St. Gregory Nazianzen the church crisis

St. Gregory Nazianzen explains the current disaster in the Church’s human element

More than 1600 years ago, St. Gregory Nazianzen, Doctor of the Church, warned us that the human element of the Church suffers shipwreck when She has evil bishops.  Here are his words:

The light and eye of the Church is the Bishop.  It is necessary then that as the body is rightly directed as long as the eye keeps itself pure, but goes wrong when it becomes corrupt, so also with respect to the Bishop, according to what his state may be, must the Church in like manner suffer shipwreck, or be saved.[1]

As the Catholic Church’s bishops go, so go their flocks.  With the spectacular betrayal by the Church’s bishops beginning with Vatican II, it is no wonder that their flocks suffered the shipwreck of heresy and vice, following their bishops! 

With the more recent, spectacular betrayal of the bishops consecrated through Archbishop Lefebvre – who are supposedly faithful to Catholic Tradition – it is no wonder that their flocks are suffering the shipwreck of liberalism, compromise, and laxity, following their bishops (e.g., accepting 95% of Vatican II and countless other evils[2])!



[1]           Words of St. Gregory Nazianzen quoted in the Catena Aurea on St. Luke’s Gospel, St. Thomas Aquinas, editor, explaining Our Lord’s words:

 

The light of thy body is thy eye.  If thy eye be single, thy whole body will be lightsome; but if it be evil, thy body also will be darksome.

 

St. Luke’s Gospel, Ch. 11, v. 34.

 

[2]           Here is a list of many other N-SSPX evils, cited to the N-SSPX’s own sources: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/sspx-simoulin-challenge-answered.html 

 

Bishop Williamson’s group is not better but is liberal in a somewhat different way.  See, e.g., https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/priests/williamson-the-evil-of-comfortably-tolerating-heresy.html

Vatican II Gave the Devil Everything He Wanted

What a victory for the devil, sending so many people to hell!  The devil could not have planned a better Second Vatican Council to achieve his goals.  So it is reasonable to believe that he and Rome’s Masons were partners in the planning (in secret) of the Second Vatican Council.  For the past 50-plus years VC II has helped the devil ensnare souls and start their trip to hell.

It is time to understand just how much of a disaster it was for those foolish souls who cared so little for their salvation that they willingly went along with the evils of VC II.  And we must fight today against those who are willing to accept even a part of those evil results, (i.e., the liberal N-SSPX which openly accepts 95% of VC II.)

A review of just what the devil gained should concern and motivate a traditional Catholic living in the catacombs to fight against the results of VC II.  The following list will demonstrate just how much the devil achieved during and after the Council.

1.    Loss of the Tridentine Mass, the main source of grace.  Replaced by an anti-Catholic service (i.e., Novus Ordo) that does not give grace.  Without grace you cannot avoid sin and will lose the Faith.  And if you lose the Faith, you lose everything, since there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

2.    Religious liberty is now taught and accepted – thanks to Vatican II.  That is, you can be saved no matter what faith you prefer.  Perhaps one that will overlook your sinful life.  Thus, there is no need for the Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

3.   Universal Salvation is another evil of Vatican II, (i.e., everyone goes to heaven).  Thus, there is no need for penance, religious fervor, sacrifice, prayer for yourself or others, etc.  Your somewhat-sinful lifestyle will be overlooked by a merciful God at your personal judgment.  You no longer need to consider God as all-just (i.e., people must do penance for their sins).  Universal Salvation is so anti-Catholic that only someone who has lost the Faith would believe it.  For one thing, most want to believe that they and their loved ones will be happy in heaven for all eternity.  When you think about it, if everyone goes to heaven, there is no real need for the Catholic Church.  But to keep the Novus Ordo parishes viable, they are made into entertainment destinations (e.g., clowns, folk masses, kissing, handshaking, etc.)  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

 

4.    The Council shattered traditional grace-giving sacraments with its destructive changes to these basic building blocks of the Catholic Faith.  Demonstrating complete arrogance, it more than “tampered” with them – it altered meanings and words – as if Christ needed help in correcting His “mistakes.”  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

5.    “Catholic divorce” – an annulment based on very doubtful reasons – was another product of VC II.  Almost anything goes, as long as you can pay what it “costs.”  With low church attendance, they have to keep the money coming in.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

6.   Rome stated that the Second Vatican Council was necessary and needed to update the Catholic Faith to make it more relevant in our modern age.  “Open a window and let in some fresh air.”[1]  As it turned out, even Pope Paul stated that the “smoke of Satan has entered the sanctuary,” (in lieu of fresh air).  It is obvious that if you want to change, update, modernize the Catholic religion, you have already lost the Faith.  As the Blessed Virgin warned at La Salette, “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ.”  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?

7.    The greatest victory for the devil was to replace the Catholic Church with the anti-Catholic conciliar church, joined and accepted by most Catholics in the 1960s and ‘70s with little regard or concern for their salvation.  Archbishop Lefebvre then made it clear that this new religion of Vatican II was a new church, and warned that there was no salvation outside the Catholic Church.  And which group accepts 95% of VC II?                                    

