"Blessed" Paul the Sick

by Thomas A. Droleskey

And the inscription of his cause was written over: THE KING OF THE JEWS. And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left. And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith: And with the wicked he was reputed. And they that passed by blasphemed him, wagging their heads, and saying: Vah, thou that destroyest the temple of God, and in three days buildest it up again; Save thyself, coming down from the cross.

In like manner also the chief priests mocking, said with the scribes one to another: He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let Christ the king of Israel come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him. (Mark 15: 26-32)

 

Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is indeed being mocked by chief priests of the counterfeit church of concilairism today, starting with Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, who has dared to offend God grievously by esteeming with his own priestly hands the symbols of false religions, who has dared to enter two synagogues and one mosque, who is daring to enter two more synagogues in Israel and the one in Rome in the coming months. Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI is spitting on Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ each time he does these things, which are, each and every single one of them, objectively speaking, Mortal Sins against the First Commandment. Anyone who denies that entering into and treating with respect places of false worship without seeking the unconditional conversion of those adhere the devils worshiped therein is intellectually dishonest or bereft of the sensus Catholicus (thereby lacking any knowledge of the necessity of defending the honor and glory and majesty of the Most Blessed Trinity) or is a coward who is afraid to speak to the truth of the Faith for one reason or another.

God will not be mocked. The true God of Divine Revelation does not want members of the Catholic Church, no less those who believe themselves to be bishops and priests, to give even the slightest degree of credibility to any false religion. The God of Revelation, which consists of Sacred Scripture and Sacred (Apostolic) Tradition, hates each and every false religion. He has no respect for false religions, which have the power to save no one and are instruments of disorder in souls and thus of disorder and chaos within nations. Those who show respect for false religions by esteeming their symbols and praising their nonexistent "ability" to contribute to the "betterment" of nations and the world are themselves enemies of God as they find themselves condemned by these very words e of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself:

But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come: but nevertheless woe to that man by whom the scandal cometh. And if thy hand, or thy foot scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee to go into life maimed or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into everlasting fire. And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee having one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 18: 6-10.)

 

It is a scandal for a man thought, albeit erroneously, by 99.9999% of the people in the world to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Successor of Saint Peter, the Visible Head of the true Church on earth, to enter into a synagogue at all, no less to listen without complain to a Talmudic hymn speaking of the "waiting" for the Messiah as he is treated as an inferior.

It is a scandal for a man thought, albeit erroneously, by 99.9999% of the people in the world to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Successor of Saint Peter, the Visible Head of the true Church on earth, to take off his shoes and then enter into a Mohammedan mosque, assuming the Mohammedan "prayer" position as he turns in the direction of Mecca.

It is a scandal for a man thought, albeit erroneously, by 99.9999% of the people in the world to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Successor of Saint Peter, the Visible Head of the true Church on earth, to refer a mountain in Japan, Mount Hiei, upon which the Tendei sect of Buddhism worship their devils,

It is a scandal for a man thought, albeit erroneously, by 99.9999% of the people in the world to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Successor of Saint Peter, the Visible Head of the true Church on earth, to praise a false religion, voodoo, as Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II did in Benin on February 6, 1993:

You have a strong attachment to the traditions handed on by your ancestors. It is legitimate to be grateful to your forbears who passed on this sense of the sacred, belief in a single God who is good, a sense of celebration, esteem for the moral life and for harmony in society. (First section of Voodoo You Trust.)

 

It is a scandal for a man thought, albeit erroneously, by 99.9999% of the people in the world to be the Vicar of Christ on earth, the Successor of Saint Peter, the Visible Head of the true Church on earth, to ignore these words of Sacred Scripture, written under the inspiration of the Third Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, God the Holy Ghost, as he esteems the symbols and even the essential "goodness" of false religions:

 

 

Or, that the idol is any thing? But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils.

You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?  (1 Cor. 10: 19-22.)

There are priests, some truly ordained and others not, in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism who know these things to be true. Some even know that the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service is evil. These men know that the nature of dogmatic truth cannot be explained away by the absurd and dogmatically condemned thesis contained in Ratzinger/Benedict's "hermeneutic of continuity." They know that the conciliar "popes" have abandoned the Catholic Church's mission to seek with urgency the unconditional conversion of all men to her maternal bosom. They know that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is meant to reign as the King over men and over nations. Some even doubt the legitimacy of their ordination to the priesthood (there is one man who had himself ordained by the retired bishop of his diocese the day before his conciliar "installation" service, others, including a chancery official of a small diocese, from what I have been told by an eyewitness, were conditionally "ordained" by a priest who claimed that he had been consecrated a bishop secretly years before).

