Apostasy Is His Field

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Roger Mahony, the conciliar "archbishop" of Los Angeles, also known as the The Six Hundred Million Dollar Man, has been at war with the Catholic Faith for most of the forty-seven years of his priesthood. Roger Mahony is a conciliar revolutionary to the core of his being who has promoted one sacrilege after another in the liturgical abuse par excellence, the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, going so far to repeatedly disparage the Immemorial Mass of Tradition as he has called twelve years ago for a "de-Europeanization" of the conciliar liturgy (see Gather Faithfully Together). Mahony then forced the conciliar Vatican to get Mother Angelica of the Eternal Word Television Network off of the air after she criticized his 1997 pastoral letter. He won.

Mahony has, of course, built a $200 million monstrosity to give architectural"space," if you will, to his apostate views of Faith and Worship.

Mahony has sponsored fellow dissidents to speak at the annual Los Angeles Religious Education Conference, held at the Anaheim Convention Center in the neighboring Diocese of Orange, California, which is under the conciliar supervision of Mahony's seminary schoolmate, Tod Brown, who has shelled out millions in his own right to compensate victims of priest/presbyter predators in his diocese and who is no less a liturgical revolutionary than Mahony himself. (See a review of the agenda of this "congress" and its association with Call to Action, Which religion is promoted at Catholic congress?)

Mahony has indemnified one pro-abortion politician after another, including former President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, who was permitted to speak from the pulpit of the former Saint Bibiana Cathedra in Los Angels, California, on Palm Sunday in 1997, supporting Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policies concerning the fitness those inclined to commit perverse acts against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments to serve in the armed forces of the United States of America.

Mahony has, as noted three days ago in Modernists In Love With Old-Fashioned Clericalism, protected priest/presbyter predators time and time and time again.

Mahony has awarded "papal" "knighthoods" to thirty-third degree Masons Rupert Murdoch and Roy Disney.

Mahony has taken bloody money from pro-abortion and drug kingpins (see my own Blood Money Talks, which was written five years before I accepted the canonical-doctrinal principle of sedevacantism and that it applied to our own circumstances).

Mahony's has urged citizens of foreign nations to break the just immigration laws of the United States of America so that they enter and stay in this country illegally while profiting from all manner of "social services" as a result.

Mahony has done everything imaginable to promote the agenda of perversity within the "official" context of his liturgies and "education" programs (see Tone Deaf), although he did support Proposition 8 (see Do You Hear The People Sing?), which banned "marriage" between those engaged in perverse acts in violation of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments while permitting "civil union" status for such people, something that the civil state can never accord legitimately.

Mahony engaged in grandstanding with Talmudic rabbis to stage a public relations event to "ban" Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of Saint Pius from stepping foot in any facility of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles under conciliar control even though no such appearance was scheduled and even though Mahony would, on entirely other grounds, have banned Bishop Williamson for holding "proscribed" theological positions (see Yes, Sir, Master Scribe).

Mahony's and Tod Brown's minions helped to register illegal immigrants (and to expedite the naturalization of immigrants who could not speak the English language) to vote in the 1996 election between then United States Representative Robert K. Dornan and challenger Loretta Sanchez Brixey so as to defeat the outspoken Dornan (see Paul Likoudis' May 8, 1997, report in The Wanderer).

Mahony's fair-haired defender of the pro-abortion, Marxist-trained Barack Hussein Obama, former Pepperdine University law professor Douglas Kmiec, made headlines for himself as he promoted Obama as a candidate who was compatible with Catholic social teaching despite his support for the slicing and dicing of innocent human beings under cover of the civil law (see Trapped by Apostasy and Willfully Trapped by Apostasy). Kmiec was rewarded for his apostasy, serving now as the Ambassador of the United States of America to Malta, where he has recently stated that meeting Caesar Obamus last year convinced that that the pro-abort's agenda was the "Catechism Come to Life." Unfortunately for Ambassador Kmiec, however, the "catechism" that has come to life during Obama's administration is that of the devil himself.