I’m sure the above is not a complete list of the devil’s total goals, (i.e., to reduce or eliminate the need for the Catholic Church).  What it does illustrate is that most people will continue to go to hell.  With no graces coming from the Novus Ordo, it is not possible to keep the Faith and avoid sin.  Thus, the leaders in Rome will not come back to tradition (before Russia is consecrated to Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart), no matter what the liberal N-SSPX claims will happen after a deal is signed. 

What are we to do?  Stand up fearlessly for the uncompromising traditional Catholic faith, and follow Christ’s instructions to Lucy at Fatima in 1943:

The sacrifice required of every person is the fulfilling of his duties in life and the observance of My laws.  Be an example of religious fervor, helping others to keep the traditional Catholic faith, love God, strive to be an ordinary saint, eternally happy.[2]



[1]           Words of Pope John XXIII.

[2]           Quoted from a pamphlet entitled Remember Our Lady of Fatima Said, published by Franciscan Marytown Press, Kenosha, WI.

Practical effects of Vatican II

Catholic Candle note:  The article below uses various objectively-measurable criterion (such as the number of priests) to show how Vatican II devastated the human element of the Church. 

However, this article uses the conciliar church’s own statistics, which don’t distinguish between certainly-valid priests and sacraments, compared to the doubtfully-valid ones which should be treated as invalid.  For this reason, the statistics given below are not nearly as bad as the real ones.

 

What Teaching of the Second Vatican Council “Eliminated” the Need for the Catholic Church?

Answer: The false teaching of universal salvation or everybody goes to heaven.  I’m afraid those in the conciliar church are willing to believe that error, because people tend to believe what they want to believe, and especially when it is easy and convenient.  In addition to the attractiveness of this error, people accept it because they were taught to follow the teachings of the Church’s leaders.

It is easy to understand who is behind the error of universal salvation and promotes it – the devil, the Masons, the leaders of false religions, and the liberal modernist leaders who are part of the human element of the Catholic Church (in Rome and elsewhere).  These leaders (or their like-minded colleagues), all took part in the Second Vatican Council. 

In addition, it is easy to see that the following would be the inevitable results.  Listed below are some statistics from 1965 – 2016[1] indicating just how devastating this false teaching has been on the religious and lay groups of the Catholic Church.  It has:

 

1)          All but eliminated religious fervor and the (perceived) need for the Catholic Church;

 

2)          Greatly reduced Mass attendance – down 33%;

 

3)          Greatly reduced financial support for the Church;

 

4)          Greatly reduced confessions;

 

5)          Greatly reduced family prayer;

 

6)          Greatly reduced priestly vocations – down 63%;

 

7)          Greatly reduced the number of Catholic schools – down 50%;

 

8)          Greatly reduced the number of marriages – down 42%;

 

9)          Greatly reduced the number of baptisms – down 51%;

 

10)       Greatly increased the number of cremations;

 

11)       All but eliminated Extreme Unction;

 

12)       Eliminated the (perceived) need for Requiem masses and prayers for the dead;

 

13)       Changed the “mass” into entertainment, rather than prayer for the poor souls;

 

14)       Eliminated Holy Days;

 

15)       Eliminated the (perceived) obligation to abstain from meat on Fridays;

 

16)       Greatly reduced the number of religious Sisters – down 262%!  (Most of the remaining sisters are elderly.)

 

17)       Increased divorces and troubled families;

 

18)       Increased the number of single parents;

 

19)       Greatly reduced the number of religious Brothers – down 300%!

 

20)       Greatly increased the number of parishes without a priest – up 600%!

 

21)       This false teaching (viz., universal salvation) suggests or fosters the idea of no punishment for sin.

 

Some of the above points have no statistics, but it is easy to believe the decline is taking place.  There will be other, worse statistics to come – as all religious fervor and morals are easily forgotten with “assured salvation.”

In the past, salvation was known to be uncertain, so many people developed religious fervor because they wanted to avoid hell and go to heaven.  If heaven is “assured” by VC II, religious fervor is not on people’s minds, and is believed to be unnecessary.

The fire and brimstone sermons from the pulpit are a thing of the past.  Now, at funerals the deceased are looking down on us, very happy and smiling.  It is what most of those still living want to believe about their deceased loved ones.  It is also comforting for everyone to think they will experience the same when it’s time for them to pass on.

Before Vatican II, Catholics knew that one of the main reasons for Christ coming to earth and suffering for us, was to show us how to save our souls and earn heaven.  So, Catholics supported the Church and worked to reach the goal of heaven.  But it is so much easier to believe that the goal is “assured” without any real effort on our part, and so people follow their liberal leaders, including the pastors of their conciliar parishes.

It is not enough to belong to the Church to be saved.   Only those Catholics who live according to the (traditional) teachings of the Catholic Church will be saved.[2]  Thus, there is no easy way out (i.e., everyone goes to heaven).  Christ showed us the way for 33 years on earth.  We must follow His example and carry our crosses, no matter how heavy, to reach our goal of salvation.



[1]               Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, 2018, http://cara.georgetown.edu/frequently-requested-church-statistics/

 

[2]           My Catholic Faith, by Bishop Louis Morrow, My Mission House, Kenosha, WI, ©1948, p.141.

When will the pope consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

Catholic Candle note: In the article below, the pope is sometimes called a “papal monarch” – which he is – to draw attention to the comparison made below to the French monarch, because of their similar and mutual disobedience to God’s commands that they perform consecrations of their realms, as He directed.

 

Our Lady of Fatima revealed that God Wills that Russia be consecrated to her Immaculate Heart.  In 1929, Our Lady of Fatima told Sister Lucy:

The moment has come when God asks the Holy Father to make, in union with all the bishops of the world, the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, promising to save it by this means.…[1]

Earlier (viz., in 1917), Our Lady of Fatima revealed that the pope definitely will consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart and through this means God will grant peace.  Here are her words:

The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she [viz., Russia] shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.[2]

However, Our Lady of Fatima warned in 1917 that, when she came in the future (viz., in 1929) to ask for the consecration, if the pope delayed this consecration, his delay would cause great harm throughout the world.  Here are Our Lady’s words:

I shall come [viz., in 1929] to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, by the Holy Father and all the bishops of the world.  If my request is heeded, Russia will be converted and there will be peace.  If not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, provoking wars and persecution against the Church.[3]

In 1931, Our Lord assured Sister Lucy that the pope and bishops will perform this consecration – but He revealed that there will first be a long delay.  Here are Sister Lucy’s words describing Our Lord’s revelation to her:

Later on, by means of an interior communication, Our Lord said to me, complaining: “They [viz., Pope Pius XI and the bishops of the world] did not want to heed My request!  …  Make it known to My ministers, seeing that they follow the example of the King of France in delaying the execution of My demand, they will also have to follow him into misfortune.  Like the King of France, they will repent and do it, but it will be late.[4]

 

What misfortune did the king of France suffer because of his disobedience in refusing to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus?

Our Lord’s threat (viz., about the Church’s hierarchy following the king of France into misfortune), refers to King Louis XIV ignoring Our Lord’s request (through St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, on June 17, 1689), that France be consecrated to His Sacred Heart.  Our Lord’s request came exactly one hundred years before the Masonic French Revolution stripped the French king of his legislative power, on June 17, 1789.

Not only did that French king (Louis XIV) ignore Our Lord’s request, but the next king, Louis XV did so too.  Likewise, Louis XV’s son, King Louis XVI, also ignored Our Lord’s request until he was imprisoned and was about to be executed during the French Revolution, in 1793. 

Thus, Our Lord waited one hundred years to the day, before allowing the godless Masonic revolutionaries to declare the French monarch to be stripped of his legislative power.  Our Lord waited a little more than one hundred years (104 years) before allowing the French to kill their king.

 

Eight popes, beginning with Pope Pius XI, ignore God’s demand to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Pope Pius XI ignored God’s 1929 request that he consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, just as King Louis XIV ignored Our Lord’s request that he consecrate France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

This consecration of Russia has not yet been made.  After Pope Pius XI’s death, the next seven popes (Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis)[5] likewise ignored God’s request for this consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.  This is like the next two kings after Louis XIV ignored Our Lord’s request for the consecration of France (until Louis XVI’s last, desperate days in prison, before his execution).

The present, worldwide, conciliar revolution is a Divine Punishment for our papal monarch’s disobedience, just as the French Revolution was a Divine Punishment for the French monarch’s disobedience.

Our Catholic Faith assures us that the Church can never be completely destroyed.  Further, Our Lord and His mother both assure us that the consecration of Russia will occur, although after a long delay.  As Our Lord predicted:

Like the King of France, they [viz., the pope and bishops of the world] will

repent and do it [viz., the consecration], but it will be late.[6]

 

When will the pope consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary?

How late will the consecration of Russia be and when will it be?  Although we don’t know for certain, here are four considerations which suggest the answer:

1.    If we infer the year the pope will consecrate Russia, by drawing a parallel to the time which elapsed before the consecration of France, this means that the pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in the year 2033.

2.    Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself drew to the consecration of France, it seems we must wait more years before the consecration of Russia, because matters are not yet quite extreme and desperate enough.

 

3.    Our Lady of Quito predicted that her victory in this Great Apostasy will not occur until all seems hopeless.

4.    It seems that God will allow a number of additional years to elapse, in order to increase the severity of our present conciliar crisis, so that the miraculous character of the Restoration will be all-the-more undeniable.

Below, we discuss each of these considerations.

 

1.   If we infer the year the pope consecrates Russia, by drawing a parallel to the time which elapsed before the consecration of France, this would mean that the pope would consecrate Russia in about 2033.

Our Lord patiently waited a little more than one hundred years (1689 – 1793) after His command for the consecration, during which time He endured the disobedience of a line of French monarchs.  After about 104 years, the French monarch finally obeyed and performed the consecration of France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Our Lady of Fatima appeared in 1929 to ask for the consecration of Russia.[7]  The parallel which Our Lord Himself made to the consecration of France, would suggest that, a little after the year 2029, the pope will perform this consecration.  If the same number of years (104) separate Heaven’s two requested consecrations and their two fulfillments, the consecration of Russia would occur about the year 2033.

 

2.   Guided by the comparison which Our Lord Himself drew to the consecration of France, it seems that we must wait longer because the situation is not yet quite desperate and extreme enough.

Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the pope and the king of France, the consecration of Russia will seemingly occur when circumstances are extremely desperate and are seemingly hopeless, as they were for King Louis XVI when he consecrated France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus while in prison, when he was soon to be executed by the Masonic revolutionaries.

Faithful and informed Catholics might suppose that the situation now is so extreme and so desperate in the human element of the Church, that things seemingly cannot get worse.  However, using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the Masonic French Revolution and the present Masonic conciliar revolution in the Church, circumstances in the human element of the Church are apparently not yet desperate enough. 

French King Louis XVI did not obey Our Lord’s command for the consecration of France when the situation in France became bad, even when it became very, very bad.  King Louis XVI saw and suffered many extreme events which alarmed him.  However, those events did not alarm him enough to end his refusal to obey Our Lord’s command to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart.  Here are events which, although dire, did not alarm the king enough to cause him to obey God:

  A mob ruled Paris;

 

  The king was forced to flee for his life from the revolutionary mob

 

  The revolutionaries “suspended” their king’s legislative authority;

  The revolutionaries “abolished” the monarchy;

 

  The revolutionaries overthrew the king’s established government assemblies;

  The long parade of public executions began (often using the guillotine), causing terror and executing loyal subjects of the king and the opponents of the revolution;

 

  Revolutionary forces attacked the king’s palace, killing hundreds of his defenders;

 

  The king was forced to place himself under the power of the “more moderate” revolutionaries, for his own protection against the more blood-thirsty wing of the same revolution;

 

  The revolutionaries placed their king under house arrest (until he was later moved to a jail);

 

  The revolutionaries stole the property of the Catholic Church and of the nobility; and

  The revolutionaries persecuted all priests who did not swear an oath to the Masonic, anti-Catholic errors of the revolution.

Using the parallel which Our Lord Himself draws between the disobedience of the pope and of the king of France, it appears that, however desperate and alarming conditions are now in the human element of the Church, they can and will get worse before the pope is so completely frantic that he will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.[8]  This suggests that some more years will pass before the consecration of Russia, while conditions in the human element of the Church become more dire.

 

3.   Our Lady of Quito predicted that her victory in this Great Apostasy would not occur until all seems hopeless.

At Fatima, in 1917, Our Lady promised us that:

In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph![9] 

Our Lady also prophesized at Quito, Ecuador, that she will completely triumph.  However, she added that her triumph will only occur when all seems hopeless.  Here are her words:

When everything will seem lost and paralyzed, that will be the happy beginning of the complete Restoration. This will mark the arrival of My hour, when I, in a marvelous way, will dethrone the proud and cursed Satan, trampling him under My feet and chaining him in the infernal abyss.[10]

Our present situation in the human element of the Church does seem very bad.  However, the situation does not yet quite seem completely lost and hopeless.  Thus, it seems we must endure some additional years before the consecration of Russia and the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, because the situation does not yet seem completely hopeless.

 

4.   It seems that God will allow a number of additional years to elapse, in order to increase the severity of our present conciliar crisis, so that the miraculous character of the Restoration will be all-the-more undeniable.

Our Lady predicted that her complete triumph will occur “in a marvelous way”.[11]  Her triumph will be miraculous, leaving no doubt that it is God’s work – and not merely a triumph caused through human efforts and human ability.

However, our fallen nature is quick to suppose that when we act as God’s tools, our own human efforts, not God, achieved the victory.  For this reason, God often chooses poor instruments for His work, to manifest that the victory belongs to Him.  Saint Augustine remarks that, when Our Lord founded His Church, “He chose not kings, senators, philosophers, or orators, but he chose common, poor, and untaught fishermen.”[12]

We see countless examples of God making sure that His victories are manifestly His work.  God leaves no doubt that His victories are not merely the result of human efforts.  One example of this is in the Old Testament, when the pagan Madianite army made war upon the Israelites.  Although the Madianites had 135,000 fighters, God Willed to give victory to the Israelites.[13]  He chose to give this victory through Gedeon, who was “the least” member of the lowest family in Manasses.[14]

Thirty-two thousand Israelites answered Gedeon’s call to fight against the far larger Madianite army.  In other words, Gedeon’s army was outnumbered more than 4:1.  But God refused to allow them to fight the Madianites yet.  God told Gedeon:

The people that are with thee are many, and Madian shall not be delivered into their hands: lest Israel should glory against me, and say: I was delivered by my own strength.[15]

God told Gedeon to send home all of his fighters who were afraid.  Gedeon sent home twenty-two thousand fighters and ten thousand remained.[16]

God then told Gedeon that his fighters were still too numerous.  God told Gedeon to bring his fighters to a river and watch them drink.  Some fighters lapped water like dogs, and God told Gedeon to keep those fighters.  Most fighters drank like men, and God told Gedeon to send those fighters home. 

Three hundred men lapped water like dogs and God instructed Gedeon to conquer the Madianites with these 300 men.[17]  Gedeon’s army was outnumbered 450:1.  With this tiny army, God gave Gedeon complete and sudden victory without losing a single man.

When Gedeon’s original army was outnumbered 4:1, those odds were bad.  After Gedeon sent home those men who were afraid, his army was outnumbered more than 13:1.  Those odds were very, very bad.  But Gedeon’s chances of victory were not yet so seemingly hopeless that the men would not credit themselves with the victory.  Only when the odds were 450:1 were things so “hopeless” that God allowed Gedeon to fight and to win the complete victory that God Willed.

In the present Great Apostasy, Our Lady promised that the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart would bring about the coming complete Restoration.  But because of our fallen nature, man is ready to steal credit for this Restoration, like Gedeon’s men were ready to steal credit for their victory over the Madianites.  Thus, the situation is not yet dire enough because man remains ready to boast that God’s victory is really from us.

We see an example of this in the N-SSPX recently bragging that there is no other way for the Church hierarchy to be reminded about Catholic Tradition (concerning the Church’s form of government) except by the N-SSPX.  Here are the N-SSPX’s words:

Only the Society can help the Church, in reminding the popes and the bishops that Our Blessed Lord founded a monarchical Church and not a chaotic modern assembly.[18]

This recent example shows us that things do not yet seem hopeless enough, since the largest group that calls itself “traditional” remains ready to consider itself indispensable in the Catholic Restoration.  So, if the Restoration came now, the N-SSPX (and perhaps, any of the rest of us) would steal the credit from God for the return to Tradition.

Because the Great Apostasy is not yet so severe so as to make things look completely hopeless, things must continue to get worse so that human leaders do not deceive themselves that victory came from their own human efforts.

 

Conclusion

We know that the pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and that there will be a complete Restoration and peace in the Church and in the world.

However, this consecration and Restoration are likely still years away, perhaps in the year 2033 (calculated by using Our Lord’s Own parallel to the consecration He commanded of the king of France).

Further, the situation in the human element in the Church is not yet hopeless enough:

  To sufficiently correspond to the situation in France during the French Revolution;

 

  To sufficiently fit the circumstances prophesied by Our Lady of Quito; and

  To show everyone that the Restoration is miraculous and not caused by the N-SSPX or other human causes.

Meanwhile, let us be of good heart!  We are in a time of great merit!  The Imitation of Christ assures us:

When you are troubled and afflicted, that is the time to gain merit.[19]

The Restoration of the human element of the Church is God’s work and victory, not ours.  God only put us here to be His faithful little tools, to use however He sees fit – not more, not less.  What more could we ever want out of our life?

 

 



[1]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added).

 

The pope must perform this consecration together with all of the bishops of the world, as Our Lady instructed in the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917.  These bishops do not need to have valid sacramental consecrations, but need only to validly wield the episcopal power to govern their respective dioceses.  For an explanation of this point, read this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html#section-10

 

[2]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917 (emphasis added), quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, pp.281-282.

.

 

[3]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917 (emphasis added; bracketed words added to clarify the timeline), quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, pp.281-282.


[4]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added; bracketed words added for clarity).

[5]           The sedevacantists reject the idea that a pope can be so extremely bad as to do what recent popes have done.  If Our Lady had requested the consecration of Russia after Pope Pius XII’s death, how quickly some sedevacantists would have trumpeted this as a “proof” that the Vatican II popes are not real popes, claiming that any real pope would have followed God’s request to perform the consecration.  However, faithful and informed Catholics know that popes, including Popes Pius XI and XII, are capable of such horrible disobedience to God.


[6]           The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.464 (emphasis added).

[7]           Our Lady did not ask for the consecration of Russia to her Immaculate Heart in 1917.  Rather, she told the Fatima children then that she would return in the future to ask for this consecration.  She returned to make this request in 1929.


[8]           Additional elements appear in this parallel between the disobedience of the French and papal monarchs.  For example, in the years before the French monarch finally consecrated France to the Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Masons gained increased influence in France.  Similarly, as we get closer to the time when a pope will consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart, we see the Masons’ increased influence in the Catholic Church (and in the world).

 

The king of France’s disobedience brought destruction and revolution upon the whole kingdom.  Likewise, the pope’s disobedience is bringing destruction and revolution upon the whole Catholic Church (in Her human element).

 

[9]           This is a portion of Our Lady’s message during the Third Apparition of Fatima, July 13, 1917, quoted from The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.297 (emphasis added).

 

Our Lady of Fatima revealed that we depend entirely on her and only she can help us.  Here are her words:

 

I want you to continue reciting the Rosary every day in honor of Our Lady of the Rosary to obtain peace in the world and the end of the war, because only She can help you.

 

The Whole Truth About Fatima, Frére Michel de la Sainte Trinité, translator John Collorafi, vol. II, Immaculate Heart Publications, Buffalo, NY, © 1989 for English translation, p.284 (emphasis added).


[10]         Words of Our Lady of Quito, Ecuador, in 1634, to Mother Marianna de Jesus.


[11]         Words of Our Lady of Quito, Ecuador, in 1634, to Mother Marianna de Jesus.

 

[12]         St. Augustine, Doctor of the Church, sermon #197, section 2, as quoted by St. Thomas Aquinas, greatest Doctor of the Church, in the Catena Aurea on St. Matthew’s Gospel, Ch. 4, vv. 18-22.

[13]         Judges, 8:10.

 

[14]         Judges, 6:11-16.

 

[15]         Judges, 7:1-2 (emphasis added).

 

[16]         Judges, 7:3.

 

[17]         Judges, 7:4-6.

 

[18]         December 28, 2018 interview of the SSPX’s new superior general Fr. Pagliarani (emphasis added; capitalization added for the first letter of the quotation).


[19]         My Imitation of Christ, by Thomas á Kempis, Book 1, Chapter 23.

Pope Francis teaches that all general principles are relative and adjustable

 

The Catholic Church has many unchangeable, general principles which do not contain exceptions.  For example, divorced and (so-called) “re-married” Catholics are forbidden from receiving Holy Communion.

Pope Francis falsely teaches that all the Catholic Church’s general principles must be adapted to local circumstances and cultures.  Here are his words: 

[C]ultures are in fact quite diverse, and every general principle needs to be inculturated[1], if it is to be respected and applied.

Quoted from Pope Francis’s apostolic constitution, Episcopalis Communio, Sept 15, 2018, §7 (ellipse is in the original; emphasis added).

 



[1]           Inculturation is: “the adoption of the behavior patterns of the surrounding culture”.  https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Inculturation

 

It is Revolutionary for Church leaders to Hold Regular, Frequent General Councils (Synods)

The Traditional Role of General Councils in the Catholic Church

A General Council of the Catholic Church is a council called by the pope.[1] The authority of a General Council apparently does not depend on the number of bishops who attended, since Catholics have never questioned the authority of a Church Council based on the small number of bishops who attended.[2]

A General Council is a rare event.[3] In approximately 2,000 years, there have been only 21 General Councils up to, and including Vatican II.[4] A General Council is generally called to address a great crisis in the Church.[5]

 

Holding Regular, Frequent General Councils is revolutionary and is not part of Catholic Tradition.

The idea of holding regular and frequent General Councils was a novelty that was attempted once before Vatican II (in 1417), by a valid (but in some ways, evil) General Council of the Catholic Church called the Council of Constance.[6] Among other things, this council commanded frequent future councils. Here are its words:

[B]y this perpetual law, we command that, from this time on, General Councils shall be held as follows: the first within five years immediately following the close of this present council; the second within seven years of the close of the council immediately following this present council; and ever afterwards thenceforward every ten years ….[7]

Such implementation of regular, frequent General Councils was completely revolutionary in the history of the Catholic Church.[8] It is not the way that Our Lord Jesus Christ established the Church to be governed.

After the Council of Constance, the next Church Council was scheduled for five years later, as commanded by the Council of Constance. This council was to be held at Pavia, Italy (near Milan). But almost no bishops came and a plague struck that town and broke up the little group assembled for the council.[9]

As the Council of Constance ordered, the next Council (after the failed Pavia attempt) was scheduled for seven years later – to be convened in Basel, Switzerland. Id. Although this Council did convene in Basel, it was moved to Ferrara, Italy, and then moved to Florence. Id. This Council treated various business and eventually disbanded but there is no record of when or why it disbanded and there is no final Council document. Id.

In practical terms, this was the end of the Council of Constance’s legislation that regular and frequent General Councils must be convened. Strangely, the Council of Constance’s legislation (mandating regular and frequent Councils) was never formally revoked, although it was ignored after that.

 

The conciliar church has done what the Council of Constance tried to do

After Vatican II, the conciliar church began the novelty of holding General Councils/synods of “bishops”[10] about every three years.[11] These synods are called by the pope, with “bishops” chosen to represent all of the other “bishops” in the world. The legislation for these synods was decreed by Pope Paul VI in 1965, who established these synods as a new, permanent Council of “bishops”.[12] This permanent General Council/synod is designed to promote collegiality[13] and Vatican II’s false teaching that the Catholic Church has two supreme authorities.[14]

After Vatican II, the conciliar church has declared itself a “synodal church”[15] to promote collegiality and decentralization[16] in the Church, despite the truth that the Catholic Church is essentially a monarchy.

In the 52 years since Vatican II, the conciliar church has held 29 councils/synods[17], compared with the Catholic Church holding 21 Councils[18] (including Vatican II) in the roughly 2000 years before that!

 

The synods promote the evil of ecumenism

Among the many other evils of this revolutionary post-Vatican II “synodality”, is the promotion of ecumenism with false religions. The synods include as participating but non-voting “delegates” the members of various false religions, who are called “fraternal delegates”. For example, the 2015 synod included 14 such “fraternal delegates”, including heretics from Anglicanism, the Baptists, and the so-called “Orthodox” sects.[19]

 

These synods bring about evil effects

Bad trees bear only bad fruit. These revolutionary synods are bad trees which predictably bear only bad fruit. For example:

  The Amazon Synod in October 2019 promoted the policy of ordaining married men,[20] and also promoted the ordination of women. As a step in the revolutionaries’ push for female priests, the Amazon synod specifically recommended that women be ordained to the priestly minor orders of Lector and Acolyte.[21]

  The Synod on the Family promoted reception of Holy Communion by divorcées who (supposedly) “remarry”.[22]

 

Conclusion

We live in the time of the Great Apostasy. Let us always be vigilant and stand strong against the novelties of the conciliar church!

Let us thank God every day for giving us the tremendous and completely-undeserved blessing of the fully-Traditional Catholic Faith!



[1] Historian Msgr. Philip Hughes wrote a history of the Catholic Church’s 20 general councils (before Vatican II). Here is how he stated this truth:

 

Ever since the popes were first articulate about the General Council, they have claimed the right to control its action and, to take their place in it (whether personally or by legates sent in their name) or by their subsequent acceptance of the council, to give or withhold an approbation of its decisions, which stamps them as the authentic teaching of the Church of Christ. Only through their summoning it, or through their consenting to take their place at it, does the assembly of bishops become a General Council.

 

Quoted from: THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, introduction (emphasis added).

 

[2] Historian Msgr. Philip Hughes wrote a history of the Catholic Church’s 20 general councils (before Vatican II). Here is how he stated this truth:

 

Nowhere in these early centuries, in fact, do we find any member of the Church questioning the truth as the General Councils have defined it. What they teach as the truth is taken to be as true as though it were a statement of Scripture itself. The question was never raised, seemingly, that the greater or smaller number of bishops who in response to the summons attended, in any way affected the peculiar authority of the General Council.

 

THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, introduction (emphasis added).

 

[3] Historian Msgr. Philip Hughes wrote a history of the Catholic Church’s 20 general councils (before Vatican II). Here is how he stated this truth:

 

The General Council of the teaching Church, in all the sessions of the occasions on which it has met, in the nineteen hundred years and more of the Church’s history, has sat for perhaps thirty years in all, at most. It is an exceptional phenomenon in the life of the Church, and usually it appears in connection with some great crisis of that life.

 

THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, introduction (emphasis added).

[4] The Church Councils are listed in chronological order in the table of contents of this book: THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961. Each Council is given its own chapter of the book.

[5] Historian Msgr. Philip Hughes wrote a history of the Catholic Church’s 20 general councils (before Vatican II). Here is how he stated this truth:

 

The General Council of the teaching Church, in all the sessions of the occasions on which it has met, in the nineteen hundred years and more of the Church’s history, has sat for perhaps thirty years in all, at most. It is an exceptional phenomenon in the life of the Church, and usually it appears in connection with some great crisis of that life.

 

THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, introduction.

[6] The Council was held in the Swiss town of Constance. Though the Council of Constance was a real council of the Church, like Vatican II was, the Council of Constance taught a number of grave errors (although it did not teach those errors infallibly), just as Vatican II taught countless grave errors, but not infallibly.

 

For example, among other grave errors, the Council of Constance taught that a Church Council was superior to the pope and could punish the pope. Here are the words of that Council:

 

This holy Council of Constance … declares, in the first place, that, lawfully come together in the Holy Spirit, being a General Council and representing the Catholic Church, it holds an authority directly [derived] from Christ, which authority everyone, of whatever status or dignity, even the pope, is bound to obey in those matters concerning the faith, the extirpation of the said Schism, and the reformation of the Church in head and members. It declares, furthermore, that whoever contumeliously scorns to obey the commands and the laws of this holy council, or of any other General Council lawfully assembled [commands, etc. referring to the matters stated], he is to be duly punished, whatever his status or dignity, even though he is the pope.

 

Quotation from the Council document, Sacrosancta, from THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, ch.16 (emphasis added; bracketed words in the original).

[7] Here is a longer part of the summary of this Council, given by historian, Msgr. Philip Hughes:

 

Five decrees were accordingly published on October 5, 1417. The first, and by far the most important in its consequences, is that called, from its first word, Frequens. It is a kind of practical corollary to the decree Sacrosancta already mentioned. Here is its text: "The frequent celebration of General Councils is the best of all methods for tilling the Lord’s field, and for extirpating the weeds and thorns of heresy, schisms and errors …. This it is that brings the Lord’s vineyard to the fullness of its fertility. The neglect to hold General Councils fosters and encourages all the disorders here spoken of; the history of former times and the events we ourselves are witness

to make this very evident. Therefore, by this perpetual law, we command that, from this time on, General Councils shall be held as follows: the first within five years immediately following the close of this present council; the second within seven years of the close of the council immediately following this present council; and ever afterwards thenceforward every ten years; all these councils to be held in a place which the pope is bound to announce one month before the end of the council, and with the approbation and consent of the council. Should the pope fail to do this, then the council itself is to choose the place and time. So that, in this way, by a kind of continuity, there shall always be a council in session or the expectation of a council. The term appointed for the coming council the pope may, with the consent of the cardinals, shorten, but in no case may he make it any longer."

 

Quoted from THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, ch.16, at footnote 309.

 

[8] After describing the Council of Constance’s declaration that there be regular General Councils in the Catholic Church, Msgr. Hughes then adds:

 

There is no need to explain what a revolution in the government of the Church was thus attempted.

Quoted from THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, ch.16.

 

[9] THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, ch.17.

 

[10] We place the word “bishop” in quotation marks because conciliar ordinations and consecrations are inherently doubtful. For an explanation of this, read these articles:

 

  https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/new-ordination-doubtful.html

 

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGd2RRcTFSY29EYzg/view

  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGZVF5cmFvMGdZM0U/view

 

However, conciliar “bishops” who are given jurisdiction (for governing) by the pope do possess this jurisdiction because this jurisdiction does not depend on the valid ordinations and consecrations of the “bishops”. A layman can wield Episcopal jurisdiction when it is given to him by the pope. For an explanation of this, read section ten of this article: https://catholiccandle.neocities.org/faith/against-sedevacantism.html

[12] Here are Pope Paul VI’s words, in his legislation:

 

It was also the Ecumenical Council that gave Us the idea of permanently establishing a special Council of bishops …. We hereby erect and establish here in Rome a permanent Council of bishops for the universal Church ….

 

The Synod of Bishops, whereby bishops chosen from various parts of the world are to offer more effective assistance to the supreme Shepherd, is to be constituted in such a way that it is: a) a central ecclesiastical institution; b) representing the whole Catholic episcopate; c) of its nature perpetual; d) as for structure, carrying out its function for a time and when called upon.

Pope Paul VI , Apostolica Sollicitudo, Establishing The Synod Of Bishops For The Universal Church, 1965.

 

[13] Pope Francis described the synods as “one of the fruits of the Second Vatican Council” and “an expression of collegiality.” https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-says-structures-collaboration-collegiality-need-strengthening

Similarly, Pope John Paul II referred to the Church Synod as “a particularly fruitful expression and instrument of the collegiality of bishops”. http://www.synod.va/content/synod2018/en/the-synod-of-bishops.html

 

[14] Among the many revolutionary changes made by Vatican II and the subsequent conciliar church, is the promotion the errors of collegiality and that the bishops (with the pope) is a separate supreme authority in the Church. Here is Vatican II’s revolutionary teaching that the Church has two supreme authorities:

 

The pope’s power of primacy over all, both pastors and faithful, remains whole and intact. In virtue of his office, that is as Vicar of Christ and pastor of the whole Church, the Roman Pontiff has full, supreme and universal power over the Church. And he is always free to exercise this power. The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head the Roman Pontiff and never without this head. … The supreme power in the universal Church, which this college enjoys, is exercised in a solemn way in an ecumenical council. … [I]t is the prerogative of the Roman Pontiff to convoke these councils, to preside over them and to confirm them. This same collegiate power can be exercised together with the pope by the bishops living in all parts of the world ….

 

Quoted from Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium, §22 (emphasis added).

 

Vatican II’s fuzzy, illogical teaching here, indicates that there are dual authorities in the Church: 1) the pope singly and 2) all the bishops together. This concept – of a double supreme authority – makes no sense, any more than two spouses can each be the head of the family, since there cannot be two greatest authorities. The conciliar church’s error of two supreme authorities in the Church is thus analogous to the false and contradictory conciliar error of “mutual submission” of spouses, as both heads of the family. (Pope John Paul II sets out this error of “mutual submission” in his encyclical, Mulieris dignitatem, §24.)

 

To read the Catholic Church’s infallible condemnations of the error of dual supreme authority in the Church, read: Lumen Gentium Annotated, by the Editors of Quanta Cura Press, © 2013, beginning on page 187. This book is available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B49oPuI54eEGbzRhdmQ3X0Z6RFE/view (free) & at Amazon.com (sold at cost).


[15] For example, Pope Francis declared on October 17, 2015:

 

The journey of synodality is the journey that God wants from his [sic] church in the third millennium. A synodal church is a listening church, aware that listening is more than hearing. It is a reciprocal listening in which each one has something to learn.

 

Words of Pope Francis, quoted here: https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-calls-synodal-church-listens-learns-shares-mission

 

[16] Declaring his intent to decentralize the Catholic Church, here are the words of Pope Francis, quoted in a news report:

 

“In this sense, I feel the need to move ahead with a healthy decentralization,” he [viz., Pope Francis] said. [Pope] Francis also said it was “necessary and urgent to think about a conversion of the papacy”, a possibility that was first floated by the late Pope John Paul II in 1995.

 

https://religionnews.com/2015/10/18/pope-francis-calls-for-changes-to-papacy-and-a-more-decentralized-church/ (bracketed words added for clarity).

 

[18] THE CHURCH IN CRISIS: A History of the General Councils: 325-1870, by Msgr. Philip Hughes, Hanover House, New York, ©1961, See, the table of contents and introduction.

 

[21] https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-leaves-out-call-for-womens-ministries-from-english-version-of-amazon-synods-final-doc

 

Although the conciliar hierarchy has eliminated the traditional four minor orders in the evil novus ordo “ordination” rite (for men), it is interesting that these modernists would propose those minor orders for women as a concrete step toward women’s (supposed) ordination to the priesthood.