by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 12, 2025 | New Blog
+Most Holy Name of Mary+
A note to readers
A few words here about the assassination of influencer/Christian activist Charlie Kirk. Kirk began his career at 18, refusing to attend college because of the liberal indoctrination tactics common to academia and counseling others in his generation to do the same. He married in 2020, claiming that he remained a virgin until marriage. Kirk’s wife was raised in a Novus Ordo household, and according to some reports, Kirk was considering joining what he believed to be the Catholic Church. In a day and age when Our Lady is continually blasphemed by Protestants, he asked fellow Christians to rethink their views regarding her. He also rejected the usurper Leo 14 as a Marxist and questioned Israel’s motives in its war against Gaza.
Six weeks ago, Kirk said in a podcast: “I think we as Protestants and Evangelicals under-venerate Mary. She was very important. She was a vessel for our Lord and Savior. I think that we, as Evangelicals and Protestants, we’ve overcorrected. We don’t talk about Mary enough. We don’t venerate her enough. Mary was clearly important to early Christians. There’s something there. In fact, I believe one of the ways that we fix toxic feminism in America is that Mary is the solution. Have more young ladies be pious, be reverent, be full of faith, slow to anger, slow to words at times. Mary is a phenomenal example, and I think a counter to so much of the toxicity of feminism in the modern era.”
This in a podcast that aired on July 16, Feast of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel. We recently reported here that Kirk supported the NAR movement. Despite this fact, he was a zealous defender of Christ and believed America should be a Christian nation. He was a young person who may have eventually figured things out over time. He denounced the evils of abortion, gender identity and the plethora of immoralities plaguing this country today. It is our hope and prayer that, somehow, he saved his soul, even though we can never assume this. Certainly his death saved him from being sucked into an even greater evil.
Introduction
A self-declared hermit and Novus Ordo, “priest,” David Nix, writing under the name “Padre Peregrino,” recently stated in a post on Substack that: “The saints seem to delineate between ‘material heresy’ (small points) and ‘manifest heresy’ (obvious heresy). The latter is held by saints to be easily identified by your average faithful layman or lay woman living in sanctifying grace.” He claims the Novus Ordo (and LibTrad) pseudo-clergy scoff at this idea, stating only “true” Catholic clergy can decide such matters. This he rightly calls, “Gnosticism… the old and tired heresy that only a certain group of ‘enlightened elites’ have access to ‘secret’ divine knowledge.” While these statements on material and formal heresy are more or less true, Nix has not consulted the proper sources to best explain the definition of these two types of heresy. And it is important that Catholics understand that even material heretics are outside the Church until a canonically elected Pope and bishops in communion with him declare otherwise. But sadly, we have no pope and no valid hierarchy left to elect one.
So in their absence, we must do what the Church commands us to do: we are bound to hold the teaching of the Continual Magisterium on this matter, NOT the teaching of the saints and early Fathers, although their opinions on doctrinal matters certainly have great merit. We are bound to obey Canon Law, since the primary source of Canon Law is the Popes and the Councils. The Fathers and Doctors contribute much that is good, but their opinions do not reflect the entirety of papal decisions made since the time of their death. They Pope is infallible; they are not. Theologians and canonists are quoted below, but they only echo the most recent decisions of the Popes and Holy Office and the Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the (1917) Code. And we are bound by that same Code to follow more recent laws.
Canon 22 states: “A more recent law given by competent authority abrogates a former law if it expressly orders abrogation or if it is directly contrary to the former law or if it readjusts the entire subject matter of the former law. Archbishop Amleto Cicognani, in his 1934 work, Canon Law states that: “… Revocation is tacit when a new law is issued directly contrary to the former law or when a new law takes up and readjusts the entire subject matter of the former law… The competent authority means the Roman Pontiff, the Council, the Bishop, or the Ordinary in general.”
Three questions raised in this article must be addressed. The first concerns the matter of who can judge heresy and whether such heresy must be formal. The second addresses whether said heresy is to be considered material or formal. And the third regards the invalid election of Angelo Roncalli in 1958.
Canon 1325 and heresy
Canon 1325 tells us: “The faithful are bound to profess their faith publicly whenever silence, subterfuge or their manner of acting would otherwise entail an implicit denial of their faith, a contempt of religion, an insult to God or scandal to their neighbor.” If LibTrads only revered and followed Canon Law, they would know the answer to the questions they pose. But they cannot afford to do this, because to do so would be their undoing. This canon would not be written as it is, if the faithful were not obligated by law to judge heresy. Furthermore, Can. 1935, under the heading “Criminal Trials,” states: “The faithful may, AT ALL TIMES denounce the offense of another for the purpose of demanding satisfaction or by the natural law in view of the danger to faith or religion or other imminent public evil.” Neither of these canons exempt the clergy from these obligations laid on the faithful.
Heresy, to be judged as such, need not involve other members of the faithful pronouncing any judgment of the person who professes it. THE LAW ITSELF judges them and places them outside the Church, even if their heresy is only material, and those observing their errors need only state that FACT. For all who belong to the Novus Ordo or Traditionalist sects belong to non-Catholic sects and therefore have incurred the excommunication in Can. 2314 §3 for communicatio in sacris. Material or formal, it doesn’t matter. Even material heretics remain in heresy because we have no pope to lift their infamy of law and their latae sententiae excommunication. And for this same reason, a new pope cannot be elected.
The Church’s teaching on material heresy
Revs. McHugh and Callan
- Heresy is not formal unless one pertinaciously rejects the truth, knowing his error and consenting to it. But for formal heresy it is not required that that a person give his consent out of malice, or that he continue in obstinate rejection for a long time, or that he refuses to heed admonitions given him. Pertinacity here means true consent to recognized error, and this can…be given in an instant and does not presuppose an admonition disregarded,” (#829b).
- Circumstances that aggravate the sin include: its external and manifest nature, manifestation to a large number of people joined with apostasy and adhesion to an heretical sect, denying several articles or defined truths at the same time, (#832b&c).
- Faith…must be firm assent, excluding doubt, (#840). Real, voluntary but especially positive doubt, deliberately entertained with full knowledge, also constitutes heresy, (#s841-45).
Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey
Rev. Tanquerey’s works were used as seminary texts internationally for decades. He holds the same position as McHugh and Callan. “Apostates, heretics and schismatics incur, on the ordinary conditions of full guilt, knowledge, etc., an excommunication specially reserved to the Holy See…” Tanquerey then points out that, “All theologians teach that publicly known heretics, those who belong to a heterodox sect through public profession, or those who refuse the infallible teaching of the authority of the Church, are excluded from the body of the Church, EVEN IF THEIR HERESY IS ONLY MATERIAL HERESY,” (Manual of Dogmatic Theology, Vol. II).
Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton
As Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton notes in his “The Teaching of the Theological Manuals,” The American Ecclesiastical Review, April 1963: “If the theses taught by Tanquerey were opposed to those of ‘the most authentic Catholic tradition of all ages,’ then thousands of priests, educated during the first part of the twentieth century were being led into error by the men whom Our Lord had constituted as the guardians of His revealed message.”
In another article Msgr. Fenton wrote: “[Cardinal] Franzelin popularized the process of distinguishing between material and formal heresy in treating of conditions for membership in the Church. He thereby did a definite disservice to the cause of theology,” (“The Status of St. Robert Bellarmine’s Teaching About the Membership of occult heretics in the Catholic Church,” AER, March 1950).
Rev. Ignatius Szal
In his Canon Law dissertation, “The Communication of Catholics With Schismatics” (1948), Rev. Szal rightly states that those raised in heresy or schism who convert to the true faith, even if no obstinacy was involved on their part, must be absolved from the censure for schism if they convert after reaching the age of 14. This has been confirmed by several decisions handed down by the Holy See and the Sacred Congregations. It is based on the rule expressed in Can. 2200 §2, (1917 Code) that they are bound by the censure of excommunication for schism or heresy given the external violation of the law.
Rev. Reginald Garrigou LaGrange
Rev. Garrigou LaGrange, O.P. states in his The Theological Virtues, Vol. I, (On Faith; written before V2 but translated afterwards): “The one thing that suffices for formal heresy is an obstinate denial of any truth which has been infallibly proposed by the Church for belief. It is not necessary that the individual believer realizes that the truth in jeopardy has been revealed.”
Canonists Revs. Stanislaus Woywod and Callistus Smith
Based on decisions issued by the Holy Office, Revs. Woywod-Smith observe: “Nevertheless, in the external forum they are not free [from the penalties of Can. 2314] for, according to Can. 2200, when there is an external violation of Church law, malice is presumed in the external forum until its absence is proved. The Holy See insists that converts from heretical or schismatic sects be not received into the Church until they have first abjured the heresy or schism and been absolved from the censure, (Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, July 20, 1859). Children converted before the age of puberty need no absolution from the excommunication (cfr. Can. 2230) and, instead of abjuration, need only make the profession of faith, (Holy Office, March 8, 1882” (A Practical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, 1957).
Revs. Woywod-Smith on Can. 731: “All canonists and moralists agree that those who are heretics or schismatics and know they are wrong cannot be given the Sacraments of the Church unless they renounce their errors and are reconciled with the Church. Numerous decrees of the Holy Office put this point beyond controversy.”
Canonist Dom Charles Augustine
“Charity does not require mental gymnastics in order to excuse what is manifest, [evident, obvious, not obscure]… Obstinacy may be assumed when a revealed truth has been proposed with sufficient clearness and force to convince a reasonable man” (Dom Charles Augustine: A Commentary on Canon Law, Vol. 8, pg. 335; 1908).
Canon E. J. Mahoney
In his work Questions and Answers: The Sacraments (1946), Canon E.J. Mahoney comments: “The LIBERAL VIEW [is that] baptized non-Catholics in good faith are members of the body of the Church precisely because they are not excommunicated…The view diametrically opposed to this is [that] the excommunication of heretics applies to material as well as formal heretics…If a choice had to be made between theses two views…, there is no question that the second fits in best with Catholic discipline, and, in particular, with our practice in reconciling converts…
The solution which I think is the correct one consists in perceiving a distinction which the Code itself supplies. The Sacraments are to be denied both to material and formal heretics but for different reasons; to formal heretics because they merit punishment, the censure of Can. 2314 §1; to material heretics because they are excluded by Can. 731 §2, which is a necessary deduction from the concept of the Church: [basically, the Church is a society of men professing the same Christian faith, participating in the same worship, receiving the same Sacraments, from lawful pastors in communion with the Pope, etc…] Those who reject the rule of faith proposed by the Church are not members of the Church and may not lawfully share in the privileges of members, as, for example, the reception of the Sacraments.”
