After Francis, who will be the 7th king to rule in Rome?

by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 25, 2025 | New Blog

+St. Gabriel Possenti+

Introduction

With Francis near death, many are wondering what will happen next. Readers have often asked about what to expect in the near future and how we can explain this from passages in St. John’s Apocalypse. I have no real answers, only opinions, but I do know what those approved commentators writing before Pope Pius XII’s death have written. Many have been confused about the following passages in the Apocalypse and how they apply to us today. Different commentators offer different solutions, but the ones provided by Rev. Kramer and Rev. Haydock below seem to offer the best explanation of what we are experiencing today, and what may lie ahead. We begin with an analysis of Antichrist’s system, which continues today in Rome with the reign of the usurpers.

Rev. H. Bernard Kramer, The Book of Destiny, p. 395-97

Apocalypse Chap. 17, Verse 10

In verse ten, St. John turns his attention from the beast to the heads; to the whole series of successive world-dynasties. He therefore changes his viewpoint from the future to the present. In explaining the significance of the heads this verse clears up the meaning of verse nine. The seven heads are seven anti-God empires. Five of them have passed away. One of the world-empires exists; this is Rome, the sixth head. The seventh empire has not yet come, and when it appears, it shall exist only a short time. That is the empire of Antichrist.

The beast existed in and through all the ancient world-empires and shall show fullest development and expression in the empire and person of Antichrist. His empire shall embody, promote and propagate much more extensively idolatry, Caesarism or state supremacy, immorality and devil-worship and persecution of God’s people than the ancient empires did. The beast existed unceasingly from the ascendancy of Egypt as a world-empire until the end of the pagan Roman dominion. Each empire grew up in the shadow of its predecessor and attacked, crushed and ended the world-dominion of that predecessor. But the beast has ceased to exist since pagan Rome fell and shall come back to life when Antichrist resurrects it by satanic power. Yet it exists potentially in the ten horns (Dan. VII. 24) into which the sixth, the Roman empire was dissolved. Some of the ten horns seen by Daniel may be existing in our times.

Apocalypse Chap. 17, Verse 11

In this verse St. John returns to the time in which the beast does not exist. This verse is complicated in English; in Greek it is clear. The clause, “the same is also the eighth”, refers to the person of Antichrist. The rest of the verse points to his empire. The English translation, “is itself the eighth” is misleading, because the pronoun “itself” modifies “beast”. In Greek “ “the beast”, is neuter gender, while the pronoun is masculine, showing that not the “beast” is the “eighth”, but Antichrist considered as a person apart from his empire is the EIGHTH. His power, which is of satanic origin, is personal and is the means by which he establishes the seventh empire. This power is independent of the empire, is not conferred by it, because it is from the throne of Satan. Therefore he is something above and distinct from his empire as a ruling power. This chapter treats of Antichrist only in relation to his empire. Chapter XIII treats directly of his person and indirectly of his empire. In Greek the clause clearly refers to Antichrist, while in some English translations it cannot be discerned unless it be translated, as some have it, “he himself is also the eighth”.

Antichrist himself, as a human being endowed with satanic might and authority, is the Beast and the EIGHTH something, because he is the culmination and personification, the head and most complete expression of all evil that shall ever exist on earth. He has thus another reason and mode of existence in being the embodiment of sin fully developed in a human being, as Christ was the embodiment of virtue and perfection. Thus the text does not say that he is the eighth head, but his empire is one of the seven heads. He is himself something distinct from those empires, pre-existed, as it were, in the great sin of emperor-worship throughout the whole series of empires, which altogether constituted the empire of Satan, and whereof his own shall be the highest development. Likewise his authority being of satanic origin and personal is something above and distinct from his empire and constitutes an EIGHTH or spiritual empire direct­ing all military and civil resources in his empire and that of Babylon. That the Beast is foredoomed to a speedy end and complete annihilation is repeated for a purpose. It shall come out of the abyss to fulfill its destiny and then be annihilated. The faithful need not fear the beast exceedingly. (End of Rev. Kramer quotes)

“But the beast has ceased to exist since pagan Rome fell and shall come back to life when Antichrist resurrects it by satanic power,” Kramer wrote above.  We daily have sites such as Novus Ordo Watch and a few others screaming that Francis is a heretic and Rome is pagan, when the Catholic Church taught at the 1869 Vatican Council that no TRUE pope could ever fall into heresy while teaching the faithful. Kramer only confirms what Henry Cardinal Manning noted in his sermons — that pagan Rome could exist once again only if Antichrist had appeared on the scene to resurrect it. And Card. Manning was convinced, even in the late 1800s, that the paganization of Rome had already begun. There is no attempt whatsoever by LibTrads to discover or explain how and why, from solid Catholic sources, the Church could be without a true pope for nearly 67 years, or what this really means for Catholics. No mention of Antichrist and only sneers if this topic is even broached. My, how pleased he must be! But we will continue to try and make sense of things despite our critics, even if our speculations prove to be somewhat off course. Because Christ told us to read the signs of the times, and to try and understand what we read. We do our best, then, to obey Him.

What follows is only the personal opinion of this author. But it could be a secondary or minor interpretation of the scriptural verses on the seven hills in an allusive sense, with the one given by Rev. Kramer being the primary meaning. For as we read from the Douay-Rheims commentary on Apoc. 22:10: “We have no certainty when we apply these predictions to particular events. For as St. Jerome takes notice, the Apocalypse has as many mysteries as words, or rather mysteries in every word” (https://www.drbo.org/chapter/73022.htm).

Another observation: the seven hills

If there are seven heads of the beast throughout history, this symbolism could continue into the beast’s actual governance, giving further clues as to where he will reign and who will be his minions. In the 12^th century, the popes granted the Italian Cardinals jurisdiction as Local Ordinaries over seven dioceses (“hills” or “mountains”) of Rome. Later in the 12^th century, two of the dioceses were combined (Santa Rufina with Porto) reducing this number to six. But a seventh “hill,” one of the suburbicarian dioceses, was added back in the 1980s, and this addition seems to be a definite sign. The “seven heads” spoken of in Apoc. 13:1 are the seven empires. But then we go to Apoc. 17: v. 9, which tells us that, “The seven heads are seven mountains and they are seven kings upon which the woman sitteth.” This could also refer to seven dioceses, not mountains, ruled by seven Novus Ordo kings — the “cardinals,” and later “bishops” appointed by the usurpers who were the “heads” of these dioceses.

The Catholic Encyclopedia tells us that one of the meanings of Antichrist could be “a king who reigns during an interregnum.” These Novus Ordo lackeys are not truly cardinals and bishops, but lesser “kings” under the universal king, Pontifex Maximus, Antichrist’s successor. (The Catholic Encyclopedia ranks cardinals alongside kings and emperors in dignity.) The first usurper-king in this series would have been Angelo Roncalli (John 23), identified as the false prophet in my 1990 work, Will the Catholic Church Survive… Rev. Kramer says of the false prophet: “This false prophet, possibly at the behest of Antichrist usurps the papal supremacy… His assumed spiritual authority and supremacy over the Church would make him resemble the Bishop of Rome… He would be Pontifex Maximus, a title of pagan emperors, having spiritual and temporal authority.” This king reigns over the “whore of Babylon,” the prostituted version of Christ’s Church, a false church presenting as the true Church of Christ.

In 1962, Roncalli transferred the cardinal’s jurisdiction over the six dioceses surrounding the Vatican to the residential bishops, suggesting further reform. These “bishops” were answerable directly to Roncalli. The “cardinals” then became titular bishops only, possessing no ordinary jurisdiction over these dioceses. Initially the six traditional dioceses were Albano (1), Frascati (Tusculum) (2), Palestrina (3), Sabina (4), Ostia (5), and Velletri, Porto and S. Rufina (6) (https://www.catholic.com/encyclopedia/suburbicarian-dioceses). Today the dioceses are reorganized and listed as Ostia 1), Velletri-Segni (2) Porto-Santa Rufina (3), Frascati (4), Palestrina (5), Albano (6) and Sabina-(Poggio Mirteto) (7). John Paul 2 joined Segni to Velletri and Sabina to Poggio Mirteto in 1986. “According to ancient Roman sources, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, the seventh king of Rome, established a Roman colony at the town, then known as Signia” or Segni (Wikipedia, Segni).

It is hard to believe there is no significance to the addition of Segni and the reorganization of the dioceses to create seven versus the traditional six dioceses. Segni, joined to Velletri and Poggio Mirteto, joined to Sabina are two entirely new additions. For from the 1100s to 1910 and from 1915 on, the cardinals, not the residential bishops, were assigned certain dioceses. Adding Segni appears to have fulfilled the prophecy of Apoc. 17:9, tying this prophecy in Apocalypse directly to the newly organized pagan Rome of the usurpers. Therefore, this biblical description could never have applied previously because only the usurpers could have ridden the beast seated on the seven mountains described in Apoc.17:4.

The identity of the ruler of the seven kings and the lesser kings is laid out in Apoc. 17:11. The beast (Paul 6) was a cardinal by all appearances, created by Roncalli. Yet in reality he was not a cardinal, because Roncalli was never pope. Becoming the second of the seven kings, he also was the eighth king, a bogus pope heading the entire system as the Man of Sin — Satan’s vicar, as Kramer explains. The lesser kings are kings by each succeeding Pontifex Maximus, but the ultimate exercise of their power rests with the eighth king (Satan joined to Montini and his successors) who lends them power to direct their activities. As antipope, Roncalli was the first universal king, playing his role as False Prophet. The inevitable result was the advent of that great harlot, the Novus Ordo church, sprawled in serpentine fashion across the seven dioceses and ruled from across the Tiber River by the eighth head — the system of Antichrist. The creation of the seventh diocese may only have been a sort of territorial marking, a sign that all of the former sees united to Rome were now in enemy control.

