by T. Stanfill Benns | Apr 20, 2023 | New Blog
+St. Marcellinus, Bishop+
Having explained at length what we most likely are facing in what appears to be the last days of mankind, it is important to put all of this in perspective and remember that we are not to grieve over our fate or mourn for what we have lost. Rather we are to rejoice in the accomplishment of God’s holy will, and the role that we have been assigned to play in this most important epoch in history. Christ has risen, alleluia, and so must we too rise from the deep contemplation of His Passion to share in the joys of His Resurrection. He tells us: “Watch ye, therefore, praying at all times, that you may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that are to come, and to stand before the Son of man” (Matt. 24:36). “But when these things begin to come to pass, look up, and lift up your heads, because your redemption is at hand” (Matt. 24:28).
What is more important than our redemption and preparation for it? And how can we prepare without being joyful, that if we bear all with patience and love, we may gain our final reward? The oppression so many experience today is not a sadness without reason — it is the consequences of so much evil going on about us wherever we turn. Jesus wept over Jerusalem, because so many would reject Him; he was rarely seen to smile; His expression and demeanor was always serious. Fr. Tonne reports, in his little work, Personality Plus that while we have no actual picture of Our Lord:
“We do have a word picture of the Master, said to have been penned on the spot where Jesus began His ministry, by one Publius Lentulus, governor of Judea. It was addressed to the Roman Senate in line with the governor’s duty of reporting to the Emperor any noteworthy event during his office.” This Roman official reported as follows: “There appeared in these days a man of great virtue, named Jesus Christ, who is yet among us; of the Gentiles accepted as a prophet of truth: but His disciples call him the son of God. He raiseth the dead and cureth all manner of disease. A man of stature somewhat tall and comely, with a very reverend countenance, such as the beholder must both love and fear.
“His hair the color of a chestnut full ripe, plain to the ears, whence, downward, it is more oriental, curling and waving about his shoulders. In the midst of his forehead is a partition of his hair; forehead plain and very delicate; his face without spot or wrinkle, beautiful with a lovely red; his nose and mouth well-formed; his beard thick, color like his hair, not over-long; his look innocent, and mature; his eyes gray, quick and clear. In reproving he is terrible; in admonishing, courteous and fair-spoken; pleasant in conversation, mixed with gravity. It cannot be remembered that any have seen him laugh, but many have seen him weep; in proportion of body most excellent; his hands and arms most delectable to behold; in speaking, very temperate, modest, and wise; a man of singular beauty, surpassing the children of men.”
And so we know now why we have all the beautiful paintings of Our Lord, rendered just as He is pictured here. Yet Jesus smiled when he held the children in His arms. He could not have been but comforted by the dear little lamb He cradles in all the portrayals we have of Him as the Good Shepherd. It is the innocent He rejoices in and cherishes. And we too must rejoice insofar as we can in all that is good and innocent, all that is given to us by the munificence of God. We must be so grateful today, and thank God frequently, for the gifts of nature that surround us — the spiritual joys we find in our daily reading, the laughter and genuineness of little children, the caresses and companionship of loved ones, the silence of a great forest, the stark beauty of the mountainous desert, the pastoral scenes of green hills and flowering fields, the wonders of a starry sky, the magnificence and power of a summer thunderstorm, the rustle of autumn leaves, the delights of an early morning snowfall glittering in the winter sun.
As St. Therese of Liseux, promoter of spiritual childhood, Rosebud of Heaven, wrote in her own innocence and sanctity:
EVERYTHING
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.
So, then, even through our tears we must smile and thank God for living in these times, for being able to help Him shoulder His cross and for being allowed to witness the culmination of all He came to earth to accomplish. We must learn to love, not as the world loves, but as Christ loved us. And that love was personified by His Passion, which all of us are reliving today. The world shudders at pain and suffering, avoids it at all costs, medicates excessively to avoid it. Too many of those who are depressed by what we must endure today to fill up what is wanting to Christ’s Passion seek to nullify the effects of that suffering with anti-depressants or illegal drugs, to avoid facing the pain of the living Hell on earth man has created for Himself without God. For some such medication is necessary to prevent a worse outcome — clinical depression, possibly suicide — but for others it is simply a way of avoiding the reality of our situation, a reality Christ chose as His own to redeem sinful men that they might reign with Him in Heaven.
If we are to truly imitate Christ, foolishness, frivolity, unseemly gaiety, constant joking, frequent indulgence in earthly amusements cannot be the road we travel. This Thomas a’ Kempis emphasizes over and over again in his Imitiation.The enjoyment of simple pleasures, cheerfulness overall, contentment, resignation to God’s holy will, perseverance in prayer, delight in holy things — this is our happiness. As Henry Cardinal Manning wrote: “I should be sorry to write a line in a tone to discourage even one simple faithful soul, but I would do even this for a moment if in so doing I could purify our confidence of the low human unreasoning unilluminated and the boastful and defiant tone too commonly heard. This seems to me to be not of faith or of the spirit of God. We know by the light of faith that all things are working out the greater glory of Jesus and of His Church…
“There is in store for the Church of God’s resurrection and then ascension a royalty and a dominion, a recompense of glory for all it has endured. Like Jesus it needs must suffer on the way to its crown yet crowned it shall be with Him eternally. Let no one then be scandalized if the prophecy speaks of sufferings to come. We are fond of imagining triumphs and glories for the Church on earth — that the gospels be preached to all nations and the world to be converted and all enemies subdued and I know not what until some ears are impatient of hearing that there is in store for the Church a time of terrible trial. And so we do as the Jews of old who looked for a conqueror, a king and for prosperity; and when their Messiah came in humility and in passion they did not know Him. So I’m afraid many among us intoxicate their minds with the visions of success and victory and cannot endure the thought that there is a time of persecution yet to come for the Church of God.” And we are living it.
So here we should realize that there must be some restraint in both our sufferings and in our joys. Christ patiently, resolutely and lovingly embraced His Passion and death on the Cross, and so we must embrace ours. We have no intention here of encouraging anyone to go about with a dark and gloomy visage, anticipating woes they may never be asked to endure or discomfiting their friends and relatives with a worried and downcast countenance. We must be as upbeat as we are able, given our specific temperament.
But just as Christ did not beam down with happiness from the Cross, neither are we expected to radiate at all times a joy that is fleeting at best. Faith and patience Christ expected us to possess. Joy in anticipating an end to our earthly probation, whether through a natural death or the consummation, in anticipating the Beatific Vision, is a joy that must shine from within. Being perpetually jovial and oblivious to the evil around us rather than of a somber and prayerful demeanor in the face of the earth’s self-immolation is insanity. This is the attitude that prevailed in Noah’s time, when men carried on as usual despite warnings of the impending flood, as though all was right in the eyes of God. Love of God is our joy; its absence, our torment, and this must be reflected in our behavior.
None of us know how long this period of time will last, nor do we know what God will ask of us in order to keep our faith. In some countries it may be far worse than in others. It is far more likely that natural disasters, famine and plagues will cause mass casualties than invasion or war. Wars and rumors of wars are often used as political goads to push everything further to the left and justify policies and legislation that otherwise would never see the light of day. We must never lose faith and patience, for this is what will win us our souls in these times — the faith and patience of the saints, as we find in the Apocalypse. We read of this also in Ecclesiasticus 2:3-4; 15-16; 20-21:
“Wait on God with patience; join thyself to God and endure that thy life may be increased in the latter end. Take all that shall be brought upon thee and in thy sorrow endure, and in thy humiliation keep patience… Woe to them that are faint-hearted, that have lost patience and that have forsaken the right ways and have gone aside into crooked ways. They that fear the Lord will prepare their hearts and in His sight will sanctify their souls. They that fear the Lord keep His commandments and will have patience even until His visitation.”
And in Romans 15: 4-5: “For what things soever were written were written for our learning, that through patience and the comfort of the scriptures we might have hope. Now the God of patience and of comfort grant you to be of one mind, one towards one another according to Jesus Christ.” And again in 2 Cor. 6:4: “But in all things let us exhibit ourselves as the ministers of God in much patience and tribulations, in necessities, in distresses.” And finally in Luke 21:19: “In your patience you shall possess your souls.” It is only by this patient waiting on God, in never losing faith, in never reverting to our former crooked ways that we will persevere until the very end.
*****************************************
Mr. Javier Morell-Ibarra’s Catholic Survival Guide, Pt. 7
(Continuing to expose the fables of the Traditionalists)
- Satanic fable that there can be “bishops” and “clerics” without a Pope.
The answer is very simple: for there to be Catholic Bishops there must be a Pope, since without a Pope there cannot even be clergy (!), as tonsure is a legal act that marks the admission to the clerical state, without citing the current discipline that invalidates all current intruders in Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, the 1917 Code of Canon Law, canon 953, and the Acta Apostolicae Sedis 43 (1951) April 9 pp. 217-218, which renders all false pastors excommunicated.
The harsh reality is that there are many blind people who are only following simple laymen disguised with fake mitres and cassocks purchased online. If you happen to be one of them, we beg you, one more time, to have mercy on your own soul and recant the heresies of Gallicanism and Febronianism as soon as possible.
- Fable that the visible and hierarchical Church can never die, which in reality is a diabolical subterfuge used by “Traditionalist” imposters to justify their false ordinations and continue with their sacrilege.
These false prophets are the main adversaries and detractors of the Parousia of Our Lord Jesus Christ, as they refuse to accept that they were deceived by Lefebvre and Thuc when they resorted to them in search of the Orders. This just as they refuse to believe that the hierarchical and juridical Church ceased to exist after the death of Pope Pius XII, and above all, after the massive apostasy of all the Bishops on December 8, 1965, on the occasion of the closure of the heretical Vatican 2 fake council. So instead they have decided to carry on advancing towards the precipice in a suicidal manner, dragging with them a large number of naive souls, whom they teach the same error with obstinacy.
Thus, these hapless characters imitate those lukewarm followers of Our Lord in the famous passage from the Gospel of Saint John 12:32-36, who were under the pernicious influence of the Scribes and the Pharisees, hence they were scandalized when Our Lord told them that the Son of God must die and be raised from the earth to attract everything to Him, replying proudly that they knew from the Scriptures that the Messiah would not die. So they abandoned Him and returned to the false christs of the Scribes and Pharisees who told them what they wanted to hear instead.
Well, exactly the same thing happens to the unfortunate supporters of the “Traditionalist” false prophets today, that is, the Lefebvrist and Thucist fake clergy. This since they flatly refuse to accept there is NOT A SINGLE valid and licit Catholic priest left in the world who can offer the Holy Sacrifice of the altar, because this was meant to happen so that the Word of God could be fulfilled and the Son of God could come to judge everyone in His glorious Second Coming. They do this by showing with their sacrilegious, reckless acts that they disregard the infallible Magisterium of the Vicar of Christ because they love the ephemeral false glory of men more than the eternal glory of God.
- Fable spread by the lay intruder Mark A. Pivarunas that there may be consecrated persons without the permission of the Pope during an interregnum.
This hypocrite individual supports his fable by saying that there were 21 consecrated persons without the permission of the Pope during the interregnum between 1268-1271, which is absolutely false, as Konrad Eubel and Pius Bonifacius Gams tell us in their respective works “Hierarchia catholica medii aevisive Summorum pontificum sive” and “Series episcoporum Ecclesiae catholicae.”
There we can verify that there was only one consecrated, adding the following two consecrations by the book Ecclesiastical History of Spain: Volume IV of the year 1873, by the Encyclopedia Gallia christiana, by the book Life of Félix Amat, Archbishop of Palmyra of the year 1838; as well as the book Viage Literario A Las Iglesias De España, Volume 19; and if a minimum of follow-up and study is done, it is verified that all of them had permission from the Pope. We could even quote “Licet ecclesiarum” by Pope Clement IV. Therefore, sustaining such impiety is manifestly heretical and perverse, since holding this fable is typical of the false prophets who try to get rid of the fundamental figure of the Pope, by daring to usurp his powers and prerogatives divinely conferred by Christ Our Lord.
- Extremely perverse fable of resorting to “epikeia” as a false solution and “miraculous” excuse to skip over and disregard what has been established by the Vicars of Christ in their Magisterium and in the Holy Canons. First of all, we will explain what epikeia is, so that our kind readers can understand the twisted logic of this fable of the Anomos so widely used by today’s false prophets.
According to the Salmanticense Moral Compendium, epikeia is a modification of the law, or the exception of a particular case; it has also been defined as justice tempered with the sweetness of mercy. Based on this definition, Traditionalist intruders have concocted a very harmful fable directly threatening the Primacy of Saint Peter, which those charlatans dare to question and deny when they blasphemously defend that anyone during a vacancy of the Holy See may be elected, confirmed and consecrated as Catholic Bishop. This regardless of what Pope Pius XII decreed and confirmed in V.A.S., and that in Sede Vacante, through the use of the “epikeia“, or rather with nom serviam, even priests may marry (!?), because it is an ecclesiastical law.
They may also ordain other priests (!?), according to the logics of the Anomos, since we have precedents, (such as Boniface IX in the Bull Sacrae Religionisof 1-II-1400 that granted the Abbot of Saint Osita, in England, the possibility of ordaining deacons and priests, major orders, later renewed by Martin V in the Bull Gerentes ad vos of 6-XI-1427): and Innocent VIII in the Bull Exposcit tuae devotionis of 9-IV-1489, granted the general of the Cistercians the ability to ordain subdeacons and deacons.
It is obvious that, for these proud televangelists of the Anomos, everything, even Dogmas (!!), is open to change, as modernists and schismatics have always said and done, and since there is no Pope because the See has been vacant since October 9, 1958, everyone may be able to skip papal constitutions and all discipline by means of epikeia. We find ourselves in the most absolute and wildest non serviam, where we can make a Copernican turn in the Divine Constitution of the Church, and turn Divine laws into ecclesiastical ones by sleight of hand, such as those that include the forms of organization of the Mystical Body of Christ, as are also the laws that regulate the constitution of the Church and those that define the powers of the Pope and the Bishops, and thus usurp the powers and jurisdiction of the Pope in life.
As if such satanic audacity could even be possible, in a sophistic boast that any intruder can change the laws that they decide to call ecclesiastical! As if such laws did not demand obligatory submission to all validly baptized individuals, as stated in the Council of Trent and the Code of Canon Law, which is where they come from, as well as other disciplinary documents that this schismatic mob want to skip! As if they could, and that anyone could vary them at their spurious whim. As a matter of fact, they are trying to make us believe that just because we may skip the law of fast during Lent if we are convalescing due to illness thanks to epikeia, we could also reach the conclusion that anyone can repeal the laws imposed by the Popes and even convert Divine laws into human ones, which constitutes horrendous blasphemy and impiety. Therefore, it is not surprising to see many of these false christs posing as wandering “clerics” who actually believe possessing such an impious power that would enable them to roam freely without being subject to their “Bishop”, and so many other irregularities, which are upheld by those who claim to defend “Tradition” with the most infamous treason.
Given these soul thieves believe that “epikeia” is the magic word that would whitewash their sacrilege and desecration, they should learn the following:
“Let us assume that an elected Bishop, presented by His Majesty, after receiving the presentation certificates, went to the Church, to be presented distantly, as all those in Peru are, and in great need for the governing Bishop, and that said Bishop who is distant, and with the need to consecrate it, and take possession of his Bishopric, and that His Holiness, in the interim, having made the consistories that are made for the confirmation of the Bishop, found, that he did not he had to confirm him, and so did not confirm him; I wonder what would it be then? would epikeia prevail? or the express will of the Pontiff?
Because if epikeia prevailed, we should say that there may be episcopal jurisdiction in the Church of God, which does not emanate from the Supreme Head, against his express will. But if the express will of His Holiness prevailed (as it is certain that it would prevail), it would be evident that the express will of His Holiness had to have been kept, by fiat, and his confirmation, and that the reason of epikeia could not be obtained by usury in said case.” (Francisco de Contreras, Information that those elected to bishops cannot be consecrated or take possession of their bishoprics without first receiving the apostolic letters from His Holiness the Pope, 1647, nº 3).
