One Heretic Speaks, Another Listens
Thomas A. Droleskey
Among the "firsts" being established by Laypope Francis, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, was the fact that the heretical "homily" delivered by arch-heretic Father Raniero Cantalamessa, O.F.M., Cap., was preached to Bergoglio, who is a lay arch-heretic in the Basilica of Saint Peter on Good Friday, March 29, 2013. The preacher was a priest, albeit a Judas priest of the Modernist and charismatic kind, and the layman believes that he exercises the "Petrine Ministry."
Father Cantalamessa lived down to his reputation for preaching heresy on Good Friday in 2013 as he has done on so many occasions before the attentive ears of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, who was a true bishop, and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who was a true priest. His principal audience two days ago was a layman, Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, whose "theology" was expressed perfectly by the "preacher to the 'papal' household."
After quoting from the lecherous anarchist, existentialist and patron of pornography named Franz Kafka's "An Imperial Message," Cantalamessa defamed our true popes and Holy Mother Church's true general councils and the ceremonial majesty of her Sacred Liturgy that is to give honor and glory to the Most Blessed Trinity and to transmit the simple fact that He is immutable and without any shadow of change or alteration whatsoever:
We must do everything possible so that the Church may never look like
that complicated and cluttered castle described by Kafka, and the
message may come out of it as free and joyous as when the messenger
began his run. We know what the impediments are that can restrain the
messenger: dividing walls, starting with those that separate the various
Christian churches from one another, the excess of bureaucracy, the
residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes, now only debris.
In Revelation, Jesus says that He stands at the door and knocks (Rev
3:20). Sometimes, as noted by our Pope Francis, he does not knock to
enter, but knocks from within to go out. To reach out to the
"existential suburbs of sin, suffering, injustice, religious ignorance
and indifference, and of all forms of misery."
As happens with certain old buildings. Over the centuries, to adapt
to the needs of the moment, they become filled with partitions,
staircases, rooms and closets. The time comes when we realize that all
these adjustments no longer meet the current needs, but rather are an
obstacle, so we must have the courage to knock them down and return the
building to the simplicity and linearity of its origins. This was the
mission that was received one day by a man who prayed before the
Crucifix of San Damiano: "Go, Francis, and repair my Church".
"Who could ever be up to this task?" wondered aghast the Apostle
before the superhuman task of being in the world "the fragrance of
Christ"; and here is his reply, that still applies today: "We're not
ourselves able to think something as if it came from us; our ability
comes from God. He has made us to be ministers of a new covenant, not of
the letter but of the Spirit; because the letter kills, but the Spirit
gives life"(2 Cor 2:16; 3:5-6).
May the Holy Spirit, in this moment in which a new time is opening
for the Church, full of hope, reawaken in men who are at the window the
expectancy of the message, and in the messengers the will to make it
reach them, even at the cost of their life. (Clerical Heretic Cantalamessa Preaches to Lay Heretic Bergoglio.)
What are "dividing walls?" you might ask.
Catholic doctrines, especially as proclaimed in the Second Millennium without the assent of the Orthodox and under the influence of the "rigid" Scholasitcist named Saint Thomas Aquinas. That's what.
Cantalamessa's "excess bureaucracy" is not merely the existence of different dicasteries in the Vatican but of the very fact that even the counterfeit church of conciliarism's alleged Code of Canon Law and the judicial machinery necessary to interpret and enforce gets "in the way" of "evangelization." This is seen clearly when one considers the heretical charismatic's description of "the residue of past ceremonials, laws and disputes, now only debris."
Yes, the Immemorial Mass of Tradition? Just debris, the residue of past ceremonials.
Disputes? Well, little things such as the Filioque, the Council of Trent's condemnation of Protestantism, Pope Pius IX's The Syllabus of Errors, Pope Saint Pius X's Pascendi Dominici Gregis and The Oath Against Modernism. So much complexity, so much pettiness, you understand.