The scarlet whore atop the beast is “Babylon, the great” (Apoc. 17:5), the early Christians’ code name for Rome. In the hand of the scarlet whore is a golden cup, “…full of the abominations and filthiness of her fornication” (Apoc. 17:4). This cup is reminiscent of a golden chalice. Rev. Leo Haydock calls this verse “…common scriptural expressions for the abominations of idolatry.” She is “drunk with the wine of her prostitution” (Apoc. 17:2),  and this is no coincidence considering the corruption of the consecration formula for the wine in the Holy Sacrifice, replacing “for many” with “for all.” The worship of bread and wine idols is frequently mentioned in Holy Scripture in connection with types of false Christs, (and these usurpers ARE false Christs): “wine of iniquity”(Ps. 4,17: “the wine of the condemned” (Amos 2,8); “the two iniquities (bread and wine)” (Osee 10, 10); “bread idols” (Jer. 7, 18); “the bread of deceit” (Prov. 23, 3); “idols without life” (Ps. 105, 28). This we find in Rev. Kenelm Vaughn’s Divine Armory of Holy Scripture, (pgs. 754-55).  Emperor-worship also is involved here, as Rev. Kramer notes. For these usurpers, so fond of their followers’ rapt attention, are not popes, but emperor-kings.

Who will be the seventh king?

Bergoglio is dying, and the new king in this line once he passes would be the seventh usurper reigning since Pope Pius XII’s death. Seven is a number that we find numerous times in the Apocalypse; among other things, it signifies completion. In Chap. 1, seven candlesticks represent the seven churches throughout the ages and their bishops are symbolized by seven stars or angels (Rev. Berry). This is mentioned again in the first verse of Chap. 2. Seven spirits of God and the seven stars are mentioned in the first verse of Chap. 3. Seven lamps and seven spirits of God in Chap. 4, verse 5; five mentions of seven in Chap. 5; 1 in chapter six, several in Chap. 8, and so on throughout the entire book. This number may not seem important to us mortals, but it means something to God. The seventh hill was created by Roncalli and could indicate that this has some special significance. It could be that these agents of Antichrist believed that the seventh king is the one who will deliver the kingdom into the hands of Satan, head of the one-world church of all religions.

We do not know his identity, but as stated in our last blog, it is likely he will make it appear that the Novus Ordo church is rejecting the changes and returning to its previous pre-Vatican 2 position, similar to what Pres. Trump is doing with this country. It will be a seduction so convincing, so diabolically clever that many LibTrads will “return” to this church, believing as they have been falsely led to believe, through private revelation and their pseudo-clergy, that this is the promised restoration of the true Church. Those who refuse to buy into it will be persecuted. The Latin Mass of St. Pius V may appear to return, and all the sacramental rites could be “restored” to their previous forms. What can it hurt? They can never be valid again without a canonically elected pope, so it will cost the usurpers nothing. This is the only way that it can appear, when political antichrist comes, that he is the true antichrist, not Paul 6. Political antichrist will then be seen as the one who abolishes the mass and destroys Rome, when it was long ago destroyed spiritually. And this will be the greatest and final deception.

As prophesied, the reign of this seventh king, if indeed he is the final usurper and this opinion holds, may well last for only 42 months, or three and a half years. But again, it could be longer, since that number may only symbolize an indefinite period as some commentators believe. Will Enoch and Elias physically appear during this time? Perhaps, if they have not already appeared in other manifestations as again, some commentators teach. All this of course is only speculation, and only time will tell whether or not it comes to pass. There will be twists, turns, contradictions and surprises. The subjects of this seventh king will be those Christ threatens to vomit from His mouth — the final, pitiful remnant of the last church of Apoc. Chap. 3, the Laodicea church. This is the seventh and final church before the end.

As Francis Panakal, author of The Man of Sin first observed, “In Pope Pius XI’s Summi Pontificatus, after describing his generation as one “’tormented … by spiritual emptiness and deep-felt interior poverty,” the pope applied to it this passage of the Apocalypse as follows: ‘Thou sayest: I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing: and knowest not, that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked’ (Apoc. 3:17). This particular passage is a description of the church of Laodicea which, in the opinion of Catholic interpreters, is a representation of the Church as a whole during the time of the Antichrist. Thus Pius XI’s application of this passage of the Apocalypse to his time would, in effect, be an indication that the age of the Antichrist had in some way already begun.” And indeed it had.

The seventh church — Laodicea

In his first address as pope, Pope St. Pius X warned Catholics that Antichrist had already been born. At that point in time, Giovanni Battista Montini (Paul 6) was six years old. The exorcist Rev. Theophilus Riesinger, O.P.Cap., revealed in 1940 what he had learned in his exorcisms — that Antichrist was already alive and would begin his persecutions in 1952, the very year Pope Pius XII first fell ill from chromic acid poisoning. Montini was then his acting pro-secretary. Pope Paul IV, in his Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, prophesied how he would come to power as the abomination of desolation — through an invalid papal election. Shortly before his death in 1939, Pope Pius XI warned that the world already had entered that deadly phase that would see the fulfillment of prophesy, the end of the age of the Church and the rule of Antichrist. It is important to weigh carefully the words of Christ through St. John to the angel of this Laodicea church, the last church, for in these words we see all that has happened to us today. We read from Apoc. Chap. 3: 14-22:

“And to the angel of the church of Laodicea, write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, who is the beginning of the creation of God:

“I know thy works, that thou art neither cold, nor hot. I would thou wert cold, or hot. But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest: I am rich, and made wealthy, and have need of nothing: and knowest not, that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. I counsel thee to buy of me gold fire tried, that thou mayest be made rich; and mayest be clothed in white garments, and that the shame of thy nakedness may not appear; and anoint thy eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. Such as I love, I rebuke and chastise. Be zealous therefore and do penance. Behold, I stand at the gate, and knock. If any man shall hear my voice, and open to me the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To him that shall overcome, I will give to sit with me in my throne: as I also have overcome and am set down with my Father in his throne. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches.”

Here we need the wisdom of Rev. Leo Haydock to make the most sense we can out of these verses. Reverend Haydock calls being hot nor cold a “dreadful reprehension,” one few recognize as such. Being cold means being “guilty of great sins.” Being hot means being zealous and fervent in piety. Being lukewarm indicates that one is “slothful, negligent and indolent” in seeking Christian piety and perfection and in “all things regarding the service of God.” For this they are guilty before God of great sins and “forfeit his favour and grace.” They fancy themselves as being safe and good because they live as others do and “are not guilty of scandalous and shameful crimes to which others are addicted.” The lukewarm are further from true conversion than the cold; “they live and die with a heart divided between God and the world,” where greater and more shameful sinners are at least cognizant of the abhorrence of the vices that they commit. “Stupidity is more dangerous than absolute wickedness”  — the cold still have a conscience. Christ, beginning to vomit the lukewarm from His mouth, means that they will be lost if they fail to reform.

The “eye salve” mentioned in Apoc. 3:18 is necessary for them to see their plight and indicates their willful ignorance. Being naked when they think they already possess the white garment of salvation describes to a “T” both those complacent in their Novus Ordo beliefs as well as those LibTrads who are certain they have the graces they need through the sacraments when they have nothing; they know not their blindness and nakedness. It also can refer to any of us who pridefully believe that we are guaranteed salvation because we no longer belong to any of these sects; we are to work out our salvation in fear and trembling. Those who continue in their ignorance and blindness can only be described as having entered into the operation of error to believe lies described by St. Paul in 2 Thess. 2. Christ warns us the Church will be rebuked, chastised and required to do penance to become zealous. But how can this possibly fit in with a restoration of the Church, when Laodicea is the last of the seven churches?! Those who overcome with Christ will share a throne in Heaven with Him, for He too has overcome. Is this not a subtle reference to the passion of the Church? In Apoc. 13:7 it is said that Antichrist will “overcome the saints” but in verse 10 of this chapter we find that the faith and patience of the saints will save them in the end.

Conclusion

For decades, many have rejected the idea, first advanced by Francis Panakal and Rev. Joaquin Saenz-Arriaga, that Paul 6 was the Antichrist. It is the proposition I presented in my first book, released in 1990. There I expanded on the topic, introducing additional evidence in subsequent e-books and articles. Those objecting to this belief falsely maintain: “There must always be bishops” and/or cite the necessary restoration of the Church before the end, but only a pope canonically elected can claim to be the successor of St. Peter. As discussed in our last blog, we have never been promised a restoration of the Church in Holy Scripture, and private revelations cannot be made the equivalent of Church doctrine; they have been known to be manipulated and falsified. All that follows once Antichrist appears is the battle of Armageddon, the destruction of Babylon, the Final Judgment and the consummation.

Some also have objected that because Christ will throw Antichrist and the False Prophet into the lake of fire alive, as recorded in Apoc. 19: 20, this means he has not yet come: “And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet, who wrought signs before him, wherewith he seduced them who received the character of the beast, and who adored his image. These two were cast alive into the pool of fire, burning with brimstone.” They hold that this verse proves that Antichrist will not appear until later, at the very end, following the restoration. I have countered that for the empire of Antichrist to exist today in Rome and worldwide, which it does, there first had to exist the Man of Sin, THE Antichrist, to establish this empire, a truth we are bound to believe. And this is what Rev. Kramer refers to above.

If one looks at all that Montini accomplished during his reign and before, no one can deny that he was the primary architect in the destruction of the Church. Nor can they possibly contest the fact that nearly half of faithful Catholics abandoned the Vatican 2 church once the Novus Ordo Missae was introduced. The cardinals and bishops betrayed the Church by invalidly electing Roncalli, and the once-faithful laity failed to reject the false Church — this was the Great Apostasy. The Continual Sacrifice had ceased, true Catholics knew this, and only Antichrist could have caused its cessation. To be the perfect mirror of Christ, Satan also had to have his vicar, and this could not be accomplished with a Protestant idea of a political figure persecuting. The Apocalypse must be taken spiritually, and Pope Paul IV himself told us who the abomination of desolation would be in his Cum ex Apostolatus Officio.

There is another explanation of Antichrist perishing alive in the pool of fire, however, that no one has considered. Because this event seems to immediately precede the Final Judgment, the meaning of “alive” could refer to the resurrected bodies of the beast and false prophet, (John 23 and Paul 6), being among the first to be so resurrected and judged, so that all the faithful may see them destroyed. Various commentators, Rev. Kramer among them, have opined that at the Last Judgment the faithful who have escaped the wiles of Antichrist will sit with Christ in judgment on those who destroyed His Church. This seems to be what Christ Himself suggests in Apoc. 3:21. Christ stands at the door and knocks (Apoc. 3:20); His arrival is imminent, Kramer warns. He invites us to the marriage feast. But those who refuse to apply the eye salve and repent, who fail to open the door, shall be cast out into the exterior darkness.