Most of these men, however, are content to keep their mouths shut about the apostasies and sacrileges and blasphemies that they see emanating from the Vatican and their local chancery office, rationalizing away their own participation in sacrilege by continuing to "offer" a liturgy that know is, at the very least, deficient and thus offensive to the Most Holy Trinity. Unable to break free from human respect or worries about financial stability or a number of other highly subjective reasons, these men stay in the conciliar structures without ever uttering a word in defense of the honor and majesty and glory of God that have been so offended by the conciliar "popes" and the conciliar "bishops."

The words these utter in private about the horrors of the day remain in private. The faithful who look to them for their spiritual nourishment unto salvation never hear these men castigate false ecumenism or religious liberty or separation of Church and State or the incorporation of pagan rituals into conciliar-sponsored liturgies. The faithful never hear these putative priests excoriate the Novus Ordo and its profanities in such terms as the "FM" (Faux Mass, FreeMasonic Mass) or hear the sarcasm that drips from their lips when they refer to "Paul the Sick," "Giovanni Paolo Seconda Il Grande Frode," or "Papa Rat." They never hear the private reactions to such things as altar girls (one fairly prominent conservative presbyter said to me in 1994, "Tom, I am praying to Saint Joseph for a happy and quick death for this man [John Paul II]).

Well, on second thought, this is not entirely correct. One true priest who was in my acquaintance for quite a while, used to telephone the host of a radio program, using a false name as he played the "role" of a woman named "Florence" who said that "she" had a son who was married to a "Jewess" and whose daughter was in a "Modernist convent" and who railed about "the Jews" being responsible for the problems of the world. The act was so popular that the hosts of the radio program in a major city some distance away from where the priest lived produced a compact disc (cd) featuring the "best of Florence's" phone calls to them. The "act" was very funny. It was, to our friends from Vicksburg, Mississippi, hill-arious. It was also a sign of how little the priest was willing to say in public, how he had to take "cover" under the guise of a make-believe character to give public voice to a caricature of his private thoughts in order to maintain his "good standing" in the conciliar structures and to do nothing to jeopardize the possibility of his name being placed in the "episcopal pipeline," he has a far better chance of doing so now that he has a "conservative" non-bishop in his own diocese and as one of his closest friends in the conciliar presbyterate is now a conciliar "ordinary" in a distant diocese.

Apart from such instances, however, most of the the faithful yet attached to the conciliar structures will never never hear the discontent, the questions, the sarcasm, the mockery or the outright rejection of conciliarism from those conciliar priests who have convinced themselves that the line popularized by William Szathmary (better known as Bill Dana) in his "Jose Jimenez" character, first created for The Steve Allen Show over fifty years ago now, "Ees not my job, man," exculpates them from ever uttering a word publicly about things that they know to be--and sometimes admit to friends privately are--offensive to God and thus harmful to the souls who look to them for the supernatural helps that they need to get home to Heaven. These men are content to watch as the conciliar "popes" and their "bishops" mock Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as His Church Militant on earth undergoes her Mystical Passion, Death and Burial.

This mockery from the conciliar "popes" and "bishops" is constant. It is unremitting. It cries out to Heaven for vengeance. Fifty years of conciliar mockery produced by false ecumenism and inter-religious "dialogue" and inter-religious "prayer" service and profane, blasphemous liturgies have robbed most Catholics of their sensus Catholicus. Most Catholics are awash in the illogic of sentimentality and emotionalism. Some might close their eyes to things that bother them in the hope that what they see are merely aberrations that do not reflect on the essence of conciliarism itself, an attitude that I know from first-hand experience leads to blaming the bad "bishops" for travesties that are indeed of the essence of conciliarism and that have the full approval and "blessing" of the conciliar "popes." It is thus difficult for the average Catholic to find fault with a "pope" who goes to a mosque or to a synagogue or who asks the non-"archbishop" of Canterbury to join him in giving a "joint blessing" to the faithful.

The average Catholic is quite selective about what he wants to hear and believe. They do not want to believe that "pope" sold out the long-suffering Catholics of the underground church in Red China nearly four years ago now as many of us noted at the time (A Betrayal Worthy of the Antichrist) and after a "clarification was issued two years ago (see Red China: Workshop for the New Ecclesiology). Others have also have documented the continued persecution of these Catholics by the Communist authorities with whom Ratzinger/Benedict has sought a full "reconciliation" (China’s Underground Church: Anguish and Dismay over Vatican Betrayal). They do not want to believe that "pope" seeks to neutralize the Society of Saint Pius X and other traditionally-minded Catholics even though he, Ratzinger/Benedict has said that it is his goal to do so:

So if the arduous task of working for faith, hope and love in the world is presently (and, in various ways, always) the Church's real priority, then part of this is also made up of acts of reconciliation, small and not so small. That the quiet gesture of extending a hand gave rise to a huge uproar, and thus became exactly the opposite of a gesture of reconciliation, is a fact which we must accept. But I ask now: Was it, and is it, truly wrong in this case to meet half-way the brother who 'has something against you' and to seek reconciliation? Should not civil society also try to forestall forms of extremism and to incorporate their eventual adherents - to the extent possible - in the great currents shaping social life, and thus avoid their being segregated, with all its consequences? Can it be completely mistaken to work to break down obstinacy and narrowness, and to make space for what is positive and retrievable for the whole? I myself saw, in the years after 1988, how the return of communities which had been separated from Rome changed their interior attitudes; I saw how returning to the bigger and broader Church enabled them to move beyond one-sided positions and broke down rigidity so that positive energies could emerge for the whole. Can we be totally indifferent about a community which has 491 priests, 215 seminarians, 6 seminaries, 88 schools, 2 university-level institutes, 117 religious brothers, 164 religious sisters and thousands of lay faithful? Should we casually let them drift farther from the Church? I think for example of the 491 priests. We cannot know how mixed their motives may be. All the same, I do not think that they would have chosen the priesthood if, alongside various distorted and unhealthy elements, they did not have a love for Christ and a desire to proclaim Him and, with Him, the living God. Can we simply exclude them, as representatives of a radical fringe, from our pursuit of reconciliation and unity? What would then become of them?

"Certainly, for some time now, and once again on this specific occasion, we have heard from some representatives of that community many unpleasant things - arrogance and presumptuousness, an obsession with one-sided positions, etc. Yet to tell the truth, I must add that I have also received a number of touching testimonials of gratitude which clearly showed an openness of heart. But should not the great Church also allow herself to be generous in the knowledge of her great breadth, in the knowledge of the promise made to her? Should not we, as good educators, also be capable of overlooking various faults and making every effort to open up broader vistas? And should we not admit that some unpleasant things have also emerged in Church circles? At times one gets the impression that our society needs to have at least one group to which no tolerance may be shown; which one can easily attack and hate. And should someone dare to approach them - in this case the Pope - he too loses any right to tolerance; he too can be treated hatefully, without misgiving or restraint. (LETTER ON REMISSION OF EXCOMMUNICATION LEFEBVRE BISHOP)

 

Those who desire "full communion" with Ratzinger/Benedict have to be very, very selective to ignore the brutal honesty he displayed when explaining to his conciliar "bishops" why he had "lifted" the "excommunications" from the four bishops of the Society of Saint Pius X. Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X, has learned this method of selectivity rather well, choosing to ignore entirely Ratzinger/Benedict's use of the words "extremism," "obstinacy," "narrowness," "one-sided positions, "rigidity," "arrogance and presumptuousness" to describe the attitudes of the members of the Society of Saint Pius X. Bishop Richard Williamson of the Society of Saint Pius X is, it appears, being given one last chance to "repent" of his "disobedience" to Fellay, who continues to ordain men to the priesthood in disobedience of the conciliar "pope" with whom he so much desires to be "reconciled. This is all premised upon Bishop Fellay's desire to break down "obstinacy," "narrowness," "one-sided positions, "rigidity," and "arrogance and presumptuousness" by expelling or exiling members of the Society of Saint Pius X, whether priests or laity, who oppose his "reconciliation" with and total assumption into the One World Ecumenical Church of conciliarism.

The public face of Catholicism is not to be found in relatively little-read publications such as The Remnant or Catholic Family News or The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture.

The public face of Catholicism is not to be found on any "conservative" or traditionally-minded website, including this one most especially.

The public face of Catholicism is not to be found even in "conservative" publications as The Wanderer.