Laws? Among other things, Cantalamessa was condemning the 1917 Code of Canon Law's prohibition against "inter-religious prayer services" whose origins date back to Apostolic times (see (The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion) and that was referenced by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in 1986:
And most recently, the Pope has been in the synagogue
of the Jews in Rome. How can the Pope pray with the enemies of Jesus
Christ? These Jews know and say and believe that they are the successors
of the Jews that killed Jesus Christ, and they continue to fight
against Jesus Christ everywhere in the world. At the end of the Pope's
visit, the Jews sang a "hymn" that included the line "I believe with all
my heart in the coming of the Messiah," meaning that they refuse Jesus
as the Messiah, and the Pope had given permission for this denial of
Christ be sung in his presence, and he listened, head bowed! And the
Holy See announces that in the near future that he will visit Taize to
pray with the Protestants, and he himself said in public at St. Paul
Outside the Walls that later this year he will hold a ceremony gathering
all of the religions of the world together to pray for peace at Assisi
in Italy, on the occasion of the Feast of Peace proclaimed by the United
Nations due to take place on October 24.
all these facts are public, you have seen them in the newspapers and
the media. What are we to think? What is the reaction of our Catholic
Faith? That is what matters. It is not our personal feelings, a
sort of impression or admission of some kind. It is a question of
knowing what our Faith tells us, faced with these facts. Let me quote a
few words - not my words - from Canon Naz’s Dictionary of Canon Law, a
wholly official and approved commentary on what has been the Catholic
Church’s body of law for nineteen centuries. On the subject of sharing
in the worship of non-Catholics (after all, this is what we now see Pope
and bishops doing), the Church says, in Canon 1258-1: ‘It is absolutely
forbidden for Catholics to attend or take any active part in the
worship of non-Catholics in any way whatsoever.’ On this Canon the
quasi-official Naz Commentary says, and I quote, ‘A Catholic takes
active part when he joins in heterodox; i.e., non-Catholic worship with
the intention of honouring God by this means in the way non-Catholics
do. It is forbidden to pray, to sing or to play the organ in a heretical
or schismatic temple, in association with the people worshipping there,
even if the words of the hymn or the song or the prayer are orthodox.’
The reason for this prohibition is that any participation in
non-Catholic worship implies profession of a false religion and hence
denial of the Catholic Faith. By such participation Catholics are
presumed to be adhering to the beliefs of the non- Catholics, and that
is why Canon 2316 declares them ‘suspect of heresy, and if they
persevere, they are to be treated as being in reality heretics.’
these recent acts of the Pope and bishops, with Protestants, animists
and Jews, are they not an active participation in non-Catholic worship
as explained by Canon Naz on Canon 1258-1? In which case, I cannot see
how it is possible to say that the Pope is not suspect of heresy, and if
he continues, he is a heretic, a public heretic. That is the teaching of the Church.
I don’t know if the time has come to say that the Pope is a heretic; I
don’t know if it is the time to say that. You know, for some time many
people, the sedevacantists, have been saying ‘there is no more Pope,’
but I think that for me it was not yet the time to say that, because it
was not sure, it was not evident, it was very difficult to say that the
Pope is a heretic, the Pope is apostate. But I recognize that slowly,
very slowly, by the deeds and acts of the Pope himself we begin to be
very anxious. I am not inventing this situation; I do not want it. I
would gladly give my life to bring it to an end, but this is the
situation we face, unfolding before our eyes like a film in the cinema. I
don’t think it has ever happened in the history of the Church, the man
seated in the chair of Peter partaking in the worship of false gods.
conclusion must we draw in a few months if we are confronted by these
repeated acts of partaking in false worship? I don’t know. I wonder. But
I think the Pope can do nothing worse than call together a meeting of
all religions, when we know there is only one true religion and all
other religions belong to the devil. So perhaps after this famous
meeting of Assisi, perhaps we must say that the Pope is a heretic, is
apostate. Now I don’t wish yet to say it formally and solemnly, but it
seems at first sight that it is impossible for a Pope to be publicly and
formally heretical. Our Lord has promised to be with him, to keep his
faith, to keep him in the Faith - how can he at the same time be a
public heretic and virtually apostatise? So it is possible we may be obliged to believe this Pope is not Pope.(The Angelus, July 1986, transcripts of talks given by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on March 30 and April 18, 1986.)
