+St. Patrick, Bishop Confessor+

Fr. Doyle’s Reflections on the Passion, Pt. 2

“We should,” writes Father Degnam, S.J., “go through the different circumstances of the Passion, and compare them with the occasions of sufferings we meet with in life. They are the drops of the chalice which our Lord asks us to drink with Him. His sufferings of the scourging, our physical pain; He is treated as a fool by Herod; He was rejected for Barabbas; are we not sometimes rejected for another – set aside for someone who is certainly more worthy than ourselves? Is not the gall they gave Him to drink like the bitterness we receive when we are longing for consolation? As we look at the dead body of our Lord hanging on the Cross, we see that His Passion was one long act of submission.”

Gratitude should fill our hearts at the thought of God’s goodness in giving us His own adorable Son as a model to imitate, so that we have only to look at Him to know what we have to do. Hear Christ Himself say: “I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, so you also should do” (Jn. 13:15). Christ is the only way we must follow, especially in the practice of virtue, and it was during the Passion that His practice of the virtues was strikingly sublime and heroic. In the most trying circumstances our Lord gave us during the Passion examples of those virtues we somehow seem to lack – meekness, mercy, charity, silence, patience, abandonment, and obedience to His Father’s will – even to death.

Well did St. Bonaventure say: “He who desires to go on advancing from virtue to virtue, from grace to grace should constantly meditate on the Passion of Jesus Christ.” …

Try to see the virtue practiced by the Master and resolve to imitate that virtue. Strive to find some lesson in each of these daily considerations and resolve to put it in practice during the day. In your examination of conscience at night, examine yourself on how you kept the resolution taken that morning. Little good will result from the study of the Passion unless such a study results in our imitation of Christ. “O foolish Galatians!” cried out St. Paul, “who has bewitched you [that you should not obey the truth], before whose eyes Jesus has been depicted crucified?” (Ga. 3:1)

At the Last Supper, Christ gathered the Apostles around Him and they set out together for Gethesemani, the Garden of the Agony. The name “Gethsemani” is interesting in that it means “oilpress”; in other words, it was a place where the fresh olives were pressed and the oil extracted. What a symbolic spot chosen by the Sacred Redeemer of Mankind for the initial and awful beginning of the Passion! Here He was to take upon Himself the sins of the world and be so crushed under their terrible weight that his precious blood flowed from every pore of His body.

With reverence, then, and with contrite hearts let us begin our contemplation of the passion of our Lord in the Garden of Gethsemani and pray that your heart and soul will be inflamed with love and aroused to imitate all the virtues practiced by the Savior in His Passion. Decide now on one positive act of mortification to be practiced this very day, recalling these words of the Imitation of Christ: “The more thou dost violence to thyself, the greater thy progress will be.” Tomorrow we shall see our Lord separating Peter, James, and John from the other apostles and taking them with Him into the midst of the garden. Thus shall we begin our study of the Passion” (end of Fr. Doyle quotes).

Introduction

We often feel we are crushed under the weight of the betrayal we must witness among those who should be Christ’s greatest supporters, and if we further continue to expose this betrayal here it is only to fulfill our obligation to defend the faith. In a past blog, I had mentioned how certain recognize and resist sects and other entities — some who claim to pray at home — were somehow connected with the In the Spirit of Chartres Committee (ISOC), a non-profit organization promoting “traditional” Catholicism. Featured on the ISOC interviews list is one Dr. E. Michael Jones, who will be discussed below. Jones is listed on this site along with Siri pope fantasizer Gary Giuffre, also Jim Condit, Robert Sungenesis, Cornelia Ferreira (all major contributors) as well as Gerry Matatics, (one known DVD; some are not tagged). To discover what they are saying, one must purchase and listen to numerous DVD’s.  As  pointed out in the past, this is not only expensive but a waste of time. A six  or seven-page  article requires a little over 20 minutes for the average person to read, while some of these DVDs can last for hours.

The 2020 link provided here on Dr. E. Michael Jones from the Fitzpatrick Informer does not need to be read in its entirety; a quick scan will confirm what is said there. Mr. Fitzpatrick has bought into the Fatima/aliens hoax, presenting “proofs” of a so-called connection from a “Catholic” author, but no good Catholic could state categorically, with any degree of certitude, that Fatima was indeed a hoax. This I also have addressed in previous blogs at length. So this is definitely NOT a recommended site.

