Can Catholics Expect a Great Monarch?

Can Catholics Expect a Great Monarch?

Copyright © 2012 by T. Stanfill Benns (This text may be downloaded or printed out for private reading, but it may not be uploaded to another Internet site or published, electronically or otherwise, without express written permission from the author.)

Most Traditionalists assume the Great Monarch prophecies are strictly of Catholic origin, since many of these prophecies are presented as proof of the Church’s belief in a future deliverer who will save Catholics from complete annihilation. And certainly these prophecies are more appealing today than ever, given the dearth of leadership in this country and the world. But doctrine, not prophecy is the bedrock of belief; prophecy and private revelations are proposed for belief on human, not Catholic faith. In fact Catholics need not even profess belief in revelations of this nature, even when they come from the mouths of saints, and in doing so they commit no sin. Even though a number of saints foresaw the advent of a Great Monarch, many alternate explanations can be offered for their various predictions. Some can be categorized as affected by political interpolations of the various time periods in which these saints lived. Others may easily apply to some other personage not accounted for by the one commenting on the prophecy. A seer or “prophet” can incorrectly interpret a revelation from God or unintentionally misapply it. Mistakes can be made relaying the message and existing prejudices can affect the transmission of the message, interfering with its accuracy. Mistranslation and misquotation is not uncommon. And errors of the time may be reflected in the prophecy. Perhaps Catholics can expect a Great Monarch sometime in the future, but this is by no means certain.

The errors possible among seers are taken from Pope Benedict XIV’s teaching on how prophecy may be misunderstood, misapplied or wrongly recounted. One of the mistakes seers and prophets may make concerning their messages or visions is that a figure in what is revealed to them may appear to be something it is not. For example, St. Malachy (if all the prophecies attributed to him are actually his own) applied several mottoes to “popes” who actually were antipopes. St. Vincent Ferrar and others believed that Antichrist lived in their lifetimes. It is speculated that the man who transcribed Anna Catherine Emmerich’s visions was a Freemason at one time, although the Church has approved Emmerich’s visions. Nevertheless, some of the Traditionalist interpretations of those visions today certainly are suspect, especially when used to support the Siri thesis. Anytime the specific interpretation of a prophecy of any kind interferes with the Church’s ordinary teaching, that prophecy is not to be trusted, Pope Benedict XIV says. To properly evaluate the Great Monarch prophecies we must keep these exceptions foremost in our minds.

The Protestant historian Clinton Locke, in his work “The Great Western Schism,” (1900), relates that the legend concerning the great monarch-holy pope alliance first began to circulate during the 14th century, in both France and Germany, independent of any then existing “private prophecies.” (Later the visionary Michel Nostradamus popularized the Great Pope/Great King prophecies, and although some believe he maintained clandestine relations with Satanic members of the royal de Medici family, Nostradamus was given Catholic burial.) Bonnie Prince Charlie’s efforts to regain the English throne and the periodic appearance of pretenders to the throne of France explain the popularity of the Great Monarch predictions. But especially in Germany, the people awaited an emperor who would bring them happiness and prosperity. The Teutonic knights, a German order modeled on the Templars is said to have secretly continued that order in conjunction with their English and French counterparts, the Knights Hospitaller. The Teutonic Knights admitted only racially pure Germans of noble ancestry and cultivated the Great Monarch legend to promote the belief that a long-awaited emperor from imperial Germany was destined to rule Europe, psychologically preparing Germans to accept Adolph Hitler. In a similar manner, a French secret society known as the Priory of Sion was said to be carefully guarding the ancient bloodlines of England and France with the help and approval of certain French prelates. The Priory used the romantic legends of King Arthur’s Court and the Holy Grail to conceal their work in wrappings appealing to the common man. It was these pseudo-Catholic prelates embroiled in the work of the Priory that Our Lady came to La Salette to warn us against.

The Priory connection

Paul Winkler, writing during World War II explains the origin of the Great Monarch legend in his “The Thousand Year Conspiracy,” (1943). Winkler quotes from Henry Heine’s work “On Germany,” where Heine, in a diatribe condemning the mindset of the Middle Ages, had this to say to the German people in the 1800s: “‘Once the blood again begins coursing through the veins of the German people…their ear will hear only the great voice of one man…He is the man whom the German people awaits…who they have so longed for in their dreams — you whom our old people have prophesied with burning desire…you who carry the divine sceptre of liberty and the imperial crown without the Cross…It is certainly more than popular legend that Emperor Frederick — the old Barbarossa — is not dead…He has taken refuge in the Kyffhaeuser mountains, hiding with his entire court until sometime in the future…'” Winkler comments: “‘The man’ expected by Heine was the subject of common tales in Germany for hundreds of years. They corresponded to a specific Germanic conception of the Messianic idea [minus the trappings of Catholic monarchy]. We can see how the popularity of Hitler in his country can be explained by his endeavor to achieve what the legends forecast…Heine failed to understand thoroughly the dangers inherent in the survival of those purely Germanic superstitions and the legends surrounding the Kyffhaeuser mountains…He did not see that some day all this would turn into a terrific diabolical avalanche running away with itself, and would end in a nightmarish conflagration spread to all parts of the world. Nor could he imagine that against this orgy of the ‘elementary spirits’ the Traditions of the Church…offered a certain resistance and protection.”

As Winkler goes on to explain, although Heine inveighed against a return to the thinking of the Middle Ages he advocated a return to such thinking in the same breath. “Today the same Middle Ages practices of which Heine spoke have placed themselves very much in the foreground,” he continues. “When the average observer speaks about ‘Middle ages practices’ in Hitler’s Germany, he does not realize that the expression he uses is much more than a simple allegorical figure — that it describes the actual comeback of a period long gone…English feudal concepts have played some part in shaping the conduct of British external and internal affairs…The survival in France of isolated feudal-minded groups was responsible for…the tragic subjection of a now feudally governed France to the sad rule of Berlin…These feudal survivals in many places, including America, constitute a certain danger. We have seen such feudal circles becoming the temporary allies of the Prussian-Teutonics…” And certainly the Priory of Sion and the Teutonic Knights guaranteed the survival of chivalry and medievalism.

Dusty Sklar traces this thinking through to Hitler’s own time in his work “The Nazis and the Occult,” (1977). Guido von List, a sometime associate of Hitler’s spiritual advisor updated Heine’s sentiments in the early part of the 20th century: “List’s study of Jewish mysticism had taught him the importance of imbuing the people with a Messianic hope. When the world is changing and the old knowledge becomes suspect, it is necessary to herald the coming of a Messiah so that the traditional verities may be adapted to new conditions. List gave the Germans, in effect, the opportunity to become competitors of the Jews for the honor of ‘chosen people.’ The German people…were the chosen people, and soon a Fuhrer would arise among them who, in turn, would lead the Messianic nation.” List’s philosophy evolved into the creation of a secret society — the Armanen — in 1908, Sklar relates; eight years after the occultist and defrocked Cistercian monk, Jorge Lanz von Liebenfels, founded the New Templars. “Membership was often interlocking, and there was continuous feedback between the cults,” Sklar writes. “Around 1912 a number of members of both cults finally came together under one roof in the Germanen Orden, which prefigured the Nazi Party…Hitler was a reader of [Lanz’ publication] ‘Ostara,’ and met Lanz several times in that period, [a period] he later alluded to as providing him with ‘the foundations of a knowledge’ which was to become so important to him.” That knowledge was practically identical to the theosophy of Blavatsky and later the Messiah-driven British Israelism of Disraeli and others.

Ancient history is filled with examples of the anticipation of savior kings allied with holy priests, both in pagan and pre-Christian literature. But it was the Jews who in Christ’s time looked for a glorious earthly king and therefore rejected Christ as heir to the promise, even though he was of the Davidic line as Scripture foretold. This is because they preferred the “second Messiah” of their own understanding to the true Messiah sent by God. “For the Jews believed that Zacharias 1:20 foretold two Messiahs, one a suffering Messiah, descended from the tribe of Joseph, Elias and the priest Zadok, and the other a glorious messiah, son of David,” (“How Christ said the First Mass,” by Rev. James Meagher, 1906). Church historians portray the Jews of Christ’s time as a carnal people who had little use for suffering; they believed they already had suffered enough. The Jewish people longed for a return to the time of the kings of earlier Israelitic centuries — not unlike the medievalism of the German people — and their leaders obliged them by creating a projection of a second Messiah to satisfy this longing. Therefore they denied Christ as Eternal High Priest in favor of this earthly king yet to come.

It is this second Messiah the Jews now await, but British Israel/Identity teaches that European and American Gentiles, not the Jews, are heirs to the biblical promises as the Chosen People, and this would include all rights to the “second messiah.” It offers its adherents unique status as Anglo-Saxon Aryans who, along with the Nazis, they hold superior to all the other races. Anti-Catholic as well as anti-Jew, BI believers hold to the ancient liberties/continuity theory professed by the Gallicanists and their British co-religionists, neatly sidestepping the necessity of the papacy. Group apologists contend that certain European royalty are directly descended from the biblical King David, and are able to rule by Divine right. Move up a few Masonic levels and you have the rest of the story — these kings are descended from King David because they share the “bloodline of Christ,” a “bloodline” carefully preserved over the centuries by the Priory of Sion. The Priory’s King of Sion, they believe, is designated to rule from Europe, and probably from Britain, as the Merovingian heir. None of this differs much from the Masonically inspired teachings of Mormonism, which may well be a uniquely American manifestation of Priory beliefs.

Authors Lincoln, Leigh and Baigent, who chronicle the history and operation of the Priory insist that, “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was not the work of some Jewish high council, but the blueprint for Priory operations,” (“Holy Blood, Holy Grail,” 1982). Members of the Rose-Croix Masons wrote the Protocols, they believe, as early as 1864. To begin with, Victor Marsden, compiler of “The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion” for republication in 1934, stated that they originated in Paris, and were allegedly found in the home of a Jewish gentleman by one Mlle. Glinka, a Russian citizen. From there they fell into the hands, he said, of Sergei Nilus upon Glinka’s later return to her homeland. For this reason some believe the Protocols were a Tsarist police forgery. The 1934 edition of the Protocols claimed they originated at an International Judaic Congress that convened in Basle in 1897. But Lincoln, Leigh and Baigent refute this, attributing them to one Maurice Cretineau-Joly, who they say was a well-known Rosicrucian and enemy of the Catholic Church, (although he is described in the Catholic Encyclopedia as a polemical religious-political writer who, in his writings professed “unwavering fidelity” to the Church. It was Cretineau-Joly who provided copies of the Masonic blueprint for the destruction of the Church, the Alta Vendita, to Pope Gregory XVI in 1846.)

The conspiracy author Nesta Webster relates that the Protocols later were found to be an updated and much improved version of Cretineau-Joly’s work, giving indication that it came from a source other than the Jews. “The Protocols are a vast improvement on the ‘Dialogues’ of Joly…An international circle of world revolutionaries working along the lines of the Illuminati…offers a perfectly plausible alternative solution to the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Sion,'” (Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, 1924). There are passages in the Protocols to demonstrate they are the work of the Priory, the authors point out. References to the advent of a “king of the blood of Sion,” a “Masonic kingdom,” a king reigning from “the dynastic roots of David,” all culminate in the startling statement that this king of the Jews will be “the real Pope of the Universe.” Author Tim Cohen frequently refers to the connection between early American aristocrats and the bloodlines of the present British royal family, tying these connections to the Illuminati, (“The Antichrist and a Cup of Tea”).  Author Frederic Haberman wrote that this great king of the Davidic line would receive his kingdom from the hands of British royalty, (Tracing Our Ancestors). His book, written in the 1940s, is dedicated to proving that all the kings of England were directly descended from the biblical King David. Will the false “Great Monarch” anticipated by a certain faction of Traditionalists be the one to accept the throne?

It is safe to say that more than any other politico-religious group in America, Traditionalists as a whole possess a medieval-ages mentality. This is demonstrated by their strong attraction to the Great Monarch legends and prophecies, also a longing to return to times when the Church was presumably free from present-day evils. They are joined by a host of like-minded Protestants of British Israel persuasion, who therefore are not opposed to the monarchic ideal. The Priory of Sion with its bloodlines and medieval trappings is the most obvious example of modern-day medievalism. But what Traditionalists forget is that the idea here, as Heine noted is to “carry the sceptre of liberty and the imperial crown…without the Cross.” There will be no re-creation of the Holy Roman Empire. And the reason there will be no re-creation of this Empire is that those promoting the false Great Monarch are determined to enjoy his reign without the guidance of the Roman See, despite their protestations to the contrary. This time travel back to the Middle Ages is intended to relocate Trads somewhere in the late 14th century, where they can rewrite the ending of the Great Schism in favor of their Gallicanist inclinations. With this in mind from a religious standpoint, a careful reading of the above paragraph will reveal an eerie similarity to the trends in Western thought pre-World War II and those of today, only those of today are more deeply entrenched than those same trends 70-75 years ago. This is especially true seeing that many Traditionalists share a common political agenda, with Sufi overtones. As explained elsewhere, Lutheranism was the necessary preparation for Nazism, and it also has served as the chosen soil for the growth of a “Catholic” version of this same evil.

Traditionalist neo-Nazis

It was Thomas Case, in the 1990s who assayed the Traditionalist sects and found that several clergymen were markedly anti-Semitic, with definite neo-Nazi or British Israel leanings, (Fidelity Magazine, October 1992). He noted that militia groups flourish in the St. Mary’s, Kansas area, home to the SSPX, (this is reportedly known to the local sheriff there). Case flagged the Society’s Fr. Ramon Angles, “Bp.” Richard Williamson, and Fr. Gregory Post, providing specific documentation in each case. He also fingered British Israel promoter Dan Jones of Colorado and Jones’ longtime friend, “Bp.” Oliver Oravec, last known to be living somewhere in Czechoslovakia. Jones’ “Sangre de Cristo Newsnotes” publication unabashedly promoted the Aryan Nations position for years, alongside other articles written by prominent Traditional clergymen. The late Fr. Lawrence Brey, at one time, at least, also professed admiration for the 1930s radio-priest Fr. Coughlin in an article featured in “The Remnant”, and has mixed with many anti-Semitic Traditionalists over the years. Fr. George Musey of Texas expressed neo-Nazi sentiments to several colleagues and followers during the course of his lifetime, a fact witnessed by this author. The openly anti-Semitic publication “Veritas,” now defunct, pumped out anti-Jewish sentiments for decades, although it also furnished the faithful with much good information on the teachings of the Church. If any doubt exists concerning Traditionalists’ anti-Semitic orientation, a quick survey of anti-Semitic literature for sale on various Traditionalist web sites should prove that what is said here is no exaggeration. And some identification of Traditionalists with anti-Semitism has been more public than others, i.e., that of Mel Gibson and his father.

“There is a virulent sickness of hatred and Hitlerism running through the Traditional Catholic movement,” Case wrote. “Society of St. Pius X [priests] in France see Marshall Petain as a hero, and his pro-Nazi Vichy government of World War II as a paragon of virtue. Catholic Traditionalism as a whole in France is imbued with extreme right-wing politics…the historical dream of a restored Catholic Monarchy, allied with pro-Hitler, anti-Semitic fascism.” Case points out that like the Action-Francais movement in the 1930s, condemned by Pope Pius XI, (atheistic) right-wing political interests are absorbing Traditionalists and using them to promote their own hidden agenda. It is no coincidence that there have been recent civil disturbances throughout Europe, especially in France, that revolve around anti-Semitic organizations. And at least one ex-FBI agent, Mike German believes that the biggest terrorist threat in this country is not Islamo-fascism but Aryan Nations fascism. German has spoken internationally on this problem objecting that the FBI will not confront these groups unless they can produce actual evidence of terrorist activity after the fact. He believes that neo-Nazi groups are multiplying in the U.S., and with good reason. One purportedly “Catholic” web site even claimed at one time that the French Monarch has amassed a large army and is only waiting until the time is right to commence the fulfillment of his mission.

Seasoned journalist and WorldNetDaily founder Joseph Farah reported in his 2005 G2 Bulletins that “The danger posed by the skinhead-Islamist alliance is being compared with the fast-growing menace of Central American street gangs, such as the Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13, who are now the largest and most dangerous criminal group in several Latin American countries and in the U.S. MS-13, too, has been known to meet with al-Qaida operatives and is believed to be involved in smuggling some into the U.S. across the Mexican border… Law enforcement officials fear skinheads and neo-Nazis could provide not just additional numbers to the Islamic terrorist cause but also some operatives who would defy profiling efforts…What brings the groups together is a common enemy – Jews – and business interests, say law enforcement officials. Neo-Nazi skinheads are deeply involved in drug-running and human smuggling gangs – two areas of common interest with Islamists… Al-Qaida, Jamaah Islamiah and Wahabbi groups see nothing wrong in using non-Muslims to further their cause. As the origin of most anti-terror activities focuses mainly on the Middle East and Asia, it is clear a western terrorist could be more successful in penetrating a number of security and defense circles. In cases of a precision attack against individuals or institutions, European or American Caucasian terrorists will be more successful in disappearing from the radar screen…Avi Beker, the secretary-general of the World Jewish Congress, says in the past two years Jews around the world have experienced the worst anti-Semitism since World War II, primarily because of the effects of the Middle East conflict.” In Canada, the U.S. and Europe, Jews have increasingly been targeted for attacks, according to news reports. And true Catholics may well be next.