“Human invalidating laws sometimes stop binding; but epikeia cannot be applied to human invalidating laws.” (The History, Nature, and Use of Epikeia in Moral Theology, by Riley, Lawrence J. (Lawrence Joseph), Bp., 1914, page 460, point 12. IMPRIMATUR: Richardus Jacobus Cushing. D.D., May 7, 1948.)
We now quote the 1917 Code of Catholic Canon Law:
Canon 11: Only those laws by which, in express or equivalent terms, an act is declared void or a person is declared incapacitated will be considered invalid or disqualifying.
POPE PIUS XII, 1945, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, paragraphs 1 to 3, chapter 1:
“The laws given by the Roman Pontiffs cannot be corrected or changed by the meeting of the cardinals of the Roman Church [the See] being vacant; nor can anything be removed or added, NOR CAN ANY DISPENSATION BE MADE REGARDING THE LAWS THEMSELVES OR SOME PART OF THEM. This is very evident in the Pontifical Constitutions [on]… the election of the Roman Pontiff. BUT IF ANYTHING CONTRARY TO THIS PRECEPT IS PRODUCED OR INTENDED BY CHANCE, WE DECLARE IT BY OUR SUPREME AUTHORITY VOID.”
1917 CODE OF CANON LAW:
Canon 2370: “A bishop who consecrates another bishop, and the assisting bishops, or the priests assisting bishops, the consecrator and the newly consecrated bishop, who have made the consecration without an apostolic mandate in violation of Canon 953, are all automatically suspended (and excommunicated) until the Apostolic See has relieved them of their sentence.”
Canon 2372: “A suspension ‘a divinis’ reserved for the Apostolic See thus strikes those who presume to receive the orders of an excommunicated, suspended or prohibited minister after a declaratory or condemnatory sentence, or of a notorious apostate, heretic or schismatic. Those who have been ordered in good faith by one of them are deprived of the exercise of the order thus received, until they are exempt from this prescription.”
Canon 188.4: “All offices will be vacant ipso facto by tacit resignation: If a cleric has publicly departed from the Catholic faith.”
Canon 2316: “Anyone who, spontaneously and consciously, helps in any way to spread heresy, or communicates “in divinis” with heretics, is considered a suspect of heresy, contrary to what is prescribed in canon 1258.”
Rev. Riley, Lawrence J., The history, nature, and use of epikeia in moral theology. IMPRIMATUR: Richardus Jacobus Cushing. D.D., May 7, 1948.
“…it can be concluded that in regards to matters that touch the essence of the Sacraments, the use of epikeia is always excluded.”
Page 344
“As regards the essence of these Sacraments, what has been previously explained about all the Sacraments is applicable to them, that is, that epikeia is never licit.”
Page 347
“At most, epikeia may excuse the individual from the precept, but it can never confer the ability to act. Epikeia cannot grant him the power that he now does not possess, nor can it restore the power that the law has withdrawn from him. For such granting or restoration of power requires a positive act.”
Page 387
- Everyone agrees that the sacraments of the new law, as sensible signs that produce invisible grace, must both signify the grace they produce and produce the grace they signify. Now, the effects that must be produced and, therefore, also signified by the Holy Ordination to the diaconate, to the priesthood and to the episcopate, namely, power and grace, in all the rites of the different times and places of the universal Church, are sufficiently signified by the imposition of hands and the words that determine it.
SACRAMENTUM ORDINIS, The episcopate is a sacrament.
Pope PIUS XII, 1947
“Consideration of the above truths leads to the conclusion that the manifest and unequivocal intention of Jesus Christ, the Divine Founder of the Church, was to establish it forever as a hierarchical-monarchical society. Nowhere in the revelation is there evidence of the intention to allow exceptions or changes to this constitution in future history, through the use of epikeia or on any other basis Men are physically free, of course, to found other churches, differing in constitution and nature from the one established by Christ. But such churches are not of Christ, and their very existence is opposed to the will of the Son of God. For, by virtue of the positively expressed will of its divine founder, the Church in its essence is to remain unchanged until the end of times.” (The history, nature and use of epikeia in moral theology, by Riley, Lawrence J. (Lawrence Joseph), Bp, 1948, page 330)
And assuming a certainly impossible assumption that we could bypass an invalidating law, by means of epikeia, thus bypassing the Supreme Authority of a Pope, which cannot be done, the question is the following: Where are those Bishops consecrated before October 9, 1958 with jurisdiction, mission, apostolicity, Catholicity that only a true Pope can give them, which is of Divine Right, and who did not apostatize in 1965?… Of course, in the multiple sects founded by the Montinian archbishop of Bulla Regia, that is to say, in the multiple sects of the Thucist schism, no way, they are not there. Nor are those Bishops found in the schism generated by the Montinian Archbishop of Sinnada de Phrygia, i.e., in the SSPX or Lefebvrist sect.
All the intruders coming out of the most pestilent bowels of the great Babylon in the 1970s and the 1980s will tell us that, in order to save ourselves, we must disobey the Papacy, its Magisterium and Canon Law, which is terrible blasphemy, pretending to make us believe that, by means of a Copernican twist of the “Salus populi suprema lex est”, disobeying the Pope will save us. But that is only typical of ministers of the Antichrist, so we must obey the Pope at all times, because he will never take us out of the Ark of Salvation. We must flee from the false shepherds who claim to give bread, but can only give wormwood, that is, bitterness and spiritual death. We remind those schismatic rebels of the serious warning by Boniface VIII: “We declare, say, define and pronounce that submitting to the Roman Pontiff is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature.” (Bull Unam Sanctam)
It is more than evident that the “Traditionalist” intruders seek to drag as many unsuspecting people as possible into the multiple schisms they have set up based on hoaxes, sophistry, double language and manifest disobedience to Saint Peter and his Successors. Hence, the faithful should keep their eyes wide open and not be deceived by these lepers of schism and heresy, because as Saint Jerome teaches us: “Whoever does not sow with Peter, scatters his seed in the wind.”
“May God give you the necessary grace to defend the rights of the Sovereign Pontiff and of the Holy See; because without the Pope there is no Church, and there is no Catholic Society without the Holy See.“ – Pope Pius IX, Address to Religious Superiors, June, 1872.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Apr 14, 2023 | New Blog
+St. Justin, Martyr+
As seen in our last blog, Manuel Lacunza y Diaz , S.J. was the individual specifically mentioned in the condemnation issued by the Holy Office in 1944 against Millenarianism and entered itno the Acta Apostolica Sedis. It is important to completely understand the implications of this renewed condemnation from the Holy Office, the original being issued in 1824, because it has not been generally discussed nor explained. From what we can learn about Lacunza without access to a Catholic interpretation of his work, he falsely taught that:
–The Apocalypse should be interpreted literally, not mystically or spiritually.
– Antichrist will be more akin to a moral system, not just an individual man.
– During the worst of Antichrist’s persecution, Christ will gather the elect up into the clouds to escape – the basis for the Protestant rapture theory.
– Christ will come to destroy Antichrist and his system, ending that age.
– The “end of the age” and “end of the world” refer to two different times.
– One age will end and a new age of peace lasting 1,000 years or more will begin, with Christ visibly reigning on earth with His resurrected saints.
– The hierarchy (at least the bishops) and some faithful Catholics will reign with Christ.
– Following the 1,000 plus years of peace, “the dragon will once again be loosed… to deceive the whole world,” THENthe world will end.
– But the world will not be destroyed by fire, even after the “reign of peace.”
Defining Millenarianism
The 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia tells us: “Millenarianism, as understood by Christian writers, may be set forth as follows: At the end of time Christ will return in all His splendour to gather together the just, to annihilate hostile powers, and to found a glorious kingdom on earth for the enjoyment of the highest spiritual and material blessings… The duration of this glorious reign of Christ and His saints on earth, is frequently given as one thousand years. Hence it is commonly known as the “millennium”, while the belief in the future realization of the kingdom is called “millenarianism” (or “chiliasm”, from the Greek chilia, scil. ete)… The roots of the belief in a glorious kingdom, partly natural, partly supernatural, are found in the hopes of the Jews for a temporal Messiah and in the Jewish apocalyptic.”
Leo J. Trese in The Faith Explained, (Fides Publishers, 1959), speaking of those who take Apoc. 20:6 literally, writes: “St. John, describing a prophetic vision (Apoc. 20:1-6), says that the devil will be bound and imprisoned for a thousand years, during which the dead will come to life and reign with Christ; at the end of the thousand years the devil will be released and finally vanquished forever, and then will come the second resurrection… Those who do take this passage literally and believe that Jesus will come to reign upon earth for a thousand years before the end of the world are called millenarists… This view, however, does not agree with Christ’s own prophecies and millenarianism is rejected by the Catholic Church as a heresy” (p. 182). Compare the above definitions to Lacunza’s idea of the 1,000 years and the conversion of the Jews during that time: “If the 20th chapter of the Apocalypse is to be literally understood, Jesus Christ himself with all his saints now risen, ought actually to reign in Jerusalem over the whole orb of the earth, and that for a thousand years…”
No spiritual period of peace
Given these definitions of Millenarianism, it is difficult to see how Lacunza’s teaching is “moderated” in any way. For the Holy Office decision begins by describing Lacunza’s system as already moderated or mitigated, then states that “It is not possible to teach systematic Millenarianism, even if moderated…” So how was it moderated given the Catholic Encyclopedia definition, written three decades earlier? St. Augustine of Hippo answers this difficulty in his The City of God, where he describes the beliefs of the early (Jewish-influenced) Chiliasts:
“Those who then rise again shall enjoy the leisure of immoderate carnal banquets, furnished with an amount of meat and drink such as not only to shock the feeling of the temperate, but even to surpass the measure of credulity…. They who believe them are called by the spiritual Chiliasts, which we may reproduce by the name of Millenarians…” Yet St. Augustine also noted that a period of peace or “sabbath rest” is indeed a valid interpretation of Apocalypse, Ch. 20 as long as the Millenarinist interpretation is not intended.” He explains:
“…As if it were a fitting thing that the saints should thus enjoy a kind of Sabbath-rest during that period [of a “thousand years”], a holy leisure after the labors of six thousand years since man was created… [and] there should follow on the completion of six thousand years, as of six days, a kind of seventh-day Sabbath in the succeeding thousand years… And this opinion would not be objectionable, if it were believed that the joys of the saints, in that Sabbath, shall be spiritual, and consequent on the presence of God… (Bk.10, Ch. 7, The City of God).
After explaining that many Catholics anticipate a triumph of Christ’s Church on earth prior to the Second Coming, a “happy era of human sanctity” where Christ the King would predominate spiritually, not physically, Rev. Anscar Vonier, O.S.B. comments: “Such an occurrence is not excluded, is not impossible, it is not at all certain that there will not be a prolonged period of triumphant Christianity before the end… If before that final end there is to be a period, more or less prolonged, of triumphant sanctity, such a result will be brought about not by the apparition of the person of Christ in Majesty but by the operation of those powers of sanctification which are now at work, the Holy Ghost and the Sacraments of the Church” (The Teaching of the Catholic Church: A Summary of Catholic Doctrine, MacMillan Co., 1959, p. 1140, from the Theological Commission of 1952, which is a Magisterial document).
All this would be just fine if all these powers of sanctification remained in place as they were instituted by Christ, with a pope and hierarchy to oversee them. But how is any of this supposed to come about if the structure of the Church no longer exists, and only a scant few Catholics remain faithful to Her teachings? If we believe this is possible it seems that we fall into another error condemned by the Church, also described in the Catholic Encyclopedia under Millenarianism:
“The fantastic views of the apocalyptic writers (Joachim of Floris, the Franciscan-Spirituals, the Apostolici), referred only to a particular form of spiritual renovation of the Church, but did not include a second advent of Christ. The “emperor myths,” which prophesied the establishment of a happy, universal kingdom by the great emperor of the future, contain indeed descriptions that remind one of the ancient Sybilline and millenarian writings…” According to Joachim of Fiore, an age of the Holy Ghost would succeed the Old Testament age of the Father and the New Testament age of the Son, another reference to the different “ages.” Instead of the Second Coming, Joachim taught that a new age of peace and brotherhood would begin, and a newly spiritualized version of man would emerge. In his writings, this “age of the laity,” so to speak, would make the hierarchy almost unnecessary. He also taught that Babylon in Apocalypse meant Rome and a pope would become the Antichrist. Rome condemned his writings (DZ 431-433), but not him by name.
Here we even see a pagan version of the Great Monarch, which shows the true origin of this fable. And since Joachim of Fiore’s idea of a lay spiritual revival is also condemned, there can be scarcely any hope of even a brief period of a peace following the death of Antichrist, as mentioned in Part 1, since we have no pope and no hierarchy, nor any means to re-establish the papacy. Those expecting such a peace point to Fatima of course, but as stated earlier, that peace was NOT unconditional, as Fatima promoters claim. It was entirely dependent on the consecration of Russia (IF this was indeed what Our Lady requested) prior to World War II by Pope Pius XI, and a sufficient number of Catholics praying the Rosary and performing works of penance.
This obviously did not happen, and the third secret, which was never officially revealed to us, came to pass: the destruction of the Church. Mary’s Immaculate Heart will triumph at the end of the world at the death of Antichrist, when all heresies are destroyed. It is beyond me how anyone could think that after the earth has been soiled by so many sacrileges and blasphemies, horrid, heart-rending crimes against children, Satan worship, all manner of impurity, the blood of countless martyrs and so many other evils, anyone would want to remain here to enjoy some kind of “peace.” Please count me out. I want only to be taken away to Heaven — please God may it be possible — with Our Lord and His Blessed Mother, to enjoy that “peace of God… which surpasseth all understanding” (Phil. 4:4).That is the peace we should all be longing for and praying for.
Antichrist will be a specific individual
Had the Jesuits Ribera, St. Robert Bellarmine and other commentators been less focused on defending the papacy against the attacks of the Protestants ad infinitum, and more intent on presenting a clearer picture of what could realistically be expected in the end times based on the teachings of Pope Paul IV and Holy Scripture, we might have been better able to sort out what to expect today. But obviously God wished to keep it hidden until the very end. And the Jesuits had their mission directly from the popes, so could never have deviated from it. They could not have afforded to use Pope Paul IV’s teaching in Cum ex Apostolatus Officio to defend the papal Antichrist theory for this would only have confirmed the possibility of identifying the papacy with Antichrist, and this would have placed the Reformers’ focus on every papal election, looking for the appearance of the Beast. This is probably why the bull was downplayed and deep-sixed so to speak, until our own times. It is humbling to think it may have been written specifically for us, to help identify the true Antichrist when he arrived.
And that Antichrist proper would be a certain, identifiable individual, as Pope Paul IV indicated, and not just a system, as Lacunza falsely taught, cannot be dismissed as a matter of speculation, or an uncertainty. This is brought out by Michael Gruenthaner, S. J., in a 1942 article for the Homiletic and Pastoral Review. He writes:
“Modern theologians base their definition of Antichrist on the passages of St. John’s epistles and all the words of St. Paul in 2 Thess. 2: 1-12. On the authority of these texts they regard it as certain that Antichrist will be an individual human being endowed with the qualities outlined in these texts who will appear at the end of time and will be destroyed by Christ at his second coming. It is apparent that this explanation of the texts in question does not belong to the deposit of faith and is not necessarily connected with this deposit, for the theologians do not declare that it must be accepted as such; they merely pronounce it as certain… In view, however, of the unanimous consent of the fathers and the theologians it would be imprudent to deny that the doctrine of an individual Antichrist is contained either explicitly or implicitly in the Scriptures unless we have cogent arguments to the contrary.”