Mahoney then cites Billot, who explains that formal heresy and schism cannot be excluded as a possibility in these cases. “…In reconciling converts…it is difficult in the first place to say with certainty that a given convert has not incurred the censure. It is not amongst those which crass ignorance excuses, and it is not unlikely that, during a given period previous to his submission, there was sufficient knowledge for incurring a censure. Therefore absolution from censure is given at least ad cautelam… Moreover, the important distinction between the internal and the external forum must always be remembered. The external government of the Church regards the external actions of people…It is open to the authority of the external government of the Church to regard the members of heretical sects as excommunicated, even though, in the internal forum of conscience, they may be guiltless of any act meriting punishment.”
The Jurist, 1948
We read also from The Jurist, volume 132, page 405: “Irregularity Arising from Sect Affiliation”: “Question: A young man in my parish joined the Methodist Church at the age of 15. He was baptized in it in infancy. At 16, through association with Catholic young men in high school, he became a convert to the Church. Does he labor under any irregularity from which a dispensation should be obtained? (signed, Pedagogous)
“Answer: Since the young man joined the Methodist Church after he had attained the age of puberty, he does not escape the penalties which the Code visits upon his act. Clearly it may be assumed that he has been absolved from the excommunication in accordance with the provisions of Canon 2314 §2, since it is apparent from the statement of the case that he is a good Catholic and proposes to study for the priesthood. It is very likely, however, that he has not been dispensed from the vindictive penalty of infamy of law (infamia juris).
- Only the Holy See can dispense from this penalty.
- One who labors under it is irregular ex defectu, not ex delicto. Of course, even considered as an irregularity ex defectu, its presence is prevented, in the internal forum, by the good faith of the party affected: that is,good faith prevents the incurring of the vindictive penalty of infamy of law, and in the absence of the latter, there is an irregularity ex defectu. In the external forum, however, the dispensation should be duly sought from the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments.
“The young man also is subject to the impediment arising ex delicto from this heresy in accordance with canon 985, 1°. In the internal forum, good faith would excuse him; in the external forum, however, a dispensation should be sought from this irregularity also from the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments. (I Cf. can. 2314, § 1, 3°. Si sectae acatholicae nomen dederint vel publice adhaeserint, ipso facto infames sunt et, firma praescripto can. 188, n. 4, clerici, monitione incassum praemissa, degradentur. Can. 2295. Infamia iuris desinit sola dispensatione a Sede Apostolica concessa).”
“All the above heresies are so-called silent heresies. No declaration of their individual existence is ever made by an ecclesiastical authority — except in the general way that all heresies have been condemned by the continual magisterium at some time, in one place or the other — and there is a record of this. To insist that one 14 and older cannot be held guilty of censures is to deny the Church’s right to establish and enforce censures. This teaching of the Jansenist heretics is condemned by Pope Pius VI:
“ ‘Likewise, the proposition which teaches that is necessary, according to the natural and divine laws, for either excommunication or for suspension, that sentences called ipso facto have no other force than that of a serious threat without any actual effect, — false, rash, pernicious, injurious to the power of the Church, erroneous.’
“ ‘Likewise, the proposition which says, “useless and vain is the formula introduced some centuries ago of general absolution from excommunications into which the faithful might have fallen, — false, rash, injurious to the practice of the Church,’” (“Auctorem Fidei,” August 28, 1794).”
The 1958 papal election
Nix ends his article by commenting: “Indeed, the Catholic Church has always taught that a Papal Conclave electing a heretical man is certainly and without doubt an invalid Conclave. And yes, you do have the ability to recognize heresy in such a man…” Of course, Nix will not take the invalid election Idea clear back to the “election” of Roncalli because he can’t afford to. That would defrock him as a Novus Ordo priest/hermit. So here he is talking about Leo, and before that, it was Bergoglio. Yet proofs clearly show it was Roncalli, and that afterwards, all other elections were automatically invalid.
Most LibTrad adults living in the 1980s know full well that the first exposition of Roncalli as a heretic and the proofs necessary to show the invalidity of his election were published in the book, Will the Catholic Church Survive…? by T. Stanfill Benns and David Bawden in 1990. The problem here is that their children and grandchildren, now following such figures as Nix, most likely do not know this. Regardless of Bawden’s co-authorship, there were many Catholic truths presented whole and entire in the book (although I have withdrawn it from circulation). Since the 1980s to the present time, these fully developed and incontrovertible proofs been expanded upon and restated so many times, in various places, that it is preposterous for those now writing to pretend they have not seen or considered them. This is certainly true of “Padre Peregrino,” who traipsed across the same stomping grounds and frequented the same seminary library I myself frequented — St. Thomas Seminary, now renamed Abp. Urban Vehr Seminary in Denver, Colorado. He must, at some point, have been aware of this website and the proofs presented here. But no one seems to believe these proofs or value them. And if mentioned at all, they frequently quote them completely out of context and without attribution.
To pretend to reinvent the wheel at this late date is nothing short of a travesty. Unless something recognizably credible can be added to already existing proofs of Roncalli’s invalid election, it is both a waste of research hours and a waste of time for readers, when such demonstrations were long ago drawn out and publicized. In reality, Roncalli would have been ineligible for election even as a material heretic, for then he was no longer a member of the Church as pointed out above. And a non-Catholic cannot become pope. For as Can. 2200 states, those suspected of such heresy must first be cleared of all guilt. And St. Robert Bellarmine writes: “This principle is most certain. The non-Christian cannot in any way be Pope, as Cajetan himself admits (ib. c. 26). The reason for this is that he cannot be head of what he is not a member; now he who is not a Christian is not a member of the Church, and a manifest heretic is not a Christian, as is clearly taught by St. Cyprian, St. Athanasius, St. Jerome, St. Augustine and others” (De Romano Pontifice,
lib. II, cap. 30).
A material heretic’s heresy has already become manifest in some way, either in speech, writing or actions. It is material only in the sense that it may be, but has not yet, been denounced. Far from denouncing such heresy, Roncalli compounded it when he usurped the papal see, proving that his suspicion of heresy notice filed with the Holy Office was indeed justified. Of course the canons would later clarify how material heretics are to be viewed nearly 500 years after St. Bellarmine wrote, for even prior to any denouncement, they are presumed to be heretics. This topic has been much misrepresented and misunderstood. This is something Bellarmine himself anticipated, when he wrote in the same chapter:
“Then two years later came the lapse of Liberius, of which we have spoken above. Then indeed the Roman clergy, stripping Liberius of his pontifical dignity, went over to Felix, whom they knew [then] to be a Catholic. From that time, Felix began to be the true Pontiff. FOR ALTHOUGH LIBERIUS WAS NOT A HERETIC, nevertheless he was considered one, on account of the peace he made with the Arians, and by that presumption the pontificate could rightly [merito] be taken from him: for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple [simpliciter], and condemn him as a heretic” (De Romano Pontifice, lib. II, cap. 30, et al).”
Quite simply, Liberius was suspected of heresy. And Bellarmine quotes several notable Fathers, not just the few Nix cites in his article, quoting the author Paul Kramer. With this consensus of the ancient Fathers, in addition to Bellarmine’s own teaching as a Doctor of the Church, the saint has resolved the entire issue singlehandedly. After all, Bellarmine was a teenager during the reign of Pope Paul IV, so Cum ex Apostolatus Officio was fairly recent when he wrote. Here, however, the lapse of Liberius did not happen before his election, as in the case of Roncalli. The issue in Roncalli’s case is resolved by Pope Paul IV’s bull, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio.
Conclusion
For the sake of people such as Charlie Kirk, we cannot let the delusions of Novus Ordo and LibTrad sect leaders predominate without protest. Truth mattered to Kirk — by all accounts, he was sincere in his beliefs, erroneous though they were. He opposed liberal indoctrination, and yet it appears he was about to become indoctrinated in the biggest lie of all. God spared him that. But what about all the others he fought for and loved who are now left behind?
Nix and others believe that if they can just “elect a true pope,” then the real Church will be vindicated and the evil purged. I thought the same thing myself at one point and was foolishly misled by a liar. Twenty years of additional research helped uncover the carefully woven layers of heresy implanted by the Modernists (and other secret societies) that have been so cleverly embedded into the fabric of modern-day “Catholic” belief. Traditionalist sects were one of their greatest weapons, just as Protestant sects helped spread error far and wide 500 years ago.
If the lying visions now guiding the world could ever be dispelled, it could only come from the admission of the fact that evil became most prevalent following the death of Pope Pius XII, although it was fomenting long before his demise. The real betrayal began with Roncalli, and until his election is investigated and publicly recognized as invalid, and the entire façade that has prevailed in Rome for 67 years is ripped away, there is no hope of leading others to the truth. Pseudo-clerics such as Padre Peregrino and LibTrads in general are the obstacle to recognizing that truth, a necessity for them if they wish to stay in business. But it is as Christ meant it to be, for as Louis Cardinal Pie of Poitiers (1815-1880) wrote:
“It is certain that as the world draws towards its end the wicked and the seducers will increasingly have the upper hand. Faith will hardly be found any longer on earth; that is to say that it will have all but completely disappeared from the institutions of the world. Even believers will scarcely dare to profess their beliefs publicly and collectively… The Church, though of course still a visible society, will be increasingly reduced to individual and domestic proportions… And finally the Church on earth will undergo a true defeat: ‘…and it was given unto him to make war with the saints and to overcome them’ (Apoc. 13:7) The insolence of evil will be at its peak.” And this, he says will last until the very end. The Church already has seen the defeat he mentions. We yet exist that She remain visible on earth until the Second Coming.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 2, 2025 | New Blog
+Feast of St. Stephen, Martyr+
Introduction
One must wonder if those who try to search out what is happening to us in these days ever think to credit and be grateful for the great Catholic minds who went before us and so eruditely plotted out what might happen to us and what we could expect in these times. But it seems that very few people really examine these things very closely because so many of the commentaries are hard to understand and also seem to mischaracterize the things that we’ve experienced as far as the destruction of the Church goes. Some commentators get most of it right, but spin-off at some point on one issue that falsely colors everything else they write. Others are wrong on most points but then are surprisingly clear on others. So most people read a little bit and tend to give up or maybe decide that, well, after all, it’s not that important. But it IS important, as we learned in our last blog, because if we don’t understand who we are and where we are in time, we’re not going to be doing what Christ expected us to do as overcomers and witnesses in this time prior to Christ’s Second Coming.
The prophet Daniel speaks of these times in the following verses in chapter 12 of the Old Testament:
“1 But at that time shall Michael rise up, the great prince, who standeth for the children of thy people: and a time shall come, such as never was from the time that nations began, even until that time. And at that time shall thy people be saved, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of those that sleep in the dust of the earth, shall awake: some unto life everlasting, and others unto reproach, to see it always.
3 But they that are learned, shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they that instruct many to justice, as stars for all eternity.