While some government agencies seem unwilling as yet to make the connection between Islamo-fascism and neo-Nazism, history shows a definite connection already exists. The History Channel has several times re-aired a series showing the interconnections of Islam and Hitler’s Germany from the 1930s on, with Muslims openly supporting Hitler, propagandizing for him and even sending troops to help win Hitler’s war. Rabbi David Dalin devotes a chapter to this involvement in his defense of Pope Pius XII,” (“Pope Pius XII: The Myth of Hitler’s Pope,” 2005). Dalin quotes Kenneth Timmerman who related that no less than the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini began meeting with Hitler in November 1941, the first of several meetings. “He had gone to convince Adolf Hitler of his total dedication to the Nazi goal of exterminating the Jews, and offered to raise an Arab legion to carry out that task in the Middle East,” Timmerman wrote. “The mufti’s close ties to Hitler, and his total embrace of Hitler’s Final Solution, provides the common thread linking past to present… Today’s Muslim anti-Semitism…feed[s] directly off of Hitler’s Third Reich.” Dalin quotes Adolf Eichmann’s deputy, Dieter Wisliceny, later condemned to death as a war criminal at Nuremburg, who said he was convinced that the mufti played a role “in the decision to exterminate the European Jews.” He insisted that the mufti had repeatedly suggested this “solution” to “Hitler, Ribbentrop and Himmler.” The mufti groomed Yasser Arafat, a distant relative of al-Husseini, for his own terrorist role, and Arafat later often referred to “our hero al-Husseini.” Egyptian leaders Nasser and Anwar Sadat also came under al-Husseini’s influence. Hebrew University’s Robert Winstrich states in Dalin’s work that there is now an anti-Jewish “culture of hatred” in the Arab Middle East permeating “books, magazines, newspapers, sermons, videocassettes, the Internet, television and radio…that has not been seen since the heyday of Nazi Germany.” Yet at La Salette, Our Lady warned that Hitler would be only a forerunner of Antichrist.

La Salette and the Great Monarch

Catholics know that Our Lady appeared at La Salette, France in 1846 to deliver monumental secrets concerning the end times to two shepherds, Melanie Calvat and Maximin Giraud. These secrets have been the result of furious controversy ever since, and more than one version of Melanie’s secret has been circulated. A work available only in French (Découverte du Secret de La Salette, published by Librairie Arthème Fayard in 2002, recently has been circulated and quoted on this subject. This book has the Nihil Obstat from Abbaye Notre-Dame de Tournay, 13 February 2002, Dom Bernard Billet. The Imprimatur is from Èvry, le jour Pâques 2002, Mgr. Michel Dubost.) It is purporting to present the currently available version of the La Salette Secret (Lecce version) as the true version. Another work, “The Woman and the Dragon,” by Maurice Canioni, 2004, published by Delacroix on La Salette also gives the Lecce version of the secret as the authentic version. But why is both a Novus Ordo source and an apparently Traditional source pointing Catholics in this direction? What is important to remember is that:

 

a)    The first work is the product of the Novus Ordo clergy and therefore cannot be trusted. For all its claims to scholarship and the author’s access to “Vatican Archives,” it can be nothing but fatally flawed. Its authors openly admit that the Archives did not contain the handwritten secrets of Melanie Calvat and Maximin Giraud to Pope Pius IX; these have been “lost.” Obviously more than is known to us today went on in the Vatican concerning this Secret.

b)    The second work is the product of Traditionalists, possible Monarchists, and for these reasons alone it must remain suspect. It may contain some worthwhile information but is no more reliable than the first work.

What has been said elsewhere concerning Maximin’s secret must be summarized here. Maximin is said to have predicted that a Great Monarch will rule in the end times, yet his secret was never published; he released it only to Pope Pius IX, and now it seems to have disappeared from the face of the earth. Easily influenced by others but always a fierce supporter of the apparition, Maximin obviously confided some details to an acquaintance with Monarchist convictions, who then published an unofficial version of the boy’s secret. Although Maximin strongly renounced this publication and forced its retraction, the secret was published as his own by many different commentators.  Rev. R. Gerald Culleton’s version of Maximin’s secret, however, mentions nothing about the Great Monarch. While Maximin obviously believed that such a Monarch would arrive, he said it would happen only in God’s good time. Melanie said many things would come about only if morals improved and the people did penance. The Fatima message also made certain assurances contingent on the people’s reform. Any deliberate staging of this king’s arrival is hardly in agreement with the spirit of Our Lady’s messages.

It is interesting that there appear to be connections between those who wrongfully published Maxmin’s secret and one of the key figures of the Priory of Sion, Abbe Berengar Sauniere of Rennes le-Chateau in the Pyrenees. Author Philip Coppens says that Sauniere and the founder of the Mariavite schism, Abbe Boullan, both Monarchists, were in contact with each other. Like Sauniere, Boullan had accumulated wealth that no one could quite account for, (“Satan in the Modern World,” Mgr. L. Cristiani, 1961). He was a follower of the Theosophist Madame Blavatsky and also frequented Rosicrucian circles according to Mgr. Cristiani. Boullan lived with a woman, Adele Chevalier, who was a former friend of Melanie Calvat’s. Sauniere, Coppens relates, was very interested in the Secret of La Salette, as was Boullan. It is even rumored that Sauniere had an affair with a distant actor relative of Melanie Calvat’s. During this same time period another Monarchist, the alleged convert Leon Bloy also was a patron of these same circles. He was obsessed with La Salette throughout his lifetime. Sauniere, Boullan and Bloy all frequented the Chapel of San Sulpice; it is impossible to believe that they never connected with each other. Bloy’s curious fascination with La Salette is confirmed by the 1908 publication of his book, “She Who Weeps,” an anthology of his writings on the apparition. Despite the defense of his friends who swore to his orthodoxy, Mgr. Cristiani calls Bloy nothing less than a Satanist: for his writings reveal that he believed the Holy Ghost and Lucifer were one and the same, (Ibid).

The association of all these figures points to one thing: the Devil was definitely determined to destroy the Secrets of La Salette, a fact that practically guarantees their authenticity. He sent his constituents Sauniere, Boullan, Bloy and others to accomplish this task. All were Monarchists and occultists. All were in a position to falsify the Secret, misrepresent it, discredit it; they did so by their very association with it. It is not too far a reach, we feel, to speculate that all were connected to the Priory. Certainly those following Madame Blavatsky were exposed to British Israel doctrines, including the idea of a pure, Aryan race, (which the Priory also promotes by the careful cultivation of its “bloodline.”) Two of these men were clerics, although Abbe Boullan was excommunicated. Bloy had applied for acceptance into a religious house but was refused. In our own day it would be Abbe Ducaud-Borget and Marcel Lefebvre, also frequenters of San Sulpice (Marcel Lefebvre sent Econe seminarians to San Sulpice on pilgrimage) who would be linked to the Priory. In Lincoln, Leigh and Baigent’s Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the authors refer to these clerics as “agents provacateur.” Lefebvre, during his lifetime, never denied his membership in the Priory. Melanie had conveyed Our Lady’s warning that priests and religious would become faithless and unworthy in the site of God, and these men are prime examples. She also warned that a forerunner of Antichrist with his armies would decimate Europe, and nearly every commentator on the Secret believes this prediction was fulfilled in Hitler. Antichrist, then, or at least one of his more ardent followers could be said to resemble Hitler in some way.

The (true) spiritual Antichrist, antipope Paul 6, is said to have conspired with Genoa’s Cardinal Siri to smuggle Nazi war criminals out of Italy in the last days of the war. “Some of the most wanted Nazi war criminals passed from Rauff in Milan, to Bishop Hudal at the Anima in Rome and then on to Archbishop Siri in Genoa. Here they boarded ships and left for new lives in South America…” (“Unholy Trinity,” John Loftus and Mark Aarons, 1992). The underground channeling of these Nazis is referred to by authors Loftus and Aarons as “the Ratlines.” Rabbi Dalin denies the accusations these authors made in their work against Pope Pius XII because they brand him as a Nazi sympathizer and hold him responsible for helping the criminals escape. Those who know Montini’s treachery and Pius’ trust in him prior to 1953 when that treachery was revealed will understand that Montini’s dealings most likely extended to the smuggling operation as well. Rauff and Bp. Hudal may have handled matters for Montini but it would not be the first time that the future Paul 6 approved an operation by insinuating he acted for the Pope. The fact that Cardinal Siri is named in this operation may provide us with a clue as to why he is so revered by Monarchist Traditionalists, who falsely hold he was secretly elected Pope in 1958 (or 1963, depending on which version of this story is consulted). Many of these same Traditionalists despise Pope Pius XII for assisting the Jews, which explains why they would idolize someone who helped high-placed Nazis escape.

The genuine version (or interpretation) of the La Salette Secret places Antichrist’s coming (in all its many phases) prior to the chastisement and the coming of the true Great Monarch during the promised Fatima peace following the chastisement. (This is assuming we have not forfeited that peace and his reign by our wickedness; it seems both the Fatima and La Salette promises hinged on whether Catholics amended their lives and did penance, at least as far as any mitigation of the coming chastisements were concerned.) It is not a coincidence that many of those who promote the Great Monarch at the same time condemn the La Salette secret. It is true that a few private prophecies say the Great Monarch will surrender his crown in Jerusalem when Antichrist comes. But either these prophecies are not accurate, or they refer to a line of holy monarchs and the final assault of Antichrist’s revived system at the end of the world against “the camp of the saints,” as Ezekiel foretells. At one time, the “Traditional Catholic” web site that zealously promoted the arrival of a great monarch quoted Yves Dupont’s monograph on this topic to support its presentation, yet failed to include Dupont’s qualifying preliminary remarks. The introduction to Dupont’s piece told readers that “a few introductory lines” were omitted from his work. Dupont’s omitted preface to his Great Monarch monograph — running to three pages, not just a “few lines” — is presented below.

Yves Dupont on the Great Monarch and age of peace

“There has been a great number of reported apparitions since 1945. I know many of these and possess a fairly comprehensive documentation on most, but I do not intend quoting any here because these recent reports have either been condemned, or the Church is still examining them. It may be argued that a condemnation from an apostate bishop is worthless but, granted that apostasy has made devastating inroads in the Church, it does not follow that every bishop is an apostate.  Further a condemnation issued by an apostate cannot be taken as worthless on this ground alone, for an apostate may still speak truth on occasion.  Finally, it must be borne in mind that apostasy can take many forms: there are shades of grey between black and white; a bishop who ignores the decrees of the Council of Trent on the Mass, or other matters, is not necessarily a faithless renegade in all matters; there is such a thing as human weakness bowing to pressure and, if this does not exonerate the fainthearted, it does provide a measure of extenuation.  It would be foolish to regard a bishop’s condemnation of a reported apparition as an additional reason to believe in it!

“It is beyond question that some of these recent reports are true, if only for the fact that Our Lady, since 1830, has never allowed a period of 28 years to go by before again visiting the world.  As the climax approaches, it is only reasonable to assume that Our Lady will make her appeals more pressing and more frequent. But because the climax approaches, it is also reasonable to assume that the devil will increase his own efforts or the downfall of souls by fabricating false apparitions and working lying wonders. The devil, as we know, is cunning and clever; he may speak truth in order to draw people away from the Church or, on the contrary, he may urge obedience to a bishop or priest he already controls. His intelligence far surpasses our human understanding, and what he does and says may sometimes appear excellent on the surface.  In view of this, there is a very real danger in accepting uncritically a reported apparition merely because the eyewitnesses saw extraordinary things. Our suspicion should even be stronger as the messages are the more verbose.

“Admittedly, I have formed my own opinion on some of these post-war reports, as some of my readers well know, but the purpose of this article is mainly to present a collection of prophecies that have either been approved by the Church as worthy of credence (e.g. Anne Catherine Emmerich), or given ample proof of their authenticity (e.g. Zacharias).  This is not to say that I have no intention of ever writing a critical study of recent reports, (I have done so concerning Garabandal and Stich), but only that they are not within the scope of this article because they require a different treatment and approach.” (Note: The Emperor Henry who Emmerich is believed to have seen in her visions, however, is said to refer to a European monarch “lame afoot,” who reigned before her visions even began, not to some future personage.),

Some of the prophecies given here have already been cited in my book CATHOLIC PROPHECY in which I gave a general picture of the coming upheaval.  The present article bears more specifically on the glorious Age of Peace to come, under the reign of the Great Monarch.  For this reason, I do not propose to quote at length the prophecies of my previous book but only the passages relating to the Age of Peace and the Great Monarch.

Many of these prophecies are French, and they make it quite clear that Monarchy will be restored in France.  But the restoration of Monarchy will not be a local affair; it will be a worldwide phenomenon. This will mark a near historical epoch and, because of this, many people are finding it hard to believe.  The age of republics and Democracies will be over, Communism and Socialism a thing of the past. This age of peace will also be an age of belief and an age of plenty.  It will mark the victory of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and of Christ the King, the revaluation of authority and discipline, and the conversion of the entire world to the Catholic Faith (except for a few pockets of unbelief).

“These conclusions have been drawn from my study of private prophecies, which I began about 30 years ago. These prophecies were made from the very beginning of the Christian Era up to our own time.  They originate from virtually every country in the world) non-Christian lands included. The concordance existing between hundreds of different prophecies is truly remarkable. It would be unreasonable to claim that the bulk of these private seers were merely repeating earlier prophecies, which they had themselves read.  Such a claim is untenable for a number of reasons: firstly, because communication between various countries was very limited prior to the 19th Century.  Secondly, because all writings were in manuscript form before Gutenberg evolved the printing press in the 15th Century. Thirdly, because some of these prophecies were discovered many centuries after they had been written. In a few cases, however, it is known that some prophecies were not made by those who handed them down; and in other cases it is not inconceivable that an old manuscript may have repeated the substance of an earlier one.  Thus, the wording of St. Remy’s prophecy, so strikingly similar to that of St. Augustine, may be just relating what St. Remy had heard or read from the writings of St. Augustine which, even in his lifetime, were reproduced in manuscript form in the monasteries of Western Europe. St. Augustine died in 430, and St. Remy was born in 437. In his youth, St. Remy would have been conversant with the writings of St. Augustine.  Such cases are few in number. But the final argument lies in the fact that many of the early prophecies have already come to pass in part. Here are some events that were predicted long ago:

1.    Ireland occupied by the English for seven centuries.

2.   England leaving the Catholic Church in the 16th century.

3.  The discovery of the Continent of America.

4.  The French Revolution and the decapitation of the French King.

5. Modern inventions: the steam engine, the motor car, the aeroplane, submarines, nuclear power, television.

6.  The rise of the lower classes and the advent of Democracy.

7.  Communism.

8.  The development of literacy, the proliferation of pornography.

9.  Low moral standards, permissiveness, deviations.

10. Crisis in the Church, new liturgy, apostasy of many bishops.

“This, I might say, is not a comprehensive listing, merely a few examples. But if the first part of these prophecies has come to pass, should we disregard the second?  I do not disregard the second part.  Here are the events we now can expect:

1. Civil wars, revolutions, breakdown of authority everywhere.

2. Military coups even in Western Countries.

3. An anti-pope in Rome; the developing apostasy becomes universal.

4. Persecution of the Church by Communist governments, abetted at first by many of the hierarchy and Clergy.

5. Complete destruction of the Church’s structures at the hands of the Communists and even those who collaborated with them.

6. Natural disasters, earthquakes, floods, drought, famines, epidemics.

7. Cosmic phenomenon, three days of darkness, collapse of Communism.

8. More military coups [followed by the] rise of the Great Monarch.

9. Rebirth of the Catholic Church. New Ecumenic Council, restoration of former disciplines in the Church.  A Holy Pope occupies the Chair of Peter.

10. Period of peace, faith, plenty.

What comes after this is not the subject matter of this article.”

(The Great Monarch piece then begins.)

In the course of the presentation that follows, Dupont comments on these prophecies:

“The Empire of the Mohammedans will be broken up (by him).”

(Ven. Holzhauser, 17th Century)

“Greece he will invade and be made King thereof. He will conquer England.”

(Cataldus, 5th Century)

“This Prince shall extend his dominion over the whole world.”

(St. Caesar, 6th Century)

“Invade Greece” and “conquer England” must not be understood with the modern and unpleasant connotation that these terms now have.  This Emperor will be anything but “imperialist”.  It means, in effect, that he will go to England to help the English people out of their Communist enslavement, and he will land in Greece to expel the Mohammedans.  All this will be made clear later in this article… At this stage, may I caution against dismissing the idea of a Mohammedan invasion in Europe as extravagant.  I discussed this point in my first book: the Mohammedan invasion is mentioned in an exceedingly large number of prophecies, and the prophecies are true.  The invasion will be made possible because,

“(a) Soviet Russia, the Beast of the Earth, will give Mohammed, the Beast of the Sea, all the military support she can, hoping thereby to avoid a direct involvement of herself in Western Europe;

 

“(b) because Western Europe will be in a state of utter chaos at the close of murderous civil wars.

“It was just as “extravagant” to speak of the “Revolt of the Algerians in 1938 when Algeria was regarded as being an extension of metropolitan France, but the revolt did come to pass in the sixties, and Algeria is now independent.)

