by T. Stanfill Benns | Oct 3, 2024 | New Blog
+St. Therese of Lisieux+
Prayer Society intention for October, Month of the Holy Rosary
“Queen of the Most Holy Rosary, in these times of such brazen impiety, manifest thy power with the signs of thine ancient victories… From thy throne dispense pardon and graces…and mercifully regard the Church, sore oppressed in the mighty conflict.” (Raccolta)
Adveniat Regnum tuum — Thy Kingdom Come!
Love is Repaid by Love Alone
The purpose of this website was intended as an attempt to borrow a spark from that Uncreated Love that is the Blessed Trinity in order to rekindle the faintly glowing ashes of Christian charity into a blazing inferno of love for Love. The emotion man so indiscriminately refers to as love is the gift of Divinity, for Divinity. It is not of itself an emotion given to man for man; it is a powerful propellant to be used discriminately and judiciously by the intellect primarily for the adoration of the Creator, and only secondly for fellow creatures. All that we are and own is on loan. As Our Lord told St. Catherine of Siena: “I am everything, and you, my daughter are nothing.”
All human love pales in comparison to its true Source. The ideal love of a man for a woman or a woman for a man, parents for their children and children for their parents is only a shadow of this first love or it is not love at all. The intense passion of lovers in its first bloom must stand in awe of that spiritual heat that fueled the love of the saints and martyrs for Christ. It is a love that cannot even be rightly explained in human terms, for it crosses earthly boundaries and lives on the very edges of Heaven itself. It is an intense flame that consumes the entire being of the lover until it gradually spills over its mortal banks into the depths of that merciful conflagration that is the Sacred Heart itself. St. Paul himself faltered when trying to explain the joys and beauty of Heaven, and neither can the true lover give voice to his bursting heart or love-seared soul. It is a sacrificial immolation; an ecstasy of indissoluble union and this is the closest human words can come to describing the Divine.
Yet where are the keepers of the flame? Where are the Catholics who stand at the foot of Christ’s Cross and keep Him company in this, the Church’s darkest hour on earth? His
Apostles, the saints and martyrs gave their all for Him — evangelizing the heathens, tortured in the Coliseum, burned at the stake, hung, drawn and quartered, preaching up to the moment of their execution, urging others to join them, forgiving those who persecuted and murdered them. This was the proof of their love, their gift returned to the Savior whose teachings they treasured and defended: love laid on the altar of sacrifice to eternal Love. Lovers who experience this deep, abiding emotion spare no effort, overcome every obstacle, pay any price, walk over shattered glass or burning coals, scale incredible heights — all in the name of love. For what sacrifices will not be gladly made for the beloved? Yet turn this emotion to the service of God and humans behave as though they are unsure what to do. They can risk their lives for their fellow man or in defense of their nation, but not for the love of God. Fearing to be branded as cultists, religious fanatics, lunatics, they forget the saints and martyrs who proceeded them, gladly dying as fools for Christ.
St. Therese, barely out of her teens, shamed us all. She knew she was “little” and could do little. But her little was far more than most today see fit to give. We have all become spoiled children, satiated with the distractions and allurements of the world. We can scarcely be bothered to say our daily prayers and a novena now and again far less attempt anything more. We have busy schedules, pressing problems, and “issues.” Yet the crumbs tossed from our tables will not satisfy the Creator who filled our storehouses with the bread of love. If we have not set at least some small part of our lives aside for Him and only Him, we have lived an empty existence; any love we pretend to give to others is stolen from Him and can be only a counterfeit.
Yet we have free will, and love is an act of the will. We can will ourselves to love God, to fuel our emotions in order to honor and serve Him. We can resolve to reform our lives and begin anew, even if only little by little, as St. Therese began. Resolve, then to begin today; for inspiration you need only look to the Cross and learn its lessons. We cannot pay our debt to God by an easy existence on this earth. As Pope Pius XII stated, the motto of Catholic Action is “Thy kingdom come on earth.” Who will fight to establish His kingdom? For as the Little Flower taught: “Love is repaid by love alone.”
The Misson of St. Therese
We live in those days foretold by St. Paul when great disorders shall befall mankind and charity will grow cold. Even among Catholics, and one might say especially among Catholics today, this virtue has been misapplied, misunderstood and has all but disappeared.
Over 100 years ago, St. Therese of Lisieux wrote: “Love alone imparts life to all the members of [the Mystical Body], so that should love ever fail, apostles would no longer preach the Gospel and martyrs would refuse to shed their blood…Souls that are on fire never can remain inactive.”” With these words and in her professed longing to be a missionary, the Little Flower displayed a crystal clear understanding of the order of love, then; for as the Catechism teaches, one must first know God in order to love and serve Him. Her desire to engage in Catholic Action at the very outset of its existence is ample evidence of the zeal that energized the Little Flower’s every waking moment.
It was a zeal that had its first beginnings in the bosom of the Martin family, whose religious fervor led to four of the five surviving Martin sisters entering the Carmelite order. St. Therese’s “science of love,” found in her “little way” is the most admirable shortcut to piety and charity for Catholics faced with the heroic sacrifices required in these times. In order that love exist, all must be apostles, and martyrs in spirit at least, and each according to God’s will for them. For as the Little Flower said herself: “the eye [of the Mystical Body] cannot be the hand.” All have different tasks as members of this Body, but all must love.
These pages then are dedicated to St. Therese the Rosebud of Heaven, that Divine Truth might excite among men and women love of the Divine King and the establishment of His kingdom on earth.
St. Therese’s Morning Offering
O my God! I offer Thee all my actions of this day for the intentions and for the glory of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. I desire to sanctify every beat of my heart, my every thought, my simplest works, by uniting them to Its infinite merits and I wish to make reparation for my sins, by casting them into the furnace of Its Merciful Love.
O my God! I ask Thee for myself and for those whom I hold dear, the grace to fulfil perfectly Thy Holy Will, to accept for love of Thee, the joys and sorrows of this passing life, so that we may one day be united together in Heaven for all Eternity. Amen.
St. Therese on Grace
Everything is a grace. Everything is the direct effect of our Father’s love; difficulties, contradictions, humiliations, all the soul’s miseries — her burdens, her needs – everything. Because through them she learns humility, realizes her weakness. Everything is a grace because everything is God’s gift. Whatever be the character of life or its unexpected events,to the heart that loves, all is well.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 24, 2024 | New Blog
+Our Lady of Ransom+
There is no better remedy for the numerous souls today in bondage to Satan than to pray for them under the title of our Lady of Ransom. For those Christians persecuted in lands held by the Muslims; those living under Communism and other evil regimes; for the victims of sex trafficking, and for those slaves to the Modernist culture of today, let us send up our prayers from their deliverance to the merciful Mother of Our Savior.
From the Catholic Encyclopedia
FEAST OF OUR LADY OF Ransom, September 24, a double major, commemorates the foundation of the Mercedarians (q.v.). On August 10, 1223, the Mercedarian Order was legally constituted at Barcelona by King James of Aragon and was approved by Gregory IX on January 17, 1235. The Mercedarians celebrated their institution on the Sunday nearest to August 1 (on which date in the year 1233 the Blessed Virgin was believed to have shown St. Peter Nolasco the white habit of the order), and this custom was approved by the Congregation of Rites on April 4, 1615 (Anal. Juris Pont., VII, 136).
But the calendar of the Spanish Mercedarians of 1644 has it on August 1, double. Proper lessons were approved on April 30, 1616. The feast was granted to Spain (Sunday nearest to August 1) on February 15, 1680; to France, December 4, 1690. On February 22, 1696, it was extended to the entire Latin Church, and the date changed to September 24. The Mercedarians keep this feast as a double of the first class, with a vigil, privileged octave, and proper Office under the title: “Solemnitas Descensionis B. Mariae V. de Mercede”.
Our Lady of Ransom is the principal patron of Barcelona; the proper Office was extended to Barcelona (1868) and to all Spain (second class, 1883). Sicily, which had suffered so much from the Saracens, took up the old date of the feast (Sunday nearest to August 1) by permission of the Congregation of Rites, August 31, 1805 (double of the second class). The Mercedarians have a special feast (double major), Apparition of Our Lady to St. Peter Nolasco in the choir of Barcelona, on the Sunday after September 24. In England, the devotion of Our Lady of Ransom was revived in modern times to obtain the rescue of England as Our Lady’s Dowry.
Our Blessed Lady ‘De Mercede,’ or for the Redemption of Captives:Our Lady of Ransom Fr. Francis Cuthbert Doyle, 1896
The appropriateness of this beautiful title, given in 1218 to our Lady, will best be understood from a narration of the events which led to the institution of this festival in her honour, and to the foundation of a Religious Order under the same glorious appellation. In the year 1189, there was born in Languedoc a nobleman named Peter Nolasco, whose soul God filled, even in his earliest years, with a great love of virtue, and with a tender compassion for the poor. At the age of twenty-five he made a vow of chastity, and joined himself to Simon de Montfort in his crusade against the Albigensian heretics. After the defeat of these latter, James I., King of Aragon, appointed him tutor to his son, whom he accompanied into Spain. At that time the Moors had seized upon certain parts of the Peninsula, and the sight of the misery to which Christians were reduced in slavery under these cruel task-masters, filled the heart of Peter with a desire to lighten their heavy burthen.