Men such Cantalamessa and Bergoglio just dismiss such talk as so much claptrap, so much archaism, so much Pharisaism. They are the "enlightened" ones, you understand. How do we know? Well, they keep telling us how "enlightened" and "humble" and "simple" they are.
Cantalamessa also managed to defame and blaspheme Saint Francis of Assisi himself, who loved the ceremonies of the Catholic Faith as one whose desire to repair Holy Mother Church was precisely what the conciliar revolutionaries have been doing and what Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis has done in the short space of seventeen days and what he intends to keep on doing until he returns to Buenos Aires after he decides to resign in order to pass on the baton of conciliarism to another revolutionary layman.
Saint Francis of Assisi loved the integrity of Catholic doctrine and he desire to rebuild the Church Militant earth whose clergy and laity had grow lax in their moral lives and to live a life of profound Eucharistic piety and deep devotion to the Mother of God so that more and more people would embrace Lady Poverty so that their souls, purified of earthly attachment, would recognize and reject any doctrine or way of living contrary to the Deposit of Faith. This effort to make Saint Francis of Assisi as a witness in behalf of conciliarism is nothing other than contemptible. It is from the devil. Saint Francis of Assisi's very Rule of Life was designed in its very simplicity to protect his mendicant friars from heresy.
A source that is not enough friendly to the great saint of Assisi's zeal for orthodoxy demonstrates that Cantalamessa is a liar and a deceiver:
A few years previously, in 1201, the pope had formally approved the
reconciliation and reorganization, into three orders, of a group of
religious zealots from northern Italy, the Humiliati, who had been
condemned as heretics along with many others by Pope Lucius III in 1184.
The three orders comprised, respectively, canons serving their own
churches, lay people living in separate male and female communities, and
married lay people leading normal working lives at home but meeting
together on Sundays to hear sermons delivered by members of their
congregations. In return for being allowed to pursue their way of life
unmolested, the Humiliati observed strict orthodoxy in doctrine and
supported the established clergy in combating heresy in their districts.
Thus Francis' three orders, and especially the Tertiaries, were
anticipated by the Humiliati. In 1208 Innocent III formally approved the reconstitution of another
group of suspected heretics, the Poor Catholics, comprising disaffected
clerics from Languedoc, when their leader, Durand of Huesca, swore
loyalty to the pope and fidelity to orthodox doctrine. In 1210, yet
another such group, mainly laymen called the Poor Men of Lyon, under
Bernard of Prim, likewise received the pope's approval in return for
various loyalty oaths.
Thus the period in which Francis grew up was one of great spiritual
ferment, in which the church hierarchy was struggling to find ways to
combat a rising tide of heterodox opposition and religious diversity, in
which evangelical poverty and the preaching of repentance were leading
themes. Francis was only one of a succession of grassroots religious
leaders who headed to Rome for papal approval early in the new century. Although the pope and local bishops at times resorted to violence to
suppress these proliferating dissident groups, they also saw the value
of harnessing the spiritual energy of zealots like Francis who were
amenable to being drawn, with their followers, into the structure of the
church while retaining the apostolic identity that was evidently so
appealing to the general populace. The Franciscans would become one of
the papacy's most important and effective tools for implementing the new
standards of pastoral care and parish life that were enunciated in the
decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215, and the order's
development fell increasingly under the influence of the church
hierarchy. (The Life of Saint Francis: Introduction.)