“Is this the One World government which is currently advocated by Leftist elements?  Most definitely not.  The One World government will not come about until the revelation of the Man of Sin who, with the Jewish nation fawning at his feet, will impose his tyranny upon the whole world.  The “dominion” in question here will not take the form of a centralized autocratic government. Centralization is the very opposite of the principle of subsidiarity which the Church and every genuine Catholic monarch has always supported.  Subsidiarity, to be sure, does not exclude supreme authority, or arbitration, but it is undoubtedly the antithesis of autocratism.  The word itself is comparatively new but the principle has always been upheld by the Church,” [but this word definitely was not understood by the Church of the past as in the same sense that it is used today by the Novus Ordo Church, nor even necessarily as it was understood by Dupont.]

In assaying what is written above, (if we return to the two 10-point lists of disasters that Dupont says are to come both remotely and proximately), it appears that while Dupont has not come out and said it in so many words, he places the coming of Antichrist prior to the arrival of the Great King and Holy Pope; he has said it without realizing it. While Dupont may have studied and been an expert in the area of prophecy, he evidently did not realize what the Church Herself actually taught concerning the Scriptural prophecies of Daniel — primarily the cessation of the continual sacrifice and the identification of the abomination of desolation. Clearly Pope Paul IV interprets the abomination of desolation as Antichrist; also heretics, apostates and schismatics parading as true Catholics. In 1559, he wrote in his infallible bull, “Cum ex Apostolatus Officio:”

“We must see attentively to driving away from Christ’s fold those who, in Our time more consciously and balefully than usual, driven by malice and trusting in their own wisdom, rebel against the rule of right Faith and strive to rend the Lord’s seamless robe by corrupting the sense of the Holy Scriptures with cunning inventions. We must not allow those to continue as teachers of error who disdain to be taught…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..

“If ever at any time it becomes clear that any Bishop, even one conducting himself as an Archbishop, Patriarch, or primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, even as mentioned, a Legate; or likewise any Roman Pontiff before his promotion or elevation as a Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, [has strayed from the Catholic Faith or] fallen into some heresy, [or has incurred schism], then his promotion or elevation shall be null, invalid and void. It cannot be declared valid or become valid through his acceptance of the office, his consecration, subsequent possession or seeming possession of government and administration, or by the enthronement of or homage paid to the same Roman Pontiff, or by universal obedience accorded him, or by the passage of any time in said circumstances, [nor shall it be held as quasi-legitimate.]”

This also was the opinion of St. Bernard, the last Father of the Church, who lived several centuries before Pope Paul IV’s bull was written. He teaches that it is an anti-pope reigning as a true pope who alone can merit the terrible title Antichrist. In supporting Pope Innocent II, St. Bernard wrote to Hildebert, archbishop of Tours: “Behold, Innocent the Christ, the anointed of the Lord, is ‘set for the fall and the resurrection of many.’ For they that are of God willingly adhere to him, whilst opposed to him stand Antichrist and his followers. We have seen ‘the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,’ (Matt. 34:15)…He has seated himself in the Chair of Peter. The holy place he covets, not for its holiness, but for its height. He has, I say, got possession of the holy place [but] not through the merit of his life. The election whereof he boasts is but a cloak for his malice. To call it an election at all is an impudent lie.” (Rev. Albert J. Luddy, “The Life and Teachings of St. Bernard”).

Commenting on the meaning of the abomination of desolation, St. Jerome writes: “It is possible to apply this text easily to either the Antichrist, to the statue of Caesar which Pilate placed in the Temple or even to the equestrian statue of Hadrian, which down to this present day stands on the very site of the holy of holies. In the Old Testament, however, the term abomination is applied deliberately to idols. To identify it further, ‘of desolation,’ is added to indicate that the idol was placed in a desolate or ruined temple. The abomination of desolation can be taken to mean as well every perverted doctrine. When we see such a thing stand in the holy place, that is in the Church and pretend it is God, we must flee…,” (Breviary Lesson for the 24th and Last Sunday after Pentecost).

“The apostasy of the city of Rome from the vicar of Christ, and its destruction by Antichrist, may be thoughts so new to many Catholics that I think it well to cite the text of theologians in the greatest repute,” (pg. 88). If the Church’s true teaching on this subject was not generally known, it is only because her enemies (who have stated for centuries that the popes of Rome were collective Antichrist) would have used it against Her; also, the Church did not wish to prematurely confuse and alarm the faithful. Manning not only shows that the Church expected such an event; he tells us that there was a definite tradition in the Church for many centuries among scriptural commentators and theologians of great repute favoring this interpretation of end times prophecy. As he stated in his work, “The True Story of the Vatican Council,” the march towards these times already had begun even before the Council convened. Therefore, Manning simply decided that what was becoming increasingly clear no longer needed to be suppressed.

Henry Cardinal Manning as follows: “The holy Fathers, who have written on the subject of Antichrist and of the prophecies of Daniel, without a single exception, as far as I know, — and they are the Fathers both of the East and the West. Of both 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. Manning undoubtedly was aware of St. Francis de Sales and St. Alphonsus’ teaching that the Sacrifice would cease in the latter days. St. Francis writes: “The revolt and separation must come…the Sacrifice shall cease and…the Son of Man shall hardly find faith on earth…All these passages are understood of the affliction which Antichrist shall cause in the Church…But the Church… shall not fail, and shall be fed and preserved amidst the deserts and solitudes to which She shall retire, as the Scripture says, (Apoc. Ch. 12),” (“The Catholic Controversy”). In his “The Holy Eucharist,” St. Alphonsus stated that: “It is true [the Mass] will cease on earth at the time of Antichrist: the Sacrifice of the Mass is to be suspended…according to the prophecy of Daniel, (Dan. 12:11).” St. Alphonsus goes on to explain, however, that in reality the Sacrifice and priesthood never will cease since “the Son of God, Eternal Priest, will always continue to offer Himself to God, the Father, in Heaven as an Eternal Sacrifice.”

And the arrival of the abomination and the cessation of the sacrifice are almost simultaneous, so that one cannot happen without the other. St. Paul tells us that first the revolt must occur, which began in the 1500s and ended following the false Vatican II council. This must happen before the Man of Sin can be revealed for what he is, and it happened just this way. For when the new Novus Ordo liturgy was officially introduced, the Man of Sin was then unquestionably revealed, and those remaining with him in his schismatic Church were the ones who revolted, not those who refused to accept the changes. Just as Daniel  predicted, Paul 6 changed times and laws. He sat in God’s temple pretending he was His vicar, when he was not. St. Paul speaks of he who witholdeth. Who else could this be but a true pope, who did hold in St. Paul’s time, and would later successfully be taken out of the way to allow the Man of Sin to reign?

As explained in the article Fifty Years After V2: Why Catholics Never Fought for Their Church, Catholics were in shock for many years after the destruction of the Church began and many could not bring themselves to believe that what was unfolding before them was actually the arrival of the Man of Sin. Even when irrefutable proofs of this horror were presented, they refused to re-evaluate their position that the pope was simply an antipope, or a bad pope. Choosing to ignore an infallible papal decree that identified Antichrist’s actions and their consequences, these Catholics were successfully propagandized by Traditionalist publicists and those they recognized as their clergy to place the coming of the Antichrist after the era of peace and the coming of the Great Monarch, holy pope. They also ignored the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas in this regard — that, “The wicked will think themselves to be in peace and security after the death of Antichrist and before the coming of Christ, seeing that the world was not at once destroyed as they thought hitherto,” (Summa Theol., Suppl. 73:1). Those publishing the Secret of La Salette without permission also published a version that places Antichrist’s coming after the Great Monarch’s death, and yet the version of this same secret printed by Rev. R. Gerald Culleton places Antichrist’s destruction before the peace and the reign of what appears to be a series of kings, (Reign of Antichrist).

Dupont elaborates further on his ideas about when the great king will reign in his work, “Catholic Prophecy.” There he writes: “There are two different stages within the latter days period: the first, heralding the final stage being of lesser intensity; the final stage bringing about the consummation of the world. To each of these two stages, the proximate signs of the End apply. Thus, we are now about to enter the first stage, the Great Disaster, which is imminent and which will be followed by a period of peace. He sees Communism as a forerunner of Antichrist, yet misses and the two men delivering Catholics from this, the Great Monarch and holy Pope, as a prefigure of Enoch and Elias. He bases this observation on Christ’s words in St. Matthew, Ch. 24:6: “But the end is not yet,” and in 24: 8: “But these things are but the beginnings of sorrows.” This falls into place with what St. Thomas says above. And yet the one thing that Dupont does not take into consideration here is that the Beast of the Sea, bearing the number 666 — that same beast who all commentators identify with the Abomination of Desolation foretold by Daniel, the Jewish precursor of Antichrist, Antiochus Epiphanes — precedes the symbolic 1,000 years of peace in Apocalypse and the re-chaining of Satan by St. Michael. His appearance conspicuously follows that of the Woman clothed with the sun, signifying, we believe, the beginning of the great apostasy in the 1500s with Our Lady’s Guadalupe apparition and the end of the apostasy foretold at Fatima, commencing with the year 1960.

This defined figure that is Antichrist is not even mentioned in the final assault on the Church prior to the consummation; instead Apoc. 20:7 speaks of the loosing of Satan proper and the reappearance of the false prophet, prelude to and messenger for Antichrist. Perhaps Antichrist proper is missing from this final act of the end times, and only appears prior to the brief and symbolic peace, because the appearance of the false prophet this time is enough to alert the faithful and avert Antichrist’s reappearance. At any rate, he does not figure predominantly after the peace, as he would if his appearance was postponed until then. In his work, Rev. Culleton distinguishes between the “day of the Lord” and the final judgment, pointing to II Thess. 2:8. He states that there appears to be a distinction between the two events mentioned here, where Christ slays the beast with the breath of His mouth and destroys the last vestiges of him with the brightness of His coming. He believes with the ancient Fathers and the majority of theologians that a brief peace and restoration of the Church will follow Antichrist’s death and the subsequent chastisement prior to the End proper.

The Great Monarch prophecies

According to Rev. R. Gerald Culleton’s scenario:

“Three powerful but evil rulers [will] cause a ‘flesh-hewing course of warfare’ and persecute Jews and Christians. They are to overcome their enemies. Two of them, however, seem destined to be overcome by the third, and he is to fall before a good ruler visibly aided by God. This visible aid is to be in some way a type of the three days darkness…The persecutions of that time will exceed in cruelty anything the world has ever seen and in no other time shall evil have so triumphed. Very few will remain faithful to God and live. It will seem as though the Church has ceased to exist. [But then the exterminating angels will bring the three days] during the last terrible battle, when all seems lost…When the darkness lifts, there will not remain alive on earth a single unconvertible evil man. [At that time] it would seem that Christ would appear in the skies or at least that there would be some happening typical of His Second Coming, and that it would be apparent that there was a preview of the last judgment…[and of] the millennium. Would the just-martyred by Antichrist then rise from the dead, this being the first resurrection spoken of in the Apocalypse? Would an earthly reward symbolical of heavenly rewards be bestowed upon the confessors who had escaped the beast? This seems not too clear, but we are led to expect at least this: that there follows the fall of Antichrist an interval during which there will be a universal peace and union in one faith under one shepherd with Christian life marvelously exemplified in the individual and in society. How long this symbol of a millennium will last is not clear but the common opinion of the Fathers was that it would not be long,” (“The Prophets and Our Times”).

While there are definitely Traditionalists at work trying to create their own idea of a great monarch and the fulfillment of these prophecies, this doesn’t mean these prophecies are any the less true or at least potentially so. If we accept such prophecies as authentic and properly recorded/reported, there seems to be some event of this nature ahead of us for the simple reason that there simply are too many ancient and newer (pre-1959) prophecies concerning the Holy Pope and the Great Monarch to summarily dismiss them all. It seems highly unlikely that so many of these saints and holy people would all have predicted the same thing if this man was to be a false king. The counterfeit king will probably appear to deceive at least some of the faithful but he will not succeed. Instead the true king will arrive in the name of St. Michael and with his aid to stand for the people, and will put the false king to flight. The following prophecies concerning the Great Monarch are listed in Culleton’s book:

• St. Caesar of Arles: After great miseries and trial, a prince exiled in his youth shall recover the crown of lilies, He will assist a Holy Pope in reforming the entire world.

• St. Bearcan: A great king renowned for his feats of arms will sail across the sea to Rome.

• Merlin: Predicted a German antipope and that a certain Royal Monarch would be the last King of England and would root out all heresies.

• St. Odile: A great warrior assisted by God will defeat an unjust conqueror.

• Leo the Philosopher: An imperial deliverer will save the kingdom and the people.

• Monk Adso: A king of the Franks (Germany) will possess the Roman empire.

• Monk Hilarion: The Great Eagle (monarch) will travel to Rome and help bring peace between the Pope and clergy.

• St. Thomas a Becket: A knight from the West will conquer Rome towards the end of the world.

• St. Hildegarde: Peace will return to Europe when the Great King takes the throne of France.

• Old English:  An Eagle (king) assisted by God shall come from the East. Universal peace shall reign in the world.

• Old Saxon: A king will be crowned, universal peace shall reign, then the end of the world will approach.

• Chronicles of Madgeburg: An emperor name Charles will rule Europe and restore the decayed state of the Church.

• Aystinger the German: A prince descended from the emperor Charles shall rule Europe and reform the Church.

• Old Italian: There shall come a general conversion to the faith of Chris• t under the Great Lion.

• Old Latin: A great French king will reign who will restore laws and religion.

• Abbot Joachim: The King of France will lend assistance to a remarkably holy pastor who will unite the East and West and crush all heresy and schism.

• Werdin Otrante: The Great Monarch will come to restore peace and the Pope will share in the victory.

• Prophecy of Orval: Predicts a holy pope and a Capetian king of France who will assist him.

• Abbot Herman of Lehnin: The people recover their king and the pope recovers his flock.

• John of the Cleft Rock: The Great Monarch will defeat the Mohammedans and God will raise up a holy pope.

• St. Bridget of Sweden: The Great Eagle will subdue the Mohammedans and people will return to the Church.

• St. Catherine of Siena: Predicts the restoration of the Church.

• St. Vincent Ferrar: When the Eagle (Great Monarch) shall capture the counterfeit king there will be a new reformation in the world.

• Fr. Jerome Votin: Heavenly dew shall fall upon the desolated earth and the Church afflicted. A son of royal blood shall govern France and the spirit of God shall be with him.

• St. John Capistran: Says a German emperor shall restore the Apostolic discipline. A great pope shall restore the Church following the death of Antichrist.

• St. Francis de Paul: A great leader of the holy militia wearing crosses on their breasts will kill all of God’s enemies and extirpate all heresies. There shall be one flock and one shepherd.

• Bd. Johannes Amadeus: Germany and Spain will unite under a great prince designated by God. Mass conversions will take place and peace and prosperity will follow.

• Nostradamus: Says the Great Monarch will reign who will return the Church to her old supremacy at about the same time a new pope is elected.

• David Porseus: A great Monarch will crush the enemies of the pope and conquer the East.

• Ven. Holzhauser: There will arise a valiant monarch anointed by God who will rule supreme in temporal matters while the pope rules supreme in spiritual matters. After a time of great upheaval and irreligion, all nations will adore God according to Catholic teaching.

• Rudolph Gekner: A great prince of the North will valiantly defend the Church of Christ and subdue the Muslims. A holy pope will reign at this time.

• Dionysius of Luxembourg: From the midst of His Church, God will raise up a great ruler who will lead erring souls back to the true faith.

• Monk of Werl: A strong European monarch will restore divine order to the Church, state and family.

• Fr. Laurence Ricci, S.J.: A great German duke (Great Monarch) will intervene by the aid of God at a time the world seems doomed. He will help the pope restore religion and there will be one flock, one shepherd.

• Capuchin Friar: A great monarch and a holy pope will reform abuses and destroy all heresies.

• Sister Marianne: The prince will reign whom people did not esteem before and there will be an unprecedented triumph of religion.

•Josefa von Bourg: Under a great monarch descended from St. Louis, the faith will spread as never before.

• Abbe Souffrand: The Great Ruler will perform great and noble deeds and these will convert unbelievers.

• Anne Catherine Emmerich: Her vision “of the holy emperor Henry” may refer to a past holy monarch, or may indicate that the Great Monarch descends from a previous German monarch.

• Bd. Anna Maria Taigi: A new pope chosen through the intercession of Sts. Peter and Paul will convert the world to Catholicism and this pope shall nominate a Christian King for the country of France.

• Bro. Louis Rocco: A great Catholic monarch shall arise after many wars and persecutions in Europe.

• Sr. Rose Adsenti of Taggia: A King will be restored to the throne of France.

• Joseph Goires: The people will be united under a powerful monarch who will make new laws and banish corruption.

Cure of Ars: The good shall triumph when the return of the king is announced. Religion shall flourish as never before.

• Brother Anthony Aix-la-Chapelle: A new German emperor is elected after many wars and travails and travels to meet the pope.

• Ven. Madeline Porzat: Our Lady will perform a great miracle and men will convert. A powerful ruler will destroy the wicked and a holy pope will reign.

• St. John Bosco: A great warrior will come from the north and meet the pope. Our Lady will appear. A true pope returns to Rome and the Church triumphs.