Fitzpatrick’s site also focuses primarily on the Jews (and Russia) as the enemies of the Church and all humanity, something I have described as both dangerous and unCatholic in the past where the Jews are concerned. This because the popes condemn any persecution of the Jews and such emphasis only excites ideas of such persecution in certain individuals. Nor does the Church officially name the Jews as the head and common denominator of Freemasonry. It was Pope Pius IX who actually called Freemasonry the Synagogue of Satan, although certainly this does not exclude the Jews from inclusion as contributing members, even leading members.

This brings us to Andy Sloan’s and Timothy Fitzpatrick’s ’s expose on E. Michael Jones as a KGB agent HERE and HERE. According to Jones own comments in this article, Jones also is a Communist collaborator and denier of Catholic dogma, something far more serious than being a secret agent. The reasons we are addressing the E. Michael Jones issue is because most of those surfing the net out there, like the reader who wisely alerted us to this long blog on Jones, may well run across Fitzpatrick. If those who frequent ISOC and see Jones’ articles there, then read what Sloan and Fitzpatrick have revealed about him, they might rightly wonder why anyone would recommend his works to those believing themselves to be Catholic. Sloan’s article explains it well, and other articles on Fitzpatrick’s site are critical of some traditionalists.

Why would ISOC sell Jones’ DVD’s? There is a good explanation for this, one that most have not fully put together but which needs to be comprehended if one is to prepare for what may well materialize in the future. Fitzpatrick’s and Sloan’s vision is not too far removed from what I posted HERE a few years ago. In this essay I noted: “In her review of Craig Heimbichner’s work, Blood on the Altar, often quoted by this author, Cornelia Ferreira writes: ‘Freemasonic leaders hope to finally fulfill their THIRD-DEGREE RITUAL by rebuilding Solomon’s Temple so that blood may again flow upon Jerusalem’s altar, defiantly reversing and nullifying, in the Talmudic and occult mind, the blood of Christ.’” My question here is, seeing that Ferreira is a registered member of ISOC, why would anyone cooperate with someone like Jones, who himself collaborates with communists (Dugin and associates) who praise Satan?

Jones has stated (see Sloan/Fitzpatrick article) that: “Russia is not a problem in the world, the US is the main problem in the world. Russia is officially Christian, in the way the United States is not… There is no Soviet Union anymore, communism has gone.” And yet research polls show that very few Russians report Russian Orthodox church attendance and many profess to be atheists. Jones even endorses Nostra Aetate, the false Vatican 2 document that denied any collective blame for the Jews in Christ’s death and called for an end to the evangelization of the Jews. The consequences of what Jones’ and others endorse are discussed below.

ISOC and its imaginary church

Canon Law considers those professing Communism, collaborating with Communism or sympathizing with Communists as apostates. True “Catholics” who associate with those who (a) are Novus Ordo recognize and resist types (b) run of the mill LibTrads and (c) types such as Jones who veer far from anything Catholic yet present are denying infallible Church teaching by their manner of acting (Can. 1325). For the Church infallibly teaches: “We deplore and condemn the pernicious error of those who dream of an imaginary Church, a kind of society that finds its origin and growth in charity, to which, somewhat contemptuously, they oppose another, which they call juridical” (Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi).  In this same encyclical, we read that Pius XII defines Church membership as “…the cooperation of all its members… [made] externally manifest through their profession of the same faith and their sharing the same sacred rites, through participation in the same Sacrifice, and the practical observance of the same laws.”

So we have this imaginary church, where both a Latin Mass in a Novus Ordo church and a Latin Mass in a LibTrad church are adjudged equally “Catholic,” (along with Uniate masses either Novus Ordo in character or those celebrated by Uniate clergy who operate independently); or one can refrain from “mass” altogether and pray at home, as long as one accepts LibTrad clergy as valid. It is a church where one can accept all Vatican 2 popes (but Francis, perhaps), reject all but John  23, or accept none after the death of Pope Pius XII. How wonderfully democratic! We are frequently criticized for measuring the Church by juridical means, (Canon Law), particularly when it involves the matter of heresy. And LibTrad pseudo-clergy and their minions generally are quite contemptuous when any proofs from canon law are produced showing they are operating invalidly and deceiving their followers. We are constantly chastised for failing to practice charity by those insisting that, contrary to Catholic teaching, all are in “good faith,” or invincibly ignorant, and must be given the benefit of the doubt.