Why JBS failed to finger Commie “popes” in 1960s

by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 18, 2025 | New Blog

+St. Bernadette Soubirous+

Introduction

A few months ago, in the blog article HERE, I mentioned the exposure of upper-level John Birch Society (JBS) members and their associates as high-degree Freemasons. Recently, a reader brought my attention to Francis’ picture on the January cover of the JBS magazine New American asking the question: “Is the Pope a Communist?” by William F. Jasper. Jasper has been writing for in the affirmative. While this will be received by those in the Novus Ordo sect opposing Francis as a confirmation of their claims that he’s not a true pope, the very fact that the article is belatedly trumpeting this fact should sound alarm bells. Why? Because the Birch Society, established in 1960, certainly did not call out the Communist sympathizers Roncalli (John 23) and Montini (Paul 6) whose conduct in the 1950s (and later their concessions to Communist leaders and governments) made their intentions clear long ago. Even though the idea of a sede vacante had been raised, they never seriously addressed the issue at a time when it was most crucial that it be addressed. And as mentioned in the Francis article, they knew full well that the Church had been infiltrated.

This because those espousing sede vacante then were considered the lunatic fringe, and no one picks up paid members by appearing to consider such theories. Had Traditionalists themselves made the papacy their primary concern and cried foul, this might not have been the case. They had the tools at hand — papal pronouncements, Canon Law, Church history and much more — but they refused to study the matter and arrive at certitude regarding the validity of the 1958 election. The Siri fanatics clouded the matter by insisting their boy was the real pope — another failed attempt to “preserve” the papal line, as demonstrated HERE. Practicing heretical exclusivism, LibTrads championed the liturgy above papal supremacy, as if the liturgy could exist without valid clergy in communion with a certainly canonically elected pope to celebrate it. As we wrote in our last blog, they called themselves Traditionalists because they believe, as the Traditionalists condemned by the  Church believed, that: “Human reason is of itself radically unable to know with certainty any truth or, at least, the fundamental truths of the metaphysical, moral, and religious order” (Catholic Encyclopedia).

Catholics ignorant of their faith and desperate for clergy were oblivious. As stated last week, their Modernist-leaning clergy had already eroded the authority of the papacy to such an extent they scarcely paid attention to the discrepancy. They viewed Traditionalists as the new heads of their Church and the JBS offered them an alternative world view that seemed to agree with the Church’s stand against Communism. This view, however, was Americanist-leaning and skewed. Russia, Russia, Russia was the real terror — no mention of the erosion of morals, the destruction of the Church and her absence as a guiding force on the world stage, or the dangers of Freemasonry and the Illuminati. Instead Catholics were offered the conspiracy of the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the Federal Reserve and world bankers, etc. Any weaving in of the Freemasons and the Modernists, or the real cause of Russia’s errors — schism — was left out of the equation. But then what can one expect with Freemasons running the show?

And this diversion and reorientation successfully distracted Catholics exiting the Novus Ordo from focusing on the purely spiritual nature of the problems in the world. Because their “priests” actively supported and promoted the JBS, they followed right along. But over time, Birch influence seemed to wane with Traditionalists. The Internet was born and more interesting conservative talking heads popped up everywhere. Trad sects abounded in every shape and form imaginable. Now Birchers sense a new opportunity, perhaps — a new exodus from the Novus Ordo they can cash in on. Novus Ordo sect members are calling out Francis as pope, unlike those leaving in the 1960s-1970s, and the JBS is siding with them. So what has changed, and why are they now deciding, after all the damage is done, that the man they are still calling “Pope” is a Communist? Readers can probably guess the answer, but let’s hit the high points.

The Birch Society’s Masonic agenda

Jasper asks, toward the end of his article, “Were American intelligence agencies used to coerce and blackmail “regime change” in the Roman Catholic Church? Is this a key part of the Deep State’s plan to create a Deep Church?  It certainly looks that way, as we have reported here in the past.” Here Jasper is referring to his comments on Bp. Vigano’s letter to Pres. Trump in June of 2020: “There are faithful Shepherds who care for the flock of Christ, but there are also mercenary infidels who seek to scatter the flock and hand the sheep over to be devoured by ravenous wolves. Just as there is a deep state, there is also a deep church that betrays its duties and forswears its proper commitments before God.” Vigano, the new Lefebvre, was ordained in 1968. His consecrator, Bishop Carlo Allorio, is listed as a Council Father for all four sessions of the false Vatican 2 council. Needless to say, as a member of the Novus Ordo sect Allorio was incapacitated to validly ordain or consecrate anyone, per Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis and the 1917 Code of Canon Law, then in effect. So Vigano, an avid supporter of Benedict 16, is no cleric.

What is the purpose of the JBS in ignoring the blatant Communist affiliations of John 23 and Paul 6 and suddenly recognizing those of Francis now? Well it is quite simple, if one follows the stated intent of the Masonic game plan. The secret societies do not want to wipe out the idea of the papacy. Instead, as they state in the Alta Vendita: “What we must ask for, what we should look for and wait for, as the Jews wait for the Messiah, is a Pope according to our needs… To assure ourselves a Pope of the required dimensions, it is a question first of shaping for this Pope a generation worthy of the reign we are dreaming of. Leave old people and those of a mature age aside. Go to the youth and if it is possible, even to the children. You will contrive for yourselves at little cost a reputation as good Catholics and PURE PATRIOTS…”

That generation raised at least partially in the reign of Pope Pius XII, who fled the Novus Ordo sect in the 1960s and 1970s, will soon be gone. Their children and grandchildren, born following Vatican 2, the advent of the Internet and all modern perversions, will then be all that is left of those who at least identify as Catholic. Scarcely any of them have been imbued with any true Catholic sense, only that false sense conveyed to them by Traditionalists and the false church in Rome. They follow only what their misguided “clergy” tell them, those pretending to retain their titles of cardinals, bishops and priests. They are incapable of independent thought or investigation, unless it tends to the Modernist bent of their leaders. They have no idea of what really happened following the death of Pope Pius XII and seem to have never heard of the Catholic rule of law, the observance of the Sacred Canons contained in the 1917 Code. If they follow any law at all, it is only that of the desecrated 1983 code instituted by John Paul 2.

Most of them are good little patriots; some of them are Americanists. The Birchers saw to that, presenting as “pure patriots.” This is why many conservatives in the Novus Ordo sect and some LibTrads will welcome the endorsement of the John Birch Society, and because of their parents’ and grandparents’ involvement it will be familiar to them and will even pass for “tradition.” The new-churchers enjoy the freedoms granted them by the false Vatican 2 council and have no desire to relinquish them. It normalizes their relationship with their non-Catholic peers and the false charity it exudes makes socializing with them so much easier. They have been rigorously brainwashed into believing that the papacy will exist “unto the consummation,” when this was never taught by the Church. In fact the absence of the papacy and the Mass in the end times has been anticipated by the Fathers and revered Catholic theologians and commentators, who base their teaching on Divine revelation. But of course this does not concur with the Masonic ideal; Masons have no desire to destroy the idea of the papacy, only to pervert and manipulate it.

JBS identified as Masons decades ago

We have often quoted Mary Lejeune, a Catholic writer who passed away in the 1980s, on the JBS. There was some realization of the unCatholic position of the JBS even then, as Lejeune reports in her Sept.-Oct. 1976 newsletter: “The favorable response to my May-June issue re the connection between The John Birch Society and The Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement [founded by Fathers Saenz-Arriaga and Francis Fenton] was absolutely overwhelming!  Many, many of the letters and long-distance telephone calls came from Catholic ex-Birchers (I had no idea that there were so many on my mailing list) who related to me the many sad experiences that they had suffered through — once they found out the truth about the JBS and decided to expose said organization. Quite a few had given up in frustration after they found that their sincere efforts to help out were thwarted by certain “cliques” within the Society.  One lady asked me if I was aware of the “Zionist infiltration” within the JBS.  I am completely aware of this situation (readers have sent me much documentation to this effect) — a situation which causes me great concern since the safety of Catholics, who refuse to leave the Society, is at stake!”

“I am concerned about them because the ORCM organization is run (with few exceptions) by priests and laity who are what can only be referred to as “super-Birchers.”  These super-Birchers are thwarting the efforts of people, such as myself, to expose the Masonic and Zionist influence within the JBS (and other “anti-communist outfits like them) in order to protect the Catholic members of the “remnant” who sincerely believe that they cannot live without the Mass and who will go anywhere to attend it… Mr. Welch believes in evolution (some Christian!) As anyone turning to page 140 of his “Blue Book” can clearly see. On page 155 of the same book we find that the Society is both a religion (?) and a revolution. I can believe this since the Birchers tried to “pump” me (however subtly) regarding the so-called “changes in the Catholic Church” since Vatican II.

“As I said previously, I have known about the Masonic nature of the JBS for a long time, but within the last six months or so I have learned a lot more about the deception and hypocrisy which is going on within said Society… Some will claim that these are days of emergency (against a Communist takeover which has already occurred), and that we should ignore our different religious beliefs and fight the battle together.  The Novus Ordo “hierarchy” keeps telling the new “People of God” the same thing.  Anyone who suggests such a thing to Catholics is putting said Catholics in a position wherein they can quickly become weakened in their faith.  Once the faith is weakened, there is a great danger of losing it entirely… Today, dear readers, we are in a spiritual battle, a death-struggle between the real Catholic Church and Satan himself and there isn’t a political organization in existence today which can save the world — especially this country.

“The morals in this country today are so decadent that only the great chastisement from the hand of God can purify it.  And let the Birchers not tell me that they write against immorality — indeed they do! But let them clean up their own “closets” in the “upper echelons” before they start preaching to others… The JBS gives hope to the people when there is no hope. The JBS, like some other “anti-communist” preachers around today, have to give people hope, otherwise they would go out of business, and the JBS is a very commercial organization! …America is doomed — not because good people didn’t fight to save her.  America is doomed because the Catholic hierarchy (made up of enemies and cowards) robbed the American people (both Catholics and Protestants) of a strong, spiritual leadership.” (End of Lejeune quotes.)

So true Catholics were warned, and some listened even then. But their children and grandchildren certainly have not been warned and are more vulnerable today by far than their parents ever were.