While revolving in his mind how his good-will might best be carried into effect, our Lady appeared to him, in a vision during the night, and intimated to him that it would be very pleasing to her Divine Son, if an Order of religious men were established for the redemption of captives. On the following day, Peter went to his confessor, St. Raymund de Pennafort, to tell him of the vision with which he had been favoured; but to his great surprise, he found the Saint already acquainted with the fact, for the same heavenly visitant had graciously signified her wish to him also. Moreover, she had revealed to the King that this project had the blessing of her Divine Son. These three, therefore, at once determined to establish a Religious Order for the purpose of redeeming captive Christians from the tyranny of the Moors.
In addition to the usual vows of religion, they by a fourth vow bound themselves to remain, if necessary, in captivity till ransom could be procured for the liberation of the slaves. Pope Honorius III. by word of mouth approved of this Brotherhood, and Pope Gregory IX. in 1235, solemnly confirmed and established it as a Religious Order. He gave its members the Rule of St. Augustine to guide them to perfection, and a white habit to remind them of the purity to which they were to aspire under the patronage of the most pure Virgin. Thus, under the auspices of our Lady of Redemption, these holy men set about their heroic work, and while rescuing the bodies of Christians from the slavery of the Moors, they did their utmost to free their souls from the slavery of the devil.
You may judge from this indication of Mary’s love for the Christian people, and from her eagerness to free their bodies from the tyranny of cruel and infidel masters, what must be her zeal to free them from the still more cruel slavery of Satan. They are her children, committed to her care by Jesus Christ, loved by Him with unutterable tenderness, and purchased at the price of His bitter Passion. In her eyes they are, so to speak, invested with the personality of Jesus Christ. They are, in a measure, unto her what He was, and therefore the love which she bore to Him is transferred to them. Judge therefore of her sorrow, when she beholds them in the jaws of the wolves of hell. When men lose their liberty, and fall beneath the yoke of a foreign power, it is their bodies only that are in chains; their minds, their souls are free. No dungeon can darken their light, no manacles, no fetters can bind down their thoughts or their aspirations. The tyrant may threaten, may kill; but he cannot compel the will to bend. If, as a last resource, he strike with the sword, one sharp pang will forever free the poor wretched prisoner from his clutches.
It is far otherwise with the tyranny of the devil. He enslaves the souls of men. With a tempting bait, he first allures them into his nets, and having once entrapped them, he holds them fast. Very speedily sin enfeebles the will, darkens the intellect, and fills the soul with disgust for heavenly things. Hence, when from time to time grace urges it to rise again, it may do so for a season, feeling all the while how terribly strong is the hold which the devil has upon its powers. It struggles against him for a while, and then falls back. Thus the evil one, by his tyranny, succeeds in destroying not only the bodies of his slaves, but their immortal souls. Therefore, Jesus bids us not to fear those who can destroy only the body: ‘I will tell you,’ He adds, ‘whom you shall fear. Fear Him who can destroy the soul.’
Our dear Mother is, therefore, full of tender solicitude for her children. When she beholds them in the power of this cruel enemy of her Son, she lifts up her pure and spotless hands before the throne of God, and continually pleads with Him for them, that the ransom of the precious blood may be applied to them, that their chains may be broken, and that they themselves may be restored to liberty.
Knowing, therefore, the great love of your holy Mother Mary for poor sinners, you must strive to the utmost of your ability to second her desire for the redemption of souls from the slavery of sin. In order that your zeal may be according to knowledge, you must begin with yourself; for otherwise you will present to the eyes both of Angels and of men the ridiculous spectacle of one who saves others, but destroys himself; who points out to others the way to heaven, but will not himself walk in it.
Do not be so foolish. Let not sin dwell in your soul; suffer it not to enslave your heart. Be not of the number of those fools who fancy that they can for a time walk with the devil, and then easily withdraw from his fellowship; who imagine that they may float with the stream, and then return in safety to the pleasant shore. Those who think thus, little know the tenacious grasp with which sin holds a man down in its iron fetters, nor the velocity with which the stream of iniquity whirls him beyond the reach of help or the hope of return. If you are wise, learn this in time. Withdraw your feet at once and forever from the fetters of sin, and turn your back resolutely upon the glitter of the tempting stream. After thus manifesting zeal for your own soul, you may venture to be zealous for the souls of others; for he who is in safety may strive to help others, and he who is not sick may with propriety try to heal those who are.
Supplication to Our Lady of Randsom: To obtain the Favour of her Patronage till Death
(Can be said for nine consecutive days as a novena.)
“The more exalted she is, the greater her clemency
and sweetness towards penitent sinners.” — St. Gregory.
Sweet Mother! turn those gentle eyes
Of pity down on me;
Oh! hear thy suppliant’s tearful cries,
My humble prayer do not despise,
Star of the pathless sea!
In dark temptation’s dreary hour,
To thee, bright Queen, we flee;
Oh! then exert a mother’s power,
When storms are rough and tempests lower;
Star of the raging sea!
Through all my joys and cares, sweet Maid,
May I still look on thee,
Who bore the Price our ransom paid,
And ne’er the suppliant’s cry hath stayed;
Star of the azure sea!
And when my last expiring sigh,
My soul from earth shall free,
Do thou, bright Queen of Saints, stand by,
And bear it up to God on high,
Star of the boundless sea!
Say the Hail Mary three times followed by the Hail Holy Queen in Latin or English
https://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Our%20Lady%20of%20Ransom.html
by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 15, 2024 | New Blog
+Seven Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary+
Today we celebrate the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows. Last week we celebrated the feast of the Blessed Virgin’s Nativity. Sept. 19 is the anniversary of Our Lady’s apparition to Melanie Calvat and Maximin Giraud at La Salette in 1846, where Mary warned us that Rome would lose the faith and become the seat of Antichrist. On May 13,1846, four months prior to Our Lady’s arrival at La Salette, Pope Gregory XVI received a packet containing The Permanent Instructions of the Alta Vendita from the hands of one Cretineau-Joly. Two weeks later, the Pope was dead. In recent blogs we have documented the infiltration of LibTrad clergy by Freemasonry. There can be little doubt that Melanie’s mission on earth was to promote Our Lady’s message in order to draw attention to the Masonic element then infiltrating the clergy. And that infiltration continues to this day. In an 1855 letter to one M. Melin, the Cure of Corps, France, Melanie spoke of her anxiety concerning the part of the La Salette Secret that dealt with priests and religious:
“I am afraid of many greater evils and I also am afraid that the words from Heaven will be ignored because they are recounted by such a great sinner as I am. Some of these things concern priests, the priests of France especially, and the rest are to do with the religious orders of men and women… This was said to me: ‘Formerly, I was crucified by those who knew Me not. Today and every day I am crucified by those who know Me, by many priests. They imagine they see, but it is not by My light, but by the light of the devil. Formerly priests and monks and nuns were the pillars of My church, but today the pillars have fallen. Calamities are going to rain upon the world and then cries and groans will rise up to Me, but for a time I shall be as if deaf.'”
In another letter to Rev. Robaud, Jan. 2, 1892, Melanie wrote: “The Church will endure forever, Our Lord said so. But among the teaching members of the Church, what traitors, what apostates, what mercenaries, what sectarians, who bear the imprint or the sign of the beast with ten horns St. John speaks of in his vision on Patmos! But this beast similar to the Lamb, who rises out of the earth, isn’t it the figure of faithless ecclesiastics?” And how true these words of Melanie’s are today, both of Novus Ordo and LibTrad clergy! How can anyone doubt that all she envisioned has come to pass? In Chapter 12 of the Apocalypse, Our Lady labors to give birth while the dragon waits to devour her progeny. Some surmise this is the election of a pope intended to reign in these times but prevented from doing so, and certainly the papacy been usurped and devoured by the malice of Satan. Other say this is a description of Mary laboring for the salvation of her children living through the horrors of the end times. Both observations are obviously correct.
What causes our poor Mother the most sorrow today? Disobedience to her Divine Son and the teachings of His Vicars. For this Mother, most pure, most holy, most obedient, is also the patroness of the papacy. And if Our Lord entrusted us to Her, He entrusted His teachings first to St. Peter and under his guidance, the rest of the twelve, who counted the Blessed Mother among the faithful to whom they would communicate these truths. Christ committed his Mother’s earthly care to St. John. Both she and St. John would suffer the “white martyrdom,” spiritual death without dying, for they would live for many years without the One they loved the most. We cannot imitate the Blessed Virgin unless we emulate her in the boundless love she had for her Son. And it is Christ Himself who told us all how to love Him: “If you love Me, keep my commandments… Take up thy Cross and follow Me.” We suffer here as she suffered, but are we willing to become worthy of her help, her love?
Read below what Fr. Alonso Mesia S.J. wrote on this topic in his The Three Hours (1899):
“Our Lord, from the height of His Cross, is looking down upon His Blessed Mother, whose
heart is sunk in an abyss of anguish, and yet He opens before her a new abyss of anguish by giving her all mankind to be her children in the person of St. John.