• Ossolinski Library Prophecy: Seems to suggest that America will assist in bringing the Great Monarch to power.

This appears to be the end of the mention of the Great Monarch in these prophecies, although many more foretell the triumph of the Church and predict the coming of a holy pope. That a king would figure in at all in modern-day affairs comes as a surprise to many people, so resigned to the rule of democratic despots and liberal prime ministers. But there is a reason that the world would turn to a monarch, and even those blind to religious truths can agree that today’s world leaders would scarcely be able to fight the Muslim forces with any success, if indeed they did not decide to embrace them. Success does not depend on numbers, but on favor with and devotion to God. Where would we possibly find this today? It would have to come from somewhere unexpected; out of the blue, just as the prophecies suggest. If a European king did reign and decided to take on an advancing army of Muslims, he would have no difficulty in finding those who would rally to his cause, even now. But especially following the expected chastisement, should the Muslims still prove to be a threat, the intent would be, as it was during the Crusades, to either convert them or utterly defeat them. It is amazing that the prophecies predict they will again pose a threat after all these years, but this only lends them more credence. If they got the Muslim part right, the Great Monarch shouldn’t be too far behind.

Many Catholics today are aware that we are in deep trouble because the Church as She once existed has disappeared from sight. While not all agree that the church in Rome is run by a usurper, many are keenly disappointed in and some are outright disgusted with the last four “popes,” even if they accept them as valid but fatally flawed successors of St. Peter. And Benedict 16 certainly isn’t getting any younger. For those who realize that the reign of these apparent successors is what stands in the way of resolving the crises in the Church, since as long as there are perceived successors a true pope cannot be elected, the advent of a Great Monarch could prove to be a crucial turning point in history. The last situation even anywhere remotely similar to our own was the Western Schism. During that tempestuous time, when three men reigned as pope, the schism was finally ended with the convocation of the Council of Constance. It was the German Emperor Sigismond and the antipope John XXIII who called the council, and when John XXIII later was deposed, it was Sigismond who rose to the occasion and kept the council moving forward. The only hope true Catholics have to resolve this crisis of authority in the Church is to find someone to champion their cause. If this could be done, with the insistence and cooperation of the people, an influential leader willing to fight for the papacy could force the deposition of the usurper, or on his death, see that a true pope was elected. But this situation would require much more.

Even in advance of such events, the valid and licit bishops and clergy either imprisoned or hiding in Communist countries or elsewhere would need to be located and freed. Some believe that a true pope (NOT the one, however, who some believe to be the “successor” of Siri) may even exist in hiding, and this is not impossible; but only a military leader who was a devout Catholic could possibly accomplish his release. Then these bishops and clergy would need to be sequestered and guarded until a true pope could be elected and installed. And if such installation in Rome or elsewhere was not possible owing to war or other catastrophes, then the new pope would need to temporarily rule in exile, under heavy guard. This is undoubtedly how the current interregnum will end. All the above prophecies inextricably link this monarch with a newly elected pope, a man described as very holy. Some attribute prodigies to his election and this may be the case; Bd. Anna Maria Taigi says Sts. Peter and Paul will come to designate the true pope. While it may dumbfound the faithful to think that such things really could occur in their lifetime, when the miraculous is so routinely scorned and discredited, it is the only real hope for an end to the imposture in Rome and the restoration of the Church.

Conclusion

The king appointed by God who reigns during the Age of Peace will undoubtedly subdue the Mohammedans, where the position held by Traditionalists would align them with the Muslims. Based on what is stated above, the king expected by Traditionalists today would be the antithesis of that king who reigns during the Age of Peace. He would not be a “genuine” Catholic monarch. The very fact that some Traditionalists holding racial and societal prejudices condemned by the Church are promoting this false king is proof enough that he cannot be the one intended by the saints and holy people who prophesied concerning his reign. This is only logical since many Traditionalists are in fact not truly Catholic, although they believe themselves to be, and therefore could be easily misled. In this present crisis, only God can restore the Church and occasion the return of the true hierarchy, necessary according to de fide Church teaching to restore the papacy and rebuild the Church. A true monarch would know where to find them, and he certainly would not be in league with Fascists. If a king sympathetic to their goals is pursued, he will not be the true but the false king, foretold by St. Vincent Ferrar. Some of those already aligned with who they believe this king to be are of the opinion that a true pope does exist in exile and are plotting his advancement once their king emerges. Unfortunately the “pope” they support is only one of many antipopes, and this alone will prove to be their downfall. As Christ said concerning Himself as the Good Shepherd, “I know mine and mine know me.” The ragged and malnourished flock in these times will be given the graces to recognize the voice of true shepherds and leaders and will know when to follow them.

More importantly, the order of all these things can be used as a sure guide to determine who the true and the false king will be. These two adversaries will likely meet each other on the battlefield prior to the chastisement or “great event,” but the actual defeat or death of the false king will come either during the chastisement or shortly thereafter. Antichrist has already reigned; the apostasy has occurred and the Sacrifice has ceased. These Scriptural prophecies already have seen fulfillment, and only those who follow the beast will deny this.

In 2004, press releases indicated that the Hinduism ecumenically tolerated by John Paul 2 during his reign had created a definite backlash against the Vatican. This toleration inspired one Muslim leader to call for a jihad against the church in Rome and a crusade by Muslim fundamentalists to seize Rome for its own political center of operations. It is not a far stretch to envision terrorists supported by neo-Fascist Traditionalists bombing Vatican City, inundating Rome and making good on their threats to establish headquarters there. As a “reward” for their support, Traditionalists would take over what was left, fulfilling Nostradamus prophecy concerning those rallying behind the Rosy Cross. So where would the new anti-Church relocate then? Incredibly, the answer to that question may have issued from the mouth of no less than the late Yasser Arafat during secret negotiations with the Vatican in 1993. According to a 1997 report issued by Barry Chamish, Arafat guaranteed JP2 perpetual control of several sites in the Holy City, including “political power over the old City of Jerusalem by the end of the millennium.” This “unwritten understanding” was first agreed upon in 1993, Chamish reported, and all further negotiations were to be kept secret. Chamish has no illusions about the Vatican’s true agenda.

“On the 10th of September, just three days before the signing of the Oslo Accords in Washington, the Italian newspaper “La Stampa” reported that then Foreign Minister Shimon Peres concluded a secret deal with the Vatican to hand over sovereignty of Jerusalem’s Old City to the Vatican and it was included in the secret clauses of the Declaration of Principles signed on September 13, 1993 in Washington, DC. In the same week that Israeli Foreign Minister and chief Oslo architect Shimon Peres signed the agreement, the Declaration of Principles with Yasser Arafat in Washington, the Israel-Vatican commission held a special meeting in Israel. Under the Vatican agreement the Israelis would give over control of the Old City to the Vatican before the year 2000. The plan also calls for Jerusalem to become the second Vatican of the world with all three major religions represented but under the authority of the Vatican. Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel but the Old City will be administered by the Vatican…The Vatican is going to have everyone believe this ‘mysterious individual’ who will ‘unite the faiths’ and appear in Jerusalem, which will be under the control of an authority headed by The Vatican.” Since the publication of Chamish’s article and Arafat’s death, no additional information on the agreement between the Vatican and Arafat has become available. Have B16’s dealings with the Muslims changed this arrangement? Or, since his apology to them, can it merely be chalked up to a public display intended to make the impression that Ratzinger is other than friendly with Islam? It is no secret that as a young man B16 was a member of the Hitler Youth group. Is it possible that he would readily surrender the Vatican into the right hands, especially given recent rumors he may resign?

Rev. E. S. Berry, in his work “The Apocalypse.” wrote in 1921: “Antichrist will establish himself in Jerusalem where a great number of Jews will have gathered under some such movement as Zionism…While Rome, the seat of the false prophet is smoldering in ashes, Christ and His faithful followers go forth to give battle against Antichrist and his allied kings…A careful reading of the Apocalypse shows clearly that Antichrist will appear long centuries before the last judgment and the end of the world.” So Berry alluded to a relocation of Antichrist’s “see” to the Holy City, but only following the subsequent destruction of Rome. Haydock and others commenting on Apoc. 18:2. say this is the destruction of “idolatrous” Rome, both in the early ages of the Church and at the time of Antichrist. That some major damage to the Vatican and the city itself may accompany the fall of the antipopes is not an illogical assumption, and cannot be excluded as a possibility. Pope Pius XII said: “If ever one day (We say this as a mere hypothesis) material Rome were to crumble, if ever this very Vatican Basilica, the symbol of the one invincible Catholic Church were to bury beneath its ruins…the historical treasures, the sacred tombs…the Church would not crumble or crack…The papacy would always endure,” (Address to the Students of Rome, Jan. 30, 1949). The false prophet Berry mentions rules in Rome, which could easily be taken as a reference to one who has set himself up as “Pope” under Traditionalist auspices, further muddying the waters.

Henry Cardinal Manning agrees with Berry’s scenario, bluntly stating that Rome’s physical destruction is inevitable. “Let the Church of Christ depart from Rome and Rome will be no more in the eyes of God than Jerusalem of old. Jerusalem …was cast down and destroyed by fire because it crucified the Lord of Glory; and the city of Rome…if it become apostate, like Jerusalem of old, will suffer a like condemnation,” (“The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy”) Manning cites as his sources for this statement “…the text of theologians in the greatest repute,” including Malvenda, Lessius, Erberman, St. Bellarmine, Viegas, and Cornelius a Lapide. It is possible that the true Great Monarch will relocate to Jerusalem once Rome is destroyed, perhaps by the Mohammedans; or it could be that some will try to falsify this prophecy by moving the NO church to Jerusalem and allowing Trads to occupy and “rebuild” Rome. Any number of scenarios could be run but God alone knows what lies ahead. At some point all will be interrupted by the chastisement. We cannot allow ourselves to indulge in the very thing that has sidelined Traditionalists all these years.

What Traditionalists have fallen prey to is the “political conspiracy theory” that links Freemasonry, Vatican II, the Kennedy assassinations, the Vietnam War, the Sindona affair, various elections of antipopes, moral decline, terrorist plots/attacks and other aberrations directly and exclusively to Zionist Jews. Many of these Traditionalists are imbued with a welter of various takes on the political conspiracy, depending on their own group’s beliefs and this involves religion to some extent, but is not the main focus of their concerns. Second guessing each other has become a favorite pastime as new “pieces” of the political conspiracy puzzle come to light, and this much to the neglect of the Church they claim has been the most unfortunate victim of the conspiracy. It is not for Catholics to waste time trying to unravel the inner workings of such things while ignoring the plight of the Church. Pope Leo XIII told Catholics in “Humanum Genus” that all secret societies spring from one source and all return to it. He did not identify that source specifically as Zionism, although prelates such as Msgr. Jouin were quick to point out that he intended to include them. Pope Leo identified the enemy as “a power almost equivalent to sovereignty…a state within a state.” He warned that from this power would evolve the very Godless system of politics we observe today. He did not advise anyone to participate in this political system, even in a peripheral way. His solution was simple and easily anticipated. He advised priests and bishops that “The multitude must be drawn to learn diligently the precepts of religion…the elements of those sacred truths in which Christian philosophy is contained.” Yet study of the faith is the one thing those calling themselves Catholic today seem incapable of mastering.

Pope Leo also defined the political goals of the secret societies in Humanum Genus as follows: “Power is held by the command or the permission of the people, so that, when the popular will changes, rulers may lawfully be deposed…The course of all rights and civil duties is either in the multitude or the governing authority…according to the latest doctrines.” This principle is reiterated in America’s own Bill of Rights, itself framed by Freemasons. It is the professed goal of nearly all ­right-wing paramilitary groups including Aryan nations and other neo-Nazi organizations, as stated in “The Turner Diaries.” A virtual bible for right-wing extremists, this novel calls for the violent overthrow of the present U.S. government, and the murder of Jews and nonwhites. This explains the militia mentality among Traditionalists. It also tells us that the groups they belong to are considered to be secret societies by the Catholic Church. And those who belong to such societies — even those who defend or support these societies in any way — are automatically excommunicated under Can. 2335, (1917 Code). All this is aside from the fact that racialism, naturalism and theosophy, three of the heresies constituting Nazism, are condemned separately by the Holy See.

If the popular will changes by gathering followers to the cause of a counterfeit Great Monarch, the U.S. government could theoretically become a despotic monarchy. He is to come from European stock, and yet here we speak of a United Europe that would be as ill disposed to accept him as the United States. He will arrive with an army. So it seems only logical given these facts that the governments of Europe and/or America first would need to topple of their own weight or by military coup. It seems most unlikely that Islam would fail to take advantage of a willing army of anti-Semites who want only to follow a fairy tale leader (who will help them elect or install yet another fairy tale “pope.”) A holy war that would annihilate Jews as well as destroy modern Rome is the ultimate dream of predominantly Protestant Identity believers. Likewise, both of these goals have topped the Islamic list for centuries. And many Traditionalists are as passionate and single-minded about this war as the Muslims themselves, believing that such a conflict is truly God’s will and the only solution to their own powerlessness and subjection to the Roman antiChurch. Such a volatile combination of kindred issues could only result in fueling a fire already white-hot in the Middle East and rapidly spreading to Western shores. As Farah reported years ago, indicators show that such a spread already had begun even then.

When journalist William Shirer first began noticing the advent of Nazism in France in 1934, it was attended by riots inspired by L’ Action Francais Monarchists, among other right-wing groups also agitating for stable government and employment opportunities. It seems the son of the current pretender to the French throne, the duc De Guise, inspired these riots at least in part. The son, then 26, felt the time was ripe to reclaim the Orleans monarchy, (“The Nightmare Years,”1930-1940, William L. Shirer, 1984). Shirer explained that France’s unstable government and political scandals, but most especially the Depression, precipitated the riots and created a favorable climate for Fascist rule, bringing in Hitler as another sort of messiah. His account of why the actual Fascist mentality triumphed and its devastating effects on France should put us on guard against similar precipitating circumstances in this country. If we fail to learn history’s lessons, we can only repeat them. Shirer’s words may one day be our own.

“In the bleak January of 1934…I was astounded by the strength of incipient fascism in [the French] democratic republic…Rowdy, antiparliamentary Fascist leagues had sprung up like mushrooms in France. Most of them appeared…to have the new and uglier quality I had seen in the Blackshirts of Italy and the Brownshirts of Germany…I could scarcely believe it — they were prowling the streets…beating up decent citizens and harmless politicians.” As for the French, “Their eyes [were] blinded to the mounting threat of Fascism, from within and from abroad…” (Ibid).

If we have not already forfeited the grace of a Great Monarch, and if such a Monarch is truly a Catholic reality, it is essential that we be on our guard against what St. Vincent Ferrar calls the “counterfeit king” (Culleton), and just as essential that we guard ourselves from being seduced by any counterfeit pope such a king would inevitably bring in his train. All in our world today is reduced to stark contrasts; good and evil, back and white, truth or lies and Christ or Antichrist. It is not surprising, then, that a possible future monarch and his accompanying pontiff would also have their mirror opposites.

 

About the Author

Since 1979, T. (Teresa) Stanfill Benns has written numerous articles on religious topics, focusing on exposing the conspiracy to overthrow the Catholic Church and world government, first exposed by the popes in the 18th century. She also is the author of several self-published works on this subject, in addition to working as an award-winning community newspaper reporter in Texas and Colorado for the past 17 years. For a detailed explanation of the subversion of the Catholic Church, why it happened and how it has divided even its own members, visit her website at http:// betrayedcatholics.com/wpcms and click on the articles section.

Content Protection by DMCA.com
Can Catholics Expect a Great Monarch?

Our Lady of Sorrows on Friday and Fatima controversy boundaries

+St. Vincent Ferrer+

Friday we celebrate the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows. This feast, according to Dom Gueranger, was consecrated by the Church in a special manner to the Sorrowful Mother under various titles beginning in 1423. That it was the intent of the usurpers to deprive us of this liturgical devotion to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary is seen by the fact that John 23 downgraded it to a commemoration only along with the feasts of St. George, Our Lady of Mt. Carmel, St. Alexius, Sts. Cyriacus, Largus and Smaragdus, the Impression of the Stigmata of St. Francis, Sts. Eustace and Companions, Our Lady of Ransom, St. Thomas a Becket and St. Sylvester. Feasts actually abolished include those of St. Philomena, St. Christopher, St. Barbara, St. Ursula, St. Nicholas, The Finding of the Holy Cross, St. John Before the Latin Gate, The Apparition of St. Michael, and St. Peter’s Chains. Twenty more saints were removed by Benedict 16, just in case those believing him to be any better than his predecessors might be reading this.

This is precisely why the prayer society is one of reparation. We wish all to consider the Friday during Passion Week in Lent, Feast of the Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin — the compassion of Mary in union with her Son’s martyrdom — as the official anniversary of the establishment of this prayer society. On this feast day, we ask members to pray for the cessation of all ceremonies that falsely claim to celebrate the Continual Sacrifice offered by our Lord on the Cross, a sacrifice the Blessed Mother shared with Him. These ceremonies not only wound the Sacred Hearts deeply but lead souls astray. We pray for the conversion of those celebrating them and those attending them. Please see the prayer society checklist for April at the end of this blog. All prayer commitments are voluntary.