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time appointed: many shall pass over, and knowledge shall be manifold.
5 And I, Daniel, looked, and behold as it were two others stood: one on this side upon the bank of the river, and another on that side, on the other bank of the river.
6 And I said to the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river: How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
7 And I heard the man that was clothed in linen, that stood upon the waters of the river, when he had lifted up his right hand, and his left hand to heaven, and had sworn by him that liveth forever, that it should be unto a time, and times, and half a time. And when the scattering of the band of the holy people shall be accomplished, all these things shall be finished.
8 And I heard, and understood not. And I said: O my Lord, what shall be after these things?
9 And he said: Go, Daniel, because the words are shut up, and sealed until the appointed time.”
And as We quoted Rev. Haydock in our last blog on verse 9 above: “The vision will not be understood till the event. It is not to be interpreted by human wit but by the spirit of God wherewith the Church is enlightened and governed.” And this is also the opinion of St. Jerome, who likewise commented on Dan. 8: 26: “Thou therefore seal up the vision, because it shall come to pass after many days.” Having explained the vision which we have examined above to the best of our ability, the angel Gabriel adds at the end: “Thou therefore seal up the vision, because it shall come to pass after many days.” By the mention of a seal, he showed that the things spoken were of a hidden character and not accessible to the ears of the multitude, OR SUSCEPTIBLE OF COMPREHENSION PRIOR TO THEIR ACTUAL FULFILMENT BY THE EVENTS THEMSELVES.” (See full text HERE.)
St. Jerome’s commentary on the Book of Daniel
St. Jerome is adamant that nearly all of the book of Daniel refers directly to the coming of Antichrist. He writes against the pagan philosopher Porphyry who denied this, claiming the book of Daniel was not canonical. St. Jerome points out how, in almost every verse, the Jewish antichrist Antiochus can only be seen as the archetype of Antichrist. What he says about Antichrist is everything that we have experienced in watching the destruction of the Church. And it is interesting that in this commentary on Daniel he twice refers to Antichrist coming at the end of the age of the Church, and not at the end of the world, as B. E. Strauss has already pointed out (although Strauss takes his quotes from a different source). But not only St. Jerome says this, but St. Bede also. “Antichrist, who is to reign AT THE END OF THE AGE, because of the unity of the body of the ungodly of which he is the head, pertains to the number of the kingdoms of the world” (Apoc. 17: 11).
In later comments, St. Jerome elaborates on Dan. 12: 1-3 as follows: “And so after the Antichrist is crushed and destroyed by the breath of the Savior’s mouth, the people written in God’s book shall be saved; and in accordance with the merits of each, some shall rise up unto eternal life and others unto eternal shame. But the teachers shall resemble the very heavens, and those who have instructed others shall be compared to the brightness of the stars. For it is not enough to know wisdom unless one also instructs others; and the tongue of instruction which remains silent and edifies no one else can receive no reward for labor accomplished. This passage is expressed by Theodotion and the Vulgate edition [of the Septuagint] in the following fashion: “And those who understand shall shine forth like the radiance of the firmament, and many of the righteous like the stars forever and ever.”
“Many people often ask whether a learned saint and an ordinary saint shall both enjoy the same reward and one and the same dwelling-place in heaven. Well then, the statement is made here, according to Theodotion’s rendering, that the learned will resemble the very heavens, whereas the righteous who are without learning are only compared to the brightness of the stars. And so the difference between learned godliness and mere godly rusticity shall be the difference between heaven and the stars.” Verse 11:33 also mentions the learned, and St. Jerome comments: “And they that are learned among the people shall teach many and they shall fall by the sword and by fire and by captivity and by spoil for many days.” The books of Maccabees relate the great sufferings the Jews endured at the hands of Antiochus… [L]et no one doubt that these things are going to happen under the Antichrist, when many shall resist his authority and flee away in various directions.”
And on Dan. 12: 4 he writes: “He who had revealed manifold truth to Daniel now signifies that the things he has said are matters of secrecy, and he orders him to roll up the scroll containing his words and set a seal upon the book, with the result that many shall read it and inquire (p. 577) as to its fulfilment in history, differing in their opinions because of its great obscurity. And as for the statement, “Many shall pass over” or “go through,” this indicates that it will be read by many people. For it is a familiar expression to say: “I have gone through a book,” or, “I have passed through an historical account.” Indeed this is the idea which Isaiah also expressed in regard to the obscurity of his own book: “And the sayings of that book shall be like the words of ‘I do not know how to read.’
“But if they give it to a man who does know how to read and say, ‘Read the book,’ he will reply, ‘I cannot read it, because it is sealed up’ ” (Isa. 39:11). Also in the Revelation of John, there is a book seen which is sealed with seven seals inside and outside. And when no one proves able to break its seals, John says, “I wept sore; and a voice came to me, saying, ‘Weep not: behold the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the book and break its seals’ “(Apoc. 5:4). But that book can be opened by one who has learned the mysteries of Scripture and understands its hidden truths, and its words which seem dark because of the greatness of the secrets they contain. He it is who can interpret the parables and transmute the letter which killeth into the spirit which quickeneth.
And in this same vein, on verses 8-10: “And if the prophet himself heard and did not understand, what will be the case with those men who presumptuously expound a book which has been sealed, and that too unto the time of the end, a book which is shrouded with many obscurities? But he comments that when the end comes, the ungodly will lack comprehension, whereas those who are learned in the teaching of God will be able to understand. “For wisdom will not enter the perverted soul, nor can it impart itself to a body which is subject to sins.” For in Ch. 9, verses, 13-14, St. Jerome already had commented: “’All this evil has come upon us, and we have not entreated Thy face, O Lord our God, that we might turn back from our iniquities and consider Thy truth.'”
“Their obduracy was so great that even in the midst of their toils they would not entreat God, and even if they had entreated Him, it would not have been a genuine entreaty, because they had not turned back from their iniquities. Yet to consider the truth of God is equivalent to turning back from iniquity (v. 13)…. “And the Lord hath kept watch over the evil and hath brought it upon us.'” Whenever we are rebuked because of our sins, God is keeping watch over us and visiting us with chastisement. But whenever we are left alone by God and we do not suffer judgment but are unworthy of the Lord’s rebuke, then He is said to slumber.”
And exactly what are these iniquities? They are repeated again and again in the book of Daniel. St. Jerome comments: “And as for the statement, “And he glorified himself even against the Prince of Power,” this means that he lifted himself up against God and persecuted His saints. He even took away the endelekhismos or “continual offering” which was customarily sacrificed in the morning and at even, and he prevailed to the casting down of the “place of His sanctuary.” And he did not do this by his own prowess, but only “on account of the sins of the people.” And thus it came to pass that truth was prostrated upon the ground, and as the worship of idols flourished, the religion of God suffered an eclipse.” (Dan. 8: 11, 12).
For “…the Antichrist shall come, and according to the Apostle [reading apostolum for apostolorum] he is going to sit in the temple of God (II Thess. 2) and be slain by the breath of our Lord and Savior after he has waged war against the saints. And thus it shall come to pass that the middle of the week shall mark the confirmation of God’s covenant with the saints, and the middle of the week in turn shall mark the issuing of the decree under the authority of Antichrist that no more sacrifices be offered. For the Antichrist shall set up the abomination of desolation, that is, an idol or statue of his own god, within the Temple. Then shall ensue the final devastation and the condemnation of the Jewish people, who after their rejection of Christ’s truth shall embrace the lie of the Antichrist” (Ch. 9: 24-27).
Idol worship among the NO and LibTrads
And not only those of the Novus Ordo and LibTrad sects, but also those calling themselves Recusants, in order not to be totally rejected by their fellow sedevacantists, will pay this tribute to idols. They do this whenever they take it upon themselves to determine that some or another “worthy” priest can Pope Pius XII’s infallible papal constitution — Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis — is only an “ecclesiastic” or disciplinary law and therefore does not bind them; the same they claim for Pope Paul IV’s infallible Bull, Cum ex Apostolatus Officio. That when these papal constitutions irrefutably teach that the attempts to simulate the Sacraments by all those pretending to act on behalf of the Church are null, void and invalid. And those calling themselves “Traditionalists” can only be classified as those same heretics condemned by Pope Pius IX in 1855 (DZ 1649); for the real meaning of Tradition, as pointed out here many times before, is not what they pretend.
Commenting on 2 Thess. 2:14, the Most Rev. John Macevilly D.D., wrote in 1898: “By “tradition,” he [St. Paul] means doctrines and institutions of the Christian religion, whether appertaining to faith or discipline. Of the latter kind he spoke — chap. 11. Ep. 1 to Cor.—“Cetera, cum venero, disponam.” From this latter verse it is clear, that Tradition was intended to be a channel of divine revelation no less than the sacred Scriptures. Traditions may be committed to writing in after times; but still they are said to be the unwritten word of God, because, not written by the Apostles, like the SS. Scriptures, but merely delivered by the word of mouth…
“Hence, God wished that the great certain means of conveying His divine truth, independent of every species of casualty, was to be the tradition of His Church, which He has constituted the indefectible oracle of his heavenly truth, unto the end of time. On this account, it is, that the Gospel is called, a testimony, to be handed down by witnesses” (An Exposition of the Epistles of Saint Paul and of the Catholic Epistles: Vols. 1 & 2). That all those official edicts of the popes, including those on discipline, are to be unquestionably observed is a matter of Church teaching and practice.
Catholic Encyclopedia on Canon Law
“The Sovereign Pontiff is the most fruitful source of canon law; he can abrogate the laws made by his predecessors or by ecumenical councils; he can legislate for the whole Church or for a part thereof, a country or a given body of individuals; if he is morally bound to take advice and to follow the dictates of prudence, he is not legally obliged to obtain the consent of any other person or persons, or to observe any particular form; his power is limited only by Divine law, natural and positive, dogmatic and moral. Furthermore, he is, so to say, the living law, for he is considered as having all law in the treasury of his heart (“in scrinio pectoris“; Boniface VIII. c. i, “De Constit.” in VI). From the earliest ages the letters of the Roman Pontiffs constitute, with the canons of the councils, the principal element of canon law, not only of the Roman Church and its immediate dependencies. but of all Christendom; they are everywhere relied upon and collected, and the ancient canonical compilations contain a large number of these precious “decretals” (decreta, statuta, epistolae decretales, and epistolae synodicae).
“Later, the pontifical laws are promulgated more usually as constitutions, Apostolic Letters, the latter being classified as Bulls or Briefs, according to their external form, or even as spontaneous acts, “Motu proprio”. Moreover, the legislative and disciplinary power of the pope not being an in communicable privilege, the laws and regulations made in his name and with his approbation possess his authority: in fact, though most of the regulations made by the Congregations of the cardinals and other organs of the Curia are incorporated in the Apostolic Letters, yet the custom exists and is becoming more general for legislation to be made by mere decrees of the Congregations, with the papal approval. These are the “Acts of the Holy See” (Acta Sancte Sedis), and their object or purpose permitting, are real laws (see ROMAN CURIA).