A new “conservatism” is the real goal

Once everything is put into perspective, the JBS’s motives become clear. They deliberately ignored the ”soft” takeover of the papal See in Rome because John 23 and Paul 6 were “normalizing” church relations with Freemasons. Later John Paul 2 walked some of the more egregious abuses of his predecessors back, just enough that it appeared he was anti-Communist, given his Polish origins and work with the underground during World War II. Then Benedict 16 continued this course, appearing even more “traditional,” and the Latin Mass groupies were encouraged. So this is where they picked up, citing their previous articles on Vigano’s “Deep Church.” It doesn’t matter that a much more comprehensive volume (John Courtenay Murray, Time/Life and the American Proposition, David Wemhoff, 2015), superior documentation-wise by far to Taylor Marshall’s Novus Ordo work, proves that the election of Roncalli was invalid, owing to lay interference (and the 1917 Code of Canon Law).

Like the LibTrad pseudo-clerics themselves, the JBS wishes to keep the idea of a papal “line” alive at all costs. Sacrificing dogma on the altars of their greed and lust for power, they are happy to violate the laws and teachings of the Church if it advances their own agenda. Nor is there any regard for Catholic teaching, for the Vatican 2  documents on ecumenism only echo the JBS’ own credo — liberty, equality and fraternity.  Proof of this can be found on page 11 of The Neutralizers, written by JBS founder Robert Welch: “All we are interested in here is opposing the advance of Communism so that Jews and Christians alike, and Mohammedans and Buddhists, can again have a decent world to live in.”  Lejeune nailed it when she wrote that the JBS teaches: “…we should ignore our different religious beliefs and fight the battle together.”  This fits right in with the American Proposition — that Catholics have no right to claim the Catholic Church is the one true Church of Christ or evangelize to this effect.

Toward the end of his article, Jasper writes: “The papal throne does seem to be occupied by an individual who fits the description of an apostate socialist/communist. How has this come about? The answer to that burning question would require much more space than is available here. However, it is important to note that the subversion we are now witnessing in the Bergoglian papacy was made possible by more than a century of patient infiltration.” It is how the results of this infiltration are interpreted and who is interpreting them that matters, and the JBS surely knows this. It is why they have waited all this time to address this matter head on, when it is too in-your-face to ignore. They quote Pope Pius XI’s Divini Redemptoris, but they do not cite Pope Pius XII’s 1948 and 1949 condemnations of Communism, which declare those either sympathizing with it or openly advancing it, particularly public officials, as apostates. It is the pope’s judgment, not theirs, that must be the determining factor here.

Francis and all his predecessors back to John 23rd were either Communist sympathizers or active supporters of Communism and therefore are considered apostates. As non-Catholics, none could validly be elected pope, given their affiliations. And yet the JBS fails to acknowledge this, pretending that 100 years (and more) of active infiltration would not contaminate and place into question the entire clerical pool. No, they leave it in the hands of those accepting these men as valid popes, with the exception of Francis. And this because the endgame rules call for a usurper pope who appears to be valid and conservative (by today’s standards only), working with world governments to realize the Masonic dream of a one-world religion. Once the Catholic Church was stripped of every vestige of possible efficacy and sacramental validity, there was no objection to this proposition. In fact it could eventually work hand in hand with a plan that would appear to endorse conservatism and reject the New World Order, purging the existing church in Rome and returning to the “old Church,” under the auspices of a charismatic leader restoring the world to a more conservative state.

This would satisfy both the “Catholic” expectations of restoration and a period of peace, foretold in Catholic prophecy and at Fatima, as well as usher in peace in Israel and the advent of the Jewish Messiah. A new “pope” could even rule from Jerusalem. And this would satisfy the goals of both the secret societies and their JBS satellites.

The JBS and British Israel

The Protestant writer Helen M. Peters states that “[Robert Welch’s] definition of Christianity is British Israel and is not based on the Deity of Jesus Christ at all…” The British-Israel hypothesis is that “Anglo-Saxons are the lineal descendants of the ten tribes of Israel and inherit the wonderful promises made to them. These promises the Anglo-Saxons possess nationally” (Protestant theologian William Hoste). “It thus provides for the world another gospel, which captivates and hypnotizes them with the thought of capturing great earthly blessings for themselves and the British Empire, apart from repentance and faith in Christ, as though He had never died and risen to procure us blessings…” British Israel can be found on the second level of the Masonic pyramid appearing in the original edition of Lady Queenborough’s work, Occult Theocrasy. Concerning the end times, British Israel advocates believe that:

• Before the Second Coming, the Jerusalem temple will be rebuilt.
• The Jerusalem temple, not the Church, is where Antichrist will show himself as God.
• Following the Second Coming, this same temple will exist in Jerusalem, or possibly a new or reconsecrated one.
• During an earthly millennium, animal sacrifices offered at this temple will commemorate Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.

As I have explained before, it is primarily the British Israel adherents, among them Traditionalists, who expect a millennium and the restoration of Christ’s Church on earth. Traditionalists believe they will be the beneficiaries of this restoration and Fundamentalists believe it will be a Jewish operation that will somehow include Christians, but they are not in agreement on the extent or timing of this involvement. Millenarianism, even in its mildest, spiritual sense, has been condemned by the Holy Office and is entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis (ASS 36, 1944, 212). The condemnation reads: “The Holy Office issued a decree on July 11, 1941 (in the session held on July 9) which reached the same conclusion in a letter sent to Archbishop Jose M. Caro-Rodriguez in Santiago, Chile: “It is not possible to safely teach systematic millenarianism even if moderated — namely that it is Catholic revelation that Christ, at the resurrection of the just, will return to reign bodily on this earth.”

In an Internet article, B. E. Strauss, identifying as a Catholic layman, observes that: “The consummation of the ages denotes the last of all ages of the world, the age of the Church. This last age consummates the ages that came before, and it is itself consummated by the consummatio saeculi, by the consummation of the (last) age” or actual consummation by fire/end of the world. Strauss points out that the most common interpretation is consummation of the world, not consummation of the ages or centuries, as it should be. He notes that the Church has not said much on this discrepancy.  But as noted in previous blogs, there are other indications from magisterial documents that the hierarchical Church is not guaranteed to last “unto the consummation” of the world by fire as previously thought. In order to avoid even mitigated Millenarianism, it is important to not associate the “end of the age or centuries” translation with the meaning that such an age will be succeeded by a 1,000-year period of peace.

Strauss continues: “…The Vatican Council solemnly teaches that the Lord promised shepherds and teachers until the consummation of the age – usque ad consummatio saeculi — which, according to Catholic commentary, BEGINS WITH THE REVELATION OF ANTICHRIST, who is announced to reign before the return of the Lord. Hence, apostolic succession seems to have come to an end already, and we deal with shepherds of vengeance.” The thousand-year reign probably began after the papacy was firmly established in Rome once the major persecutions of Christians subsided. In 445, Emperor Valentinian pronounced that the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope to be called Vicar of Christ (492-496). A little over 1,000 years later, Luther tacked his heresies to the door of Wittenberg Cathedral, followed by Henry VIII’s defection around 1532. Freemasonry was established in England 200 years after Luther’s revolt but existed secretly from the late 1400s on.

Conclusion

A new world order might mean something different than people are expecting. It could mean that a majority of countries together decide to roll back the clock so to speak, peacefully co-exist, appear to return to a more spiritual existence and more or less live by democratic principles — for a time. But we must remember that “The day of the Lord shall so come, as a thief in the night. For when they shall say, peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come upon them, as the pains upon her that is with child, and they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. For all of you are the children of light, and children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore, let us not sleep, as others do; but let us watch, and be sober” (1Thess. 5: 1-6). Any reconstruction of the Church or pretended peace — all will be an illusion. For there is no reconstructing the Church once she has lost Her apostolicity. And there can be no peace without Christ’s true vicar. As Msgr. Van Noort wrote in his Christ’s Church, 1959:

“Just for the sake of argument — even though it cannot actually happen — let us conjure up some church which would bear a merely specific likeness to Christ’s Church; a church which would be like it in all respects except numerical identity. Imagine, now, that the Church planted by the apostles has perished utterly. Imagine whether you make it the year 600, 1500, or 3000-that all its members have deserted. Imagine, furthermore, that out of this totally crumpled society a fresh and vigorous society springs up and then, after a time, is remodeled perfectly to meet the blueprints of the ancient but now perished apostolic structure. Such a process would never yield a church that was genuinely apostolic, that is, numerically one and the same society which actually existed under the apostles’ personal rule. There would be a brand-new society, studiously copied from a model long since extinct. The new church might be a decent imitation. IT MIGHT BE A CARICATURE. ONE THING IT DEFINITELY WOULD NOT BE IS APOSTOLIC.”

Strauss, quoted above, obviously believes Antichrist has already arrived for he says the end of the Church’s age on earth, “BEGINS WITH THE REVELATION OF ANTICHRIST, who is announced to reign before the return of the Lord. Hence, apostolic succession seems to have come to an end already, and we deal with shepherds of vengeance.” That Antichrist will be an identifiable individual is taught by the Church as certain. That he will be accompanied by those who will support and continue his persecution is confirmed by St. John, who teaches there will be “many” antichrists. Only Antichrist could cause the cessation of the Continual Sacrifice, and if this did not indeed happen in 1969, how can anyone explain why nearly all true Catholics who exited the Novus Ordo sect insisted on a return to the Latin Mass?

What Birchers and others advocating for a papal election are doing is supporting the creation of a straw man.  A “straw man” is a logical fallacy opposed to the Scholastic method of St. Thomas that occurs when a person rebuts an argument by misconstruing it. The concept itself is taken from the appearance of a scarecrow, which some at first mistake for a real man but is not a real man — it is only a contrived imitation of one. Similarly, in the strawman fallacy, those depicting Francis as a Communist are ignoring the real facts in the case, that John 23 was a Communist, his election was invalid, and Francis is one of a long line of antipopes under Canon Law. An example of a straw man argument is: “I prefer wine to whiskey,” and the straw man promoter falsely concludes: “Then you must hate whiskey.” Likewise the LibTrads, who, when one says the age of the Church and with it, apostolic succession, ended with the invalid election of Roncalli, reply, “Then you are denying indefectibility, because the Church, just as Christ constituted it, will last ‘until the consummation.’”