But the “charity” extended by ISOC and others to those who yet regard the current Roman usurpers as true (if evil) popes and participate in services clearly shown to be idolatrous — worshipping mere bread as Christ’s true Body and Blood — is liberal, not Catholic charity, as demonstrated here countless times. The stated aims of ISOC, as pointed out before, is to “unite the clans” and organize a papal election to regulate everything. This in violation of infallible papal teaching, and we have written enough on this for readers to know such an election is now impossible given the invalidity of LibTrad clergy per Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis.

It is the insistence on this validity, and the absurd propagation of the material-formal heresy, that ties all the groups under the ISOC umbrella together. Because the key to uniting seems to be the endorsement of a “compromise” candidate for the papacy, someone from the conservative Novus Ordo sector who would “renounce” any previous heresy and return the Church to is pre-1958-status. That is the gist of the material-formal insanity, which contradicts both Pope Paul IV’s Cum ex Apostolatus Officio and Pope St. Pius V’s motu proprio, Inter Multiplices, where, in the first year of his pontificate, Pope St. Pius V confirmed everything in Pope Paul IV’s bull.

The heresy of Traditionalism — again

The teachings of both popes forbid the admittance of public heretics, apostates or schismatics to any future office in the Church. After the death of Pope Pius XII any attempting ordination or consecration were automatically invalidated and incapacitated for obtaining any offices under Canon Law and Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis. Only by their continuing contempt for Canon Law and papal teaching throughout the centuries — TRUE tradition as defined by the Church Herself — can these pseudo-clergy and their followers continue to pursue this “papal election” course and realize the establishment of their condemned imaginary church, which is really only the creation of a “traditional” version of the Novus Ordo church! It is interesting to note that in the Jones article, tradition is defined differently than it is understood by most LibTrads. It is ”perennialism” that actually reduces to the condemned heresy of Traditionalism, as mentioned in footnotes 13 and 14 to the Jones article.

In other Jones article footnotes we also find:

(170) Dugin – satanist Aleister Crowley is a traditionalist (2nd paragraph: https://arcto.ru/article/384

(171) Jones propaganda – “Western civilisation will not survive and we need to return to tradition.”

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains the heresy of traditionalism (DZ 1649-1652) as follows: “According to traditionalism, human reason is of itself radically unable to know with certainty any truth or, at least, the fundamental truths of the metaphysical, moral, and religious order. Hence our first act of knowledge must be an act of faith, based on the authority of revelation. This revelation is transmitted to us through society, and its truth is guaranteed by tradition or the general consent of mankind.” Perennialism is the belief that this “general consent of mankind” can be found in “Catholicism, Hinduism, Judaism (including the Kabbalah), Orthodox Christianity and Islam,”  which the Novus Ordo also teaches by its concessions to these rother religions. Perennialism is best explained by the link below, but beware: this is a site associated with the very individuals found at ISOC — a decidedly LibTrad sedevacantist site quoting Cekada and Sanborn — and is definitely NOT recommended by this author (https://truerestoration.org/what-is-perennialism-and-why-should-we-know-about-it/).

Three things should be noted here. One, traditionalism is the type pf perennialism peculiar to  “Latin Mass Catholics” because Perennialists consider only the orthodox” or more ancient expression of the Catholic faith as true; they reject modernism, scientism, secularism and syncretism so their beliefs appear to be Catholic when in reality they are in line with Novus Ordo teaching and practice. Secondly, the same can be said of the truerestoration site that is said about ISOC. Peel back the layers of the onion and you will find the very things they are allegedly advocating for and promoting are secretly contaminated with what they also profess to condemn! And these are contaminated in such a way that only those who know or uncover the true background of LibTrad pseudo-clergy can pick up on this fact. The truerestoration link explains the perennialism of Rama Coomeraswamy, but it fails to track this heresy back to those who imbibed it in the very seminary training they received under Marcel Lefebvre.

A tainted pool

LibTrad pseudo-cleric Rama Coomeraswamy, was the “converted” son of Hindu philosopher Ananda Coomeraswamy, who also professed perennialism. Ananda was a personal friend of Aleister Crowley’s, and the two men even “shared” Ananda’s wife. This is a known fact published in certain books as well as online. Rama’s father also mixed with many other leading occultists of the 20th century. Why a person with this familial background would be found among “catholic traditionalists” can only be explained by the meaning of tradition and traditionalism itself as stated above — it is not the Latin Mass tradition, or tradition as taught and understood by the Church. No, it is that tradition explained by John 23^rd’s biographer, Meriol Trevor, as follows: “[Roncalli] thought of himself as representing a different tradition” (Pope John, p. 206). In his Blood on the Altar, Craig Heimbichner warned that Crowley and his OTO had infiltrated the Church in ways Catholics could not comprehend. The two Coomeraswamys can be linked to that Satanic pathway into the remnant Church via LibTrad pseudo-clergy. The following on Cekada, Dolan, Sanborn and McKenna from Wikibin and Wikipedia explains why truerestoration is actually a part of the very problem this link addresses.

“Prior to his declaration as a Sedevacantist, Coomaraswamy had become close to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. The former was appointed a Professor of Church History at the New England seminary of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX). It was in that capacity that he successfully influenced a significant number of students to subscribe to Sedevacantism, resulting in the separation of nine SSPX priests, among them Clarence Kelly, Daniel Dolan, Donald Sanborn, [William] Jenkins, Anthony Cekada. The group then formed the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV). When Dolan, Sanborn, Cekada and most of the other priests of the SSPV began to dissent from the rigorist leadership of Kelly, Coomaraswamy again joined them in departing from the SSPV. They then united in a loose manner as the Instauratio Catholica. Over time, even this loose confederation frayed and ceased to exist” (https://www.wikibin.org/articles/rama-p.-coomaraswamy.html). “[“Bishop”] Robert F. McKenna participated in a number of exorcisms and worked for many years with demonologist Dave Considine and Rama Coomaraswamy, M.D.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McKenna). Need we say more?

Masonic origin of the term ‘traditionalist’

The term traditionalist came into use in 1965 when Rev. Gommar DePauw founded the Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM) in New York. This was done under the auspices of a Masonic organization, The Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, (OSJ), also known as the Shickshinny Knights. (This group is not to be confused with the “Catholic “ order, the Knights of Malta, (SMOM), investigated under Pope Pius XII for Masonic infiltration and its status as a Catholic knighthood indefinitely suppressed. Pius XII died before the investigation was concluded, but Roncalli reinstated the order.) On its official letterhead, the OSJ itself claims regarding CTM: “During the Second Vatican Council, our members attending the council as Cardinals, Bishops, with their ‘periti’ priests realized there was going to be a great deal of confusion and disturbance afterwards. So under the brilliant and cogent leadership of our Grand Prelate Bishop Blaise S. Kurz and with the support of Francis Cardinal Spellman of New York, WE started the Catholic Traditionalist Movement” (document available on request).

As always maintained here, this proves that an alternative organization to sweep up those exiting Vatican 2 was deliberately created beforehand to deceive the elect. The ambiguous use of the word traditionalist or tradition, misapplied to the liturgy only and not used as the Church Herself defines it, was unquestionably accepted and adopted by Catholics who did not even know, far less understand, its origins and connection to an actual heresy condemned by the Church. In a 1981 article for The Roman Catholic publication, entitled “Light on the OSJ,” sedecvacantist Anthony Cekada wrote:

“In the mid-1960’s, the head of the Catholic Traditionalist Movement (CTM) in Westbury, New York, Father Gommar De Pauw, became involved with the OSJ. In a telegram to Mr. Pichel [OSJ co-founder] dated June 23, 1968, Father De Pauw (a Doctor of Canon Law and former seminary professor) said that: “I have today informed His Holiness Pope Paul VI that, in virtue of the perpetual privileges granted by his predecessors to the Sovereign Order, we have today offered the first public traditional Latin Mass in the Ave Maria Chapel of the Greater New York Priory located in the Catholic Traditionalist Center in Westbury… The red and white flag of our Order once again waves in American skies. Father De Pauw signed himself as “Knight-Commander of Justice, Prior, Chaplain.”