“Whatever may be said about the forms used in the past, today the promulgation of general ecclesiastical laws is effected exclusively by the insertion of the law in the official publication of the Holy See, the “Acta Apostolical Sedis“, in compliance with the Constitution Promulgandi of Pius X, dated 29 September, 1908, except in certain specifically mentioned cases. The law takes effect and is binding on all members of the community as soon as it is promulgated, allowing for the time morally necessary for it to become known, unless the legislator has fixed a special time at which it is to come into force.” And Rev. S. B. Smith, D.D., in his Elements of Ecclesiastical Law (1881; endorsed by both Henry Cardinal Manning and John Cardinal Newman), wrote the same in his work below.
Of the Nature of the Power of the Roman Pontiffs
“The decrees of the Roman Pontiffs constitute the chief source of canon law; nay, more, the entire canon law, in the strict sense of the term, is based upon their legislative authority. Hence it is that heretics have ever sought to destroy, or at least to weaken, this legislative power. The following are the chief errors on this head : the Roman Pontiff has legislative power over the entire Church ; that the Pontifical laws bind both de jure and de facto, independently of their acceptation by anyone, even bishops…
“Are Pontifical laws obligatory on the faithful or the Church, even when not accepted by anyone? We reply in the affirmative. The proof is : Papal laws are binding, even without being accepted by anyone, if Popes (a) have the power to enact laws independently of such acceptation; (b) if, de facto, they wish their laws to be binding without such acceptation. But this is the case; therefore, etc. The Sovereign Pontiff can, if he chooses, enact laws obligatory on the entire Church independently of any acceptation. This is indubitable — nay, according to Suarez, de fide.
“The Roman Pontiff de facto wishes that his laws should bind independently of their acceptation by anyone. This is evident from the fact that the wording of the Papal laws, as of laws in general, is mandatory. Now, a command given absolutely does not oblige merely on condition of its being accepted, but unconditionally or absolutely ; otherwise the supposed law or command would be no law at all, but merely a counsel… We therefore reject the following opinion, advanced by Bouix and Craisson, (and followed by us in the first and second editions of this work, n. 22, 26, 32): The opinion of those who hold that it is the will of the Roman Pontiffs that, certain Papal laws pertaining to discipline should not, de facto, bind before being accepted, is lawful and sustained by many Catholic doctors. IN FACT, THE AUTHORS ALLEGED BY BOUIX AND CRAISSON FOR THIS OPINION EITHER DO NOT MAINTAIN IT OR SUSTAIN THE VERY OPPOSITE.”
So we see that those rejecting these decrees are only reiterating the objections posited by the Modernists and Liberals who were already plaguing the Church in the 19th century. It was simply yet another manifestation of the Gallicanist heresy, a rejection of the authority of the papacy. But we have gone over this many times before, and as St. Jerome notes above, “…when the end comes, the ungodly will lack comprehension.”
Conclusion
It is only because we have been blessed with the Internet and our own Catholic library books that we have any understanding of religious matters, ourselves. We provide only a restatement of the truths gifted us by these saints and holy people — a reflection of those great lights who shone so brightly in the past and warned us so frequently and fervently. Without them we would be totally in the dark regarding our seeming abandonment by God, an abandonment rightly understood only by Christ Himself on the Cross.
Many of them we must mention here: the Popes first of all, then the Fathers and Doctors of the Church; all the sainted theologians; scriptural commentators such as Rev. Leo Haydock, and Rev. Leonard Goffine, Rev. E. S. Berry, Rev. H.B. Kramer; members of the hierarchy including Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Louis-Edouard Cardinal Pie, Louis Cardinal Billot, Rev. Frederick Faber, Rev. Felix Sarda y Salvany, Rev. Reginald Garrigou-LaGrange, Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey, Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton and Rev. Francis J. Connell; the laymen Juan Donoso Cortes, Louis Veuillot and Peter Allies; all the many canonists and those writing Canon Law dissertations whom we have cited here — and there are so many others, they would fill yet another page. But all work together to help us better understand our role in these times. Little appreciated is the role that St. Michael has played in protecting those of us who do our best to preserve the faith. Without his assistance and protection, we would not even exist.
Commenting on Apoc. 12:7, St. Bede writes: “Michael, with his angels, fights against the devil, for that, according to the will of God, he contends for the Church in her sojourning, by praying and ministering help; of whom Daniel also said, that he would come to the aid of the Church in the last and most grievous affliction.” Those of us devoted to him, who each day recite the prayers given us by Pope Leo XIII, know his power and must not fail to thank him for his continued assistance. Rev. Haydock, commenting on Daniel 12: 8, tells us that when the scattering of the band of holy people has been accomplished, then they will be miraculously delivered. And we can be sure that the deliverer will be St. Michael, standing up for his people. We salute you dear St. Michael, whose feast day is this month, for truly without you as our guardian, we would long ago have been snatched up by the Evil One. May we always pray to be worthy of thy continuing patronage!
A shout out
Kudos to Laura Wood for a great blog on the need for wisdom in old age, contrary to the insane model provided by the world. Read it HERE. The video on Communism featured on her site is also an excellent if grisly reminder of where we are headed.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 22, 2025 | New Blog
+The Immaculate Heart of Mary+
Introduction
In a comment made on the Aug. 1 NAR blog, a reader provided links to videos that explain how the powers that be are vying among themselves for control of the world with NAR being only a part of this overall plan. While the videos mentioned in the link are interesting, they are factually incorrect in certain places particularly on the subject of the “Jesuit conspiracy” within the Church. And as might be expected, they accept the Novus Ordo as the Church and have no idea (or do they?) of the level of deception perpetrated on those identifying as “Catholic.” Therefore I don’t recommend them for viewing (too much time wasted) but I do want to comment on their creator’s overall premise.
The video narrator, Jiang Xueqin, points out that the existence of NAR, the New Apostolic Reformation, is a part of an effort by Protestants to stake out their religious claim on America. He believes this could lead to a civil war that could possibly help solidify their position and advance the drive toward one-world government. While there are several contenders for the position of a one-world religious leader, the final outcome will basically be determined within their own inner circles and fought out on the world stage. Jiang deals with this on a religious level and what it boils down to is which of these world leaders will head the one world religion as “Antichrist,” although that’s not how it is presented.
He first lists Zoroastrianism as a religion and their belief in the battle of good against evil towards the end of the world. This position, however, has only a negligible impact on what we’re talking about. Then he lists the Muslims, the Jews, the Orthodox, the Anglo Protestants and finally the Catholics. Terrorist elements aside, the Muslims seemed to be not as organized as the others but are concerning because of their numbers and the inroads they have made into countries worldwide through immigration. Muslims expect a Mahdi or end-times Messiah much as the Jews expect their Messiah. The Jews anticipate a Messiah who will act as a leader and Liberator — a military figure who will liberate Gaza and return it to Israeli dominion. This so the Jews can reclaim the Dome of the Rock, rebuild their temple and restore Jews to their homeland to enjoy the promises God made to the chosen people.
The Orthodox are working to establish their religious worldview and this includes the possible invasion of America and its conversion to orthodoxy as part of that plan. Then there is the Anglican Protestant faction which is behind the New Apostolic Reformation worldwide jostling for its own position in the queue. Finally there are the Catholics who Jiang calls the king of conspiracies and of course he is referring to the Novus Ordo, which already has a worldwide organization capable of demanding from its members any number of policy changes. Jiang notes in the final analysis that some melding of the Novus Ordo and Orthodox may result, something for which the Novus Ordo sect has been lobbying for decades. And there are now positive signs that this is being actively discussed in Rome.
This would place the Jews and the Muslims in an awkward position. It renders them outliers along with those Protestants who refuse to endorse NAR and “Traditional” Catholics not in communion with Rome. Eventually these two entities must battle each other to determine who will control Jerusalem. Jiang also completely discounts China as a contending force in this race for world religious recognition, stating he believes the country will collapse under the considerable weight of its own population. This may be a major miscalculation on his part but only time will tell. Jiang goes into great detail about the Jesuit conspiracy, dating back to their origin, suppression and reinstatement, calling them the spy network of the Catholic Church. He does not mention of course the spy networks for the other religions — the terrorist organizations for the Muslims, the Mossad for the Jews, the revamped and renamed KGB for the Russian Orthodox, and the Freemasons for the Protestant sects, who created this organization from their own ranks in the 1700s.
The Katechon
The comical aspect of all this is that Putin, the Jewish Messiah, the Muslim Mahdi and presumably the people at the top of the NAR movement and their prophets all believe themselves to be a version of what some refer to as the katechon, a Greek word for the restraining power mentioned by St. Paul in 2 Thess. 2: 6-7: “He who withholdeth.” Primarily the NAR but also Russia, seem to be fancying themselves as the withholding power that can stop the coming of Antichrist — a human way to prevent Antichrist from ever arriving. And they brazenly twist Holy Scripture in such a way that it basically can be used and interpreted in a manner totally disassociated from its true meaning and purpose — Christ ‘s intent for His Church. One of those indirectly involved with the NAR movement is PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, and he has some interesting views on how the katechon might be able to permanently prevent Antichrist’s coming.
At the same time, however, he makes the statement that people tend to fear the Second Coming more than they fear the coming of Antichrist. But if Holy Scripture is believed as it is written the Second Coming cannot occur unless Antichrist is revealed, Armageddon happens (Apoc., Ch. 16), Rome is destroyed, (Apoc. 17-18) and Christ comes to judge the living and the dead. This is the classic example of man’s believing that he can dictate the outcome of world events to God. The Bible has always been for Protestants a book or cipher they are free to interpret or understand in any way they want in order to arrive at their desired goal. Of course we know better and the problem with this katechon business is that they have no idea what they’re talking about when it comes to the withholding power that St. Paul speaks about.
The idea is not new. LibTrad pseudo-clergy have acted as the katechon for decades, pretending to perpetuate the Church and provide the Mass and Sacraments, so it will appear as though they still exist. For if they once admitted that the Mass could no longer be validly offered, then the question of how it could cease would need to be answered and Antichrist brought into the picture, even though that question was raised and answered long ago. And it was answered in the same breath as the disappearance of the papacy, had Catholics consulted approved sources and not those false christs and hirelings sent to deceive them.
Cardinal Manning on the withholding power
In his The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, (1862), Henry Edward Cardinal Manning wrote: “The barrier, or hindrance, to lawlessness will exist until it is taken out of the way. Now what is the meaning of the words, until it ‘be taken out of the way’? The Son of God shall permit, for a time, the powers of evil to prevail. That He will permit it for a time stands in the book of prophecy. When the hindrance is taken away, the man of sin will be revealed. The event may come to pass that as our Divine Lord, after His three years of public ministry were ended, delivered Himself of His own free will into the hands of men, and thereby permitted them to do that which before was impossible, so in His inscrutable wisdom He may deliver over His Vicar upon earth, as He delivered Himself, and that the providential support of the temporal power of the Holy See may be withdrawn when its work is done…
“The gates of hell may war against it; they may strive and wrestle, as they struggle now with the Vicar of our Lord; but no one has the power to move Him one step until the hour shall come when the Son of God shall permit, for a time, the powers of evil to prevail. That He will permit it for a time stands in the book of prophecy. When the hindrance is taken away, the man of sin will be revealed; then will come the persecution of three years and a half [representing an indefinite period -Ed], short, but terrible, during which the Church of God will return into its state of suffering, as in the beginning; and the imperishable Church of God, by its inextinguishable life derived from the pierced side of Jesus, which for three hundred years lived on through blood, will live on still through the fires of the times of Antichrist!
“When the whole number of those whom He hath chosen to eternal life is filled up. It may be that when that is done, and when the times of Antichrist are come, that He will give over His Vicar upon earth, and His Mystical Body at large, [for a time]… The Church would, as in the beginning, again be made up of members voluntarily uniting themselves together throughout the whole world, having indeed a legal recognition here and there, but wandering up and down the earth, without any contact with the nations of the world as such…” And here Manning ends with a warning to the LibTrads: “For as surely as the Son of God reigns on high, and will reign “until He has put all His enemies under His feet,” so surely everyone that lifts a heel or directs a weapon, a tongue, or a pen, against His faith, His Church, or His Vicar upon earth, will share the judgment which is laid up for the Antichrist whom he serves… ‘Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall he broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder’” (Matt. 21:44). Christ’s Vicars shall not be mocked.
Revs. E.S. Berry and Rev. H.B. Kramer, also other commentators, share this opinion on the pope being the withholding power. And as will be seen below, it must necessarily come with the cessation of the Holy Sacrifice, for only Antichrist can abolish the true Mass. The abolition of the Continual Sacrifice and the taking away of the pope and his power are both predicted in the Book of Daniel as being accomplished in one fell swoop by the beast — Antichrist proper. The Jewish sacrifice of lambs happened daily, but ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. The Old Covenant became the New, because Christ came to fulfill the law. Likewise, the Continual Sacrifice of Christ, the Lamb of God, was taken away in 1958 when the true katechon was taken away. Cardinal Manning writes in his The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy (1861):
“Let us hear, therefore, the words of the prophet Daniel. Speaking of the person whom St. John calls the Antichrist, whom he calls the king that shall work according to his own will, the prophet Daniel says,” “He shall speak words against the High One, ”— that is, the Almighty God,— “and shall crush the saints of the Most High.” Again he says, “It’— that is, the power of this king — “was magnified even unto the strength of heaven: and it threw down of the strength, and of the stars, and trod upon them. And it was magnified even to the prince of the strength; and it took away from him the continual sacrifice, and cast down the place of his sanctuary.” Further, he says, “The victim and the sacrifice shall fail, and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation.” These three passages are taken from the seventh, and the eighth, and the ninth chapters of Daniel. I might add more, but they are enough, for in the Book of Apocalypse we find a key to these words. St. John, evidently referring to the Book of Daniel, writes of the beast, that is, the persecuting power which shall reign on the earth by might, “It was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them.”
“Now here we have four distinct prophecies of a persecution which shall be inflicted by this antichristian power upon the Church of God. The Holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of Antichrist, and of these prophecies of Daniel, without a single exception, as far as I know, and they are the Fathers both of the East and of the West, the Greek and the Latin Church — all of them unanimously — say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of Antichrist, the holy sacrifice of the altar will cease… The fulfilment of the prophecy is yet to come; and that which we have seen in the two wings, we shall see also in the centre;’ and that great army of the Church of God will, for a time, be scattered. It will seem, for a while, to be defeated, and the power of the enemies of the faith for a time to prevail. The continual sacrifice will be taken away, and the sanctuary will be cast down.”
How do you have a Sacrifice without a sanctuary? And who can you take the Sacrifice from who would be a Prince of Strength if not the pope and those he commissions through his bishops (symbolized by stars, the commentators say) to offer the Sacrifice? And if the sanctuary has been cast down, where is the Prince?
LibTrad misrepresentation of “consummation”
And what else does Daniel have to say on this topic? A great deal more, for he predicts in Ch. 9:27 that “ …The victim and the sacrifice shall fail and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation AND to the end.” And the footnote to the Douay Rheims Bible reads: “By his sacrifice upon the cross, Christ abolished all the sacrifices of the law… The abomination of desolation some understand as the profanation of the temple by the crimes of the Jews and by the bloody faction of the zealots; others of the bringing in thither the ensigns and standard of the Pagan Romans. Others in fine distinguished three different times of desolation: that under Antiochus; that when the temple was destroyed by the Romans and the last near the end of the world under Antichrist to which, as they suppose, this prophecy may have a relation.”
The definition of consummation is completion, fulfillment, conclusion. When Christ spoke on the Cross, “It is consummated,” He indicated that His sufferings were finished, over, done with; completed or brought to their final conclusion. In his work Eschatology, (1929), Rt. Rev. Joseph Pohle tells us:
“The consummation of the world may be regarded either as in process (in fieri) or as an accomplished fact (in facto esse). Regarding it from the former point of view we speak of the “last things” (novissima, τὰ ἔσχατα), i. e. the events to happen at the second coming of our Lord. “The four last things of man” are Death, Judgment, Heaven (Purgatory), and Hell. The four last things of the human race as a whole are: the Last Day, the Resurrection of the Flesh, and the Final Judgment, followed by the End of the World. These four events constitute so many stages on the way to the predestined state of consummation (consummatio saeculi, συντέλεια αἰῶνος), which will be permanent and irrevocable.”
Daniel foretells the utter consummation and desolation of the temple, resulting in the “completion” of the 70 weeks for his people and the Holy City (Dan. 9:24, 27; 12:7). This marked THE TIME OF THE END of the Jewish age, NOT the end of time itself (Dan. 12:4). He distinguishes between the consummation and the end proper. The Jews have never been able to rebuild their temple; all attempts have met with frightening natural disasters and deadly accidents that have brought their work to a halt, and this can be expected to continue. And while presumption has led some to believe that an end to the Church’s time on earth would never come, we must remember why it came for the Jews: disobedience, sins of the flesh, idolatry, blasphemy, apostasy. And those identifying as Catholic were/are not guilty of these same sins?
Commenting on 1 Cor. 10: 11. Haydock notes: “Upon whom the ends of the world are come, the last age of the world which Saint John calls “the last hour.” (1 John 2:18) This verse reads: “Little children it is the last hour and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh and now there are many antichrists whereby we know that it is the last hour.” Haydock comments ”It is the last hour:” that is, according to the common interpretation, the last age of the world from the coming of Christ to the day of judgment and the end of the world which Saint Paul calls “the end and consummation of ages.” Hebrews 9:26: “Jesus… at the end of ages… hath appeared for the destruction of sin by the sacrifice of himself.” Haydock then says: “He came at the end of the ages, as it were, in the last age of the world; the putting away or abrogating of sin.” All this is made quite clear in B.E. Strauss’ s work, quoted here at length before, Even to the Consummation of the Age (2023). Strauss quotes from Fathers of the Church showing that what happened to the Jews in 70 A.D. will happen and has happened also to the Church. (Strauss’s PDF is available on request).
Strauss emphasizes that even though the word saeculi which translates as age appears in many magisterial and biblical works in Latin, not mundi, meaning the world, saeculi is still translated as “world.” LibTrad forums claim that the Vatican Council documents read “world,” but they do not read mundi in Latin, but saeculi. Below we present the Latin from Denzinger/Bannwort’s Enchiridion Symbolorum, 1911. This is far more reliable than the 1957 Denzinger edition edited by the Modernist Karl Rahner, quoted from by LibTrads. The question is: How do you translate saeculi to mean mundi or world?
Why have the distinctions on the withholding power and consummation of the age versus the world not been rightly understood or presented until recently? Regarding understanding, we read from Daniel, Ch. 12:4: “O Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book until the appointed time…” Rev. Haydock: “The vision will not be understood till the event. It is not to be interpreted by human wit but by the spirit of God wherewith the Church is enlightened and governed.” As for presentation, much has been hidden from the faithful to deceive them and attain purely political and financial ends. The LibTrad forums offer only their own opinions and ipse dixit (parrot) their exalted leaders the pseudo-bishops, such as Sanborn, without ever investigating for themselves. The Church and Her approved authors alone have the right to interpret these things. The word “world” was used for a very specific reason in these mistranslated documents and they refuse to see it. It is what keeps their pseudo-clergy and the prostitute Novus Ordo church in business.
The Triumph of the Church
In response to questions raised by readers concerning the triumph of the Church on earth that has been promised in various places, Card. Manning has a very good explanation for what that triumph truly is and what we should expect it to be — and it’s not what people think. It is not a restoration of the Church on earth as She once was. There is nothing in Holy Scripture that even hints that that is a possibility. Amazingly, Manning tells us that what we are experiencing NOW is the glorious triumph of the Church, when there are so few of us left who recognize what has happened and yet we continue to persevere in our own poor way, awaiting the last day and the Final Judgment. We read from his The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, p. 148:
“We are fond of imagining triumphs and glories for the Church on earth,— that the Gospel is to be preached to all nations, and the world to be converted, and all enemies subdued, and I know not what,— until some ears are impatient of hearing that there is in store for the Church a time of terrible trial… many among us intoxicate their minds with the visions of success and victory, and cannot endure the thought that there is a time of persecution yet to come for the Church of God…. according to the analogy of all God’s dealings, the last glories of His Church on earth will be greater than the first. And yet perhaps we are perplexed to understand how this can be verified. We look at the present state of the Church in the world, and all seems dark before us. The reason is this, that it is difficult for us justly to estimate and to understand the days in which we are. As we cannot measure the motion by which we are carried along, as no man, perhaps, knows his own countenance, or is conscious of his own stature, so it is with the times that are upon us… It is necessary, therefore, that the present should be known by retrospect. And the greatest times and the most glorious are often those which look darkest when they are near.
“The days, therefore, which are upon us now, though heavy shadows and dark clouds hang upon the horizon, will doubtless hereafter be glorious to those who see them afar off; and I may say without rashness that they will be more glorious than any times we read of in the history of the Church… certain other periods of history which we look upon now as periods of especial glory, and to show that they were moments which those who lived in them looked upon as times of the greatest darkness, suffering, and tribulation, pregnant with evils known and unknown for the present and the future… these times were dark beyond anything we see now. They were times of old heresies and new. They were times when arose the greatest heresy that has ever afflicted the Church of God — I mean that which is now upon it; for there has been none so widespread, none so manifold, none so hostile, none so universal in its denial of the revelation of God… What could be darker than these epochs of the past? Yet we look back upon them now as the most bright and glorious times in the annals of the Church.” (End of Manning quotes).
Conclusion
Those who have not bothered to study Holy Scripture and the teachings of the Church will quite possibly be led astray by the machinations of those who pretend that man can hold back the coming of Antichrist when we know that Antichrist has already come, the Sacrifice has been taken away and the consummation will last till the end. This diabolical political charade is simply a culmination of the ecumenism that was foisted on the world at the false Vatican 2 council because this is man’s solution to God’s revealed Word, an insult He will not abide. By not accepting the fact that the Church has physically disappeared and could disappear just like the Jewish church disappeared, people have found themselves this cozy little corner where they can weather the storm, or so they think. But that storm has yet to break and when it breaks those who don’t have the truth will find themselves without any solace, any protection and sadly without any faith. We hope and pray this is not the case but what we have seen over the last 60 plus years does nothing to encourage us to believe that many will eventually accept the truth. God, have mercy on our souls.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 15, 2025 | New Blog
+Our Lady’s Glorious Assumption+
(This excerpt is taken from The Life of the Blessed Virgin Mary, written by Rev. B. Rohner, O.S.B. in 1897, before Pope Pius XII proclaimed that the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into Heaven was a dogma of faith.)
CHAPTER XLVI. THE BLESSED VIRGIN IS ASSUMED INTO HEAVEN
Although the holy Church has not yet raised it to an article of faith, and although we are not in possession of detailed satisfactory evidence as to the miraculous manner in which the assumption of the Blessed Virgin was accomplished, yet there cannot be a doubt but that, not only the pure soul of the blessed Mother of God was admitted into heaven, but also her immaculate body; for it had been the dwelling-place of the Most High, and the sacred Ark of the Covenant in the New Law. To a believing soul it is sufficient to know that this really took place, although Divine Providence has not been pleased to clearly enlighten us on this point, nor, indeed, on many others. In the first place, I shall relate to you, Christian reader, what the earliest Christian writers have left in their writings concerning the glorious mystery of the Assumption. Then I shall furnish you with the reasons why we may believe unconditionally this mystery; nay, must believe it, although no direct decision of the holy Church obliges us to do so.
THE EMPTY TOMB
After the solemn and touching ceremony of laying the virginal body of our blessed Lady in the tomb, t h e apostles and other believers, as already stated, remained at the grave for three days. What kept them there? Their great love and profound respect for the Mother of Jesus would not permit them to think for a moment in their hearts that this immaculate tabernacle of the Redeemer would be given over to corruption. They remembered vividly and joyfully the glorious resurrection of their divine Master on the third day. An interior voice, perhaps even a special revelation, informed them that Christ, who had Himself arisen, would be pleased to awake His highly favored beloved Mother also from the sleep of death.
Deeply impressed with this conviction, they opened the grave on the third day. Or, if we choose, we may safely adopt another opinion given and held by many learned and pious writers. These teach that one of the apostles, having arrived in Jerusalem too late to see the remains of the Blessed Virgin, was over-powered with grief and disappointment. He begged that the stone enclosing the tomb might be removed just once more, to enable him to gaze for the last time on the beloved countenance of their departed guide and Mother. In expectation of this happy privilege, he had travelled incessantly, night and day, from his remote mission. Moved at his deep piety and earnest pleadings, the other apostles granted his wish.
In anxious expectation, and wavering between hope and fear, they lifted away the heavy stone. A sweet fragrance immediately came forth from the grave. A supernatural brightness arose and enveloped all present. The flowers that had surrounded the body revived and again assumed their most beautiful colors. But the fairest and brightest flower, the sacred remains of the Mother of Jesus, was not there. A cry of astonishment and joy fell from the lips of all: “She is risen, she is not here!” Yes, the Blessed Virgin had arisen from death, and with body and soul had been conducted into heaven. Such was the firm belief of the wondering apostles and their fellow-watchers. It would be absurd to suppose that robbers could have rifled the grave and carried away the body; for the whole gathering of apostles and other friends had been continually on guard. Hymns of joy and exultation were now sung in honor of the glorified Queen of heaven. As the happy news spread far and wide. new courage and lively faith were awakened in the
souls of all believers. Here the almighty God had plainly given incontestable evidence that He was near His holy and beloved Church, with His protection and grace, and ready and willing to reward the love, fidelity, and sacrifice of His friends.
PROOFS OF THE ASSUMPTION
From the days of the apostles down to our own time it has been the unbroken universal belief of the whole Catholic world that the blessed Mother of God has been admitted to the presence of God, not alone in soul, but also with her pure and now glorified body. But, Christian reader, although you believe firmly and joyfully this miraculous assumption of your blessed Lady, yet it may not be superfluous, for a still better understanding of the mystery, for an increased faith in it, and perhaps as a help to defend it, to give the grounds on which this Catholic conviction is based. Briefly, then, I would lay before you, for your study and meditation, the following eight points:
(a) The festival of the Assumption of the Blessed Vir- gin was evidently observed even in the very earliest years of Christianity as a joyful feast commemorative of this miraculous event. Many learned writers have made good attempts to prove that the feast was established by the apostles and celebrated in their time. It is certain that during the reign of the Emperor Constantine the Great, who died May 22, 337, this festival used to be celebrated in the East with great devotion and pomp. In the Western Church. it has been a festival of the first class ever since the sixth century. Even from the very prayers used in the Mass and divine office on this day, it is clear that the church commemorates the translation from earth to heaven, not only of the soul of our blessed Lady, but also of her sacred body.
(b) As early as the year 451, Marcian, the Emperor of the Eastern Empire, summoned Bishop Juvenalis to the court at Constantinople in order to get his opinion on this question; namely, whether the body of the Blessed Virgin was still in the grave at Jerusalem or not. The Emperor’s intention was, if the body were to be found, to have it translated to the church recently erected in his capital by the Empress Pulcheria, and which was to be dedicated to God under the invocation to the Blessed Mary. Bishop Juvenalis stated the tradition universally admitted in Palestine, namely, that the body as well as the soul of the Blessed Mother of God had been translated by angels into heaven. (Niceph. Hist. Book II.) In fact, at no period in Christian history has anyone claimed to have seen any relic from the sacred person of and expose to public veneration every relic deserving such honors, not a word has ever been said of any relics or these sacred remains.
(c) In the Western Church, the holy bishop, St. Gregory of Tours, also gives testimony in his writings, published about the year 550, of the assumption of the Blessed Virgin. Not many years later one of the most saintly of Popes and renowned of church writers mentions the universal belief in this mystery. Pope Gregory the Great, who died on the 12th of March, 604, composed for the Mass celebrated in honor of the Assumption the following prayer: “We beseech thee, O Lord, that we may obtain real assistance, through the solemn celebration of this day on which the Mother of God died indeed a corporeal death, but could not be detained in the bonds of death.”
(d) The Greek Church considers this general belief so well founded, that in a council held in Armenia in the year 1342, the assembled members issued the following declaration: ” Let everyone know and understand the Church of Armenia holds and teaches that the holy Mother of God, by the power and virtue of Jesus Christ, was translated into the kingdom of heaven, both body and soul.” Again this same Eastern Church, when repelling the calumnies which the so-called Reformers, Luther and Calvin and their followers, uttered against the Mother of God, declared in a council held in Jerusalem in the year 1672: “It is beyond all doubt that the Blessed Virgin Mary is not only a great and miraculous sign on earth, because although she brought forth God in the flesh and yet remained a virgin, but she is also a great and miraculous sign in heaven, because she was translated thither body and soul: for although her immaculate body was enclosed in the tomb, yet, like the body of Our Lord, after three days it was released and admitted to heaven.”
(e) Death is the wages of sin. As God had wrought the greater miracle of preserving Mary from every stain of even original sin, it was eminently becoming that He should not omit a lesser miracle and one expected from His justice, mainly to avert Mary from the wages of sin, death in its destructive form.
(f) This precious body was the miraculous source in which the body of Christ, the Victor over death, the grave, and corruption, was itself formed. How then could this virginal flesh fall a prey to death and corruption?
(g) As Mary had given her virginal body to the King, the Blessed Virgin of glory to be His dwelling-place, it is right and proper that this same Lord should give His kingdom of eternal glory to be her resting-place. St. Bernard thus beautifully expresses this sentiment: “When the Lord came into this world, Mary received Him in the noblest dwelling on earth, in the temple of her chaste womb. Therefore, on this day has the Lord exalted her to an honorable throne in His heavenly kingdom.” What human imagination can picture to itself the splendor with which our glorious Queen was carried up to heaven, the reverence and love with which the heavenly hosts met and greeted her, the songs of triumph amid which she was conducted to the presence of her divine Son, the affection with which He received her, and placed her above all other creatures.
(h). If it be objected that it is altogether new and un- heard of for any member of the human family to be translated in body from this life on earth to heaven before the general resurrection of the flesh on the last day, we should recall to mind the case of the patriarch Enoch, who, according to the clear and undoubted testimony of Holy Scripture, was carried in body by the power of God from earth to heaven. Moreover, the prophet Elias was borne to heaven in a fiery chariot drawn by fiery horses. These evidences and many others which might be adduced, and which may be found in Brennan-Businger’s “Life of Christ.” are sufficient to give to the doctrine of the bodily assumption of the Blessed Virgin a solidity and a certainty that cannot be given to any other fact in ancient history. For this reason the renowned Pope Benedict XIV. has declared it godless, unintelligible, absurd, and foolish, to doubt this consoling, well-grounded doctrine. The Holy See abstains from defining the Assumption to be an article of faith. Happily it needs no formal declaration; for all Catholics believe it firmly and willingly.
CHRIST’S ASCENSION AND MARY’S ASSUMPTION
There is, however, an essential difference existing between the triumphant ascension of Our Lord and the assumption of His blessed Mother. This difference is well described by St. Peter Damian, a renowned doctor of the Church. He says: “With the eyes of thy soul observe the Son ascending and the Mother carried. Thou wilt discover a manifestation of glory in the ascent of the Son, and the same in that of the Mother. For the Redeemer ascends to heaven in the power and dominion of His strength, as Lord and Creator, surrounded by the homage of the angels, but not aided by any help from them.
But Mary is carried to heaven, and as a sign of her supereminent grace, under the escort and with the help of the angels, for it is grace and not nature that elevates her. Hence this day is termed Assumption, while Our Lord’s day is styled Ascension. For power is something different from mercy, and to the Creator alone belongs the right to transcend by His own inherent power the forces of a nature created by His own hands. ‘The entire glorious company of the heavenly spirits came forth to meet the ascending Saviour. With them were united the hosts of the souls of the just, whom Jesus was leading, and thus conducted by both in triumph to the Father, He sits in equal glory at the right hand of Majesty. The triumphal procession that came to meet the approaching Virgin is far more splendid and glorious. For as she was entering the palace of heaven, the Son Himself came forward, with the whole heavenly court of angels and just souls. (Sermon on the Assumption.) Now is fulfilled completely the prophecy of the timid Virgin of Nazareth, which many years before she had pronounced in holy youthful enthusiasm: “Behold from henceforth, all nations shall call me blessed; for the mighty hath done great things to me. He puts down the mighty from their seat and hath exalted the humble.” (Luke I. 49.)
I, too, praise thee and call thee blessed, O glorious Queen of heaven. I, too, rejoice that thou hast been raised to a throne of everlasting glory. O that it may be permitted to me one day to see thee there, face to face, to glorify thee, and with all the angels and saints to love thee forever and ever. Amen.
ASSUMPTION OF OUR LADY
O Mother pure, our hymns to thee ascending,
Proclaim thee Queen of the eternal years;
Oh let our hearts earth’s joys and sorrows blending
Place at thy feet their rosary of tears.
Awake, my soul, list to the angels rending,
The vault of heav’n with joy that stills all fears
O Queen of sorrows, for our follies grieving,
We cast ourselves distressed before thy throne;
‘Tis thou hast taught our lips to still be weaving,
The words of hope amid the words of moan.
We have no hope, alas! of e’er retrieving,
Our ways, unless thou keep us as thine own
O Lady Queen, behold thy children praying
To be received beneath thy mantle’s fold;
Thou wilt not frown upon our late essaying
To wrest our sinful hearts from Satan’s hold.
Oh, stay our wilful feet from wayward straying,
And bind them fast to thee with love’s pure gold.
F.M.S.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 1, 2025 | New Blog
+St. Peter in Chains+
August, Month of the Immaculate Heart of May
Prayer Society Intention for August
Most holy and Immaculate Virgin Mary, our tender mother and mighty help of Christians, continue to show thyself to be the helper of the Christian people in these our days… Bring low the enemies of our holy religion and frustrate their wicked designs. (Raccolta)
Introduction
A Protestant movement aiming to “Christianize” democracy in America, the “New Apostolic Reformation,” (NAR), now has been backhandedly endorsed by Pres. Donald Trump, and even conservative Protestants are worried that this group’s beliefs are not Christian. NAR has been building its membership worldwide since the 1990s. The group is characterized on Wikipedia as: “a Christian supremacist theological belief and controversial movement associated with the far-right that combines elements of Pentecostalism, evangelicalism, and the Seven Mountain Mandate to advocate for spiritual warfare to bring about Christian dominion over all aspects of society, and end or weaken the separation of church and state… American Republican politicians such as Mike Johnson, Doug Mastriano, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Lauren Boebert and activists such as Charlie Kirk have aligned with it… The NAR is rooted in the Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity movements” (The NAR also is known as the Independent Network Charismatic (INC) or Apostolic-Prophetic Movement.)”
A Mother Jones article reveals that Trump’s former national security adviser Mike Flynn has hosted NAR leaders on his “ReAwaken America” tour and Vice-president J. D. Vance appeared in Pennsylvania at an event hosted by Lance Wallnau, a Texas business strategist-turned-NAR superstar, during last year’s presidential campaign. Vance has publicly styled himself as a “post-liberal.” Below we provide some background on NAR, post-liberalism, and Vance’s ties to an even more disturbing philosophy.
What is the NAR
NAR chronicler Holly Pivec, who has been documenting the growth and activities of the NAR for over a decade, has linked Pres. Trump’s new Office of Faith head Paula White-Cain with NAR. ”White, a well-connected televangelist and prosperity gospel preacher, is known as an apostle who concurs with much Bethel Church and NAR theology.” Trump’s executive order establishing the office states its purpose is to “assist faith-based entities, community organizations, and houses of worship in their efforts to strengthen American faith. Mother Jones reports that Trump asked White-Cain to be his “personal minister” in 2002 and engaged other NAR personalities as counselors during his first term as president.
According to Pivec’s article HERE, “The New Apostolic Reformation is made up of hundreds of churches and organizations that are led by apostles and prophets who share a distinct theology. Many of these churches and organizations have joined “apostolic networks.” These apostolic networks are made up of, in some cases, hundreds of churches and organizations that submit to the leadership of a single apostle, such as Harvest International Ministry — a network of over 12,000 churches and organizations under NAR apostle Ché Ahn… The distinctive teaching of the New Apostolic Reformation is that God has restored the governmental offices of apostle and prophet to the church…. NAR leaders teach that God began restoring the office of prophet to the church in the 1980s and the office of apostle in the 1990s. C. Peter Wagner — one of the movement’s most influential U.S. apostles — teaches that 2001 A.D. marked the beginning of the “Second Apostolic Age,” when the proper church government — headed by living apostles and prophets — was finally restored.
“The primary role of apostles, as taught in the NAR movement, is to govern the church. They are seen by many NAR leaders as filling the highest office in church government above prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. Thus, they are often referred to as the movement’s “generals.” The primary role of prophets, as taught in the NAR movement, is to receive new divine revelation. Thus, prophets are seen by many NAR leaders as filling the second highest office in church government second only to the apostles… NAR prophets are not expected to be 100 percent accurate in their predictions. Thus, they still can be considered legitimate prophets even when they make errors. Critics of the NAR movement believe this toleration of false prophecies is in direct contradiction to the Bible’s teaching that a key sign of a false prophet is giving erroneous, or false, predictions (Deut. 18:20-22). (ED. Note: Not to mention the fact that it is Catholic dogma that Divine Revelation ended with the death of the Apostles. Most Protestants believe it ended with the Book of Revelation, our Apocalypse, which is why they also reject NAR teaching).
“Now that the church is under the leadership of living apostles and prophets, it can complete its primary task — the Great Commission, which has been redefined by NAR leaders as a commission to take dominion, or sociopolitical control, of the earth. One of the more problematic teachings associated with the New Apostolic Reformation (though, again, not held formally by all those who would identify with the movement) is referred to as dominion theology. This theology suggests that Christians should attempt to institute God’s kingdom by conquering the “seven mountains” of society, which include (1) politics, (2) education, (3) media, (4) business, (5) religion, (6) family, and (7) entertainment. Popularized by Lance Wallnau and Bill Johnson in Invading Babylon, the Seven Mountain Mandate (7M) becomes the means by which Christians extend God’s Kingdom…
“NAR leaders teach that they and their followers will develop vast supernatural powers and will perform miracles that will surpass those performed by the biblical apostles and prophets and even those performed by Jesus during his earthly ministry. These miracles will include amazing feats such as healing every single person inside hospitals and mental institutions simply by laying their hands on the buildings and having command of the laws of nature, including gravity. One of most radical teachings in the NAR movement is known as the “Manifest Sons of God.” According to this teaching, the people who continue to receive the new revelation given by NAR apostles and prophets will gain more and more supernatural powers until they eventually become “manifest” or unveiled as “sons of God.”
“Though it is called the New Apostolic Reformation, the movement’s teachings are not new but are actually very old. Throughout church history, groups on the fringes of Christianity have attempted to restore the offices of apostle and/or prophet, including the Montanists (second century), the Irvingites (1830s), and the Apostolic Church (early 1900s)” (end of Pivec quotes). And here we must add many other heresies to this list, including Gnosticism, Theosophy, Spiritism and Mormonism. All of these manifestations are only the fulfillment of St. Paul’s prophesy regarding the operation of error, with its lying signs and wonders. Only the apostolic line of canonically elected Catholic popes — proceeding from St. Peter who was appointed by Christ Himself, and ending with Pope Pius XII — could possibly claim any connection to the Divine. And no pope has ever added to Divine revelation but has only determined its true, pre-existing sense.
The apostasy of “Messianic” Judaism should also be added to the heresies list. According to the Mother Jones article, “The NAR also appropriates Jewish imagery. Two days after I heard one shofar at Ephrata, I attended an all-day “prayer burn” at a barn in the countryside where several attendees blew them. Others wore tallitot, or Jewish prayer shawls. A group of tween dancers carried a chuppah, a four-posted canopy often used in Jewish weddings. The group sang in Hebrew as they danced the hora, a standard feature in Jewish celebrations. Then, one of the NAR leaders I recognized from Ephrata took the microphone and began to speak about Jesus. “He’s the Lord of hosts,” she said. A cacophonous roar of shofars came from the crowd.” The entire theological structure of the NAR mimics that of Judaism, for like the Jews — who esteem the Talmud or laws and teaching of their rabbis over the Torah (Old Testament) — the NAR places Holy Scripture and Divine Revelation secondary to the teachings of their apostles and prophets.
What is post-liberalism
HERE we see that post-liberalism is three things. “First, it is an authoritarian ideology adapted from Catholic reactionary movements responding to the French Revolution and, later, World War I. Second, it is a loose international coalition of illiberal, right-wing parties and political actors. Third, It is a set of policy proposals for creating a welfare state for family formation, the government establishment of the Christian religion and the movement from republican government to administrative despotism… “[Post-liberals are now] training conservative Harvard Law School graduates to adopt [a] negative view of the U.S. Constitution… [Post-liberalism] is filtering into some Catholic seminaries and has made its way into American Protestantism under the name of “Christian nationalism” and this is where post-liberalism intersects with the NAR. According to Wikipedia, “Post-liberals advocate for a communitarian approach that emphasizes social conservatism and social solidarity, often drawing on traditionalist conservative and religious frameworks.” But this should rather read as appearing to “draw on traditionalist, conservative and religious frameworks,” for it certainly cannot be aligned with Catholic teaching.
What is communitarianism
Communitarians balance national laws against the undefinable notion of an international “community.” It eliminates U.S. Constitutional Law. Thousands of communitarian programs and laws have been introduced into American communities, and hundreds of elected representatives embrace the new ideology. Communitarian law is the foundation for international communitarian sustainable development programmes under U.N. Local Agenda 21… Communitarianism is linked to COMMUNISM and is also referred to as Civil Society (a freemason term) and The Third Way (a Marxist Platform). The entire philosophy is based on vague notions of what constitutes a “good society” (What is the Hegelian Dialectic?, by Niki Raapana and Nordica Friedrich). “Its common ancestor is a system of philosophy known as “Hegelianism.”
“Hegelianism is named after Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, born in Germany in 1770. Basically Hegel was an evolutionist, believing that nothing actually “is” but only is in the process of perpetually “becoming,” (primitive Modernism). And as we learn from the 1911 Catholic Encylopedia: “Among Catholic philosophers who were influenced by Hegel the most prominent were George Hermes (q.v.) and Anton Gunther (q.v.). Their doctrines, especially their rejection of the distinction between natural and supernatural truth, were condemned by the Church. [Hegelianism]… is utterly repugnant to the Christian mind.”
In A. Allen Butcher’s The Six Waves of Communitarianism: A History, (referenced by Raapana), Butcher explains how communitarianism was introduced by degrees or “waves” following the Protestant Reformation. The third wave officially introduced liberalism and modernism or progressivism to America at the same time that Marx and Lenin were formulating their ideology on communism and socialism. The fourth wave brought FDR’s New Deal. Thirty years later, in the 1960s came the fifth wave, ushering in the peace movement, ecology, [ecumenism] and feminism.
The sixth wave arrived in the 1990s with co-housing, eco-villages and various “networks,” as in networking. When Protestantism exploded into numerous sects beginning with the Reformation, this created the anti-thesis to the Catholic Church, which up until that time had held sway. In the 1800s during the second wave of communitarianism, Hegel’s philosophy was put to work in earnest.
One article authored by a Novus Ordo sect member, who neglected to mention the origins of communitarianism, even encourages NO sect members to become communitarians, as John Paul 2 taught in Centesimus Annus (1991). “Pope John Paul’s great vision of communitarianism and a New Global Order has yet to receive the recognition it deserves in furthering the understanding that humanity is built on religious values, without which transformations in totalitarian regimes would have been impossible” (Robert Phillips, Communitarianism, the Vatican, and the New Global Order). This when Pope Pius XI taught in Divini redemptoris, (1937): “The doctrine of modern Communism… is often concealed under the most seductive trappings… Too few have been able to grasp the nature of Communism. The majority instead succumb to its deception, skillfully concealed by the most extravagant promises… The rapid diffusion of the Communistic ideas is now seeping into every nation… to be found in a propaganda so truly diabolical that the world has perhaps never witnessed its like before… It… strives to entice the multitudes by trickery of various forms, hiding its real designs behind ideas that in themselves are good and attractive.
“Under various names which do not suggest Communism, they establish organizations and periodicals with the sole purpose of carrying their ideas into quarters otherwise inaccessible. They try perfidiously to worm their way even into professedly Catholic and religious organizations. Again, without receding an inch from their subversive principles, they invite Catholics to collaborate with them in the realm of so-called humanitarianism and charity; and at times even make proposals that are in perfect harmony with the Christian spirit and the doctrine of the Church. Elsewhere they carry their hypocrisy so far as to encourage the belief that Communism, in countries where faith and culture are more strongly entrenched, will assume another and much milder form. It will not interfere with the practice of religion. It will respect liberty of conscience.
“We trust that those rulers of nations, who are at all aware of the extreme danger threatening every people today, may be more and more convinced of their supreme duty not to hinder the Church in the fulfillment of her mission. The State must allow the Church full liberty to fulfill her divine and spiritual mission, and this in itself will be an effectual contribution to the rescue of nations from the dread torment of the present hour. Everywhere today there is an anxious appeal to moral and spiritual forces; and rightly so, for the evil we must combat is at its origin primarily an evil of the spiritual order. From this polluted source the monstrous emanations of the communistic system flow with satanic logic. Now, the Catholic Church is undoubtedly preeminent among the moral and religious forces of today. Therefore the very good of humanity demands that her work be allowed to proceed unhindered” (end of Pius XI quotes).
The word communitarianism DOES actually suggest the doctrines of communism and collectivism. And this doctrine, derived as it is from the writings of Hegel, is already condemned, should some be deceitful enough to suggest it is not really Communism in it proper sense. They forget Can. 1324, which states,” It is not sufficient to avoid heretical error but one must also diligently shun any errors which more or less approach heresy. Wherefore all constitutions and decrees by which the Holy See has condemned and prohibited such opinions must be observed.” And they also forget that: “Those, who by words or conduct externally manifest that they personally accept the doctrine of Communism are apostates and incur excommunication ipso facto” (Problems in Canon Law, Rev. William Conway p. 322;1949).
As if the above was not enough, there are further disturbing elements involved in this NAR shift.
The “Dark Enlightenment”
What follows better explains the focus of the Trump administration on eradicating the Democrat Party, funding the introduction of AI, and moving to a more centralized form of government. Of course the errors of liberal Dems, particularly on a moral and faith-based level, must not be tolerated. The party should instead be thoroughly reformed, but this seems impossible given its platform. Yet the goals of Vance and presumably Trump himself are just as bad, buried deep in a philosophy that is both uncatholic and frankly, frightening.
Various website and blog articles report that Vance’s political career was largely funded by Silicon Valley billionaire and PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, who filled Vance’s 2022 Senate campaign coffers with $15 million. Thiel also helped finance Curtis Yarvin’s software startup in 2013. Yarvin is best known for his blogs promoting the “Dark Enlightenment,” a philosophy that teaches American democracy is an experiment that has failed, one that should be replaced by an “accountable” monarchy, comparable to the way corporations are structured. While on the surface this may sound appealing to those who hate liberalism and favor monarchy, when combined with the rule of a Protestant elite in matters of faith, it can only spell spiritual disaster.
Key Beliefs of the Dark Enlightenment:
“Monarchy Over Democracy: Yarvin believes that a CEO-like leader should rule with absolute authority, without the inefficiencies of elections or legislative gridlock.
- “The Cathedral: He coined the term “The Cathedral” to describe a self-reinforcing elite system of media, academia, and government institutions that allegedly manipulates society under the guise of democracy.
- Technocratic Authoritarianism: Yarvin sees big tech and AI-driven governance as the future of society, replacing traditional democratic institutions. While Vance does not publicly endorse Yarvin’s most radical ideas, his rhetoric and policy positions reflect the core tenets of the Dark Enlightenment, including:
- Skepticism of democracy and calls for a more centralized, leader-driven governance system.
- Alignment with tech elites who push for corporate-driven governance rather than traditional policymaking.
- A belief that traditional institutions like the press and universities need to be dismantled.”
And all the above we are witnessing as Trump’s second term unwinds. How far it will actually succeed and to what effect has yet to be seen. It could take hold only to be reversed with the next election. It could be implemented and carried out to its fullest extent by a Trump monarchy or the election of Vance. It could topple or be exacerbated by war or a natural disaster. Anything is possible; man proposes, God disposes.
Conclusion
Catholics must remember that the type of democracy written about by the popes prior to the death of Pope Pius XII did not anticipate the later inroads of democracy itself into the Church. By this I mean the intrusion of Americanism, Modernism and ecumenism, which paved the way for the problems we see today; the subsequent leveling down of all religious classes to a more manageable playing field; the teaching of Vatican 2, set out by John Courtney Murray, S. J., that in a democracy, peopled by individuals of different faiths, Catholics have no inherent right to teach the Catholic Church is the only one in which salvation can be found, and finally, the heretical idea that the Church herself can change her teachings, readjust her outlook, or touch even the words of Christ Himself in the Canon of the Mass. Here we see the necessary preparations for the “community of faith,” the idea that all men — not just the many who would enter the Church — could be saved, regardless of their lack of belief in one God in three Persons, unrepented sins, questionable baptism or marriage status, or their public lives as sinners. This contrary to centuries-old Church teaching and timeless biblical principles.
In many ways what is happening with the NAR and Office of Faith is similar, on a national level, to what happened to the Church in the 1960s. Then we were expected to bow down to men never validly elected to the papacy who usurped the Chair of Peter and proceeded to betray the Deposit of Faith entrusted to them by Christ. Very few priests dared to defy their superiors and meekly went along with all that Vatican 2 brought with it. We were to accept the changes they made, contrary to all we had ever been taught, without a whimper, or be excluded as members of their “church” and treated as pariahs. So we chose the latter, and gladly. Now the NAR has apparently reduced Protestant pastors and evangelists, most of whom at least had what passed as theological training in their various sects, to third in command, subservient to the “governance’ of apostles and prophets.
So if they don’t accept their “revelations,” will they be cast out as non-Christians? Re-educated? Penalized? If classified as outcasts, what place will these Christians have in a communitarian society? Will all this apply to true Catholics in America as well? This is the danger in binding Catholicism or any other religion to a particular form of government, whatever form that might be. The Popes have warned us about this and have made it clear where such ideas originate, as Pope St. Pius X teaches in his address to the French Sillon below:
“The Sillon’s… brand of Catholicism accepts only the democratic form of government which it considers the most favorable to the Church and, so to speak, identifies it with her. The Sillon, therefore, subjects its religion to a political party… What We wish to affirm once again, after Our Predecessor [Pope Leo XIII], is that it is an error and a danger to bind down Catholicism by principle to a particular form of government. This error and this danger are all the greater when religion is associated with a kind of Democracy whose doctrines are false… We fear that worse is to come: the end result of this developing promiscuousness, the beneficiary of this cosmopolitan social action, can only be a Democracy which will be neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor Jewish. It will be a religion… more universal than the Catholic Church, uniting all men become brothers and comrades at last in the ‘Kingdom of God – We do not work for the Church, we work for mankind…’ We know only too well the dark workshops in which are elaborated these mischievous doctrines which ought not to seduce clear-thinking minds” (Pope St. Pius X, Our Apostolic Mandate).
And Pope Pius XII warns that unless the TRUE CHURCH is allowed to play a role in establishing a truly moral and God-fearing democracy, it will fail. “If the future is to belong to democracy, an essential part in that achievement will have to be given to the religion of Christ and to the Church. She is the mouthpiece of our Redeemer and the institution which carries on His mission of saving men. She teaches and defends supernatural truths and communicates to men the supernatural helps of grace in order to actuate the divinely established order of beings and ends which Is the ultimate foundation and directive norm of every democracy. The Church has the mission to announce to the world, which is looking for better and more perfect forms of democracy, the highest and most needed message: the dignity of man, the call to be sons of God” (Pope Pius XII, Christmas Message, Democracy and a Lasting Peace,1944).
NAR is the end-result of centuries of revolt against authority of all types, both civil and religious. It began with various schisms and errors in the Church, culminating in the Protestant Reformation. And from there it disintegrated into the chaotic splits that eventually resulted in thousands of Protestant sects. That it has ended in equating God with man, as capable of conveying Divine revelation, comes as no surprise: Strike the shepherd and the flock will be dispersed. And then one will come who will stand in the place of God, showing himself as God. Whether it be a false pope in the Vatican or an apostle in the Office of Faith, the results are the same. And St. Peter, whose feast day we celebrate today, remains in chains, the teachings of his true successors in office castigated and ignored.
St. Peter, ask Jesus to have mercy on our souls!