While Gruenthaner may believe that to deny this teaching is only “imprudent,” the Vatican Council teaches it is more than that. In DZ 1788 we read: “In order to restrain impetuous minds… We, renewing the decree [of the Council of Trent], declare that in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the instruction of Christian doctrine, that must be considered as the true sense of Sacred Scripture which Holy Mother Church has held and holds, whose office is to judge concerning the true understanding and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures. And for that reason, no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture itself contrary to this sense or even contrary to the unanimous agreement of the Fathers.”
This is an order to hold the teaching of the Fathers and theologians both as the TRUE sense of Sacred Scripture, and if someone were to claim that it was permitted to do otherwise they would be denying the authority of the Vatican Council. Therefore we must believe that Antichrist IS an individual man. And at least one theologian, Rev. Jean Allo, a well-respected French scripture scholar, has opined that Antichrist is also a “collective personality, the entire series of those working in behalf of Satan to the end of time” as Gruenthaner notes; “a malevolent power” exercised by a series of antichrists “culminating in” (or emanating from) a particular man. This avoids Lacunza’s error and defines our own situation.
St. Bernard and Pope Paul IV define Antichrist
To be clear, this system of Antichrist both culminates in Paul 6 and emanates from him. The Church has repeatedly referred to antipopes throughout Her history as antichrists. St. Bernard of Clairvaux openly called the antipope Anacletus II Antichrist. Championing Pope Innocent II, St. Bernard wrote: “Behold Innocent the Christ, the anointed of the Lord… They that are of God willingly adhere to him whilst opposed to him stand Antichrist and his followers. We have seen the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place to attain which the antipope burned with fire the sanctuary of God. He persecutes Innocent and with him all innocence… [He is] that beast of the Apocalypse, to whom has been given a mouth speaking blasphemy and power to wage war against the saints (Apoc. 13:5-7) …He has seated himself in the Chair of Peter. The holy place he covets, not for its holiness, but for its height. He has, I say, got possession of the holy place [but] not through the merit of his life. The election whereof he boasts is but a cloak for his malice. To call it an election at all is an impudent lie.”
Is not this the absolute confirmation of what Pope Paul IV would teach 400 years later? Who is this antipope but the ‘Son of Perdition (2 Thess. 2:3), who has tried to seduce the Church throughout the ages? How can it NOT fit Angelo Roncalli and Giovanni Baptiste Montini? Include Pope Paul IV’s definition of the abomination of desolation as a heretic, apsotate or schismatic, invalidly elected, followed by a series of successors including the Man of Sin, and we have the complete picture. And it is in perfect agreement with what is described in the Book of Daniel and in the Apocalypse. Roncalli and Montini were collaborators, even before their “elections.” They had worked out the details of their system over an extended period of time in the star chambers of the Illuminati. As Pope Pius XII’s pro-secretary of state, Montini had established a worldwide network of clerical spies during World War II to keep a close eye on world events and bring about both the success of his father’s Christian Democrat party and his own election.
The three years-and-a-half came and went
The three years and a half (1,260 days) all assume to be the brief duration of Antichrist’s reign is described by many commentators as only the heighth or pinnacle of his reign of terror. This might be counted from Paul 6’s address to the United Nations Oct. 4, 1965 to the official promulgation of the Novus Ordo on April 3, 1969 — exactly three years and a half. He appeared at the United Nations only two weeks after the passage of the schema on religious liberty by the council fathers –1,997 to 224 — the schema endorsing the teachings of John Courtney Murray S.J., so fiercely opposed by Msgr. Joseph C. Fenton. His address to the UN was a victory speech, a celebration of the destruction of the Church initially set in motion by the U.S. government itself as declassified CIA documents prove. There he proclaimed: “Behold the day we have awaited for centuries.” He thereby surrendered the Church’s supremacy in teaching and belief before the world and Her undeniable requirement for membership in Her ranks in order to secure eternal salvation.
And then of course there was the horrendous revision of all the sacramental rites in 1968, a year many have pointed to as a chaotic watershed year for both the nation and the anti-Church. The Sacraments instituted by Christ, which Pope St. Pius X and Pope Pius XII taught could never be touched in their essentials, were reduced to the mere symbols prescribed by the Modernists. And this necessarily coincided with the liturgical changes, already in full swing, since the heighth of Antichrist’s reign could not have been complete without the abolition of the Continual Sacrifice.
Cessation of the Continual Sacrifice
Of course the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae was only the abrogation of what the public believed to be the true “Latin” Mass but was really the corrupted John 23 missal. The true abrogation of the Mass of Pope St. Pius V occurred with the promulgation of John 23rd’s missal. But the corruption of the Consecration of the Wine (translating “for many” from the Latin into English as “for all men”) appeared with the issuance of dialogue Mass booklets for the laity in January 1959. Here we see gradualism at its finest, a gradualism Xavier Rynne, in his Vatican Council IIascribes to Montini as follows: “Pope Paul was firmly committed to gradualism as a policy of action and to middle-of-the road solutions as a goal” (p. 447). And gradualism has long been a Communist tool, but then Saul Alinksy and Montini were great friends, so…
This cessation of the Continual Sacrifice is yet another biblical prophecy that is confirmed by the unanimous opinion of the Fathers. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning tells us, in his The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy:“The Holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of Antichrist and the prophecies of Daniel — all of them unanimously — say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of Antichrist, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar will cease.” And yet so very few among the commentators note this necessary identifying mark of the Sea Beast, the Man of Sin, even though it was the completion of the Great Revolt. All know and readily admit it was the final straw following the false Vatican 2 council that led to nearly half of all those then identifying as Catholic to leave the anti-Church. By departing, they fulfilled Christ’s prophecy in Matt. 26:31: that the sheep would scatter once God Himself struck the shepherd, implicitly acknowledging the fact that the Man of Sin was then reigning.
Conclusion
So there are three truths which we cannot doubt: the two which rest on the unanimous opinion of the Fathers regarding the Man of Sin and the Continual Sacrifice; and the third being the definition of the abomination of desolation by first St. Bernard and then finally and infallibly, Pope Paul IV in Cum ex Apostolatus Officio. For Paul IV explained the mystery of 2 Thess. 2 regarding “he who withholdeth” as the papacy and the Church, and how they could be taken out of the way, something Henry Cardinal Manning explains in his work, The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Christ. Although Manning does not refer to Paul IV’s Bull, because even then he could not do so without raising Protestant speculation, it is clear that he believed Antichrist could reign only in the absence of a canonically elected Roman Pontiff and the Apostolic College. And so he did.
Could the three and a half years also apply to the time Satan is loosed, when the papacy is renounced and Satan himself unleashed as the world’s religious leader proceeds to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple? Some commentators believe there will be two three and a half year periods, but they are very few. The mention of this in Chapter 20 of Apocalypse indicates Satan himself will descend on the “camp of the saints” and inspire what Rev. Haydock describes as “the last persecution of Antichrist” by Gog and Magog, which some believe is Russia and its leader in league with China and other nations. If we live in the time after antichrist described by St. Thomas Aquinas, which I believe that we do, the three and a half years are past. Satan and his hordes will come quickly and the battle of Armageddon will be waged as described in Chap. 16 of Apocalypse. This I have detailed at some length here and here.
The Church has never endorsed the literal interpretation of Apocalypse. And yet all the horrors of Antichrist perpetrated on the faithful are presented as physical events, not spiritual ones. Christ warned us: “And fear ye not them that kill the body, and are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt. 10: 28). The intellect is the seat of the soul, as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches: “The intellectual soul is sometimes called intellect, as from its chief power; and thus we read (De Anima i, 4), that the “intellect is a substance.” And in this sense also Augustine says that the mind is spirit and essence (De Trin. ix, 2; xiv, 16)… Wherefore it follows not that the intellect is the substance of the soul, but that it is its virtue and power.”
Antichrist has conducted a relentless war of fraud and deceit, lying illusions, and false miracles on the intellect that has robbed nearly all who were once Catholic of their faith. His war is not primarily a physical one, although certainly it has had its physical aspects. And certainly Satan’s onslaught as the last antichrist may end in unimaginable carnage. These are things we cannot know; everything written here and all that was written by the commentators is speculation. While it may be much easier to see into the future as we witness prophecy being fulfilled, only the event itself will reveal the truth.
“Therefore fear them not. For nothing is covered that shall not be revealed: nor hid, that shall not be known. That which I tell you in the dark, speak ye in the light: and that which you hear in the ear, preach ye upon the housetops” (Matt. 10: 26-27). We hear you, dear Lord.
Mr. Javier Morell-Ibarra’s Catholic Survival Guide, Pt. 6
(Sorry for misspelling your name in past blogs!)
- Fable that the Magisterium should not be interpreted literally.
The false prophets accuse those who rely on the Magisterium of being rigorous zealots for wanting to expose them, since they allege that it is barbaric and unfair to want to interpret everything to the letter, but that is a blatant lie, as well as blasphemy. Because belief and adherence to the Magisterium is a matter of Catholic faith, which tells us that “the See of Peter always remains free from all error.” Basically, the great problem of these sophists who are expert in misrepresenting everything is they have convinced themselves that the infallible Magisterium of the Vicars of Christ was a matter of purely human faith, like private revelations, when in reality it is a question of Catholic faith. Therefore, whoever does not respectfully believe and yield obedience to the Magisterium divinely inspired by the Holy Ghost for the edification and government of the souls that make up the Mystical Body, whoever does not believe this, commits a sin against the Holy Ghost, make no mistake about it. There is no excuse whatsoever for those professional charlatans posing as Catholic clergy.
- Fable that we ought to recognize antipope Bergoglio, alias “Francis”, along with the other usurpers of the Papacy starting from masonic agent Angelo Roncalli, since the laity would have no authority to determine whether or not they are heretics, so we would be somehow forced to submit to these enemies of God, resisting them when they make mistakes, because absolute obedience is not due to the “popes” (?), alleging sophistically that “we must obey God before men.” [Acts 5, 29]
The answer to this absurd fallacy is very simple, since it is not we, simple laymen, who determine that the See is Vacant, but it is heresy itself that determines it, since a public and notorious heretic [from Roncalli to Bergoglio] cannot be Pope, since the Magisterium of the Catholic Church establishes very clearly that a person who departs from the Catholic Faith and commits heresy cannot be Pope, without the need for a subsequent express declaration to that effect, as decreed by Pope Paul IV in his Bull Cum ex apostolatus officio promulgated in perpetuity. This admonition of the first Vicar of Christ and the rest of the Apostles in Acts 5:29 has been maliciously distorted to try and turn it into carte blanche to disobey the Supreme Pontiff, but the “luminary” who came up with such an impious interpretation completely forgot about Luke 10:16. There we read that whoever hears blessed Saint Peter and his Apostles, hears Our Lord, and whoever despises them, despises Christ and His heavenly Father that sent Him. For the Pope is sweet Christ on earth, so he that hears the Pope, hears Christ and His Eternal Father. Quoting his Holiness Pope Pius XII: “By mysterious designs of the Providence, WE HAVE BEEN CALLED TO BE here below the Vicar and representative of Jesus Christ, THE LIVING IMAGE OF GOD INCARNATE” (September 30, 1939.)
Basically, it is about the same perverse fallacy held by hypocritical heretic Marcel Lefebvre and his unfortunate spiritual offspring of the SSPX sect, thus showing their null catholicity by recognizing and resisting on multiple occasions those whom they considered as “popes”, that is, antichrists Montini, Luciani, Wojtyla, Ratzinger, and now Bergoglio, “ignoring” that the Pope is the Successor of Saint Peter, and that the Episcopal Body, which is the Catholic Bishops in communion with the Pope. The Bishops validly and licitly consecrated, with a mission received from the Pope, are the successors of the Apostles. Hence, if anyone dares to disobey the Pope, he is disobeying God. It is of Catholic and Divine faith that the Holy Church is exempt from all error, and furthermore Christ and his vicar constitute a single Head [cf Unam sanctam, Mystici Corporis Christi]. Therefore, to maintain that the passage from Acts 5:29 would enable anyone to disobey the Pope is blatant blasphemy typical of charlatans like hypocritical heretic Lefebvre.
The malice of this sophistry is enormous, since to dare claim that the Pope, the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the most holy head in the entire world, who is also the Head of the Mystical Body of Christ, the Holy Catholic Church, the most holy and immaculate Body that ever existed; to even venture that such a Head can fail or err is intolerable impiety and gross blasphemy. In another age, the Holy Office would never have allowed such a degree of audacity and irreverence, which constitutes a very grave sin against the Holy Ghost as it maliciously suggests that the Paraclete would be wrong when speaking through the mouth of the Pontiffs.
- Fable of appealing for adherence to a “future Pope” who, according to the “Traditionalist” impostors, would confirm and legalize (!?) the multiple irregularities and transgressions committed by those wretches, who insolently pretend to be nothing less than “successors of the Apostles.” (!?)
Based on this false logic, many of these hirelings and soul thieves have impiously dared to erect “religious foundations” and to profess “solemn vows”, carrying out according to them the “apostolic mission” for which they have been called (!?), trusting in a future “Pope” who will give his approval to such desecrations, which is utter madness. The answer to such arrogance is simple, and it is provided by Pope Pius II: “Who will not find it ridiculous, when the appeals are made for what does not exist and for the time of whose future existence no one knows?”
Pope Pius II, Execrabilis, 1460.
From which it automatically follows that without Jurisdiction provided by the Pope there is no Apostolicity, and without the Pope there is no Jurisdiction [cf Mystici Corporis Christi, Ad Sinarum Gentem, Apostolorum Principis Sepulcrum), all those pretentious charlatans being only intruders, that is, non-Catholics.“Legitimate mission is that which comes from the one who has the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven or of the Church, who is the Pope. Thus, the intruding bishops or those who separate from obedience to the Roman Pontiff, ARE NOT SUCCESSORS OF THE APOSTLES, BUT THIEVES, as Jesus Christ calls them, and we must flee from them as sheep flee from wolves.” (Saint Anthony Mary Claret, 1849, The Fourth Mark of the Church: Apostolic)
“To become a successor of the Apostles, it is necessary to be received into the body of the Apostles, into that body that Christ gave power to govern His Church. Thus, even at the time of the Apostles, their successors were appointed… Jurisdiction is possessed only by those in communion with and under the obedience of the supreme head of the Church… The Roman Catholic Church is apostolic because the body of their teachers and rulers legitimately succeed the Apostles. The apostolicity of the teaching body of the Church is for us a guarantee for the apostolicity of the doctrine and the sacraments of the Church, and of all its permanent institutions. Being the successors of the Apostles, the bishops cannot carry out their office independently of the Pope, their supreme head, because the apostles recognized Saint Peter as their supreme head…
“The dependence of the bishops on the Pope is even greater than that of the Apostles on Peter; because the Apostles, having received the extraordinary mission of preaching the Gospel… also received an extraordinary power from Our Lord they did not transmit to their successors… Individual bishops do not inherit this extraordinary power… The bishop… invested with the episcopal dignity by the clergy or even by a chapter, contrary to the laws of the Church… is an intruder. All those who support a priest, bishop or diocesan administrator who has not legitimately received his mission from the Pope, and all who relate to him in spiritual matters, are, like the one they support, treated by the Church as schismatics, because by such action they separate themselves from the unity of the Church.” (Rev. Wilhelm Wilmers, Handbook of the Christian Religion, 1891).
“Apostolicity of mission means the Church is a moral body, that it possesses the mission entrusted by Jesus Christ to the Apostles and that it is transmitted through them and their legitimate successors in an uninterrupted chain of the current representatives of Christ on earth. This authoritative transmission of power in the Church constitutes apostolic succession. This apostolic succession must be both material and formal; the material consists of the royal succession in the Church, through a series of persons from the apostolic age to the present; the formal adds the element of authority in the transmission of power; It consists in the legitimate transmission of the ministerial power conferred by Christ on his Apostles. No one can give a power he does not possess. Therefore, in tracing the location of the mission of the Church back to the Apostles, no gap can be allowed, no new mission can emerge; rather, the mission conferred by Christ must pass from generation to generation through legal and uninterrupted succession. The Apostles received it from Christ and gave it in turn to those rightfully appointed by them, and these again selected others to continue the work of the ministry.