Update on Material-Formal debate

A reasonably well-researched and brief article has been presented by a Sedevacantist “cleric” from St. Gertrude the Great explaining why the church and seminary there do not accept Guerard des Lauriers’ material-formal theory. The author proves his point, although he cites modern works in some places. In this article the following statement is made:

“…Since the Thesis holds that Bergoglio and his bishops receive legal designation to maintain the apostolicity from the part of the Church, then the only logical conclusion would be that we, the Traditional Bishops and priests, have not received legal designation… That the traditional clergy is illegal, that is, outside the true Church and true apostolicity… is a position which is defended by the Novus Ordo and the R&R position; but it must be rejected by the Sedevacantists… One cannot see these differences among the traditional clergy as something one can just express his opinion about, like a debate about the working of God’s grace in a soul. These questions pertain to where is the true Church of Christ, which obviously affects the salvation of souls… While it is true that one can err in good faith where the true Church is, no one can remain in the state of doubt about it.”

But it is not this false thesis itself which holds Traditionalists are outside the Church and true apostolicity, but the constant teachings of popes and councils. And it is true, this cannot be and must not be something that is relegated to a matter of opinion. If no one may remain in doubt about where the true Church is, as this Traditionalist rightly states, then the next article that must be presented is a believable, provable CATHOLIC documentation of Traditionalists’ ability to operate minus a true pope, which is the real elephant in the room everyone is ignoring. And please, leave Cekada out of the proofs and quotes and stick to solid papal, conciliar and Church-approved sources in any such presentation. The article excerpted above proves they have the ability on some level to conduct research. But unless they prove their case without resorting to epikeia and other fallacies of operation, they are what their opponents claim — headed for total discreditation and dissolution, just as the material formal crowd itself is headed, and that is inevitable in any case. Because If they honestly and diligently investigate, they will discover that the very lack of integrity they decry in the Novus Ordo and R&R types is lacking in their own justification for operating outside the papacy.

Either the R&R, Novus Ordo and Sedevacantist sects accept ALL true Church teaching as this recent article states or they will accept the “holy pope” and “great monarch” now waiting in the wings, soon to be handed to them by Bergoglio and company. As Henry Cardinal Manning so aptly warns: “Whosoever shall fall on this stone [the Rock that is St. Peter] shall be broken, but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder” (Matt. 21:44).

What in the world… The Fatima controversy

Even before writing my last blog on the actual legitimacy of the Fatima apparitions, several secular works questioned the apparitions from a non-Catholic standpoint making blasphemous, claims, basing conclusions on sketchy information and generally trashing devotion to Mary and belief in miracles. While I have doubts myself about just how far the entire affair was compromised, I do believe Our Lady appeared to the children. Exactly what she said and what has been added or subtracted over the years I do not know. And now the Church and the world is in such a state of chaos we will NEVER know the truth, and that is something we simply have to live with. I have never been big on private revelations although I did write a book on Fatima in 2012. Even in that book I expressed reservations. I personally believe the use of dates and numbers at Fatima speaks volumes, and I explained this in that work. There is a way to interpret the clues the Blessed Mother left in her apparitions in a totally Catholic manner, aside from the messages, that tells us all we need to know about what she came to warn us about, including the contents of the Third Secret. The fact that no one ever delved into the spiritual side of the apparitions is why we find ourselves in the midst of this debate today.

Who do we trust regarding revisionist history on Fatima — Protestants? Novus Ordo authors? Sci-fi enthusiasts? If we can’t trace it back somehow through trustworthy channels existing at least pre-1959 is it even reliable? Are there anytruly trustworthy channels, since it appears to have been corrupted and redirected secretly from within the Church itself? We can only speculate on all these things, really, and that goes for either side, pro or con. Given a fake sister Lucy (and this has been proven from several different sources; the best researched of these can be found at https://diesilli.com/blog/) and the fact that the Vatican called in all Sr. Lucia’s handwritten notes, along with the Third Secret in 1957, something was definitely up. And we know what was going on in the Vatican in the 1950s, as demonstrated in The Phantom Church in Rome. More research is necessary to establish the facts as far as this can be done and is underway. And until we have a better idea of what we are looking at, it is probably imprudent to proceed any further. So why the big stir in the first place?

Well yes, the last blog has caused some of that stir, but someone had to point out how Fatima was manipulated all those years to help accomplish Vatican 2. Felix Morlion was the force behind religious liberty and was working in concert with John Courtney Murray to pave the way for Vatican 2. He also was the one responsible for instilling liberation theology sympathies among the clergy in Central and South America, as the hatchet man for John 23rd and Paul 6. This should help document the subversion of the Church, not cause an overreaction that entirely trashes the apparitions. Nor should people reading how Fatima has been propagandized be tempted to adopt a Manichaean attitude towards the apparitions, assuming that because the what they see proceeding from Fatima today is being used so successfully for evil it must be evil in itself. This is the same type of thinking that prompts people to believe that guns, not the people who use them to maim or kill others, are evil in themselves, so guns must be banned. The contents of the Third Secret should be clear whether it has been released or not; we have it on the word of Holy Scripture. All the markers are there. And this is what the Church expects us to resort to in determining the truth, not apparitions.

First came the great revolt — the cardinals posit an invalid election exactly as anticipated in Pope Paul IV’s 1559 bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, which calls the usurpation of the Holy See by a heretic the arrival of the Abomination of Desolation. Once he who withhold is taken out of the way as St. Paul predicts (the papacy), the bishops would complete the revolt at Vatican 2. Then the Man of Sin is revealed for what he truly is, the counterfeit church is set up and the Holy Sacrifice is officially taken away. What more do people want? That should be enough for anyone, coming as it does from an infallible papal document as well as several places in Holy Scripture. But people refuse to see things for what they really are because they are afraid to believe we live in the very last days. Private prophecies and revelations allow them to interpret events privately, something not allowed in Holy Scripture and regarding papal decrees. They then can customize and adjust these events to suit the times and their own personal tastes. And they can speculate endlessly about the contents of the Third Secret, since it was never released, all the while ignoring the fact that we don’t need to know it — we are living it!

Those subverting the Church knew Fatima was a useful distraction, which is why we have Traditionalism today. It kept the fires of hope burning, telling Catholics that this was merely a temporary situation — eventually the “clans would be united” and a true pope could be elected, when this is no longer possible. As pointed out in the last blog, the “holy pope” everyone is expecting and restoration Traditionalists are awaiting can only be a creation of the counterfeit church, no matter how orthodox he may appear to be. And many will settle for that rather than accept the fact that Antichrist has already come and only God Himself can resolve — or end, once and for all — this incredibly painful trial. The Fatima messages were compromised to perpetuate that false hope as well — peace in the end no matter how we behaved or what else might happen; no need for a sufficient number of the faithful practicing prayer and penance and no need to figure out what was really going on in the Church. Do what you please; it will all work out in the end because that promise of Russia’s conversion and the subsequent peace was unconditional. This kept people focused on political developments, private revelations and prophecies to help shore up that hope because they felt it was all they had left.

It also fostered an unhealthy, cultistic attitude toward the apparitions that verged on Mariolatry, obfuscating the need to obey papal and conciliar teachings. This is why people like Schuckardt and Gruner were so successful. To be anti-Fatima was very nearly made the equivalent of being anti-Catholic; to belong to Traditionalist or conservative Novus Ordo sects and be accepted one had to go along with their devotions to get along. Even if they secretly harbored grave doubts, there are those who would not openly admit that Fatima was used as a propaganda tool by those who later set up the Novus Ordo. And this they do simply to appear to be part of the herd and avoid persecution. This is how, as Henry Cardinal Manning so well explains, the Incarnation and its earthly manifestation, the papacy, was driven from the face of the earth, setting the stage for Vatican 2. Perhaps papal obedience should have been part of the Fatima message as it was in Our Lady’s message to the children at La Salette. Who knows; maybe it was.

Knowing how and why Fatima was perverted is necessary to avoid the traps laid by the usurpers and their push to establish a worldwide religion in conjunction with the New World Order. They cannot be allowed to use Our Lady to make it appear her messages confirm their diabolical agenda. But with or without accepting Fatima as true, we are still tasked to save our own souls and that depends on accepting all the Church teaches up to the death of Pope Pius XII, not resorting to private revelations and prophecies to help figure out what’s going on in the world. We cannot be attacking each other over these apparitions which are not necessary for salvation. This is just another snare laid by the enemy to divide us even further. Yes, I know Fatima is approved by the Church but what exactly does such approval mean? Does it bind us for belief even when it is once realized that new doubts have arisen? The pronouncements of the Church should clear up any questions on this matter.

Concerning both Lourdes and La Salette, Pope St. Pius X wrote, in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis: “These apparitions or revelations have neither been approved nor condemned by the Holy See, which has simply allowed them to be believed on purely human faith, in the traditions which they relate, corroborated by testimony and documents worthy of credence. Anyone who follows this rule has no cause to fear.” St. Thomas Aquinas tells us human faith is an opinion strengthened by proofs, or certitude, which requires that the intellect firmly adhere to a given object. The Church allows belief in these apparitions on human faith arising from moral certitude as defined by the Council of Trent and Pope Benedict XIV. Pope Benedict XIV writes: “While there must not and cannot be given an assent of Catholic faith, there may, however, be given an assent of human faith following the rules of prudence and according to which these revelations are probable and piously credible,” (De Servorum Dei Beati…, 1747).

The following is taken from Rev. Michael Walsh, B.D., B.A., The Apparition At Knock – A Survey Of Facts And Evidence, 2nd ed. St. Jarlath’s College, Tuam, 1959. Pp 10-14. Chapter IV – Catholic Teaching: “In 1877 the [Sacred] Congregation of Rites was asked whether it approved the apparitions at Lourdes and La Salette. The reply was: “Such apparitions are neither approved nor reproved or condemned by the Holy See; they are simply authorised as pious beliefs on purely human faith, according to a tradition which has been confirmed by suitable testimonies and evidences.” (A.S.S., 11. 1877). As Walsh further notes: “Accounts of visions or apparitions are not to be accepted without serious examination… In general it can be said that until such time as a decision has been made by competent authority, two extremes are to be avoided in regard to reported revelations and apparitions. One is the credulous mentality which accepts all such stories uncritically. The other is the frame of mind which automatically rejects them. Neither attitude is scientific. Care must be taken to find the truth.”

Probable opinions are defined by theologians as those that are well founded either by the weight of the authority favoring it or the weight of the testimony and evidence supporting the opinion itself. Catholics may freely prefer any other opinion for any good reason (paraphrased from Rev. Sixtus Cartechini’s The Value of Theological Notes and the Criteria for discerning Them. This is also the teaching of St. Alphonsus Liguori and the theologians.) This is not to be confused with being unable to use a probable opinion where the sacraments or one’s eternal salvation is at stake. Fatima is not a sacrament; it does not involve the established rights of a third party nor is it necessary for our eternal salvation. A probable opinion can be used then to determine other matters not related to these three exceptions and this includes the matter of Fatima. So what well-founded evidence and testimony are we bound, as Catholics, to consider?

According to the Fatima Center website, “With the knowledge and consent of Pope Pius XI, on October 13, 1930, Bishop da Silva of Leiria (the diocese in which Fatima is contained) announced the results of the official inquiry of Fatima in a pastoral letter on the apparitions. This official approval contained these important paragraphs: “In virtue of considerations made known, and others which for reason of brevity we omit; humbly invoking the Divine Spirit and placing ourselves under the protection of the most Holy Virgin, and after hearing the opinions of our reverend advisors in this diocese, we hereby declare worthy of belief the visions of the shepherd children in the Cova da Iria, parish of Fatima, in this diocese, from the 13th May to 13th October, 1917 [and] permit officially the cult of Our Lady of Fatima.”

Pope Pius XII indicated his acceptance of the Fatima apparitions with his two consecrations, but he never officially approved the complete content of the messages per se, even though he had received photocopies of all of them from Sr. Lucia. He did the same with La Salette in 1946 (Acta Apostolica Sedis [AAS]; 38, 1946; 155), commenting that the investigation of the apparition of Our Lady at La Salette was “a canonical process that proved favorable.” But this does not embrace the controversial La Salette message and its many versions. The same is true of Fatima. We can believe in the apparitions then without believing necessarily in the exact particulars of the messages. And we certainly have every right to withhold judgment concerning these messages whenever there is undisputed proof, which there is in the case of Fatima, that they may have been wrongfully conveyed, or were possibly coerced, doctored, manipulated, or are being deliberately misinterpreted to fit a given political agenda. If Pope Pius XII appears to have had his doubts, no one can blame us for entertaining doubts of our own.

 So we are free to disregard Fatima entirely if we have any serious doubts whatsoever that it is true. What we cannot and must not do, in the interests of charity, is condemn each other for believing either pro or con that Fatima is true or false. The Blessed Mother has so much to mourn for in these evil times, and we add this to her sorrows? In the interests of charity and peace among the few of us who are left, there must be no condemnation either way — to believe or disbelieve; no insistence that anyone order their conscience either way; this is precisely what Traditionalists do to retain their followers. Peaceful toleration of both beliefs must prevail until a true pope can advise further on the matter, should we ever see one.

Chaos is such a useful tool in creating dissension and disunity. We daily see the results. We have our Lord, we have the teachings of his vicars on earth, we have the Blessed Mother in all her many lovely manifestations. Why do we need anything more?

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Prayer Society Intention for April: Devotion to the Eucharist by refusing to dishonor it

(Compiled by Victoria Rodriguez)

St. Vincent Ferrer

🔲 Fast/Ab

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

 6 Wednesday

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

7 Thursday

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

 8 Friday

Seven Sorrows of the BVM

🔲 Fast/Ab

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

🔲 Spiritual Mass and Mortification for the intentions of the Society

🔲 Celebrate with special devotion the Feast of the Sorrowful Heart

🔲 Renew consecrations to SH and SIH to promote their interests and intentions

9 Saturday dedicated to Our Lady

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Berthe Petit’s Consecration

🔲 Holy Rosary  

10 Palm Sunday  

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

11 Holy Monday

St. Leo I

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary  

12 Holy Tuesday

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary    

13 Holy Wednesday

St. Hermenegild

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary  

14 MAUNDY THURSDAY

🔲 Fast

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary   

15 GOOD FRIDAY

🔲 Fast/Ab

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

🔲 Spiritual Mass and Mortification for the intentions of the Society

16 HOLY SATURDAY

🔲 Fast/Ab Until Noon

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Berthe Petit’s Consecration

🔲 Holy Rosary  

17 EASTER SUNDAY 

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

18 EASTER MONDAY   

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

19 EASTER TUESDAY   

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

20 Easter Wednesday 

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

21 Easter Thursday

St. Anselm

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

 22 Easter Friday 

Sts. Soter & Caius

🔲 Ab

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

🔲 Spiritual Mass and Mortification for the intentions of the Society

23 Saturday dedicated to Our Lady

Easter Saturday

St. George  

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Berthe Petit’s Consecration

🔲 Holy Rosary  

24 Low Sunday

St. Fidelis 

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

25 Monday

  1. MARK, Ev

🔲 The Greater Litanies

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

26 Tuesday

Sts. Cletus & Marcellinus

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

27 Wednesday

St. Peter Canisius

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

28 Thursday

St. Paul of the Cross. and St. Vitalis

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

29 Friday

St. Peter of Verona

🔲 Ab

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Devotion to the SIH

🔲 Holy Rosary

🔲 Spiritual Mass and Mortification for the intentions of the Society

30 Saturday dedicated to Our Lady

St. Catherine of Siena

🔲 Morning Offering in reparation for our sins

🔲 Consecration by Pope Pius XII

🔲 Berthe Petit’s Consecration

🔲 Holy Rosary  

Prayers to be Practiced in Common 

▪︎Spiritual Mass in union with all of the Sacrifices of the Mass ever offered throughout the world, preceded by the Perfect Act of Contrition and followed by Spiritual Communion.

▪︎Devotion to the Agonizing Heart of Jesus, in favor of the many thousands of persons who die every day.

▪︎Devotion to the souls in Purgatory.

Content Protection by DMCA.com
Can Catholics Expect a Great Monarch?

The Horrors of Unbelief and the Passion of the Church

J+M+J

Prayer Society Intention for April: Devotion to the Eucharist by refusing to dishonor it.

(Read the life of St. Hermenegild for April 13)

First Friday and Saturday April 1 & 2

There has been some dismay expressed regarding the objections to a prayer society and a call for common sense about such things — something that is much needed. Glad to see someone realizes that these objections are truly specious and shouldn’t need to be answered by providing a mini-Canon Law dissertation (lol).  Jansenistic rigorism had thoroughly coursed through the veins of the spiritual life long before the death of Pope Pius XII, an over-reaction to liberal inroads that blurred the lines between the passivity of quietism and the heresy of action. Some modern-day Traditionalist groups revived full-blown rigorism and it has left its mark on many exiting from those sects. It seems pretty obvious to a rational person to conclude that without a superior to ask permission, one may proceed, if cautiously, but then who is rational these days?