“Most afflicted Mother! what a piercing sword must it not be, that thus so deeply wounds thy
tender heart. Thy son Jesus commends all sinners to thee, that thou mayest receive them for thy children in His place. Heartrending exchange! Thou losest thy most amiable Son
Jesus, and in His stead receivest sinners, nay, ever such perverse and obstinate sinners, as have repeatedly crucified Him by their sins. Most sorrowful Lady, what a torment to thy tender heart, already deeply wounded without this new stab. What ! So ungrateful a wretch committed to thy care; so grievous a sinner to be adopted for thy child! O infinite charity of our Saviour towards sinners, in confiding them to His own Blessed Mother to be their Mother also. O incomparable mercy of the compassionate Mother of Jesus! who, full of love and gentleness, presses the whole world to her bosom, with all tender solicitude and maternal affection.
“Refuge of Sinners. How shall we express our gratitude for so great, so heroic an act, by which thou hast vouchsafed to accept us for thy children? By what obedience, by what services, can we render ourselves worthy of so great a favour? O happy sinners! reflect with joy on the eminent dignity of Mary, your Mother. Mary, who is the Mother of God: a Mother, full of grace; a Mother, the mirror of sanctity and purity, and this Mother your Mother also. Alas! what a contrast between so holy a Mother and such perverse children: between a Mother so pure and children so corrupt.
“O great Oueen of Heaven, take us now under thy protection. and make us children worthy of thee. Where is the Christian, who with the greatest submission and confidence ought not to acknowledge thee for his Mother. Hell trembled at hearing the words of Jesus: the devils raged with envy. Hearken, O man! listen, O Hell! Mary is the Mother of sinners, the Mother of the just, the Mother of all. O blessed Lady, I kiss thy sacred feet a thousand times, and exclaim with a voice that I wish might echo through heaven and earth: However unworthy I am to be called the child of Mary, yet, O great Queen, obtain that I may one day behold thee, and love thy Son Jesus, as much, if possible, as thou thyself lovest Him.
“Devout souls, look up to Jesus who gives you to His Mother’s care, and, in her, bestows on you all the riches of His mercy, which you will never obtain without the intercession of Mary. Through her we obtain pardon from her Son, together with all His precious graces. O Jesus, inexhaustible fountain of love and generosity, what a boundless love must have been Thine to love us with so much tenderness. Since Jesus, O my soul, has said of thee, Ecce Mater, Behold thy Mother! Surely thou art bound to contemplate her, to meditate on her graces with all thy powers and faculties. Consider her well, O my soul, lift up thine eyes, raise thy whole heart to her; for she also says to thee, Ecce Mater. I am your Mother, consider me as such. Behold her oppressed with grief on account of your sins. Sympathize with her in the sorrow she feels for you. She prays for you: she implores mercy and pardon for you. Beseech her by her sorrows to look upon you as her child, and to obtain for you all necessary help, now, and at the awful hour of death.
“O Mother of God, prove thyself my Mother also. Ah! turn those merciful eyes of thine upon me, beloved Mother. Remember the inexpressible anguish which we cost thee at the foot of the Cross. Let not the excessive grief thou didst then suffer be all in vain. May thy sorrows and thy holy patronage prove a powerful assistance to me in my last agony. Today, O amiable Mother! on this day I would fain show myself thy child. even were I to lay down my life in love and sorrow at the foot of the Cross here. Welcome, O happy death! Would that I might die at the feet of Mary my Mother, and at the feet of Jesus so full of love for me.
“Jesus, in His last moments, gives us today to His Virgin Mother. O Mary, who can understand what thou then must have suffered? Accept me for thy child and be to me a Mother, as I now promise thee loyal obedience. In thanksgiving to Jesus for having given us Mary for our Mother, let us recite five times the following prayer: Most sweet Jesus, we return Thee infinite thanks having given Thy blessed Mother, Mary, to be our Mother also.
“O sorrowful Mary, our Mother, pray for thy sinful children now, and at the hour of our death.” (End of Fr. Mesia quotes)
And this also from Fr. Bernard A. Fuller, S.J., (At Noon on Calvary, 1930):
“Jesus is whispering to you from the Cross. He has done all this for love of you. He is going to ask you now to do something for love of Him. It is His dying wish: “Son, behold thy Mother.”
“And from that hour the disciple took her unto his own.” So standing here under the Cross of Jesus take His Blessed Mother for your own. In His sight dedicate and consecrate yourself to her: “Lord Jesus, my dying Saviour , I will take her unto my own; I will honor her and I will love her. She will be my Mother. No word or deed of mine will ever wound her heart or bring the blush of shame to her cheeks.”
“This is Christ’s dying wish, and you can do nothing that will please Him more. “If I be lifted up, I will draw all things to Me”; and lifted up on the Cross of Calvary, He knows that the surest way of coming to His love is through Mary His Mother. He knows that through Mary’s love human love will be kept pure and manly and divine. He knows that if you love her your little ones will love her and in her love their hearts will be pure and their faith will be strong. Calvary and all its pains and insults and blasphemies are worth the love of a pure boy’s and a pure girl’s heart. Oh! He knows that it is hard to bring up children and to train them in the love and the fear of God. He knows what it costs — all the toil, all the anxious prayers, all the daily sacrifices. But, oh! you devoted mothers and fathers of the children of God, looking down on His Blessed Mother, Jesus sees you. From the Cross of Calvary the bleeding hand of your dying Saviour is blessing you and your homes.”
Novena in Honour of the Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin
O ! most blessed and afflicted Virgin, Queen of Martyrs! thou who didst stand unshrinking beneath the Cross beholding the agony of thy dying Son; through the sword of grief which pierced thee then, through the continual sufferings of thy life of sorrow, through the unutterable joy which now far more than repays thee for them, look down with a mother’s pity and tenderness on me kneeling before thee to venerate thy sacred sorrows and to lay my petition with child-like trust in the shrine of thy wounded heart. I beg of thee, O! Mother, continually to plead for me with thy Son, and through the merits of His most sacred Passion and Death, together with thy own sufferings at the foot of the Cross, so touch His sacred Heart who can
refuse thee nothing, that I may surely obtain my request. To whom shall I fly in my wants and miseries, if not to thee, O Mother of Mercy, who having so deeply drunk of the chalice of thy Son, canst most pity and feel for us poor exiles, still doomed to sigh in this valley of tears. Offer to Jesus but one drop of His Precious Blood, but one pang of His adorable Heart; remind Him that thou art our life, our sweetness, and our hope, and obtain what I ask through Jesus Christ our Lord. AMEN.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 8, 2024 | New Blog
PADUA, ITALY – SEPTEMBER 9, 2014: Paint of Saint Ann and little Mary in church Santa Maria dei Servi by R. Maluta from end of 19. cent.
+Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary+
Some people seemingly have no shame and simply cannot admit they are wrong. We speak here of a certain “recusant” site that has publicly stated a document of the Roman Pontiff was not properly quoted on this site and an inference was drawn on this blog that contradicts what the pope intended. This is a classic example of projection, not to mention a matter potentially libelous, and this should be taken as a warning. Such a grievous accusation, common to LibTrads, is one that cannot be tolerated.
What the recusants say
The betrayedcatholics blog on modesty now in question was featured HERE. We will now quote here what the recusant blog posted regarding St. Nicholas’ instructions to the Bulgarians: “We consider what you asked about pants (femoralia [which is the Latin for “breeches” or “knee-length pants”]) TO BE IRRELEVANT; for we do not wish the exterior style of your clothing to be changed, but rather the behavior of the inner man within you, nor do we desire to know what you are wearing except Christ — for however many of you have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ [Gal. 3:27] — but rather how you are progressing in faith and good works. But since you ask concerning these matters in your simplicity, namely because you were afraid lest it be held against you as a sin, if you diverge in the slightest way from the custom of other Christians, and lest we seem to take anything away from your desire, we declare that in our books, pants (femoralia) are ordered to be made, not in order that women may use them, but that men may.
“But act now so that, just as you passed from the old to the new man, [cf. Eph. 4:22-24; Col. 3:9-10] you pass from your prior custom to ours in all things; but really do what you please. For whether you or your women wear or do not wear pants (femoralia) neither impedes your salvation nor leads to any increase of your virtue. Of course, because we have said that pants are ordered to be made, it should be noted that we put on pants spiritually, when we restrain the lust of the flesh through abstinence; for those places are constrained by pants in which the seats of luxury are known to be. This is why the first humans, when they felt illicit motions in their members after sin, ran into the leaves of a fig tree and wove loin cloths for themselves.[cf. Gen. 3:7] But these are spiritual pants, which you still could not bear, and, if I may speak with the Apostle, you are not yet able; for you are still carnal.[I Cor. 3:2] And thus we have said a few things on this matter, although, with God’s gift, we could say many more.” (End of St. Nicholas I quote.)
What betrayedcatholics has said
- In our blog, we were not talking about “breeches” or what today would be called pedal-pushers (femoralia), but loose-fitting, full-length women’s slacks.
- They pretend we have misrepresented what the pope said because we did not quote him in full, (see full text of what the Pope wrote HERE, under Ch. LIX). These so-called recusants do this by placing emphasis on different parts of what the pope said and no emphasis on the language used in his opening statement or the final conclusion he arrives at in his remarks. First, Pope Nicholas I wrote: “We consider what you asked about pants TO BE IRRELEVANT…” Do they not know the meaning of this word? Taken from Merriam-Webster, relevant means: (1) having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand; (2) affording evidence tending to prove or disprove the matter at issue or under discussion. The same source notes that irrelevant means NOT relevant; inapplicable. So are they going to make a matter the pope clearly intends to have no bearing on the issue at hand a major issue, against his will and the introductory statement to the contrary?
Secondly, the pope writes: “Pants (femoralia) are ordered to be made, not in order that women may use them, but that men may.” They then claim that in saying this, and referring to ”putting on the new man,” (see above) the pope is stating he does not want women to wear pants. But the pope makes his own words clear in the succeeding paragraph of his instruction by stating that: “Of course, because we have said that pants are ordered to be made, it should be noted that we put on pants spiritually, when we restrain the lust of the flesh through abstinence.”
- Yet pay attention to what the pope says after commenting on “the new man”: “But act now so that, just as you passed from the old to the new man, [cf. Eph. 4:22-24; Col. 3:9-10] you pass from your prior custom to ours in all things; BUT REALLY DO WHAT YOU PLEASE. FOR WHETHER YOU OR YOURWOMEN WEAR OR DO NOT WEAR PANTS (femoralia) NEITHER IMPEDES YOUR SALVATION NOR LEADS TO ANY INCREASE OF YOUR VIRTUE.” How can one possibly misread this sentence?!
Excommunication for falsifying papal documents
The above is further evidence of how LibTrads mislead Catholics, placing their own interpretation on the clear words of the popes! As we have repeatedly cited Msgr. Fenton as stating before, NO ONE may dare to interpret these documents contrary to their obvious meaning — Pope Nicholas I’s words are perfectly understandable, and he is not even talking about full coverage, loose women’s slacks, but form-fitting pedal-pushers! In their insistence on abiding by their own warped opinion of modesty in this regard, these Liberal-minded “Catholics” dare to misrepresent his very words and intent. THEY are the ones who are guilty of falsifying the meaning intended by Pope Nicholas I, not this author. But of course this was the very purpose of projecting blame — to deflect the guilt from themselves.
Perhaps they would be interested in knowing that there is an excommunication especially earmarked for misrepresentations of this kind, which states as follows: “All persons who forge or falsify letters, decrees or rescripts of the Apostolic See or with full knowledge of the forgery make use of the letters, decrees or rescripts, automatically incur EXCOMMUNICATION RESERVED IN A SPECIAL MANNER TO THE APOSTOLIC SEE” (Can. 2360 §1). Revs. Woywod-Smith comment on this canon: “The law of the code protects the official acts or documents not only of the Supreme Pontiff himself, but also of the Sacred Congregations and the Tribunals and Offices of the Holy See against forgery and mutilation and the willful use of forged or mutilated documents of the Apostolic See.”
Msgr. Fenton on honoring papal decisions on doctrinal matters
Surely even the recusants would agree that the wearing of pants by women is a matter of morals. Is it really necessary to remind them that the Roman Pontiff is infallible when teaching on matters of faith and morals?! It is imperative that Catholic women know whether or not they are committing sin in wearing “breeches,” (women’s slacks). And the pope provided it above but the Puritanical LibTrads insist on distorting his words. This might not amount to an actual forgery, but we are forbidden to even attempt to interpret papal documents, so it would most likely qualify as a falsification. The serious nature of matters such as these is stressed below by Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton, in his “The Doctrinal Authority of Papal Allocutions,” The American Ecclesiastical Review, February 1956:
“Theologians legitimately discuss and dispute among themselves doctrinal questions which the authoritative magisterium of the Catholic Church has not as yet resolved. Once that magisterium has expressed a decision and communicated that decision to the Church universal, the first and the most obvious result of its declaration must be the cessation of debate on the point it has decided. A man definitely is not acting and could not act as a theologian, as a teacher of Catholic truth, by disputing against a decision made by the competent doctrinal authority of the Mystical Body of Christ on earth. Thus, according to the clear teaching of the Humani generis, it is morally wrong for any individual subject to the Roman Pontiff to defend a thesis contradicting a teaching which the Pope, in his Acta, has set forth as a part of Catholic doctrine. It is, in other words, wrong to attack a teaching which, in a genuine doctrinal decision, the Sovereign Pontiff has taught officially as the visible head of the universal Church. This holds true always and everywhere, even in those cases in which the Pope, in making his decision, did not exercise the plenitude of his apostolic teaching power by making an infallible doctrinal definition.
“The Humani generis must not be taken to imply that a Catholic theologian has completed his obligation with respect to an authoritative doctrinal decision made by the Holy Father and presented in his published Acta when he has merely refrained from arguing or debating against it. The Humani generis reminded its readers that “this sacred magisterium ought to be the immediate and universal norm of truth for any theologian in matters of faith and morals.” Furthermore, it insisted that the faithful are obligated to shun errors which more or less approach heresy, and “to follow the constitutions and decrees by which evil opinions of this sort have been proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See.’ In other words, the Humani generis claimed the same internal assent for declarations of the magisterium on matters of faith and morals which previous documents of the Holy See had stressed.
“We may well ask why the Humani generis went to the trouble of mentioning something as fundamental and rudimentary as the duty of abstaining from further debate on a point where the Roman Pontiff has already issued a doctrinal decision and has communicated that decision to the Church universal by publishing it in his Acta. The reason is to be found in the context of the encyclical itself. The Holy Father has told us something of the existing situation which called for the issuance of the Humani generis. This information is contained in the text of that document. The following two sentences show us the sort of condition the Humani generis was written to meet and to remedy:
“And although this sacred magisterium ought to be the immediate and universal norm of truth on matters of faith and morals for any theologian, as the agency to which Christ the Lord has entrusted the entire deposit of faith — that is, the Sacred Scriptures and divine Tradition — to be guarded and defended and explained, still, the duty by which the faithful are obligated also to shun those errors which approach more or less to heresy, and therefore “to follow the constitutions and decrees by which evil opinions of this sort have been proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See,” is sometimes ignored as if it did not exist. What is said in encyclical letters of the Roman Pontiffs about the nature and constitution of the Church is habitually and deliberately neglected by some with the idea of giving force to a certain vague notion which they claim to have found in the ancient Fathers, especially the Greeks.”
“Six years ago, then, Pope Pius XII was faced with a situation in which some of the men who were privileged and obligated to teach the truths of sacred theology had perverted their position and their influence and had deliberately flouted the teachings of the Holy See about the nature and the constitution of the Catholic Church. And, when he declared that it is wrong to debate a point already decided by the Holy Father after that decision has been published in his Acta, he was taking cognizance of and condemning an existent practice. There actually were individuals who were contradicting papal teachings. They were so numerous and influential that they rendered the composition of the Humani generis necessary to counteract their activities. These individuals were continuing to propose teachings repudiated by the Sovereign Pontiff in previous pronouncements. The Holy Father, then, was compelled by these circumstances to call for the cessation of debate among theologians on subjects which had already been decided by pontifical decisions published in the Acta” (end of Msgr. Fenton quote).
And such individuals, obviously, still exist today. We remember another instance of this where a definite decision regarding the bishops as receiving their power from Christ only indirectly, but directly from the Roman Pontiffs. This was infallibly declared in Mystici Corporis Christi, Ad Sinarum Gentum and even by the Vatican Council. Two years ago it was called into question by an especially impertinent LibTrad who tried to refute it with a quote from a German theologian whose translated works were known to contain errors of the sort Msgr, Fenton mentions above (see HERE). This definition was even recognized as such by Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who Msgr. Fenton documented as testifying to this fact. This same individual once aligned himself with the recusant position but according to unconfirmed reports, later left the group.
Conclusion
The Acta did not exist in the time of Pope Nicholas I. It came into existence later when, as Msgr. Fenton explains, it was necessary to silence those “deliberately flouting” the teachings of the Holy See. This, however, does not lessen the authority of what Pope Nicholas I teaches. For as Msgr. Fenton also notes, “The private theologian is obligated and privileged to study these documents, to arrive at an understanding of what the Holy Father actually teaches and then to aid in the task of bringing this body of truth to the people. The Holy Father, however, not the private theologian, remains the doctrinal authority. The theologian is expected to bring out the content of the Pope’s actual teaching, not to subject that teaching to the type of criticism he would have a right to impose on the writings of another private theologian” (Msgr. J.C. Fenton,“The Doctrinal Authority of Papal Encyclicals, Pt. II, ” Sept. 1949, AER). As Revs. Pohle-Preuss write in The Sacraments, Vol. IV: “It matters not what the private opinions of…theologians [are]. It is not the private opinions of theologians but the official decisions of the Church by which we must be guided.”
The recusants are scarcely theologians. They cannot produce one document from the Magisterium that specifically and unquestionably condemns the wearing of modest slacks by women. Do they really think that if this was such an important matter and that women were truly sinning by wearing slacks, something they already were doing in the 1940s and 1950s, the popes would not have been perfectly clear in their instructions concerning this? What a slap in the face to the Roman Pontiffs by insinuating they were remiss in not issuing such a prohibition! No one here is suggesting anyone switch to wearing slacks versus dresses or skirts, but we absolutely refuse to condemn others for wearing slacks when a pope has said it is “irrelevant” and no sin.