“Any interruption in this succession destroys apostolicity, because the break means the beginning of a new series that is not Apostolic. “How will they preach if they are not sent?” (Rom. 10, 15). An authoritative teaching mission is absolutely necessary, a mission entrusted by a man is not authoritative. Hence any concept of apostolicity that excludes the authoritative union of the apostolic mission robs the ministry of its divine character. Apostolicity, or apostolic succession, then, means that the mission conferred by Jesus on the Apostles must pass from them to their legitimate successors, in an unbroken line, until the end of the world/consummation of the age. This notion of apostolicity is derived from the words of Christ himself, the practice of the Apostles, and the teaching of the Fathers and theologians of the Church.
“Apostolicity is not found in any other Church. This is a necessary consequence of the unity of the Church. If there is only one true Church, and if the Catholic Church, as just pointed out, is Apostolic, it follows that no other Church is Apostolic. All the sects that reject the episcopate, by the very fact make the apostolic succession impossible, since they destroy the channel through which the apostolic mission is transmitted. Historically, the beginnings of all of these churches date back to a period of time after the time of Christ and the Apostles. As for the Greek Church, it is enough to point out that it lost the apostolic succession by withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the legitimate successors of Saint Peter in the See of Rome. The same is true of Anglican claims to continuity (MacLaughlin, “Divine Plan of the Church”, 213; and, Newman, “Diff. Of Angl.”, Lecture 12), for the very fact of separation destroys their jurisdiction. They have based their claims on the validity of Anglican orders. However, these have been declared invalid. But even if they were valid, the Anglican Church would not be apostolic, for jurisdiction is essential to the apostolicity of mission. A study of the organization of the Anglican Church shows that it is completely different from the Church established by Jesus Christ.” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907).
- Fable that the Montinian, Novus Ordo or conciliar sect is our only enemy, cunningly seeking to exempt their “traditionalist” franchises from any responsibility. It is a reiteration of the “Non Una Cum” fable, used as a perverse mantra by the false prophets of the Thucist schism and the ex-Lefebvrist false wandering clergy.
Resolution of this fable:
If you and your followers state day in day out that the Conciliar church is not the Catholic Church, but a non-Catholic sect that has broken with Catholicism, then absolutely all the Catholic Bishops, whether validly and licitly consecrated by His Holiness Saint Pius X, His Holiness Benedict XV, His Holiness Pius XI or His Holiness Pius XII who defected to the Conciliar sect, ipso facto ceased to be Catholic Bishops [cf Canon 188.4, Cum ex Apostolatus officio] by their public abandonment of the Catholic Faith, ipso facto losing their ecclesiastical offices and their jurisdiction, not the character of the order, which is indelible, that is, indelible as long as the order has been received, of course.
On the other hand, if you state actively and passively that His Holiness Pius XII is the last true Pope, who bound in heaven that the power of Jurisdiction only reaches the Bishop through the Pope [cf Mystici Corporis Christi, Ad Sinarum Gentem, Apostolorum Principis Sepulcrum], who made it clear that the current discipline for the consecration of Catholic Bishops is reserved exclusively to the Pope, and that no Bishop can proceed to it without a certain apostolic mandate (Canon 953), and whoever consecrates without permission from the Pope ends up being excommunicated (Acta Apostolica Sedis 43 (1951) pp 217-218) and suspended ipso facto (Canon 2370), and who also taught that in periods of interregnum (Apostolic Constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis [Acta Apostolica Sedis 38 ( 1946), n. 3, pp. 65-99]).
Under His Supreme Authority, which is that of Our Lord Jesus Christ, all power and jurisdiction of the Pope in life cannot be used or exercised, otherwise it will be null and void , that is invalid, as His Holiness Pope Leo XIII declared in his infallible Bull Apostolicae Curae of September 13, 1896, and the current discipline on episcopal consecrations is reserved exclusively to the Pope while he is alive (Canon 953). And in interregnums it is prohibited not under illegality, but under nullity, that is invalidity. His Holiness Pope Innocent IV said in his Apparatus Super Quinque Libros Decretali, that the Pope can, by means of a Constitution, prohibit a Bishop from christening, ordaining, and even validly baptizing , so if it affirms that the sacraments conferred by such persons are invalid, then they are effectively invalid (sic).
“Et quidem satis bene videntur dicere in eo, quod dicunt, quod possunt facere constitutiones summi Pontifices super praemissis, et eis factis, si constituatur quod non valeant sacramenta a talibus collata, non valebunt”.
Therefore, could you explain to us how would it possible that there can be a valid “Bishop”, who would have received jurisdiction directly from the Pope, that is, which is an essential requirement for him to be licit and Catholic, in your “chapel”-sect created in 1981 by the hands of the “Archbishop” of Bulla Regia [Thuc], an “Archbishopric” that Montini-Paul 6 gave him in 1968, and that by sleight of hand Canon 188.4 and Pope Paul IV’s Cum ex apostolatus officiowould not be applied to him, nor the discipline of episcopal consecrations (canon 953 (Acta Apostolica Sedis 43 (1951) pp. 217-218) and that of interregnums (Acta Apostolica Sedis 38 (1946), n. 3, pp. 65-99), not to mention more illegalities than have already been quoted hundreds of times. And we also leave out what His Holiness Pope Leo XIII said in his infallible bull Apostolicae Curae: “Since obtaining nullliter orders means the same thing as a null and void act, that is, invalid, as the same word and common speech require”; would you please explain all of that?… “Nulliter enim obtinuisse ordines idem est atque irrito actu nulloque effectu, videlicet invalide, ut ipsa monet eius vocis notatio et consuetudo sermonis; praesertim quum idem pari modo affirmetur de ordinibus quod de beneficiis ecclesiasticis…”And the same goes for Lefebvre, of course.
Can you tell us, if you would be so kind, how is it possible that in your sect-garage-private “chapel” there is a valid Bishop, with jurisdiction, and who is Catholic, i.e., licit?…
Because, as far as we know, priests cannot consecrate bishops, and it is prohibited sub poena nullitatis to usurp the powers and jurisdiction of the Pope in interregnums since 1945, the current discipline of episcopal consecrations being exclusively reserved to the Pope. Therefore, the leader of your sect could never have been consecrated Bishop sub poena nullitatis, much less as a Catholic, so we will have to conclude that he is nothing more than a priest who lost his office in 1965, and who believed in 1981 that an ultramodernist Montinian Archbishop [Thuc], who had previously “consecrated” five “Bishops” to the Vetero-Catholic schism, and five countrymen of Palmar de Troya (Spain), an Archbishop who lost his office in 1965. This just like the Roncallian Titular Archbishop of Sinnada of Phrygia [Lefebvre], who “made” him a Catholic Bishop 23 years after the death of His Holiness Pope Pius XII, and 16 years after the Great Biblical Apostasy. And you dare say that 65 years after the death of Pope Pius XII, and 42 years after the infamy of your garage, you affirm that laymen disguised with mitres can “consecrate” Catholic Bishops and “ordain” Catholic Priests? You carry on with the chimerical tale that these men would be valid, licit, and would have jurisdiction to absolve sins, and they would represent the Holy Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church, but nothing could be further from the truth.
From which it can be easily gathered that not only did these men not receive the power of jurisdiction, for we have not had a Pope since October 9, 1958 [cf “Mystici Corporis Christi”, “Ad Sinarum gentem”, “Ad Apostolorum principis”], but nor did they receive the power of order sub poena nullitatis in an interregnum, that is invalidity. (Vacantis apostolicae Sedis, Apostolicae Curae, canon 953, AAS 43 (1951) pp 217-218).
Therefore, at the very least, their episcopal ordinations would be dubious (to some, to others it is obvious that they are invalid), and in conferring the sacraments it is never permissible to adopt a probable course of action as regards validity, abandoning the safest course; the opposite was explicitly condemned by Pope Innocent XI in the Decree of the Holy Office of March 2, 1679.
As a result, they are not only illicit, in other words, intruders, which they know, and for this reason they always emphasize that they are valid in order to deceive the simple, since they lack all jurisdiction to govern the flock of Our Lord Jesus Christ, but they are also invalid because the leader of their sect or garage was never consecrated Bishop in 1981 sub poena nullitatis during the interregnum in which they say we are, so we must necessarily conclude that they have been simulating episcopal consecrations and ordinations, as well as simulating the adminitration of sacraments, for more than 40 years.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Apr 10, 2023 | New Blog
A belated Blessed Easter to All!
Resurrezione; affresco nel Coro delle Monache; Brescia, complesso di Santa Giulia
+EASTER WEEK+
The condemnation of Millenarianism, mentioned in our last blog, will be discussed here at greater length in order to shine a much-needed light on why we find Matt. 28:20 in Holy Scripture translated in two or three different ways into English. As Mr. Javier Morrell-Ibarra noted in last week’s blog, all versions of the Bible he consulted did not read “consummation of the world,” as did all the 10 or more 19th and 20th century Bibles consulted here, but “consummation of the ages/centuries.” There may be a good explanation for this, which is what we intend to explore here. This will be part on of a two-part series.
Below readers will see the actual condemnation of Millenarianism issued by the Holy Office in 1944, in both Latin and English. There is an explanatory paragraph and history of the error provided here, however, which is omitted in Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma, 1957 edition, (and this edition has been proven deficient regarding other teachings as well). It attributes this condemnation to one Manuel de Lacunza-Diaz S.J., whose work, we learn, had already been condemned by the Holy Office in 1824. What is most notable in this explanation of the condemnation is that “It is not possible to teach systematic Millenarianism, even if moderated” as Catholic revelation. And yet such a form of moderated Millenarianism has been taught, at least as a possible outcome, even after this second condemnation was issued. It is usually shored up with Catholic prophecies and Marian apparitions, some not approved, to make it appear more believable.
Extracts from Lacunza’s work and other sources will be examined below to explain how widespread his teachings have become among Catholics and Protestants alike.
Manuel Lacunza y Diaz on the Millennium and Antichrist
The following excerpts are taken from Wikipedia. Lacunza’s quotes will appear in blue. “The first of Lacunza’s “new discoveries” was that: ‘I am not of the opinion that the world – that is, the material bodies or celestial globes that God has created (among which is the one on which we live) – has to have an end, or return to chaos or nothingness from which it came forth.’ He protested against the common teaching that at the end of the world, the earth would be consumed by fire… Secondly, Lacunza concluded that the Biblical expressions “end of the age” and “end of the world” refer to two different times. He understood the “end of the age” or “day of the Lord” as merely the end of a phase of human history that would be closed by the coming of Christ and the beginning of His kingdom on Earth. At this time the living would be judged and the Jews converted, after which a new society would be established for a thousand-year reign of justice and peace.”
Lacunza wrote: “El Terino (a very learned author) … His words are these: ‘But it shall be fully accomplished towards the end of the world, in the general conversion of all the Jews unto Christ,’ the same which I say, with this only difference: that I place after the end of the age, the same event which he… pretends to place ‘towards the end of the world.’ … Along with this great event announced in almost all the scriptures, you shall likewise find at the end of this present earth, or which is the same, the end of the day of men, which the Lord so frequently called the consummation of this age; and immediately after this day, you shall find that of the Lord, the age to come, the kingdom of God, the new earth and the new heavens, wherein dwelleth righteousness, peace, love, and uniformity in the same faith, in the same worship, in the same laws and customs, a uniformity of language among all the peoples, tribes, and families of the whole earth”.
“If the 20th chapter of the Apocalypse is to be literally understood, Jesus Christ himself with all his saints now risen, ought actually to reign in Jerusalem over the whole orb of the earth, and that for a thousand years… The dragon will once again be loosed, and will return to deceive the whole world… The resurrection of all the individuals of Adam’s race, the last judgment, the ultimate sentence, and the execution of this ultimate sentence, cannot take place immediately upon and in the very natural day of the coming in glory and majesty of our Lord Jesus Christ….” But Lacunza is wrong.
“Lacunza’s interpretation of Biblical prophecy led him to believe that during the period before the “day of the Lord” there would be an apostasy within the Catholic Church which would make it part of a general system which he labelled Antichrist, in the sense that there would be a general “falling away” in doctrine among the churches, resulting in moral apostasy. In this sense the Antichrist would be composed of “a moral antichristian body, composed of many individuals … animated by the same spirit”, which would consist of “seven false religions [that] should unite to make war against the body of Christ, and against Christ himself ” – which was in accordance with his personal interpretation of Revelation 13:1. In The Coming of the Messiah in Majesty and Glory, Lacunza compared his views on the Antichrist – that Antichrist was a general moral apostasy within the churches – with what he declared to be the “universally recognized” view of his day:
“This Antichrist is universally recognized as a king, or most potent monarch … It is commonly said, that he will take his origin from the Jews, and from the tribe of Dan … shall feign himself Messiah, and begin to perform so many and such stupendous works, that the fame thereof being soon spread abroad, the Jews shall fly from all parts of the world, and from all the tribes, to join themselves to him, and offer him their services … After Antichrist shall have conquered Jerusalem, he shall, with great ease, conquer the rest of the earth … The ambition of this miserable and vilest Jew, shall not rest satisfied, by becoming the universal king of the whole earth … but he shall immediately enter into the impious and sacrilegious thought of making himself God, and the only God of the whole earth … Whereupon shall arise the most terrible, the most cruel, perilous persecution against the church of Jesus Christ; and it shall last for three years and a half … Upon his death the Church, and the whole world, shall begin to breathe again, everything reverting to a perfect calm, and a universal joy. The Bishops, who had concealed themselves in mountains, shall return and resume their sees, accompanied by their clergy and some other Christian families, who had followed them in their voluntary exile. At this time shall come to pass, the conversion of the Jews, according to the universal spirit of the converters” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Lacunza).
Comments on the above
That the world will not be destroyed by fire then renewed contradicts Holy Scripture and is one of the specific errors condemned by the Holy Office. This is Millenarianism pure and simple, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia article on this topic, and is likewise condemned. The earth will be consumed by fire, consume meaning to “take up, redeem,” to “1. Do away with completely; DESTROY” (Webster’s Seventh Collegiate Dictionary). The destruction of the world by fire IS Catholic revelation. God will then renew the earth and when souls are united with their bodies, many commentators believe they will live on earth as an extension of Paradise, and this will be the New Jerusalem. We read in Matt. 24:14-15: “And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come [consummatio]. When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.” Surely this is clear enough for everyone, coming from Our Lord Himself. When he pronounced from the Cross “It is consummated…” his life was done; finished, just as the Church was and the world shall be. Pope Paul IV told us who that abomination would be, and everyone has discredited his bull.
Lacunza taught there was a 1,000 year or more period of peace and a restoration of the Church between the death of Antichrist and the actual coming of Satan to surround “…the camp of the saints” (Apoc. 20:8). The Apocalypse is a very difficult book to understand and rightly interpret, and I am no Scripture scholar. But if we place the chaining of Satan at the beginning of the fifth century — when the persecution of the early Christians was at an end — until the time of the beginning of the great apostasy, when he was loosed — first the Gallicanist heresy, in the late 1300s-early 1400s, then the Protestant Reformation, (because Gallicanism is what fed Luther’s revolt and King Henry VIII’s establishment of the Anglican church) — we have roughly 1,000 years. Some Scripture commentators have advanced this opinion. Even though the Orthodox schism happened in 1054, the schismatics seem to have retained jurisdiction and delivered valid Sacraments for their own people (by implicit permission of the popes), although Catholics were strictly forbidden to participate in these ceremonies and Sacraments without incurring the censure for communicatio in sacris and schism/heresy.
St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of a period where Antichrist will die, and life will go on as before, just as we have seen: “Although men be terrified by the signs appearing about the judgement day, yet before those signs begin to appear the wicked will think themselves to be in peace and security after the death of Antichrist and before the coming of Christ, seeing that the world is not at once destroyed as they thought hitherto.” (Supplement to the Summa Theologica, 73:1). This could account for the fact that the death of Antichrist (Paul 6) did not immediately result in the consummation, or his being hurled into the lake of fire. And it may be that this interlude vaguely referred to in Scripture confused Lacunza and prompted him to think it signified a lengthy period of peace. I have speculated that what we are seeing is the survival of Antichrist’s system of papal usurpation, its perpetuation and the reign of Afinal satanic antichrist, not THE antichrist, although it will be short-lived. This, I think, could be the final assault launched by Satan on the remnant referred to in Apoc. 20:8. Am I correct? Who knows; only time will tell.
No 1,000 years of earthly peace
Lacunza believed the “end of the age” and “end of the world” refer to two different times. He understood the “end of the age” or “day of the Lord” as merely the end of a phase of human history.” But the end of the “ages/centuries” seems to refer to the end of the Church’s time on earth which we have already witnessed; for then Christ says He will be with us “even to the consummation.” This is what B. E. Strauss notes in his piece quoted in my last blog. “The consummation of the ages denotes the last of all ages of the world, the age of the Church. This last age consummates the ages that came before, and it is itself consummated by the consummatio saeculi, by the consummation of the (last) age” or actual consummation by fire/end of the world. Strauss points out that the most common interpretation is not consummation of the ages or centuries, but consummation of the world. In order to avoid even mitigated Millenarianism, it is important to not associate any reversion to the “end of the age/centuries” translation with the meaning intended by Lacunza (and the many others today who follow him): the belief in a 1,000-year period of peace.
I believe it is very likely that the phrase “the consummation of the world” was translated into English versions of the Bible in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Great Britain precisely because it is there that this Millenarianist belief fulminated among the Protestants and certain Catholic circles, especially in the U.S. and Great Britain. Until the actual event, it appears the Church felt it was too dangerous to make any distinction between end of the “age of the Church” and the age of Antichrist, because this would only have aided Her enemies and caused Her premature dissolution. It also would have created panic and confusion among the faithful. There are many signs that even theologians such as Henry Cardinal Manning, who predicted the taking away of the papacy (St. Paul’s “he who withholdeth”) doubted there would be a restoration of the Church. For while Manning has much to say about the time of Antichrist and what leads up to it, he also mentions the Church’s final triumph but fails to explain when/how it will occur.
The Church’s final triumph, according to most of the commentators writing even before the Holy Office decree, is Christ’s Second Coming and the destruction of Antichrist’s system. In the end we win, but not without paying a terrible price. The Holy Office decree tells us that the idea of even a mitigated Millenarianism, which some would describe as a spiritual restoration minus Christ’s physical reign on earth and the resurrection of some of the dead – cannot be safely taught. And yet this idea of a glorious, peaceful period of restoration is the very hinge on which the Traditionalist door swings — Lacunza’s mitigated Millenarianism, condemned by the Holy Office. The Great Monarch and Holy Pope prophecies, Our Lady’s message at Quito, Ecuador, the La Salette message, the Fatima peace, the Catholic Restoration – rah, rah, sis-boom-bah, rally around the Traddie flagpole. Yes, we quote La Salette, although selectively. And yes, we also quote Fatima, but as all know who are reading this, we backed off that message considerably last year when it was revealed that Pope Pius XII had serious doubts about it.
It is now known that Our Lady told Sr. Lucia the pope would consecrate Russia to her but it would be TOO LATE. Traditionalist and Novus Ordo Fatima promoters say the Fatima promise of peace was “unconditional” but that was based on the conversion of Russia, which never happened and now can never happen, since we have no Pope and therefore no Church.
Private prophecy cannot trump divine revelation. There can be no restoration of the Church, no “peace” other than the absence of another actual world war and no monarch charging in on a white horse to save us. We have no validly ordained and consecrated bishops and the line of succession cannot be restored. The lost ten tribes have already converted, so the majority of the Jews have already entered the Catholic fold centuries ago at the beginning of the Great Apostasy (see the article documenting this here). It is time for those calling themselves Catholic to grow up, accept God’s will signified in the decisions of the Roman Pontiffs and prepare for the coming of Our Lord.
Protestants base their teachings on Lacunza
Lacunza’s teachings are what the Protestants later used to concoct their false teachings on Dispensationalism, an outgrowth of Masonic British Israelism, because his was the first theological treatise to propose the idea of the rapture. This has already been discussed in our previous article, The Final Chapter… Dispensationalists believe that:
- Believers will be raptured several years before the Second Coming.
- That before the Second Coming, the Jerusalem temple will be rebuilt.
- The Jerusalem temple, not the Church, is where Antichrist will show himself as God.
- Following the Second Coming and an earthly peace, this same temple will exist in Jerusalem, or possibly a new or reconsecrated one.
- During an earthly millennium, animal sacrifices offered at this temple will commemorate Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross.
This is a Jewish restoration versus the idea of a “Catholic restoration,” both of which are absurd. The Jewish restoration idea was even advanced by at least one Catholic Scripture scholar in the 1950s! So much for the condemnation of Millenarianism by the Holy Office. If a verifiable canonically elected pope and at least a few of the hierarchy had survived the Great Apostasy, such a restoration might have been possible, but no more. In order to prevent those not familiar with the many extravagant interpretations by the commentators on the Apocalypse form becoming completely lost in the apocalyptic maze, we say this about Mr. Morrell-Ibarra’s series continued below.
Summary of consummatio saeculi
His observation that “the end of the world is a period of time encompassing different events” means this: It is intended as an overview of the world’s end, from the very beginning of the Great Apostasy (at the time of the Protestant Reformation and the issuance of Pope Paul IV’s Cum ex Apostolatus Officio predicting the abomination of desolation) all the way up to Christ’s actual Second Coming, and the progression of events in between. This period begins with the apostasy of Catholic rulers and their people foretold by St. Paul in 2 Thess. 2 (“for lest there come a revolt first”), and finally ends in the apostasy of the cardinals and bishops (the stars falling from Heaven, Apoc. 6:13, according to Rev. Berry), with the subsequent scattering of the faithful. This in turn causes the papal see to be left vacant owing to an invalid election of a heretic by heretics and fulfills the prophesy of “he who withholdeth” (the Church, but primarily the Pope) being taken out of the way.
Then begins the reign of the False Prophet, as predicted in Apocalypse Chapter 13, who prepares the way for the installment of the Sea Beast, or Antichrist proper, who changes all times and laws, desolates the Church and causes the Continual Sacrifice to officially cease. This then becomes the creation of the system of Antichrist, a succession of false popes, which predominates until the papacy is handed over to the New World Order religious leader. This man will be Satan incarnate who will REPLACE God in the minds of worldlings, Satan encompassing the camp of the saints at the very end. All of this is predicted by various commentators and can be carefully chosen as puzzle pieces to combine what we see with what Holy Scripture and the Church teaches. This then assists us in completing the final tapestry of the Second Coming, which will be discussed in our next blog.
Mr. Morrell Ibarra’s Catholic Survival Guide, Pt. 5
- Fable of the supposed validity of the spurious orders of the sedevacantist “traditionalist” imposters and hirelings.
All these false christs hide behind the supposed validity of their fraudulent titles and dignities, although inwardly they know they are illicit, which is why these charlatans avoid, like vampires avoid light and holy water, naming the word “illicit”, because according to them, what really matters is if they are “valid”, since that would make everything they touch “holy”, and thus they deceive many unwary souls with little or no knowledge of the Magisterium and the 1917 CIC, who grant them a credit and a competence none of those disobedient hypocrites possess. The improvised pseudo-theology of the Thucist and Lefebvrist sectarians has wreaked havoc, as they have created a kind of “new” magisterium to justify themselves and their sacrilege, despising and minimizing the one true Magisterium that every creature is obliged to obey if they want to save their souls, hence chaos and confusion are rampant.
In reality, none of them has really understood the difference between validity and liceity, which is why they manage to deceive the simple so easily, so an urgent explanation of both key concepts is required.
To be licit, permission from the Pope is required, also a canonical mission so as to be consecrated Catholic Bishop (Can. 953), and so that he can ordain Catholic priests; this canonical mission is fundamental, since it is what would make the minister Catholic, have Apostolic Succession, be part of the Hierarchy of the Holy Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church, have an ecclesiastical position or office (Can. 147) and, consequently, have the power to rule the flock of Our Lord Jesus Christ, a power that only the Pope can transmit to the Catholic Bishops, a power that the Pope receives immediately from Christ Our Lord [cf Mystici Corporis Christi, Ad Sinarum Gentem, Apostolorum Principis Sepulcrum]. Therefore, liceity is an ESSENTIAL requirement to function as a cleric, since lacking this, one is NOT a Catholic but a schismatic.
On the other hand, to be valid, permission from the Pope is not required, therefore one is not a Catholic, one does not have an ecclesiastical office, one does not have jurisdictional power, hence one is an intruder since he has not entered through the gate of the sheepfold, so he does not have the power to rule the flock of Christ; to be valid, it is only required that the ordaining minister be a validly consecrated bishop (matter, form, intention), that is, without the permission of the Pope, but evidently all these consecrations and ordinations will be illicit, desecration, gravely sinful, all of them being excommunicated both the ordaining bishop and his ordinands, since they are outside the Mystical Body of the Church, lack mission and power to rule, and are intruders who would only perform invalid acts, which, if carried out, would be gravely sacrilegious. This is the case of the Greek and Russian Orthodox schismatics, who were valid clergy, but completely illicit, non-Catholic.
Pope Pius XII, 1951
ACTAS S. CONGREGATIONUM SUPREMA SACRA CONGREGATIO S. OFFICII II DECRETUM DE CONSECRATIONE EPISCOPI SINE CANONICA PROVISIONE
“The bishop of any rite and dignity, who confers episcopal consecration on someone without having received the appointment of the Apostolic See or without it having been expressly confirmed, and also the one who receives said consecration, even if both do so coerced by grave fear (canon 2229 § 3, 3°), they incur ipso facto excommunication reserved in a very special way to the Apostolic See.” (AAS 43 1951, 9th April, pp. 217-218)
“All those who support a priest, bishop or diocesan administrator who has not legitimately received his mission from the Pope, and all those who maintain relations with him in spiritual matters, are, like the one they support, treated by the Church as schismatics, because with such an action they separate themselves from the unity of the Church.”
Manual of the Christian Religion, 1891, p. 371 by Wilmers Wilhelm, 1817-1901.
Summarizing:
Valid = ordained without the permission of the Pope, non-Catholic, without power of government, all his acts are sacrilegious, sinful, null and void.
Licit = ordained with the permission of the Pope, Catholic, with power of government, his acts are sacred.
His Holiness Pope Pius VI tells us in this regard:
“… ministers without a mission and pastors without jurisdiction, and consequently intrusive parish priests, would only do null acts, and all the functions they exercised would be equally desecration.”
It is abundantly clear that the supposed validity these intruders claim is of no use to them at all, because it does not make them Catholic since they never received permission or Jurisdiction from the Pope. Therefore, it is absurd and even suicidal for them to cling to this very dubious validity to justify their sacrilege and desecration in the eyes of their misled followers. Furthermore, they are not even valid (!), as they are nothing more than simple laymen in disguise, since the Magisterium denounces and proves them guilty, as we will have the opportunity to demonstrate throughout this essay.
- Fable of the supposed “ignorance” about the Magisterium and Canon Law on the part of those who sought the Holy Orders when it was forbidden to do so.
This is probably the most “humane”, subtle fable those hypocritical impostors can appeal to in order to gain the sympathy and trust of the extremely disoriented faithful. Its false logic would be formulated as follows:
“You dare state that we are invalid and illicit for seeking the Holy Orders from people [Lefebvre & Thuc] who, according to you, were not worthy and could not confer any Orders on us, having lost Jurisdiction after apostatizing along with the rest of Catholic Bishops on December 8, 1965… BUT WE DIDN’T KNOW IT BACK THEN (!?) We were completely IGNORANT of Canon Law and the Magisterium (!?), and WE JUST WANTED TO BE ORDAINED PRIESTS (AND BISHOPS) FOR THE HONOR AND GLORY OF GOD, AND FOR THE GOOD FOR SOULS, AND TO SAVE THE CHURCH (!?) We didn’t know anything, we just wanted to help prevent the disappearance of the Priesthood and the true Catholic Mass (!?) Therefore, HOW DARE YOU JUDGE US, AND JUDGE OUR HOLY INTENTIONS?… HOW DARE YOU IMPUTE THESE SERIOUS ACCUSATIONS OF BEING SCHIMATIC AND HERETICAL INTRUDERS TO US?”
To which we will respond with complete serenity and firmness in the following manner:
“If the offender making this claim is a cleric, his petition for mitigation must be dismissed, either as false or as indicating ignorance that is affected, or at least gross or supine. His ecclesiastical training in the seminary, with its moral and dogmatic theology, ecclesiastical history, not to mention canon law, ensure that the attitude of the Church towards heresy was imparted to him… Thereafter, his professional associations and his contacts with Church affairs offer another guarantee that he must have known about heresy. Therefore, his present ignorance is unreal; or if it is real, it can only be explained as either deliberately fostered – affected ignorance – or else as the result of a total failure to do even a modicum of work regarding fundamental ecclesiastical theory and practice – gross and supine ignorance.”
Eric Francis Mackenzie, The Delict Of Heresy, 1932, p. 48
In this simple way, we will silence and hopefully put to shame those conceited schismatics. As a matter of fact, what annoys them all is when someone dares speak to them based on the unquestionable authority of the Magisterium, making them see they are hopelessly wrong. They cannot stand this and react like Pharisees, tearing their hair out, yet another evident sign that they are not in the truth but in error, since they only seek the acclaim of the simple and spiritually ignorant to feed their ego. This should come as no surprise, because looking back in the history of the Church, we will discover that the Supreme Pontiffs of Our Lord Jesus Christ have always spoken with divine authority because their word was sacred and infallible, yet many bad Christians and false brothers refused to believe in this dogma of faith, and for this reason they rebelled against the Papacy and its Magisterium, being the origin of fatal schisms and heresies. Here is the origin of evil: pride, the reluctance to accept that God had chosen certain specific men to entrust them with the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to bind and loose, and to teach, guard and govern the Flock of Christ Our Lord. And how could it be otherwise, behind this spirit of pride and rebellion we always find the father of lies, who was the first rebel who dared utter his impious “Non Serviam” in front of the Holy Trinity, which earned him the most lightning expulsion from Heaven and being hurled into the depths of Hell.
- Fable of “Non Una Cum” the antipopes of the conciliar sect, in this case, Bergoglio, aka “Francis”, according to which the grave sacrilege and desecrations of the sedevacantist intruders arising from Msgr. Thuc’s line would be “legitimized”, as well as of those performed by Lefebvrist pseudo “clerics” who later became sedevacantists.
According to this absurd logic, the only thing that counts would be to remain “Non Una Cum” Bergoglio, alias “Francis”, no matter if the Minister be heretical and schismatic, illicit, invalid, null and sacrilegious; all that would be secondary, the important thing is to be “Non Una Cum”, that is, to not be in communion with, even if those who tell us so have been excommunicated for disobedience to the Magisterium and for their adherence to schism and heresy, no problem, let us all repeat the wicked mantra of “Non Una Cum”, as if that were the magic wand that could turn their sacrilegious simulations into something acceptable to God Almighty, which is ridiculous and false.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Mar 30, 2023 | New Blog
+Seven Dolors of the Blessed Virgin Mary +
Prayer Society Intention for April, Month of the Holy Ghost
That we may always “Hear and follow the Sovereign Pontiff(s), who teach infallibly through the Holy Ghost, and the Church, which is the pillar and ground of truth” — the Raccolta
The following quotes from the first installment of Mr. Morell-Ibarra’s work have been objected to by several readers and for this reason will be addressed below.
Did Novus Ordo bishops defect prior to 1965?
Mr. Morell-Ibarra’s work makes frequent and specific mention of the operation of error. He claims that those bishops following Angelo Roncalli and Giovanni Montini did not officially lose their offices until 1965, But is this really the case? He writes:
“The… Bishops and Cardinals miserably betrayed the Flock of Christ and …apostatized en masse at the moment they signed their signature on the heretical closing documents of the accursed Vatican 2 cabal, thus consummating a public and notorious act of apostasy and being excommunicated en bloc [Canon 188.4 and Bull Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio], losing ipso facto any position and jurisdiction they had when joining a non-Catholic sect.”
This was indeed a public betrayal, but it was by no means the first. And while it was the first that most of the faithful may have been able to know about all this, Canon Law does not require that such heresy be manifest to EVERYONE, en masse, before the censure is considered to be incurred. This false belief that these bishops may be considered not culpable of their offenses immediately on the election of Angelo Roncalli is one of the primary errors of traditionalists. It is one that leaves the door wide open to the “discovery” of some validly consecrated bishop in the future and the alleged validity of their subsequent ministrations.
In order to determine exactly how Catholics must view the Great Apostasy, it is necessary to follow precisely the order laid out by St. Paul in 2 Thess 2: vs. 3-7, 12: “Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God… And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time… Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth but have consented to iniquity.” The revolt or apostasy does not come at the end; it comes at the beginning. It actually began with the Protestant Reformation, as we have pointed out in other articles, and culminated in the defection of the cardinals who “elected” Angelo Roncalli, False Prophet. It was Roncalli who worked hand in hand with Montini throughout his entire reign as false pope. One might even call Montini Roncalli’s puppet master.
The Son of Perdition, Montini, could not have eventually been revealed without the invalid election of Roncalli. Thiswas the great defection — the cardinal-bishops’ and the cardinal-priests’ violation of all that was written in Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS), and for that matter by Pope Paul IV in his Cum ex Apostolatus Officio in electing an unworthy candidate. This 1559 bull announced that the abomination of desolation would sit in the Holy Place if a heretic was invalidly elected as pope, which sadly happened in October 1958. So first the revolt, once he who withholdeth was taken out of the way. Next, the gradual revelation of Montini as the Man of Sin, refused the cardinalate by Pope Pius XII, being falsely “lifted up” to the cardinalate by Roncalli. Then Montini’s invalid election as pope, sitting “…in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God.”
The bishops to whom the election of a true pope devolved, according to Canon Law and all Church practice, by their “silence and manner of acting,” (Can. 1325 defining heresy), lost their offices for accepting Roncalli as pope, when they were bound to know he was unworthy of election and were obligated, for this reason, to elect a true pope. In this they consented to “…the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity” — the very mystery of iniquity that was THE Antichrist, (Montini), introduced by Roncalli. That the actions of these bishops were both public and culpable is explained below.
Canon 2197
“In Canon law the term offense implies an external and morally imputable violation of a law to which at least an indeterminate canonical sanction is attached” (Canon 2195).
“An offense is public if it has already been divulged or if it was committed under or attended by such circumstances that it’s divulgation may and must be prudently considered easily possible (1) “An offence is notorious by notoriety of fact if it is publicly known and committed under such circumstances that it cannot be concealed by any subterfuge nor excused by any excuse admitted in law, (i.e., both the fact of the offense and the impeccability or criminal liability must be publicly known” (3) “An offense is occult if the offense is public but its imputability is not public” (4) And Canon 2199 further explains imputability as follows: “The imputability of an offense depends on the evil will of the delinquent and the extent to which his ignorance of the violated law or his omission of proper diligence was culpable…” Revs. Woywod-Smith note that an offense is considered public when at least 6-10 persons in a small community know of its existence or could know; more in a larger commmunity.
Canon 2200
“The evil will spoken of in Canon 2199 means a deliberate will to violate a law and presupposes on the part of the mind and knowledge of the law and on the part of the will freedom of action given the external violation of a law the evil world is presumed in the external form until the contrary is proved.” Commenting on Can. 1828, which warns against conjecturing about something not proven as “a fact established by evidence in the case,” Revs. Woywod-Smith write: “(5) ALL PERSONS are presumed to know the law (CANON LAW DOES NOT ADMIT IGNORANCE AS AN EXCUSE FROM THE LAWS THAT DISQUALIFY A PERSON OR RENDER ACTS INVALID…)” and Pope Pius XII’s constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS) is an invalidating law. Under Can. 2242 Woywod-Smith further observe: “Contumacy of the offender is implied in the deliberate violation of a law to which a censure latae sententiae is attached, and therefore the censure is incurred immediately with the breaking of the law. The violation is considered to be deliberate where disqualifying and invalidating laws are concerned, such as a lack of jurisdiction which invalidates the Sacrament of Penance.”
Rev. Garrigou-Lagrange also notes that under Can. 985, n. 1: “Apostates from the faith, heretics, and schismatics incur irregularities ex delicto, by the sinfulness of their condition (whether material or formal).” This confirms the statements made by other theologians concerning the return of those from heresy held by one after the age of 14, who wished to be admitted to orders. For they teach that unless first absolved, they cannot be so admitted. Ignorance, therefore, will not excuse these bishops. It excused the faithful only up to the time that the revised sacramental rites and Novus Ordo Missae was introduced: THE FINALIZATION OF THE GREAT APOSTASY came when the faithful, priests and religious left the Novus Ordo between 1965-69. After that time they too incurred excommunication for heresy and schism by migrating to Traditionalist or other non-Catholic groups without first determining what happened and why. They became at least material heretics under Can. 2200, meaning they were guilty of incurring the censure but not necessarily of committing the SIN of heresy. That is something that only the pope or a bishop delegated by him for that specific purpose could determine.
Roncalli’s public defection
All Canon Laws are public documents available to the faithful. Bishops especially are bound to be well-versed in these laws. Angelo Roncalli was first listed as a “suspected Modernist” in 1925 by the Holy Office when he was relieved of his teaching position at the Lateran Seminary for exhibiting these tendencies. When Roncalli was the nuncio to France, he appointed a thirty-third degree Freemason and close friend, the Baron Yves Marsaudon, as head of the French branch of the Knights of Malta, a Catholic lay order. Pope Pius Pope Pius XII later refused to appoint a new head for the Knights of Malta following the death of its then existing head. Roncalli also insisted on receiving his cardinal’s hat from the anti-Catholic Vincent Auriol, an atheist and notoriously anti-clerical socialist, then President of the country of France. He also was implicated as a socialist sympathizer in the banning by Pius XII of the worker priest movement in France. Prior to Pope Pius XII’s election, he also campaigned publicly to become pope. And yet his unworthiness was not known to these bishops???
These are not occult offenses; they are very public affairs. Roncalli may later have been absolved by the pope from favoring these heresies and given a warning, (this would have been done secretly), but that does not make him anyone worthy to be elected pope. These cardinals and bishops were bound to know this, given his public behavior and the notoriety of his acts Even the heads of cathedral chapters are bound to know the laws governing the invalid election of unworthy candidates when electing clerics. Pope Pius XII’s Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis orders that cardinals voting to elect a pope go to the altar and “…kneeling there, he will pray for a little while; then rising, in a loud and intelligible voice, he will swear an oath in this form, which is kept written down on a card placed on the Altar: ‘I call to witness Christ the Lord, Who will judge me, that I choose the man that, according to God, I conclude ought to be elected.’” The violation of this oath invalidated the entire election according to VAS itself, and ALL the hierarchy were bound to know this and to obey this constitution.
In matters of doubt as to whether Roncalli could have been elected given his past behavior, they were bound to refer to the old law, that being Pope Paul IV’s 1559 bull Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, which reads: “We sanction, establish, decree and define, THROUGH THE FULLNESS OF OUR APOSTOLIC POWER, that… all and sundry Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals… who in the past… have strayed or fallen into heresy… or who, in the future, shall stray or fall into heresy or shall incur, incite or commit schism… BEING LESS EXCUSABLE THAN OTHERS IN SUCH MATTERS… are forever deprived of, and furthermore disqualified from and incapacitated for their rank…” This bull is the basis, noted In the Fontes or footnotes to the 1917 Code, for the tacit resignation of all offices found in Can. 188 no. 4. The bull further states: “They shall be treated, as relapsed and subverted in all matters and for all purposes, just as though they had earlier publicly abjured such heresy in court. They can never at any time be re-established, reappointed, restored or recapacitated for their former state…” (para. 3).
And this bull applies to the bishops as well, if they do not oppose the election of a heretic. For Cum ex… further states: “…Whoever knowingly presumes in any way to receive anew the persons so apprehended, confessed or convicted [and Roncalli was known to have been put on notice by Pius XI and Pius XII for his behavior], or to favor them, believe them, or teach their doctrines, shall ipso facto incur excommunication, and, become infamous.They shall not and cannot be admitted orally, in person, in writing, through any spokesman or procurator to offices public or private, or deliberations or a Synod or general, or provincial Council, or a Conclave of Cardinals, or any congregation of the faithful, or anyone’s election, or to give testimony. They shall be incapable of making a will, nor shall they receive any inheritance; furthermore, no one shall be obliged to answer to them in any affair.”
There is also the infallible 1458 bull of Pope Pius II, Execrabilis, confirmed at the Vatican Council, which states that; “Nobody dares under whatever pretext to make such an appeal from any of our ordinances sentences or commands and from those of our successors or to adhere to such appeals made by others or to use them in any manner by [appealing to a future council]… Anyone of any status, rank, order or condition, even if adorned with imperial, royal or PAPAL DIGNITY, who shall contravene [this bull]… shall ipso facto incur sentence of anathema from which he cannot be absolved except by the Roman Pontiff and at the point of death.” And this bull precedes that of Pope Paul IV.
Bishops bound to uphold papal laws
So there was never a second Vatican Council; for from the moment Roncalli attempted to announce the intent to convene such a council, in January of 1959, he was deposed under this bull. This has not been emphasized enough and adds additional weight to the invalidating effects of VAS. Certainly in all the preparatory sessions to the Council beginning in 1959, as history readily reveals, Roncalli had given ample evidence of his heretical intentions. Those bishops who arrived to participate in the first session of this council October 11, 1962 were already heretics and therefore could scarcely convene one; neither could the usurper Roncalli call such a council. But even if they had not been heretics previously, they were from that point ipso facto excommunicated. The following oath from the episcopal consecration illustrates how far they fell from fulfilling their duties:
“I …, elected to the Church of …, from this hour henceforward will be obedient to Blessed Peter the Apostle, and to the holy Roman Church, and to our Holy Father, Pope…, AND TO HIS SUCCESSORS CANONICALLY ELECTED. I will assist them to retain and defend the Roman Papacy… I shall take care to preserve, to defend, increase and promote the rights, honors, privileges and authority of the holy Roman Church, of our Lord, the Pope, and of his aforesaid successors. I shall observe with all my strength, and shall cause to be observed by others, the rules of the holy Fathers, the Apostolic decrees, ordinances or dispositions, reservations, provisions and mandates…” The consecrator asks: “Will you receive, keep and teach with reverence the traditions of the orthodox fathers and the decretal constitutions of the Holy and Apostolic See?… Will you exhibit in all things fidelity, submission, obedience, whom was given by God the power of binding and of loosing, AND ACCORDING TO CANONICAL AUTHORITY, to Blessed Peter the Apostle, to his Vicar our Holy Father, Pope N. and to his successors, the Roman Pontiffs?”
How were they to fulfill this oath of strict obedience without knowing how to determine whether or not such a pope was canonically elected??? Even the faithful are bound by the laws of the Church, and these laws state that if the external act is committed, the offense is considered deliberate and culpable until proven otherwise. Rev. Benedict Pfaller notes: “…The religious would renounce the Catholic faith in passing over to a non-Christian group such as Buddhism, Mohammedanism, some well-defined cult of paganism, Judaism, etc.; or in joining a Protestant, heretical, non-Catholic Christian sect or a schismatic church; or in joining any professedly and manifestly anti-Catholic group, such as a league of Freethinkers, or, finally, in openly denying even one article of the Catholic faith…On July 30, 1934, a response of the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code…state(d) that the declaration of fact IS NOT NECESSARY in order that a religious be considered as ipso facto legitimately dismissed… THE RELIGIOUS MUST BE CONSIDERED DISMISSED EVEN BEFORE THE DECLARATION OF THE FACT TAKES PLACE,” (Ipso Facto Dismissal of Religious, Catholic University of America Canon Law dissertation, 1948, Volume 34, Number 7, page 743-4, April 1934). Once again, this indicts bishops on grounds of accepting a false pope.
Concerning irregularities, Revs. Woywod Smith comment on Can. 986: “Contrary to the former law… the irregularity [for apostasy, heresy or schism] is now incurred [by the clergy] even though one does not join an heretical sect.” Particularly during an interregnum, we may NOT dispense ourselves from these laws! Like it or not, many of us cooperated in heresy and/or were involved in a schismatic sect and incurred excommunication for heresy and/or schism. We must conduct ourselves accordingly, doing penance for three years. We must also amend our lives and repair any damage done by such heresy and schism. If even those age 14 and older are considered culpable, how much more so ourselves. This is especially true in this age of instant access to the truth via the Internet. Revs. Woywod-Smith also state under Can, 672§1, (see also Can. 2295) that the religious who has given signs of complete amendment for three years is to be readmitted to his order, but the reason for dismissal must have been grave, as stated in Can. 647§2. Therefore, Catholics who have done penance could readily be absolved were there a true pope and hierarchy, so there is hope and there is a remedy.
All of this is stated on the website in several different places as well as in The Phantom Church in Rome. But it does not hurt to remind everyone WHY we must believe these bishops were schismatics from the beginning of Angelo Roncalli’s reign and must be considered as such by all Catholics.
Must Catholics believe Antichrist was an individual person?
In a quote from Msgr. Straubinger’s Bible, cited in the first installment of Mr. Morell-Ibarra’s work, one could be led to believe that Antichrist will not be a specific man, but only a collectivity. This is an error, as shown below, although not one that Mr. Morell-Ibarra seems to engage in, since prior to this quote he names Paul 6, Giovanni Montini, as theAntichrist. Today of course we are left only with the collectivity, or system, which is the thought I believe he was trying to convey. The quote is cited below.
“Buzy, drawing attention to the fact that Jesus constantly speaks in the plural of false Messiahs and false prophets and never of a false Messiah in singular or of an Antichrist, concludes: “that in the teaching of Jesus as in that of Saint John (I John 1, 18-23) there is no individual Antichrist; there is only one powerful and terrible collectivity of antichrists.”
Rev. E. Sylvester Berry says it is certain, and that Suarez holds it as an article of faith that Antichrist is a definite person. Bellarmine teaches also that he will be one, individual person (se Summo Pontifice, lib. iii, c. 2). Likewise Rev. Augustin Lemann according to Fr. Fahey, Rev. H.B. Kramer and several others. Henry Cardinal Manning states in his The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy that it is the unanimous opinion of the Fathers that Antichrist will be a definite PERSON, which means we must accept this as a rule of faith. The Vatican Council teaches that: “In matters of faith and morals pertaining to the instruction of Christian doctrine, that must be considered as the true sense of Sacred Scripture which Holy Mother Church has held and holds whose office it is to judge concerning the true understanding and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures. And for that reason, no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture itself contrary to this sense or even contrary to the unanimous agreement of the Fathers“ (DZ 1788).
Manning points out that it is the Protestants who would make Antichrist only a SYSTEM, meaning all the popes from the beginning. Yet all these authors also concede that The Antichrist will be the culmination of, or the head of, A SYSTEM. Rev. Kramer attributes the establishment of this system to Roncalli, False Prophet, in advance of his reign. Rev. Bernard Le Frois calls this system “collective Antichrist,” persecuting Christians down through the centuries, symbolized in the last days by the seven heads in Apocalypse, Chap. 13. We can neither deny that Antichrist is a specific man nor that he heads a system, for he scarcely would be able to accomplish anything if not aided by others, and Holy Scripture indeed teaches he will be so aided. This is why we have always maintained that Giovannni Baptiste Montini, Paul 6, was Antichrist, installed as the Man of Sin with the help of the False Prophet, Angelo Roncallli, aka John 23.
We now proceed to our third installment of Mr. Morell-Ibarra’s work below. Any further questions arising with this work will be addressed in a later blog.
Installment #3 of Javier Morrell-Ibarra’s Survival Handbook
The fables, also called logics of the Anomos, are the logics of disobedience to the Papacy, which are normally used by the acolytes of the Thuc and Lefebvrite schisms, in short, by the devotees of what we have branded as “congregational sedevacantist ecumenism”, logics that are normally contradictory and based on their subjective and fallacious perception. These are perverse logics where these sectarians put their personal interests and their own obsessive-compulsive disorders before what the Popes have always decreed to be ruled in perpetuity, blind as all these pretentious individuals are due to their detestable Luciferian arrogance that prevents them from receiving the Grace that God grants only to the humble and small. We will deal with these insidious fables concocted by the wickedness of the false prophets in the next chapter.
The following fables of the Anomos employed by the false christs and their false prophets have been identified in the course of these turbulent years that have elapsed since the death of the last Catholic Pontiff Pope Pius XII, and with it the consequent disappearance of the obstacle or Katejon that retained the manifestation of the supreme impious who was to engender the abominable Harlot of the Apocalypse that has eclipsed the Holy and Immaculate Bride of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the eyes of the entire universe to the immense shock and horror of Heaven and earth. These twisted fables respond to a very extensive series of obsessive-compulsive disorders suffered by those who spread them, which they arrogantly describe as “new magisterium”, a term coined by themselves, and which we have called “OCD Traditionalism”, that is, Traditionalism based on obsessive-compulsive disorders. All of them have been completely refuted by Sacred Scripture and the infallible Magisterium of the Vicars of Christ, both of which constitute the sword of the Holy Ghost, which is the Word of God, with which the last faithful must inevitably arm themselves if they want to survive the terrible spiritual hunt and slaughter that is unfolding before our eyes at this very moment.
Therefore, every time we hear any of these false christs or their false prophets trying to deceive us with these perverse fables that follow, let us know that these people are misled because of their pride and their disobedience towards the only authority established by God to feed, rule and govern the Flock, which is blessed Saint Peter and his Successors, the last of them being Pope Pius XII, whose infallible Magisterium remains in force until the Parousia, therefore we must not lend any credit to those who try to deceive us in this way, but we must flee from them and avoid them as heretics and obstinate sectarians, applying what is recommended to us in Titus 3,10 concerning those unfortunate individuals who have gone astray and are blinded by their own Luciferian arrogance.
Compendium of the main fables or false logics of the Anomos spread by the false Christs and their false prophets:
- Fable of the promise of Our Lord Jesus Christ to be with us until “the consummation of the centuries” (Matthew 28, 20), which many false Christs and false prophets have misunderstood and translated as “the end of the world” literally, that is, Judgment Day, the physical destruction of the world, etc. They promote this fable in order to justify their sacrilege and desecration, and so make the arrogant claim that they can function without a Pope to provide the Jurisdiction that only the Vicar of Christ possesses by divine right. From which it follows that all of them operate from the most absolute and flagrant illegality and invalidity, without any jurisdiction, which turns them into dangerous intruders and soul thieves who have not entered through the Fold’s fenced gate and must be vigorously rejected and denounced by the faithful.
We have already explained that the consummation of the centuries is the end of an era, not the end of the world understood literally, but the end of the Christian era in which the Church and the Papacy illuminated, governed and sanctified the Catholic world, for they constituted the Katejón or obstacle that kept the mystery of iniquity tied and prevented the manifestation of the wicked man, and that once both have been removed from the middle so that Scripture could be fulfilled, Satan has been unchained, thus beginning the time of the Antichrist or the Anomos.
- Blasphemous and perverse fable spread by hypocritical heretic Marcel Lefebvre whereof it would be possible to recognize the Pope and resist him at the same time when he would have deviated from the Faith and taught a different Gospel (!?)
But if you accuse the Pope, you accuse Our Lord Jesus Christ, and if you accuse Our Lord, you accuse the Most Holy Trinity! The Lefebvrist madness is a very grave mortal sin against the Holy Ghost. Just what kind of madman can even imagine that a Pope could invalidate all things sacred and do everything possible so that the flock of Our Lord Jesus Christ would fall into the lake of eternal fire, using the same immediate Power of the Incarnate Word and being inspired by the Holy Ghost !? What kind of hellish whisper was directing Lefebvre to even think of such blasphemy? What kind of hypnosis do his sectarians who are legion still suffer today? If Montini was the Pope, as Lefebvre always believed, then the Novus Ordo is valid, the Montinian Ordination Rite is valid, and the entire heretical Vatican 2 cabal is dogmatic. But Montini was indeed THE Antichrist!
We will revisit this fable to refute it once and for all with the aid of the Magisterium.
- Fable of Canon 209 and the famous “common error”. Can. 209 – In errore communi aut in dubio positivo et probabili sive iuris sive facti, iurisdictionem supplet Ecclesia pro foro tum externo tum interno. This is the favorite fable of the vast majority of “traditionalist-sedevacantist” false clergy and religious, who naively think that the tricky recourse to this canon will function as a “magic wand” that can validate and legitimize everything, even the most flagrant contempt and disobedience towards the Magisterium and the Code of Canon Law. According to these hypocritical charlatans, their insolent transgressions would be “excused” and “justified” by what they consider to be a state of “common error” on an almost universal scale that would have deceived the whole world during the Vatican 2 bogus council and the great apostasy that ensued shortly thereafter. Thus, these impostors imagine that anything “good” can come out of transgressing the discipline imposed by Pope Pius XII, because according to them, “they were all deceived by common error” (sic), hence Our Lord and the Church would be obliged to provide them with Jurisdiction to perpetrate their horrible Mass simulations and sacrilege. (!?)
But what these loud-mouthed, opinionated bigots fail to understand is that the Church is the Pope, its Head, who [in union with Our Lord Jesus Christ] is the one who supplies Jurisdiction for the entire Mystical Body, since he is the ONLY one who enjoys full universal jurisdiction. And not any excommunicated schismatic like Lefebvre or Thuc, nor any “pneumatic church” that claims to function without a Head, since the Holy Catholic Church has always been jurisdictional. If these sectarians refuse to understand that nothing works without the Pope, and they choose to deceive themselves by saying that there was no massive apostasy… and pretend that this is like a normal interregnum, after 65 years (!), that can only mean one thing: Namely, that all these prideful imposters who hold fast to their fake cassocks are under the insidious influence of the Operation of error. This therefore blinds them because of their arrogance and inordinate attachment to a piece of cloth that gives them a false authority over the extremely puzzled faithful, instead of the love, fidelity and obedience they owe to the Pope, the Holy Church and Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Their situation is certainly harder to accept and implies a greater degree of sacrifice than ours, simple laypeople like them, but we painfully accept it and carry on whereas they cling to a non-existent clerical state, hence it would also mean more supernatural merit for them if they were humble enough to admit that they were deceived by the false Christs of Lefebvre and Thuc, but they refuse for a simple matter of despicable pride and their insatiable lust for the vainglory and esteem of the disoriented faithful without theological and canonical knowledge who blindly resort to them.
by T. Stanfill Benns | Mar 25, 2023 | New Blog
+Feast of the Annunciation+
A reader reports that Traditionalists now are claiming they cannot be excommunicated because no true pope or council has ever formally condemned the Novus Ordo and Traditionalists sects as heretical or schismatic, maintaining they can appeal to Can. 2261 §2 to ”supply” jurisdiction for all their activities. Of course this entirely skirts the issue of ALL Traditionalist ordinations and consecrations, invalidated by Pope Pius XII’s 1945 papal election constitution Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS). But then Traditionalists have been intent on going their merry way and doing as they please without bothering to obey the pope for decades, a calculated lawlessness that these sects have always practiced and encouraged. That a declaration of the Novus Ordo and Traditionalist sects is necessary to consider them heretical and schismatic is an outrageous supposition condemned by the constant teaching of the Church, as easily seen here. The specific application of VAS to the validity of their masses and sacraments is demonstrated in the paragraphs below. Please save this as an easy reference to why these sects are not Catholic.
An easy way to determine the invalidity of all Traditionalist operations
Traditionalists cannot continue to justify their operations on the basis of epikeia and necessity as explained here by pretending that no law exists which provides ground rules to be observed in this so-called “emergency.” If they consider those ruling from Rome as usurpers, they must also admit the Church currently exists during an interregnum. Ample proofs have been available for decades that such an interregnum began with the death of Pope Pius XII. And if we are now experiencing such an interregnum, and their intention is to preserve the Catholic Church exactly as it existed on the death of Pope Pius XII, then there is definitely one, infallible law and one law only that Traditionalists were bound to follow: Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis (VAS).
The first three paragraphs of this papal constitution infallibly lay down the parameters that must be met in order to preserve the integrity of the Church’s laws, rights and teachings during one of the most dangerous periods imaginable — when the Roman Pontiff has passed away and the Church no longer possess a visible head. It invalidates all actions that usurp the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff during an interregnum and any attempt to either change or dismiss VAS itself or any of the sacred canons contained in the 1917 Code of Canon Law. This application of VAS to the Code has been stated by the canonists themselves, (Woywod-Smith, Bouscaren-Ellis). VAS further enjoins any and all to defend the rights of the Church during this most vulnerable time from any incursions made by Her enemies.
The second part of VAS involving the election of a Roman Pontiff requires that a new election be held in no less than three months’ time. Those failing to elect during this time period lose the right to elect (Anscar Parson, Canonical Elections), so this right was lost long ago. While claiming to acknowledge the existence of VAS, Traditionalists deny that they are in violation of this infallible constitution. And they have done nothing to prove that it does not apply to them exactly as it is said here to apply. They have not proven it was somehow abrogated, that it is not infallible, or that it is no longer enforceable. None of their pseudo-clergy have presented the teachings of popes and councils in an official position paper to vindicate their claims. They have not done so because they cannot; VAS is a codification of all papal election laws from the earliest times. All previous laws were abrogated in establishing this law. Below we will see that no matter what objections they might bring, VAS entirely and completely obliterates Traditionalists’ very existence and renders all of their acts invalid.
- Bps. Ngo dinh Thuc and Marcel Lefebvre could not validly create priests and bishops during an interregnum because a papal mandate and confirmation of episcopal appointment could not be obtained. These are acts that have been reserved exclusively to the Roman Pontiffs for centuries. To presume the possession of the mandate and confirmation of any appointment is therefore a usurpation of papal jurisdiction according to VAS that invalidates any attempt at consecration. In addition, men who never became bishops could scarcely establish seminaries or validly ordain priests, acts which can be executed only by a validly consecrated bishop.
- Some claim that the supposed orders conveyed by Thuc and Lefebvre cannot be considered invalid because these men were approved and appointed under Pope Pius XII. But the validity of Lefebvre and Thuc’s ordinations/consecrations in the 1970s-80s and the subsequent ordinations conferred by their “bishops” has been questioned even by Traditionalists for decades. Therefore they are already doubtful and to be avoided. But this is not all.
- For in presuming the validity of these ordinations and consecrations without a decision by the Holy See, Traditionalists usurp papal jurisdiction BECAUSE ONLY THE POPE MAY DETERMINE SUCH VALIDITY. Therefore said presumption is null, void and invalid.
- VAS also invalidates THE EXERCISE of any orders received after 1958, just as Pope Pius VI’s Charitas and other papal decrees have done, even by bishops approved under Pope Pius XII. Because of their adherence to the Novus Ordo (and later, Traditionalist sects), the men conveying these orders, even if they used the old rite, were at least suspect of communicatio in sacris and therefore presumed to have incurred this censure under Can. 2200 (and possibly other censures as well). Can. 2200 holds them guilty until the pope determines otherwise. To presume the lifting of these censures and vindicative penalties, which is clearly an act of papal jurisdiction, is to usurp said jurisdiction. Therefore any EXERCISE of these orders, even if otherwise valid, constitutes a presumption of absolution from these censures, a usurpation of papal jurisdiction rendering them null, void and invalid.
- It is a proven and indisputable fact that the only source ever cited for supplying jurisdiction throughout the history of the Church is the Roman Pontiff, who holds supreme jurisdiction in the Church. To claim that such jurisdiction is supplied in his absence by the law itself is an absurdity, (since Canon Law itself is predicated on papal law and the perpetual existence of the Roman Pontiff); and to say that it is supplied by Christ is heresy. VAS forbids appeal to the supplying principle and invalidates any such appeal as a presumption of papal jurisdiction during an interregnum.
- Any attempt to change or dismiss canon law also is nullified. This would include the violation of Can. 6 n. 4, which requires Traditionalists to adhere to the old law regarding heresy, meaning no declaratory sentence is needed for its existence; Can. 104, reflected in VAS, which invalidates anything done based on error; Can. 147, which requires that in order to possess jurisdiction, certainly validly ordained or consecrated clergy must first receive an office from competent authority; Can. 200, which requires proof of jurisdiction be presented; Can. 804, which requires presentation of the celebret in order to say mass in a place other than the priest’s proper diocese; Can. 2265 §1 which forbids those excommunicated form advancing to orders. And these are only a few among many.
Traditionalists are only laymen simulating the Sacraments, and this we know infallibly from the mouth of Pope Pius XII. Mr. Morrell-Ibarra offers Scriptural proofs of this simulation below.
Installment #2 of Javier Morrell-Ibarra’s Catholic Survival Guide and Reference Handbook
The Great Montinian or conciliar Harlot is the parent sect from which all these false Christs and their false prophets arise, who are all miasmas of the mystical body of the Antichrist, putrefying elements that walk towards their perdition while trying to deceive the greatest possible number of candid souls with little or no formation in the Faith, the Doctrine, and the Magisterium…
In this sense, we can also compare the enormous sin of these false shepherds with the sin committed by King Saul [cf I Kings 8-14], who dared to celebrate the holocaust without being a priest, which was contrary to the Law and was a serious fault, even though his intention was to prevent his people from dispersing, which is exactly what the heretical and schismatic intruders do today, since they try to establish themselves in the visible Church without even being priests, under the fallacious pretext of preventing the faithful from dispersing after the great apostasy of the conciliar sect, in addition to other outlandish excuses that these hypocrites have fabricated to justify their unjustifiable transgression and disobedience to the Magisterium of Pope Pius XII and the Holy Canons. As we read in the commentary on this passage in the Bible by Mons. Straubinger:
“This is a great lesson to show us how faith and trust in God must be maintained even against all appearances, without trying to resort to our human prudence to correct what we believe to be an error by the infinite Wisdom.” This constitutes, in effect, exactly the same sin of those fraudulent impostors, who dare to impiously judge as an “error” by Pius XII the fact that he has bound on earth and in Heaven that absolutely no one can usurp the functions of the Pope during the time that the See is vacant. For such reason these intruders, at the height of their malicious pride and satanic human prudence, have thought it convenient to “consecrate” and “order” one another, as if they could, without Peter and against Peter, thus demonstrating to all their little faith and trust in God, and their null Catholicity, because whoever is not united to the Holy See is not Catholic but heretical and schismatic.
“Whoever leaves the chair of Peter, on which the Church is founded, is not in the Church. For whoever does not maintain unity with the Church, does not have the Faith either.”—Saint Cyprian
… “They devoted themselves solely to the study of the books of Holy Scripture, without presuming to ask their own thoughts for its interpretation, but rather they sought it in their writings and in the authority of the ancients, who, in turn, as was evident, they received from the apostolic succession the rule of their interpretation.” … — Saint Gregory of Nazianzus and Saint Basil.