The public face of what is presented, albeit falsely, as Catholicism to Catholics and non-Catholics alike everywhere throughout the world is what was last detailed in What Lines Are You Reading Between, Bishop Fellay?

The public face of what passes for Catholicism is in the once Catholic parishes that have been seized the conciliarists.

The public face of what passes for Catholicism is to be found in supposedly "Catholic" schools, "update programs," "workshops," colleges, universities, professional schools and hospitals.

The public face of what passes for Catholicism is to be found in the papal "knighthoods" and prestigious medals and honors bestowed upon those who promote sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance (most particularly willful murder and the sin of Sodom), including those bestowed upon Talmudic rabbis such as Aaron Bisno, who was awarded the Benemerenti Medal, instituted by Pope Pius VI over two hundred twenty years ago now as a sign of papal respect for those who had demonstrated "military merit," by, guess who (no, not Woody Woodpecker), Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, in 2005. Rabbi Bisno believes that the surgical execution of the innocent preborn is a matter of "religious freedom," something that I will be elaborating upon in a day or two:

Ordained in 1996, Rabbi Bisno was a graduate of the pro-abortion Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, the oldest existing Jewish seminary in the Americas and the main seminary for training rabbis in Reform Judaism. Additional degrees were obtained from Washington University in St. Louis and the University of Pennsylvania.

Following his appointment as Executive Director of the Hillel Jewish Center at the University of Virginia from 1996-1998, Rabbi Bisno served as Associate Rabbi of Congregation Rodeph Shalom in Philadelphia until 2004.

While in Philadelphia, Bisno was one of 729 rabbis who signed a letter in support of President Clinton's veto of H. R. 1122, the "Partial-Birth Abortion Act of 1997. Most Renew America readers are acquainted with the grizzly late abortion/infanticide procedure whereby the abortionist delivers the baby's body, feet first, all but the baby's head. At this point, a sharp object is plunged into the back of the baby's head which provides an opening for the baby's brains to be sucked out with a vacuum aspirator. The skull of the baby implodes, facilitating the delivery of a dead child through the woman's cervix.

The pro-abortion/infanticide letter of September 10, 1998 defending "partial birth" killing to which Bisno affixed his signature stated in part:

The debate surrounding reproductive choice speaks to one of the basic foundations upon which our country was established — the freedom of religion. It speaks to the right of individuals to be respected as moral decision makers, making choices based on their religious beliefs and traditions as well their consciences. ...

Abortion is a deeply personal issue. Women are capable of making moral decisions, often in consultation with their clergy, families and physicians, on whether or not to have an abortion. We believe that religious matters are best left to religious communities, not politicians. (As found on Randy Engel's The unborn child as a casualty of Catholic ecumenicalism. For other examples, please see Continuing to Knight Infidels.)

Yes, these acts of false ecumenism, which are hideous in the sight of God and help to convince Catholics and non-Catholics alike that the pro-abortion and pro-perversity work of non-Catholics is pleasing to God, which means that the importance of "interfaith relations" cannot stand in the way of "disagreements" over baby-killing and perversity. This is the public face of Catholicism most people see.

The public face of what passes for Catholicism is to be found in the statements of conciliar "bishops" such as the "cardinal archbishop" of Berlin, Germany, Rainer Maria Woelki, endorses "pastoral solutions" to assist "couples that love each other" who just happen to be of the same gender and engaged in sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance:

ZEIT: From the Catholic Congress a statement is quoted that has given you a lot of trouble. You said about homosexual relationships: "I think it is conceivable that, where people take responsibility for each other, where they live in a stable homosexual relationship, that is to be regarded in a similar manner to heterosexual relationships," Do you stand by this?

Woelki: "You must be careful not to mark down someone in an unfair way (literal translation of German- official English translation Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided) says the Catechism about people who have homosexual tendencies. If I take that seriously, I do not view in homosexual relationships "a violation of natural law" view, as expressed in the Catechism. I try to also perceive that as people they always assume responsibility for one another, loyalty to each other and have promised to provide, even though I cannot share such a life plan. The life plan for which we stand as the Catholic Church is a sacramental marriage between a man and a woman who is open to the transmission of life. This is what I said at the Catholic Congress in Mannheim immediately before the statement you quoted. (World's Yongest Fake, Phony, Fraud Cardinal Equates Marriage With Perverted Unions. "Cardinal" Woelki also expresse a desire to and to assist divorced and remarried couples who lack conciliar decrees of nullity, something that can be read in the interview, which has been translated and reproduced on the Catholic Conservation site in the link provided.)