This extremely incomplete listing of the many apostasies and other infidelities of Roger "Cardinal" Mahony helps to put into a bit of perspective the apostate's own self-revealing statement that he pays no attention to the killing of innocent babies under cover of the civil law and that it was way "out of hsi field" to comment on whether funding for abortion should be excluded from ObamaCare! His "field" is immigration," not the restoration of legal protection to the innocent preborn:

(CNSNews.com) - When asked whether he agreed with Cardinal Justin Rigali, head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops' pro-life committee, that the House health care bill funds abortion and needs to be amended to prohibit abortion funding, Cardinal Roger Mahony told CNSNews.com that the issue of abortion funding in the health care bill is “way beyond my field.”

When asked whether he believed abortion should  be funded under the bill, Cardinal Mahony said: "No, but that's what the president said, too, so."

Mahony is the Roman Catholic archbishop of Los Angeles. Rigali is the Roman Catholic archbishop of Philadelphia. 
 
On August 11, Cardinal Rigali sent a letter on behalf of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to members of the U.S. House of Representatives explaining in detail why the House health care bill would fund abortions.

“Because some federal funds are authorized and appropriated by this legislation without passing through the Labor/HHS appropriations bill, they are not covered by the Hyde amendment and other federal provisions that have long prevented federal funding of abortion and of health benefits packages that include abortion,” Rigali wrote in this letter.

“The committee rejected an amendment to extend this longstanding policy to the use of federal subsidies for health care premiums under this Act,” the cardinal wrote. “Instead the committee created a legal fiction, a paper separation between federal funding and abortion: Federal funds will subsidize the public plan, as well as private health plans that include abortion on demand; but anyone who purchases these plans is required to pay a premium out of his or her own pocket (specified in the Act to be at least $1.00 a month) to cover all abortions beyond those eligible for federal funds under the current Hyde amendment. Thus some will claim that federal taxpayer funds do not support abortion under the Act. But this is an illusion. Funds paid into these plans are fungible, and federal taxpayer funds will subsidize the operating budget and provider networks that expand access to abortions.”

When asked by CNSNews.com whether he agreed with Cardinal Rigali that the bill funds abortion and should be amended to explicitly prohibit abortion funding, Cardinal Mahony said: “This is way beyond my field. My field is immigration. I really haven’t kept up on that, and I spend all my time on this other. You have to get somebody who spends time on that.”

When asked whether he believed abortion should be funded under the health care bill, Cardinal Mahony said: “No, but that’s what the president said, too, so.”

The cardinal spoke to CNSNews.com at a Sept. 22 panel discussion in Washington, D.C., focusing on the involvement of faith communities in immigration reform. The event was sponsored by a liberal think tank, the Center for American Progress.

In his August 11 letter to members of the House of Representatives, Cardinal Rigali called on members to support amendments to correct the provisions in the bill that allow for abortion funding.

In direct contradiction to what Cardinal Rigali wrote in his letter to members of Congress, President Obama said in his speech to a joint session of Congress on Sept. 9 that the health care bill does not fund abortion. Previously, the president had said that people who say the health care bill funds abortion were fabricating. (Cardinal Roger Mahony: Abortion Beyond His Pay Grade; for a review of the truth about Obama's claims concerning abortion funding in ObamaCare, see Richard Doerflinger Re: Summary of Current Amendments; see also part of a transcript of an interview between a member of the United States House of Representatives, Bart Stupach, D-Michigan, with the Fox News Channel last week, Democrat MI Congressman Bart Stupak states that Obama and Pelosi's contention that abortion isn't in healthcare "is just not true.")

 

Leaving aside the simple fact that the Natural Law principle of subsidiarity forbids any role to be played by a national or central government in the provision, something that even the conciliar "bishop" of Sioux City, Iowa, Walter Nickless has recognized (see "Bishop" Nickless on ObamaCare), Roger Mahony demonstrates to one and all that he has little concern over the daily slaughter of over four thousand innocent human beings under cover of the civil law. He does not realize or care that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ sanctified the womb when He, the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, chose to be conceived as a helpless embryo in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother by the power of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, at the Annunciation. He does not realize or care that Our Lord is in solidarity with every child in every mother's womb no matter the condition of the child conceived.