In addition, the episode narrated in Numbers 16 about the sedition carried out by Korah, Dathan and Abiram, with the horrible end they had, serves to perfectly illustrate the incredible perversity and daring of these miserable false prophets of the traditionalist-sedevacantist sects, who emulate those proud Israelites in their satanic attempt to create a secular priesthood, completely outside the authority instituted by God, who at that time were Moses and Aaron, and in our time is the Vicar of Christ. Let us read the excellent comments given to us in Bishop Straubinger’s Bible in connection with this passage: “In this chapter we are presented with the first known attempt to create a lay priesthood, independent of the authority instituted by God. Moses, who was not a priest, immediately recognized the scope of this movement, which if imposed would have undermined the foundations of theocratic rule. For this reason it was not meekness (cf. 12, 3) that impelled him this time to intercede for the criminals, but rather, moved by holy zeal, he asked God not to accept the oblation of the criminals (v. 15).Korah, the first cousin of Moses and Aaron, seems to have revolted out of sheer ambition and envy, because, being of the same family, he wanted to participate in the honors and privileges of the priests. He did not recognize the idea of a priesthood instituted by God, proclaimed the equality of priests and laity, and practically denied Aaron’s authority as the spiritual leader of the people.
We also find similar movements in Christian times, from the Gnostics to the modern sects, all of which coincide in denying what Saint Paul says in Hebrews 5, 4. “No one takes this honor except he who is called by God as Aaron was”. That is why Saint Augustine compares Korah with the heretics who divide the Mystical Body of Christ. cf. 19, 6; I Corinthians 12, 4 ss.; Ephesus 4, 11. Dathan and Abiram had very other reasons to revolt. They didn’t care so much about spiritual authority. They were Reubenites, sons of Jacob’s firstborn, and because of this they believed they had the right to exercise some authority over the other tribes. They could not understand that God had given all power into the hands of Moses and Aaron, who were from the tribe of Levi. These two movements, that of the Levites who aspired to the priestly dignity, and that of the Reubenites who sought to recover the rights of the birthright, which they had lost (cf. Genesis 49, 4 and note), united, and organized a riot that threatened to destroy all the work that Moses had done at God’s command.”
As we see, disobedience and rebellion against God and His High Priests are at the origin of all evil and sin. Therefore, it is not surprising that there are very clear parallels between what is said in this passage and what the Lord warns us in the book of Apocalypse, with the same and identical words, when Yahweh warns the Israelites to stay away from the tents of those impious men [Koreh, Dathan and Abiram] so as not to be in solidarity with their sins. And in parallel we have in Apoc. 18: 4 the following warning: “Come out of her my people, so as not to be in solidarity with her sins and not participate in her plagues.” It is evident that both in Numbers and in the Apocalypse we are told to flee the company of those criminals because of the existence of sacrilege and desecration. From which it follows that God’s punishment will also fall on these unfortunate heirs of Korah who are the false christs of today, just as it did on Korah, Dathan and Abiram for being sacrilegious and profane, just as it fell on King Saul, also sacrilegious and defiling, as we have seen before. We will quote this episode again later, as it masterfully exemplifies the same sin that the usurpers and imposters commit today.
But I would not want to end this section without first mentioning the terrible threat from Jesus Christ Our Lord that hangs over the heads of false christs and their false prophets, as well as all those who believed the insane fables of these impostors and were seduced by their rhetoric and their false prodigies, falling into their clutches, that is, joining their sects and participating in their sacrileges and acts of desecration. It is especially significant and overwhelming that Our Lord warns us about these disobedient hypocrites in Matthew 7:15-20, calling them by the name of false prophets and comparing them to bad trees that cannot produce any good fruit, so they will be cut down and will be cast into the fire: that is, at the end of their thread of life, they will be condemned to hell for all eternity. Indeed, shortly afterwards Our Redeemer explains to us what the sentence of condemnation of those arrogant wretches will be based upon. It is URGENT that those who have been deceived by these individuals read this and immediately get out from under their pernicious influence, because they are risking eternal life: “Not everyone who says to me: “Lord, Lord”, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my heavenly Father. Many will say to me on that day: “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many wonders in your name?” Then I will declare to them: «I never knew you. Away from Me, you workers of iniquity!” (Matt. 7: 21-23).
Yes, this terrible warning from the Lord applies directly to all these false shepherds, who are blind, dropsical, swollen with arrogance and eager for the false glory that their fraudulent titles and non-existent dignities of “bishop”, “father”, “abbé”, “brother” or “sister” give them, to the point of despising and disobeying the Divine Will of the Heavenly Father which is expressed in that the Catholic Church. This Church must be governed by Saint Peter and his Successors, whose infallible Magistery must be faithfully obeyed by of ALL the faithful, whether they are Bishops, Priests, Religious, or simple laymen: we are all obliged to obey the Popes to obtain the salvation of our soul. Because whoever obeys the Pope obeys God, but whoever does not obey him is disobeying God Himself, thus imitating the arrogant Lucifer when he sang his impious and blasphemous “Non Serviam” before the Blessed Trinity in the midst of the heavenly court, which earned him ipso facto expulsion from Heaven and being precipitated deep into the abyss of fire.
In addition, this other warning from Our Lord Jesus Christ also applies to false christs and false prophets and to those who have been deceived by them: One said to him: “Lord, will those who are saved be few?” He answered them: “Fight to enter through the narrow gate, because many, I declare to you, will try to enter and will not be able to. As soon as the owner of the house has woken up and has closed the door, you, being outside, will start knocking on the door saying: “Lord, open for us!” But he, answering, will tell you: “I don’t know you (nor do I know) where you are from.” * Then you will begin to say: “We ate and drank before you, and you taught in our squares.” *But he will tell you: «I tell you, I don’t know where you are from. Away from me, all you workers of iniquity.” There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast out. And from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south they will come to sit at the table in the kingdom of God. And so there are last who will be first, and first who will be last. (Luke 13, 23-30).
The comments on this passage in Bishop Straubinger’s Bible are very illuminating:
[* 26. You taught in our squares: In verse 27, He insists that he does not know them. In addition, it is written that “no one will hear his voice in the squares”, because he will not be turbulent (cf. Matthew 12, 19 and note). If they listened, then, it was to others, as Jesus told him (John 5, 43 and note); to others who did not seek the glory of the one who sent them, but their own glory (John 7, 18 and note), for which they could not have faith (John 5, 44 and note). Those were not, therefore, the true disciples to whom He said: “Whoever listens to you listens to Me” (Luke 10, 16), but the false prophets about whom He had warned so much. Cf. Matthew 7, 15 and note.
* 27. See Matthew 15, 8, quoting Isaiah 29, 13. Matthew 7, 23; 25, 41. Jesus condemns in advance those Christians who are content with the mere name of such and with their external link to the Church.]
Indeed, for at the decisive hour of Judgment, many deceived by the false Christs and their false prophets will uselessly plead before Our Lord that they “ate and drank before Him”, that is, they received what they believed were the Holy Sacraments from the hands of those intruders and impostors, who also preached to them without having any mission or jurisdiction over them. To them those poor gullible souls gave undue credit, thinking that with their false preaching Our Lord was “teaching them in their squares”, that is, in their schismatic and heretical “chapels” and garages, in total contempt and flagrant disobedience of the Papal Magisterium and the 1917 Code of Canon Law, which severely prohibit attending celebrations performed by intruders who have been excommunicated for schism and heresy.
How terrible their surprise will be when they discover at the crucial moment of Judgment that Our Lord will not recognize them or know where they come from, since in fact all these sectarian and schismatic communities have been generated in the spirit of rebellion and contempt for the divine authority of the Vicars of Christ to teach, bind and loose, believing in their infinite pride that they could function bypassing all channels and disciplines established by the Holy See. For this reason, we affirm that those proud rebels did not seek the Glory of God but their own, a false, vain human glory, seeking to be praised and venerated by the blind and the simple who were completely deceived in their particular sects. These include the SSPX, IMBC, CMRI, SSPV, Palmar de Troya, Sociedad Sacerdotal Trento, Mont Carmel, Avrillé, and other small groups and schismatic organizations. This as well as all the false “wandering clerics” that emerged from these sects and now pretend to function independently, deceiving thousands of poor, blind abductees who also supported them financially and made sacrilegious simoniacs out of them.
For NONE of those imposters was sent by God since there was no Pope who could grant them permission and a canonical mission, as well as provide the Jurisdiction necessary to function, without forgetting that they constantly belittled and ignored the voice of Peter in the person of Pope Pius XII, who strictly prohibited the misdeeds and illegalities that these fools perpetrated at the height of their boldness and hypocrisy. This is why we affirm that all of them are cursed and have been sentenced by God. The most terrifying thing will be, without a doubt, when they will have to hear from the lips of Our Lord Jesus Christ those harsh words of “I don’t know you (nor do I know) where you are from”, followed by the fearsome sentence of condemnation “Get away from me, all workers of iniquity.”
Now you understand our insistence that all those who have been deceived by these dangerous tricksters who traffic in sacred things must IMMEDIATELY abandon these schismatic sectarians, who have their conscience seared (I Timothy 4, 2) and walk towards their perdition. This while turning many ignorant souls into mere consumers of sacraments that are nothing but sacrilege and desecration, as the Magisterium and Canon Law warn us, making them concur in communicatio in sacris with those lepers of schism and heresy.
Let no one be deceived, because all those who give credence to the fables of those impostors and grant them an authority and legitimacy they do NOT possess, participating in their simulations and allowing themselves to be fed, that is, spiritually instructed by them, should know that they are being complicit in a very serious sacrilege. This despite the fact that there is no consecration, nor therefore transubstantiation in all those horrible simulations, since those who commit them are only simple laymen in disguise, but those who have allowed themselves to be mentally abducted by those false pastors do think that they are truly receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. Hence the terrible warning in I Corinthians 11, 29 against those who receive Communion without making due discernment of the Body of the Lord, becoming guilty of the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, eating and drinking their own damnation.
So that our readers understand the tremendous seriousness of the sacrilegious crime of the simulation of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we invite you to read the following:
“It seems superfluous to us to demonstrate in many words what a grave and horrendous crime is committed by anyone who, without being invested with priestly Orders, dares to celebrate the sacrifice of the Mass, since the reasons why it is justly considered such a sacrilegious crime are so evident to all that it must be detested and punished with a rigorous application of sanctions”.
[…] “No itinerant bishop, priest or deacon should be received without letters of recommendation; and when they present letters, carefully examine their content; and receive them if they are of proven piety; otherwise, do not even give them what is necessary and let them not be admitted to communion in any way: many things can result from surreptitious behavior.” — Pope Benedict XIV, Encyclical Quam Tumba
“We firmly believe and confess that, no matter how honest, religious, holy and prudent one may be, he cannot and should not consecrate the Eucharist or celebrate the sacrifice of the altar, if he is not a priest, regularly ordained by a visible and tangible bishop. For this office, three things are, as we believe, necessary: a certain person, that is, a priest properly constituted for that office by the bishop, as we have said before; the solemn words that were expressed by the Holy Fathers in the canon, and the faithful intention of the one who utters them. Therefore, we firmly believe and confess that whoever believes and claims that, without previous episcopal ordination, as we have said, they can celebrate the sacrifice of the Eucharist, is a heretic and is a participant and consort in the perdition of Korah and his accomplices, and is to be segregated from the entire Holy Roman Church.” — Pope Innocent III, Eius exemplo, 1208.
Finally, this severe threat from Our Lord Jesus Christ in the form of a parable also hits the false christs and their false prophets, as well as their unfortunate acolytes who preferred the seduction of the perfidious fables of those hypocritical charlatans to the solid, infallible Truth of the Holy Word of God revealed in Scripture and the Magisterium: Parable of the marriage feast and the guest who had not on a wedding garment (Matthew 22, 10-14). This is applicable to those deceived by the false Christs and their false prophets, as well as to all those ravenous wolves themselves, since many of them will have lived in an apparently pious manner in the eyes of the world and their own deceived conscience, but they will not possess the essential Grace that would have made them Catholics. This grace is submission, fidelity and obedience to the Papacy and its infallible Magisterium, which those disobedient, arrogant individuals so many times ignored or openly despised, impiously wanting to believe that they could function without the permission of the Pope and without having received any mission or jurisdiction from the Vicar of Christ: for this reason they will be reputed as schismatics and non-Catholics at the hour of Judgment. We also recommend reading the comments taken from Bishop Straubinger’s Bible.
“And his servants going forth into the ways, gathered together all that they found, both bad and good: and the marriage was filled with guests. And the king went in to see the guests: and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. And he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? But he was silent. Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. *For many are called, but few are chosen.”
[* 14. This parable also refers first of all to the chosen people of the Old Covenant. The Father first invites the Jews to the wedding feasts of his Son with mankind through his “servants”, the prophets. Those who despised the invitation will lose the dinner (Luke 14, 24). The “other servants” are the apostles that God sent without reproving Israel (Luke 13, 6 ss.), during the time of the Acts, that is, when Jesus had already been immolated and “everything was ready” (verse 4; Acts 3, 22; Hebrews 8, 4 and notes). Rejected this time by the people, as He was by the Synagogue (Acts 28, 25 ff.) and then “burnt the city” of Jerusalem (verse 7), the apostles and their successors, inviting the Gentiles, fill the room of God (Romans 11:30). The man who does not wear a bridal garment is the one who lacks sanctifying grace, without which no one can approach the Wedding Banquet of the Lamb (Apoc. 19, 6ff.). Cf. 13, 47 ss. and notes]
And in the same chapter 22 of the Gospel of Saint Matthew, we read this revealing verse 29 a little later:
And Jesus answering, said to them: “You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.”
On which we add this juicy comment taken from Bishop Straubinger, complemented by our own reflections highlighted in purple:
[ 29. You err because you do not understand the Scriptures! Is this not a reproach that we all have to accept? Few are, in fact, those who know the Bible today, and it is not surprising that those who do not study the Scripture of Truth fall into error, as Jesus teaches so many times, and the Supreme Pontiffs remember it so much when they demand its reading daily in homes. Cf. verse 31; 21, 42; John 5, 46 and note. And even fewer are those who know the true hidden treasure of the infallible Magisterium of the Vicars of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which is also the Word of God inspired by His Holy Ghost to the Supreme Pontiffs for the instruction and government of all the Catholic faithful. That is why there are so many today who err and fall into the twisted sophistry and the fables of the Anomos spread by the false prophets, those lepers of schism and heresy, precisely because they did not know the Magisterium that could have protected them against those grave errors and deviations!]
It is universally known that the Holy Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church is founded on the solidity of Saint Peter, the Stone and the Rock, but these sects want us to believe that we must disobey Pope Pius XII, the fundamental rock of the Church, and that we must follow them —they who say they know the spirit of the letter, which is none other than disobedience and non serviam; that we must follow them to their dens of thieves, intruders, foxes and wolves, navigate their rafts and allow ourselves to be guided by these pirates, buccaneers, corsairs, filibusters, thieves and desecrators of the treasures of the Holy Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church. They would have us be deceived by the brilliance of their fake mitres, hooks and their plunder and booty, with the excuse of the rite, incense and pomp, and that we make a defection of Saint Peter, Prince of the Holy Apostles and Fundamental Stone of the Holy Apostolic and Roman Catholic Church, who speaks in his successors assisted by the Holy Trinity in full. Those perfidious thieves that came out of the depths of the great Babylon want to kidnap us through sophistry and disguises to take us back from where God Almighty freely got us out of without us deserving it. What a betrayal of the Good Lord and His compassion it would be to re-enter where He took us out of for our soul’s health, that is, our salvation!
May God grant us that we do not fall for our personal sins and get lost, and may He keep us steadfast in not abandoning His Holy Catholic Church founded on Peter, on the solidity of the Stone, instead of delving into the false churches with feet of clay and quicksand, thus abandoning the Mystical Body of Christ our Lord!