And that is the real problem; we are no longer dealing with rational human beings, but products of ruthless propagandization and even delusion. Does the phrase lying wonders strike a chord? It should, now more than ever. What I am about to suggest below is slowly becoming a consensus among those praying at home. And while it may raise eyebrows, there is every indication that we need to calmly and objectively re-evaluate this entire Fatima business based on information that has only become available in the last few decades. That is what rational people do, and we can ill-afford to ignore the many alarming signs that the Fatima messages as we were taught to understand them were politicized and prostituted to promote a one-world agenda, just then emerging under Woodrow Wilson following WWI. This may be upsetting and objectionable to readers, but we ignore the truth at our own peril.

Fatima “consecration” March 25

Oh what great care was taken to make this dog and pony show look oh so reverent, even “traditional” (not). All the exterior trappings were in place. Even the wording of the “consecration” seemed uncharacteristically unobjectionable. Surely many were sucked in. They cannot and will not look around them and see the devastation caused by Vatican 2 and Traditionalism (Masonic and political) and conclude that this cannot be and is not the Catholic Church.

St. John’s Apocalypse mentions the need to do penance six times in his address to the seven churches (Ch. 2 and 3); again to those who have survived the plagues loosed by the four angels to kill one-third of mankind (9: 21-22) and twice in Ch. 16, when the angels pour out their seven vials of wrath and men blaspheme God rather than do penance.  War, famine, plagues, universal bankruptcy — nothing will convince those deceived by the operation of error that the promised Fatima peace is not theirs simply because they failed to abandon the Roman usurpers and the bishops and priests they held as idols. Nor will they heed the final call of the angel to leave Babylon (pagan Rome) in Apoc. 18:4: “Come out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sins and that you receive not of her plagues.” All the Marian messages delivered in the 1800s, right down to the last messages before the death of Pope Pius XII — all of them demanded prayer and penance, so we know this part of the Fatima message, at least,  is genuine. But who was listening? According to Our Lady herself, very few, and today we are reaping the whirlwind.

The fulfillment of the Fatima promise of Our Lady was dependent on the required number of souls practicing prayer and penance as we have pointed out in a previous blog. Those engaging in idolatrous practices since the death of Pope Pius XII, having never heeded the angel’s command to leave the Babylonish whore, cannot possibly hope to satisfy that request. Fatima at this juncture, however useful it may be as a tool for the establishment of a new world order and religion, is really a moot point for Catholics today because it has been perverted in ways we cannot even fathom. So I am going to try and explain what needs to be said here by telling a story. It may become confusing at times but please bear with me.

The key to understanding everything

During the 19th century, there was an alarming surge in occultism and secret societies. We know the papal condemnations of the secret societies began in the late 1700s. Popes Pius IX and Leo XIII continued these condemnations. But it was not just Freemasonry they condemned but ALL secret societies, and they went under many disguises as Pope Leo XIII explained in Humanum Genus. It was in the 19th century that a very sinister form of Gnosticism began to emerge that involved several different related secret societies working in concert. It manifested itself in various ways, both religious and political. It involved Kabbalism, the ancient Gallicanist heresy, theosophy, naturalism, syncretism, ecumenism, the Liberal Catholic and Old Catholic sects, neo-Modernism, Nazism, a return to an unCatholic type of monarchical rule and what Pope Pius XII would refer to as black paganism — hedonism, immodesty, individualism and rationalism. If Modernism was the “synthesis of all heresies,” neo-Modernism is merely that same synthesis, widened to include all the new variations of those same heresies we see today.

The best way to describe the operation of all these systems is to compare it to Santeria, the practice of paganism under the guise of Catholic devotion to the saints. The practitioners of these systems and members of the groups above have all worked in concert to concoct a religion that outwardly appears to be Catholicism but secretly could be practiced as any of the Egyptian mystery religions connected to Freemasonry including gnosticism. This “wedding” of Catholicism with paganism is the syncretism expressed in the heathen philosophies of Plato and the Greek philosopher Pythagorus in the early centuries B.C. Today’s brand of syncretism assimilates Christianity, also Kabbalism, (Jewish mysticism), with these and the other philosophies named above, amounting to a pagan sort of Christianity.

Priory of Sion, Hieron du Val d’Or

To provide an example of how this would work, let’s say that one believed in the heresy that Christ did not die on the Cross, escaping instead to France with Mary Magdalene and Joseph of Arimathea and fathering a family. This is what the Priory of Sion, which Lefebvre apparently belonged to, is all about. They further believe that Jesus’ descendants then founded the monarchical dynasties of nearly all the European nations. Holding this heresy, you could speak of Jesus, Mary and Joseph all day long, while meaning something entirely different than Catholics! Another example of this is provided by the founders of the Hieron du Val d’Or, a group affiliated with the Priory of Sion. If beliefs from that group were held, one could foster devotion to the Sacred Heart while believing it represented the third eye of Shiva, head of the Hindu gods. This is where ecumenism was going all along, first with toleration of all religions and the teaching that anyone could be saved in any religion. This then progressed through the hidden actuation of this dual belief system by the secret societies who had penetrated the Church, linking any religion desired to Catholic practice and credo.

Catholic writer Mary Lejeune warned in the 1970s that the Traditionalist sects they were joining were occult-based and Masonic in origin, but to no avail. Author Craig Heimbichner, in his Blood on the Altar (2005) notes that many of those initially singing the praises of the Latin Tridentine Mass in the late 1960s, early 1970s were practicing theosophists, who succeeded in luring Traditionalists into “Latin Mass” groups. Theosophy, founded by Russian-born Helena Blavatsky around 1875, “combined elements of Plato’s philosophy with Christian, Buddhist, and Hindu thought (including reincarnation), in a way that she claimed had been divinely revealed to her,” according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary. Heimbichner links the awe for the old Mass to C.W. Leadbetter, founder of the Liberal Catholic (Theosophical) church in Sydney, Australia in 1917, citing several quotes proving theosophic occultism later was introduced into Traditional circles. Dr. Leslie Rumble, wrote an article for the Homiletic and Pastoral Review in March 1958 entitled Are Liberal Catholic Orders Valid?  Under the subhead “Magical Sacraments,” Rumble comments as follows on Leadbetter’s consecration as bishop by the Old Roman Catholic bishop Wedgwood: “Already in Anglican orders, [Leadbetter] evidently hoped to obtain, from his episcopal consecration, an intensification of psychic force and of clairvoyant powers!”

Aleister Crowley, OTO and the “magical mass”

Heimbichner quotes author James Wasserman as stating that “Persons of Gnostic-hermetic interests have more in common with traditionalist Catholics than with either modernist Vatican II Catholics or with Protestants…The right-wing exploits a superstition among some Catholics who hold to a kind of unspoken “magic sacramentalism,” [condemned by Pope St. Pius X in his encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis against Modernism–Ed], “i.e, the notion that being present at the Holy Mass itself, with its awe-inspiring solemnity and its bells, incense and candles — not one’s state of grace, fidelity to the Commandments of God or relationship with Jesus Christ — becomes the individual’s guarantor of sanctity.” Heimbichner calls this a “Satanic perversion” of Catholicism, mixing pagan elements with the true, much as is done in the Satanic rituals connected to Voodoo and Santeria, as noted above. He links all this to Aleister Crowley’s the Golden Dawn and his Order of Oriental Templars (OTO). Here we must quote more from Heimbichner on this magic sacramentalism as understood by practitioners of theosophy:

“If the Mass is that kind of magic, as stated by a seminary lecturer and prominent writer for the largest traditional Catholic group in America, [presumably the St. Pius X Society-Ed] then the priest must be a magician. This magical sacramentalism falsifies the reality of the Eucharist and satanically mocks it by twisting it into a totem of the eternal Pagan cycle drama rather than upholding the truth that as the embodiment of Calvary the Eucharist is the sole ontological exception to that cycle drama. The occult heresy of magical sacramentalism and the aristocratic caste mentality it fosters reflects the hierarchical order Crowley sought to impose. The model Crowleyan hierarchy has no accountability. A megalomaniac does not brook interference. Checks and balances are nonexistent.

“The goal is absolute power without restraint. Where better to launch such a totalitarian project in the ranks of breakaway traditional Catholics who crave the restoration of order and obedience but who do not recognize any higher earthly authority other than the prelates who rule over their particular group? I hasten to add that this perverted magical belief is not intrinsic to Catholicism; rather it is just that: a satanic perversion. Pope Pius V convened the council of Trent in part to crush this heretical counterfeit theology, a function of this ‘Satan is the ape of God’ process.The crisis today is that orthodox authentically traditional Catholics too often do not wish to confront this growing menace in their ranks, preferring instead to sweep it under the rug which is exactly what the occult infiltrators hope they will do.

Fascism and totalitarianism

“Magical sacramentalism is not the only means for transforming pious Catholics into slavish occultists. If we studied the juncture at which royalism and monarchism intersect with the once secret heresy which teaches that certain of the crowned heads of Europe were literally genetic descendants of Jesus Christ, we begin to discern the emergence of an organization that would have an authority so divine it could not be resisted by any believing Christian. The law of this illumination to occultists seeking to impose totalitarian rule is nearly irresistible. Their modern agent in this regard was Pierre Plantard who founded the Priory of Zion. Aleister Crowley preached occult fascism, venerated Adolf Hitler and rabbi Blau and remained a British agent and crypto Zionist all of his life.” It was Thomas Case writing for Fidelity Magazine in the 1990s who assayed the Traditionalist sects and found that several clergymen were markedly anti-Semitic, with definite neo-Nazi or British Israel leanings.

“There is a virulent sickness of hatred and Hitlerism running through the Traditional Catholic movement,” Case wrote. “Society of St. Pius X [priests] in France see Marshall Petain as a hero, and his pro-Nazi Vichy government of World War II as a paragon of virtue. Catholic Traditionalism as a whole in France is imbued with extreme right-wing politics…the historical dream of a restored Catholic Monarchy, allied with pro-Hitler, anti-Semitic fascism.” Case points out that like the Action-Francais movement in the 1930s, condemned by Pope Pius XI, (atheistic) right-wing political interests are absorbing Traditionalists and using them to promote their own hidden agenda. When journalist William Shirer first began noticing the advent of Nazism in France in 1934, it was attended by riots inspired by L’ Action FrancaisMonarchists, among other right-wing groups also agitating for stable government and employment opportunities. It seems the son of the current pretender to the French throne, the duc De Guise, inspired these riots at least in part. The son, then 26, felt the time was ripe to reclaim the Orleans monarchy. Shirer explained that France’s unstable government and political scandals, but most especially the Depression, precipitated the riots and created a favorable climate for Fascist rule, bringing in Hitler as another sort of messiah. And here we see the entire world being set up for the reign of just such a “savior.”

Monarchism and the Great King

One Traditionalist website has claimed for years that this French Monarch has amassed a large army and is only waiting until the time is right to commence the fulfillment of his mission. This individual (also another person who has since distanced himself from him) promotes the idea of a “hidden pope” who is waiting in the wings and will soon make himself known to the world. These sites quote numerous Catholic prophecies supporting the advent of such a monarch. They believe he will rule with this hidden pope during an era of peace for the world predicted at Fatima and elsewhere.  According to a Wikipedia article brought to my attention by a loyal reader, “The Hiéron’s agenda was the creation of a new Habsburg and Catholic Holy Roman Empire with a French temporal and spiritual head in the manner of the Grand Monarch, an association of Europeans bound by common law and dedicated to advancing the mission of Christ the King.” (Here they cite sources linked to the Priory of Sion.) “They claim the existence of a secret parallel Catholic tradition called l’Eglise d’Avignon (Church of Avignon), which they trace to the medieval Papacy installed in Avignon from 1309 to 1378. The claim is that it continued in secret with a Pope who represents the esoteric aspects of the Catholic Church. L’Eglise d’Avignon is said to serve as an intermediary between the Roman Church and the Eastern Orthodox tradition.” So just as was noted in our last blog, the plan all along has been to absorb the Eastern Orthodox churches.

My, my, my… Now we know where all of this hidden pope business is leading us to. And we also know why they seem to be linked to shady sources and personages and are reportedly ultra-secretive with their followers, even to the point of threatening those who stumble upon their secrets or question their authority. After all, who wants anyone to know they aren’t really Catholic?!!! Let’s explore this Gallican Church they talk about establishing and dig a little deeper here. Because I think we have discovered the answer to why it is that there are so many similarities between Traditionalist and Gallicanist/Old Catholic organizations: They are one and the same! This one-world church has already been established internationally by various Traditional groups who appear to be disconnected — it is just waiting for a head. And the Catholic Restoration bunch as well as others out there are only too happy to promote those involved in keeping this “parallel papacy” alive and well until the appointed time. No doubt they will present someone at least remotely presentable who will then become the “holy pope” predicted by the prophecies, minus any pretensions to infallibility. And many panicked Traditionalists will fall for it.

Gallicanism was at its height during the time of the Western Schism. Its advocates worked hard to promote their beliefs, voiced as follows by Jean Gerson from Henry Cardinal Manning’s The Pastoral Office: “Bishops in the primitive Church were of the same power as the PopeThe decision of the Pope alone, in matters which are of faith, does not as such bind (anyone) to believe… ‘The Roman Church, the head of which is believed to be the Pope ……may err, and deceive and be deceived, and be in schism and heresy, and fail to exist.” Are not these all the very teachings that have emanated from Traditionalism? And these same beliefs also were held by Gerson’s contemporaries Peter d’Ailly, Almain and others. Later in The Catholic Encyclopedia article on Gallicanism, which should be read in full to properly understand this topic, the author tells us that during this time period and even before, those promoting Gallicanism believed that bishops were equal to the pope in the sense that they received their commission directly from Christ and without any need for its activation or regulation by the Pope. So there you have it. Apparently the Gallicanists were agents of those who believed that the French kings ruled by Divine right as descendants of Christ, per the Priory of Sion heresy, and therefore those rights should take precedence over any exercised by the pope. Sound familiar?

Now does everyone understand why the Vatican Council was called specifically to condemn Gallicanism? Is it not clear that Pope Pius IX realized the storm that was about to break regarding the dogma of infallibility? If those believing themselves to be Catholic wish to sell their birthright to this monstrosity that is parading as Traditionalism, then at least they should know exactly what it is they are getting themselves into. Private revelations such as Fatima and age-old prophecies regarding the Great Monarch and a holy Pope reigning during an era of peace —  the same peace promised at La Salette and Fatima — all must be seen now for what they truly are: genuine revelations in the beginning perhaps, but later manipulated by Freemasons to promote their one-world agenda (see more on the Great Monarch hoax here). And we mention Fatima because sadly there is every indication it has been more highly co-opted and politicized than any other revelation, with the possible exception of La Salette. Both of these apparitions actually happened and the resulting revelations are true in part, but what part? La Salette seer Melanie Calvat was relentlessly persecuted and Sr. Lucia dos Santos may well have been murdered to prevent her from possibly revealing the third secret on her own.

Doctrinal warfare and psychopolitics

In 2015, David A. Wemhoff published his monumental 990-page biography on Jesuit John Courtney Murray, (John Courtney Murray, Time/Life, and the American Proposition: How the C.I.A.’s Doctrinal Warfare Program Changed the Catholic Church; South Bend: Fidelity Press, 2015). In his work, Wemhoff describes the operation used to subvert the Catholic Church and names those who were responsible for its implementation. “The Doctrinal Warfare Program is the name given to a classified US Government operation commenced in 1953 (in a document entitled PSB D33 with annexes) which targeted the intellectuals, business leaders, and clerics in a number of different societies with the goal of having them approve of the American ideology in principle,” (read here “adopt the heresy of Americanism). The program also was referred to as “psychological warfare” or “psychopolitics.” Wemhoff explains that psychological warfare involved “the manipulation of words, events, and ideas to shape a target audience’s views ideas, perceptions and beliefs.” It was Time/Life media mogul Henry R. Luce who honed it as a weapon using the written word and, with the help of his associates, embedded it in newspapers and other publications throughout the world. One of these associates was John Courtney Murray, another the Jesuit Gustave Weigel and yet another, Dominican Felix Morlion. There were many others.

A detailed explanation of how this program was applied, at least from a journalistic standpoint, is presented in Morlion’s 1944 work, The Apostolate of Public Opinion. This book basically laid the groundwork for how to mold public opinion in a certain way to produce the desired results, using Catholic and secular print, radio and television media. With Fatima the desired results were to employ it as a political tool to fight Communism during the Cold War and promote the democratic ideal as one that could be reconciled with Church practice, paving the way for the laity’s greater role in Church affairs following Vatican 2. While Communism may have been the error intended by Our Lady in her message to the three children, it could also be said that her use of dates and numbers pointed to a warning regarding the errors of Freemasonry, not Communism.  Many forget that Communism is only one of the many levels found on the Masonic pyramid. But no one wished to hear about Freemasonry, even though Marx, Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky were all high-ranking Freemasons and members of the Illuminati, according to Internet sources. One work claims the Soviet Union was abolished only to rule under another name — the European Union. The plan was to make nice with the Masonic sect, which is exactly what John 23 did.

Felix Morlion and Pro Deo

For those attempting to see Fatima in a new light, the Freemason angle is important. The Jesuit Fr. Robert Graham reportedly confirmed to one news outlet that Morlion was a CIA agent. who answered to head Jesuit Janssens, OSS operative Giovanni Montini, (who later became Paul 6) and John 23. Giuseppe Cardinal Siri also is reported to have been appointed as a Pro Deo official. Morlion later established Pro Deo, a “Catholic” intelligence agency, with the help of Office of Strategic Services (OSS) director Bill Donavan. The OSS was a forerunner of the CIA. Pro Deo University was established in Rome in 1945. An Internet document dated 1957 reports that “James D. Zellerbach has been succeeded by Louis Rabinowitz… Fred Altschul, Nathan Cummings, Leo Cherne and David Steinman… the first Jewish members on the Board of Directors of the American Council. Other members include Henry Luce, Dean Harry Carman, Huntington Hartford and C. D. Jackson. It has the approval of church authorities through the cooperation of a Doctrinal Council composed of members of the Dominican Order, responsible for its religious and philosophical inspiration in the spirit of Thomas Aquinas as developed in Vittoria and Bellarmine for national and international government by consent.” Conspiracy theorists will recognize Jackson as the founder of the Bilderbergers. Truly we see here an ecumenical and conspiratorial board of trustees.

We could lead readers through the maze of Masonic and other conspirators and trace them all to their final destination — the destruction of the Church — but we would be preaching to the choir. Most readers are already well aware of the players in this game. So what is the bottom line to all this? Morlion began what we now see today as the corruption of the media, slanting the news in ways that can never be fully appreciated. It is interesting to note that he first set up his news agency under the direction of Cardinal Cerejeira in Lisbon before relocating to the U.S. in 1941. Shortly thereafter, in 1943, Lucia was told by Bishop da Silva to write out the third secret. She delivered it to him via messenger in a sealed envelope in 1944. There it remained until the Holy Office demanded the secret be delivered to Pope Pius XII in 1956-57. This according to Bro. Michael in his The Whole Truth About Fatima: The Third Secret. Later the Holy Office also demanded that a photocopy of all of Sr. Lucia’s writings be sent to the Vatican. Bro. Michael writes that the intent of the Holy Office in doing this was “…to snatch it from the hands of the future recipient, Cardinal Cerejeira” (p. 496). No real reason is given for this comment. But the author further notes that beginning in 1956, there was a notable cooling on the part of Pius XII to the entire Fatima message.

Pius XII and Fatima

In retrospect, we see above a chilling indication that Pope Pius XII may very well have been tumbling to the fact that there was something very wrong regarding Fatima. He may even have begun to suspect that Sr. Lucia had passed away, to be replaced by a double. Certainly, beginning in 1954 following his near brush with death, (which several attribute to poisoning), the pope became a different man, limiting contact with the public, refusing to fill key Curia and other Vatican offices and generally withdrawing from the outside world. Yet his writings continued; he was ever the shepherd. Some claim that when he was favored with a vison of Christ before his recovery, which Pius XII publicly confirmed, Christ left him with a message. That message was placed in a sealed envelope to be opened by his successor. If indeed this is the case, it died with the Fatima Secret; but as with that secret, we know the contents. Some believe his death also could be contributed to poisoning, something later testified to by one of the Swiss guards instructed to watch over his decaying corpse on display in the Vatican.

The early decomposition of Pius XII’s body later was contributed to a botched embalming process, but one physician reportedly whispered to the guard that it was actually an attempt to hide the poisoning. It is certainly possible that those so close to their victory could not afford to deal with a “woke” pope, and so Pope Pius XII had to be removed. Physicians later testified that excluding the hiccups he experienced during his previous illness, which had returned with a vengeance, he was otherwise a very healthy man and should have lived much longer. But the Pope knew before his death what would happen. He is said to have commented to one cleric: “After me, the deluge.”

Blaspheming Our Lady

What is said above about the dual belief system observed by pagan and Masonic “Catholics” who have infiltrated the Church has, sadly, been extended to devotion to Our Lady as well. One theosophist author, J.J. Van der Leeuw, gives us a crude hint at what reverence for the Blessed Mother could mean in a pagan context. “When we turn to that most ancient religion of Hinduism, we find that every male deity has… his feminine counterpart of aspect and thus the idea of the motherhood of God is interwoven through the entire structure of this great religion of Hinduism. In the religion of ancient Egypt, God the mother was worshipped as Isis… and the Trinity of that great religion of light was Osiris, Isis and Horus, the son. This is the identical conception of the great mother in all the ancient religions.” Van der Leeuw calls this a “better understanding of the third person of the divine Trinity — God the creator, the divine mind, and the divine mother — and he urges people to try and comprehend these realities so that they may worship the eternal mother in their daily lives and experience “the divine transmutation of the creative energy, the Magnum Opus, by which man becomes more than man; by which man becomes God” (The Fire of Creation, published in 1976).

This is nothing more than pure secular humanism intertwined with transgenderism, and the worship of God’s mother as divine! The author concludes his work with the following: “It is by giving the worship of Our Lady the proper place in the Christian religion… that we can actively insist in bringing nearer that religion of the near future, which in its ideals will show us the unity that binds what we call the masculine and feminine aspect in all things…This precious heritage…the worship of God the Mother…(will), in the Christianity of the future, be a great and splendid religious ideal.” Van der Leeuw’s references to “sacred sex”, aka Aleister Crowley’s “sex magic,” tells the rest of this disgusting and distressing story. So here we have the reason why Theosophy reveres Our Lady, and New Age priestess Annie Besant is even featured in one photo holding a rosary. The idea of God as a woman is not new. As Gnosticism progressed and mingled with other sects, the teachings of the Ophites and Naassenes, who worshipped the serpent as the first created being who possessed all wisdom, were mixed in with Barbelo-Gnostic teachings.

Mgr. Cristiani, in his book Satan in the Modern World, relates that in 1957 a work appeared written by one R. Barbeau that identified Leon Bloy as a confirmed Satanist. Based on correspondence from Bloy himself, Barbeau revealed that Bloy revered Satan as the Holy Ghost. This new twist on Barbelo Gnosticism resulted from the influence of the above-mentioned sects that later introduced serpent worship. But Bloy takes the female spirit idea one step farther — he identifies this Barbelo spirit as Our Lady and Satan at the same time. Bloy wrote the book She Who Weeps, dedicating it to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. This book incorporated Melanie’s version of the secret, interpreted according to Bloy’s Gnostic “revelations.” For this reason Pope St. Pius X, in 1911, forbade the circulation of the book and any further interpretations of the secret. Bloy proposed that Mary was weeping at La Salette because Our Lady’s tears were an expression of her sadness over the fact that Satan has been exiled from heaven and is so little appreciated! He styles her “triumph” as the winning, by Our Lady, of God’s forgiveness of Satan and the banishment of hell.  This was a theme expressed by “Cardinal” Karol Wojtyla in a Lenten address before Paul 6 in March of 1976 (Sign of Contradiction, Wojtyla).

Conclusion

All the above is reported with regret and great sorrow, yet we feel the information is necessary to make better sense of where all of this is heading and why. It is only a bare sketch of what is really going on, which would take an entire book to explain. Certainly we will not hear it on the nightly news, even if we read between the lines, thanks to Felix Morlion and his successors. This is the true Passion of the Church — being forced to stand by and watch helplessly as Our Lord is crucified a second time and His Church desacralized and presented to the world as the creation of Satan. This is what requires our prayers and sacrifices, although we can only hope to dress the wounds, not heal them.

And it should explain why the prayer society is named as it is — Society for Reparation to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. Not only have her messages been ignored, they have been perverted to promote those things most offensive to her Sorrowful Heart. All the more reason why we cannot use this as an excuse to neglect what is requested by Our Lord and Our Lady simply because some might misinterpret it, for this is human respect. Nor, when there is sufficient doctrinal basis for what is contained in these messages, can they be dismissed as unworthy of circulation or “optional,” especially when what is predicted comes to pass. At the very end, her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart will triumph, and peace will finally reign when she crushes the head of the abominable serpent.

Content Protection by DMCA.com
Can Catholics Expect a Great Monarch?

No approval needed for prayer society; and the Church’s passion begins in earnest on March 25

+ St. Gabriel, Archangel +

Some have asked if the Church allows lay people to participate in and establish prayer societies. I originally and mistakenly quoted Can. 686 on this subject years ago, but this canon does not refer to the type of society we recently invited people to join, for several reasons enumerated below. The Society for Reparation to the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary:

  1. is not a community that lives in common, such as religious do;
  2. does not collect dues or participate in any sort of fundraising activities;
  3. is not offering anyone any special indulgences granted to it as a society;
  4. has no set minimum requirements for membership, only suggestions and
  5. has no governing body.

Therefore, it does not even exist as defined by the Church itself and is strictly a lay organization. The distinction between lay and religious societies in law is explained under Canon 1489, which discusses the St. Vincent de Paul Society, founded by lay people, not religious. This society is discussed by the canonists Woywod-Smith under Canon 686, where they comment that such lay societies are not included in those canons which refer to associations which are strictly ecclesiastical, and a lay society only is what we intended to establish and are able to establish.

Lay persons have a right to demand spiritual goods, and prayer in common is definitely a spiritual good. They have the obligation to do all they can to work for the salvation of souls, and this society is a society of reparation, to appease God’s anger and make reparation to Our Lady for the sorrows caused by her straying and confused children; also to pray for the conversion of sinners, the dying and the souls in Purgatory. Those belonging to lay societies are not required to organize under their diocesan bishop, only be subject to him in matters of faith and morals. This is according to a decision of the Holy Office on the lay status of the St. Vincent de Paul Society in 1920 (AAS 13-1335). But such obedience is demanded from all Catholics, not just members of lay and religious associations.

Troubling issues behind the questions

Catholics questioning the founding of this society have every right to do so. And no one is being compelled to join; it was merely established to provide a prayer link between like-minded Catholics praying for things in common. But what is disturbing about the motives prompting the questions are the (sometimes scrupulous) reasons they were posed in the first place, reasons tied to erroneous thinking that has been perpetrated by Traditionalists since they first arrived on the scene. The sources of this erroneous thinking are the three reasons most often cited by Traditionalists to justify their operations — epikeia, necessity and impossibility. Epikeia has been discussed at length on this site and in a more recent blog its Gallicanist origins were revealed. While Traditionalists adamantly defend their right to invoke it in the present circumstances, all modern theologians agree it cannot be used whenever the validity of the Sacraments is in question.

Rev. Lawrence Joseph Riley, A.B., S.T.L., in his The History, Nature and Use of EPIKEIA in Moral Theology, 1948), basically explains that for the use of epikeia to be considered lawful, the law in question must be assumed to be: a) deficient by reason of its universality; b) in need of correction or amendment; c) is challenged by one who goes against the clear rules of the law d) using a probable presumption that the legislator did not intend to include this particular case when fashioning the law. It cannot be said that legislators were ignorant of the possibility of extended interregnums. Or that they had never encountered cases where Catholics were without Sacraments for long periods of time such as during the Arian heresy, the Japanese in the 1600s and those behind the Iron Curtain, all of whom refused to allow schismatics to minister to them. Specifically regarding episcopal consecrations without the papal mandate, it has been seen that the mind of the legislator definitely DOES anticipate such cases, since these are implicated in the very context of the constitution Ad Apostolorum Principis as well as Pope Pius XII’s papal election law governing interregnums, The mind of the legislator also is demonstrated in papal decrees such as Charitas, not to mention numerous decisions of the Sacred Congregations barring reception of the Sacraments from schismatics. Regarding the use of epikeia in the reception of the Sacraments, Fr. Riley states the following:

“The inquiry is made as to whether in reference to them [the sacraments] epikeia may ever be lawfully used. This question should not be confused with what would at first glance appear to be a somewhat kindred point, namely whether it is ever lawful to employ doubtful matter in confecting a sacrament, but this is not the precisely the question which concerns us now. Our interest turns rather to the problem of whether a sacrament can ever be given validly with matter or form that is certainly substantially different from that prescribed… It would be difficult to find any theologian who would ever allow epikeia under such circumstances. As the council of Florence declared, a sacrament is constituted by its matter, its form and ‘by the person of the minister conferring the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does; if any of these is lacking, the Sacrament is not fulfilled’ (DZ 695). In the words of Suarez: These are the quasi-foundations of the visible Church of Christ. If they be altered then in that Church there would result a substantial mutation contrary to the manifest intention of its founder.” Those elements which are necessary for the validity of a sacrament remain so even in the face of extreme difficulty or impossibility … The sacraments exist according to the institution of Christ or they do not exist at all. In short, it may be concluded that in regard to matters which touch the essence of the sacraments the use of epikeia is always excluded.”

The papal mandate is required both for the validity of ordinations and episcopal consecrations. To validly ordain, one must have been assigned to a diocese by competent ecclesiastical authority, and this was not the case with either Lefebvre or Thuc. No such mandates were issued to Lefebvre or to Thuc for their consecration of bishops. Without these mandates, Pope Pius XII teaches, the acts of anyone attempting to consecrate are null and void, i.e., they never create priests or bishops. Canon 147 states: “An ecclesiastical office cannot be VALIDLY obtained without canonical appointment. By canonical appointment is understood the conferring of an ecclesiastical office by the competent ecclesiastical authority in harmony with the sacred canons.” In the case of bishops, this authority is the Roman Pontiff; in the case of priests, bishops in communion with the Roman Pontiff, possessing an office assigned to them by the Roman Pontiff.

None of those ordained or consecrated by Lefebvre or Thuc can claim to have received an office from competent ecclesiastical authority in harmony with the sacred canons. At one time both Lefebvre and Thuc possessed offices under Pope Pius XII, but they resigned those offices to accept offices under John 23 and Paul 6. So they cannot claim, either, to have received offices from the competent ecclesiastical authority, valid ordination and consecration or not. Canon 147 is not concerned with the validity of orders received, it speaks only of offices, which have to do with jurisdiction, not orders.  This is explained in Can. 109, which states that all those degrees of jurisdiction outside those of the Roman Pontiff are received “…by canonical appointment.” This canon’s authentic interpretation by the Holy See, (AAS 42-601), reminds the hierarchy that Can. 147 proceeds from Divine law and the infallible decrees of the Council of Trent (DZ 960, 967), so that none can proceed against Can. 147 with impunity. It furthermore declares an excommunication reserved especially to the Holy See against those who violate this canon, and that includes any among the laity who cooperate in any way in these crimes. Under Can. 147 in the Canon Law Digest, Vol. 3, The Sacred Congregation of the Council declared:

“The Catholic Church is, in virtue of its institution by Christ Himself, a perfect society hierarchically established, whose full and supreme power of government and jurisdiction rests with the Roman Pontiff, the successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter in the primacy. Hence no one can presume to intrude himself or others into ecclesiastical offices or benefices without a legitimate canonical investiture or provision… The Council of Trent declared that, “those who undertake to exercise these offices merely at the behest of and upon the appointment by the people or the secular power and authority, AND THOSE WHO ASSUME THE SAME ON THEIR OWN AUTHORITY, are all to be regarded not as ministers of the Church but as thieves and robbers who have entered not by the door,” (Cap. IV, Session XXIII, de reform). Both orders AND jurisdiction are required for apostolicity as the Catholic Encyclopedia explains:

“Apostolicity of mission consists in the power of holy orders and the power of jurisdiction derived by legitimate transmission from the Apostles. Any religious organization whose ministers do not possess these two powers is not accredited to preach the Gospel of Christ. For ‘How can they preach,’ asks the Apostle, ‘unless they be sent?’” (Rom. 10:15). And from Rev. E. S. Berry’s The Church of Christ: “…Jurisdiction in the Church can neither be obtained nor held against the will of her supreme authority; its transmission depends entirely upon legitimate succession. It is not sufficient, therefore, that a church have valid Orders; it must also have a legitimate succession of ministers, reaching back in an unbroken line to the Apostles, upon whom our Lord conferred all authority to rule His Church… There can be no legitimate successor in the Church of Christ who has not received jurisdiction either directly or indirectly from her supreme authority.” And without a true pope there is no one to even indirectly supply such jurisdiction, despite Traditionalist claims to possess supplied jurisdiction.

Who has given these Traditionalists the jurisdiction necessary to apostolicity to minister to the faithful as a lawfulminister, which can only be obtained by possessing a canonically appointed office? As Rev. Berry also points out in his work and Pope Leo XIII and Pope Pius XII teach: “There is not the slightest intimation in Scripture or tradition that Christ ever promised to confer authority directly upon the ministers of the Church; consequently, it can only be obtained by lawful succession from those upon whom Christ personally and directly conferred it, i. e., from the Apostles.” Whatever the Traditionalist argument is regarding offices, those who do not receive them cannot be considered as lawful ministers of the Church, but only thieves and hirelings. We must follow the laws and teachings of the Church, not claims against these teachings made by Traditionalists. Pope Pius XII’s Constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis leaves no doubt regarding the true status of those usurping papal jurisdiction and acting outside papal laws during an interregnum: all their acts are null and void.

Necessity and impossibility

Necessity is a term often credited to the Decrutum of Gratian but it is not something that in practice was ever used for the type of situation we find ourselves in today. It was mainly cited in marriage cases and sometimes in cases of justifiable homicide. In his Summary of Scholastic Principles, (1956) Rev. Bernard Wuellner says this about necessity: “Necessity knows no law… No law can bind a subject to do the impossible or anything morally evil… No one ever has a right to do a wrong,” (nos. 333, 337, 484). But how does this definition of necessity correspond to what is being done by Traditionalists? Moral evil is committing idolatry or gravely risking its commission by attending the masses and receiving the sacraments from those doubtfully ordained and consecrated. This can definitely be classified as “a wrong.” Traditionalists have no right to do this wrong, either on their own account but especially concerning others. And it is not impossible to keep the faith without resorting to doubtful sacraments. So how they manage to use this principle in any meaningful way is baffling in light of its definition.