Some might to save Cantalamessa's heresy in party by claiming that he is opposed to "religious ignorance and indifference." Nice try. No sale.
The truth is that Cantalamessa believes that it is enough for people to be "believers" and that it is indifference to "belief" in general that is ruining the world. This is nothing other than Judeo-Masonry. It is diabolical.
Cantalamessa's and Bergoglio's desire for "simplicity"and "linearity" have been condemned many times in the two hundred nineteen years.
Pope Pius VI condemned it in Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794:
Obscuring of Truths in the Church [From the Decree de Grat., sec. I]
1. The proposition, which asserts "that in these later times
there has been spread a general obscuring of the more important truths
pertaining to religion, which are the basis of faith and of the moral
teachings of Jesus Christ,"—heretical.
The Power Attributed to the Community of the Church, in Order That by This the Power May Be Communicated to the Pastors
2. The proposition which states "that power has been given by God
to the Church, that it might be communicated to the pastors who are its
ministers for the salvation of souls"; if thus understood that the power
of ecclesiastical ministry and of rule is derived from the COMMUNITY of
the faithful to the pastors,—heretical.
The Name Ministerial Head Attributed to the Roman Pontiff
3. In addition, the proposition which states "that the Roman
Pontiff is the ministerial head," if it is so explained that the Roman
Pontiff does not receive from Christ in the person of blessed Peter, but
from the Church, the power of ministry, which as successor of Peter,
true vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church he possesses in the
The Power of the Church for the Establishing and the Sanctioning of Exterior Discipline
4. The proposition affirming, "that it would be a misuse of the
authority of the Church, when she transfers that authority beyond the
limits of doctrine and of morals, and extends it to exterior matters,
and demands by force that which depends on persuasion and love"; and
then also, "that it pertains to it much less, to demand by force
exterior obedience to its decrees"; in so far as by those undefined
words, "extends to exterior matters," the proposition censures as an
abuse of the authority of the Church the use of its power received from
God, which the apostles themselves used in establishing and sanctioning
5. In that part in which the proposition insinuates that the Church "does
not have authority to demand obedience to its decrees otherwise than by
means which depend on persuasion; in so far as it intends that the
Church has not conferred on it by God the power, not only of directing
by counsel and persuasion, but also of ordering by laws, and of
constraining and forcing the inconstant and stubborn by exterior
judgment and salutary punishments" leading toward a system condemned elsewhere as heretical.. . . .
Calumnies Against Some Decisions in the Matter of Faith Which Have Come Down from Several Centuries
12. The assertions of the synod, accepted as a whole
concerning decisions in the matter of faith which have come down from
several centuries, which it represents as decrees originating from one
particular church or from a few pastors, unsupported by sufficient
authority, formulated for the corruption of the purity of faith and for
causing disturbance, introduced by violence, from which wounds, still
too recent, have been inflicted,—false, deceitful, rash, scandalous,
injurious to the Roman Pontiffs and the Church, derogatory to the
obedience due to the Apostolic Constitutions, schismatic, dangerous, at
The So-called Peace of Clement IX
13. The proposition reported among the acts of the synod, which
intimates that Clement IX restored peace to the Church by the approval
of the distinction of right and deed in the subscription to the
formulary written by Alexander VII (see n. 1ogg),—false, rash, injurious
to Clement IX.
14. In so far as it approves that distinction by extolling its
supporters with praise and by berating their opponents,—rash,
pernicious, injurious to the Supreme Pontiffs, fostering schism and
The Composition of the Body of the Church
15. The doctrine which proposes that the Church "must be
considered as one mystical body composed of Christ, the head, and the
faithful, who are its members through an ineffable union, by which in a
marvelous way we become with Him one sole priest, one sole victim, one
sole perfect adorer of God the Father, in spirit and in truth,"
under-stood in this sense, that no one belongs to the body of the Church
except the faithful, who are perfect adorers in spirit and in
truth,—heretical. (Pope Pius VI, Auctorem Fidei, August 28, 1794.)