Roger Mahony does not realize or care that the direct, intentional taking of an innocent preborn life, whether by chemical or surgical means, is one of the four crimes that cry out to Heaven for vengeance. There is no moral equivalency between the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn and the issue of immigration. None whatsoever.

While those immigrants who are here illegally must be treated with the respect and dignity that befits redeemed creatures, they have chosen to break the just immigration laws of the United States of America, which has the Natural Law right to protect the integrity of its borders, and must be subjected to the legal due process that will review their circumstances prior to a determination as to whether they should be deported. They have chosen to place themselves in legal jeopardy. The innocent preborn have not chosen to be conceived.

Let me reiterate the simple truth that there is no moral equivalency between the absolute right to life of the innocent preborn and the plight of illegal immigrants who have  chosen to flaunt the just laws of a sovereign nation. None.

It does, however, tell us a great deal about Roger "Cardinal" Mahony's priorities that he can admit publicly that abortion-funding in ObamaCare's nationalization of the health-care industry is “way beyond my field" and that he hasn't "kept up on that, and I spend all my time" on immigration." All his time? All his time? All his time is given over to the protection of those who have violated just laws that belong to a sovereign nation to make by virtue of the Natural Law while no time is given over to the care and the defense of the most defenseless, those who lives are extinguished every day by chemical and/or surgical means?

Roger Mahony demonstrates his willing suspension of rationality in taking Barack Hussein Obama at his dishonest "word" concerning abortion funding in ObamaCare despite the evidence brought forth by Richard Doerflinger and as even admitted by the thoroughly secular FactCheck website:

The truth of that depends on what is meant by “federal dollars.” Actually, as we’ve written before, under Democratic legislation now before Congress, the “public option” would cover abortions in cases of rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother and could cover all abortions if the administration chooses, and as Obama once promised. Private insurance plans purchased with the help of federal subsidies to low- and moderate-income workers also could cover all abortions, as many, if not most, private plans do today.

Under an amendment adopted by a House committee, abortions would be paid for by the "public option" only with money collected from policyholders in the form of premiums, not with money collected from taxpayers. But is money collected by the government and paid out to abortion providers by the government “federal dollars"? The anti-abortion side says yes. And the same goes for federal subsidies given to low- and moderate-income persons to help them buy insurance. If they use those dollars to buy private policies that cover all abortions, does that mean “federal dollars” go to fund abortions? Again, abortion foes say yes.

The advocates of abortion rights argue otherwise. They say the House bill would be an extension of longstanding policy under the Hyde amendment, which forbids use of federal taxpayer dollars to fund Medicaid abortions except in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother’s life, but also allows states to use their own Medicaid money to fund other abortions (and 17 of them do). In any case, the matter is not so simple or clear as the president would like it to seem. (Obama’s Health Care Speech.)

 

None of this matters to Roger Mahony, who is always so busy with "immigration" to pay attention to the plight of the innocent preborn and the public policy proposals that make more possible their criminal executions under cover of the civil law and with our own taxpayer dollars.

This reminds me of a book, Midwestern Politics by John Fenton, that I read in a graduate course on American political parties at the University of Notre Dame du Lac in the Spring Semester of 1973 taught by Professor Howard Reiter. There was a passage in the book about politics in Caesar Obamus's adopted home city, Chicago, focusing on a Anthony DeTolve, now deceased, who was a member of the Illinois House of Representatives from 1951 to 1956 and then was a member of the Illinois State Senate from 1959 to 1966. The late Mr. DeTolve's nickname was "Busy, Busy," earned because he would say the following whenever reporters tried to question him about anything. "Busy, busy, all the time busy."

Roger Mahony is the conciliar incarnation of Anthony "Busy, Busy" DeTolve" as he busies himself about immigration policies, which come under the realm of prudential judgments and are subject to legitimate disputes among men of good will, while ignoring the plight of the preborn, whose inviolability is protected by the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as these have been entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

Mahony, who believes himself to be a Successor of the Apostles, has no time to remind one and all that there the common temporal good is impeded, not advanced, by the existence of the American genocide under cover of the civil law, and that no one who supports the direct, intentional taking of any innocent human life under the cover of the civil law is qualified to serve in any position of public trust, whether elected or appointed, and that those who support abortion can never be instruments in the pursuit of the common temporal good, which must be undertaken in light of man's Last End: the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven. Mahony doesn't even know or accept this truth, enunciated so clearly by Pope Saint Pius X in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906:

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it.

 

The likes of Roger Mahony and his stooge Douglas Kmiec do understand or accept the fact that it is impossible to produce true temporal justice when that which is opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity is promoted under cover of the civil law and promoted in every aspect of popular culture:

The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)

 

Is baby-killing under cover of law, whether by surgical or chemical means, repugnant or opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity, "Cardinal" Mahony? Is it? Tell us, please. Repeat after me, Roger Mahony: Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph Biden believe in that which makes it impossible to produce true temporal peace and tranquility because he supports evils that are opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity. Can't repeat this, Roger Mahony? Then you have expelled yourself from the Catholic Church because you believe that it is possible to produce true temporal peace and tranquility in spite of open support for the mystical dismemberment of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the persons of preborn human beings.

 

Too strong?

Consider these words of Pope Leo XIII, contained in Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896:

 

The Church, founded on these principles and mindful of her office, has done nothing with greater zeal and endeavour than she has displayed in guarding the integrity of the faith. Hence she regarded as rebels and expelled from the ranks of her children all who held beliefs on any point of doctrine different from her own. The Arians, the Montanists, the Novatians, the Quartodecimans, the Eutychians, did not certainly reject all Catholic doctrine: they abandoned only a certain portion of it. Still who does not know that they were declared heretics and banished from the bosom of the Church? In like manner were condemned all authors of heretical tenets who followed them in subsequent ages. "There can be nothing more dangerous than those heretics who admit nearly the whole cycle of doctrine, and yet by one word, as with a drop of poison, infect the real and simple faith taught by our Lord and handed down by Apostolic tradition" (Auctor Tract. de Fide Orthodoxa contra Arianos).

The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium. Epiphanius, Augustine, Theodore :, drew up a long list of the heresies of their times. St. Augustine notes that other heresies may spring up, to a single one of which, should any one give his assent, he is by the very fact cut off from Catholic unity. "No one who merely disbelieves in all (these heresies) can for that reason regard himself as a Catholic or call himself one. For there may be or may arise some other heresies, which are not set out in this work of ours, and, if any one holds to one single one of these he is not a Catholic" (S. Augustinus, De Haeresibus, n. 88).

 

No one who supports baby-killing under cover of law is a member of the Catholic Church in good standing. No one who enables the career of those who support baby-killing under cover of law is a member of the Catholic Church in good standing. Such people are the enemies of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and thus the enemies of true social order founded in a docile acceptance of and submission to the Deposit of Faith that He has revealed exclusively to the Catholic Church, which alone has been charged by Him, her Invisible Head and Mystical Bridegroom, to teach taught infallibly and safeguarded eternally the truths contained in that same Deposit of Faith.

 

No Catholic can support baby-killing under cover of law and/or support those for public office who support such killing and be a member of the Catholic Church in good standing. It is that simple, and any Catholic who supports Barack Hussein Obama and his pro-abortion Vice President, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is betraying the Catholic Faith

One who supports abortion and/or promotes the political careers of those who enable the slaughter of the preborn must reckon themselves with these words from Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii, December 31, 1930:

Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother's womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. (Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii, December 30, 1930.)

 

Roger Mahony, it appears, is constitutionally incapable of recognizing and accepting this truth. Apostasy is his field. Apostates do not think or speak or act as Catholics whenever it suits them to think or speak or act according to the apostasies they accept as indicative of "theological progress." He is joined in his disdain of "pro-lifers" by the conciliar "archbishop" of Vienna, Christoph Schonborn, who is too busy making demands on the Society of Saint Pius X (see Negotiating To Become An Apostate) to denounce a pro-abortion public official (see Cardinal Schonborn Against Pro-Life Rally - Gloria TV report).

That Roger Mahony has remained in power in the conciliar structures to deform souls and to blaspheme the honor and majesty and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity is one of the most striking scandals that has been visited upon Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism by the likes of the late Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and his "successor," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

Then again, "conservatives" are who understandably and rightly upset about Mahony's apostasies and his betrayal of the innocent preborn fail to understand that Mahony is simply part and parcel of a counterfeit church, headed by a man who has been at war with the Catholic Faith from the time in his seminary days when he became a disciple of the "New Theology" that was condemned by Pope Pius XII in Humani Generis, August 12, 1950. Ratzinger/Benedict will do nothing to discipline Mahony for his disregard of the innocent preborn just as he has done nothing to discipline "Archbishop" Robert Zollitsch for having denied--on Holy Saturday, April 11, 2009, of all days--that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ died in atonement for our sins.

What well-meaning "conservatives" attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism do not want to understand or accept is that Ratzinger/Benedict is himself an apostate, one who can blaspheme God regularly and openly and brazenly in the following ways:

Places of worship, like this splendid Al-Hussein Bin Talal mosque named after the revered late King, stand out like jewels across the earth’s surface. From the ancient to the modern, the magnificent to the humble, they all point to the divine, to the Transcendent One, to the Almighty. And through the centuries these sanctuaries have drawn men and women into their sacred space to pause, to pray, to acknowledge the presence of the Almighty, and to recognize that we are all his creatures. (Speech to Muslim religious leaders, members of the Diplomatic Corps and Rectors of universities in Jordan in front of the mosque al-Hussein bin Talal in Amman)

I cordially thank the Grand Mufti, Muhammad Ahmad Hussein, together with the Director of the Jerusalem Islamic Waqf, Sheikh Mohammed Azzam al-Khatib al-Tamimi, and the Head of the Awquaf Council, Sheikh Abdel Azim Salhab, for the welcome they have extended to me on your behalf. I am deeply grateful for the invitation to visit this sacred place, and I willingly pay my respects to you and the leaders of the Islamic community in Jerusalem. (Courtesy visit to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem at the Mount of the Temple. May 12, 2009; see also The Laws of God Forbidding All Communication in Religion With Those of a False Religion.)

In its work, the Biblical Commission could not ignore the contemporary context, where the shock of the Shoah has put the whole question under a new light. Two main problems are posed: Can Christians, after all that has happened, still claim in good conscience to be the legitimate heirs of Israel's Bible? Have they the right to propose a Christian interpretation of this Bible, or should they not instead, respectfully and humbly, renounce any claim that, in the light of what has happened, must look like a usurpation? The second question follows from the first: In its presentation of the Jews and the Jewish people, has not the New Testament itself contributed to creating a hostility towards the Jewish people that provided a support for the ideology of those who wished to destroy Israel? The Commission set about addressing those two questions. It is clear that a Christian rejection of the Old Testament would not only put an end to Christianity itself as indicated above, but, in addition, would prevent the fostering of positive relations between Christians and Jews, precisely because they would lack common ground. In the light of what has happened, what ought to emerge now is a new respect for the Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament. On this subject, the Document says two things. First it declares that “the Jewish reading of the Bible is a possible one, in continuity with the Jewish Scriptures of the Second Temple period, a reading analogous to the Christian reading, which developed in parallel fashion” (no. 22). It adds that Christians can learn a great deal from a Jewish exegesis practised for more than 2000 years; in return, Christians may hope that Jews can profit from Christian exegetical research (ibid.). I think this analysis will prove useful for the pursuit of Judeo-Christian dialogue, as well as for the interior formation of Christian consciousness. (Joseph Ratzinger, Preface to The Jewish People and Their Scriptures in the Christian Bible, May 24, 2001.)

 

A Jewish reading of the Bible is a "possible one"? God is so obscure in His Revelation that it is "difficult" for those who adhere to the Talmud to understand the simple truth that every book of Holy Writ refers unequivocally to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? This is blasphemy. This is apostasy. God has made His Revelation clear.

Indeed, Saint John Chrysostom specifically condemned those who would make the kind of assertion that has been made repeatedly by Ratzinger/Benedict concerning the "difficulty" of Jews' recognizing the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

Let that be your judgment about the synagogue, too. For they brought the books of Moses and the prophets along with them into the synagogue, not to honor them but to outrage them with dishonor. When they say that Moses and the prophets knew not Christ and said nothing about his coming, what greater outrage could they do to those holy men than to accuse them of failing to recognize their Master, than to say that those saintly prophets are partners of their impiety? And so it is that we must hate both them and their synagogue all the more because of their offensive treatment of those holy men." (Saint John Chrysostom, Fourth Century, A.D., Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews.)

Many, I know, respect the Jews and think that their present way of life is a venerable one. This is why I hasten to uproot and tear out this deadly opinion. I said that the synagogue is no better than a theater and I bring forward a prophet as my witness. Surely the Jews are not more deserving of belief than their prophets. "You had a harlot's brow; you became shameless before all". Where a harlot has set herself up, that place is a brothel. But the synagogue is not only a brothel and a theater; it also is a den of robbers and a lodging for wild beasts. Jeremiah said: "Your house has become for me the den of a hyena". He does not simply say "of wild beast", but "of a filthy wild beast", and again: "I have abandoned my house, I have cast off my inheritance". But when God forsakes a people, what hope of salvation is left? When God forsakes a place, that place becomes the dwelling of demons.

(2) But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who says so? The Son of God says so. For he said: "If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God?

(3) If, then, the Jews fail to know the Father, if they crucified the Son, if they thrust off the help of the Spirit, who should not make bold to declare plainly that the synagogue is a dwelling of demons? God is not worshipped there. Heaven forbid! From now on it remains a place of idolatry. But still some people pay it honor as a holy place. (Saint John Chrysostom: Eight Homilies Against the Jews)

 

Who is going to yet another synagogue, a place of idolatry? That's right, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI.

What "conservatives" and many Motarians in the structures of the counterfeit church of concilairism refuse to understand or accept is that Roger Mahony is a true son of concilairism. His apostasies stem from and are thus very similar to those that are authored by Ratzinger/Benedict himself.

Similarly, many "conservatives" and Motarians fail to understand or accept the simple truth that crimes against the innocent preborn have been made more possible and have become more institutionalized because of the blasphemous crimes against the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity that have been committed by the conciliar "pontiffs," including Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI. Crimes against God are more heinous that crimes against men, and those who refuse to accept this truth and start to defend the honor and glory and majesty of God by condemning publicly the blasphemous words and sacrilegious conduct of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict are just as guilty as Roger Mahony of looking the other way at offenses that might cause them to act in a manner that would cost them human respect and prestige.

Consider, yes, once again, these words of Pope Saint Leo the Great to this effect:

But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59 )

 

No one is "pro-life" if he does not first defend the honor and glory and majesty of the Author of life, God Himself. "Mainstream" pro-life leaders have an obligation to get their heads out of the sand and to stop caring about their own human reputations as all of their well-intentioned work in defense of the inviolability of innocent human life is meaningless if they are unwilling or afraid to face facts about how the conciliar "pontiffs" have blasphemed God as they have praised false religions and esteemed their symbols and referred to their places of diabolical idolatry as "sacred."

Roger Mahony is simply another branch of the tree of apostasy known as conciliarism whose seeds were planted by a young Father Joseph Ratzinger five decades ago

There is a way out of the the trap of apostasy that is conciliarism, and it runs through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary through to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit and as we distribute blessed Green Scapulars to those whom God's holy and ineffable Providence places in our paths each day. We trust in Our Lady. It is that simple. Those of us consecrated to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary can be the most effective instruments of helping to plant the seeds for the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary if we offer our Rosaries and all of daily prayers and actions and sufferings and humiliations in reparation for our sins and those of the whole world.

As the late William C. Koneazny, the founder of the old Catholic Rendezvous meetings in Salisbury, Connecticut, noted before he died, "In the end, Our Lady is going to come and throw the bums out."

Yes, Bill, in the end Our Lady's Immaculate Heart will triumph when a true pope consecrates Russia to that same Immaculate Heart with all of the world's bishops in fulfillment of her Fatima Message.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon, a triumph that will be heralded by unceasing shouts of:

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!

 

Saint Joseph, Patron of Departing Souls, 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.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.

Saint Therese of Lisieux of the Child Jesus and the Holy Face, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?