clearly says jurisdiction is lost and only ‘acts’ of jurisdiction
are declared valid until the person is found out (canons 2264-2265).
This is simply to protect the faithful from invalid sacraments, not to
help heretics retain office and destroy the Church. Charisms of the
office, unlike indelible sacraments, require real jurisdiction. The SSPX
pretends that penalties of the censure of ipso facto excommunication
cannot apply to cardinals since it reserved to Holy See (canon 2227).
This is another fabrication since the law does not refer to automatic
(latae sententiae) penalties but only to penalties in which a competent
judge is needed to inflict or declare penalties on offenders. Therefore
it only refers to condemnatory and declaratory sentences but not
automatic sentences. To say that ipso facto does not mean what it says
is also condemned by Pope Pius VI in Auctorem Fidei.
4 The SSPX holds a form of the Gallican heresy
that falsely proposes a council can depose a true pope. This was already
tried by the Council of Basle and just as history condemned those
schismatics, so it will condemn your Lordship. This belief also denies
canon 1556 “The First See is Judged by no one.” This of course means in a
juridical sense of judgment, not remaining blind to apostasy, heresy
and crime which automatically takes effect.
5 The SSPX denies the visible Church must manifest
the Catholic faith. They claim that somehow these men who teach heresy
can’t know truth. This is notion has been condemned by Vatican I,
Session III, Chapter 2. It is also condemned by canon 16 of the 1917
code of canon law. Clearly LaSalette has been fulfilled. Rome is the
seat of anti-Christ & the Church is eclipsed. Clearly, our Lords
words to Sr. Lucy at Rianjo in 1931 have come to pass. His “Ministers
[Popes] have followed the kings of France into misfortune”.
6 The SSPX reject every doctor of the Church and
every Church father who are unanimous in stating a heretic ipso facto is
outside the Church and therefore cannot possess jurisdiction &
pretends that is only their opinion when St. Robert states “... it is
proven, with arguments from authority and from reason, that the manifest
heretic is ipso facto deposed.” The authority he refers to is the
magisterium of the Church, not his own opinion.
7 Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis is
misinterpreted by the SSPX to validly elect a heretic to office against
the divine law. A public heretic cannot be a cardinal because he
automatically loses his office. This decree only refers to cardinals and
hence it does not apply to ex-cardinals who automatically lost their
offices because they had publicly defected from the Catholic faith. The
cardinals mentioned in this decree who have been excommunicated are
still Catholic and still cardinals; hence their excommunication does not
cause them to become non-Catholics and lose their offices, as does
excommunication for heresy and public defection from the Catholic faith.
This is what the Church used to call a minor excommunication. All post
1945 canonists concur that Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis does not remove
ipso facto excommunication: Eduardus F. Regatillo (1956), Matthaeus
Conte a Coronata (1950), Serapius Iragui (1959), A. Vermeersch - I.
Creusen (1949), Udalricus Beste (1946) teach that a pope or cardinal or
bishop who becomes a public heretic automatically loses his office and a
public heretic cannot legally or validly obtain an office. Even
supposing this papal statement could apply to non-Catholics (heretics),
Pope Pius XII goes on to say “at other times they [the censures] are to
remain in vigor” Does this mean the Pope intends that a notorious
heretic will take office and then immediately lose his office? It is an
absurd conclusion, hence we must respect the interpretation of the
Church in her canonists.
Errors/Heresies typical of an SSPX chapel attendees & priests:
1) We are free to reject rites promulgated by the Church. [Condemned by Trent Session VII, Canon XIII/Vatican I, Session II]
2) The Pope can’t be trusted to make judgments on
faith and morals. We have to sift what is Catholic. [Condemned by
Vatican I, Session IV, Chapter III.]
3) We are free to reject or accept ordinary
magisterial teachings from a pope since they can be in error. This
rejection may include either the conciliar ‘popes’ when teach heresy or
the pre-conciliar popes in order to justify the validity of the
conciliar popes jurisdiction, sacraments, etc [Condemned by Vatican I
(Dz1792)/Satis Cognitum #15 of Leo XIII]
4) The Kantian doctrine of unknowability of
reality. We can’t know what is heresy, therefore we can’t judge.
[Condemned by Vatican I, Session III, Chapter 2: On Revelation, Jn7:24].
5) The faith of the Pope can fail. Frequently this
is expressed as “we work for” or “we pray for the Popes conversion to
the Catholic faith”. [condemned by Vatican I and at least 3 earlier
councils mentioned above].
6) Universal salvation, ecumenism, religious
liberty, validity of the Old Covenant, etc. can be interpreted in a
Catholic sense. [Condemned by every saint, every doctor of the Church
and every Pope who comments on such issues; for instance Pope Eugene IV
(Cantate Domino – Council of Florence)]
7) Contraries can be true. [Hegelian doctrine
against Thomistic Philosophy]. If these positions appear to be
contradictory, they are.
When I [Michael Creighton] point out these positions are against the
Faith, frequently the Hegelian doctrine is employed by those in
attendance at the SSPX chapel.