 

It appears as though "Cardinal" Woelki is on the fast track to being a "candidate" for "beatification" by the counterfeit church of concilairism as he ignores the plain words of Sacred Scripture, the binding precepts of the Natural Law and Holy Mother Church's constant condemnation of the unnatural perversion of the gift that God has given to men and women to continue the species.

Why is this so?

Look for yourselves:

Paul VI, or Giovanni Battista Montini, the Pope who reigned from 1963 to 1978 and led three of the four sessions of the Second Vatican Council, guiding the Church through the difficult post-conciliar period, could be proclaimed a saint in 2013. After examining the “Positio” with the documents of the canonical process, in recent weeks, theologians of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints voted in favour of the former pope’s beatification, without raising any objections. Next 11 December cardinals and bishops of the Congregation will also vote. Having overcome the theologian hurdle, the final “yes” from cardinals looks highly likely.

Benedict XVI could approve what he recognises as Pope Montini’s “heroic virtues” in the next consistory for the promulgation of the decrees on beatifications and canonizations, expected to take place next Christmas. This will conclude the beatification process. Then, before the beatification ceremony takes place all that remains is for the official recognition of a miracle that occurred through the intercession of the candidate to be elevated to the sainthood. In Paul VI’s case, Antonio Mazzaro, the Postulator promoting his cause, has already chosen a healing case which initial analyses proved “unexplainable”, out of the suggestions put forward. The alleged miracle involves the healing of an unborn child which took place sixteen years ago in California.

During the pregnancy, doctors found a serious problem in the foetus and because of the repercussions it would have had on the brain, they advised the young mother that the only solution was to abort. The woman had wanted to follow the pregnancy through and entrusted herself to the intercession of Paul VI, the pope who wrote the “Humanae Vitae” encyclical in 1968. The child was born without problems but the family would have to wait until the age of 16 to have full confirmation perfect healing. Although the Vatican’s examination of the miracle will formally begin after the announcement of the candidate’s heroic virtues, this could all be over and done with quite quickly.

Benedict XVI has followed developments in his predecessor’s cause for beatification closely. Paul VI appointed Ratzinger Archbishop of Munich and cardinal. After beatifying John Paul II - the pope with whom he collaborated for a quarter of a century - in record breaking time last year, Ratzinger expects to do the same for the late Brescian pope, Montini. After leading the Council and concluding it with almost complete unanimity, Montini was a suffering witness at the time of the student protests of 1968 in Italy and continued to highlight the Church’s Credo through speeches and encyclicals, without ever taking any steps back in relation to the path marked out by the Second Vatican Council.

John Paul I’s (renowned for his holiness throughout the world) beatification cause is also being deliberated on alongside Paul VI’s, while Pius XII’s was approved in 2009 with the promulgation of the decree of heroic values but a miracle is yet to be selected to be presented to the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, the Vatican dicastery led by Cardinal Angelo Amato who deals with new sainthood causes. (Paul VI to be beatified soon - Vatican Insider.)

"Heroic virtues?"

Betraying priests behind the Iron Curtain to agents of Josef Stalin (see We Must Accept What Rationalists Reject)?

Adopting the methods of Saul Alinsky after meeting him courtesy of Jacques Maritain (see Alinsky's Sheen)?

Signing the documents of the "Second" Vatican Council that have resulted in the loss of so many souls to the Catholic Faith and helped to give a textual foundation for the conciliar revolution?

Telling the delegates at the United Masonic Nations Organization on October 4, 1965, that "The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace" (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI's Address to the United Nations, October 4, 1965?

Constantly extolling the "Cult of Man"?

Returning to Turkey the flag of the Turkish flagship that was captured in the Battle of Lepanto?

Promulgating false rites of episcopal consecration, priestly ordination, the administration of the Sacrament of Confirmation and abolishing the Sacrament of Extreme Unction?

Promulgating the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service on April 3, 1969?

Issuing the socialist manifesto Populorum Progressio, March 25, 1967 (see Making a Mockery of Catholicism).

Genuflecting before Greek Orthodox patriarch Athenagoras I on December 7, 1965, in Constantinople, Turkey?

Permitting First Communion to be given two years prior to the reception of First Penance on an "experimental" basis?

Restoring the permanent diaconate?

Betraying Josef Cardinal Midzsenty (see We Must Accept What Rationalists Reject) while engaging in his wretched policy of Ostpolitik?