Impossibility is discussed as follows by Revs. McHugh and Callan in their work, Moral Theology, A Complete Course:

“317. …though the law itself remains, there are cases in which non-observance of it is excused from guilt. These cases can be reduced to physical and moral impossibility.

(a) In cases of physical impossibility (i.e., when the powers requisite for observance are wanting), one is manifestly excused; for law is reasonable, and it is not reasonable to require impossibilities.

(b) In cases of moral impossibility (i.e., when a law cannot be kept without the infringement of a higher law or the loss of a higher good), one is also excused; for it is unreasonable to prefer the less to the more important.

“489. (b) Impossibility excuses from both obligation and guilt.

“492. Absolute or physical impossibility (i.e., the want of the power or of the means of complying with a law), of course, excuses from its observance; for no one is bound to what is impossible. This applies to divine law, and hence much more to human law. Example: He who is unable to leave the house is not obliged to go to Mass.

“494. Moral impossibility excuses from the observance of a human law in the following cases:

(a) One is excused when a considerable loss in health, reputation, SPIRITUAL ADVANTAGE, property, etc., or a grave inconvenience will result from observing a law which is not a prohibition of nature in the sense of the previous paragraph; for the legislator cannot impose obligations that are needlessly heavy, and hence positive law does not oblige in case of such moral impossibility. Example: OUR LORD REPROVED THE INHUMAN RIGOR OF THE PHARISEES, WHO INSISTED THAT THEIR REGULATIONS MUST BE OBSERVED, WHATEVER THE DIFFICULTY OR COST.

(b) One is excused when a lower or less urgent law is in conflict with a law that is higher or more urgent. In such a case the greater obligation prevails, and the lesser obligation disappears.”

Conclusions from the above

In invoking all the above, Traditionalists have created a prejudice among Catholics regarding the proper use of these principles. It is not wrong to appeal to epikeia in certain cases if one does so only in grave need, with great caution, and on rare occasions. But it was never meant to be used as a long-term solution for an ongoing emergency. And it cannot be used where there is any doubt regarding sacramental validity. Necessity does not apply because it seems to forbid the very things Traditionalists claim it allows them to do. They interpret laws forbidding them to act as an evil against the common good when such laws were made precisely to protect the faithful against the ministrations of hirelings and the sin of idolatry. There were other things that could have been done that would have greatly benefited the faithful but they failed to take the safer course and employ those means. Ironically, necessity could be used to support those choosing to pray at home.

“Impossibility excuses from both obligation and guilt,” meaning we cannot be blamed for not resorting to a bishop who does not exist. Physical impossibility is clearly at work here when we consider that it is impossible today to find a true priest or bishop to validly convey the Sacraments, far less consult to found a prayer society. And when the ecclesiastical superiors are lacking whom the law tells us we must approach in the usual order of things, then we can do what we need to do to provide for our spiritual needs without consulting them, within limits. This because moral impossibility excuses us from suffering a loss of a spiritual advantage, and not being able to pray together is definitely a disadvantage. Hence moral theology would allow us to pray together as long as we are willing to subject ourselves to a true pope and hierarchy should they ever be restored. McHugh and Callan note it was the Pharisees who insisted on a strict adherence to the law with no exceptions whatsoever. It is hoped this will satisfy those who may have doubts about praying together.

What in the World

We have been viewing the virtual circus regarding what began as the consecration of Russia and Ukraine, “bishops” invited (not ordered) to join in, Ratzinger tacked on as a backup “pope” for conservative NO’s and some Trads, and now the news that humanity will be consecrated with especial mention of Russia and Ukraine. This amid cries from those watching the show that “this won’t work.” Well of course it won’t work – Francis is no pope. Who knows what comes next, but it is interesting to note that double agent Malachi Martin told one interviewer in 1996 that according to John Paul 2, Russia would move on the Ukraine and attempt to take Kiev. This would occur before 2017, and it would have something to do with Russia’s conversion, the “final solution.” (See the interview at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sosatXEV9JU. The whole event was preplanned over 25 years ago. Martin should know as one of the conspirators working both sides. Did Trump interrupt their timeline, precipitating his 2020 defeat? Possibly.

A clue to what is really about to happen may be found here: https://www.marysway.net/icon-consecration-of-russia-final-marian-dogma/ On Nov. 27, 2001, Josyp Terelya, patriarch of the Russian Orthodox church’s conservative branch, consecrated Russia and its peoples to the Immaculate Heart of Mary along with the Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova. The image used for the consecration is called the Miraculous Icon, portraying the “final Marian dogma.” The patriarch presented Putin with a large, framed portrait of the Icon. This is interesting only because it provides a backdrop for what will likely evolve from the consecration event March 25. This event is a cleverly staged drama that will begin with the consecration by Francis and B16 which then will appear to halt the war. The culmination of the consecration could consist in the “return” of Russia to Rome as part of some pledge of peace, probably introducing Putin as the head of some new European/Asian alliance based on Russian orthodoxy — making him the “great monarch” and Francis “the great pope.” Francis would then help Putin negotiate peace for all and the two would rule the newly re-ordered world; scary and sobering stuff here. This would mark the realization of the great reset already in progress. And it will be based on what appears to be devotion to Our Lady, but instead is a frightening New Age perversion of that devotion.

Or, something unexpected could happen to throw everything off course. These people only THINK they are in control and can escape the wrath of God indefinitely. But that wrath will come upon them when they least expect it. We can only pray that in the aftermath we remain steadfast and save our own souls. O Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us!

Content Protection by DMCA.com
Spiritual solace and remedies for perilous times

Spiritual solace and remedies for perilous times

+St. Peter Nolasco+

“Our Lady of Mercy, ransom the captives, deliver us from all sin and from the bondage of the evil one!”

In these present times, it is difficult to know what exactly to say or do and especially, what to believe regarding the legitimacy of the rulers of this country. There are many false portrayals of events circulating, many individuals and groups who are beginning to reveal, by the scenarios they are promoting, exactly who they are and where they are trying to lead even sincere Catholics. It is a time of diabolical confusion and a prelude to the great dangers now being introduced as this country slides further and further into the Socialist/Communist abyss. Yet Socialism and Communism are only the outer layer of the onion peel, for closer to the core is found the true source of these evils as we were warned by the Roman Pontiffs long ago. These twin evils are the engines of the Secret Societies, used to enslave the masses by those operating at the highest levels of the Illuminati. This can be seen by studying the Masonic pyramid (see https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/articles/a-catholics-course-of-study/traditionalist-heresies-and-errors/papal-teaching-on-church-and-state/the-amazing-secret-behind-freemasonrys-triumph/) and thoughtfully considering all the organizations that lead to Masonry’s triumph.

Many of those among the Traditionalists believe they will see the victory of a holy king and holy pope at this time, but this would be possible only through the working of miracles. Yet the reign of such a king may have been forfeited, and with it the reign of the Holy Pope he was intended to defend. Karl von Habsburg became the emperor of Austria following the assassination of his uncle, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who cast the imperial veto during Pope St. Pius X’s election to prevent the election of Cardinal Mariano Rampolla. JP 2 created Habsburg a beatus, but this is no black mark on his holy life and his efforts to save Christendom. Was he working in league with the Angelic Pastor, the last Pope to be declared a Saint? Pope St. Pius X died in 1914 and Habsburg in 1922 at the age of 31. Both fought the forces of Modernism. Before his death, Pope St. Pius X supposedly told a Habsburg family member that Karl Habsburg, not his uncle Archduke Ferdinand, would be the next emperor, a man “sent from Heaven.” He may have made this statement after being informed by the Belgium seeress, Berthe Petit, that the Archduke would be assassinated. But neither this sainted pontiff nor Emperor Karl would live to fulfill the prophecy so many saintly seers predicted.

Perhaps, had von Habsburg lived into his later years, he would have been the Great Monarch who preserved Hungary from Communism (Karl also was Emperor of Hungary), rescued Cardinal Mindszenty and blew the whistle on the 1958 election as his uncle had done before him in 1903. But it was not to be. Our Lady appeared at Fatima in 1917, just five years before his death. Already the die had been cast and the world was entering the final phase of its downward spiral into Godlessness.

Certain biblical commentators agree that what has come to be known as “the peace of Fatima” will be granted to the Church. Long before Fatima occurred, saints, holy people, and theologians predicted a period of peace as well; and the popes have assured us of Our Lady’s victory, which implies peace. But one question remains unanswered: Our Lady predicated her promise on whether enough Catholics offered sacrifices, prayed the Rosary, and did penance. Can we trust the opinion of those writers who pretend that this promise was absolute rather than contingent upon the devotion manifested by the faithful? Not given what we know today regarding their orthodoxy. So this being the case, could Our Lord simply come suddenly to judge the world without first granting it peace? Given the extent of evil today, the world does not deserve to see the Church restored. While it does seem contrary to all the popes have taught concerning Mary’s triumph and the future of the Church to expect the Second Coming minus this peace, we cannot speculate upon God’s plans for His Church or think we completely understand what private prophecy is telling us.

It is true that we may have forfeited such a restoration by our wickedness. But as Rev. E. S. Berry said in his The Apocalypse of St. John: “Can we admit that a world steeped in paganism and torn with schism and heresy is the only result of Christ’s death on the Cross?” Berry then concludes it better reflects Christ’s glory and the perpetuity of His Church that She be restored rather than have it appear that the Church no longer existed when the world came to an end. As true as this may seem, the Church teaches nothing on this matter; in fact She is notably silent. This is because the secret of the Latter Days is contained in the little sealed book described in Apoc. 10; this could well be the Fatima secret never revealed.  We were not meant to know God’s plans regarding us in these times until they slowly unfold. God’s thoughts are not our thoughts and His ways are not our ways. What seems reasonable to us in way of an outcome may not be God’s intention at all. We search the Scriptures and private prophecies, some by the Saints, for answers because nothing, or at least very little, is certain about these times.

One seer out of all the many, however, seems to have given us a better idea of what would happen to the Church, although her predictions sometimes seem to contradict each other. That seer is Marie-Julie Jahenny, the Breton (Nantes, France) mystic and victim soul who was imprinted with an impressive array of the various stigmatas. She was born in 1850 and died in 1941. A survey of the bulk of her prognostications regarding the Church in these times shows that she correctly predicted the two World Wars, Kulturkampf in Germany, and many other events. In 1881 she correctly described in detail the death of Melanie Calvat, the La Salette seeress, who died some 23 years later. Marie-Julie took the clergy to task for failing to spread La Salette, accusing them of actually prohibiting the Secret’s distribution and undermining its urgent warnings, especially where the clergy was concerned. She announced that “a distinct justice” is reserved for those obstructing Our Lady’s messages.

I choose to quote from her works here because in retrospect her prophecies have not received the attention in Traditionalist circles that, for example, those of Anna Catherine Emmerich or other holy people have received. And yet she is closest to our times and has been clearer and more accurate in her predictions than many others. Certainly divine revelation and papal teaching must always override anything in way of private revelations, and private revelations must always be taken with a grain of salt. Other writers may prefer not to quote Marie-Julie because she details at length the three days’ darkness which many now question as an actual event, some believing it refers only spiritually and not actually to the eclipse of the Church in these times. There also is the problem of conflicting revelations, but these may be explained by the fact, as one commentator points out, that Marie-Julie’s ecstasies were written down by several different people, at different times.

Therefore, the discrepancies can be attributed to incorrect transmission due to inadvertence, improper understanding of what was said or intended, actual misrendering of the message in places where it seemed to be too harsh, or did not agree with the understanding of the one recording the ecstasy, or other human errors. And certainly there is always the possibility that one or more of these transcribers were secret “send ins” who deliberately created doubt by their accounts, although this seems unlikely in this particular case. Such may have been the case, however, with one of those recording Anna Catherine Emmerich’s ecstasies, and this fact is even documented by an article in the American Ecclesiastical Review. Another issue is Marie-Julie’s predominant references in her ecstasies to the Great Monarch, which may have been prompted by a purely political (Monarchist) bias, one blemished by its own dangerous ties to secret societies, (unknown to the seer). All this remains to be seen, however, and only time can tell if it is simply a political preference embellished with other medieval era prophecies or has some basis in fact.

A caution here: a more recent “interpretation” of Marie Julie’s prophecies rules out any possibility the Papal See could currently be vacant, or has been vacant for many years, by referring to specific predictions and their timeline. This is to ignore the dogmatic teaching of the Church and give credence instead to a private revelation. These revelations can only confirm what is already known as truths taught by the Church; they cannot be used as a tool to gauge what will happen in the future or what has happened in the past. It is the duty of those studying the faith to first determine what the Church teaches regarding any given subject before taking statements made in any private revelation as valid. This is why we are free to believe them or not believe them, because Catholics must believe only what can be demonstrated as those things we are bound by the Church to believe.

We can take those things predicted by Marie-Julie that we now know to be true as proof of her credibility, and leave other things, such as the three days darkness and Great Monarch, aside for the time being. One thing we do know: nothing in our current time period can be ruled out as too fantastical or too radical, given what we already know and have seen. The three days could easily be manipulated by those New Agers plotting to drastically reduce the population on earth, something God may allow to happen. But the results — that the good, not the bad, would survive — would be totally unintended by the planners. And while the revival of a monarchy in this time of nothing but democracies throughout the world may seem like a longshot, it is the model the Church prefers and on which She is built. Listed below is a summary of some of Marie-Julie’s more pertinent prophecies, taken from various sources.

–  More than once, the seer pronounces “You have been warned!”

– “It must be that this reign of sin ends. Never has the earth and the world been in a similar condition. It must end, (sin and evil) or every soul will be lost!”

– Her beloved confessor, Mgr. Fournier, appeared to her after his death and announced: “Sorrow will extinguish the Church for a certain time and that time is written in Heaven.” Marie- Julie says: “There will be a complete and perfect overthrow of everything… All Church work will stop. There will be complete destruction and death.” The Church will exist “only as a structural organization,” but She will “continue in the Catacombs.” Jesus told her He would “carry away the Church with all her walls and ornaments.”

– Regarding the false Vatican 2 church, she prophesied that Church law would be violated by both priests and the people who follow them.  Most priests and bishops will defect from the faith and the number of the faithful will be “very small… Ministers of God will be the first to apostatize.” In the 1880s Jesus told her: “Disciples not of my Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas and under influence of the enemy of souls a mass that contains words odious in my sight… Religion will remain only in “the lone souls of a few who will be harassed and persecuted.” There will be a “new clergy” and “new mass… new preachers of new sacraments, new baptisms new confraternities… There will not remain any vestige of the Holy Sacrifice.” St. Michael told her Satan would have possession of everything and “all goodness, faith and religion will be buried in the tomb. So why have so few read and taken note of these words written so long go?

Next, we include as whole pages her later words to the faithful, taken from the Marquis de la Franquerie’s Marie-Julie Jahenny, the Breton Stigmatist https://archive.org/details/PropheciesOfMarieJulieJahenny/page/n5/mode/2up):

St. John of the Cross told Marie-Julie: “It is a sure sign that God loves us when He makes us suffer on earth. He who does not suffer, is not the true friend of God. The Lord admits us (into) His grace; thank him. Remember that when we feel the pains of life, we experience His grace. When the Lord begins a work in which He wants His glory to break forth, he surrounds it first with persecutions, the cross, neglect, all kinds of penalties. This is the real charm of the Finger of God. It is necessary that one who is in the friendship of the Lord be tested, that everything in his soul is purified.”

“Under the fury of the storm, what will you do? Wait, pray and do what God wants. Love God with all our heart, faithfully serve God, serve him through the obscurities that are in us, serve despite the darkness where God leaves us and where we need to walk, serve Him all the same. Even when the light of your soul is absolutely extinguished, do not lose heart, go through all the dangers, face the dangers and God will fill you with His grace and His comfort. Who can make us happy on earth, except the peace of God that lives within us, working in us, that prays in us? Without this peace, man becomes like one damned, he runs and precipitates himself into the first gulf that he meets, because it is the devastation inflicted within him by his unregulated passions. Yet this is what happens in many hearts.”

Marie-Julie also was told in her ecstasies: “To keep peace, there is one thing to do, it is to say what God wants, it is to obey the Will of God, it is nothing that can be found in the human creature. It is to be found in God, since He is the Treasure of all… Pray for the Church threatened by a conspiracy hatched by a horrible jealousy of perverted minds banded together to overthrow it. The storm is terrible, but the Church will remain infallible and its walls shall not be shaken. But there will be martyrs … Pray for the Church and ask God for the return of a lost family, a people corrupted, a degraded society. All are our brothers in the Lord. They are souls redeemed at the price of His Blood. Prayer is the only remedy.”

To this can be added nothing more. She has said it all, and it seems that now is the time she foretold and her remedies are those that may help us to endure what lies ahead. Catholic prophecy as a whole is insistent that the only one who can save us from this terrible chastisement is Our Lord Himself, working through His Blessed Mother. Man must do God’s will and obey His law, and God will do the rest. As Marie-Julie said, “When everything seems lost, then will be the time of victory.”

 

Content Protection by DMCA.com