Pope Pius IX condemned men such as Cantalamessa and Bergoglio in his first encyclical letter, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846:
15. Also perverse is the shocking theory that it makes no difference to which
religion one belongs, a theory which is greatly at variance even with reason. By
means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and
vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain
eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any
sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and
darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.
16. The sacred celibacy of clerics has also been the victim of conspiracy.
Indeed, some churchmen have wretchedly forgotten their own rank and let
themselves be converted by the charms and snares of pleasure. This is the aim
too of the prevalent but wrong method of teaching, especially in the
philosophical disciplines, a method which deceives and corrupts incautious youth
in a wretched manner and gives it as drink the poison of the serpent in the
goblet of Babylon. To this goal also tends the unspeakable doctrine of
Communism, as it is called, a doctrine most opposed to the very natural law. For
if this doctrine were accepted, the complete destruction of everyone's laws,
government, property, and even of human society itself would follow.
17. To this end also tend the most dark designs of men in the clothing of
sheep, while inwardly ravening wolves. They humbly recommend themselves by means
of a feigned and deceitful appearance of a purer piety, a stricter virtue and
discipline; after taking their captives gently, they mildly bind them, and then
kill them in secret. They make men fly in terror from all practice of religion,
and they cut down and dismember the sheep of the Lord. To this end, finally --
to omit other dangers which are too well known to you -- tends the widespread
disgusting infection from books and pamphlets which teach the lessons of
sinning. These works, well-written and filled with deceit and cunning, are
scattered at immense cost through every region for the destruction of the
Christian people. They spread pestilential doctrines everywhere and deprave the
minds especially of the imprudent, occasioning great losses for religion.
18. As a result of this filthy medley of errors which creeps in from every
side, and as the result of the unbridled license to think, speak and write, We
see the following: morals deteriorated, Christ's most holy religion despised,
the majesty of divine worship rejected, the power of this Apostolic See
plundered, the authority of the Church attacked and reduced to base slavery, the
rights of bishops trampled on, the sanctity of marriage infringed, the rule of
every government violently shaken and many other losses for both the Christian
and the civil commonwealth. Venerable brothers, We are compelled to weep and
share in your lament that this is the case.
19. Therefore, in this great crisis for religion, because We are greatly
concerned for the salvation of all the Lord's flock and in fulfillment of the
duty of Our Apostolic ministry, We shall certainly leave no measure untried in
Our vigorous effort to secure the good of the whole Christian family. Indeed, We
especially call forth in the Lord your own illustrious piety, virtue and
prudence, venerable brothers. With these and relying on heavenly aid, you may
fearlessly defend the cause of God and His holy Church as befits your station
and the office for which you are marked. You must fight energetically, since you
know very well what great wounds the undefiled Spouse of Christ Jesus has
suffered, and how vigorous is the destructive attack of Her enemies. You must
also care for and defend the Catholic faith with episcopal strength and see that
the flock entrusted to you stands to the end firm and unmoved in the faith. For
unless one preserves the faith entire and uninjured, he will without doubt
perish forever. (Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus, November 9, 1846.)
So much for Raniero Cantalamessa, whose heresy is notorious and well-documented over the course of his wretched career (see, among many other articles, Say What,Father Cantalamessa?, No Ambiguity Here, Ever Endeavoring to Make Judas Seem Admirable, What's Next? "Beatifying" Manel Pousa?) So much for the letting "the Holy Spirit" blow as He will, although the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity bends with the changes in the world to discard how He has directed Holy Mother Church in the past. Such a suggestion is apostasy and blasphemy of the highest order.
So much for Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis, who shows us very clearly by his words and actions that he does not believe in much of the Catholic Faith, starting with Papal Primacy itself. A simple wave of the act and "fiat" by the "Petrine Minister" just makes doctrine and rubrics disappear before our very eyes without having to resort to the philosophically absurd and dogmatic condemned "living tradition" of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and the "hermeneutic of continuity" of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.
This is why, as mentioned two days ago in This Is No Longer The Subject Of Parody, Jorge Mario Bergoglio felt free to offend even the tender sensibilities of "conservative" Catholics attached to the structures of his false church in the delusional belief that it is the Catholic Church by washing the feet of two women, including a Serbian Mohammedan, in the Roman Juvenile Detention Centre on Maundy Thursday, March 28, 2013, during the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical service's "Mass of the Lord's Supper." Some of these "conservatives" believe themselves to be experts in the conciliar "code of canon law" that contradicts the Catholic Church in many instances, and they are struggling to explain what their beloved "pope" has done.
Indeed, the original posting of a New York Daily News article on the washing of the women's feet contained a quote, since removed in a later posting, attributed to "Father" John Zuhlsdorf of the "What Does the Prayer Really Say" website exercise in conciliar propaganda and intellectual gymnastics, that had "'Father' Z" saying that it was important to try to "figure out" what Bergoglio/Francis is doing, that perhaps it is the case that he is doing all manner of "liberal" things now in order to get "liberals" on his "side" so that they cannot criticize him when he reaffirms Catholic doctrine on various points. No wonder "Father" Zuhlsdorf altered his confused thinking later by writing on his blog that alleged canon lawyers had to figure out when a "pope" can violated what is said to be canon law. This is inanity. Insanity.
A Fox News Channel report did include "Father" Zuhlsdorf's remarkable exercise in damage control:
The Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied
from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when it concerns
liturgical abuses, had to measure his comments when the purported
abuser was the pope himself.
"Before liberals and
traditionalists both have a spittle-flecked nutty, each for their own
reasons, try to figure out what he is trying to do," Zuhlsdorf wrote.
in characteristic form, he added: "What liberals forget in their
present crowing is that even as Francis makes himself — and the church
— more popular by projecting (a) compassionate image, he will
simultaneously make it harder for them to criticize him when he
reaffirms the doctrinal points they want him to overturn." (New universal public face of apostasy's washing of women's feet is final straw of sorts for wary traditionalist Catholics.)
"Father" Zuhlsdorf's remarks are both nauseating and laughable.
"Figure out what he is trying to do"? Are you serious, "Father" Zuhlsdorf. You insult the intelligence of believing Catholics as you turn a completely blind eye to the offenses that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has committed through the course of his career as a lay member of the Society of Jesus by entering into places of false worship, esteeming the symbols of false religions and reaffirming adherents of false religions in their falsehoods. Millions upon millions of Catholics have shed their very blood rather than to give anything approximating the appearance of such apostate behavior. And you have to "figure out" what this egregious enemy of Christ the King and of the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood to redeem? Shameful cowardice in the name of protecting one's "status" and "prestige" before men. Shameful.
Jorge Mario Bergoglio is doing as Petrine Minister Francis what he was doing in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He washed the feet of women on Maundy Thursday in Argentina. He did so in Rome three days ago. What's the big deal? This is who the man is, a revolutionary who has no regard for liturgical norms, to which he will abide only in certain circumstances while feeling otherwise justified in discarding as the occasion necessitates.
Bergoglio probably used "girl altar boys" as a layman presbyter long before they were approved officially in 1994 by Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, an act that constituted my definitive break with the delusion that the "Polish Pope" was going to restore the Catholic Church. I had fought that battle to the point of tracking down the syncretist Mother Teresa in Hong Kong at the request of Father John A. Hardon, S.J., to convince her to telephone the "pope" to stop such permission from happening before it became an accomplished fact. Mother Teresa assured me that she would call the "pope," saying, "This will be a disaster for the Church. They will be pushing for women
priests next." She agreed to call Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II, reaching
his omnipotent secretary, the then Monsignor
Stanislaw Dziwisz, now the conciliar "cardinal" archbishop of Krakow,
Poland, being told that the decision had been made. I was told by Father
Hardon that Mother Teresa was flabbergasted by the turnaround. So was I, which I is why I wrote a very strong "open letter" to Wojtyla/John Paul II in The Wanderer that closed with the following sentence, "Why have you rewarded the dissenters?"
I was an idiot, something, of course, that I remain in so many respects (there, beat you to the punch, all right?).
Karol Wojtyla/John Paul defected from numerous points of the Catholic Faith. Why be concerned about "girl altar boys" when the man I believed to be "waiting for the right moment" to "restore" the Church and get rid of the "bad bishops" had said that the Old Covenant had never been abrogated and who engaged in various acts of "inter-religious prayer services," egregious outdoor "liturgies" and praised one false religion after another, including "voodoo" (see Voodoo You Trust).
Similarly, the "conservatives" and "canon law" Perry Masons in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who are in a tizzy over Jorge Mario Bergoglio's washing of the feet of women on Maundy Thursday, March 28, 2013, had their heads collectively in the sand with their mouths sealed shut by cement and their fingers bound together by super glue whenever their "champion," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict entered a place of false worship to be treated as a inferior and as he praised the ability of one false religion after another to "contribute" to the "betterment" of the world. These "conservatives" and "canon law" Perry Masons saw no evil and they spoke no evil. It is almost as though they wanted to say, "Direct violations of the First and Second Commandments are not covered any longer by canon law. Things do change after all."
As has been demonstrated amply on this site and at Novus Ordo Watch amply in the past eighteen days, Bergoglio/Francis is no less a blasphemer than Ratzinger/Benedict. The "conservatives" and canon law Perry Masons have not said a word about Jorge Bergoglio's being "blessed" by Protestant ministers--in front of Father Raniero Cantalamessa, by the way--in Argentina or lighting a menorah or by other acts showing the kind of "esteem" for false religions condemned by Saint Paul the Apostle, denounced by Pope Leo XIII in Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892, and denounced by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.
Such people must remain blind and deaf when a Vatican spin doctor named "Father" Thomas Rosica, whom we met before in Coming Soon: The Two-Headed "Pope" Monster, justifies Bergoglio/Francis's liturgical "impropriety" on Maundy Thursday in a way that no doubt brought a tear the the eyes of Father Cantalamessa and Layman Bergoglio:
In response to the many questions and concerns raised over Pope
Francis washing the feet of 12 young people at the Roman Juvenile
on Holy Thursday evening, especially that two were
young women, Fr. Lombardi has sent me the following information to be
shared with you.
One can easily understand that in a great celebration, men would be
chosen for the foot washing because Jesus, himself washing the feet of
the twelve apostles who were male. However the ritual of the washing of
the feet on Holy Thursday evening in the Juvenile Detention Centre in
Rome took place in a particular, small community that included young
women. When Jesus washed the feet of those who were with him on the
first Holy Thursday, he desired to teach all a lesson about the meaning
of service, using a gesture that included all members of the community.
We are aware of the photos that show Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio,
then-Archbishop of Buenos Aires, who in various pastoral settings washed
the feet of young men and women. To have excluded the young women from
the ritual washing of feet on Holy Thursday night in this Roman prison,
would have detracted our attention from the essence of the Holy
Thursday Gospel, and the very beautiful and simple gesture of a father
who desired to embrace those who were on the fringes of society; those
who were not refined experts of liturgical rules.
That the Holy Father, Francis, washed the feet of young men and women
on his first Holy Thursday as Pope, should call our minds and hearts to
the simple and spontaneous gesture of love, affection, forgiveness and
mercy of the Bishop of Rome, more than to legalistic, liturgical or
canonical discussions. (Vatican Spokesman on Participation of 2 Women in Foot Washing Ceremony.)
Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, "Father" Rosica, did not just happen to have "any" member of "the community" present at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday. He had the Apostles, whom He was ordaining to the fullness of the Holy Priesthood at that very moment. He was teaching them to serve others, most especially by removing the dirt on the souls of sinners in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. It is really very, very simple.
Modernists must seek to rationalize their actions as they are rationalists, which is why Bergoglio's fellow Jesuit and Thomas Rosica's superior in the Press Office of the Holy Week, got into the act himself:
The Vatican’s chief spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the
pope’s decision was “absolutely licit” for a rite that is not a church
sacrament. Francis also took into account “the real situation, the
community where one celebrates,” Lombardi added.
The Casal del
Marmo prison where Francis celebrated houses both young men and women,
“and it would have been strange if girls had been excluded,” Lombardi
“This community understands simple and essential things; they were not liturgy scholars,” Lombardi said. “Washing feet was
important to present the Lord’s spirit of service and love.”
document issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says that the
inclusion of women in the foot-washing rite is an “understandable way
of accentuating the evangelical command of the Lord,’who came to serve
and not to be served,’ that all members of the church must serve one
another in love.”
The bishops’ document continues, “It has become
customary in many places to invite both men and women to be participants
in this rite in recognition of the service that should be given by all
the faithful to the church and to the world.” (Vatican defends Pope Francis’ washing of women’s fee.)
When in doubt, of course, rationalize. It's just a matter of not "hurting anyone's feelings," right?
And the so-called United States Conference of "Catholic Bishops" has been in the business for decades of establishing "customs" that violate the few norms that govern the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service in order to petition the Occupy Vatican Movement to ask for recognition and full acceptance of the "customs" that were established as acts of defiance in the first place. Then again, the American bishops of yore ignored Vatican norms with impunity even long before the "Second" Vatican Council. Rebellion among Catholic prelates, both those in the past and the the fake ones at the present time, is of the essence of the condemned heresy of Americanism.
Everything about the Catholic Faith is "up for grabs" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, including its own liturgical norms, to say nothing of every aspect of the Catholic Faith.
Kneel for the reception of the sacramentally invalid rite of confirmation in the conciliar church?
Not in front of "Pope" Francis last night at the Novus Ordo version of the "Easter Vigil Mass." The poor, unsuspecting confirmandi stood before the false "pontiff," who gave them a kiss rather than a slap on the cheek.
Women sponsoring men at last night's alleged "confirmation" ceremony in the Basilica of Saint Peter.
Not a problem. Come right on up. Meet Jorge. Have a photograph taken. Get a chance to buy the photograph at the store of the Vatican's official photographer for a nice tidy sum of Euros. Nothing going on here, certainly not a true administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation.
Men such as Raniero Cantalamessa and Jorge Mario Bergoglio are very predictable. So are their "conservative" defenders in the conciliar structures, men who will not believe that the Antichrist is among them unless he can show them his credentials.
The conciliar revolutionaries, including each of the six conciliar "popes" and their appointees and subordinates, keep showing us that they are figures of the Antichrist. They have established their credentials. How can anyone deny this? For what reason? Fear of admitting that these men are not Catholics and cannot be true and legitimate Successors of Saint Peter, that the horrible species of persons known as "sedevacantists" are correct?
The apostasy is in our faces.
The blasphemy cries out to Heaven for vengeance.
Even though it is the time of Easter rejoicing, we still have much for which to make reparation, especially by means of praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits and by enduring whatever suffering that must come our way for our refusal to have any association at all with men who are figures of Antichrist and thus enemies of Christ the King and of the souls He redeemed by shedding every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday.
The Mystical Body of Christ here on earth will know its resurrection one day. For the moment, though, she is in the tomb. We must keep close to Our Lady as it will be the Triumph of her Immaculate Heart that will make possible this resurrection and thus the vanquishing of conciliarism and its offenses once and for all.
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us now and at the hour of our death.
Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior and Balthasar, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints