Occasionally Catholic Remarks Do Not Make Modernists Catholics Themselves

There are times when a conciliar “pope” or “bishop” comes very close to approximating Catholic truth on this or that subject.

In this regard, of course, it must be remembered that Modernism is synthesis of all heresies, is a mixture of truth and error and that Modernists can sound like they are preaching the Catholic Faith on one occasion and then preach heresy or error on another occasion with a perfectly clear conscience as they do not see that there is any contradiction between the Catholic Faith and Modernism’s corruption of it by means of dogmatic evolutionism.

Pope Saint Pius X warned us about the doublemindedness of Modernists in Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907:

18. This will appear more clearly to anybody who studies the conduct of Modernists, which is in perfect harmony with their teachings. In their writings and addresses they seem not unfrequently to advocate doctrines which are contrary one to the other, so that one would be disposed to regard their attitude as double and doubtful. But this is done deliberately and advisedly, and the reason of it is to be found in their opinion as to the mutual separation of science and faith. Thus in their books one finds some things which might well be approved by a Catholic, but on turning over the page one is confronted by other things which might well have been dictated by a rationalist. When they write history they make no mention of the divinity of Christ, but when they are in the pulpit they profess it clearly; again, when they are dealing with history they take no account of the Fathers and the Councils, but when they catechize the people, they cite them respectfully. In the same way they draw their distinctions between exegesis which is theological and pastoral and exegesis which is scientific and historical. So, too, when they treat of philosophy, history, and criticism, acting on the principle that science in no way depends upon faith, they feel no especial horror in treading in the footsteps of Luther and are wont to display a manifold contempt for Catholic doctrines, for the Holy Fathers, for the Ecumenical Councils, for the ecclesiastical magisterium; and should they be taken to task for this, they complain that they are being deprived of their liberty. Lastly, maintaining the theory that faith must be subject to science, they continuously and openly rebuke the Church on the ground that she resolutely refuses to submit and accommodate her dogmas to the opinions of philosophy; while they, on their side, having for this purpose blotted out the old theology, endeavor to introduce a new theology which shall support the aberrations of philosophers. (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominci Gregis, September 8, 1907.)

In this regard, therefore, it should be kept in mind that each of the conciliar “popes” have made statements and/or issued documents that were fully consonant with the Catholic Faith while also promoting doctrines that have been condemned by the authority of the Catholic Church, participating in one sacrilegious event after another, claiming that “religions” are a path to “peace,” engaging in inter-religious “prayer services” that have treated non-Catholic clergymen as legitimate “ministers of the Gospel,” making it appear as though dogmatic evolution has not been condemned by Holy Mother, and promoting one condemned novelty after another its ongoing “reconciliation” with the world.

Such was the case two days ago when Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV gave an address to a group of seminarians and newly installed conciliar presbyters about the Sacrament of Penance, an address that was largely unobjectionable, if not actually commendable in part, but also contained the usual conciliar drop or two of poison:

Your Eminence, Your Excellency, dear priests, deacons and others who are with us today, good morning and welcome!

I am very pleased to meet those who, in the early stages of their priestly ministry or whilst awaiting ordination, are perfecting their training as confessors through the Course on the Internal Forum, offered annually by the Apostolic Penitentiary.

I extend a cordial greeting to His Eminence, Cardinal Angelo De Donatis, Major Penitentiary, to the Regent, Monsignor Nykiel, and to all the members of the Penitentiary, to the ordinary and extraordinary penitentiaries of the Papal Basilicas, and to all of you participating in this Course. It was strongly desired by Saint John Paul II, who supported it with his pastoral zeal; it was confirmed by Pope Benedict XVI with his theological wisdom, as well as by Pope Francis, who always took great care to show the merciful face of the Church.

I too urge you to continue in this service, deepening and expanding the programme of formation, so that the fourth Sacrament may be ever more deeply understood, properly celebrated and thus serenely and effectively lived by all God’s holy people.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation – as we know – has undergone significant development throughout history, both in theological understanding and in the form of its celebration. The Church, our mother and teacher, has progressively recognized its meaning and function, broadening the scope of its celebration. Yet the fact that the Sacrament can be received repeatedly is not always matched by a willingness on the part of the baptized to make use of it: it is as though the infinite treasure of the Church’s mercy remained “unused”, due to a widespread distraction among Christians who, not infrequently, remain in a state of sin for a long time, rather than approaching the confessional with simplicity of faith and heart to receive the gift of the Risen Lord.

Interjection Number One:

“Pope Leo XIV” seems to be unaware of the fact that many of his presbyters do not offer the Sacrament of Penance on regular basis, a situation that was so pronounced even as early as the early 1970s in the immediate aftermath of the “Second” Vatican Council, a phenomenon that had become so widespread by a decade later that Karo Jozef Wojtyla, who was, despite his being a principal architect of the conciliar revolution and a firm defender of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo liturgical abomination of desolation who participated one liturgical travesty after another, a promoter of what he thought to be Eucharistic piety and of the Sacrament of Penance, called out “Bishop” John Raymond McGann of the Diocese of Rockville Centre, New York, in April of 1983 during the ad limina apostolorum visit of the New York Province bishops, some real at the time and others not, over the fact that sixteen parishes in his diocese did not have regularly scheduled confessions during Holy Week, which had concluded just weeks before the visit.

McGann’s completely unashamed response was, “Our priests are very busy, Your Holiness,” to which “Pope John Paul II” answered tartly, "Excellency, I was not too buy to hear Confessions in Saint Peter's on Good Friday."

McGann got into further trouble later that day in April of 1983 when he was talking at lunch with John Paul and the other New York Province "bishops" about how most young people then did not know their faith and were thus in theological states of error, inculpable for their ignorance. John Paul II put down his soup spoon and said, "I agree with you. You are correct. However, the bishops and priests who are responsible for these young people being in states of error go directly to Hell when they die." McGann turned ashen, reportedly having difficulty eating for three days. "Ah, what a pope we have," I said when learning of this from Roman contacts.

Well, Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II was no pope but he was not unaware of the fact that, apart from such of Protestantism’s rejection of the Sacrament of Penance in favor a “profession of faith on one’s lips and in one’s heart” that results in one being able to sin repeatedly while being “assured” of the instant absolution by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ without any
“intermediary” such as a priest and by  cultural factors at work in the world that have obliterated any sense of sin in the world and thus of the need for sacramental forgiveness of it, the Novus Ordo itself has played a major role in the abandonment of the use of the Sacrament of Penance by even those Catholics who bother to show up for the Saturday evening or Sunday exercises in communal self-gratulations.

Why is this so?

Once again, I always appreciate thoughtful question from the peanut gallery.

Well, first, consider the fact that there only two mandatory days of fasting in the Novus Ordo calendar: Ash Wednesday and Good Friday.

Second, consider the fact that are very few references to a God Who judges souls, death, eternal perdition, sin or the necessity of making reference for it, or punishment in the collects of the Novus Ordo liturgical travesty.

How can I assert that this is true?

Well, third, this is not an “assertion” as the conciliar authorities have kind enough to tell this to us in Paragraph Fifteen of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal:

The same awareness of the present state of the world also influenced the use of texts from very ancient tradition. It seemed that this cherished treasure would not be harmed if some phrases were changed so that the style of language would be more in accord with the language of modern theology and would faithfully reflect the actual state of the Church's discipline. Thus there have been changes of some expressions bearing on the evaluation and use of the good things of the earth and of allusions to a particular form of outward penance belonging to another age in the history of the Church. (Paragraph Fifteen of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal, 2002.)

Who says that forms of outward penance belong “another age in the history of the Church”?

Not God.

Not His Catholic Church.

Only prideful men who pose as shepherds and who have convinced most Catholics in the world that the practices of the “past” were “bad” and that we must do “positive” things in Lent rather than “negative” things such as fasting and denying ourselves various legitimate pleasures dare to assert such a thing.

Not God.

Not His Catholic Church.

We must love the Mass as Our Lord taught it to the Apostles before He Ascended to the Father’s right hand in glory. It is the sole means by which we can access to Our Beloved before we see Him face to face in Heaven, please God we die in a state of sanctifying grace. We keep Him company at the foot of the Cross in every Mass with Our Lady, Saint Joseph, Saint John the Evangelist, Saint Mary Magdalene–and all of the angels and the saints, each of whom is present mystically. If we want to appreciate the fullness of Our Lord’s love for us we must cleave to Him in the Mass and make whatever sacrifices we need to make to assist exclusively at the Mass that is all about God from the moment a priest of the Roman Rite enters the sanctuary and addresses God, not us, and recites the Judica me (Psalm 42), except in Masses for the dead and during Passiontide, to the time he recites, at least during most Masses of the year, the Gospel of the Incarnation at the end of Mass.

The lack of the use of the Sacrament of Penance within the counterfeit church of conciliarism is very much, although certainly not entirely, attributable to the false spirit of a false liturgy that emphasizes man’s essential “goodness” and a false sense of mercy that borders on the presumptuousness of Protestantism.

All right, I return now to Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s address of March 13, 2026:

It was the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215, which established that every Christian is obliged to make a sacramental confession at least once a year; and the Catechism of the Catholic Church, following the Second Vatican Council, confirmed this norm (cf. CCC, no. 1457), which is also a law of the Church: “After having attained the age of discretion, each of the faithful is bound by an obligation faithfully to confess serious sins at least once a year” (Code of Canon Law, 989).

Saint Augustine affirms: “He who confesses his sins, and accuses them, does now work with God. God accuses your sins: and if you also accuse, you are united to God” (In Iohannis evangelium tractatus, 12, 13: CCL 36, 128). To recognize our sins, especially in this time of Lent, therefore means “being in harmony” with God, uniting ourselves with Him.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is thus a “workshop of unity”: it restores unity with God through the forgiveness of sins and the infusion of sanctifying grace. This fosters the inner unity of the individual and unity with the Church; consequently, it also promotes peace and unity within the human family?

But – again we ask ourselves – can man, a small and simple creature, truly “break unity” with the Creator? Is this image not perhaps a partial and, ultimately, demeaning interpretation of the Revelation that Jesus has given us of God?

On closer inspection, sin does not break unity, understood as the creature’s ontological dependence on the Creator: even the sinner remains totally dependent on God the Creator, and this dependence, when recognized, can open the way to conversion. Rather, sin breaks spiritual unity with God: it is turning one’s back on him, and this dramatic possibility is as real as the gift of freedom that God himself has bestowed upon human beings. To deny the possibility that sin truly breaks unity with God is, in reality, a failure to recognize the dignity of man, who is – and remains – free and therefore responsible for his own actions.

Dear young priests and ordinands, may you always be keenly aware of the most exalted task that Christ himself, through the Church, entrusts to you: to restore people’s unity with God through the celebration of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. A priest’s entire life can be fully realized by celebrating this Sacrament assiduously and faithfully. And indeed, how many priests have become saints in the Confessional! Let us think only of Saint John Mary Vianney, Saint Leopold Mandić and, more recently, Saint Pio of Pietrelcina and Blessed Michał Sopoćko.

The unity restored with God is also unity with the Church, which is the mystical body of Christ: we are members of the “whole Christ”. The theme of your Course this year: “The Church called to be a house of Mercy”, would be incomprehensible if we did not start from the root, which is the risen Jesus Christ. The Church welcomes people, as a “house of Mercy”, because first and foremost she continually welcomes her Lord, in the Word heard and proclaimed, and in the grace of the Sacraments.

For this reason, in the celebration of the sacrament of Confession, whilst penitents are reconciled with God and with the Church, the Church herself is edified and enriched by the renewed holiness of her repentant and forgiven children. In the confessional, dear brothers, we collaborate in the ongoing edification of the Church: one, holy, catholic and apostolic; and in so doing we also give new energy to society and to the world.

Unity with God and with the Church, finally, is the prerequisite for the inner unity of individuals, so necessary today, in this age of fragmentation in which we live. This inner unity is found as a genuine desire, especially among the younger generations. The unfulfilled promises of unbridled consumerism and the frustrating experience of a freedom detached from the truth can, through divine mercy, be transformed into opportunities for evangelization: by bringing to the surface a sense of incompleteness, they allow us to awaken those existential questions to which only Christ can give a full answer. God became man to save us, and He does so also by nurturing our religious sense, our irrepressible longing for truth and love, so that we may embrace the Mystery in which ‘we live and move and have our being’ (Acts 17:28).

This dynamism of unity with God, with the Church and within ourselves is a prerequisite for peace among people and nations: only a reconciled person is capable of living in an unarmed and disarming way! Those who lay down the weapons of pride and allow themselves to be continually renewed by God’s forgiveness become agents of reconciliation in everyday life. In him or her are fulfilled the words attributed to Saint Francis of Assisi: “Lord, make me an instrument of your peace”. This is largely unobjectionable and parts of the passages quoted above are quite Catholic.

Dear friends, never neglect to approach the Sacrament of Reconciliation yourselves, with faithful constancy, so that you may always be the first to benefit from divine Mercy, of which you have become – or will become – ministers. May Mary, Mother of Mercy, always accompany you on your journey and enlighten your steps. I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing upon you and your daily efforts. Thank you. (To Participants in the Course on the Internal Forum promoted by the Apostolic Penitentiary, 13 March 2026.)

Now, before examining Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s omission of any discussion about Mortal and Venial Sins, a bit of attention should be given to the fact that the secular press has made much of the currently reigning false “pontiff’s” reference to the reconciled living in an unarmed and disarming way as a not-so-oblique swipe at President Donald John Trump’s and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s preemptive war of choice against Islamic Republic of Iran, although as either Trump nor Netanyahu is Catholic, the false pontiff’s reference was probably meant for Vice President James David Vance, who is being a good “solider” of Trump’s by not airing his reported disagreements about the war, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, both of whom are Catholics within the conciliar structures.

My readers should be well aware of the fact that preemptive war is opposed to the Just War Theory and, of course, to the current “military excursion” in Iran, something that I have made “perfectly clear,” to call to mind America’s thirty-seventh president’s favorite phrases.

However, the conciliar revolutionaries do not believe that there is any such thing as a “just war,” something that Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself said repeatedly and that Victor Manuel Fernandez reiterated in Dignatatis Infinita:

38. Another tragedy that denies human dignity, both in the past and today, is war: “War, terrorist attacks, racial or religious persecution, and many other affronts to human dignity […] ‘have become so common as to constitute a real ‘third world war’ fought piecemeal.’”[64] With its trail of destruction and suffering, war attacks human dignity in both the short and long term: “While reaffirming the inalienable right to self-defense and the responsibility to protect those whose lives are threatened, we must acknowledge that war is always a ‘defeat of humanity.’ No war is worth the tears of a mother who has seen her child mutilated or killed; no war is worth the loss of the life of even one human being, a sacred being created in the image and likeness of the Creator; no war is worth the poisoning of our common home; and no war is worth the despair of those who are forced to leave their homeland and are deprived, from one moment to the next, of their home and all the family, friendship, social and cultural ties that have been built up, sometimes over generations.”[65] All wars, by the mere fact that they contradict human dignity, are “conflicts that will not solve problems but only increase them.”[66] This point is even more critical in our time when it has become commonplace for so many innocent civilians to perish beyond the confines of a battlefield.

Yes, even just wars do inevitably bring with them many foreseen but unintended evil consequences.

However, to shallowly assert that no war is ever worth a mother’s tears is to make a mockery of the fact that, although wars are to be avoided at all costs and can be undertaken only as a last and most regrettable resort to defend one’s own nation when it is legitimately threatened and only then to repair the wound to justice, this is the vale of tears and nothing, not even a mother who loses a son in warfare, suffers in this life is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross. To refrain from undertaking a just cause solely because people will suffer would embolden aggressors who have no compunction about causing others to suffer, something that we see today on both sides of the Russo-Ukrainian war and in the Middle East between the Israelis and her Mohammedan enemies. Men whose souls are captive to the devil by means of Original Sin and by the effects of their own Actual Sins even though they themselves may not be aware of the fact are fully capable of engaging in wars of conquest or retaliation without regard for who suffers as a consequence.

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ told us that there would be wars and rumors of wars as warfare is a consequence of Original Sin and the Actual Sins of men:

And Jesus being come out of the temple, went away. And his disciples came to shew him the buildings of the temple. [2] And he answering, said to them: Do you see all these things? Amen I say to you there shall not be left here a stone upon a stone that shall not be destroyed. [3] And when he was sitting on mount Olivet, the disciples came to him privately, saying: Tell us when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the consummation of the world? [4] And Jesus answering, said to them: Take heed that no man seduce you: [5] For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many.

[6] And you shall hear of wars and rumours of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. [7] For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be pestilences, and famines, and earthquakes in places: [8] Now all these are the beginnings of sorrows. [9] Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name's sake. [10] And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another.

[11] And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. [12] And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. [13] But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. [14] And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come. [15] When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.

[16] Then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains: [17] And he that is on the housetop, let him not come down to take any thing out of his house: [18] And he that is in the field, let him not go back to take his coat. [19] And woe to them that are with child, and that give suck in those days. [20] But pray that your flight be not in the winter, or on the sabbath.

[21] For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be. [22] And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened. [23] Then if any man shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him. [24] For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. [25] Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.

[26] If therefore they shall say to you: Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out: Behold he is in the closets, believe it not. [27] For as lightning cometh out of the east, and appeareth even into the west: so shall the coming of the Son of man be. [28] Wheresoever the body shall be, there shall the eagles also be gathered together. [29] And immediately after the tribulation of those days, the sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven shall be moved: [30] And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all tribes of the earth mourn: and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with much power and majesty. (Matthew 24: 1-30.)

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ taught us to remain calm in every circumstance of our lives, explaining that there will be wars and rumors of wars but that the end is not yet to come. We must remain ever calm in the loving arms of Our Lady, who told Juan Diego the following as his uncle was suffering from an illness from which Juan Diego thought he was going to die:

"Listen and take heed, least of my sons," she said quietly. "There is nothing which thou needst dread. Let not thy heart be troubled. Do not fear this illness, neither any other illness or affliction. Am I not here beside thee; I, thy Merciful Mother? Am I not thy hope and salvation? Of what more dost thou have need? Let nothing distress or harass thee. As to the illness of thy uncle, he will not die of it. Indeed, I ask thee to accept as a certainty my assurance that he is already cured." (Frances Parkinson Keyes, The Grace of Guadalupe, published in 1941 by Julian Messner, Inc., pp. 47-48.)

We are not to fear any illness or affliction. There is no suffering, nor any world crisis, that we can bear in this life that is the equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to suffer in His Sacred Humanity during His fearful Passion and Death as those Seven Swords of Sorrow were plunged through and through the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Need it be pointed that it will there will an armed battle between Antichrist and the forces of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Just Christ at the Armageddon?

Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection. In these the second death hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of Christ; and shall reign with him a thousand years.  7 And when the thousand years shall be finished, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, and shall go forth, and seduce the nations, which are over the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, and shall gather them together to battle, the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.  8 And they came upon the breadth of the earth, and encompassed the camp of the saints, and the beloved city.  9 And there came down fire from God out of heaven, and devoured them; and the devil, who seduced them, was cast into the pool of fire and brimstone, where both the beast 10 And the false prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Apocalypse 20: 6-10.)

Only those who reject Original Sin in favor of a Rousseauean concept of inherent human goodness and the ability to avoid conflict can contend that wars are in of themselves offenses to human “dignity” even if, quite indeed, innocent human beings are targeted deliberately by unjust aggressors.

The fact that there is probably no world leader today who understands the principles of the Just War and thus who act according to the dictates of an amoral utilitarianism and that there have been few wars in more recent times that have been truly just in no way vitiates the fact that have been just wars in the past and will be just wars in the future, especially in the case of the war against Antichrist as mentioned above.

What Victor Manuel “Tucho” Fernandez wrote in Dignitatis Infinita, however, was not even new with him as the wretched sodomite named Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Montini/Paul VI said the following when speaking before the General Assembly of the United Nations on October 4, 1965:

Here our message reaches its culmination and we will speak first of all negatively. These are the words you are looking for us to say and the words we cannot utter without feeling aware of their seriousness and solemnity: never again one against the other, never, never again!

Was not this the very end for which the United Nations came into existence: to be against war and for peace? Listen to the clear words of a great man who is no longer with us, John Kennedy, who proclaimed four years ago: "Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind." There is no need for a long talk to proclaim the main purpose of your Institution. It is enough to recall that the blood of millions, countless unheard-of sufferings, useless massacres and frightening ruins have sanctioned the agreement that unites you with an oath that ought to change the future history of the world: never again war, never again war! It is peace, peace, that has to guide the destiny of the nations of all mankind! (Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI, Visit to the United Nations: Speech to the United Nations Organization, October 4, 1965    .)

Montini/Paul VI also said:

In saying this, we are aware that we are speaking for the dead as well as the living: for the dead who have fallen in the terrible wars of the past, dreaming of world peace and harmony; for the living who have survived the wars and who in their hearts condemn in advance those who would try to have them repeated; for other living people too: the younger generation of today who are moving ahead trustfully with every right to expect a better mankind. We also want to speak for the poor, the disinherited, the unfortunate, those who long for justice, a dignified life, liberty, prosperity and progress. People turn to the United Nations as if it were their last hope for peace and harmony. We presume to bring here their tribute of honor and of hope along with our own. That is why this moment is a great one for you too. Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI, Visit to the United Nations: Speech to the United Nations Organization, October 4, 1965    .)

This was pure socialist utopianism and an not-so-implicit denial of the effects of Original Sin in the souls of the unbaptized and its vestigial-aftereffects in the souls of the baptized in the world can be mitigated by means of Sanctifying Grace in the souls of men but never eliminated entirely.

Pope Pius XI, by way of contrast, understood the farcical, utopian nature of naturalistic means to produce world peace and “universal brotherhood” as he brushed aside the League of Nations as follows in Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922:

When, therefore, governments and nations follow in all their activities, whether they be national or international, the dictates of conscience grounded in the teachings, precepts, and example of Jesus Christ, and which are binding on each and every individual, then only can we have faith in one another's word and trust in the peaceful solution of the difficulties and controversies which may grow out of differences in point of view or from clash of interests. An attempt in this direction has already and is now being made; its results, however, are almost negligible and, especially so, as far as they can be said to affect those major questions which divide seriously and serve to arouse nations one against the other. No merely human institution of today can be as successful in devising a set of international laws which will be in harmony with world conditions as the Middle Ages were in the possession of that true League of Nations, Christianity. It cannot be denied that in the Middle Ages this law was often violated; still it always existed as an ideal, according to which one might judge the acts of nations, and a beacon light calling those who had lost their way back to the safe road.

There exists an institution able to safeguard the sanctity of the law of nations. This institution is a part of every nation; at the same time it is above all nations. She enjoys, too, the highest authority, the fullness of the teaching power of the Apostles. Such an institution is the Church of Christ. She alone is adapted to do this great work, for she is not only divinely commissioned to lead mankind, but moreover, because of her very make-up and the constitution which she possesses, by reason of her age-old traditions and her great prestige, which has not been lessened but has been greatly increased since the close of the War, cannot but succeed in such a venture where others assuredly will fail. (Pope Pius XI, Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, December 23, 1922.)

There can be no true peace without the Prince of Peace Himself and His Catholic Church.

Robert Francis Prevost’s veiled but nevertheless clear opposition to all armed conflict two days ago was yet another conciliar effort to deny the Just War Theory and even to deny the Natural Law right of individual and national self-defense.

However, as could be expected, the secular press paid no attention whatever about the fact that the second set of passages from “Pope Leo’s” March 13, 2026, address’s failure to  provide any explanation about Mortal Sin and the malice with which it is committed that was discussed in detail by the aforementioned Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II in an “post-synodal apostolic exhortation entitled Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, December 2, 1984:

Mortal and Venial

17. But here we come to a further dimension in the mystery of sin, one on which the human mind has never ceased to ponder: the question of its gravity. It is a question which cannot be overlooked and one which the Christian conscience has never refused to answer. Why and to what degree is sin a serious matter in the offense it commits against God and in its effects on man? The church has a teaching on this matter which she reaffirms in its essential elements, while recognizing that it is not always easy in concrete situations to define clear and exact limits.

Already in the Old Testament, individuals guilty of several kinds of sins - sins committed deliberately,(75) the various forms of impurity,(76) idolatry,(77) the worship of false gods (78) - were ordered to be "taken away from the people," which could also mean to be condemned to death.(79) Contrasted with these were other sins especially sins committed through ignorance, that were forgiven by means of a sacrificial offering.(80)

In reference also to these texts, the church has for centuries spoken of mortal sin and venial sin. But it is above all the New Testament that sheds light on this distinction and these terms. Here there are many passages which enumerate and strongly reprove sins that are particularly deserving of condemnation.(81) There is also the confirmation of the Decalogue by Jesus himself.(82) Here I wish to give special attention to two passages that are significant and impressive.

In a text of his First Letter, St. John speaks of a sin which leads to death (pros thanaton), as opposed to a sin which does not lead to death (me pros thanaton).(83) Obviously, the concept of death here is a spiritual death. It is a question of the loss of the true life or "eternal life," which for John is knowledge of the Father and the Son,(84) and communion and intimacy with them. In that passage the sin that leads to death seems to be the denial of the Son(85) or the worship of false gods.(86) At any rate, by this distinction of concepts John seems to wish to emphasize the incalculable seriousness of what constitutes the very essence of sin, namely the rejection of God. This is manifested above all in apostasy and idolatry: repudiating faith in revealed truth and making certain created realities equal to God, raising them to the status of idols or false gods.(87) But in this passage the apostle's intention is also to underline the certainty that comes to the Christian from the fact of having been "born of God" through the coming of the Son: The Christian possesses a power that preserves him from falling into sin; God protects him, and "the evil one does not touch him." If he should sin through weakness or ignorance, he has confidence in being forgiven, also because he is supported by the joint prayer of the community.

In another passage of the New Testament, namely in St. Matthew's Gospel,(88) Jesus himself speaks of a "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit" that " will not be forgiven" by reason of the fact that in its manifestation, it is an obstinate refusal to be converted to the love of the Father of mercies.

Here of course it is a question of external radical manifestations: rejection of God, rejection of his grace and therefore opposition to the very source of salvation(89)-these are manifestations whereby a person seems to exclude himself voluntarily from the path of forgiveness. It is to be hoped that very few persist to the end in this attitude of rebellion or even defiance of God. Moreover, God in his merciful love is greater than our hearts, as St. John further teaches us,(90) and can overcome all our psychological and spiritual resistance. So that, as St. Thomas writes, "considering the omnipotence and mercy of God, no one should despair of the salvation of anyone in this life."(91)

But when we ponder the problem of a rebellious will meeting the infinitely just God, we cannot but experience feelings of salutary "fear and trembling," as St. Paul suggests.(92) Moreover, Jesus' warning about the sin "that will not be forgiven" confirms the existence of sins which can bring down on the sinner the punishment of "eternal death."

In the light of these and other passages of sacred Scripture, doctors and theologians, spiritual teachers and pastors have divided sins into mortal and venial. St. Augustine, among others, speaks of letalia or mortifera crimina, contrasting them with venialia, levia or quotidiana.(93) The meaning which he gives to these adjectives was to influence the successive magisterium of the church. After him, it was St. Thomas who was to formulate in the clearest possible terms the doctrine which became a constant in the church.

In defining and distinguishing between mortal and venial sins, St. Thomas and the theology of sin that has its source in him could not be unaware of the biblical reference and therefore of the concept of spiritual death. According to St. Thomas, in order to live spiritually man must remain in communion with the supreme principle of life, which is God, since God is the ultimate end of man' s being and acting. Now sin is a disorder perpetrated by the human being against this life-principle. And when through sin, the soul commits a disorder that reaches the point of turning away form its ultimate end God to which it is bound by charity, then the sin is mortal; on the other hand, whenever the disorder does not reach the point of a turning away from God, the sin is venial."(94) For this reason venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity and therefore eternal happiness, whereas just such a deprivation is precisely the consequence of mortal sin.

Furthermore, when sin is considered from the point of view of the punishment it merits, for St. Thomas and other doctors mortal sin is the sin which, if unforgiven, leads to eternal punishment; whereas venial sin is the sin that merits merely temporal punishment (that is, a partial punishment which can be expiated on earth or in purgatory).

Considering sin from the point of view of its matter, the ideas of death, of radical rupture with God, the supreme good, of deviation from the path that leads to God or interruption of the journey toward him (which are all ways of defining mortal sin) are linked with the idea of the gravity of sin's objective content. Hence, in the church's doctrine and pastoral action, grave sin is in practice identified with mortal sin.

Here we have the core of the church's traditional teaching, which was reiterated frequently and vigorously during the recent synod. The synod in fact not only reaffirmed the teaching of the Council of Trent concerning the existence and nature of mortal and venial sins,(95) but it also recalled that mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent. It must be added-as was likewise done at the synod-that some sins are intrinsically grave and mortal by reason of their matter. That is, there exist acts which, per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object. These acts, if carried out with sufficient awareness and freedom, are always gravely sinful.(96)

This doctrine, based on the Dccalogue and on the preaching of the Old Testament, and assimilated into the kerygma of the apostles and belonging to the earliest teaching of the church, and constantly reaffirmed by her to this day, is exactly verified in the experience of the men and women of all times. Man knows well by experience that along the road of faith and justice which leads to the knowledge and love of God in this life and toward perfect union with him in eternity, he can cease to go forward or can go astray without abandoning the way of God; and in this case there occurs venial sin. This however must never be underestimated, as though it were automatically something that can be ignored or regarded as "a sin of little importance."

For man also knows, through painful experience, that by a conscious and free act of his will he can change course and go in a direction opposed to God's will, separating himself from God (aversio a Deo), rejecting loving communion with him, detaching himself from the life principle which God is and consequently choosing death.

With the whole tradition of the church, we call mortal sin the act by which man freely and consciously rejects God, his law, the covenant of love that God offers, preferring to turn in on himself or to some created and finite reality, something contrary to the divine will (conversio ad creaturam). This can occur in a direct and formal way in the sins of idolatry, apostasy and atheism; or in an equivalent way as in every act of disobedience to God's commandments in a grave matter. Man perceives that this disobedience to God destroys the bond that unites him with his life principle: It is a mortal sin, that is, an act which gravely offends God and ends in turning against man himself with a dark and powerful force of destruction.

During the synod assembly some fathers proposed a threefold distinction of sins, classifying them as venial, grave and mortal. This threefold distinction might illustrate the fact that there is a scale of seriousness among grave sins. But it still remains true that the essential and decisive distinction is between sin which destroys charity and sin which does not kill the supernatural life: There is no middle way between life and death.  (Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, December 2, 1984. Please see Saint Alphonsus de Liguori’s Sermon on the Malice of Mortal Sin for a fuller discussion of the subject that is to be found below in Appendix B.There is a great deal of irony in the passages cited above as “Pope John Paul” participated in all manner of sacrilegious ceremonies, including the first “World Day of Prayer for Peace” in Assisi, Italy, on October 27, 1986, and, among so many examples, the time he participated in an Aztec ceremony that resulted in the dumping of an urn of ashes upon his head in Mexico City, Mexico, on August 1, 2002. The Eternally Wishful Television’s Raymond Arroyo excuse this act of apostasy by saying: “

You may think that you just witnessed a pagan ceremony, but what you just saw was a rich example of the inculturation of the Gospel.”

Wishful thinking could not wipe away a blatant act of apostasy twenty-three and one-half years ago, and anyone who can come to the defense of Wojtyla or Joseph Alois Benedict/XVI or Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s in pagan ceremonies does not understand the binding precepts of the First Commandment as countless millions of Catholics have preferred to be tortured to death rather than even give the appearance of lending credibility to the acts that took place in front of a putative Successor of Saint Peter. (Rather than take up space in the main body of this commentary, I will reprise photographic evidence of like acts of apostasy committed by the conciliar “popes” in the past decades.)

Thus, leaving subjective culpability to God alone, the conciliar “popes,” including Wojtyla/John Paul II, have committed Mortal Sins aplenty by their promotion of false doctrines, false liturgies, and their endless reaffirmation of non-Catholic Christian heretics and schismatics, Jews, Mohammedans, the Orthodox, the Copts, animists, Hussites, Waldensians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jainists, and other devil-worshipers in their false religions without once ever exhorting anyone in any of these groups to convert unconditionally to the Catholic Faith upon the peril of the loss of their immortal souls.

Now, all this having been noted, what Wojtyla/John Paul II wrote in the passages of Reconciliatio et Paenitentia quoted above was very good, and it contrasts in its specificity with Robert Francis Prevost/Leo XIV’s lack of specificity in the address he gave two days ago.

Moreover, Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II also condemned the heretical theology of the “fundamental option” as follows in Reconciliatio et Paententia:

Likewise, care will have to be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of " fundamental option"-as is commonly said today-against God, intending thereby an explicit and formal contempt for God or neighbor. For mortal sin exists also when a person knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason, chooses something gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice already includes contempt for the divine law, a rejection of God's love for humanity and the whole of creation; the person turns away from God and loses charity. Thus the fundamental orientation can be radically changed by individual acts. Clearly there can occur situations which are very complex and obscure from a psychological viewpoint and which have an influence on the sinner's subjective culpability. But from a consideration of the psychological sphere one cannot proceed to the construction of a theological category, which is what the "fundamental option" precisely is, understanding it in such a way that it objectively changes or casts doubt upon the traditional concept of mortal sin. (Karol Jozef Wojtyla/John Paul II, Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, December 2, 1984.)

The so-called “theology of the fundamental option” is nothing other than situational ethics, a false moral philosophy of moral relativism, that was developed and popularized by the likes of  Protestants Rudolph Bultmann and Joseph Fletcher, who was an Episcoplian “priest” before becoming an atheist, and adapted for use in Catholic circles by the such luminaries of the adversary as Father Joseph Fuchs, S.J. Father Bernard Haring, C.SS.R., Father Karl Rahner, S.J, and Father Richard McCormick, S.J.

Situational ethics rests on the old sophisms of the Sophists themselves in Athens: that man is the measure of all things. It is thus the case that no moral principle is said to be absolute as each person faces a variety of supposed “individual” choices that are said to be contingent upon the peculiar circumstances in which the choices are to be made. No one set of principles or laws applies in all situations as morality is dependent upon the intentions of the individual and the supposedly extenuating circumstances that are known only within the depths of his conscience. “Love” is said to be the ultimate law.

The late Father Richard McCormick, who taught at Georgetown University for many years until his death in 2000, developed what can be called the “twin forks” (Long Islanders are familiar with the term that refers to the north and south forks of our beloved homeland), of heretical situational ethics that masqueraded itself until the names of “proportionalism” and the “fundamental option.”

The false moral theology of the fundamental option contends that an otherwise objectively evil act can be rendered licit to pursue according to the "weight" of extenuating circumstances of the person involved as one's "option is for God." which contends that one is never guilty of any kind of truly serious, no less mortal, sin unless his "option" is said to be against God. A sinner is just "fine" with God as long as he does not opt to turn away from Him. It is no accident that this heresy was propagated in the 1970s by a Jesuit priest, McCormick, and it certainly does not matter to lay Jesuits such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio that the "theology of the fundamental option" was condemned even by the conciliar Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith in Persona Humana on December 29, 1975 (see Persona Humana, which drops its fair share of poisons by speaking of sodomy in subjective rather than objective terms, something that Randy Engel herself noted in "Open Letter to Pope Francis" that Persona Humana, which was issued under the authority of a practitioner of perversity, Giovanni Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul the Sick, gave credence to the lie that homosexuals are born that way.")

Readers of this site should know, however, that every sin involves a turning away from God as we seek creatures, starting with our own sinful temptations, and that Mortal Sins involve a casting out of the very inner life of the Most Blessed Trinity that is found in baptized souls who are in states of Sanctifying Grace. The theology of the "fundamental option" ("seeking God with a good will") is destructive of individual souls and thus of nations. Jorge Mario Bergoglio endorsed this heresy implicitly, especially when he minimized the gravity of sins against impurity, and Robert Francis Prevost was negligent not to have discussed potential sins with putative confessors of souls.

Thus, even though Prevost/Leo’s address of March 13, 2026 (which was the thirteenth anniversary of that dreadful day when the Argentine Apostate walked out on the Loggia of the Basilica of Saint Peter to commence his twelve years, one month and eight days of masquerading as “Pope Francis) were essentially sound it omitted very important points about Catholic moral theology while, as noted above, implicitly denying the Natural Law right of individual and national self-defense when justice requires its use.

The lesson in all of this is as follows: Beware of the doublemindedness of Modernists as they are capable of speaking as Catholics one day and then as Modernists the next as fundamental building block of Modernism is a denial of Aristotle’s Principle of Noncontradiction.

As Saint Robert Bellarmine suummarized so very clearly:

There are some person, dear listeners, who hold almost everything with a firm faith that Catholics hold: but there is one thing or another, which they have not yet been able to accept completely, such as that purgatory exists, that sacred images are to be venerated, that the sovereign Pontiff is the vicar of Christ and the head of the whole Church. And since there are many things that they believe, and only one or two things that they do not believe and consider it is not important if taken together with the other articles, they think they are situated very well on the foundation of Christ. What is the difference, they say, even if I err in that one thing, which I still cannot believe, and at the judgment will the Lord be concerned about that? And will he not be mindful of the many difficult things I believe? Indeed, this is the way in which they flatter themselves; I serious rebuke them and say that they have fallen from grace and have laid their foundation on sand, and will have no part with Christ. Either the faith is had completely, or it is not had at all. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism. I ask you (to clarify the matter with a crass example), when you order a pair of shoes from a shoemaker, if when they are finally made you find they are an inch shorter than your feet, do you not put them on and wear them? Your will say “I cannot wear them” But they are only an inch too short, so why can't you wear them, since they are just a little bit short of the right measurement? As, therefore, your shoes are either the right size for your feet or they have no value at all, so also the faith is either integral, or it is not the faith. Therefore no one should deceive himself. If we want to build a house which cannot be moved by wind or rain, we must lay the foundation of both rocks, that is, on Christ and Peter. (Sermons of St. Robert Bellarmine, S.J., Part II: Sermons 30-55, Including the Four Last Things and the Annunciation., translated from the Latin by Father Kenneth Baker, S.J., and published in 2017 by Keep the Faith, Inc., Ramsey, New Jersey, pp. 152-154.)

Any questions?

On Laetare Sunday

Today is Laetare Sunday, the Fourth Sunday of Lent, a day of moderate rejoicing as Our Blessed Lord and Saviour’s Easter victory over the power of sin and eternal death is made manifest to the world yet again. The Gospel passage that is read at Holy Mass today provides us with Saint John the Evangelist’s account of Our Lord’s multiplication of the loaves and fishes, which is a prefiguring of the miracle of Transubstantiation that takes place every time the ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross is offered at the hands of a true priest.

Saint Augustine of Hippo’s reflection on this miracle is contained in a set of readings read at Matins in today’s Divine Office:

The miracles which our Lord Jesus Christ did were the very works of God, and they enlighten the mind of man by mean of things which are seen, that he may know more of God. God is Himself of such a Substance as eye cannot see, and the miracles, by the which He ruleth the whole world continually, and satisfieth the need of everything that He hath made, are by use become so common, that scarce any will vouchsafe to see that there are wonderful and amazing works of God in every grain of seed of grass. According to His mercy He kept some works to be done in their due season, but out of the common course and order of nature, that men might see them and be astonished, not because they are greater, but because they are rarer than those which they lightly esteem, since they see them day by day.

Or it is a greater miracle to govern the whole universe, than to satisfy five thousand men with five loaves of bread; and yet no man marvelleth at it. At the feeding of the five thousand, men marvel, not because it is a greater miracle than the other, but because it is rarer. For Who is He Who now feedeth the whole world, but He Who, from a little grain that is sown, maketh the fulness of the harvest? God worketh in both cases in one and the same manner. He Who of the sowing maketh to come the harvest, is He Who of the five barley loaves in His Hands made bread to feed five thousand men; for Christ's are the Hands which are able to do both the one and the other. He Who multiplieth the grains of corn multiplied the loaves, only not by committing them to the earth whereof He is the Maker.

This miracle, then, is brought to bear upon our bodies, that our souls may thereby be quickened; shown to our eyes, to give food to our understanding; that, through His works which we see, we may marvel at that God Whom we cannot see, and, being roused up to believe, and purified by believing, we may long to see Him, yea, may know by things which are seen Him Who is Unseen. Nor yet sufficeth it for us to see only this meaning in Christ's miracles. Let us ask of the miracles themselves what they have to tell us concerning Christ for, soothly, they have a tongue of their own, if only we will understand it. For, because Christ is the Word of God, therefore the work of the Word is a Word for us. (Saint Augustine of Hippo, as found in Matins, Divine Office, Laetare Sunday.)

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s reflection on this Laetare Sunday also emphasized the fact that the Divine Redeemer, Who has died for our sins and has risen from the dead, now feeds the whole world with Himself, the true Manna come down from Heaven:

We are now come to the explanation of another name given to the fourth Sunday of Lent, which was suggested by the Gospel of the day. We find this Sunday called in several ancient documents, the Sunday of the five loaves. The miracle alluded to in this title not only forms an essential portion of the Church’s instruction during Lent, but it is also an additional element of to-day’s joy. We forget for an instant the coming Passion of the Son of God, to give our attention to the greatest of the benefits He has bestowed upon us; for under the figure of these loaves multiplied by the power of Jesus, our faith sees that Bread which came down from heaven, and giveth life to the world. ‘The Pasch,’ says our Evangelist, ‘was near at hand’; and, in a few days, Our Lord will say to us: ‘With desire I have desired to at this Pasch with you.’ Before leaving this world to go to His Father, Jesus desires to feed the multitude that follows Him; and in order to [do] this, He displays His omnipotence. Well may we admire that creative power, which feeds five thousand men with five loaves and two fishes, and in such wise that even after all have partaken of the feast as much as they would, there remain fragments enough to fill twelve baskets. Such a miracle is, indeed, an evident proof of Jesus’ mission; but He intends it as a preparation for something more wonderful; He intends it as a figure and a pledge of what He is soon to do, not merely once or twice, but every day, even to the end of time; not only for five thousand men, but for the countless multitude of believers. Think of the millions, who, this very year, are to partake of the banquet of the Pasch; and yet, He whom we have seen born in Bethlehem (the house of bread) is to be the nourishment of all these guests; neither will the divine Bread fail. We are to feast as did our fathers before us; and the generations that are to follow us, shall be invited, as we now are, to come and taste how sweet is the Lord.

But observe, it is in a desert place, as we learn from St. Matthew, that Jesus feeds these men, who represent us as Christians. They have quitted the bustle and noise of cities in order to follow Him. So anxious are they to hear His words, that they neither hunger nor fatigue; and their courage is rewarded. A little recompense will crown our labours, our fasting and abstinence, which are now half over. Let us, then, rejoice, and spend this day with the light-heartedness of the pilgrims whoa re near the end of their journey. The happy moment is advancing, when our soul, united and filled with her God, will look back with pleasure on the fatigues of the body, which, together with our heart’s compunction, have merited for her a place at the divine banquet.

The primitive Church proposed this miracle of the multiplication of the loaves as a symbol of the Eucharist, the Bread that never fails. We find it frequently represented in the paintings of the catacombs and on the bas-reliefs of the ancient Christian tombs. The fishes, too, were given together with the loaves, are represented on these venerable monuments of our faith; for the early Christians considered the fish to be the symbol of Christ, because the word ‘fish’ in Greek is made up of five letters, which are the initials of these words: Jesus Christ, Son (of) God, Saviour.

In the Greek Church this is the last day of the week called, as we have already noticed, Mesonestios. Breaking though her rule of never admitting a saint’s feast during Lent, she keeps this mid-Lent Sunday in honour of the celebrated abbot of the monastery of Mount Sinai, St. John Climacus, who lived in the sixth century. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B,, The Liturgical Year: Volume V--Lent, pp. 316-318.)

Yes, this is a day of moderate rejoicing, which is noted as follows by the Abbot of Solesmes in the prayer he composed for this day:

Let us, then, rejoice! We are children, not of Sina, but of Jersualem. Our mother, the holy Church, is not a bond-woman, but free; and it is unto freedom that she has brought us up. Israel served God in fear; his heart was ever tending to idolatry, and could be kept to duty only by the heavy yoke of chastisement. More happy than he, we serve God through love; our yoke is sweet, and our burden light! We are not citizens of the earth; we are but pilgrims passing through it to our true country, the Jerusalem which is above. We leave the earthly Jerusalem to the Jew, who minds only terrestrial things, is disappointed with Jesus, and is plotting how to crucify Him. We also have too long been groveling in the goods of the world; we have been slaves to sin; and he more the chains of our bondage weighed upon us, the more the chains of our bondage weighed upon us, the more we talked our being free. Now is the favourable time; now are the days of salvation; we have obeyed the Church’s call, and have entered into the practice and spirit of Lent. Sin seems to us now, to be the heaviest of yokes; the flesh, a dangerous burden; the world, a merciless tyrant. We begin to breathe the fresh air of holy liberty, and the hope of our speedy deliverance fills us with transports of joy. Let us, with all possible affection, thank our divine Liberator, who delivers us from the bondage of Agar, emancipates us from the law of fear, and making us His new people, opens to us the gates of the heavenly Jerusalem, at the price of His Blood.

The Gradual expresses the joy felt by the Gentiles, when invited to enter the house of the Lord, which has now become their own. The Tract shows God protected His Church, the new Jerusalem, which is not to be conquered and destroyed as was that first one. This holy city communicates her own stability and security to them that are in her, for the Lord watches over both the mother and the children. Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B,, The Liturgical Year: Volume V--Lent, pp. 320-321.)

Yes, the Old Covenant has been superseded by the New and Eternal Covenant that our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ instituted at the Last Supper on Maundy Thursday and ratified by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross on Good Friday. Agar and her son, Ishmael, have been sent away. Holy Mother Church is the one and only true means of salvation, and she is blameless in the sight of her Divine Founder, Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom. She provides her children with security and stability, not confusion and ceaseless change, something that should prove to anyone who has the gift of intellectual dispassion to admit once and for all that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not and can never be the spotless mystical bride of Christ the King, the Catholic Church.

May Our Lady of Sorrows guide and protect us during the remaining three weeks as we meditate upon the Sorrowful Mysteries her Most Holy Rosary, and may we always, always, always invoke the power intercession of Saint Joseph. 

The Feast of Saint Joseph will be celebrated in four days, that is, on Thursday, March 19, 2026, with a commemoration of the Thursday of the Fourth Week of Lent, and it is thus that we must remember that he is always first after Our Lady to whom we must fly as he is the one chosen by God from all eternity to protect the Holy Family with whom we seek to be united by virtue of Our Lord’s Easter victory over the power of sin and death after He had walked the Via Crucis—the Via Dolorosa—and died for us on the wood of the Holy Cross.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Appendix A

Father Francis X. Weninger’s Third Sermon for Laetare Sunday (the Fourth Sunday of Lent)

"And this He said to try him; for He Himself knew what He would do."--John 6.

"Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat?" Christ asked Philip. He questioned him thus to try him. He--Jesus--knew that by a miracle He would feed those who, in order to hear His Word, had so zealously followed Him.

That which Christ did in today’s Gospel is repeated by divine Providence unceasingly in the life of man. Men so often know not what they do, and so little accustom themselves to yield submissively to the decrees of Providence! Were it otherwise, how willingly would God do great and wonderful things in us!

I say: Only too often you know not what you are doing, no matter how clever you deem yourself; but God always knows what He does. Hence yield yourself to His guidance.

Mary, thou who didst stand silent beneath the cross, obtain for us that we may submit as perfectly as thou didst to the divine, though trying, decrees of Providence! I speak in the most holy name of Jesus, to the greater glory of God!

"Father, they know not what they do!" Indeed, most men know not what they do. They neither understand nor reflect on the ways of God, nor allow themselves to be guided by His fatherly hand. They wish the Lord to follow whither they lead, and to do as they wish, because they imagine it will promote their happiness, while only too often it proves to be the cause of their misfortune and ruin.

This is the case, first, with all those who are foolish enough to seek the gratification of their wishes where it can not be found, but where, on the contrary, they meet the reverse. Man, who is created for happiness, seeks to satisfy the inclinations of his nature. He desires worldly goods, honors and pleasures, and these for the longest possible period. God, however, has not created him for these, but for Himself, for His glory; and this, for all eternity, but under the one condition that we serve Him.

The sinner seeks the gratification of his natural inclinations for riches, honors and pleasures; but where and how does he seek it? In creatures, and by the transgression of God's laws. Oh, fatal delusion; for what are all earthly possessions? Dust! What is all earthly honor? Vapor! What is all worldly pleasure? Delusion! What is the longest age? Scarcely a moment, if compared with eternity.

Besides, how true and undeniable is the assurance of Holy Writ, that each one will be punished in that wherein he offended! The proud suffer humiliation; the avaricious, imaginary need; the passionate, wrongs; the envious, losses; the impure, great bodily torments; the intemperate, thirst; the indolent, hardships.

And, notwithstanding this, such men think that they act wisely, and consider the ways of the virtuous foolish, because these do not allow themselves every enjoyment, but turn their eyes from time to eternity, and bestow all their care upon the latter.

"Father, they know not what they do!" But Jesus knoweth what He does when He afflicts these worldly, sinful children of His Church with misfortune, when He throws obstacles in their evil path, and thus calls, admonishes and urges them to repentance.

When the Lord in this manner designs to seek men they ought to be most grateful; for then there is hope that they will return to the path of salvation. No more terrible judgment can befall the sinner than when God allows him to walk unpunished the road to destruction, and recompenses the good moral qualities, which he may still possess, with temporal goods, for then nothing awaits him in the other world save the endless punishment of sin.

But not only to sinners, but also to those who, though they fear God, and keep His commandments, still lead in the world the life of lukewarm and tepid Christians, are the words of God addressed: "They know not what they do," nor what they desire. God, however, knows why He sends this or that calamity, if Christians do not, who, in their ignorance, endeavor to resist or avoid the dispensations of Providence.

The evil sometimes goes still further. Even among good Christians there are unfortunately many who, finding the ways of God incomprehensible, dare even to criticise them in their own mind, or in the presence of their intimate friends, and who, refusing to put themselves entirely in God's hands, never draw, for the sanctification of their souls, the full benefit from the sacred dispensations of divine Providence.

Why are these miserable and deluded persons so obstinate, so unyielding? I answer: Because they judge the ways of God as they appear to them; they are not sufficiently penetrated with the light of holy faith, and do yield to their self-conceit.

It is not without reason that Jesus exhorts us "not to judge according to the appearance." It may happen, and, in fact, not seldom does happen, that pious and zealous souls make plans, and are confused and embarrassed when, on the point of carrying them out, they find that these plans have been thwarted and rendered futile. God allows this; but men do not know it, and can not comprehend why He permits it. Why? Because they do not really know men as they are; but God knows them.

They do not know themselves, or how they stand in the sight of God. Not so, however, Jesus. He knows how weak they are, and that, if they began the work, they would leave it unfinished, and abandon it, which would be worse than not to have begun it at all.

They can not read the heart of men. Not so, however, Jesus. He knows what He does. He knows that those very persons who now seem favorably disposed towards them, would afterwards oppose their work, and destroy it. They do not know that a good deed done now may prevent the execution of a better work later.

Finally, they do not consider that God has no need of us to lead souls to their destination, and that frequently He only bestows upon us the merit of our good intentions. "Lord, Thou hast no need of my works," says the Psalmist. Oh, how beneficial to every soul would it be if she made a similar confession! Then the arm of God would not be shortened; for, seeing us perfectly willing to let Him act for us, and to leave to Him the results of all our labors, whatever their importance, He would be most ready to multiply the loaves of bread that is, to increase His graces and blessings, because we would then be working only for His honor and glory, and not for our own self-love and vanity.

If we are thus disposed, if we act in this manner, then will those, who are Christians only in name, be induced to say, when they consider our life: We can not understand how people can live thus; how they can care so little for worldly goods, so little for amusement, honor, and the approbation of men; and, withal, be so lavish in providing for the needy, in seeking, at so much trouble and division, for the well-being of others. How can they despise the world, and seem to find heaven upon earth in union with Jesus, especially in the Most Holy Sacrament? They do not understand this; they do not know it. But those who live thus know why, and they can say, with David: "I believe, therefore do I speak thus."

I believe, I trust in Jesus, therefore I live thus, and in joy and sorrow exclaim: Jesus, in life and in death, I am thine! Amen!

Appendix B

Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri’s Sermon on the Malice of Mortal Sin

"Behold, Thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 1 Luke ii. 48

MOST holy Mary lost her Son for three days: during that time she wept continually for having lost sight of Jesus, and did not cease to seek after him till she found him. How then does it happen that so many sinners not only lose sight of Jesus, but even lose his divine grace; and instead of weeping for so great a loss, sleep in peace, and make no effort to recover so great a blessing? This arises from their not feeling what it is to lose God by sin. Some say: I commit this sin, not to lose God, but to enjoy this pleasure, to possess the property of another, or to take revenge of an enemy. They who speak such language show that they do not understand the malice of mortal sin. What is mortal sin? First Point. It is a great contempt shown to God. Second Point. It is a great offence offered to God.

First Point. Mortal sin is a great contempt shown to God.

1. The Lord calls upon Heaven and Earth to detest the ingratitude of those who commit mortal sin, after they had been created by him, nourished with his blood, and exalted to the dignity of his adopted children. ”Hear, O ye Heavens, and give ear, Earth; for the Lord hath spoken. I have brought up children _ and exalted them; but they have despised me." (Isa. i. 2.) Who is this God whom sinners despise?; He is a God of infinite majesty, before whom all the kings of the Earth and all the blessed in Heaven are less than a drop of water or a grain of sand. As a drop of a bucket, . . . as a little dust. ” (Isa. xl. 15.) In a word, such is the majesty of God, that in his presence all creatures are as if they did not exist. ”All nations are before him as if they had no being at all." (Ibid. xl. 17.) And what is man, who insults him? St. Bernard answers: ”Saccus vermium, cibus vermium." A heap of worms, the food of worms, by which he shall be devoured in the grave. ”Thou art wretched and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked." (Apoc. iii. 17.) He is so miserable that he can do nothing, so blind that he knows nothing, and so poor that he possesses nothing. And this worm dares to despise a God, and to provoke his wrath. ”Vile dust," says the same saint, ”dares to irritate such tremendous majesty." Justly, then, has St. Thomas asserted, that the malice of mortal sin is, as it were, infinite: ”Peccatum habet quandam infinitatem malitiae ex infinitatem divine majestatis." (Par. 3, q. 2, a. 2, ad. 2.) And St. Augustine calls it an infinite evil. Hence Hell and a thousand Hells are not sufficient chastisement for a single mortal sin.

2. Mortal sin is commonly defined by theologians to be”a turning away from the immutable good." St. Thom., par. 1, q. 24, a. 4; a turning ones back on the sovereign good. Of this God complains by his prophet, saying: ”Thou hast forsaken me, saith the Lord; thou art gone backward. ” (Jer. xv. 6.) Ungrateful man, he says to the sinner, I would never have separated myself from thee; thou hast been the first to abandon me: thou art gone backwards; thou hast turned thy back upon me.

3. He who contemns the divine law despises God; because he knows that, by despising the law, he loses the divine grace. "By transgression of the law, thou dishonourest God." (Rom. ii. 23.) God is the Lord of all things, because he has created them. ”All things are in thy power... Thou hast made Heaven and Earth." (Esth. xiii. 9.) Hence all irrational creatures the winds, the sea, the fire, and rain obey God, ”The winds and the sea obey him." (Matt. viii. 27.)”Fire, hail, snow, ice, stormy winds, which fulfil his word." (Ps. cxlviii. 8.) But man, when he sins, says to God: Lord, thou dost command me, but I will not obey; thou dost command me to pardon such an injury, but I will resent it; thou dost command me to give up the property of others, but I will retain it; thou dost wish that I should abstain from such a forbidden pleasure, but I will indulge in it. ”Thou hast broken my yoke, thou hast burst my bands, and thou saidst: I will not serve." (Jer. ii. 20.) In fine, the sinner when he breaks the command, says to God: I do not acknowledge thee for my Lord. Like Pharaoh, when Moses, on the part of God, commanded him in the name of the Lord to allow the people to go into the desert, the sinner answers: "Who is the Lord, that I should hear his voice, and let Israel go ?" (Exod. v. 2.)

4. The insult offered to God by sin is heightened by the vileness of the goods for which sinners offend him. ”Wherefore hath the wicked provoked God." (Ps. x. 13.) For what do so many offend the Lord? For a little vanity; for the indulgence of anger; or for a beastly pleasure. ”They violate me among my people for a handful of barley and a piece of bread." (Ezec. xiii. 19.) God is insulted for a handful of barley for a morsel of bread! God! why do we allow ourselves to be so easily deceived by the Devil?”There is," says the Prophet Osee, “a deceitful balance in his hand." (xii. 7.) We do not weigh things in the balance of God, which cannot deceive, but in the balance of Satan, who seeks only to deceive us, that he may bring us with himself into Hell. ”Lord," said David, ”who is like to thee ?" (Ps. xxxiv. 10.) God is an infinite good; and when he sees sinners put him on a level with some earthly trifle, or with a miserable gratification, he justly complains in the language of the prophet: ”To whom, have you likened me or made me equal? saith the Holy One." (Isa. xl. 25.) In your estimation, a vile pleasure is more valuable than my grace. Is it a momentary satisfaction you have preferred before me?”Thou hast cast me off behind thy back." (Ezec. xxiii. 35.) Then, adds Salvian, ”there is no one for whom men have less esteem than for God." (Lib. v., Avd. Avar.) Is the Lord so contemptible in your eyes as to deserve to have the miserable things of the Earth preferred before him?

5. The tyrant placed before St. Clement a heap of gold, of silver, and of gems, and promised to give them to the holy martyr if he would renounce the faith of Christ. The saint heaved a sigh of sorrow at the sight of the blindness of men, who put earthly riches in comparison with God. But many sinners exchange the divine grace for things of far less value; they seek after certain miserable goods, and abandon that God who is an infinite good, and who alone can make them happy. Of this the Lord complains, and calls on the Heavens to be astonished, and on its gates to be struck with horror: ”Be astonished O ye Heavens, at this; and ye gates thereof, be very desolate, saith the Lord." He then adds: ”For my people have done two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living water, and have digged to themselves cisterns broken cisterns that can hold no water." (Jer. ii. 12 and 13.) We regard with wonder and amazement the injustice of the Jews, who, when Pilate offered to deliver Jesus or Barabbas, answered: ”Not this man, but Barabbas." (John xviii. 40.) The conduct of sinners is still worse; for, when the Devil proposes to them to choose between the satisfaction of revenge a miserable pleasure and Jesus Christ, they answer: "Not this man, but Barabbas." That is, not the Lord Jesus, but sin.

6. ”There shall be no new God in thee," says the Lord. (Ps. Ixxx. 10.) You shall not abandon me, your true God, and make for yourself a new god, whom you shall serve. St. Cyprian teaches that men make their god whatever they prefer before God, by making it their last end; for God is the only last end of all: ”Quidquid homo Deo anteponit, Deum sibi facit." And St. Jerome says: ”Unusquisque quod cupit, si veneratur, hoc illi Deus est. Vitium in corde, est idolum in altari." (In Ps. Ixxx.) The creature which a person prefers to God, becomes his God. Hence, the holy doctor adds, that as the Gentiles adored idols on their altars, so sinners worship sin in their hearts. When King Jeroboam rebelled against God, he endeavoured to make the people imitate him in the adoration of idols. He one day placed the idols before them, and said: "Behold thy gods, Israel!" (3 Kings xii. 28.) The Devil acts in a similar manner towards sinners: he places before them such a gratification, and says: Make this your God. Behold! this pleasure, this money, this revenge is your God: adhere to these, and forsake the Lord. When the sinner consents to sin, he abandons his Creator, and in his heart adores as his god the pleasure which lie indulges. ”Vitium in corde est idolum in altari. ”

7. The contempt which the sinner offers to God is increased by sinning in God’s presence. According to St. Cyril of Jerusalem, some adored the sun as their god, that during the night they might, in the absence of the sun, do what they pleased, without fear of divine chastisement. "Some regarded the sun as their God, that, after the setting of the sun, they might be without a God." (Catech. iv.) The conduct of these miserable dupes was very criminal; but they were careful not to sin in presence of their god. But Christians know that God is present in all places, and that he sees all things. ”Do not I fill Heaven and Earth? saith the Lord," (Jer. xxiii. 24); and still they do not abstain from insulting him, and from provoking his wrath in his very presence: “A people that continually provoke me to anger before my face." (Isa. Ixv. 3.) Hence, by sinning before him who is their judge, they even make God a witness of their iniquities: ”I am the judge and the witness, saith the Lord." (Jer. xxix. 23.) St. Peter Chrysologus says, that, “the man who commits a crime in the presence of his judge, can offer no defence." The thought of having offended God in his divine presence, made David weep and exclaim: ”To thee only have I sinned, and have done evil before thee." (Ps. i. 6.) But let us pass to the second point, in which we shall see more clearly the enormity of the malice of mortal sin.

Second Point. Mortal sin is a great offence offered to God.

8. There is nothing more galling than to see oneself despised by those who were most beloved and most highly favoured. Whom do sinners insult? They insult a God who bestowed so many benefits upon them, and who loved them so as to die on a cross for their sake; and by the commission of mortal sin they banish that God from their hearts. A soul that loves God is loved by him, and God himself comes to dwell within her. ”If any one love me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him, and will make our abode with him." (John xiv. 23.) The Lord, then, never departs from a soul, unless he is driven away, even though he should know that she will soon banish him from her heart. According to the Council of Trent, ”he deserts not the soul, unless he is deserted." X 9. When the soul consents to mortal sin she ungratefully says to God: Depart from me. “The wicked have said to God: Depart from us." (Job xxi. 14.) Sinners, as St. Gregory observes, say the same, not in words, but by their conduct. ”Recede, non verbis, sed moribus." They know that God cannot remain with sin in the soul: and, in violating the divine commands, they feel that God must depart; and, by their acts they say to him: since you cannot remain any longer with us, depart farewell. And through the very door by which God departs from the soul, the Devil enters to take possession of her. When the priest baptizes an infant, he commands the demon to depart from the soul: ”Go out from him, unclean spirits, and make room for the Holy Ghost." But when a Christian consents to mortal sin, he says to God: Depart from me; make room for the Devil, whom I wish to serve.

10. St. Bernard says, that mortal sin is so opposed to God, that, if it were possible for God to die, sin would deprive him of life;”Peccatum quantum in se est Deum perimit." Hence, according to Job, in committing mortal sin, man rises up against God, and stretches forth his hand against him: ”For he hath stretched out his hand against God, and hath strengthened himself against the Almighty." (Job. xv. 25.)

11. According to the same St. Bernard, they who wilfully violate the divine law, seek to deprive God of life in proportion to the malice of their will;”Quantum in ipsa est Deum perimit propria voluntas." (Ser. iii. de Res.) Because, adds the saint, self-will”would wish God to see its own sins, and to be unable to take vengeance on them." Sinners know that the moment they consent to mortal sin, God condemns them to Hell. Hence, being firmly resolved to sin, they wish that there was no God, and, consequently, they would wish to take away his life, that he might not be able to avenge their crime. “He hath," continues Job, in his description of the wicked, ”run against him with his neck raised up, and is armed with a fat neck." (xv. 26.) The sinner raises his neck; that is, his pride swells up, and he runs to insult his God; and, because he contends with a powerful antagonist, ”he is armed with a fat neck." “A fat neck" is the symbol of ignorance, of that ignorance which makes the sinner say: This is not a great sin; God is merciful; we are flesh; the Lord will have pity on us. O temerity! illusion! which brings so many Christians to Hell.

Moreover, the man who commits a mortal sin afflicts the heart of God. “But they provoked to wrath, and afflicted the spirit of the Holy One." (Isaias Ixiii. 10.) "What pain and anguish would you not feel, if you knew that a person whom you tenderly loved, and on whom you bestowed great favours, had sought to take away your life! God is not capable of pain; but, were he capable of suffering, a single mortal sin would be sufficient to make him die through sorrow. ”Mortal sin," says Father Medina, ”if it were possible, would destroy God himself: because it would be the cause of infinite sadness to God." As often, then, as you committed mortal sin, you would, if it were possible, have caused God to die of sorrow; because you knew that by sin you insulted him and turned your back upon him, after he had bestowed so many favours upon you, and even after he had given all his blood and his life for your salvation. (An act of sorrow, etc.)  (Saint Alphonsus de Ligouri, Sermon On the Malice of Mortal Sin.)