“OSJ literature published in 1968 noted that Father De Pauw was “Coordinator and Dean of the Roman Catholic Section” of the OSJ’s “Ecclesiastical Tribunal” and that the Westbury Chapel was the “Roman Catholic Church of the Order for the Official Investiture of Knights in the Greater New York Priory.” (The Coordinator of the “Old Roman Catholic Section of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal” was listed as “The Rev. Dr. Gerard G. Shelley.”) Other OSJ literature published that same year notes that: “From the very beginning, all the speeches and writings of the Rev. Dr. Gommar A. De Pauw established his eagerness and true feeling of the spirit of sane Ecumenism [???-Ed.] as opposed to insane ecumania in the following words: “The time is overdue when Traditionalist Roman Catholics and conservative Protestants join hands and forces to save whatever is left of Christianity.” Father De Pauw later left the OSJ and continued to celebrate the traditional Mass for the CTM.” (End of Cekada quotes). Cekada ends his article by advising Traditionalists not to join the OSJ.

In the article HERE, it is explained how Marcel Lefebvre was later identified with the OSJ and even acted as its Grand Master. Since Coomeraswamy was an avid Lefebvrist at one point and Cekada, Sanborn and others mentioned above were his admiring students, it is not a far leap to conclude Coomeraswamy was at least a sympathizer if not an actual OSJ member. Certainly the type of ecumenism professed by the OSJ tallies with his accursed perennialism. And what is practiced by associations such as ISOC and other LibTrad organizations is simply a “catholic” variety of ecumenism — uniting the fractured LibTrad clans claiming the name Catholic with no common doctrinal basis whatsoever for their beliefs. The Church is ONE in belief; apostolicity of DOCTRINE is superior to that of mission, for without teaching the true doctrines Christ taught His apostles, there could be no mission. True belief must precede practice, or nothing can be Catholic.

Yet further proofs Trad pseudo-clergy are invalid

Although there should be no need for additional proofs that LibTrad pseudo-clergy are indeed invalid, the above information should be added to the list. And here we also wish to add the following statement by the then Archbishop of Nicaea, Raphael Merry del Val, later to become Pope St. Pius X’s Secretary of State. In his 1902 refutation of the Protestant Dr. Oxenham, The Truth of Papal Claims, Abp. del Val proves that the idea that the juridic Church cannot exist without the Pope is not novel at all but was well understood in the early part of the 20th century, having already been taught by Pope Pius IX. Abp. del Val wrote:

“The Church is built upon the Apostles but upon the Apostles as Christ ranked them with their Prince at their head, who was endowed by Him with special prerogatives… Accordingly, St. Paul speaks of the Apostles collectively and he couples them with the Prophets as authorized teachers of divine truth. In doing so, Paul does not exclude but includes Peter with whatever powers Christ gave him. That special office must last as long as the Church herself remains, namely to the end of time… The Apostolic Office, therefore, remains in the Church in the person of St. Peter’s successor and in the Catholic episcopate when united to its divinely constituted head, the rock of the whole edifice. FOR WITHOUT HIM THERE CAN BE NO CATHOLIC EPISCOPATE AND NO SUCCESSION FROM THE APOSTLES ACCORDING TO THE MIND OF CHRIST. And thus it is not correct to say, as Dr. Oxenham says, that ‘All bishops alike are successors of St. Peter as an apostle.’

“Bishops have power and jurisdiction in their own right, for the Holy Ghost hath placed them to rule or feed the Church of God and accordingly the Pope, the chief Bishop, addresses them as his ‘venerable brethren’. But the actual exercise of that power and jurisdiction which the bishops hold from God is BY THE WILL OF GOD united with and DEPENDENT UPON the Apostolic Office centered and living in the Rock, the chief Ruler, the Chief Shepherd of the whole flock. Unlike the individual apostles, the individual Bishop has not received from God a universal mission in the world.”  And Abp. del Val is not alone. Rev. J. Tixeront, in his Holy Orders and Ordination: A Study in the History of Dogma,(1928), quotes medieval canonists as far back as 1125 to the effect that for orders to be considered valid, they must be conveyed with the accompanying (papal) approval necessary to jurisdiction (i.e., papal mandate for episcopal consecration).

As Pope Pius IX, Abp. del Val and Pope Pius XII, (in his Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis) — all teach such presumed jurisdiction cannot exist without the pope. Rev. Tixeront insists that if there is any doubt regarding ordination or consecration, it must be conditionally repeated. And as the most recent practice of the Church shows: “(Nov. 18, 1931 Holy Office decision): “A Catholic who lapses from the Church and receives orders from a schismatic bishop can be received back into the Church only on the understanding that such ordinations, even if valid, will be completely disregarded,” (Dr. Leslie Rumble, Homiletic and Pastoral Review: “Are Liberal Catholic Orders Valid?” 1958).

Conclusion

Much more could be said on this topic and may be explored later, but the themes above only reinforce what I have tried to expose for over three decades. The neo-Modernist LibTrads are working in plain sight, if one only points out their covert affiliations, to bring about a LibTrad ecumenical version of the Novus Ordo church headed by yet another false pope. Their proponents may present as valid clergy, or even as laypeople praying at home. But their aim is the same — hide their true affiliations and beliefs in order to deceive, if possible, even the elect. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning warned us in his work The Vatican Decrees in Their Bearing on Civil Allegiance (p. 111, 115-116) that the Old Catholics were planning a coup to topple the Church; one of the reasons that the Vatican Council was convened. And as Cekada quotes from an OSJ circular: “In a long program designed for the unity of all the Christian Churches, the Sovereign Order of Saint John of Jerusalem recognizes and accepts both the Old Roman Catholic Church and the papal Roman Catholic Church as one and the same Universal Church.”

The more things change, the more they remain the same. In his encyclical Quartus Supra, Pope Pius IX wrote:

“Long ago Christ warned that many would come in His name, stating that they were the Christ, and as a result, seduce many; this has proved true. For by means of the new schism which arose three years ago among the Armenians in Constantinople, the common enemy of the human race is wholly engaged in undermining faith, destroying truth and disrupting unity by worldly wisdom, heretical discussion, subtle, clever deceit, and even, where possible, by the use of force. While exposing the pretenses and plots of this enemy, St. Cyprian lamented that ‘he snatches human beings out of the very church and while they think they have already drawn near to the light and escaped from the night of the world, he brings darkness over them once more in ways of which they are unaware. Thus, although they do not observe Christ’s gospel and His law, they call themselves Christians and judge that they possess the light while they walk in darkness, attracted and deceived by the adversary. For he transfigures himself like an angel of light, as the Apostle says (2 Cor 11.14) and disguises his ministers as ministers of justice who present night as day, ruin as salvation, hopelessness in the guise of hope, faithlessness under the pretext of faith, the antichrist with the title of “Christ.” Thus while telling lies which resemble truths, they make vain the truth by their subtlety… (para. 5)

“The chief deceit used to conceal the new schism is the name of “Catholic.” The originators and adherents of the schism presumptuously lay claim to this name despite their condemnation by Our authority and judgment. It has always been the custom of heretics and schismatics to call themselves Catholics and to proclaim their many excellences in order to lead peoples and princes into error… For the Catholic Church has always regarded as schismatic those who obstinately oppose the lawful prelates of the Church and in particular, the chief shepherd of all. Schismatics avoid carrying out their orders and even deny their very rank… They are schismatics even if they had not yet been condemned as such by Apostolic authority” (paras. 6 and 12).

We have quoted this many times before; it never grows old. And as many times as we discover that it is necessary, we will no doubt quote it again. This blog is written for the further education of those who already believe and understand, as well as for those laboring to understand. But FIRST AND FOREMOST, it is written to defend the truths of Faith and promote God’s honor and glory. So even if no one reads it at all, it will be printed here as God wills and for as long as He wills.