INVITING PAUL ERLICH TO SPEAK AT THE VATICAN IS LIKE INVITING LUCIFER

Featured Image
Cardinal Burke in Virginia on March 24. Claire Chretien / LifeSiteNews
Claire Chretien

NEWSBIOETHICS, CATHOLIC CHURCHMon Mar 27, 2017 – 10:56 am EST

Cardinal Burke: Vatican hosting pro-abort population control activist was ‘simply a scandal’

Abortion , Biological Extinction Conference , Cardinal Burke , Catholic , Catholic Church , Paul Ehrlich , Pontifical Academy Of Sciences , Pontifical Academy Of Social Sciences , Raymond Burke , Scandal

SPRINGFIELD, Virginia, March 27, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Cardinal Raymond Burke said it’s “simply a scandal” that pro-abortion and pro-contraception population control activist Paul Ehrlich was given a platform at a recent Vatican conference.

Burke was speaking on Friday to a standing room only crowd at St. Raymond of Peñafort Catholic Church as part of its distinguished speaker series. He fielded questions at the end of his talk.

He was asked about how “Paul Ehrlich, a great defender of abortion and a sworn enemy of the Church, was recently given a platform at a Vatican conference.” Ehrlich’s speech has caused confusion and has Catholics wondering what’s going on in the Vatican, the questioner said.

“It’s simply a scandal,” said Burke. “I’m scandalized by it and I don’t see how any good Catholic wouldn’t be scandalized by that. I don’t understand it.”

He continued, “These days especially, when fundamental truths about human life and the family are getting called into question in our society in most egregious ways, and I think especially our children and young people are being subjected to this…to let such people who have no grounding whatsoever in the truth of the faith [speak at the Vatican] – it just takes my breath away.”

Ehrlich has compared human babies to garbage, said every sexually active woman needs “free access” to abortion and contraception, and said the Catholic Church’s moral teachings are “just as unethical” as a “terrorist act.” He has defended mass forced sterilization and even forced abortion.

Ehrlich, along with John Bongaarts of the Population Council, spoke at the Biological Extinction Conference last month despite outcry from pro-life activists. The conference was sponsored by the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences.

Bongaarts told the Vatican conference attendees there is an “unmet need for contraception and family planning” and reducing birth rates would help the environment. Ehrlich praised Pope Francis for his environmentalism. Ehrlich later criticized LifeSite and “right wing Catholic websites” for opposing his invitation.

It was at this same conference that Bishop Marcelo Sánchez Sorondo, the Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, said “we don’t know exactly” what the Church teaches about procreation. “Education” will help women have one or two children instead of seven, Sorondo said.

Burke exhorted the faithful to remain true to the teachings of the Church despite rampant confusion. He reminded them of an excellent resource of clarity, the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Burke also addressed transgenderism, Catholic history, the sacred liturgy, and why so many young people are drawn to the Traditional Latin Mass.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on INVITING PAUL ERLICH TO SPEAK AT THE VATICAN IS LIKE INVITING LUCIFER

BRAVO JOHN-HENRY WESTON, HE TELLS IT LIKE IT IS

CATHOLIC LIFEFEATURED
Pro-Life Speaker Westen Receives Standing Ovation For Vatican Critique
Maike Hickson
March 27, 2017
OnePeterFive

From 10-11 March 2017, the Bringing America Back to Life Convention was held in Cleveland, Ohio. The convention was a gathering of nearly 1,500 defenders of life from different religious backgrounds and from all parts of the United States. This gathering, which included the courageous former Planned Parenthood nurse Abby Johnson, also featured many Catholic speakers such as Michael Hichborn (Lepanto Institute), John Smeaton (Society for the Protection of Unborn Children), Gabriele Kuby (Catholic German author), as well as John-Henry Westen (LifeSiteNews).

It was John-Henry Westen who proposed a larger topic that would have an impact on all pro-life work. A topic which, as he argued, affects all Christians and people of good will, namely: “After 2000 Years, Is the Catholic Church Altering Its Stance on Life and Family?” With this challenging topic, Westen addressed the serious problem that the Catholic Church — which was heretofore at the forefront of the protection of innocent and vulnerable life and of moral standards with regard to marriage and the family — seems now to be drifting away from that vocation and orientation under Pope Francis. This continued weakening of the Catholic Church’s doctrinal and moral resistance will inevitably affect all people in the world who fight for the defense of human life, since what is arguably the most powerful moral voice seems now be withdrawing, or at the very least, quieting down.

What is important for us to know in the current situation in the Church is that John-Henry Westen — after his charitable and detailed critique of the current pope — received a standing ovation, and thus found much support for his candid approach. This event might well be an indicator of the way social conservatives of different religious backgrounds perceive the grave changes that are proposed and also taking place in Rome right now.

It is also a sign that many Catholic defenders of life — especially the ones in attendance at that meeting — are increasingly critical of some of Pope Francis’ doctrinal and pastoral positions; this is even more significant inasmuch as much of this recent public criticism does not come from the expected traditional Catholic circles, but from more mainstream or “conservative” sources.

Westen, who is the co-founder and editor-in-chief of the pro-life news website LifeSiteNews.com, told his audience on 11 March in Cleveland how difficult it has become for him and his colleagues at LifeSiteNews to report on Church events after the resignation of Pope Benedict and under the pontificate of Pope Francis. He and Steve Jalsevac, the other founder of LifeSiteNews, are both Catholics who had lost their way for a period of time in their earlier lives and then, under grace, found their way back to the full Catholic Truth. Having once lived a life outside of the fullness of Catholicism, they now better know from the inside how precious is the Catholic Faith and all of its teaching. As Westen put it: “without truth, we would not have come home.” “We needed the truth for our own good,” he explains. Thus they have made it their work motto to speak the truth in love — “Veritas in Caritate” or “Caritas in Veritate.” Based on this principle, LifeSiteNews publicly criticizes even prelates of the Church, “for their own good,” and while being especially mindful of the words of Our Lord about those who scandalize the Little Ones of Christ.

John-Henry Westen invited all people present — Catholic or not — to pray for Pope Francis. Until recently, he explained, the Vatican was at the United Nations a voice standing against the killing of the innocent children in the womb; however, with Pope Francis, a new tone has come into the Church. Westen reminded people of Francis’ September 2013 words, according to which “it is not necessary to talk about these issues [such as abortion, contraception and same-sex unions] all the time.” Westen recounted to the audience how this papal statement was a shock to him and his colleagues. But, he added, it then even became “much more grave.” In February 2016, Westen said, Pope Francis publicly praised as “one of the forgotten greats,” Emma Bonino, Italy’s long-term promoter (and procuror) of abortion. Bonino has never repented — at least not publicly — for her having performed such illegal abortions herself in the past.

The Canadian journalist also recounted how, during Francis’ visit in the U.S. in September 2015, there took place a private meeting between the pope and the Kentucky civil clerk Kim Davis who was punished for refusing to sign same-sex “marriage” licenses. What troubled Catholics at the time was that the Vatican tried to deny that the meeting took place and seemed embarrassed about it and never released official photos of that meeting. At the time, LifeSiteNews reported that the Vatican then claimed that there was only “one real audience” at that time in the U.S., and that one was with a former student of Pope Francis and his same-sex “partner.” According to Westen, Kim Davis was then accused by some of the public media of being a liar, while many pictures were being ostentatiously shown of the papal meeting with that homosexual “couple.”

As Westen described it, Pope Francis seems to wish to be “on a good footing with the media.” The secular media do not mind Catholics, explained the journalist, as long as they are not making a claim “of absolute truth.” Westen added: “Unfortunately, the pope has a similar approach,” seeming to “give in” with regard to the multiplying “hard cases.” As an example, the editor of LifeSiteNews quotes Pope Francis himself describing a same-sex couple where one of the two partners is a transgender. While talking about this couple, Francis called the “she” who had become a “he” a man, therefore accepting this immoral conjunction and behavior as licitly normal. The pope also called their union a “marriage.”

John-Henry Westen also explained his purpose in mentioning this candid description of these examples: “I show you things to wake you unto prayer.” “Prayer and speaking out to your pastors and bishops” is now so vital in Westen’s eyes.

Westen also mentioned the 16 June 2016 case where Pope Francis claimed in front of priests in Rome that cohabiting couples have “fidelity” and that they have “the grace of a real marriage.” Westen, who is the father of eight children, still remembers how his own daughter called him from college, asking him about these stunning papal words, since people were now believing that Pope Francis is officially accepting cohabitation. Westen continued: “I asked cardinals with whom I later spoke: was I supposed to lie to my daughter?” And he insisted that “this is a fight for our children’s souls.”

As another scandalous example, John-Henry Westen mentioned the words of then-Archbishop Blaise Cupich who said at a press conference during the 2015 Synod on the Family with regard to same-sex couples and their possible access to the Sacraments that one has to respect the consciences of the people. Here Westen insisted that one may not receive Our Lord in Holy Communion unworthily and that the words of Cupich go against Holy Scripture. Without being in the state of grace, explained Westen, one partakes in a “false communion.”

Later in his talk, Westen summed up our current situation in the Church with the words “we have thus going on now not just one heresy.” The world’s laxer beliefs have now come home to permeate the Catholic Church.

In the second part of his talk, John-Henry Westen gave a beautiful wholehearted witness to the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima, explaining to Catholics and to non-Catholics alike how the Blessed Mother warned the world about the danger of hell and about the especially perilous consequences of sins against purity. Leading the audience calmly, and in detail, through the events of 1917, Westen presented how this 100-year-old message is still decisively valid for us today — and perhaps it is now even more urgent than ever. The Catholic Canadian journalist recounted how, today, most people believe that nobody goes to hell — or that “Our Lord did not mean that.” But, on the contrary, the seer Sister Lucia herself said indeed in 1954 to Father Lombardi: “Father, many [souls] will be lost.” John-Henry Westen also mentioned here that Cardinal Carlo Caffarra — one of the authors of the dubia concerning the papal document Amoris Laetitia — was told by Sister Lucia that “the final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family.”

After mentioning many other scandalous incidents — such as the ecclesiastical threats addressed to the priests and current seminarians of Malta if they were now to oppose the novel teaching of Amoris Laetitia; Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia’s controversial sex-education program; Paul Ehrlich’s presence and comments at a Vatican conference in Rome; and the fact that the dubia still remain unanswered by the pope up to today — Westen pointed to the possibility that perhaps “we will [soon] be meeting in homes again” for Holy Mass on Sunday. However, we have to “hope and fight,” added the journalist; “to pray and to spread the truth” are now so vital. With a good cheerful tone in his voice, Westen said that there is hope that we will win this battle in the end, because “Christ will win!”

After this Catholic witness of a journalist warrior, the 1000 people in the audience rose to their feet in well-deserved applause. Such praises for a controversial topic would have been unthinkable just a year or two ago, but this is further evidence of how drastically times have changed.

John-Henry Westen’s talk can be listened to on these two following links:

sequence, after a short interruption:

ttps://www.facebook.com/LifeSiteNews/videos/10155186124948203/

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on BRAVO JOHN-HENRY WESTON, HE TELLS IT LIKE IT IS

THE DOUBLE TRUTH ABOUT THAT 30 MILLION

 

Settimo Cielodi Sandro Magister 

28 mar 17

Knights of Malta. The Double Truth About That 30 Million

 

 

The reply of Eugenio Ajroldi di Robbiate, director of the communications office of the Order of Malta, to what was published on March 23 by Settimo Cielo on “the mystery of those 30 million Swiss francs,” has not been passed over in silence by other knights of the Order, closer to the mental workings of former Grand Master Fra’ Matthew Festing, forced to hand in his resignation last January 24 to Pope Francis in person.

This is what is attested to in the following letter, from a person very well-informed on the affairs of the Order, rich in information that in its turn contradicts, corrects, or completes what has been stated by the official spokesman.

*

Dear Magister,

Sometimes even those responsible for the external communications of big organizations make mistaken or imprecise statements. There is no exemption to this rule for the Order of Malta, which recently has generated great confusion, especially on the New Zealand CPVG trust with its Swiss fiduciary, at first denying its existence and then creating a great deal of confusion on the legal circumstances that have led to opposition between the Order and the trust.

A few clarifications need to be made on the latest position statement of the Order, to correct or contradict its contents.

Albrecht Freiherr von Boeselager was not removed as an elected member of the Sovereign Council, but because a disciplinary procedure had been initiated against him. The circumstance had determined his suspension as a member of the Order, and therefore his automatic disqualification from the position of Grand Chancellor. The whole procedure had been examined by the Office of the Advocate General, which had confirmed its validity. All the circumstances were reported in a statement on the website of the Order, which was later removed. The Grand Master had attached a copy to a letter sent to numerous personalties connected to the Order on January 14, 2017. Over the last 15 years, two members of the Sovereign Council, both Italian, have resigned from their positions at the request of the Grand Master.

The Grand Master, as related in the report of the Ethics Committee of the Order, which he set up in 2015, learned about the distribution of condoms and abortifacient pills (in the period 2004-2014, then resumed in 2015) by Malteser International at the end of 2014, after a meeting of the Hospitallers of the Order held in Hong Kong. After the institution of the Ethics Committee and the publication of the report (early 2016) the Grand Master asked for an opinion from Cardinal Gerhard Müller, of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (March 12, 2016), after which he began to pressure Boeselager. No debate, therefore, in the presence of the Grand Master or in the Sovereign Council on the distribution of birth control and abortifacient pills before the end of 2014, as also confirmed by the Grand Master in a letter of April 8, 2016.

In the previously cited letter of January 14, 2017, the Grand Master announced the completed constitution of a professional commission within the Order to bring clarity on the events of the New Zealand trust. This circumstance generated the strong acceleration of events that led to the forced resignation of the Grand Master himself. Evidently no one wants light to be shed on the trust, its money and where this comes from. Therefore it is not accurate to say that the internal commission did not exist; in fact, its constitution had been officially announced.

The suit against the fiduciary of the CPVG trust had been initiated with a criminal complaint to the public prosecutor on the part of two physical persons, on April 26, 2013. On the same date, the public prosecutor opened criminal proceedings against persons unknown for “Gestion déloyale qualifiée, abus de confiance e blanchiment d’argent.” The Order of Malta and the Hospitaller Order of Saint John of God in turn presented a criminal complaint against the same fiduciary, joining the suit on May 10, 2013.

The assets of the CPVG trust were frozen on April 29, 2013. A request from the fiduciary of the trust aimed at getting the assets unfrozen was reject by the criminal appeals court of the Court of Justice in Geneva on April 30, 2014. The assets are still frozen.

With regard to the presumed conflict of interest, reiterated and substantiated by the Grand Master in the letter of January 14, 2017, of three members of the commission appointed by the Secretariat of State on December 21, 2016, it would be rather astonishing if there were an admission of such conflict on the part of the Sectretariat of State itself.

It has been stated by the Order that out of the 30 million Swiss francs kindly donated by the CPVG trust, 3 million have already been distributed.

So then, between 2012 and 2013 Marc Odendall, with what authority it is not clear, negotiated a donation “to the Order of Malta” of around 2 million euros (not 3 million Swiss francs) with the fiduciary of the CPVG trust. Of this 2 million, about one million was distributed to Malteser International (but perhaps Boeselager, as with the condoms, was unaware of it).

100,000 Swiss francs were also donated to a foundation called “Caritas in Veritate,” headed by Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, in that it is a project supported by Odendall in his capacity as representative of the international Order of Malta (sic). In 2014, when the assets were frozen, Tomasi and Odendall, together with Marwan Senhaoui, tried to convince then-Grand Master Jean-Pierre Mazery to sign a transaction with the fiduciary of the trust. Together with Boeselager after he became Grand Chancellor following Mazery, they continued to solicit the Grand Master over the subsequent years. On December 21, 2016, the three were appointed to the commission set up by the Secretariat of State.

The decision to drop the charges against the CPVG trust in Geneva is thought to have been made by the government of the Order in 2016. But here it would be necessary to better define the government of the Order. In fact neither the Grand Master, who to the very last always denied the authorization to sign, nor the Sovereign Council, which according to some of its members never discussed issues connected to the trust, ever deliberately decided to drop the charges. What the government of the Order could mean, therefore, is not clear and is a concept unknown to the Constitution and Code of the Order.

There is cited a decision in January of 2017 to drop the charges, but any act of governance in the period between December 6, 2016 and January 28, 2017 was declared null first by the Secretariat of State (January 25, 2017) and then by the Sovereign Council, which on January 28, 2017 ratified the action. It would therefore have been necessary to have suspended any action and to have waited for a new Grand Master to take office before signing the transaction.

Concerning the destination of the donation, the hope is that it may not be used to buy condoms, but for humanitarian projects under the full governance of the Order and not of a clique of Germans through organizations that they control.

There remains that legitimate doubt over the origin of these 30 million Swiss francs. They appear in fact to have come from a foundation in Liechtenstein named Malta Stiftung, and then to have gone through a Malta trust under New Zealand law before they finally arrived at the CPVG, this too under New Zealand law. But in the case that pitted the Order against the fiduciary, there were also cited two foundations based in Panama and another New Zealand trust. A strange roundabout.

Cordially,

(Signature)

(English translation by Matthew Sherry, Ballwin, Missouri, U.S.A.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THE DOUBLE TRUTH ABOUT THAT 30 MILLION

IS THE CHURCH ALREADY IN DE FACTO SCHISM OVER DE FIDE DOCTRINE ? THE ANSWER IS “YES.”

vatican-city

Is the Catholic Church in De Facto Schism?

Why is there confusion in the Catholic Church over Amoris Laetitia, and what consequences does it have for Church unity? I argue here that the confusion is ultimately over two de fide dogmas of Christian faith and that one consequence of the confusion is de facto schism within the Catholic Church.

When de fide (“of the faith”) is used in Catholic theology to designate a doctrine, it signifies a truth that pertains to Divine Revelation. The term Divine Revelation refers to truths by which God chose to reveal himself and his will to humanity in order to reconcile the world to himself so men and women might live united with him imperfectly in this world and, after death and judgment, perfectly with him in the Kingdom. Thus, the Church considers de fide doctrines necessary for salvation. Their status in Catholic teaching is irreformable. And their mode of proclamation is infallible.

This essay has three aims. First, it introduces and explains the theological concept of “secondary objects of infallibility” and shows how almost all of the truths pertaining to sexual matters taught by the Catholic Church belong to the category of secondary objects of infallibility, and so are rightly designated de fide doctrines. Second, it argues that beginning with the intra-ecclesial dissent from the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae, the Catholic Church has existed in a grave state of disunity over de fide doctrines, and that this disunity is deepened by the problems caused by Amoris Laetitia. Finally, it offers practical advice to the hierarchy and laity for responding to the crisis.

Secondary Objects of Infallibility
The documents of the Second Vatican Council teach that Jesus willed the Catholic Church’s infallible authority in defending and teaching the truths of divine revelation (also known as the “deposit of faith”) to extend not only to formally revealed truths, but also to truths necessarily connected to the truths of divine revelation, even if they have never been proposed as formally revealed. These can be taught infallibly because they are necessary for religiously guarding and faithfully expounding the truths of divine revelation (Lumen Gentium, no. 25). These are sometimes referred to as “secondary objects” of infallibility, in contrast to “primary objects,” which refers to formally revealed truths.

Pope John Paul II notes in a 1998 Apostolic Letter that the Church not only possesses primary truths of divine revelation by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, it also possesses these secondary objects of infallibility by “the Divine Spirit’s particular inspiration.” In his commentary, Joseph Ratzinger, then-Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), writes that when compared with doctrines set forth as formally revealed, “there is no difference with respect to the full and irrevocable character of the assent which is owed to these teachings.” Ratzinger designates the assent owed to them as “based on faith in the Holy Spirit’s assistance to the Magisterium and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium.” So, like formally revealed truths, these truths too are owed an assent of faith, even if they also could be understood without the assistance of divine revelation.

Although “de fide doctrine” has ordinarily (though not always) been reserved for teachings set down by the Church as formally revealed, it is no less true that Catholic teachings specifying secondary objects of infallibility are de fide doctrines—as Ratzinger calls them, “doctrines de fide tenenda (to be held by faith).” Canon law says they “must be firmly accepted and held” and that anyone who rejects them “sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church” (Canon 750, § 2).

Moral Doctrines on Sex and Marriage
The moral norms on sex and marriage taught by the Catholic Church fall into both the categories of primary and secondary objects of infallibility. Primary objects include truths explicitly taught in Divine Revelation, such as the prohibition against adultery and the indissolubility of marriage; secondary objects include teachings on sex and marriage taught by the Church since apostolic times as to be definitively held. These latter, in virtue of the way they have been proposed, should be held as taught infallibly by the Church’s Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, which teaches infallibly when the bishops “though dispersed throughout the world, but still preserving the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, teaching authentically on a matter of faith and morals (res fidei et morum), agree on a single judgment (on that matter) and teach that judgment as to be definitively held (definitive tendendam).”

There can be no reasonable doubt that the Church’s teachings on the singular context of marriage for upright genital sexual expression and the wrongfulness of every form of freely chosen non-marital sexual behavior (e.g., masturbation, extra-marital intercourse, homosexual acts, contraceptive acts, etc.) have been taught by the bishops in universal agreement, always and everywhere, as clearly pertaining to the temporal and eternal welfare of the faithful, and so definitive tendendam. The fact that Catholics in recent times have denied some or all of the teachings in no way compromises the fact that the conditions for an infallible exercise of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium have been met for most of the Church’s long history.

It follows that the basic truths of sexual ethics taught and defended by the Catholic Church pertain either directly (as primary objects) or indirectly (as secondary objects) to the deposit of faith and thus may be referred to—and in fact are—de fide doctrines.

Unacknowledged Ecclesial Schism
Beginning with the dissent from the Catholic Church’s reassertion of its ancient teaching on the wrongfulness of contraceptive intercourse in Humanae Vitae (1968), and carrying through the widespread acceptance of utilitarian—called “proportionalist”—reasoning in Catholic moral theology in the 1970s, many Catholics began to deny the existence of intrinsically evil actions (i.e., actions that are never morally legitimate to choose because their choosing always radically contradicts the good of the human person). This logically led to the rejection of the Church’s teachings on the wrongfulness of all types of sexual activity traditionally designated as intrinsically evil. This rejection has existed at all levels in the Catholic Church, from the laity to the hierarchy, and has been both resolute and obstinate.

The Catholic Church has thus existed for decades in a condition of objective and grave disunity over matters of de fide doctrine. Another way to say this is that the Catholic Church has existed in a de facto state of schism.

Confusion, Disunity, and Amoris Laetitia
There is confusion in the Catholic Church over Amoris Laetitia because some bishops are saying—and prescribing as policy in their dioceses—that remarried divorcees, under certain circumstances, may return to Holy Communion without resolving to live in perfect continence with their partners. Other bishops, in continuity with Catholic tradition, hold that this is not and cannot be legitimate.

The matters of de fide doctrine raised by these conflicting interpretations are the intrinsic wrongfulness of adultery and the absolute indissolubility of Christian marriage, both of which are infallibly affirmed by Scripture and Tradition. If the doctrines are true, then a divorcee who is sexually active with someone other than his first valid spouse, while his first spouse still lives, is committing adultery.

Although Cardinal Kasper, and other episcopal defenders of granting permission to civilly remarried divorcees to receive Holy Eucharist, affirm the wrongfulness of adultery and the indissolubility of marriage, their affirmations would seem to be incompatible with the permission they defend. For no one in manifest unrepentant objective serious wrongdoing can be freed to receive the Holy Eucharist, not by a priest or bishop or anyone, since their “state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist” (Familiaris Consortio). They must therefore not be doing anything objectively wrong. But this can only be the case if adultery is sometimes licit, or marriage is not indissoluble.

Many bishops recognize this contradiction and so oppose granting the permission. But others believe there is no conflict and so grant permission.

Thus, the hierarchy exists in a state of grave disunity on matters pertaining to the deposit of faith. In other words, as I have said, the Catholic Church is in de facto schism. The conflict over Amoris Laetitia is not the cause of the disunity, which has existed for decades. But it perpetuates the division and deepens it in a very significant way. It deepens it because the pope has gone on record defending the position that is contrary to the Church’s perennial teaching. It is hard to overstate the seriousness of this situation.

Duties of the Holy See
What should the Holy Father do? He should begin by directing Cardinal Müller of the CDF to reply to the five dubia submitted by Cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffara, and Meisner. This would help to clarify some of the harmful confusions raised by chapter eight of Amoris Laetitia. Then he should teach clearly and authoritatively what is true on matters of sexual morality that have been thrown into doubt and confusion since the beginning of his pontificate. He should teach that each and every consummated Christian marriage is absolutely indissoluble; every form of freely chosen non-marital sexual behavior is always wrong, especially adultery, but also homosexual acts, contraceptive acts, masturbation, and fornication; sexual intercourse with someone other than one’s valid spouse is always adulterous; one who is bound by a valid marriage bond, who lives with a different person more uxorio (in a marital way), is in an object state of adultery; and such a one must refrain from Holy Communion unless and until he confesses with contrition his wrongful actions and resolves to live chastely.

Finally, knowing that the episcopate is divided on de fide doctrines of morality, he needs to lead his brother bishops to face frankly this crisis in the Church and to resolve firmly to overcome it. He should convene a closed-door synod exclusively of the world’s bishops at Assisi or Castel Gandolfo or some other venue out of the spotlight—no media, periti, ecumenical observers, etc.—on the theme of episcopal unity in matters of morality. The synod’s length should be unspecified, so it can last as long as necessary. He should address his brothers in charity, without scolding or innuendo, on how very injurious—indeed, how catastrophically harmful—it is to the salvation of souls when the successors of the apostles are not united on de fide matters.

As both a father to his sons and a brother among brothers, Pope Francis should admonish all to set aside petty and unchristian posturing, all vice and proud ignorance, and every expression of party spirit, to repent of the divisions that they themselves should long ago have addressed, and to commit themselves to the common goal of episcopal unity. He should allow—and not merely say he allows—his brother bishops to speak freely on matters of disagreement without fear of reprisal. He should use his exceptional Argentinian warmth to persuade his brothers to want unity in the episcopate; to urge them to talk to each other freely and forthrightly; and to facilitate consensus on whatever agreements need to be reached. The unity toward which he strives and on which he insists should extend no further than matters pertaining to the deposit of faith, insisting that the Church tolerates diversity on everything else, and being the first to model this to all of his brothers.

Finally, he should be willing to do whatever it takes, including laying down his own life, to facilitate among the bishops of the Catholic Church the dying request of Jesus to his Father, that “they all may be one.”

Duties of the Lay Faithful
What should lay Catholics do? They should form their consciences in accord with the definitive moral truths taught by the Catholic Church, especially the norms of sexual ethics and teachings about marriage. They should see that every negative norm (“thou shalt not”) that the Church defends is necessarily entailed by some positive good that that norm protects and promotes (e.g., we shouldn’t kill the innocent, because life is a great good). They need to see now more than ever that the teachings on the absolute indissolubility of marriage and the prohibition of adultery are not club rules, but moral truths entailed by the great goodness of Christian marriage. Jesus willed marriage to be a sacramentum (a divinely instituted sign or symbol) of his absolutely indissoluble love for his Church; thus consummated Christian marriage is absolutely indissoluble; divorce is not only wrong, it’s impossible: just as Jesus cannot be divorced from his Church, a man cannot be divorced from his valid wife. It follows that if he has sex with anyone else, for any reason, however socially acceptable, while his valid wife still lives, he’s an adulterer. Adultery can be forgiven, like every sin; but to be forgiven, it requires contrition and a firm resolve to avoid the sin. These are Christian moral truths; and they are de fide doctrines of the Catholic Church.

Moreover, Catholics should not allow distress over the present situation to shake their faith in Jesus’s promise to preserve the Church from damnable error and to provide a trustworthy barque for the salvation of souls. They mustn’t succumb to Wycliffe, Luther, or Zwingli’s temptation to turn their frustrations with churchmen, however justified, against the Church of Christ herself. They should realize that the Church has suffered from without and within many times over the centuries, and compared to other periods in history—the fourth century Arian heresy, the fourteenth century Great Schism, the French Reign of Terror, the German Kulturkampf—her problems today are mild.

Additionally, every baptized Catholic should resolve to live as a saint. Only the fewest saints make it to stained glass windows. The rest never gain great attention or grow famous enough to garner a “cause” in Rome. But they do their best to discern and follow Jesus’s will every day, turning from wrongful self-love, spurning ambition, accepting humiliations serenely, repenting of every sin they become aware of, saying no to every inclination to think about or act upon non-marital sexual desires, turning from immoderate anger, and denying, denying, denying the godless social constructivist narrative on sex, gender, and marriage promoted by the modern secular mind.

Every Catholic needs to be convinced that social and ecclesial renewal begins with him or with her. In history, renewal has almost never come from the top down, from the papacy and Rome, but rather from the bottom up. It has come from Christians firmly resolving to live by faith in Christ and endeavoring to know the power of his resurrection, sharing patiently in his sufferings so as to attain the resurrection from the dead that he promised.

Finally, they should pray for the unity of the episcopate.

Editor’s note: This essay first appeared February 22, 2017 in Public Discourse, the online journal of the Witherspoon Institute and is reprinted with permission.

E. Christian Brugger

By 

Christian Brugger is Professor and Dean of the School of Philosophy and Theology at the University of Notre Dame Australia, Sydney.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

THE BENEDICT OPTION IS NOT A RETREAT, IT IS AN ATTACK ON A SECULAR SOCIETY

Image result for HOLY FACE

ZZZZ

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/evil-is-not-inevitable-the-benedict-opportunity

Commentary  |  Mar. 28, 2017

Evil Is Not Inevitable: The Benedict Opportunity

COMMENTARY: It is no time to retreat. It is time to advance. It is no time to wave Christians away from politics. It is a time to wave them in.

Tom Hoopes

I picked up Rod Dreher’s just-released book, The Benedict Option, ready to criticize it, and I was surprised. I couldn’t do that.

Then, when I sat down to wholeheartedly recommend it, I was surprised again. I can’t do that, either.

Instead, what I want to do is propose that The Benedict Option, which has captured the imagination of both secular and religious journalists, is a great opportunity for Catholics: It is an opportunity to rediscover and promote Christian living in our time.

But I also want to issue a warning: The book could be an opportunity for a tragic error.

The Benedict Option

Dreher’s description of the “Benedict Option” begins with the story of a young St. Benedict rejecting Rome, “where promising young men seeking a place in the world went to complete their education,” and heading, instead, first to a cave and then a cloister — from whence he and his monks would save Western civilization.

Dreher associates himself with Scottish philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre’s proposal in After Virtue: “What matters at this stage is the construction of local forms of community within which civility and the intellectual and moral life can be sustained through the new dark ages which are already upon us. … We are waiting not for a Godot, but for another — doubtless very different — St. Benedict.”

In the past, I have contrasted the Benedict Option with the “Francis Option” — the saint whose first call was to a cave versus the saint whose first call was to build a church; the cloistered monk versus the itinerant friar. Now that I have read the book, I can’t do that.

Dreher has been blogging about his “BenOp” concept for years. Any tendency his idea had to be a “hideaway” movement is no longer there. In fact, it was never there for Benedictines, either. Early in his book, Dreher quotes a monk saying, “The best defense is offense. You defend by attacking.”

Dreher’s book — subtitled “A Strategy for Christians in a Post-Christian Nation” — is not calling Christians to withdraw: He is calling them to rediscover themselves to become better witnesses.

“Jesus Christ promised the gates of hell would not prevail against his Church,” he writes, “but he did not promise that hell would not prevail against his Church in the West. That depends on us, and the choices we make right here, right now.”

A Practical Guide

Most of the book is made up of advice about living the Christian life, which roams from child-raising to Catholic identity in public life, from the workplace to the bedroom.

His section on liturgy is so good — simple, profound and clear — I want to read it out loud to my class at Benedictine College. His chapter on restoring a proper relationship with technology is so good that I assigned it for my students to read.

But there is plenty to quibble with in Dreher’s how-to. He is painting with a broad brush, and that is perilous.

I would rewrite his education section entirely to put the stress on Catholic higher education, which has proven to have the most lasting effect on students, for instance. And when he writes, “Pull Your Children Out of Public Schools,” I could feel the defenses rising in his audience.

But the book is a beautiful introduction to living a faithful, rooted, Christian life in our difficult times. More than that, it has all the fresh energy and insight of Rod Dreher, a traditionalist Eastern Orthodox Christian with a hipster heart, who sees old truths as revolutionary and knows beauty, truth and goodness are what ultimately attract hearts and minds.

So why can’t I recommend it wholeheartedly? Because the book’s timing couldn’t have been worse.

Only God Is Inevitable

Dreher very clearly conceived and created the book to be a how-to manual for Christians to survive a Hillary Clinton administration. When he wrote this book, it was inevitable that Hillary would win, and it was inevitable that she was going to lead us down the “road to despotism,” as Cardinal Francis George called President Barack Obama’s actions against religious liberty.

Dreher describes “The Roots of the Crisis” that is strangling the Western world in two sets of bullet points, with a tale in between that goes from William of Ockham’s separation of God and reason through Descartes’ separation of mind and body all the way to the radical autonomy and relativism of our own time.

The analysis of our dark times is unassailable, but that is part of the problem. It too easily falls into the trap of deciding that because things happened this way, they had to happen this way. From there, it is easy to imagine that the future has to happen in a certain way, too.

Dreher says history is poetry, not a syllogism; but then he treats it as a syllogism, as something inevitable: A darkness is descending as certainly as night follows day.

But after he wrote the book, something crazy happened. God decided to remind us that nothing is inevitable: The Chicago Cubs won the World Series for the first time in 108 years. The Atlanta Falcons’ 25-point Super Bowl lead collapsed. La La Land’s Oscar win was revoked. And Hillary Clinton lost her race for the White House.

“Don’t be fooled,” Dreher writes. “The upset presidential victory of Donald Trump has at best given us a bit more time to prepare for the inevitable.”

I absolutely agree with Dreher that there are no political saviors — and that Trump is farther from being a savior than most. But one thing Trump did do was take all the force out of that last word: inevitable.

The ideologue lost. The progress of secularism is not inevitable. Everyone thought it was — I certainly did — but it’s not.

The Opportunity

And why did Hillary lose? She didn’t lose because Trump is well-liked. He’s not. She didn’t lose because he had better name recognition. Her name is one of the biggest in politics.

She lost because Trump refused to kowtow to political correctness. If you have the audacity to stand up to the bullies, you can prevail. No one knew you could do that. Now we know.

And now that we know, it is no time to retreat. It is time to advance. It is no time to wave Christians away from politics. It is a time to wave them in.

But Dreher highlights Lance Kinzer, a legislator who left the political rat race in Kansas to recharge his faith and family. Dreher appreciates what he did and spells out an “anti-political politics” this way: “Secede culturally from the mainstream. Turn off the television. Put the smartphones away. Read books. Play games. Make music. Feast with your neighbors,” and more. And it’s all very good, very practical advice.

But it isn’t Kinzer’s advice. To his credit, Dreher also shares Kinzer’s politics, which are not “anti-political” at all: Engage with lawmakers; set achievable political goals; put freedom of religion first; reach out to the media on religious liberty, and more.

Don’t retreat. Advance — or, at least, stand your ground.

I know friends in the political sphere are scared to death of Dreher’s book. Yes, the culture has gone to frightening extremes. But that means that Christians have a duty to step up — to be the yeast in the dough and the salt of the earth. We also have an opportunity to do so.

We no longer need to find a “moral majority” — only a “sane majority” who think it’s wrong to kill babies, change boys into girls and remove protections from girls’ restrooms. The sane majority is easy to find, and they are willing to rally.

Pick whatever option you want — the Holy Spirit wants many to flourish — and Dreher’s book will help you.

But pray to St. John Paul II, the pope who turned an aggressively secularist Poland into a spiritual powerhouse, that we won’t back down.

We should never back down. Nothing is inevitable if we fight with God.  {i.e., with the help of God ! – Abyssum}

Tom Hoopes is writer in residence at Benedictine College in Atchison, Kansas,

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THE BENEDICT OPTION IS NOT A RETREAT, IT IS AN ATTACK ON A SECULAR SOCIETY

THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE TRANSGENDERED

gay priesthood

The Priesthood of the Transgendered

CRISIS MAGAZINE
[Emphasis and {commentary} in red type by Abyssum] 

There was always something Disneyesque about the 1980s preachers of the prosperity gospel. Of course there was no corpus on their cross, that sacrilege had been achieved by earlier versions of Protestantism. What was really galling about the perpetually smiling televangelists was their soft-lens obliteration of the cross itself, which had at least remained a disturbing sign of sacrifice for earlier Protestants. For the televangelists, the cross was resolved and transcended. It was antiseptic, warm, radiant and amorphous.

I don’t think we can over-estimate the harm done by anodyne Christianity, either of the televangelist variety or the various kinds most of us profess to this day. Then and now it was scrubbed clean of the blood of the martyrs. But the most basic truth about Christianity is that we are elevated to participate in the redemptive sacrifice of Christ. We are called to take up our crosses and following him. Through the incarnation God humbled himself to enter into humanity, but in so doing he also elevated us to join with him in the redemptive work of salvation. As St Paul said: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church” (Col. 1:24).

The most basic laws of nature are the imperative to self-preservation and the perpetuation of the species. From a single-celled amoeba on up to a human being, it is natural to seek the beneficial and avoid the harmful. But that is never enough for us. The supernatural beckons with truths and obligations beyond our own bodily preservation. We instinctively know that there is a debt to be paid for our transgressions of natural law. It is a universal truth that only through sacrifice is the soiled cleaned and sanctified.

Aristotle said we are political animals, that is, we are made for the polis, the city, the community. This fundamental truth intertwines with our intrinsic religiosity. Just as the first word of the Lord’s Prayer is communal, our relationship with God is never strictly personal and private. We approach God with each other and through each other, and the heroically sacrificial among us are our priests. Though our culture is post-Christian our natures remain deeply religious, still requiring sacrifices offered by priests. But the priests of our age are not those consecrated by the Church; they are the others who are sacrificial exemplars of the next step in the forward march of progressive history.

The religion of our age is the belief in the forward march of history, the belief in progress.  The benighted past is the evil. And our priests are the vanguard of those fighting it, the ones far enough ahead of the arc to be a challenge, but not quite so far as to be despised. They are not really martyrs, but they wear the mantle of the persecuted forward outliers. Their charism is prophecy. They reveal to us the faces we will see in the mirror tomorrow.

For a period of time, during the ascendancy of gay pride, homosexuals assumed the role of our persecuted avant-garde priesthood. On the one hand they were anything but ascetic, pursuing a hedonistic transgression of natural sexuality, but insofar as they could claim social condemnation and rejection by villainous reactionaries, whether real or imagined, they were exemplars of a transcendent, sacrificial commitment to the religion of progress; they were priests. They claimed moral authority and we gave them deference.

But once we had caught up with the avant-garde, their claims of persecution and thereby their sacrificial priesthood ended. The religion of progress had triumphed over natural sexuality, and even if we ourselves hadn’t become homosexuals, we had internalized their philosophy. Now we are in the age of the priesthood of the transgendered, and the transformation they are ushering in is much deeper, much more existential. Whereas the homosexual priesthood sanctified the rejection of nature, the transgendered priesthood sanctifies the unreality of being {emphasis by Abyssum}.

The transgendered priesthood is the spiritual compliment to the technological development of virtual reality. The transgendered have transcended not only their natures, but their very bodies. They, and through them, all of us, have achieved spiritual and physical plasticity. There is no longer essence. We are utterly subject to our own redefinition and reconfiguration.

The rise of the transgendered movement marks the complete defeat of common sense realism, which had been the everyday, boots on the ground response to existentialism. It could be seen in the common sense of the parent who would say to her child “you can bark all you want, but that doesn’t make you a puppy.” But now, enlightened by the post-essentialist existentialism of the transgendered age, when little Tanner declares that he feels like a Tanya, mom and dad are floating in space with joy. They give little Tanner hormone blockers and surgery so that his body can be mutilated to match the madness of his mind. Now, any attempt to convince Tanner that he is in fact a boy is viewed as hate speech. For some time now, the naturally modest period of pre-pubescent sexual latency has been forcibly violated by explicit and perverse sex education. Now a growing number of parents support the rights of adult men dressed as women to use the same washrooms and change rooms as their daughters.

Over the course of a mere three years, the transgendered have gone from being just creepy and transgressive to almost societal mainstream. Soon, once completely mainstream, they will be desacralized, like the now suburbanized homosexual movement. They will be replaced by a new mildly persecuted avant-garde.

A possible candidate group for replacement of the transgendered the are advocates of inter-generational sex, or more plainly, adults who want to have sex with children. My students have a visceral disgust at the suggestion, not unlike their response to homosexuality ten years ago, or transgenderism three years ago. But given the complete subjectivity and meaninglessness of sex established by the acceptance of homosexuality and now transgenderism {e.g., Milo Yiannopoulos} they are unable to express any rational argument to support their visceral disgust. The avant-garde will cry discrimination and point to the logical consistency of their newly minted sexual lifestyle. We will initially cower in silence and then in short order embrace the most explicit abuse of our children.

There is little reason to wonder at the implosion of the West and the loss of our cultural will to live. Even the most debased, corrupted soul can’t help but have occasional eruptions of conscience, and when what is seen in the mirror is more terrifying than what is seen looking out across the barricades at a world which hates us, the battle is lost. We know we are monsters and deserve to die. But on a hopeful note, it is darkest before the dawn. We are fast approaching an age when persecution will be upon us. But persecution is witness, persecution is priesthood, and it will be all the more brilliant for the darkness that surrounds it.

The priesthood of the transgendered is one of the last of the degenerate priesthoods. In the not too distant future we will join St. Paul in “…filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ on behalf of his body, which is the church.”

Joe Bissonnette

By 

Joe Bissonnette teaches religion and philosophy at Assumption College School in Brantford, Ontario where he lives with his wife and their seven children. He has written for Catholic Insight, The Human Life Review, The Interim, The Catholic Register and The Toronto Star.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE TRANSGENDERED

THREE DATES TO REMEMBER: 1517, 1717, 1917! WHAT’S WITH THE 17TH YEAR ???? WILL 2017 BE ANOTHER DISATEROUS YEAR ???

Image result for HOLY FACE

De Mattei: Shedding Light on Today’s Crisis

Italian historian Roberto de Mattei, whose columns we bring you here first in English each week, was stateside in Washington, D.C. last night. Below are his prepared remarks, well worth a read.

RORATE CAELI

Roberto de Mattei

The Cosmos Club – Washington.

March 27th 2017

Anniversaries in 2017

As in the lives of men, anniversaries are also celebrated in the lives of peoples. And 2017 is full of anniversaries; not all anniversaries however, merit a cake with candles.

The most talked about anniversary has been Martin Luther’s. Five hundred years have passed since October 31st 1517 when Luther nailed his 95 theses on the great door of Wittenberg Cathedral. An action which would set in motion the so-called Protestant Reformation and mark the end of Medieval Christendom.

Two centuries later, on June 29th 1717, The Grand Lodge of London was founded. This event is considered the birth of Modern Freemasonry, which in turn, is directly connected to the French Revolution. The Masonic Lodges in effect, were the intellectual, operative laboratories in which the Revolution of 1789 was hatched.

On October 26th or November 7th 1917, depending whether the Gregorian or the Julian calendars are adopted, the Lenin and Trotsky Bolshevik Party occupied the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg. Thus, the Russian Revolution entered history and has yet to leave it.

1517, 1717, 1917, then, are three symbolic dates, three events that are part of a single process. Pius XII, in his speech to the men of Catholic Action on October 12th 1952, summed it up like this: “Christ yes, Church no; (the Protestant Revolution against the Church); then: God yes, Christ no; (the Masonic Revolution against the central mysteries of Christianity); finally the impious cry: God is dead; rather: God has never existed (the atheistic Communist Revolution). And here – Pius XII concludes –  is the attempt to build the structure of the world upon foundations that We do not hesitate in pointing out as, the principals responsible for the danger that threatens mankind”.

 

Three stages of a single process which is now reaching its pinnacle. The Church called it Revolution, with a capital R, to describe its metaphysical essence and historical, centuries-old significance.

Yet, this year there is a fourth anniversary which, till now, has been discussed very little. 2017 is also the first centenary of the Fatima apparitions and it is in light of the Fatima message that I propose to examine the three revolutions that are commemorated this year.

 

Some principals to remember

 

The first element to emphasize is that we are speaking here about historical facts.

 

The apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima, between May 13th and October 13th 1917, are an objective historical fact, not a subjective religious experience of Our Lady appearing to the three little shepherds.

Historians imbued by rationalism, including many Catholic ones, would like to expel all that is supernatural from history – miracles, revelations and heavenly messages – consigning them to the private sphere of the faith. However, these miracles, these apparitions and these messages, when they are authentic, are part of history, in the same way as war and peace and all that happens in history and which history records.

The Fatima apparitions were events that happened in a precise place at a particular moment in history. Events verified by thousands of witnesses and a thorough canonical investigation, which ended in 1930. Six Popes in the 20th century publically acknowledged the Fatima apparitions, even if none of them fully complied with the requests. Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI visited the sanctuary as Popes, while John XXIII and John Paul I went there when they were still Cardinals, Roncalli and Luciani.  Pius XII, sent his delegate, Cardinal Aloisi Masella. All of them honoured Fatima.

But the message of Fatima represents a historical event for another reason: it is a private revelation not only for the spiritual good of those who received it – the three little shepherds – but for all of humanity.

The Church makes a distinction between public Revelation and private revelations. The public Revelation of the Church ended with the death of the last Evangelist, St. John.  However, St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that revelations and heavenly prophecies continue even after the conclusion of public Revelation, not to complete or propose new doctrine, but to direct the behaviour of men in conforming to it[1]. Sometimes private revelations are reserved for the spiritual perfection of those who receive these supernatural gifts. At other times, as in the case of the Sacred Heart Messages to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, they are directed to the good of the Church and all of society. The Sacred Heart of Jesus is at the centre of the Paray-le-Monial revelations and the Immaculate Heart of Mary is at the centre of those from Fatima. Fatima and Paray-le-Monial are private revelations for all of mankind. They have the characteristics of great “spiritual direction” which the Lord offers us to guide the behaviour of men at certain times in history

A third principle arises from the fact that some private revelations, like Fatima, are reserved not for the good of single individuals but for the whole of society, in a determined historical period. Private revelations help us to interpret the historical times we live in, but the times we live in help us, in turn, to understand more deeply the significance of the revelations. There is a reversibility. If it is true that Divine words project light in the darkest ages of history, the opposite is also true:  the course of historical events, helps us to understand the meaning, at times obscure, of prophecies and revelations. In the centenary of the Fatima apparitions, it is necessary then to read Our Lady’s words in light of what happened during the last century, a ravaged century[2], to make sure that the light of this message illuminates with greater clarity the darkness of the times we are now living in.

The Russian Revolution of 1917

The historical background in which the Fatima apparitions took place is that of a terrible war, historically called “The Great War”: the war between 1914 and 1918 which saw more than nine million victims in Europe alone.  A holocaust of blood, defined, in that same year 1917, by Pope Benedict XV as a “useless massacre”[3]. A useful massacre only to the anti-Christian Revolution that saw in the war the chance “to republicanize Europe“[4] and to complete the goals of the French Revolution.

The war overturned the political order that had been in force in Europe since 1815: that of the Congress of Vienna, which saw a Holy Alliance between the Empires of Austria and Russia against the liberal Revolution. The troops of the Hapsburg Empire and those of the Germans, lined up on the eastern front, contributed to the collapse of the Czarist Empire.

On April 3rd 1917, a month before the apparitions, the head of the Bolshevik sect, Vladimir Ilic Lenin (1870-1924), until then in exile in Zurich[5], returned to Russia in a sealed train-wagon made available by the German Joint Chief of Staff, who wanted to make Russian fall into complete chaos.  Lenin set fire to Russia. However, the end never justifies the means and the chaos swept through not only Russia, but the entire world.

The same year, on January 13, 1917, another Russian revolutionary, Leon Trotsky and his family crossed the Atlantic Ocean and landed in New York. Antony Sutton put a good question: “How did Trotsky, who knew only German and Russian survive in capitalist America?“[6]. What is certain is that American President Woodrow Wilson provided Trotsky with a passport to return to Russia to “carry forward” the revolution[7]. In August an American Red Cross Mission, made up of lawyers and financiers, arrived in Petrograd. The mission was in fact a mission of Wall Street financiers to influence and pave the way for control, through either Kerensky or the Bolsheviks revolutionaries, of the Russian markets and resources [8].

There was then a convergence of interests among the German military and American financiers. This cloaks the origins of the Russian Revolution in a certain mystery.

The Russian Revolution, started by Lenin was carried out in two stages: the first was the so-called February Revolution, which led to the abdication of the Czar and the instauration of a liberal-democratic republic, under the leadership of Alexander Kerensky (1881-1970).

The second stage was the October Revolution, which brought about the fall of Kerensky and the instauration of Lenin and Trotsky’s Communist regime. There then opened up a killing season of no historical precedent.

The Russian Revolution, like the French Revolution, was the work of a minority, and was carried out with surprising rapidity, without anyone being quite aware of what was happening. John Reed, an American journalist and socialist, who took part in the Revolution, wrote a book entitled: “Ten Days that Shook the World”, in which he describes the atmosphere of those days efficaciously:

“Superficially all was quiet; hundreds of thousands of people retired at a prudent hour, got up early, and went to work. In Petrograd the street-cars were running, the stores and restaurants open, theatres going, an exhibition of paintings advertised…. All the complex routine of common life-humdrum even in war-time-proceeded as usual. Nothing is so astounding as the vitality of the social organism-how it persists, feeding itself, clothing itself, amusing itself, in the face of the worst calamities….”[9].

Fatima 1917

The Russian Revolution was not only a historical event, it was a philosophical event. In his theses on Feuerbach (1845), Karl Marx sustains that the task of the philosopher is not that of interpreting the world, but of transforming it[10]. The revolutionary has to demonstrate in praxis, the potency and efficacy of his thought. Lenin in achieving power, performed a philosophical act because he didn’t theorize it, but brought the Revolution about. In a manner of speaking, Marx and Engel’s Socialism, thanks to Lenin, became ‘incarnate’ in history. The Russian Revolution appears then like a diabolical parody of the Mystery of the Incarnation.  Jesus, by His becoming incarnate, wanted to open up the gates of Heaven to men: the Marxist Revolution, closed the gates of Heaven in order to make of the Earth its impossible paradise. It was an eruption of the demonic into history.

However, Heaven responded with an eruption of the sacred upon the earth. At the other end of Europe, during those same months, something else was taking place:

On May 13th 1917, at the Cova de Iria – an isolated place of rocks and olive trees, near the village of Fatima in Portugal “a lady dressed all in white, more brilliant then the sun, shedding rays of light, clear and stronger than a crystal glass filled with the most sparkling water, pierced by the burning rays of the sun” appeared to three children who were watching over their sheep, Francesco, Jacinta Marto and their little cousin Lucia dos Santos. This Lady revealed Herself as the Mother of God, entrusted with a message for mankind as She had done before in Paris, at Rue du Bac in 1838 and at Lourdes in 1858. Our Lady gave an appointment to the three shepherd-children for the 13th  of every subsequent month until October.  There were six apparitions. The last apparition ended with  a great atmospheric miracle, a miraculous seal from Heaven. “The dance of the sun”, witnessed by thousands of people who were able to describe it in great detail and which was seen even from 40 kilometres away[11].

From that moment on, the history of Fatima and Russia has been intertwined together.

The history of the 20th century, until our days, has seen the struggle between the children of light and the children of darkness. The first nourish themselves on what we might call the spirit of Fatima; the second on the spirit of the Prince of Darkness, which, in the twentieth century was manifested above all under the form of Communism and its metamorphoses.

The Secret of Fatima

Prior to being a place Fatima is a message.

The message revealed by Our Lady at Fatima contains three parts, called secrets,  which form an organic, coherent whole. The first is a terrifying vision of hell into which the souls of sinners precipitate; the mercy of the Immaculate Heart of Mary counters this punishment [and is] the supreme remedy offered by God to humanity for the salvation of souls.

The second part involves a dramatic historical alternative: peace – fruit of the conversion of the world and the fulfilment of Our Lady’s requests, or a terrible chastisement would await mankind if it remained obstinate in its sinful ways. Russia would be the instrument of this chastisement.

The third part, divulged by the Holy See in June 2000, expands on the tragedy in the life of the Church, offering a vision of a Pope and bishops, religious and laity struck dead by persecutors. Discussions that have opened up in recent years about this “Third Secret” risk however in obscuring the prophetic force of the Message’s central part, summed up in two decisive sentences:  Russia “will scatter her errors throughout the world” and “in the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph”.

Russia will scatter its errors throughout the world

“Russia will scatter her errors throughout the world”. The term errors is precise: the error is the denial of the truth. Truth then, exists and there is only one truth: that which is preserved and diffused by the Catholic Church. Russia’s errors are those of an ideology which opposes the natural and Christian order, by denying God, religion, the family and private property. This complex of errors has a name: Communism and has in Russia its universal centre of diffusion.

Too often Communism has been identified with a purely political regime, neglecting its ideological dimension, whereas it’s precisely its doctrinal dimension that Our Lady highlights.

 

The anti-Communism of the 20th century has often been limited by identifying only the Communism of the Soviet tanks or the Gulags, which are certainly an expression of Communism, but they are not its heart. Pius XI, emphasized the ideologically perverse nature of Communism.

“For the first time in history – stated Pius XI in his encyclical Divini Redemptoris of March 19th 1937 — we are witnessing a struggle, cold-blooded in purpose and mapped out to the least detail, between man and all that is called God.” (2 Thess. 1,4)”.

Many anti-Communists have neglected this aspect, under the illusion of arriving at a possible compromise with a “humanitarian” Communism, purified of any violence. They have not understood the intrinsic ideological malice in Communism.  What are the origins of this ideological malice? The Communists themselves sum up their errors in the formula of dialectic materialism: the universe is matter in evolution and Hegelian dialectic is the soul of this evolution. This philosophical, pantheistic vision has its political expression in a classless society.  Social and political egalitarianism derives from metaphysical egalitarianism, which not only denies the distinction between God and man, but by divinizing matter, denies every distinction between men and created things.

The genealogy of errors

Errors do not spring up from nowhere. Russia’s errors, like all errors, sprung forth from previous errors and they, in turn, generate further errors. In order to fully understand their nature, we need to ask where these errors came from and where they are taking us.

Communism’s base text is The Manifesto of the Communist Party, published by Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Friedrich Engels (1820-1895) in February 1848. This text was commissioned to Marx and Engels by The League of the Just, a Communist group devoted to the ultra-Jacobin ideas of Gracchus Babeuf (1760-1797). Among the direct precursors of Socialism, Engels counts, alongside the Jacobins, also the Anabaptists, the “levellers” of the English Revolution and the philosophers of the Enlightenment in the 18th century[12].

The Anabaptists represent the far-left of the Protestant Revolution, what the historian George Hunston Williams (1914-2000) described as the radical Reformation, opposed to the magisterial Reformation of Luther and Calvin[13]. In reality, it was not about opposition, but development: what characterizes all Revolutions is that their potentialities are contained in their genetic instant and the principles at the roots of Anabaptism originate from the impetus, that Luther,from the very beginning had impressed on the religious Revolution of the 16th century.

Professor Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira (1908-1995) observed that:

“Like cataclysms, evil passions have an immense power-but only to destroy. In the first instant of its great explosions, this power already has the potential for all the virulence it will manifest in its worst excesses. In the first denials of Protestantism, for example, the anarchic yearnings of communism were already implicit. While Luther was, from the viewpoint of his explicit formulations, no more than Luther, all the tendencies, state of soul, and imponderables of the Lutheran explosion already bore within them, authentically and fully, even though implicitly, the spirit of Voltaire and Robespierre and of Marx and Lenin.”[14]. 

We need to emphasize a second point here.  It is true that “Ideas have consequences”[15], but not all consequences are coherent with the intentions.  A German philosopher, Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920), coined the expression “”heterogony of ends“(Heterogonie der Zwecke,) to describe the contradictions that often exist between the intentions of man and the consequences of his actions. This heterogony of ends is typical of all utopias, which in denying reality, are doomed to be contradicted by it.

Luther, for example, theorized faith alone, denying any value to human reason. Yet, at the same time, he denied the Church’s authority, in the name of Sola Scriptura, interpreted according to the principle of free examination. The Italian Anabaptists, who go by the name of Socinians, because they follow the ideas of the Sienese heretics, Lelio (1525-1562) and Fausto Socino (1539-1604), ascribe a primary role to reason, thus demolishing the very texts of Holy Scripture with their criticism.

Socinianism is a form of radical Protestantism which moved from Italy to Poland, where it flourished between the 16th and 17th centuries; it then migrated to Holland and from Holland it reached England at the time of the English Revolution. Socinianism is a point of passage among religious sects of the Anabaptist types in the 17th and 18th centuries, along with the philosophical sects of a Masonic structure in the 18th century.  In the “lay temple” of social virtues –  the Masonic Lodge –  the cult of a new ethic freed from the bonds of all dogma and religious morality, was practiced.

The relationships between Socinianism and Freemasonry can be followed through the figure of John Toland (1670-1722), author of a work entitled Pantheisticon (1720 –  in which he illustrates the doctrine and the organisation of a society of “sodales socratici”, which were presented as centres not only for philosophical and political discussion, but also for an esoteric introduction to Pantheism and  proposed to their members the realization of an egalitarian republic, free of every form of “religious superstition”[16].  Pantheism and egalitarianism are always connected.

In 1723, after the foundation of the Grand Lodge, a Presbyterian clergyman, James Anderson published The Constitutions of the Free-Masons. This work was reprinted in Philadelphia in 1734 by Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), who was that year elected Grand Master of Masons in Pennsylvania. In December 1776, Franklin was dispatched to France as commissioner for the United States. During his stay in France, Benjamin Franklin was active as a Freemason, serving as Venerable Master of the Lodge Les Neufs Soeurs. The foundation of the Grand Orient in 1773 marked the beginning of a new phase: a political campaign outside the lodges.  Freemasons controlled the elections of March-April 1789 in France and a bloc was formed in the third state that was led by Masonry. Among the associates of the French lodge, was Count Mirabeau (1749-1791), a former French ambassador in Berlin, orator and statesman, who in early 1791 would be elected president of the National Assembly.

The Librarian of Congress, historian James H. Billington writes: “Mirabeau pioneered in applying the evocative language of traditional religion to the new political institutions of revolutionary France. As early as May 10, 1789, he wrote to the constituents who had elected him to the Third Estate that the purpose of the Estates-General was not to reform but “to regenerate” the nation. He subsequently called the National Assembly “the inviolable priesthood of national policy,” the Declaration of the Rights of Man “a political gospel,” and the Constitution of 1791 a new religion “for which the people are ready to die” [17].

Mirabeau was a member of the Illuminati of Bavaria, a secret society founded in 1776 by Adam Weishaupt, a professor of Canon Law at Ingolstadt University in Germany. The two prime source books for our knowledge of Adam Weishaupt’s Illuminati conspiracy are professor John Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy, first published in 1798, and the Abbé Augustine Barruel’s four-volume study, Memoirs illustrating the History of Jacobinism, published in 1799. I recommend these books. The purpose of the Order was to destroy all religions, overthrow all governments and abolish private property.

The Russian Revolution did not arise spontaneously, but was the outcome of a process going way back. The Communist theorist, Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), sums up this revolutionary process in the formula “the philosophy of praxis”.  “The philosophy of praxis is the crowning point of this entire movement; (…) it corresponds to the nexus Protestant Reformation plus French Revolution. It is a philosophy which is also a politics, and a politics which is also a philosophy”[18].

The Revolution betrayed

However, a false philosophy, when it is politicized – that is –  when it is carried out in the praxis – always betrays its premises. Only the truth is coherent with itself. Error is always contradictory. In this sense, the Revolution can only establish itself if it betrays itself. As in every Revolution, also the Communist October Revolution was a Revolution betrayed. The debate between Stalin and Trotsky is eloquent. Trotsky accuses Stalin of having betrayed the Revolution. Stalin responds that the praxis, that is the conquest and preservation of power, demonstrates the truth of his thought. Both were right and both were wrong. Those who fight the truth, fight themselves.

What is certain is that in the 20th century there are no other crimes comparable to Communism for the temporal space in which it spread, for the territories it embraced, for the quality of hate that it was able to secrete. But these crimes are consequences of errors. After the collapse of the Soviet Union these errors were as if released from the wrapping that contained them, to propagate like ideological miasma over the entire West, under the form of cultural and moral relativism.

The relativism today professed and lived in the West is rooted in the theories of materialism and Marxist evolutionism; in other words, on the denial of any spiritual reality and any stable and permanent element in man and society.

Antonio Gramsci is the theorist behind this cultural Revolution which transforms the dictatorship of the proletariat into the dictatorship of relativism.  The task of Communism, for Gramsci, is to bring to the people that integral secularism, which the Enlightenment had reserved to a restricted élite. On the social level, this atheistic secularism is actuated, according to the words of the Italian communist, by means of a “complete secularisation of all life and all customs connected to it”, that is, through an absolute secularisation of social life, which will allow for the Communist “praxis” to extirpate in depth the social roots of religion. The new Europe with no roots, which has expelled every reference to Christianity from its founding Treatise, has fully realized the Gramscian plan for the secularisation of society.

We need to acknowledge the fact that the Fatima prophecy, in which Russia would have scattered Her errors throughout the world, has been fulfilled. The fall of the Iron Curtain made the diffusion of these errors unstoppable. The decomposition of Communism has putrefied the West. Anti-Communism, for its part, has vanished, because “very few have been able to penetrate the true nature of Communism” as Pius XI had warned in Divini Redemptoris.  Nowadays, one feels almost embarrassed to say they are anti-Communist. This is Communism’s great victory: that it is has gone down without shedding a drop of blood, without being put on trial, without an ideological indictment, which would condemn its memory.

Vladimir Bukovsky, in his Judgment in Moscow wrote:

“Any event in our lives, even if it is of small significance, comes under the scrutiny of some commission or other. Especially if people have been killed. A plane crash, a railroad disaster, an industrial accident – and experts argue, conduct analyses, seek to determine the degree of guilt (…) even of governments if they had the slightest connection with what occurred.(…) Yet here we have a conflict (…) which affected practically every country in the world, cost scores of millions in lives and hundreds of billions in dollars, and – as has so often been claimed – almost brought about global destruction, which is not being examined by a single country or international organization.
 
Is it so surprising that alongside our willingness to examine every accident, we refuse to investigate the greatest catastrophe of our time? For in our heart of hearts we already know the conclusions such an investigation would yield, as any sane person knows full well when he has entered into collusion with evil. Even if the intellect provides specious logical and outwardly acceptable excuses, the voice of conscience whispers that our fall began from the moment we agreed to “peaceful coexistence” with evil.”[19]

Unfortunately the Catholic Church has promoted, and is promoting, this “peaceful coexistence” with evil.

The Communist dictator, Fidel Castro, when he died on November 26th 2016, received praise from the entire West, and even from the Catholic Church. Pope Francis, the seventh successor to Pius XI, in an interview given to Eugenio Scalfari compared Communism to Christianity and affirmed that inequalities are “the greatest evil that exists in the world”[20]. Yet, the essence of Communism lies precisely in the suppression of any form of social differences and the religious expression of this egalitarianism is the ecumenical equalization of all religions, just as its philosophical expression is ecological pantheism.

Pope Bergoglio recently received in the Vatican the exponents of the so-called “popular movements”, representatives of the new Marx-Ecologist left  and expressed his liking for the pro-Marxist regimes of the Castro brothers in Cuba, Chàvez and Maduro in Venezuela, Morales in Bolivia, Rafael Correa in Ecuador and José Mujica in Uruguay.

Cardinal Zen, the Bishop Emeritus of Hong Kong and China’s highest-ranking prelate, in an interview accuses Pope Francis of “selling out” Chinese Catholics by striking a deal with the Communist government[21].

The errors of Communism have not only been scattered throughout the world, but have penetrated into the temple of God, like the smoke of Satan enveloping and suffocating the Mystical Body of Christ.

The Smoke of Satan in the Church

And it is not only this.  At Fatima, Our Lady showed the three little shepherds the terrifying vision of hell where the souls of poor sinners go and it was revealed to Jacinta it was the sin against purity that leads most souls to hell. Who could possibly have imagined one hundred years later, that the public profession of impurity would have been added to the immense number of impure sins that are committed, under the form of sexual liberation and the introduction of extramarital unions, even homosexual, into the laws of the most important nations of the West?

And who could have ever imagined that a pontifical document, Pope Francis’ post-synod Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia made public on April 8th 2016, would endorse adultery? The Divine and natural law does not admit exceptions. Those who theorize the exception destroy the rule.

In one of the “dubia” formulated by the Cardinals to the Pope we read: “After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin?”

The fact that today a doubt of this sort can be presented to the Pope and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, indicates how very grave and deep the crisis the Church is immersed in, is.

Cardinal Kasper and other pastors and theologians, have stated that the Church must adapt its evangelical message to the praxis of the times. But the primacy of praxis over doctrine is the heart of Marx-Leninism. And if Marx stated that the task of philosophers is not to know the world, but to transform it, today many theologians and pastors retain that the task of theologians is not that of spreading the Truth, but to re-interpret it in praxis.  We need not then reform the habits of Christians in order to bring them back to Gospel teachings, but adapt the Gospel to the heteropraxis of Christians.

In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph

The antidote to the dictatorship of relativism is the doctrinal and moral purity of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It will be Our Lady and not men, who will destroy the errors that threaten us. Heaven, though, has asked for mankind’s concrete collaboration.

Our Lady states that the conditions to avoid chastisement are: a public and solemn act of the consecration of Russia  to Her Immaculate Heart, done by the Pope, in union with all the bishops of the world and the practice of reparatory Communion on the first Saturdays of the month.

The Ecumenical Council Vatican II would have been a great opportunity to fulfil Our Lady’s requests. In 1965, 510 archbishops and bishops from 78 countries signed a petition in which they asked the Pope in union with the Council Fathers, to consecrate the whole world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and in a special way Russia and the other nations dominated by Communism. Paul VI however, paid no heed to the request.

Pius XII and John Paul II made partial acts of consecration to Russia or to the world, fruitful, not lacking in effects, but incomplete.

Benedict XVI on May 12th 2010, in the Chapel of the Apparitions, raised a prayer of entrustment to Our Lady, asking for the liberation: “of every danger threatening us”. But also this act was incomplete.

Those devoted to Fatima hoped in something more from Pope Francis, compared to his predecessors, but were disappointed.  In his Marian act of October 2013, the Pope did not mention the Immaculate Heart nor the world, nor the Church, let alone Russia. Pope Francis will go to Fatima this coming 13th of May. What will he say and do there?

Today the consecration of Russia has still not been done, the practice of reparatory Communion on the First Saturdays is not being spread; and above all the atmosphere in which we are immersed is a spirit of degenerate hedonism, in the satisfaction of every pleasure and desire, outside the moral laws. Who could claim then, that the prophecy of Fatima has been fulfilled and that the great events preannounced by Our Lady in 1917 are behind us?

Our Lady, at Fatima, did not only ask the hierarchy of the Church for public acts. Along with these necessary actions there has to be a profound spirit of interior conversion and penance, as we are reminded in the Third Secret, in the triple call of the Angel to do penance.

Penance signifies above all repentance, a spirit of contrition, which makes us aware of the gravity of sins committed by us and others, and which makes us detest them with all our hearts. Penance signifies a doctrinal and moral revision of all the errors embraced in the last century by Western society. The Fatima message reminds us explicitly that the alternative to penance is a terrifying punishment which threatens mankind.

For the world to avoid this punishment it must change its spirit, but it cannot do so if it won’t recognize the enormity of the sins that are committed, starting with the introduction of mass-murder and homosexual unions into laws. Both these cases are sins directly against God, Creator of nature: sins, as the Catechism teaches,  that cry out to Heaven for vengeance; in other words, they incur a great chastisement.

Without repentance the chastisement cannot be held back. Without reference to this chastisement, the message of Fatima is emptied of its deep significance.

Penance signifies repentance; penance signifies detestation and hate for sin: the hate for sin must impel us to fight it and when the sin is public, it must impel us into public action, to combat the roots and consequences of the evil in society. For this the call to penance in the Fatima message is also a call to combat the errors which are corrupting the whole of society today.

The Fatima message is not only an anti-Communist message;  it is also an anti-liberal and anti-Lutheran message as the errors of Russia descend from the errors of the French Revolution and Protestantism. They are the errors of the anti-Christian Revolution, which the Catholic Counter-Revolution opposes.  As Count de Maistre states, this is not a Revolution in the opposite way, but is the opposite of the Revolution in all its political, cultural and religious aspects[22].

Fatima directly opposes 1917, 1717 and 1517. We won’t be celebrating any of these dates.

Allow me to recall a revelation from Our Lady at Fatima which we learned about only a few years ago; exactly in 2013 when the Carmel of Coimbra published the volume Um Caminho sob  o olhar de Maria.

Around four o’clock in the afternoon on January 3rd 1944, in the convent chapel of Tuy, in front of the Tabernacle, Our Lady urged Sister Lucia to write the text of the Third Secret and Sister Lucia recounts:

“I felt my spirit inundated by a mystery of light that is God and in Him I saw and heard the point of a lance like a flame that is detached touch the axis of the earth and it trembles: mountains, cities, towns and villages with their inhabitants are buried. The sea, the rivers and clouds exceed their boundaries, inundating and dragging with them in a vortex, houses and people in a number that cannot be counted; it is the purification of the world from the sin in which it is immersed. Hatred, ambition, provoke the destructive war. After I felt my heart racing and in my spirit a soft voice that said: ‘In time, one faith, one baptism, one Church, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic. In eternity, Heaven!’ This word ‘Heaven’ filled my heart with peace and happiness in such a way that, almost without being aware of it, I kept repeating to myself for a long time: Heaven, Heaven!!”[23].

Our Lady reminds us that a dreadful chastisement threatens mankind and that profession of the Catholic faith in its entirety is necessary in the dramatic age we  are living in. One Faith, one Baptism and one Church.  We need not then leave the Church, but turn back to Her and live and die in Her, since outside the Church there is no salvation. Outside Her doors there is only the inconsolable abyss of hell. The alternative remains that between Heaven and Hell, which have their own foretastes on this earth. Hell for the nations is: atheistic, anarchistic, egalitarian society. Paradise for the nations is: austere, hierarchical, sacred, Christian Civilization.

We conquest Heaven on earth by fighting in defence of the true Church, so often abandoned by Churchmen.

And the final exclamation: “Heaven! Heaven!” seems to refer to the dramatic choice between Heaven, the place where souls that are saved reach eternal happiness, and hell, the place where the damned undergo sufferings for all eternity.

Those who want to escape death, in time and eternity, have only one path before them: to fight against the disorders in the modern world, to affirm, in their lives and in society, the perennial principles of the natural and Christian order. This was the path chosen by many saints who should be our models, such as St. Maximilian  Kolbe (1894-1941).

On October 17th 1917, on the eve of the Russian Revolution and without knowing anything about the apparitions at Fatima, the young Polish Franciscan founded the Militia of the Immaculate to combat Freemasonry which was celebrating the 200th anniversary of the constitution of London’s Grand Lodge with blasphemous parades through the streets of Rome. St. Maximilian Kolbe is one of the saints who prophesised the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

The Triumph of Mary’s Immaculate Heart, which is also the Reign of Mary announced by many privileged souls, is nothing other than the triumph in history of the natural and Christian order, preserved by the Church. Our Lady announced this triumph as the final outcome of a long trial, of tragic days of penance and struggle, but also of immense trust in Her promise.

Let us turn to Her then, in this Centenary of Her apparitions, asking Her, to make haste, this moment, making of ourselves an instrument, in our times, for Her victory against the Revolution: super Revolutionem victoria in diebus nostris, which is equivalent to saying:

In the end Her Immaculate Heart will triumph.

Translation: Contributor Francesca Romana

 

[1] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, 174, 6 ad 3.

[2] Robert Conquest, Reflections on a ravaged Century, W. W. Norton & Company, New York 2001.

[3]  Benedict XV, Letter of 1 August 1917, in AAS IX (1917) p.421-423.

[4] Ferenc Fejtő,  Requiem pour un empire défunt, Lieu Commun, Paris 1988, pp. 308, 311

[5] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Lenin in Zurich, Book Club Associates, London 1976.

[6] Anthony Sutton,Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution,  Arlington House, New Rochelle  1974, p. 22

[7] Sutton,op. cit., p. 25

[8] Sutton,op. cit., pp. 86-88

[9] John Reed,Ten Days that Shook the World, Boni and Liveright, New York 1919, p. 112

[10]Tesi su Feuerbach, tr. it. in Feuerbach-Marx-Engels,Materialismo dialettico e materialismo storico, a cura di Cornelio Fabro, La Scuola, Brescia 1962, pp. 81-86

[11]Martins dos Reis,O Milagre do Sol e o Segredo de Fátima, Ed. Salesianas, Porto, 1966

[12] Frederick Engels, The Development of Socialism. From Utopia to Science, 1878,  tr. tr. it. Editori Riuniti, Roma 1958, pp. 15-17.

[13] George H. Williams, The Radical Reformation, Westminster Press, Philadelphia 1962

[14] Plinio Correa de Oliveira,Revolution and Counter-Revolution, The American TFP, Hanover, PA, 2002, p. 25

[15] Richard M. Weaver, Ideas have consequences, The University of Chicago Press, Chigago & London 2013.

[16] Margaret C. Jacob, The Newtonians and the English Revolution, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1976

[17] James H. Billington, Fire in the Minds of Men: Origins of the Revolutionary Faith, Basic Books 1980, pp. 19-20.

[18]Antonio Gramsci,Quaderni dal Carcere, [Prison Notebooks] edizione critica dell’Istituto Gramsci, by Valentino Gerratana, Einaudi, Torino 1975, vol. III, p. 1860

[19] Vladimir Bukovsky, Gli archivi segreti di Mosca, tr. it., Spirali, Milano 1999, pp. 62, 65.

[20] La Repubblica, November 11th 2016.

[21]LifeSiteNews  22nd February 2017.

[22] Joseph de Maistre, Considérations sur la France, cap. X, 3, in Œuvres complètes, Vitte, Lyon-Paris 1924, t. I, p. 157

[23] Carmelo de Coimbra,Um Caminho sob  o olhar de Maria, Ediçoes Carmelo, Coimbra 2012, p. 267

Labels: de Mattei

Posted by Adfero. at 3/29/2017 12:21:00 PM

– See more at: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2017/03/de-mattei-shedding-light-on-todays.html#more

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on THREE DATES TO REMEMBER: 1517, 1717, 1917! WHAT’S WITH THE 17TH YEAR ???? WILL 2017 BE ANOTHER DISATEROUS YEAR ???

DID CARDINAL THEODORE McCARRICK INCUR EXCOMMUNICATIO LATAE SENTENTIAE UNDER UNIVERSI DOMINICI GREGIS ???

Image result for photo of cardinal mccarrick

 

Universi Dominici Gregis #80 seems to have been violated by Cardinal McCarrick. After the election, he admits to being influenced by an “external” person, who suggested that he “push Bergoglio” prior to the election. McCarrick then admits to indirectly pushing Bergoglio during pre-conclave presentations. See:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3iaBLqt8vg

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

CONCERNING CHARLIE JOHNSTON

 width=

On Charlie Johnston

Jesus Walking on Water by Michael D. O’Brien

THERE is an underlying theme I try to weave throughout all the aspects of my ministry: Be not afraid! For it carries within it the seeds of both reality and hope:

We cannot hide the fact that many threatening clouds are gathering on the horizon. We must not, however, lose heart, rather we must keep the flame of hope alive in our hearts… —POPE BENEDICT XVI, Catholic News Agency, January 15th, 2009

In terms of my writing apostolate, I have spent the past 12 years striving to help you face this gathering Storm precisely in order that you may not be not afraid. I have spoken about the uncomfortable realities of our times rather than pretending that everything is flowers and rainbows. And I have spoken over and over again about God’s plan, a future of hope for the Church after the trials which she now faces. I have not ignored the labor pains while at the same time reminding you of the New Birth coming, as understood in the voice of Tradition. [1] As we read in today’s Psalm:

God is for us a refuge and strength, a helper close at hand, in time of distress: so we shall not fear though the earth should rock, though the mountains fall into the depths of the sea, even though its waters rage and foam, even though the mountains be shaken by its waves… The Lord of hosts is with us: the God of Jacob is our stronghold. (Psalm 46)

SHAKEN CONFIDENCE

In the past two years, the “mountains” of confidence have been toppled in some as one alleged prediction after another has failed to come to pass by certain “seers” and “visionaries.” [2] One such prediction was by an American, Charlie Johnston, who said that, according to his “angel”, the next president of the United States would not come through the normal electoral process and that Obama would remain in power. For my part, I have explicitly warned my readers against banking too much on specific predictions like these, including Charlie’s (see On Discernment of the Details). God’s mercy is fluid and, like a good father, He does not treat us according to our sins, especially when we repent. That can change the course of the future in an instant. Still, if a seer feels in good conscience that God is asking them to make such predictions public, then that’s their business; it’s between them, their spiritual director, and God (and they must also be responsible for the fallout, either way). However, make no mistake: the negative fallout from these sometimes rash predictions affects every one of us in the Church who are trying to promote the authentic revelations that Our Lord and Lady want us to hear in these times. In that regard, I wholeheartedly agree with Archbishop Rino Fisichella who said,

Confronting the subject of prophecy today is rather like looking at wreckage after a shipwreck. —”Prophecy” in Dictionary of Fundamental Theology, p. 788

All this said, I have been asked by some readers to clarify my position on Charlie since I not only mentioned him a few times in my writings, but appeared on the same stage with him at an event in Covington, LA in 2015. People have automatically assumed that, as such, I must therefore endorse his prophecies. Rather, what I endorse is the teaching of St. Paul:

Do not despise prophetic utterances. Test everything; retain what is good. (1 Thess 5:20-21)

 

OF “THE STORM”

Charlie’s spiritual director, a priest in good standing, suggested that he contact me three years ago because we were both speaking of a coming “Storm”. This is, after all, what Pope Benedict said above, as well as St. John Paul II:

It is precisely at the end of the second millennium that immense, threatening clouds converge on the horizon of all humanity and darkness descends upon human souls. —POPE JOHN PAUL II, from a speech, December, 1983; www.vatican.va

In the approved revelations of Elizabeth Kindelmann and the writings of Fr. Gobbi, which bear the Imprimatur, they also speak of a coming “Storm” upon humanity. Nothing new here, really. So I agreed with Charlie’s statement that a great “Storm” is coming.

But how that “Storm” unfolds is another matter. At the conference in Covington, I specifically stated that I could not endorse Charlie’s prophecies [3] but that I appreciated his spirit and faithfulness to Sacred Tradition. It was also very interesting to have an open Q & A with those at the Covington event where we shared our respective viewpoints. In Charlie’s own words:

One need not agree with all—or even most—of my supernatural claims to welcome me as a fellow worker in the vineyard. Acknowledge God, take the next right step, and be a sign of hope to those around you. That is the sum of my message. All else is explanatory detail. — “My New Pilgrimage”, August 2nd, 2015; from The Next Right Step

In this case, prediction of the future is of secondary importance. What is essential is the actualization of the definitive Revelation. —Cardinal Ratzinger (POPE BENEDICT XVI), Message of Fatima, Theological Commentary, www.vatican.va

 

CLARIFICATIONS

All this said, last May, I began to see that many were still assuming that I endorsed everything Charlie was saying. I might point out, however, that I have shared the podium with several alleged mystics and seers over the years, but none who were condemned by their local ordinary or who taught anything contrary to the Catholic faith. A few years back, I also shared the stage with Michael Coren, a Catholic convert and author who has subsequently apostasized. I think most people understand that I am not responsible for what others say and do simply because I spoke at the same event as them.

Nonetheless, last May in Fear, Fire, and the Rescue?, I pointed out the Archbishop of Denver’s preliminary assessment of Charlie’s messages and his statement that…

…the archdiocese encourages [souls] to seek their security in Jesus Christ, the Sacraments, and the Scriptures. —Archbishop Sam Aquila, statement from the Archdiocese of Denver, March 1st, 2016; www.archden.org

At the same time, I felt obligated to address the significant differences that were emerging between my writings and Charlie’s. In The Coming Judgment, I noted the Archbishop’s warning for “prudence and caution” regarding Charlie’s alleged prophecies, and went on further to reiterate the eschatological vision of the Church Father’s that differs from what Charlie and some other mainstream eschatologists are proposing. In Is Jesus Really Coming?, I pulled together what is a “prophetic consensus” of 2000 years of Tradition and modern prophecy that paints an unmistakable picture of the horizon.

Since Charlie’s failed prediction, the Archdiocese of Denver issued another statement:

The events of 2016/17 have shown that Mr. Johnston’s alleged visions were not accurate and the Archdiocese urges the faithful not to condone or support further attempts to reinterpret them as valid. —Archdiocese of Denver, Press Release, Feb. 15th, 2017; archden.org

That is my position too, of course, and hopefully every faithful Catholics’. Again, I draw my readers’ attention to the wisdom of St. Hannibal:

How many contradictions we see between Saint Brigitte, Mary of Agreda, Catherine Emmerich, etc. We cannot consider the revelations and the locutions as words of Scripture. Some of them must be omitted, and others explained in a right, prudent meaning. —St. Hannibal Maria di Francia, letter to Bishop Liviero of Città di Castello, 1925 (emphasis mine)

…people cannot deal with private revelations as if they were 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on CONCERNING CHARLIE JOHNSTON

WHAT IS FRATERNAL CORRECTION?

Image result for HOLY FACE

What is Fraternal Correction?

 

“But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all: If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews.”        [Douay-Rheims bible translation, Galatians 2:14]

By John J. Arechiga

March 28, 2017

 

John J. Aréchiga is known to me to be a researcher of exceptional ability. For some time I have read the results of his research and at my urging he has agreed to allow me to publish several of his essays. This essay addresses a matter of critical importance to the Roman Catholic Church at this moment in its history. I publish this essay in the hope that it will contribute to the efforts of persons in the Church in authority who have the power to find solutions to the problems that currently afflict the Church.

+Rene Henry Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi

 

There is a time and place for fraternal correction – and you have to wonder whether this moment in history, this moment in time, is in need of fraternal correction.

The issue is not sedevacantism, schism, or the indefectibility of the Church. The issue is fraternal correction of scandalous Catholic Modernists. To what end fraternal correction? Preferably return of the prodigal sons – else excommunication.

What is fraternal correction? It is “Brother reproving a brother.” It usually involves a serious fault, either unknown as to gravity by the offender or hoped to be corrected by such admonition. It is an exercise of fraternal charity when commendably done. It should never be exercised merely for the sake of the offended, but mainly to help the offender or benefit a third party. In some religious communities it is a recognized form of fostering humility and a valuable aid to growing in Christian perfection.       [Essentially Verbatim: Father John Hardon, Modern Catholic Dictionary, page 219]

 

You will find the basis for fraternal correction in scripture; in Summa Theologica, the principal doctrinal synthesis in Catholic theology; in an Apostolic Constitution; in the code of canon law; and in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

 

“But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee: take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church (emphasis supplied). And if he will not hear the church: let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth shall be loosed also in heaven.”                                                    (Douay-Rheims, New Testament, Saint Matthew 18: 15-18)

“Augustine says in his Rule: “Show mercy not only to yourselves, but also to him who, being in the higher position among you, is therefore in greater danger.” But fraternal correction is a work of mercy. Therefore even prelates ought to be corrected (emphasis supplied).”                                                                                                                                       (Summa Theologica, II-II, Question 33, Article 4)

“We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff (emphasis supplied), who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fullness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith (emphasis supplied). Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted, We have been concerned lest false prophets or others, even if they have only secular jurisdiction, should wretchedly ensnare the souls of the simple, and drag with them into perdition, destruction and damnation countless peoples committed to their care and rule, either in spiritual or in temporal matters; and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place. In view of this, Our desire has been to fulfil our Pastoral duty, insofar as, with the help of God, We are able, so as to arrest the foxes who are occupying themselves in the destruction of the vineyard of the Lord and to keep the wolves from the sheepfolds, lest We seem to be dumb watchdogs that cannot bark and lest We perish with the wicked husbandman and be compared with the hireling.”                                                                   (Cum Ex Apostolic Officio, paragraph 1)

“According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they [Christian faithful] possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful (emphasis supplied), without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.”                                              [1983 CIC 212 §3]

 

“The fruits of charity are joy, peace, and mercy; charity demands beneficence and fraternal correction (emphasis supplied); it is benevolence; it fosters reciprocity and remains disinterested and generous; it is friendship and communion: “Love is itself the fulfillment of all our works. There is the goal; that is why we run: we run toward it, and once we reach it, in it we shall find rest.”                                                                                    [CCC 1829]

Before moving on it is very important to note that the quote from Cum Ex Apostolic Officio focuses on contradicting the pope – fraternal correction – and has nothing to do with sedevacantism, schism, or the indefectibility of the Church. Moving on…

Tell the Church? Who or what is the Church? Broadly defined, it is the faithful of the whole world. Since the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church has been defined as a union of human beings who are united by the profession of the same Christian faith, and by participation of and in the same sacraments under the direction of their lawful pastors, especially of the representative of Christ on earth, the Bishop of Rome. Each element in this definition is meant to exclude all others from actual and vital membership in the Catholic Church, namely apostates and heretics who do not profess the same Christian faith, non-Christians who do not receive the same Sacraments, and schismatics who are not submissive to the Church’s lawful pastors under the Bishop of Rome.         [Essentially Verbatim: Father John Hardon, Modern Catholic Dictionary, page 105]

Arguably, any lay person, religious, priest, bishop, archbishop, or cardinal may raise the issue of fraternal correction:

Whoever raises the issue of fraternal correction must proceed carefully – and take one or two more with him, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.

The initial approach to the witnesses must be in strict confidence – to avoid scandal, especially scandal of the weak.

The scope of today’s issues requires far more than two or three witnesses. There is a time and place for fraternal correction – and you have to wonder whether this moment in history, this moment in time, is in need of fraternal correction.Fraternal correction is always the avenue of first recourse – even when considering contemporary controversial issues such as the Dubia and the papal election of Jorge Mario Cardinal Bergoglio (Pope Francis).  To what end fraternal correction? Preferably return of the prodigal sons – else excommunication.  That being said, it is written in the Old Testament prophecy of Isaias:

“And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: Whom shall I send, and who shall go for us? And I said: Lo, here am I. Send me.”                                                                                         (Douay-Rheims, Old Testament, Isaias 6:8)

Today we must ask who will go first, who will raise the issue of fraternal correction, who will say:

“Lo, here am I. Send me.” Speak now or forever hold your peace!

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment