About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Sheepdog says:


    I confront lies every day and I shed light on things including this so called “Papacy”. Almost daily I am still tweeting and yet again I drew attention. Please make sure my Twitter page is shared, but more importantly keep putting out the link to this BLOG post. Also start getting the word out there NOW. Hope others will join me. Still working on the letters.

  2. abyssum says:

    My Dear Mary D,

    Thank you for your comment and for your ehcouragement. You are doing all that you can do in your present state of life and if you do it heroically you are on the path leading to sanctity. Again, thank you for your comment.

    +Rene Henry Gracida

  3. Mary D says:

    Dear Bishop Gracida, since I am late in commenting on the Open Letter, much of what I would have said..has been said. I agree with you that PF is not a validly elected pope and so I am doing what I can to change this situation. First of all, I never give to the special bishop’s collections because I believe they don’t make good use of the money. Second, I pray and fast for the Church,
    for the valid Cardinals and Bishops, that they may have courage and fortitude to correct the errors of Francis the merciful. Third, I spend much time in Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament,
    being with the Lord to console His Heart in reparation for all the sufferings He is enduring. I pray
    especially for priests, some by name, since I know they are under attack from the enemy. I pray to their guardian angels to help them through this time of troubles.
    This is all I can do, as I see it, right now. If it is His Divine Will that I do more, in any way, I
    will do so.
    God bless you ,dear brave Shepherd! May you continue to do this important work that God has
    entrusted to you . You are an inspiration to everyone! Thank you so much for answering the Great Call of God!

  4. abyssum says:

    Thank you, Joan, for your comment.

    The truth is that the laity are not powerless sheep. The laity supply the clergy with the financial basis which enables them to live a life of relative luxury compared to the lifestyle of the laity. Therefore, while the laity must make their concerns known to the clergy by means of conversation and letters, the laity must give or withhold their financial support in relation to the sexual purity and doctrinal purity that they and the Lord Jesus Christ expect and have a right to have..

    +Rene Henry Gracida

  5. Joan Flood says:

    Thank you so much. The laity are so thirsty for affirmation of the truth and infallibility of the previous popes from our clergy. We are also desperate for leadership from the clergy.

  6. abyssum says:

    Dear hellenback7,

    Thank you for your comment!
    Yes, the CCC has been formally breached with the abolition of the death penalty, but it cannot stand. The arrogance of the Francis Clones is intolerable,their previous assaults on the CCC, e.g. the open borders disaster that is changing Europe forever. The fact that Fisichella first achieved notoriety in a case involving abortion marks him as an enemy of human life. One thing is certain, before they are through the Francis Clones in the Vatican Curia will have rewritten the entire CCC. All the more reason to use canonical weapons as one would use Roundup and kill the weed at the root as my Open Letter demands. The valid cardinals need our support through our prayers and sacrifices. We must have confidence that they will act. Their present silence is necessary since they are in danger of being losing their red hats and perhaps their heads also.

    Continue sending your good comments, hellenback7, they are helpful to all who read them.
    +Rene Henry Gracida

  7. hellenback7 says:

    Bishop Gracida, thank you so much for your detailed reply.

    I had read some of the Fisichella “commentary” previous to this but the quasi-intellectual and theological(?) gymnastics became obvious and tiresome in a very short time.
    I was happy to see Kwasniewski expose him so thoroughly but missed the perfect…”Orwellian twists and turns” comment, so thank you for that as well.

    Please take care of yourself Excellency. My previous confidence that we have the Catechism is not quite as rock steady anymore.
    I’m not trading mine in or adding any “corrections” to the ’92 edition but it will be more difficult to call others to attend to it, now that it has been breached.
    I pray the Lord prevents further alterations in the CCC. I also pray, as I’m sure many do, that He continues to grant you the strength and courage to fight through the thickening “fog”.

    We just need to remember that “The gates of hell will not prevail” (not that they won’t storm the ramparts).

  8. Sheepdog says:

    The Most recent video of the “Two Popes” is here. Just so everyone knows, I feel like this is a strange video and Benedict may not be “Emeritus” he may still just be “Pope”. Also since he always blesses them, are the Cardinals still invalid since they were illicitly appointed by Francis?

  9. Sheepdog says:

    “abyssum says:
    August 7, 2018 at 12:04 pm
    Bravo Sheepdog,

    You are a wonderful example of the SENSUS FIDEI, the laity making known to the Hierarchy their agreement or disagreement with questionable statements or actions which seem heterodox or even outright heretical. Keep it up !!! May your tribe increase !!!”

    Thank you. And thank you for embedding my Twitter so people here can see it. However, with newer comments, you have to click on “older posts”, so now not everyone will see it. Maybe put it on the side or in a Tab. I am tweeting daily about what is going on. It would be a huge help as I also tweet things that I take the time to look for that no one else has the time to find. Just refuted some Sedevacantists as well. Said “No SSPX”. They wondered why I was equating SSPX with Sedes; when I have always alluded that the SSPX and Michael Matt Groups are not the path I am taking, although they are good in some cases. I know I mention my Twitter, but it is playing a key Role. I will screenshot why in another post as it relates to the Reign of Francis the merciful!!!!!!

    Can everyone on here imagine when I take some letters to the post Office? Standing in line with yellow envelopes that are going to go to the good Cardinals Sarah and Burke? Its happening. I am the one who is going to do it. This is a huge moment for me. It is surreal. I could very well affect the outcome of this by what I write, so carefully I will do it. Forgive me everyone if I am taking my time, but at least I Have some days off each week that I can fully devote myself to this. God truly works wonders, but pray for me since I am often a voice of one online. Sometimes there is also a fog of confusion when I do this. Hard to explain.

  10. Sheepdog says: you can easily refute this Excellency. I am not going to “buy in” to their Sedevacantism here and on Twitter.

  11. abyssum says:

    Dear Elizabeth,

    Thank you for your comment.
    Yes only the future will reveal if there are any courageous cardinals who will do what I have asked them to do. I do not expect any of them to contact me it would be too dangerous for them since they could lose their red hat immediately if that were found out and it would then be too dangerous for the Church since they would not be able to participate either in the special conclaves I am asking them to call or the next ordinary conclave which would then proceed to elect a clone of Francis the Merciful to be the next pope; a fate worse than the present.
    +Rene Henry Gracida

  12. Elizabeth G. says:

    Your Excellency, as with most everything on your blog, this letter makes so much sense to me. I have just passed it on to a priest I trust. …I would be so grateful to know that that there are faithful Cardinals who would be willing to risk possible martyrdom to defend the Church. Afterall, there have been martyrs in all ages. Perhaps this will even be accomplished in our lifetimes. But God has His own time to keep. We may feel that nothing in the Church is as it has been or should be. We are not Cardinals so it seems it will not be up to us, but we can pray for the Holy Spirit to ignite our hearts and theirs. You are a brave and faithful bishop who has surely been inspired. You have certainly given me great hope. And with that I ask Sainte Marie-Madeleine and all the saints to pray for our Church.

  13. abyssum says:

    Dear hellenback7,

    Ye, you are correct. The decision to change the Catechism teaching on capital punishment is typical of the Bergolian revolution to reduce everything to relativism. Witness the latest hodgepodge offered by Francis Clone, Rino Fisichella as exposed by Peter Kwasniewski.

    Vatican archbishop: Critics of Pope Francis are not faithful to Tradition

    Catholic, John Paul Ii, Pope Francis, Rino Fisichella, Vatican, Veritatis Splendor

    VATICAN CITY, August 7, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — Those who criticize the teaching of Pope Francis on the basis of former magisterial documents are not faithful to the tradition of the Catholic Church, a high-ranking Vatican official has said.

    In an interview with Vatican News, to mark the 50th anniversary of the promulgation of Veritatis Splendor — Pope John Paul II’s 1993 landmark encyclical on certain fundamentals of the Catholic Church’s moral teaching — Archbishop Rino Fisichella, president of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, said “there is no foothold for challenging the magisterium of Pope Francis in the light of the previous magisterium.”

    Asked about “sectors of the Church” who criticize Pope Francis for “depart[ing] from Catholic doctrine” — and who often point to Veritatis Splendor as the basis for their criticism — Fisichella said he believes “one should never use the magisterium as an instrument to dispute the development of doctrine. When it is used as an instrument, then I fear there is no desire to discover the truth, and that there is also no fidelity to the tradition of the Church.”

    Instead, he said, “we must reiterate how much continuity there is in the development.”

    The Italian archbishop also said he believes it is important “to read carefully all of Pope Francis’ teaching and not just some of his interviews. A mosaic is revealed by the whole set of tiles, not just one tile,” he said, adding that the “mosaic” of the current pontificate displays “a great openness” in the work of Evangelization, of not “putting the norm before proclamation.”

    Archbishop Fisichella is perhaps best known to pro-life advocates for an article he wrote for L’Osservatore Romano in 2009 criticizing a local bishop and seeming to support the actions of Brazilian abortionists who aborted the twins of a sexually abused girl. Pope Benedict XVI removed Fisichella as the head of the Pontifical Academy for Life after the article appeared in the Vatican newspaper.

    In this week’s interview, Fisichella says the three “great elements” of Pope Francis’ pontificate are “the encounter with the person of Jesus, the constant proclamation the Church must announce, and that pastors are called to go out to meet everyone.”

    “This is the idea of the Church ‘going forth’ and therefore also the ability — as Evangelii Gaudium notes – to accompany our contemporaries, to walk alongside them in order to understand them, to really understand their needs and at times even, perhaps, to take a step backwards. This dimension emerges together with the need for mercy. The Jubilee of Mercy was the concrete sign of how Pope Francis has identified and guided his Pontificate,” he explained.

    Archbishop Fisichella said that Veritatis Splendor (promulgated by Pope John Paul II on August 6, 1993) was released in a “cultural context marked by secularism and, consequently, by a strong philosophical relativism.” Within this context, he said, the encyclical, presents “the fundamental points which remain as references for Christian doctrine.”

    When we speak of truth, he said, we have to always keep in mind a “dynamic” concept. “Truth is not a fixist dimension,” he added, applying a biological evolutionary model to theological truth.

    Fixism is the non-scientific theory that the species alive today are identical to those of the past and that evolution does not happen.

    “For Christians, truth is first and foremost that living World that the Lord has left us. Let us not forget that Jesus said: ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life.’ Therefore, the dimension of truth opens to personal encounter: it is the truth of the Gospel, the truth represented by the person of Jesus Christ,” he said.

    The truth, he explained, “is the entire content that Jesus wanted to transmit to his disciples and that comes to us through the Apostles. It is a truth that opens more and more to a discovery of the mystery that has been revealed. There are some fundamental points that remain as in the dogmatic and moral teaching of the Church. These are elements that remain in their immutability,” Fisichella said.

    “Obviously, all of this requires on the part of theologians — as the encyclical Vertiatis Splendor maintains — a great work of interpretation. The unchanging norm is based on the truth of the Gospel.”

    Fisichella also insisted that the Catholic Church cannot accept an idea of truth which is “closed in” on itself. “The truth, by its very nature, refers to fidelity but also to freedom. ‘The truth shall make you free.’”

    “A truth that opens up more and more is a truth that makes every believer, every man, discover a deeper freedom. This, however, also requires fidelity. The link between fidelity and truth is a typical link of the biblical conception of truth.”

    In comments to LifeSiteNews, Dr. Peter Kwasniewski — a Thomist scholar who issued an open critique of Pope Francis’ change to the Catechism’s treatment of capital punishment as contradicting both the natural law and the deposit of faith and who argued that the change is not a mere prudential judgment but a matter of principle — offered this response to Archbishop Fisichella’s remarks:

    All of the proponents of the revolution in moral doctrine always invoke a specious and vague concept of ‘development of doctrine.’ It has become a mantra by which any position can be defended, so long as it bears some element of remote resemblance, without the need for argumentation or the actual preservation of substance. Remember, the rule given for development is that any new insight must totally respect the truths already attained, in their very specificity. So there could be a new insight into Christology, but not such that Jesus Christ ceased to be confessed as true God and true man. Similarly, in the field of morals, there are many new insights into marriage, but none that would ever justify its dissolution, or the use of contraception, or communion for adulterers; and it is no less true with regard to the death penalty, which, however often or rarely it should be used, is contained within the very power of the state as God’s representative in the governance of human affairs.
    Unpacking the August 6 Fisichella interview, point by point, Dr. Kwasniewski said:

    Characteristically, Fisichella hides in vagueness: “we must reiterate how much continuity there is in the development.” Translated from Vaticanese, this means: “we must keep repeating, till we’re blue in the face, that the rabbit we pulled out of the hat is the same as the frog we put in.” Using code language, he speaks of putting “proclamation” before “the norm,” which means, there are no absolute norms that govern proclamation and pastoral accompaniment.

    Then, in a move familiar from Walter Kasper’s theology of revelation, Truth is a “dynamic concept, not a fixist dimension, a ‘living’ word,” i.e., not capable of being propositionally expressed once and for all (as in the Church’s de fide statements and judgments). In this way, rather than having a fixed point of reference for Christian life and thought, which in Fisichella’s way of thinking would be “closed in on itself,” we have a “truth that opens up more and more.”

    Whatever this means, it apparently means that we have to be prepared “to take a step backwards,” i.e., renounce the traditional moral teaching of the Church for the sake of “accompany[ing] our contemporaries.” This, again in code language, is what he means by “a great work of interpretation,” which here translates to a clever work of deconstruction, utilizing points in John Paul II’s encyclical as “references,” but not as indisputable givens.
    Kwasniewski summed up Fisichella’s comments, saying: “The cumulative effect of Fisichella’s Orwellian twists and turns is that we can chuck out whatever in Veritatis Splendor (or Humanae Vitae or Familiaris Consortio, etc.) no longer seems to fit with the needs of modern Western people as seen by Pope Francis.”

  14. abyssum says:

    Dear christopherlawrence,

    I regret to have to say that I am under such pressure of time due to the volume of emails that I receive plus health problems that I simply do not have the time to do as you ask.

    +Rene Henry Gracida

  15. abyssum says:

    Dear unwillinggecumenist,

    Thank you for your encouragement, I need it !!!

    +Rene Henry Gracida

  16. abyssum says:

    Dear hellenback7,

    The Catechism of the Catholic Church as published by His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, is an entirely infallible document and never validly subject to material change because this work entailed both the wide consultation by His Holiness, and his intentional invoking of Petrine power by the direct citation of Luke 22:32. Period. The distinguished theologian, Father Basil Cole, O.P. has explained this in an article, as I recall, perhaps some years ago in The Priest magazine published by Our Sunday Visitor Press.

Comments are closed.