Redefining the ends of marriage and promoting a "natural" means to limit the size of families in Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968 (see Forty-Three Years After Humanae Vitae)?

Creating one revolutionary bishop (true ones between 1965 and 1968 and false ones in the Roman Rite between 1968 and 1978) after another, including the likes of Joseph Bernardin, Terence Cooke, Bernard Law, Humberto Medeiros, Francis Mugavero, John Raymond McGann, Thomas Gumbleton, Rembert Weakland, Howard Hubbard, John May, Raymond Hunthausen, John Roach, John Quinn and a chap by the name of Joseph Ratzinger, to name just handful as it is 2:00 a.m. on the morning of Tuesday, October 16, 2012, the Feast of Saint Hedwig, after all.

Opening the way to the conciliar annulment factory?

Presiding over what he himself called "the auto-destruction of the Church" as thousands of priests and religious sisters quit their religious vow and the pews of formerly Catholic churches emptied?

Engaging in egregious acts of sacrilege and blasphemy in "inter-religious" events?

Promoting "liberation theology" in the name of a "preferential option for the poor" at the Conference of Latin American Episcopates in Medellin, Colombia, on August 246, 1968?

Living a life of sin that had been used against him by the Soviets and was later used as a wedge for the Freemasons to get him to approve of cremation?

A life of sin? Yes, for those who don't know, please consider the following:

[Atila[ Guimarães quotes Franco Bellegrandi, a former member of the Vatican Noble Guard, part of the papal military corps, who witnessed the unfortunate changes that occurred at the Vatican after Pope Paul VI took office.

Bellegrandi repeats the charge that while Archbishop of Milan, Montini, dressed in civilian clothes, was picked up by the local police on one of the archbishop's nocturnal visits to the male brothels of the city.

The former Vatican guard describes the homosexual colonization process that he says began under Pope John XXIII, but which accelerated under Montini's rule--a process with [which] the reader should by now be thoroughly familiar. Bellegrandi says that old employees were turned out of their jobs at the Vatican to make room for Montini's favored brethren afflicted with the same vice. They in turn brought along their favorite catamites--"effeminate young men wearing elegant uniforms and make-up on their faces to dissimulate their beards," says Bellegrandi.

Bellegrandi says that he was told by an official of the Vatican security service that Montini's actor friend was permitted free access to the pontifical apartments and was seen taking the elevator late at night.

One of the statements made by Bellegrandi that attracted my attention was that Montini no sooner took office than he was subject to blackmail by Italian Freemasons. In exchange for their silence regarding Archbishop Montini's furtive sojourns to Switzerland to rendezvous with his actor-lover, who appears to have been quite open about his relationship with the prelate, the Masons demanded that the pope eliminate the Church's traditional ban on cremation after death. The pope complied. (Mrs. Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, p. 1156)

An elderly gentleman from Paris who worked as an official interpreter for high-level clerics at the Vatican in the early 1950s told this writer that the Soviets blackmailed Montini into revealing the names of priests whom the Vatican had clandestinely sent behind the Iron Curtain to minister to Catholics in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The Soviet secret police were on hand as soon as the priests crossed over the Russian border and the priest infiltrators were either shot or sent to the gulag.

The extent to which Pope Paul VI was subject to blackmail by the enemies of the Church will probably never be known. It may be that, in so far as the Communists and the Socialists were concerned, blackmail was entirely unnecessary given Montini's cradle to grave fascination and affinity for the Left. On the other hand, the Italian Freemasons, M16, the OSS and later the CIA and the Mafia were likely to have used blackmail and extortion against Montini beginning early in his career as a junior diplomat, then as Archbishop of Milan and finally as Pope Paul VI.

There can be no question that Pope Paul VI's homosexuality was instrumental in the paradigm shift that saw the rise of the Homosexual Collective in the Catholic Church in the United States, at the Vatican and around the world in the mid-20th century.

Pope Paul VI played a decisive role in the selection and advancement of many homosexual members of the American hierarchy, including Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, Terence Cardinal Cooke, John Cardinal Wright and Archbishop Rembert Weakland and Bishops George H. Guilfoyle, Francis Mugavero, Joseph Hart, Joseph Ferrario, James Rausch and their heirs.

The knowledge that a homosexual sat in the Chair of Peter--knowledge that spread like wild-fire on the "gay" gossip circuit--would certainly have served as an inducement for homosexual men to aspire to the priesthood and even prompt them to contemplate the unthinkable--a religious order or community composed exclusively of sodomites.

Most important, the long-guarded quasi-secret of Paul VI's homosexual life has, for decades, contributed to the silence and cover-up by the American hierarchy on the issue of homosexuality in general and the criminal activities of pederast priests in particular.

But it is a secret no longer.

The final piece of the puzzle has been put in place.

"Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us." Mrs. Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, pp. 1156-1157)

Yes, sounds like a perfect candidate for "beatification" in the counterfeit church of conciliarism if the assembled non-cardinals give their approval to the "miracle" that took sixteen years to manifest itself and is based upon the diagnosis of a condition in an unborn child by doctors ever eager to convince women to kill their babies by claiming the existence of "problems" that simply do not exist. What could be better? A phony "pope" who lived a life of moral degradation with a phony "miracle" to speed him along the path fo a "beatification" even though his embalmed body turned black before it had been shown to the public and was said to reek of a horrible smell (something that was blamed on the heat of the Mediterranean sun beating down on the poor man's mortal remains)?

Sure, "Blessed" Paul the Sick will fit right in with Jose Maria Escriva Balaguer y Albas and Mother Teresa, a syncretist, and Antonio Rosmini, forty of whose propositions were condemned by Pope Leo XIII in 1887 only to be "rehabilitated" in 2001 by Joseph "Cardinal" Ratzinger (see Beatifying Their Own), and most notoriously, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II (see "Beatifying" Yet Another Conciliar Revolutionary, "Canonizing" A Man Who Protected Moral Derelicts, Unimaginable Deceit and Duplicity, Not The Work of God, To Be Loved by the Jews, Perhaps Judas Was the First to Sing "A Kiss is Just a Kiss", Enjoy the Party, George, Enjoy the Party, and Anticlimactic "Beatification" for an Antipope).

What's next? Well, after Albino Luciani/John Paul I gets himself approved for "beatification," the only thing to do after this is to await the death of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI so that his own "cause" for "canonization" could be introduced by his own successor. That way, you see, each of the five conciliar "popes" would carry with them a "seal of sanctity" with which conciliar apologists could bludgeon critics by saying irrationally, "These men were saints, not heretics and blasphemers as you keep insisting." That's why this is being done. Make no mistake about this whatsoever.

Mind you, I have just provided a summary of some of the more salient low lights that qualify Giovanni Montini to be "beatified" as "Blessed" Paul the Sick. For a more extensive analysis, including some of the correspondence that the late Abbe de Nantes, Georges de Nantes, who denounced the "Second" Vatican Council as soon as it was over in 1965 (see The Abbé de Nantes: Fidei Defensor), had with Montini/Paul VI, please see Paul VI Beatified?, by Father Luigi Villa.

Giovanni Montini/Paul VI was no kind of "virtuous" man, no less a Catholic. Montini/Paul VI, apart from living his life of sin and being a lifelong admirers of socialism, was a bitter and vindictive man who did not like to have his conscience singed by anyone. He reacted violently to criticism from the Abbe de Nantes and Bishop Antonio Castro de Mayer, nearly slapping Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in the face when they had the following exchange in the Apostolic Palace on September 11, 1976:

Montini: "Why do yo not accept the Council? You signed the decrees."

Lefebvre: "There were two that I did not sign."

Montini: "Yes, two, religious liberty and Gaudium et Spes."

(Archbishop Lefebvre's mental note: "I thought at the time: 'I signed the others out of respect for the Holy Father. He [Montini] went on.")

Montini: "And why not religious liberty?"

Lefebvre: "It contains passages that are word for word contrary to what was taught by Gregory XVI and Pius IX."

Montini: "Let's leave that aside! We are not here to discuss theology."

(Archbishop Lefebvre's mental note: "I thought to myself: 'This is unbelievable.'") (Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, The Biography of Marcel Lefebvre, Kansas City, Missouri, Angelus Press, pp. 491-492.)

Word-for-word contrary to what was taught by Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX. Concilairism is contrary to the Faith as, among other things, the "Cult of Man" can make no room for the Social Reign of Christ the King that was exemplified during the time in which lived the life of the saint whose feast we celebrate today, Saint Hedwig, the maternal aunt of Saint Elizabeth of Hungary, who was married to Henry, the duke of Poland:

Hedwige was illustrious for her royal descent, but still more for the innocence of her life. She was maternal aunt to St. Elizabeth, the daughter of the king of Hungary; and her parents were Berthold and Agnes, Marquis and Marchioness of Moravia. From childhood she was remarkable for her self-control, for at that tender age she refrained from all childish sports. At the age of twelve, her parents gave her in marriage to Henry, duke of Poland. She was a faithful and holy wife and mother, and brought up her children in the fear of God. In order the more freely to attend to God, she persuaded her husband to make with her a mutual vow of continency. After his death, she was inspired by God, whose guidance she had earnestly implored, to take the Cistercian habit; which she did with great devotion in the monastery of Trebnitz. Here she gave herself up to divine contemplation, spending the whole time from sun-rise till noon in assisting at the holy Sacrifice. The old enemy of mankind she utterly despised.

She would neither speak of worldly affairs, nor hear them spoken of, unless the affected the interests of God for the salvation of souls. All her actions were governed by prudence, and it was impossible to find in them anything excessive or disorderly. She was full of gentleness and affability towards all. She triumphed completely over flesh by afflicting it with fasting, watching, and rough garments. She was adorned moreover with the noblest Christian virtues; she was exceedingly prudent in giving counsel; pure and tranquil in mind; so as to be a model of religious perfection. Yet she ever strove to place herself below all the nuns; eagerly choosing the lowest offices in the house. She would serve the poor, on her knees, and wash and kiss the feet of lepers, so far overcoming herself as not be repulsed by their loathsome ulcers.

Her patience and strength of soul were admirable; especially at the death of her dearly-beloved son, Henry duke of Silesia, who fell fighting against the Tartars; for she thought rather of giving thanks to God, than of weeping for her son. Miracles added to her renown. A child, that had fallen into a mill-stream and was bruised and crushed by the wheels, was immediately restore to life when the saint was invoked. Many other miracles wrought by her having been duly examined, Clement IV, enrolled her among the saints; and allowed her feat to be celebrated on the fifteenth of October, in Poland, where she is greatly honoured as patroness of the country. Innocent XI extended her Office to the whole Church, fixing it on the seventeenth of October. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year.)

The once thoroughly Catholic land of Poland (in which most of Silesia is located) is now littered with men claiming to be "bishops" who have, following the example of Paul the Sick, renounced the Social Reign of Christ the King, good conciliarists that they are, of course (see Distracting Us With More Side Shows, part three from 2010). Our own country is littered with men claiming to be "bishops" who have never accepted the Social Reign of Christ the King, men whose belief that the insidious "market place of ideas" would help everyone, including men such as Barack Hussein Obama, to find "common ground" has made possible the legal institutionalization of various evils that they are now powerless to resist. None of this can come from the Catholic Church. Not one little bit of it. It came from the likes of Paul the Sick and his "successors," including the future "beatus," Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI if God does not intervene by then.

Yes, a world where Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ does not reign as King and where His Most Blessed Mother is not honored as its Immaculate Queen is one where most every man will live and think and act and speak naturalistically, not supernaturally according to the Mind of the Divine Redeemer as He has discharged It exclusively in the Catholic Church. The Faith must be shunted aside in favor or the pursuit of wealth or popularity or career success or in favor of this or than naturalistic"system" of economic, social and political "order" to which which must be rendered an assent of faith and a due submission of will at all times. And while there were other forces that have been at work in the world for nearly seven centuries that are certainly responsible for this situation, it is also true that the "reconciliation" by the likes of Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII and Montini and Luciani and Wojtyla and Ratzinger with the false principles of Modernity have made it possible for the last "bastions" of Catholicism against the world to be torn down. Only one who is willfully blind can ignore this truth.

We must grow in love more and more with God as He has revealed Himself through His true Church. We will come to hate our sins the more. We will seek to do voluntary penances for our sins and those of the whole world. We will be more attentive to the needs of the members of the Church Suffering in Purgatory. We will have more apostolic zeal for the salvation of souls, seeking to distribute Green Scapulars to those whom God's Holy Providence places in our paths each day. We will live for the Faith, not for the passing things of this world.

We must be champions of Christ the King as His consecrated slaves through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, never fearing the onslaughts of the figures of Antichrist that walk amongst us as long as we pray the Holy Rosary every day as well as to wear and to fulfill the conditions associated with the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, making sure to make reparation for our own sins which are so responsible for worsening the state of the world and the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Fatima, 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.

See also: A Litany of Saints