These recusants cannot and must not be allowed to interpret Pope Nicholas I as stating that pants are forbidden when he clearly does not do so. A better understanding of the English language and its usage would be helpful here, since this is what the Church instructs us to do whenever there is a doubt about any law or teaching (Can. 18), but they are not interested in that. They insist on acting as theologians when no one may dare to do so today, in believing as they wish to believe, for whatever reason. We may only quote those theologians loyal to the papacy writing on these topics, but most importantly it is the words and teachings of the popes that must always hold sway. We have no right to our own opinion when a pope has clearly stated otherwise.
We have said it before and will continue to repeat it for as long as necessary: We follow the popes and those scholastics loyal to them, not the opinions of men. We are to obey God not man, and the Vicar His Son set over us to be the never-failing source of His Truth.
Great quote from a reader by Fr. Charles B. Garside
(In his The Prophet of Carmel: The Life and Mission of Elias the Prophet written in 1873, Fr. Charles B. Garside was reacting to the false doctrines that had already entered “high places” in society and the Church. In his commentary on the life of St. Elias, he challenges Catholics of all times to take the correct position of active resistance in the face of error: The war must be waged on all fronts until the victory is achieved.)
“The world and the devil were never so successful as they are now in pretentiously disguising error under the garb of truth. Vices are enshrined as virtues in the attractive temple of falsehood. Immorality is idealized. Debased views of God and His creation, of the soul and the body, are openly processed in circles of rank and intellect.
“False doctrine is not only tolerated in the “high places” of social life; it is termed, as if in satire, “sound learning.” Presumptuous skepticism is canonized by popular acclamation, as not only a right but a duty, and the very perfection of mental and moral freedom. These are some of the hostile elements with which our present life is perilously charged.
“How can this array of foes be successfully met without a clear-sighted and persevering courage and how can this courage be obtained? Every Catholic is bound, according to his means and opportunity, to confront, denounce and resist the enemies of God. The war has to be waged by speech, by writing, by protests, by authority, by active and passive opposition, by sufferings, and by various other modes which need not be mentioned in detail.
“No class is exempt from military service in the great conflict which is perpetually raging. All are called to the ranks, no matter what may be their individual temperament or temptations. The contest is as unavoidable as it is difficult, but with the grace of God we shall succeed if we are “strong in faith.” “This is the victory that overcomes the world, even your faith.”
“Our adversaries may surpass us in station, talent and accomplishments. They may be clothed in them from head to foot, and we may, like Elias, be alone and unarmed, but we shall be the real “men of God.” We shall deliver our message without quivering; and though our personal Achab – whoever he may be – may refuse to believe in our words, we shall nevertheless, have borne testimony to the true God.”
by T. Stanfill Benns | Sep 2, 2024 | New Blog
+Pope St. Pius X+
Prayer Society Intention for September, Month of The Sorrows of the Blessed Virgin Mary
“Dear Mother, by thy heart sunk in the bitterness of desolation, obtain for me the virtue of diligence and the gift of wisdom.”
Introduction
There are those who have objected that the Jews are not cited here as the primary founders of Freemasonry and do not today function as the main movers and shakers in this organization. We have never denied they had a hand in founding Freemasonry, but only questioned their active participation in the role of all secret societies today. And there are theologians and Catholic authors who do not blame them directly, but only indirectly for Freemasonry’s emergence. So below we will assay Catholic writers and historians on this topic.
Here we are speaking of Freemasonry which began as an underground current following the disbanding of the Templars in 1312, during the reign of the Avignon popes. Supposedly some of these Templars disbanded, perhaps bearing grudges against the Church, but continued under other names and in secret. In his Freemasonry and the Vatican, quoting from several sources, Comte Leon de Poncins states that “In reality, there was an ancient Catholic Masonry, about which little is known, which gradually fell into abeyance” (p. 115). He here seems to refer to a Catholic Masonry in existence that was centered around the masonry, or brick and stone laying guilds. But he also quotes another source that claims the Stuarts and Irish/Scottish aristocracy also belonged to a type of Catholic Masonry, in the 1600-1700s, which was later infiltrated by Protestant Freemasons. Today there is no such thing as “Catholic Masonry,” and this will be explained below.
Quoting from what he claims to be the most comprehensive and well-documented history of Freemasonry ever written, by one N. Deschamps, de Poncins relates that: “In the Middle Ages and at the time of the Renaissance, the Freemasons in Germany and Italy were overwhelmed with favors by the sovereign pontiffs and there is not a trace of heresy or hostility against the Church in the statutes of Stroudsburg of 1462 or as revised in 1563. However, in 1535 we come across a document which reveals the existence of an order under the name of Freemasons whose anti-Christian principles are absolutely in harmony with those of modern Masonry, and this time it is no longer a question of builders protecting their arts… The oldest and most authentic document of the Masonic Lodge, known as the charter of Cologne, dates back to the year 1535. It reveals the existence already going back sometime perhaps even two centuries of one or several secret societies which eked out a clandestine existence throughout the various states of Europe in direct antagonism with the religious and civil principles that formed the basis of their constitutions.
Rogue Templars and Socinus
Deschamps then goes on to quote from Michelet regarding the hotbed of Jewish influence and heresies existing in the Languedoc region of southern France. De Poncins concludes his quotes from this author with the following: “Sixteenth century Freemasonry arose out of the ruins of the Knights Templar…” The Languedoc area of France was where some of the Templars had congregated, a largely Jewish region and source of the Cathar and Waldensian heresies. On the orders of King Phillip IV, several member of the Knights Templar were arrested on Oct. 13, 1307, and put to death in1307-1308. Pope Clement V formally disbanded the order in 1312. This would account for one or more secret societies “already going back sometime perhaps even two centuries” as Deschamps reports above. And the seedbed for this, as will be seen below, were the rogue Templars and Gallicanists.
Comte de Poncins’ observations were confirmed by Msgr. George E. Dillon in his work Freemasonry Unmasked, several decades prior to the publication of de Poncin’s book. Dillon’s book was first released in 1885 under the title, The War of Antichrist with the Church and Christian Civilization. Msgr. Dillon dedicated the work to Pope Leo XIII, and Pope Leo XIII personally reviewed Msgr. Dillon’s work and ordered the Italian edition to be printed in Rome at the Holy See’s own expense. (This according to the publisher’s note to the fifth edition, revised and enlarged.) In discussing the origins of Freemasonry, Msgr. Dillon cites the studies of Mgr. Segur, the Bishop of Grenoble France, who dates the founding to a Laelius Socinus of Siena, Italy, founder of the Unitarian sect, and his nephew Faustus, around the year 1547. According to Segur, the aim of both Laelius and Faustus was “not only to destroy the Church but to raise up another temple into which any enemy of orthodoxy might freely enter. It was called Christian but was without Christian faith or hope or love.” One Abbe Franc believed that Oliver Cromwell was a Socinian, Dillon relates.
According to Msgr. Dillon, Mgr. Segur, “…connects modern Freemasonry with the Jews and Templars as well as Socinus. There are reasons which lead me to think he is right in doing so. The Jews for many centuries previous to the Reformation had formed secret societies for their own protection and for the destruction of the Christianity which persecuted them and which they so much hated. The rebuilding of the Temple of Solomon was the dream of their lives. It is unquestionable that they wished to make common cause with other bodies of persecuted religionists. They had special reason to welcome with joy such heretics as were cast off by Catholicism. It is therefore not at all improbable that they admitted into their secret conclaves some at least of the discontented Templars burning for revenge upon those who dispossessed and suppressed the order. The fact would account for the curious combination of Jewish and conventional allusions to be found in modern Masonry.”
“The era of the so-called Reformation was a sad epoch… It was an era of church demolition rather than of church building. Wherever the blight of Protestantism fell, the beauty and stateliness of church architecture became dwarfed, stunted and degraded whenever it was not utterly destroyed. The need of brother Masons [builders] had passed and succeeding Masons began to admit men to their guilds who won a living otherwise than by the craft. In Germany their confraternity had become a cover for the Reformers and Socinus, seeing it as a means for advancing his sect a method for winning adepts and progressing stealthily without attracting the notice of Catholic government, would desire, no doubt, to use it for his purpose. We have to this day the statute the genuine Freemasons of Strausbourg framed in 1462 and the same revised as late as 1563 but in them there is absolutely nothing of heresy or hostility to the Church.
“But there is a curious document called the Charter of Cologne dated 1535, which if it be genuine, proves to us that there existed at that early date a body of Freemasons having principles identical with those professed by the Masons of our own day. It is to be found in the archives of the Mother Lodge of Amsterdam which also preserves the act of its own constitution under the date of 1519. It reveals the existence of lodges of kindred intent in London, Edinburgh, Vienna, Amsterdam, Paris, Lyons, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Antwerp, Rotterdam, Madrid, Venice, Goriz, Koenigsburg, Brussels, Danzig, Madgeburg, Bremen and Cologne and it bears the signatures of well-known enemies of the Church at that. Namely Hermanas, or Herman de Weir, the immoral and heretical Archbishop elector of Cologne, placed for his misdeeds under the ban of the empire; Doctor Coligny leader of the Huguenots of France; Jacob d’ Anville, prior of the Augustinians of Cologne, who incurred the same reproaches as Archbishop Herman Melancthon, the reformer… etc., etcetera.”
This leads us directly back to the Avignon papacy and the advent of the Gallicanist heresy, dedicated to eroding papal authority. Disbanded and frustrated, it appears the remaining rogue Templars and those wishing to eliminate or mitigate papal authority managed somehow to join forces with and influence those amongst the hierarchy in the Church. These members of the clergy most likely took them for good Catholics and trusted them, and it is into their ears they began to whisper doubts regarding papal supremacy and early ideas of democracy such as Marsilius of Padua taught. In short, they began the campaign to democratize and modernize the Church, to align Her with the state once they had toppled the monarchies, to strip the Church of Her rightful power. If their efforts are viewed over time with the hindsight afforded by history, it can easily be seen that this is what they did gradually over the centuries until the time of the Vatican Council.
Masonry’s Jewish origins
Did the Jews first instigate and fund Freemasonry and its many satellites? That appears to be the case. And it is still funding and supporting its efforts. But is it the primary source behind Freemasonry? It is hard to believe that it is any longer the driving force that propels it for two reasons. One, Protestant and atheistic hatred of Catholics has mushroomed to such an extent that active participation by the Jews is no longer necessary, although there may be supervisory forces at the upper levels of the Masonic pyramid directing certain groups. Secondly, Pope Leo XII, in his 1825 encyclical Quo Graviora, observed: “What is definitely ascertained is that those different sects, despite the diversity of their names, are all united and linked by the similarity of their infamous plans.”
Later Pope Pius IX would teach: “We have resolved, Venerable Brethren, to raise our Apostolic voice therefore, and We hereby confirm before you the constitutions of our predecessors and in virtue of our Apostolic authority We hold up to reprobation and we condemn this Masonic society and all other societies of the same order, which although different in appearance but pursuing the same aim against the church or legitimate civil power, are constantly being formed” (Allocution of Sept. 15, 1875). He further noted in this same allocution: “The Masonic sect has developed to such an extent that in these days of great difficulty it shows itself everywhere and with impunity and raises a more audacious countenance.”
Pope Leo XIII taught in Humanum Genus that: “There are several organized bodies which, though differing in name and ceremonial, in form and origin, are nevertheless so bound together by community of purpose and by the similarity of their main opinions as to make in fact one thing with the sect of the Freemasons, which is a kind of center whence they all go forth and whether they all return.” As Pope Pius IX observed above, even in his day these sects had greatly grown in number and become commonplace. They have now grown to such great proportions today that it would be almost impossible for such societies to be directly governed by Jewish entities. From the beginning, Freemasonry was populated primarily by Protestant heretics, both clerical and lay — renegades from the faith during the Reformation and the French Revolution. The majority of these individuals were baptized Catholics. Without their hatred of the papacy, the Mass, Catholic governments and Catholic culture, propelling them to destroy the Church, their efforts would have been in vain.
The Kabbala and the Talmud
And it is these same Protestants today who seek to replace the Catholic Church, particularly in this country, now that the usurpers rule in Rome. Quoting the Jewish author Joshua Jehouda in his Judaism and the Vatican, Vicomte Leon de Poncins tells us that: “The Renaissance, the Reformation and the Revolution of 1789 constitute three attempts to rectify Christian mentality by bringing it into tune with the progressive development of reason and science.” The discovery of the Jewish Kabbalah, imparted by Pico de Mirandola to various enlightened Christians, contributed much to the spiritual blossoming known as the Renaissance. About half a century later the rehabilitation of the Talmud was to lead to the Reformation… Laicism, to which the Revolution gave birth, confers on the Jew his dignity as a man but Christian theology has not yet abolished its spiritual contempt for him. This accounts for the twofold attitude of the modern world with regard to the Jew and for the successive outburst of anti-Semitism. Although the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution which followed it liberated the Jew in the social and political fields they both hold the monotheistic religion of Israel in the same contempt as Christian theology.”
Freemasonry uses the Kabbala as its bible. In a 1914 work written by Rabbi Elie Benamozegh, Israel et l’Humanite, the Rabbi writes: “What is certain is that Masonic theology corresponds well enough to that of the Kabbalah. Moreover a profound study of rabbinical works in the first centuries of the Christian era provides abundant proof that the Haggada was the popular form of a secret science whose methods of initiation bore the most striking resemblances to Freemasonry.” And in an editor’s note to this work it is written: ”To those who may be surprised by the use of such an expression Masonic theology we would say that there is a Masonic theology in the sense that there exists in Freemasonry a secret philosophic and religious doctrine which was introduced by the gnostic Rosicrucians at the time of their union with the Freemasons in 1717. The secret doctrine or gnosis belongs exclusively to the high or philosophic degrees of freemasonry (Vicomte Leon de Poncins, Freemasonry and the Vatican).
De Poncins next quotes the anti-Semitism authority Bernard Lazare, who relates: “it is true of course that there were Jews connected with freemasonry from its birth students of the Kabbalah as is shown by certain rites which survive. It is very probable too that in the years preceding the outbreak of the French Revolution they entered in greater numbers than ever into the councils of the secret societies, becoming indeed themselves the founders of secret associations. There were Jews in the circle around Weishaupt and a Jew of Portuguese origin, Martinez de Pasquales, established numerous groups of illuminati in France and gathered around him a large number of disciples whom he instructed in the doctrines of reintegration.” De Poncins then quotes another English source to the effect that: “Although I have not by any means dealt with the Hebraic influences on all the symbolism of Masonry, I hope I have given sufficient illustrations to support the deduction that Masonry as a system of symbolry rests entirely on a foundation which is essentially Hebraic” (Hebraic Influences on Masonic Symbolism, B. Shillman). De Poncins then goes on to show the affinity between Jewish and Masonry’s doctrines and their conception.
There can be no doubt, then, that Freemasonry was founded on the Kabbala and the Talmud. That being said, it cannot be used as an excuse to exhibit hatred toward Jews today or engage in anti-Semitism, for surely the popes knew that this was the case before they ever forbade us to engage in such persecution. Are they using ignorant non-Catholics to help them rebuild their temple? Yes. Have they managed to convince them that their Christian roots are Jewish? That is true of at least some Protestant sects, who believe they are helping the Jews to fulfill biblical prophecy in advancing their cause. Can they then claim to march as Christian soldiers in the cause of Christ the King? Absolutely not. For Christ alone is the King of Zion and He it is who at His Second Coming will reclaim the throne of David.
No “Catholic” Masonry
It is no coincidence that the usurpers John 23 and Paul 6 embraced Freemasonry, as de Poncins explains, and along with it the ecumenism that brought both the Jews and all non-Catholic sects into their New World Order fold — Novus Ordo Missae, Novus Ordo Saeculorum. Some say they have seen articles claiming that Francis intends to dissolve the papacy, and this would be consistent with what was reported in the article HERE. Some Protestant evangelists even claim that Protestantism is dissolving into an amorphous mass of “believers.” The stage has been set, and we are being propelled headlong into the vortex. Traditionalism has played its part in the advancement of this process by their involvement in Freemasonry, as indicated in site articles and recent blogs. And no specious objection of what they belong to as being permitted under the title of “Catholic Masonry” can be tolerated. This according to the Holy Office itself, as we see below.
1950 instruction from the Holy Office
“Among the things which are springing up again with renewed vigor and not only in Italy is Freemasonry with its ever-recurring hostility to religion and to the Church. What appears to be a new feature in this Masonic renaissance is the rumors circulating in various social classes that a particular rite of Masonry might no longer be in opposition to the Church whereby even Catholics can enroll at their ease in the sect without fear of excommunication and reproach. Those responsible for propagating these rumors must surely know that nothing has been modified in the Church’s legislation relative to Freemasonry and if they continue this campaign, it can only be in order to profit from the naivete of simple folk. The bishops know that Canon 684 and especially Canon 2335 which excommunicates those who have given their names to Masonry without any distinction between rights are as full in force today as they always have been; all Catholics ought to know this and remember it so as not to fall into this snare and also so as to know how to pass due judgment on the fact that certain simpletons believe they can call themselves both Catholics and Freemasons with impunity. This, I repeat, applies to all Masonic rites, EVEN IF SOME OF THEM IN VARYING CIRCUMSTANCES DECLARED THAT THEY ARE NOT HOSTILE TO THE CHURCH” (Most Reverend Mario Cordovani, Master of the Sacred Palace; printed in Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1950, as quoted by de Poncins. https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/what-happened-to-the-church/
Later Masonic indicators
In 1985, Christopher Shannon of Arizona and one Ely Jason (Dennis D’Amico) proposed to found an International Society of Catholic Scholars. David Bawden was working with Jason on this. But Jason wanted this to be a “Catholic” secret society and Shannon and Bawden later disassociated themselves from each other and from Jason for this and various other reasons. In 1989, Bawden wrote a letter to this author saying he had “doubts” about “Fr.” Peter Tran Van Khoat, whom he was then assisting in his ministry in Texas, because Khoat had also proposed a Secret Society of Catholics, based on the Essenes, a group that seems to have been neither entirely Jewish nor Christian. (The Catholic Encyclopedia says of Essenism: “Freemasons pretended to find in Essenism pure Christianity.”) At that time Khoat, who in the 1980s served as a priest for the Gibsons and the Traditionalist chapel St. Jude’s Shrine, was working with Hutton Gibson and Gary Giuffre to validate the Siri “papacy.” In January 2023, with research help from a friend, I exposed Khoat in a blog as a complete fraud, con man and married man who had never even been a priest. Shortly before this blog was released, Hutton Gibson dropped completely off the radar. A Gibson apologist who later denounced the Siri theory had earlier questioned whether Khoat was a reliable source of information, but never investigated him fully.
So it seems that the infiltration of the secret societies did not stop with the Birchers, but went even deeper still, as Blood on the Altar author Craig Heimbichner and others have attested, even descending to the OTO, or Order of the Oriental Templars, associated with Aleister Crowley’s order of the Golden Dawn. Is it mere coincidence that Crowley was once friends with Rama Coomeraswamy’s father, the Buddhist Ananda Coomeraswamy? Is it coincidence that the “Catholic” convert, Rama Coomeraswamy, was a married “monsignor” who belonged to the Society of St. Pius X? Coincidence is a messenger to the truth, so it seems highly unlikely. Masonic involvement, however, was not limited to the Lefebvre bunch and the Priory of Zion they were obviously connected with, as other sources have proven. The Knights of St. John Jerusalem was home to the SSPX as well as other Traditional organizations. How deeply their involvement ran will never be known, as the secrecy of these groups hides all from view.
Conclusion
What we now know is that a certain number of LibTrads were participants in the very forces that destroyed the juridic Church, and their leaders’ ready access to unlimited funding may well be explained by their affiliation with certain secret societies. Excommunication for Masonic membership means nothing to them since they do not recognize the supremacy of papal jurisdiction. Gallicanism is their game and abandonment of papal teaching is the tool used to ready those who still value the ritualistic element of Catholicism for the eventual dissolution of the papacy. By avoiding all contamination with any secret society, we hope and pray, even if only by desire, to still count ourselves members of Christ’s Mystical Body,— the Church Militant, the Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant — of which He is the supreme Pontiff. The gates of hell shall never prevail against that Body, which Christ has promised us will last unto the consummation.
Viva Cristo Rey!
by T. Stanfill Benns | Aug 22, 2024 | New Blog
+Feast of the Immaculate Heart of Mary+
Sweet Heart of Mary, be my salvation!
In my early 20s, I read a book that later would send me indirectly to the doors of Traditional “Catholicism.” That book was None Dare Call it Conspiracy, by Gary Allen. It helped me make sense of a world that was suffering a moral and religious crisis at the time, a crisis that officially began with usurpation of the throne of St. Peter but had actually been in the making for over a century. When I discovered that the Church I was baptized in, the one I had left after the institution of the Novus Ordo Missae, was being “revived” by Traditionalists, I investigated them. It was then I discovered this particular sect supported a right-wing group whose philosophy was based on Allen’s book, and everything seemed to finally come into focus. I became a member of the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement headed by Fr. Francis E. Fenton and briefly, the John Birch Society.
Four years spent in the movement, after writing for four Traditionalist publications, I realized that the goal of all these interrelated but separate sects was to maintain the status quo, not move forward to advocate for doctrinal unity which could be had only by electing a true pope. I resigned membership in the Birch society in 1982 and was done with the ORCM by 1983. I began actively advocating for a papal election in 1986-87. Readers know the rest. I have since discovered and exposed the founding and infiltration of the Traditionalist movement by Freemasons, and recently a reader has kindly advanced my knowledge regarding the Birch Society’s role in that infiltration. It further strengthens what is written HERE regarding Traditionalism’s Masonic origins and should leave Catholics with no doubt regarding the true motives and intent of LibTrad pseudo-clergy.
In that article I wrote: “Early in the Traditionalist game (1975), Catholic writer William Strojie, in his Letters, commented on De Pauw’s beliefs and affiliations and found them wanting. Strojie and Mary Lejeune, who wrote Sword of Truth were apparently the first among writers at the time to link DePauw’s Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM) to the Old Catholics and Gnostics. They also identified Fr. Francis E. Fenton’s John Birch Society-affiliated Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM) as not only linked to the Old Catholics, but also to the Americanists, (the initials for the Old Roman Catholic Church are ORCC and Fenton’s group functioned in the U.S. much as that church functions both in Britain and here).”
What Lejeune and Strojie didn’t know is that the John Birch Society’s own council members directing the society were peppered with Freemasons and Communist sympathizers. This is confirmed by former JBS members in the article found HERE. Much of the information comes from Who’s Who in America and other sources. Below the implications of this find will be discussed.
Masonic Birchers, their associates and British Israel
Most interesting about the Birch expose article is that it lists as one of their council members a Dr. [John] Grady, founder of the Shickshinny Knights (Sovereign Order of St. John of Jerusalem, SOSJ) but does not refer to his Masonic membership in this order. The Shickshinny Knights were taken to court and denounced as a legitimate order. They also were investigated by the FBI for neo-Nazi and terrorist-type connections in the 1990s (https://barthsnotes.com/2012/05/24/patcon-and-the-investigation-of-a-sovereign-order/). Wikipedia rightly reports that Fr. Fenton founded the ORCM on the suggestion of and with the support of Rev. Joaquin Saenz- Arriaga, a Mexican canonist and theologian. The translator for Arriaga’s work frankly admits, in a dedication for The New Montinian Church, that Arriaga was a member of the Order of St. John Jerusalem, an order that also tracks back to Marcel Lefebvre. Below is the preface to Saenz-Arriaga’s book.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE
“Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, S.J., Ph.D. was born October 12, 1899, ordained a Jesuit priest in April, 1930, and died in April, 1976. An acclaimed sentinel and guardian of the Rock of St. Peter, he held doctorates in philosophy, theology and Canon Law. An active and prodigious traditionalist writer, he authored or co-authored more than fifty books exposing the neo-gnosticism of the Post-Conciliar Church, including such well-known texts as Sede Vacante (The Vacant Chair), For Christ and Against Christ, The New Mass Is Not the One Catholic Mass, The Plot Against the Church, etc. A dedicated servant of Christ, his love of God and mankind propelled him to write the present comprehensive expose against the occult conspiracy. A shining star of the Jesuit Order and the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, he first published La Nueva Iglesia Montiniana on the Feast of the Assumption, August 15, 1971. This was subsequently translated and published in Italian, creating such a furor within liberalized Church circles that it even brought about an invalid excommunication, handed down by a bishop who did not have jurisdiction over Fr. Saenz and who did not call a tribunal to hear the case. It is hoped that the timely and long-awaited publication of this book on August 15, 1985 will provide the reader with enough historical insight to appreciate the nature of the pagan anti-Christian conspiracy which is at work against the Church.”
It should be no surprise, then, that Fenton himself was a member of the same organization on which Grady also sat as a council member, or that Saenz-Arriaga was a member of Grady’s Shickshinny Knights. “Fr.” Dan Jones, an ORCM pseudo-cleric, regularly promoted Grady’s side organization, the American Pistol and Rifle Association, and recruited Traditionalists for membership in the group. Jones also openly promoted British Israel ideology in his Sangre de Cristo Newsnotes. He would later embrace a schismatic alternative-pope group in Canada condemned by Pope Pius XII.
Although not a council member, another possible Masonic connection was Kennett Bawden, father of David Bawden, aka “Pope Michael.” According to family members, the elder Bawden left the Masons on embracing the Catholic faith, sometime in the 1960s, 1970s. During his time as a member of the St. Pius X Society and for some time afterward, Kennett Bawden was a public relations agent for the Kansas branch of the JBS (1970s, 1980s). His 1995 obituary lists him as “a lifetime member” of the JBS. He was the main funder and promoter of his son David’s 1990 “election.”
H.M. Peters on the JBS and British Israel
British Israel is treated in various articles on this site and is one of the lower rungs of Freemasonry listed on Lady Queenborough’s Masonic pyramid. The authors of the JBS article mention Protestant author and researcher, Helen M. Peters, in their work and her reference to the philosophy of the JBS as definitely supporting British Israel. Peters is quoted at length in the treatise HERE on the history of British Israelism, which the article on the Masonic origins of Traditionalism mentioned above links to the Birch Society and Traditionalists. She doesn’t expose the JBS, founded by Robert Welch, as infiltrated by Freemasons, but she definitely provides the spiritual link that places them in the service of the One World religion architects. Peters writes:
“This one “link” is all important because it not only ties in the conservative and Identity Movements, it links them with the Jew’s religion which the Identity people promote as the Kingdom Message. The Identity people are bastard offspring of Judaism because their belief in the earthly kingdom is Judaism.
“The John Birch Society has been a thorn in the flesh of many would-be patriots. The purpose of the John Birch Society is to soak up any effective opposition and neutralize it or turn it toward a false conservatism. Robert Welch and his Society has never attacked the Kingdom Message propaganda. In fact they promote British Israel under the cover of Fundamental Christianity. “Welch laid to rest any questions on British Israel to his members in his booklet THE NEUTRALIZERS. We say that he who does not want the whole truth does not deserve any truth. With this in mind let us take a close look at Welch’s double talk in his phony expose` of British Israel. He simply attacks it by one name and promotes it under another.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a booklet distributed by the John Birch Society. Its purpose, according to its author, is to “minimize the effect of the whole splintering (efforts to destroy the John Birch Society) operation.” According to Robert Welch none of his members are supposed to believe any bad stories about himself or his society unless they first check with headquarters in Belmont, Massachusetts. This, most of them dutifully do.
“If through guile, one wishes to twist men’s minds, it is necessary to be compassionate, sincere, religious and, in this case, patriotic. These qualities of character cause an unfaltering admiration, stupefying followers and “neutralizing” opponents. The way for a villain to disguise his crime is to implicate it to others, blaming them for that which he is guilty.
“THE NEUTRALIZERS is a case in point. If we suppose that Mr. Welch has a valid attack upon advocates of “Anti-Semitism,” “Religious Neutralism,” “Academic Neutralism,” “Political Neutralism,” and “Tangentitis,” we have a right to examine him and his Society with regard to the same topics. (We have not checked with Belmont but we will go ahead.) As Mr. Welch so powerfully stated, on page 39 of THE NEUTRALIZERS, “Consistency is seldom a virtue of the bigot.” End quote. With this we agree and with this in mind we turn the spotlight upon Mr. Welch and his “Anti-Communist John Birch Society.”
“In the first section of THE NEUTRALIZERS on “Anti-Semitism” the term anti-Semitism is used twelve times. This of course injects the revolutionary tactic of racism because of the commonly false definition put upon the word “Semitic.” With all the knowledge that Sir Robert possesses he cannot prove that there is a Semitic Race, let alone that the Jews are Semites. His genealogical proof of a Semitic Race today is as impossible as is any British Israelite’s racial identity. Racial lineage dating back to any of the tribes of Israel was forever destroyed when the genealogical tablets were destroyed with the Jewish Temple in 70 A.D. The error of “Jewish Semitism” is as erroneous as the error of “Arab Semitism.” But of course the idea of race helps promote conflict and revolution.
“Then with the gall of a brass monkey he equates religion with race in order to confuse the two. On page 8 he suggests that “Jews” are sometimes “Jews” and sometimes not — “but those who had formerly been Jews and many who had not been Jews.” End quote. So Welch says on page 18 that the Communists do the “opposite of the appearance that they create so diligently.” Is he not here following the same pattern of using racism (semitism) to promote revolution?
“Then like all good Masons do, he equates all religions to one big happy family. On page 20 he states that Communism must go “so that Jews and Christians alike, and Mohammedans and Buddhists, can again have a decent world to live in.” End of quote. Now be not deceived that his plan graciously allows Christianity a fourth part with the heathens. His definition of Christianity is British Israel and is not based on the Deity of Jesus Christ at all… Mr. Welch and all the Right-Wing Communists say the bad guys are in the Kremlin. They are bad all right because they are controlled by the same British Israel that controls Mr. Welch. The only thing is, their left-wing Communism is going to give way to Mr. Welch’s “Christian Communism” (https://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/hoax/unionjack_epilogue.htm).
Is that not precisely where we are headed in this coming election? And is this not reflected in the establishment of the Abrahamic Family House celebrating all three world religions, the Satanic result of indifferentism, pan-Christianism, Modernism, ecumenism and the religious liberty espoused at the false Vatican 2 council?
Replacement theology and conversion
Right-wing Christian fundamentalism, as explained by Peters above in the link on British Israel, rebuffs the idea of a “replacement theology,” or supersessionism. This term is defined by one Protestant writer as: “The animosity even some Christians have toward the Jewish people. They choose to believe in the Replacement Theology that ‘essentially teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Adherents of the Replacement Theology believe the Jews are no longer God’s chosen people, and God does not have specific future plans for the nation of Israel.’” Romans 11: 28-31 is quoted to support the restoration of Israel: “As concerning the gospel, indeed, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are most dear for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance. For as you also in times past did not believe God, but now have obtained mercy, through their unbelief; So these also now have not believed, for your mercy, that they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded all in unbelief, that he may have mercy on all.”
Rev. Leo Haydock, however, interprets this as follows: “They are… enemies to God, for He has rejected them at presentfor their willful blindness…” Typically, this Protestant neglects to refer to the preceding verses, Rom. 11:25-27: “For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery, (lest you should be wise in your own conceits), that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should come in. And so all Israel should be saved, as it is written: ‘There shall come out of Sion, he that shall deliver, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. And this is to them my covenant: when I shall take away their sins’.” Rev. Haydock comments: “All Israel shall be saved when all nations are converted [and] they [the Jews] submit to the faith of Christ… Christ Jesus shall then come to them by His powerful grace, ‘And this is to them my covenant… [when I shall take away their sins’”].
And then we find this verse: in 2 Corin. 3 vs 13-16: “And not as Moses put a veil upon his face, that the children of Israel might not steadfastly look on the face of that which is made void. But their senses were made dull. For, until this present day, the selfsame veil, in the reading of the Old Testament, remaineth not taken away (because in Christ it is made void). But even until this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. But when they shall be converted to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.” Let them once convert and THEN the promises will be fulfilled, in the establishment of the heavenly New Jerusalem, as the Good Book teaches. This conversion very likely already happened in part, as reported in the article cited previously on the lost Jewish tribes. But toward the very end, before the consummation of the world by fire and after the terrible chastisement and destruction of Rome, time will be given for the remaining Jews to convert, as well as “The Synagogue of Satan…those who say they are Jews and are not but do lie. I will make them to come and adore before thy feet” (Apoc. 3:9).
Who is this synagogue? As Msgr. Jouin reports in his booklet on Freemasonry: “The renewed sentences of anathema by Pope Pius IX strike most particularly the satanism of secret societies. In his Encyclical of November 2l, 1873, the Pope writes of them as ‘the synagogue of Satan.” So is Freemasonry, aligned at the top with certain Jewish entities, those of whom this pope speaks, the ones now promoting British Israel? Or is he referring to the fact that the Jews as a race have ceased to exist, since all their genealogies were lost with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D., and by their dispersion among the nations. This is even taught by Jewish historians and converts from Judaism. What must Catholics believe about replacement theology, now so popular among Fundamentalists? Surely it cannot be called animosity, for Catholics are not anti-Semites. We wish to take nothing from the Jews that belongs to them, only enrich them with the acceptance of the Messiah that they mistakenly rejected so long ago. Then indeed all the promises made to them will be fulfilled. These are not our terms, but the terms of their God.
Rev. Denis Fahey reports that Pope Pius XI, in his Sept. 6, 1938, address to Belgian pilgrims wrote: “At the most solemn moment of the Mass we recite the prayer which contains the expression “sacrifice of Abel, sacrifice of Abraham, sacrifice of Melchisedek” in three strokes, three times, three steps, the entire religious history of mankind—a magnificent passage. Every time we read it; we are seized by an irresistible emotion. The sacrifice of our patriarch Abraham. Note that Abraham is called our patriarch, our ancestor. Antisemitism is incompatible with the thought and the sublime reality expressed in this text. It is alien to us, a movement in which we Christians can have no part. The promise was made to Abraham and to his descendants. It is realized in Christ, and through Christ in us who are members of His Mystical Body. Through Christ and in Christ we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham. No, it is not possible for Christians to take part in antisemitism. We acknowledge for all the right to defend themselves, to adopt measures of protection against what threatens their legitimate interests. But antisemitism is inadmissible. Spiritually, we are Semites.”
It is the British Israel adherents, among them Traditionalists, who expect a millennium and the restoration of Christ’s Church on earth. Traditionalists believe they will be the beneficiaries of this restoration and Fundamentalists believe it will be a Jewish operation that will somehow include Christians, but they are not in agreement on the extent or timing of this involvement. Millenarianism, even in its mildest, spiritual sense, has been condemned by Pope Pius XII and this is explained HERE. The thousand-year reign probably began after the papacy was firmly established in Rome once the major persecutions of Christians subsided. In 445, Emperor Valentinian pronounced that the Bishop of Rome was the law for all. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope to be called Vicar of Christ (492-496). A little over 1,000 years later, Luther began his revolt, followed by that of Henry VIII around 1532. Freemasonry was established in England 200 years after Luther’s revolt.
Conclusion
LibTrads no longer can defend the fraudulent and apostate foundations of their “church.” As documented in the Masonic origins article, The Catholic Traditional Movement (CTM), the Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement (ORCM), the St. Pius X Society (SSPX) — and any remaining LibTrad pseudo-clergy issue from these three organizations — ALL were founded by men later linked to the exact same secret society: the Knights of St. John Jerusalem. And now we have shown that the ORCM was intertwined with a Masonic-run organization from the outset. Any so-called clerics were excommunicated for cooperating in any way with these apostates, and any Traditionalists joining “Fr.” James Wathen’s Solemn Order of St. John of Jerusalem were excommunicated for joining a secret society. Wathen claimed in his Is the Order of St. John Masonic that the order was not aligned with Freemasonry, but it was secret in nature, never sanctioned by a reigning pope, and therefore did not have to be directly aligned to qualify as a forbidden secret society.
The link HERE explains that it was indeed a secret society populated by former WWII generals and other military personnel directing “underground armies.” Some have claimed these armies exist both in Europe and the U.S. Fidelity Magazine writer, Thomas Case, reported in the 1990s that the SSPX in St. Mary’s, Kansas was a neo-Nazi hotbed, and much of this seems to be directly traceable to the SOSJ (see HERE). LibTrads have been warned before, but the preponderance of evidence is now firmly stacked against them. The length, depth and breadth of the infiltration of the Church is something that is almost unbelievable, but the popes warned us long ago it was occurring and no one heeded their warnings or obeyed them. God warned the Israelites in Leviticus 26 about what would befall them if they broke His Covenant and disobeyed Him. (The whole chapter should be read) Sadly, we reap what we sow.