But as Strauss and others point out, this refers to the consummation of the ages, as stated in the 1869 Vatican Council, not the final conflagration, and the Church did indeed last unspotted until Pius XII’s death. It is quite telling that LibTrads fail to be able to explain how their argument could possibly hold up, given that Christ constituted the Church with St. Peter as its head, and their pseudo-clergy have operated as the true Church without that head since Pope Pius XII’s death. A new conservative “pope,” even if he cleaned house from top to bottom, would be yet another antipope/antichrist, meant to deepen the deception and create yet more confusion.  Francis may be breathing his last as we write this: Beware what comes after him. No matter how amazing his successor may appear to be in rivaling Pres. Trump’s swamp clean-up, regardless of whether he is hailed as Trump’s right-hand man on a spiritual level, the con is on. The next straw man can never resurrect the one, true Church, only Her caricature — the lying wonders foretold by St. Paul.

LibTrad pseudo-clergy and their Communist ties

by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 10, 2025 | New Blog

+St. Scholastica+

Introduction

For over 175 years, the Catholic Church has condemned the system of atheistic Communism. The first official warning against this system was issued November 9, 1846, by Pope Pius IX in his encyclical Qui pluribus. But over 100 years before that encyclical appeared, Pope Clement XII condemned anyone joining or associating with Freemasons or any like societies. The two would not appear to be related, but their relationship has become quite clear with the issuance of the Alta Vendita and the establishment of the Soviet Republic. Both share the same goals and both work for the same master. So exactly how does Communism relate to Freemasonry? The Masonic pyramid found in Lady Queenborough’s Occult Theocrasy ranks Communism at the upper level of the Masonic ”degrees.” And we read in the conclusion to her book just how Freemasonry and Communism intersect:

1 — Owing to their union, all secret societies, whether political, philanthropic or occult in appearance, serve a political purpose unknown to the majority of their members.

2 — The power wielded by such societies is real and its character is international.

3 — Regardless of their exoteric objects, the esoteric aims of most societies are all directed towards the same end — namely: the concentration of political, economic and intellectual power into the hands of a small group of individuals, each of whom controls a branch of the international life, material and spiritual, of the world today.

The main branches thus controlled are:

 — The international banking groups and their subsidiaries.

 — International, industrial and commercial control groups with their interlocking directorates.

 — Education, art, literature, science, and religion as vehicles of intellectual and moral perversion.

4 — The groups already organized throughout different countries for the study of international affairs: political, financial and economic.

5 — The international press, the medium used to mold public opinion.

6 — The political party organizations of each nation, whether conservative, liberal, radical, socialist etc. existing in every country with parliamentary administration.

7 — Internationally organized corruption, the white-slave traffic, vice and drug-rings, etc.

The Communist International and Soviet Russia stand today as monuments to the Masonic ideal of Albert Pike, symbolized by the three:

Destruction — Its organization of the Terror.

Materialism — Its assault on Religion.

Imposition — Its Communist state.

“By every means, whatever they may be, one must impose first on the family, and then on the nation in order to achieve the aim of imposing on humanity.”

1. Destruction of supernaturalism, there where the conscience has not been reached by Masonic materialism.

2. The destruction of authority, there where education has not been reached by Masonic materialism.

3. The destruction of anti-Masonry, there where the state has not been reached by Masonic materialism. (End of Queenborough quote)

Msgr. George E. Dillon, D.D, in his Freemasonry Unmasked: The Secret Power Behind Communism, confirms the above, as does Rev. Denis Fahey, Jose Maria Cardinal Caro of Chile, Vicomte Leon de Poncins and many other Catholic writers. Freemasonry is the vehicle used to carry the passengers to their destination; it travels along a road that steadily inclines  (gradualism). The signposts along that road are Liberalism, Modernism, Americanism and Socialism. Communism is the ultimate destination. All that remains once Communism is realized is Grand Orient Freemasonry, focused on the perversion of morals, then the council of 33 and the Illuminati council of 13. with its the worldwide rule of the Antichrist at the pyramid’s pinnacle. World War I and World War II paved the way to Communism. Communism then not only set the stage for the final destruction of the Church; it engineered it in such a way that it also provided the template from which the survivors of that destruction, and finally those who exited Vatican 2, would be subverted and controlled. What follows below will explain this phenomena.

LibTrad lies

In her 2023 work, When the Sickle Swings, Novus Ordo author Kristen Van Uden describes the sufferings of those valiantly preserving their faith behind the Iron Curtain. In the process, she also affords us an amazing look at the factors that played into the founding of “Traditional Catholicism” — the LibTrad scam. Before we begin, let us first repeat how misleading the title that this movement chose for itself truly is. First of all, it corresponds quite well with the heresy of Traditionalism, condemned by Pope Pius IX. This heresy, related to Fideism, pretends that Catholics are imbued with a sense of divine revelation that will guide them in discerning truths of faith; that they need not study these truths to arrive at certitude concerning what is and is not revealed. And that is exactly how many of those in the LibTrad sect think and believe.

Then there is the injury done to the Church’s true definition of Tradition as defined by Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey in his Dogmatic Theology, used to instruct seminarians for many decades. Tanquerey writes: “In a strict sense, Tradition is a revealed doctrine pertaining to faith or morals which is not referred to in the Sacred Scriptures but which through legitimate pastors of the Church has been infallibly transmitted from age to age. The object of Tradition is solely the teaching which has been made known supernaturally by God to the human race. The means or organ of Tradition is the infallible teaching authority of the legitimate pastors of the Church” (Vol. I, p. 170). So in pretending to champion Tradition, LibTrad pseudo-clergy imply they are legitimate pastors continuing to represent Christ’s Church on earth, a patent lie. (More on this below.)

Communist goals and a history of Traditionalists

Van Uden prefaces her work with the following goals of a Communist regime:

• Outlaw the public worship of the Church

• Round up the clergy and religious

• Seize and control Church property

• Control the laity

• Infiltrate the clergy and the faithful

If this doesn’t ring a bell with readers, it should. When I asked my mother why we didn’t go to Mass anymore, she told me it was because the Communists had taken over the Church. She was spot on. We can say it was the Modernists or the Freemasons or whatever other group we wish to assign it to. But  in the middle of the Cold War, when Communist “awareness” was at its highest, almost no one shouted that the Catholic Church had been seized by the Communists, using classic tactics that had been employed for nearly 50 years. The Latin Mass was abolished. Clergy and religious who opposed the changes either left their positions, retired or were reassigned. Those protesting the changes were shut out of their own churches. The laity were counseled to accept the changes as a matter of obedience and those who dared asked questions were shunned, subjected to harsh criticism or penalized in other ways.

The infiltration of the clergy and educated laity began in the 1800s, and as seen at the election of John 23 and the Vatican Council, by then all but a very few Cardinals and bishops were dedicated Modernists or exhibited Modernist leanings.

But it didn’t stop there. Control of the laity extended to those among the clergy organizing the resistance; we will call them the clean-up crew. The resistance was well anticipated and plans were made accordingly, using the lessons learned from schismatic and heretical sects and from Communist countries. The “soft” approach was taken, meaning no deaths, no serious physical injuries — at least none anyone could prove. But the actual progression of the Traditionalist movement was very predictable. By avoiding any determination of whether the usurpers in Rome were true popes, Traditionalism was able to focus solely on replacing the Church and convincing followers that all that really mattered was Mass and Sacraments. They also were able to subtly undermine the papacy based on the “bad behavior” of the anti-popes.

All that changed with the advent of Sedevacantism, first promoted by Rev. Joaquin Saenz-Arriaga of Mexico, a covert Freemason who helped found the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM) in America. When then Novus Ordo affiliated Peter Martin Ngo-dinh-Thuc endorsed Sedevacantism and consecrated Guerard des Lauriers and the Thuc bishops, two of whom were Mexicans affiliated with Saenz, the spits began in earnest with des Lauriers’ development of the material-formal hypothesis. Lefebvre’s insistence on upholding the John 23 missal, also the discovery of the fact he had been both ordained and consecrated by a Freemason, peeled members from the Society of Pope St. Pius X. The “Bp.” Shuckhardt scandals in Washington state also resulted in further factionalization.

Independent groups abounded and doctrinal integrity was non-existent. Conditional consecrations and ordinations also multiplied, as rivalry and distrust increased among the various sets. There was no center of organization, no standard of orthodoxy. At least the underground Church still recognized the occupant of Rome as pope, even after Pius XII’s death, though they had little or no access to him. Papal allegiance among LibTrads amounted to lip service only, with many even openly criticizing Pope Pius XII. In the LibTrad movement, personality cults abounded and every man became his own mini-pope. Attempts at papal election by several groups in the 1990s to remedy the situation only further fragmented Traditionalists.

Clergy in the underground Church

Those suffering the loss of their clergy in Communist countries faced a different set of circumstances than we face today. They were persecuted physically and psychologically; some were thrown into prison. Many among the clergy were herded into work camps or imprisoned and an untold number of both clergy and laity were martyrs for the faith. Even so, they managed to form Catholic Action groups to promote the faith and advocate for a return of their right to publicly practice the faith. They had intermittent access to valid Sacraments and the Mass, at least until Roncalli’s election in 1958, and possibly longer, since their clergy did not have regular communications with the Vatican and may have been ignorant of the true conditions in the Church. They seemed to have held to pre-Vatican 2 standards, at least until the 1980s. Their nemesis was the ”national churches “ set up by the Communists, as was done in France. This has never been the case with us, nor have we ever been actively persecuted for the faith.

When the Communists set up these national churches in various countries, “Good Catholics often knew to avoid these collaborator priests as they had avoided the “juring” priests of the French Revolution’s Reign of Terror,” Van Uden writes. Often these “juring” priests were hard to identify, for “sometimes priests would collaborate with the government on certain occasions or to certain degrees but not entirely. They would share different opinions with different people. Who could be trusted, how much vetting could the laity realistically be expected to do before attending mass, receiving the sacraments. Being flooded with these graces — was that not the priority?” And of course we know now that Pope Pius VI invalidated the actions of these priests constitutional priests in France in almost identical circumstances. And Pope Pius XII excommunicated as a vitandus one Jan Deschet in Czechoslovakia, who the Communists appointed as a diocesan administrator in one region following the death of the bishop there. (Canon Law Digest, Can. Vol. III).

Like us today, Van Uden reports that when the Mass was unavailable, they recited their Mass prayers and undoubtedly offered a perfect Act of Contrition and Spiritual Communion. And her book illustrates how the victims of Communism wrestled with identifying who their legitimate pastors truly were. “Czechoslovak Catholics faced almost insurmountable struggles in locating the sacraments. Not only did they have to avoid the national priests but they had to be wary in discerning and approaching men who claimed to be clandestine clergy as well. After the Pius XII mandates, secret consecrations abounded. Due to the secretive nature of the consecrations, the identities, episcopal lineage and supporting documentation of the secret clergy were often obscured if available at all. This secretive, chaotic atmosphere presented unique challenges in vetting candidates ensuring doctrinal orthodoxy and personal virtue and keeping track of sacramental lineages.

“Ordinations occurred discreetly, often in plain clothes, in hotel rooms, parks or private residences. As a security measure witnesses were rarely present. Historian Felix Corley has written that the candidates for the priesthood or the episcopate would sometimes not even be informed of the identity of their ordaining bishop, as an added layer of protection should one of them be arrested. In reality, the chaos that ensued in the underground church exemplifies the Scripture ‘Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered’ (Zach. 13:7). In the absence of direct lines of communication with the Vatican and under the constant pressure of state surveillance, the underground church was by its very nature not a monolithic, organized force. Within the circles that comprised the clandestine church, several competing factions arose, of varying degrees of reliability and certainty in sacramental validity.”

Desperation for clergy and its dangers

She mentions the renegade Czech bishop Felix Maria Davidek, secretly consecrated a bishop in 1967 by an underground bishop (who, under VAS, was therefore doubtfully valid at best). Davidek created his own faction and established what Udon identifies as “a personality cult.” He then proceeded to consecrate women, “[using] the emergency as an excuse to undertake increasingly unorthodox measures. He cut off ties with underground church members who did not agree with his maverick approach and doctrinally liberal views. He essentially created his own faith, his own church, in which priesthood took on a novel definition.” Davidek ordained one Oliver Oravec in February 1968, who later emigrated to the U.S. to serve as a “Traditional” priest. “Bp.” Robert McKenna “consecrated” Oravec on Oct. 21, 1988. According to the National Catholic Reporter, Davidek consecrated some 17 bishops without Vatican approval (and a total of 68 priests altogether). “Serious doubts exist about the validity of some ordinations, particularly those performed by Davidek,” the article stated. “Davidek suffered from schizophrenia… and doubted the validity” of several of his ordinations.”

What is most interesting about all of this is what Van Uden writes next: “The convoluted story of the factional underground church shows the dangers endemic to operating outside of ordinary jurisdiction… This chaos caused many laymen to doubt the VALIDITY of their sacraments. This confusion continued into the 21st century as the church in the former Czechoslovakia reorganized itself… Approximately 250 priests had been secretly ordained from 1949 to 1989… In the year 2000, John Paul 2 required the majority of these priests to undergo conditional ordinations.” Van Uden remarks that those suffering behind the Iron Curtain had already renounced their money, their status and even given their lives for the faith. They had been discerning enough to see through the lies of the national church. But what brought them down in the case of Davidek and others was “their desperation for clergy” to provide Mass and Sacraments, and this she calls a temptation of Satan. Those enemy elements operating following the death of Pope Pius XII, then, knew just what to do. Catholics may have been discerning enough to exit the Novus Ordo church, but they would not forego their Mass and Sacraments.

Sacramental validity and supremacy of bishops

It was perhaps in the underground church that the faithful first became accustomed to the idea that the bishops and priests were the ones who assured the survival of the juridic Church, not the papacy. Van Uden writes: “The clergy are the lifeblood of the Church: their Apostolic succession ensures they are acting in persona Christi in providing sacraments, leading and administering to the faithful. No clergy, no mass, no Real Presence, no absolution, no sacrament of any kind, no visible Church. The faith lives on in extraordinary circumstances even when the faithful are deprived of the sacraments but governments certainly try to smother it.” And yet the necessary sacraments remain, and the visible Church, the Mystical Body with Christ as its Head, with visible members adhering to the dogmas of the Church, also remain. Even if all the bishops apostatized, which they have, if a true pope existed, he alone (with any remaining faithful) would constitute the visible Church as Mystici Corporis Christi infallibly teaches.

Why would many of the laity have doubted the validity of the sacraments from underground priests? Why not just their “liceity”? Because those members of the Church persecuted, unlike the LibTrad sects, fully realized that they lived among the enemy, who had infiltrated the ranks even of the underground clergy. They doubted them and avoided them because they could not verify the lineage of their consecrators with any degree of certainty. Liciety never entered into the picture. Van Uden talks about those who would go “church hopping,” when in doubt of certain questionable priests or those affiliated with the national church. They did this also because they could not even trust their fellow Catholics, some of whom were merely posing as Catholics to inform on them or effectively scatter and neutralize their Catholic Action cells and prayer groups. Van Uden quotes one Cuban refugee who explained that “Due to [an] atmosphere of distrust and uncertainty, many Cubans who felt called to resistance preferred to take renegade individual action rather than become entangled with [a] group… It may not have been as effective a strategy as organized resistance but it was safer… This strategy is still employed today as the culture of informing and infiltration still reigns supreme in Cuba.”

Apostolicity and its three elements

So if we are not experiencing Communism today in our own ranks, why does so much of this sound so familiar?! The bishops in the underground church basically ruled in the stead of the pope because communication with Rome was difficult and at times impossible. The faithful in the underground church were presumably unaware of the destruction caused by Vatican 2 and the abolition of Pope St. Pius V’s Latin Mass, at least for a time. They simply followed their bishops, those they felt they could trust. They may have suspected something was brewing but their investigation into the situation, if possible at all, was greatly hampered. Not so with those in free countries. They fell into the same trap as their underground church fellows  — their desperation for the clergy and the Mass and Sacraments was their downfall.

Catholics did not realize, or perhaps had never known, that there are three elements, (not just one), to apostolicity. “According to Catholic teaching, Christ’s Church essentially and necessarily enjoys a triple sort of apostolicity: apostolicity of doctrine, government, and membership. 1) Apostolicity of doctrine means the Church always retains and teaches the very same doctrine which it received from the apostles. Doctrine, as the term is used at this point, includes also the sacraments. It was the apostles and no one but the apostles that Christ commissioned to teach all nations. 2) Apostolicity of government or mission or authority means the Church is always ruled by pastors who form one, same juridical person with the apostles. In other words, it is always ruled by pastors who are the Apostles’ legitimate successors… 3) Apostolicity of membership means that the Church, in any given age, is and remains numerically the same society as that planted by the Apostles. The College of Bishops who rule it always forms one and the same juridical person with the Apostolic College. Here it is asserted that the entire membership of the Church is likewise apostolic. Apostolicity of membership follows as an inescapable consequence of apostolicity of government” (Msgr. Van Noort, Christ’s Church, 1959, pgs. 151-155). And that Apostolic College must always include the pope.

And As Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey teaches, in his Dogmatic Theology, (Vol. I, 1959), used as a textbook in seminaries worldwide, “In order that an adult be in the full membership of the Church, he must be subject exteriorly to the rule of legitimate pastors and in a particular way to the rule of the Roman Pontiff, who has been constituted the head of the body of the Church.” We read here legitimate pastors, just as stated in the Council  of Trent’s anathema against those who “come from some other source,” (DZ 968). And certitude must be had concerning this legitimacy, just as Van Uden mentioned was lacking in the evaluation of the underground clergy. If one is not under the rule of legitimate pastors or the Roman Pontiff, one cannot be a full member of the Church. So recusants, in this sense validity doesn’t matter: you are outside the Church for recognizing these men as valid because when they are not in communion with the Roman Pontiff.

It was the divorce of doctrine and church membership from this mark of the Church that put LibTrad clergy firmly in the driver’s seat. The assault on religion, the destruction of authority, which includes the “re-education” of the faithful through the molding of Catholic public opinion —funded by the CIA with the help of Felix Morlion — was hugely successful. The de-emphasis  (minimization) of doctrine in favor of the liturgy and exterior religion had been carried out for years with the help of Modernist bishops who had already infiltrated the Church (see The Phantom Church in Rome). These were all lessons learned from the underground churches in Communist countries, who split into factions, Van Uden reports, just as the LibTrad sects themselves. It also was modeled on the Masonic-Gnostic sects proliferating for the past two centuries, as explained HERE.

So for those falsely claiming that “There will always be bishops,” the verdict is in: Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS) and Canon Law infallibly precludes this. But Van Uden’s work and that of others writing on the same topic show that in addition to VAS, history demonstrates that the episcopal lines were deliberately corrupted by the Communists long ago and their validity cannot be verified with any certainty. Moreover, the Novus Ordo church claimed virtually all the underground priests and bishops for their own, following the “fall” of Communism, according to Van Uden and news reports from the 1990s.

Conclusion

So why is it important to know that Communist tactics destroyed the Church? Because it signaled the final realization of all Freemasonry’s goals and allowed them to run the Church themselves from the apex of the pyramid. This is the best argument for the fact that Antichrist long ago arrived. The minute Roncalli took office he began pandering to Freemasons and Communists, continuing the course he set as a Cardinal. This is documented by Vicomte Leon de Poncins in his Freemasonry and the Vatican, (1968). It fulfills the necessary destruction of “anti-Freemasonry,” a goal of the secret societies that could only be accomplished once the destruction of religious and monarchical authority was accomplished.  By focusing on Communism and not its driving force, by promoting world peace  without identifying the spiritual source of world unrest — the denial of the Incarnation — a false scenario was created that even those considering themselves devout Catholics bought into.

But it was not primarily the bishops, as Van Uden assumes, that Communists targeted — it was the papacy. Masonic documents, especially the Alta Vendita, also Modernist literature, in a more subtle way, make it clear that their ultimate goal was to first destroy or manipulate the papacy, then create their own version/imitation of the Catholic Church minus its doctrinal structure. Van Uden credits creation of a church of their own making as the goal of all Communists. And this counterfeit Church would then pass as Catholic while being run from the top as a Communist front operation, on different levels — the Novus Ordo and the LibTrad movement among them.

The Church living in the virtual catacombs — those praying at home who follow all that the popes, the Holy Office, the Councils and Canon Law teach — are still subject to the attacks of the infiltrators, who pretend to be faithful to the continual magisterium for a time, stir up hatred and discontent, then depart. But we know that even though living as solitaires is a lonely existence, it is the safest way to practice the faith, just as Cuban Catholics living under Castro’s rule and others behind the Iron Curtain discovered. Japanese Catholics survived without clergy for over 200 years, under severe persecution. So surely God is not asking us to do the impossible, as some pretend, since we are not under physical persecution. Speaking on the great need for individuals strong in their faith who can operate independently, — and on the dangers of Communism, which he witnessed firsthand — Fr. Francois Dufay wrote in the 1940s:

“The Church of the Catacombs…[will] need profound dogmatic and spiritual formation, especially on the theology of the Church, the meaning and value of persecution and suffering, and should be steeped in the remembrance of the great saints and martyrs of the past. Thus armed, the Christian faith will use its bad times for growth in charity… Actually it’s solitaries who must be found and trained, in other words, Christians capable of living their faith all alone, amid the strongest pressures, the most painful happenings and the most forbidding of deserts.” And this is the hard lesson those persecuted in Communist countries learned. It is one we ourselves must take to heart, and despite the vicious attacks from without, we must remember this quote from St. John Chrysostom: “He who can never love Christ enough, will never give up fighting against those who hate Him.”

1955 Fr. Cronin work upholds VAS on Trad invalidity

by T. Stanfill Benns | Feb 2, 2025 | New Blog

†Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary†

Light a candle, purge the darkness from your souls

Prayer Society Intention for February, month of the Holy Family and the Blessed Trinity

“O Most Holy Trinity , who art dwelling by Thy grace within my soul, make me love Thee more and more.” (Raccolta)

(Please pray for a reader’s mother’s swift recovery from her stroke and for the repose of the soul of Timothy Hunt, requiescat in pace.)

Introduction

A post last week on the Novus Ordo Watch site (definitely not recommended, but which sometimes publishes accurate articles on matters of faith), has provided a thought-provoking sequel of sorts to the article on the rehash of Robert Robbins’ objections posted here last week. Since it will be quoted and discussed at length below, the article can be viewed HERE. I do, however, possess an original edition of Rev. John F. Cronin’s work, the author cited in the article, and have verified all the quotes from his work. Not that there was any question that the quotes were accurate, but firsthand quotes are always preferable to those relied upon secondhand.

The article opens with comments on the confusion regarding the extent of the binding nature of papal documents, both before and after Vatican 2, a confusion that could easily have been dispelled by drawing a firm dividing line at the moment of Pope Pius XII’s death Oct. 9, 1958. When such chaos as occurred at Vatican 2 exists, the safer course demands that all which is doubtful be rejected, and only that which is certainly orthodox be trusted. There were means to determine this and these means were available via seminary libraries, local libraries by inter-library loan, from Catholic booksellers and later the Internet. I know this because I began purchasing books from seminary libraries and these other venues in the early 1980s. At that time there was no Internet, so everything was done the hard way. I assumed others were doing the same, and a select few were so doing; but not for the same reasons.

The Novus Ordo Watch article seemingly states that it was not generally understood, following Vatican 2, that irrevocable assent was required not only to infallible papal documents but also to those things taught in the ordinary magisterium. As explained in an article posted several years ago HERE, the confusion was generated by those opposing Henry Cardinal Manning and strict interpretation of the Vatican Council decrees. Pope Pius XII ended this confusion with Humani generis by teaching that: 1) What is taught in official papal documents is not binding, para. 20; 2) Ex cathedra pronouncements are rare, para. 21, 3) Restrictions can be placed by theologians on what constitutes an ex cathedra pronouncement, and theologians may dictate a formula for the actual wording of the pronouncement, para. 21.

For over three decades, we have quoted Bellarmine, Manning, Berry, Tanquerey, Billot, Garrigou-Lagrange, Fenton, Connell, Herve, Van Noort and others who in many cases taught what was contained in Humani generis long before it was written. Cronin now joins this list of theologians. But when papal documents written by Pope Pius XII and his predecessors were readily available in the 1960s and 1970s, as were the explanations by these theologians, why was no one citing their binding nature then? Why were the revered “Traditionalists,” such as Saenz-Arriaga, Lefebvre, Oswald Baker, Vezelis, Kelly, et al insisting that these teachings were not strictly binding, that Canon Law was to be interpreted liberally or dismissed, that they did not strictly apply in an “emergency” when Pope Pius VI himself, in the letter Charitas, taught that they most certainly did?

If these sites are going to now insist that their readers accept the binding mature of papal documents, then let there be no exceptions to this rule. But we know they are making exceptions — and Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, Pope Pius XII’s 1945 papal election law governing interregnums, also obedience to Canon Law, are primary among them. The entire debacle that became Traditionalism and later Sedevacantism could have been avoided if those who presented themselves to the faithful as orthodox clergy and established Traditionalist groups had carefully studied papal teaching and Canon Law before embarking on their (lucrative) careers. But that was not consistent with their motives. The papacy was not the focus of their attention, only the Mass and Sacraments, as if the latter could validly exist without the former. And this is why they had to find a way around the jurisdiction issue, which tells us they knew there was a problem. So they pretended epikeia could fill the gap, excluding Canon Law and binding papal teaching.

Where the problem began

Below we will comment on some of Cronin’s remarks as they relate to the above, but first we will address the objections noted in the article made by Pope Pius XI denouncing the prideful assumption by Catholics that papal decrees not issued ex cathedra were not binding.

“For it is quite foreign to everyone bearing the name of a Christian to trust his own mental powers with such pride as to agree only with those things which he can examine from their inner nature, and to imagine that the Church, sent by God to teach and guide all nations, is not conversant with present affairs and circumstances; or even that they must obey only in those matters which she has decreed by solemn definition as though her other decisions might be presumed to be false or putting forward insufficient motive for truth and honesty. Quite to the contrary, a characteristic of all true followers of Christ, lettered or unlettered, is to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff, who is himself guided by Jesus Christ Our Lord” (Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Casti Connubii, n. 104).

And to this we add, from Pope Pius XII’s Humani generis, (nos. 29-31): “It is well known how highly the Church regards human reason for it falls to reason (to demonstrate God’s very existence and the truths of faith)… But reason can perform these functions safely and well only when properly trained, that is when imbued with that sound philosophy which has long been, as it were, a patrimony handed down by early Christian ages and which moreover possesses an authority of even higher notes, since the teaching authority of the Church, in the light of divine revelation itself, has weighed its fundamental tenets…” (and here of course he is speaking of Scholasticism).

“Of course this philosophy deals with much that neither directly nor indirectly touches faith or morals, in which consequently the Church leaves to the free discussion of experts. But this does not hold for many other things especially those principles and fundamental tenets to which We have just referred. The Church demands that future priests be instructed in philosophy according to the method, doctrine and principles of the Angelic Doctor, since, as we well know from the experience of centuries, the method of Aquinas is singularly preeminent both for teaching students and for bringing truth to light. His doctrine is in harmony with divine revelation and is most effective both for safeguarding the foundation of the faith and for reaping safely and usefully the fruits of sound progress.”

If we seek an answer to why the doctrine on papal obedience has been so perverted, it is found in the tenets of the Modernists, whose hatred of authority, magisterial teaching and Scholasticism is well-known. And, (with the exception of des Lauriers, Carmona, Zamora, McKenna and Vezelis), where did all of those who later served as Traditionalist “bishops” receive their training? In Novus Ordo seminaries and secular universities and then the Society of St. Pius X, which at least nine of them later exited. Does anyone really believe that these men could possibly have received Catholic training in these institutions, saturated in Modernism and Rationalism? For there they were taught by men never approved by the Church, in seminaries never erected by a canonically elected pope and admitted as candidates to the priesthood by those who had no right or power to call them. And we wonder why people are confused and have not obeyed the popes…

(The quotes below are taken from Rev. John F. Cronin, Catholic Social Principles: The Social Teaching of the Catholic Church Applied to American Economic Life [Milwaukee, WI: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1955], pp. 55-61; 685. Imprimatur, 1950. Rev. Cronin’s ecclesiastical career is summarized HERE.) 

On minimalism

Fr. Cronin —“In the first place, the teaching mission of the Church is not confined to infallible pronouncements by the pope or ecumenical councils. Christ’s injunction to teach all nations was not limited by any qualifications… The Church has been commissioned by God to teach with authority on matters of faith and morals. It has been promised the guidance of the Holy Spirit. In rare cases, the fullness of this guidance is invoked in a solemn definition of an article of faith. But the great bulk of Church teaching is had through the normal channels of pronouncements by the popes, bishops, and theologians… A “minimist” attitude of accepting only infallible pronouncements is simply un-Catholic.”

T. Benns — We have addressed this before. As Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton wrote: “Ultimately theological minimalism was a device employed BY LIBERAL CATHOLICS to make the rejection of authoritative papal teaching on any point appear to be good Catholic practice.Sometimes it took the crass form of a claim that Catholics are obligated to accept and to holdonly those things which had been defined by the explicit decrees of the ecumenical councils or of the Holy See. This attitude… was condemned by Pope Pius IX in his letter Tuas Libenter (DZ 1683). Another crass form of minimalism was the opposition to the Vatican Council definition of papal infallibility. The men who expressed that opposition sometimes claimed to hold the doctrine of papal infallibility as a theological opinion but they showed a furious hostility to the definition which proposed that doctrine as a dogma of divine and Catholic faith” (“The Components of Liberal Catholicism,” The American Ecclesiastical Review, July 1958).

We see that this heretical attitude was condemned long ago. So how and why has it been allowed to fulminate among those who pretend to lead and direct those believing themselves to be “Traditional” Catholics today?

Acta Apostolica Sedis

Fr. Cronin — “As a second point, the form of teaching is relatively unimportant. Rather it is the solemnity and definiteness as determined by the text itself. It is true that the very nature of an encyclical, addressed to the entire world, implies a certain solemnity. But a broadcast, a papal letter, an allocution, or even an address to a particular group may, under certain circumstances, involve important and binding teachings on some matters.

T. Benns — We must remember that Cronin wrote just before the release of Humani generis, which taught that even papal letters, allocutions or addresses can be binding if entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis. According to Msgr. Fenton: “Those allocutions and other papal instructions, which, though primarily directed to some individual or group of individuals, are then printed in the Acta Apostolica Sedis are directives valid for all of the Church militant. We must not lose sight of the fact that, in the encyclical Human generis, the Holy Father made it clear that any doctrinal decision printed in the pontifical Acta must be accepted as normative by all theologians. I This would apply to all decisions made in the course of the Sovereign Pontiff’s ordinary magisterium” (“Infallibility in the Encyclicals,” American Ecclesiastical Review).

Infallibility of two papal teachings spurned

Fr. Cronin — “The obligatory nature of such assent is particularly serious when the pope declares that he has, not only the right, but the duty to pronounce with supreme authority the… teaching of the Church. ‘Respectful silence, which consists in neither rejecting nor criticizing the given teaching,’ is inadmissible in this matter…“The… encyclicals and addresses contain various levels of teaching. At the highest level are the references to revealed teaching as embodied in the Scriptures.”

T. Benns — And yet we have those still insisting today that Pope Paul IV’s 1559 bull, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, is not infallible. This when Pope Paul IV wrote:

Cum ex Apostolatus Officio

“Whereas We consider such a matter to be so grave and fraught with peril that the Roman Pontiff, who is Vicar of God and of Jesus Christ on earth, holds fullness of power over peoples and. kingdoms, and judges all, but can be judged by no one in this world — (even he) may be corrected if he is apprehended straying from the Faith. Also, it behooves us to give fuller and more diligent thought where the peril is greatest, lest false prophets (or even others possessing secular jurisdiction) wretchedly ensnare simple souls and drag down with themselves to perdition and the ruin of damnation the countless peoples entrusted to their care and government in matters spiritual or temporal. And lest it befall Us to see in the holy place the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, We wish, as much as possible with God’s help, in line with our pastoral duty, to trap the foxes that are busily ravaging the Lord’s vineyard and to drive the wolves from the sheepfolds, lest We seem to be silent watchdogs, unable to bark, or lest We come to an evil end like the evil husbandmen or be likened to a hireling… (para. 2)

“We approve and renew, by Our Apostolic authority, each and every sentence, censure or penalty of excommunication, suspension and interdict, and removal, and any others whatever in any way given and promulgated against heretics and schismatics by any Roman Pontiffs Our Predecessors… Upon advice and consent concerning such as these, through this Our Constitution, which is to remain forever effective, in hatred of such a crime the greatest and deadliest that can exist in God’s Church, We sanction, establish, decree and define, through the fullness of Our Apostolic power, that although the aforesaid sentences, censures and penalties keep their force and efficacy and obtain their effect (bishops archbishops and Cardinals committing heresy, apostasy or schism) are forever deprived of, and furthermore disqualified from and incapacitated for their rank” (para. 3; end of Cum ex… quotes).

And then of course there is Pope Pius XII’s 1945 papal election law Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, specifically written to determine what is to be done during an interregnum and the rules and regulations for the canonical election of a true pope. Pope Pius XII wrote, in the preamble to his constitution: 

Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis

“Continually in the course of the centuries, Our Predecessors solemnly determined to order and define the procedures of governance of the vacant Apostolic See and the election of the Roman Pontiff, for which they were supposed to provide; and in the same manner they endeavored to apply themselves with watchful care and to devote their energies to useful rules in the weighty business divinely entrusted to the Church, to wit, electing the successor of Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, who on this earth is the Vicar of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and as supreme Pastor and Head feeds and rules all the Lord’s flock. However, since there was already a desire to have collected into one place these laws about electing the Roman Pontiff, enlarged in number in preceding ages, and since some of them, less accommodated to special circumstances, had become outdated on account of changed conditions, the great man Pius X, our Predecessor, with judicious advice decided forty years ago to reduce them (appropriately selected) to a summary, having published the well-known Constitution Vacante Sede Apostolica on the twenty-fifth of December of the year 1904.

“Wherefore, having seasonably considered the matter, with sure knowledge and the plenitude of Our Apostolic power, We have undertaken to publish and promulgate this Constitution, which is the same as that given by Pius X, of holy memory, but reformed throughout…”

As Cronin notes above: when a pope quotes from the writings of other popes in his own works, showing their great authority, “…these writings are considered binding upon the faithful.” And, “The form of teaching is relatively unimportant. Rather it is the solemnity and definiteness as determined by the text itself. The obligatory nature of such assent is particularly serious when the pope declares that he has, not only the right, but the duty to pronounce, WITH SUPREME AUTHORITY, the… teaching of the Church.”

The Sedevacantists who first published these excerpts from Rev. Cronin surely cannot applaud Cronin for his championing of the papacy and at the same time read the preamble to Pius XII’s constitution above and claim it does not irrevocably bind them! For the constitution is all Cronin says it must be: (a) a serious document, treating in its first three paragraphs the dogmatic scope of papal jurisdiction during an interregnum, (b) with grave import given to Pius XII’s words and commands, which (c) he backs with centuries of papal teaching contained in Pope St. Pius X’s original constitution. Anyone who could ignore his stated intent of issuing it, “with sure knowledge and the plenitude of Our Apostolic power” is definitely not Catholic or is incapable of all rational thought. Pius XII’s intent to invalidate any election not conducted exactly as the constitution commands; any acts usurping papal jurisdiction or anything contrary to papal or Canon Law is likewise secured in. para. 3 by his “Supreme Authority.” And paragraph 108 strengthens what is said in the preamble.

Conclusion

“God established an eternal chair in Rome… The primacy of Peter will endure forever through the special assistance promised it when Jesus charged him to strengthen his brethren in the faith” (Pope Pius XII, Address Vi è a Roma, Jan. 17, 1940). The etymology of eternal is from “…the late 14c., from Old French eternel “eternal,” or directly from Late Latinaeternalis, from Latin aeternus “of an age, lasting for an age, enduring, permanent, everlasting, endless,” contraction of aeviternus “of great age,” from aevum “age” (from PIE root *aiw- “vital force, life; long life, eternity”). And forever can mean: “…an indefinitely long period of time; without end” (Internet and other sources). We know that in the sense that Christ binds in Heaven whatever is bound on earth, the papacy is eternal; that binding will exist always, since God Himself has no beginning and no end. The primacy will endure likewise, for Christ is the invisible Head of His Mystical Body, the Church.

But we also know that the Church on earth will have its end. Henry Cardinal Manning writes: “Some of the greatest writers of the Church tell us that in all probability, in the last overthrow of the enemies of God, the city of Rome itself will be destroyed; it will be a second time punished by Almighty God, as it was in the beginning… The writers of the Church tell us that in the latter days the city of Rome will probably become apostate from the Church and Vicar of Jesus Christ; and that Rome will again be punished, for he will depart from it; and the judgment of God will fall on the place from which he once reigned over the nations of the world…The Holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of Antichrist, and of these prophecies of Daniel, without a single exception, as far as I know, and they are the Fathers both of the East and of the West, the Greek and the Latin Church — all of them unanimously — say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of Antichrist, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar will cease.” (The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy, 1861).

What was the first sign that all these things were about to befall us? The gradual dismembering, then finally the abolition of the Latin Mass. Some 40-50 percent of Catholics exited the Church in the late 1960s, early 1970s following the institution of the Novus Ordo Missae, so they indeed recognized this sign. Cardinal Manning’s warning regarding the Mass was first published in 1970, one year after the cessation of the Mass, when Robert Bergin issued his first edition of These Apocalyptic Times (printed by Fatima International). The book sold so many copies it quickly ran to many additional printings. But what Catholics didn’t know is that the unanimous opinions of the Fathers must be taken as a rule of faith, and that this is binding on Catholics for belief per the Council of Trent and the Vatican Council (DZ 1788, 1809). NO ONE may interpret Scripture otherwise, and yet this failure to acknowledge the significance of this event as taught by the Church Herself is precisely what spawned Traditionalism. This successfully prevented the faithful from realizing that the cessation of the Mass meant that Antichrist was among us.

Once the Novus Ordo Missae was instituted, who among aspiring Traditionalists read the binding pronouncements of the Roman Pontiffs for the answers, or humbly and with a right intention consulted Canon Law? Oh no, they sought out “bishops” who had tacitly resigned their offices and were yet affiliated with apostate Rome, instead, and allowed themselves to be convinced that papal teaching was not binding unless issued ex cathedra. They did not bother to translate the one constitution that governed our situation and would have answered their questions. That constitution would not be fully translated from the Latin until 2012, when it was posted on this site! Early Traditionalists located and had translated Cum ex Apostolatus Officio on the 1970s, but the Society of St. Pius X and other LibTrad factions dismissed this obviously infallible bull as a disciplinary document, despite the fact that it clearly taught who would be considered the Antichrist if a heretic or schismatic was elected and “accepted” as pope. And this by providing a Scripture reference. Rev. Cronin rates such papal teaching as follows: “At the highest level are the references to revealed teaching as embodied in the Scriptures.“

Then of course there is Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis itself, fully complying with all of Rev. Cronin’s prerequisites for a binding papal document but dismissed as “an ecclesiastical law.” It erases the “papacy” of Roncalli, nullifiying his election on several counts. It also invalidates the acts of all those attempting to be ordained without valid tonsure or dimmissorial letters or attempting consecration without the papal mandate. In short, VAS stopped the Traditionalist movement dead in its tracks, before it ever began. NOW concludes its excerpts from Rev. Cronin with this statement: “Catholics must assent to what the Pope teaches because he teaches it.” Firm and irrevocable assent must be given to anything entered into the Acta Apostolica Sedis and decrees which mention previous infallible pronouncements and/or declare a person excommunicated.

But what they don’t mention is the inevitable penalty for multiple, repeated failures to assent to these papal acts — forfeiture of Church membership. That occurs just by enrolling oneself in a Traditionalist sect and remaining there, denying the papacy by pretending the juridical Church could ever exist without a canonically elected pope; attending “Mass” and receiving the “Sacraments” from laymen who never became priests or bishops; believing and accepting teaching from these same laymen as though it was authoritative. This explains how followers of LibTrad pseudo-clergy became “confused” regarding the binding nature of papal teachings.

(Please join us for next week’s blog and a surprising look at how Catholics in Communist countries coped when their faith was sorely tried.)